Batman: Arkham City - Graphics Comparison - PC (DX11) vs. Xbox 360 & PS3

It is of course no secret that the PC version mostly looks better than the console version(s). But nowadays having well implemented DX11-Tessellation the PC leaves the consoles far behind. Check the screenshot comparison on

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
WorldGamer2374d ago

Very impressive. However, arguable if this will really have an effect on how much and individual enjoys the game.

For the most part the enhancements seem aesthetic rather than functional, guess it comes down to what people value in the end.

Good stuff overall for PC gamers tho.

decrypt2374d ago (Edited 2374d ago )

Lol console gamers paying more and getting less.


They are still paying more though :P per game it all adds up in the end. Sure the differences can vary ranging from slight to extreme, however why complain when its cheaper.

limewax2374d ago

Maybe so but that isn't really an issue, I'm sure the consoles would also have the extra features if they were capable.

I'm getting a free PC version anyway, but I played both console and PC copies of AA, and I have to say the experience is no different, But it is very nice to watch the smoke billow around your feet or the paper fly around during a fight. It's just an added bonus

colonel1792374d ago

It depends doesn't it? How much does a PC which can take advantage of the quality of the game cost? And how often do you have to upgrade it in order to run future games.

If you bought a PC the same time as the PS3 launch, would it still be enough to run today's games in a quality better than PS3/360 or you would have had to upgrade it once or twice by now?

WorldGamer2374d ago (Edited 2374d ago )

@ decrypt

Thanks for your well crafted comment, because you seem like a gentleman that likes to bring a sense of intelligence to your interactions with others, not just leave jerk like comments.

You must be popular on this site, and with good reason.

Elitist, gotta love em. :\

@ limewax

"I'm getting a free PC version anyway, but I played both console and PC copies of AA, and I have to say the experience is no different,"

Well said sir, speak the truth. You already got some disagrees, but gameplay on games on PC and Consoles are usually the same. DX11 adds nice visuals, but little else.

@ colonel179

"If you bought a PC the same time as the PS3 launch, would it still be enough to run today's games in a quality better than PS3/360 or you would have had to upgrade it once or twice by now?"

That is an excellent question, one I am sure you will get no response to. Fact is, PCs are cool, but if you are a busy person who has a job, a life outside of videogames, etc, consoles serve their purpose. Gamers come in all shapes, sizes and dedication to the hobby. Fact.

Ranshak2374d ago (Edited 2374d ago )


I built a PC back when PS3 launched. It cost me about 800usd. Specs were as follows:

CPU: coreduo 2.4ghz
GPU: 8800gtx
Ram: 4gigs

Today it still plays most games out at 1080p, it even ran batman AA at 1080p maxed out aside the physx. It played games like farcry 2 in 1080p 35-40fps. While that rig even today plays 95% games out in 1080p both the consoles do exactly the opposite having maybe 5% of their titles in 1080p.

Now sure that PC cost me 200usd more then a PS3, however till date its played every game better then the PS3 or xbox 360. If i were to give it a upgrade to bring it upto times today. I would upgrade the CPU to a quad core, plus i would give a GTX 560. I am sure alot more money would have been saved in 5 years of gaming on that rig, specially when considering the Steam discounts i must have saved a small fortune.

Hence yea in the long run console gaming is always more expensive.

Autodidactdystopia2374d ago

Inni Minni Miny - More with PC.

are you in good hands?

Messatsu2902374d ago

Don't even bother arguing with console fanboys, most of them are 14 or under and will never understand how a pc works.

Morgue2373d ago (Edited 2373d ago )

Who cares about PC gaming except PC gamer's and they way some of their posts sound, PC can stand for Pretty Childish. Go hang out at your WoW or Starcraft convention dressed in a costume and eat Doritos, drinking soda all day. Then go home and fap to 4Chan.

DarkSymbiote2373d ago

Not everyone can pay a gazillion monies at once. You'd think with arrogance comes intelligence.

Ranshak2373d ago (Edited 2373d ago )


"Not everyone can pay more per game bought. You'd think with arrogance comes intelligence. "


Read my post above initial cost differences are negligible at best. Its the long run that counts, console gaming is always more expensive in the long run.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 2373d ago
evrfighter2374d ago (Edited 2374d ago )

Arguable if what has an affect on the game?

