260°

You Should Absolutely Not Buy Batman: Arkham Knight’s $40 Season Pass

CraveOnline: "I’m as excited for Batman: Arkham Knight as the next guy, but when Warner Bros. announced today that the Arkham series would receive another overpriced season pass, I set my wallet on fire, put its ashes into a locked safe and then threw that safe off of a bridge in order to ensure that I’d never even contemplate purchasing it."

Read Full Story >>
craveonline.com
Blastoise3278d ago

There's no chance I will. I don't buy any game that launches with a season pass, let alone boasts "Legendary Batmobile skins" and "Alternative Character skins" as a reason to buy it. It's a load of BS

Sharingan_no_Kakashi3278d ago

This pretty much says it all. Well said.

Bansai3278d ago

40 bucks? Are they effin crazy?

DARK WITNESS3278d ago (Edited 3278d ago )

I don't know why people are so supprised.

This is what many people keep pointing out. Every time we give in to