When your shooting for an epic setting and environment. The immersion that graphics can give you makes all the difference. the small things like broken glass, debris with a physics system. Seeing smoke swirl as you run through it. the depth in the surroundings thanks to tessellation.

The experience will indeed change. Especially if you add 1080p 60+fps anti aliasing into the mix.

WorldGamer2374d ago

You are still talking only visual fidelity, not gameplay. That smoke, glass, debris you speak of isn't going to get lodged in your foot, or make you harder for enemies to see or allow you to hide behind anymore than their absence allows you to do the same on consoles. They won't make extra sound if you step on it for enemies to hear. They will have the same effect as it does on consoles, NOTHING.

In the end, the overall gaming experience is the same. Might be painful to hear, but it is the truth.

I would say, if the difference was SNES to XBOX graphics, then that would be something. At this stage, I get the same gaming experience minus a few extra visual extras. That's certainly nothing to hold yourself above anyone else for.

Visual fidelity aside, no one above has said anything special. The arguments are thin at best.

Consoles, PC.... they ALL provide a great gaming experience.

Somebody2374d ago

It's all about immersion. Yes some of the effects may be superficial but it is pretty big deal for the guys who have spent years coding them into their games. Like the guys in Pixar or Dreamworks animation studios, they spent years making mindblowing effects so I'm sure they would appreciate the movie goers would notice the nice little touches they've added, even if the effect lasted for a few second.

In Crysis, I spent the so much time in the village where we're supposed to rescue some CIA chick. All I did was played around with the smoke coming out of fuel station that I blew up. Seeing how the smoke scattered whenever I threw a grenade at it, then watching it gathered back into a column again. The scattering smoke does nothing (except in multiplayer, maybe). It's just for show but it does add to the immersion and I discovered it by mistake. I was distracted by the breakable vegetation in Crysis. In Crysis 2 I was distracted by bullet decals floating above indestructible tree bark.

Graphical fidelity, sound, physics and gameplay. Why sacrifice any one of those if the developers are actually capable of making all of them possible in one game? If there are hardware capable of producing all four types of immersions flawlessly in a game, why hold the developers back?

Let them loose and make even better games.

SantistaUSA2373d ago

@WorldGamer come on man, saying that those extra features don't add nothing is just ridiculous. Is just like playing the game with surround sound versus just using the crappy tv speakers, it makes a huge difference on you experience.

I guarantee if those were the difference between the x360 and ps3 people would be bragging non stop.

And whenever the new gen comes out, the same people that says now oh it's no big deal, will be going crazy saying omg look at the graphics, so much going on the screen etc.

I'm one of the lucky ones that enjoy gaming in general, got the PS3, X360 and a killer PC. ALL Platforms have their strengths and weaknesses, I love them all :)

Fishy Fingers2374d ago (Edited 2374d ago )

Even at low res the difference is stark. Kind of makes up for the delay.... Almost.

solar2374d ago

The PhsyX included also adds a lot to the immersion of the atmosphere. Ugh come on Nov. 15th!!!

Orpheus2374d ago

You forgot 3D vision ???

Fishy Fingers2374d ago

Not to interested in the 3D vision, even though I do have the option there, but the phsyX sure looks nice.

Getting in free with my second 570 was a nice treat too :)

solar2374d ago

I got my copy free with my 2nd 560ti. ;) free and SLI for PhsyX!!! Cant go wrong :D

Azurite2374d ago

I like that smoke effect when he ran through it.

MasterCornholio2374d ago

Nice to see they did a great job with the PC version. Unlike Carmack with rage.


kramun2373d ago

After the patch the pc version runs fine. Don't know why you felt the need to take a swipe at Carmack in an article that's not in any way related to Rage.

MasterCornholio2373d ago

Lol kind of ticked off at him. I got carried away sorry


ACBAA2374d ago

Definitely makes up.. now we need a confirmation on (ALL) DLC's being available for PC's aswell.. then i will totally forget they delayed this

Show all comments (48)
The story is too old to be commented.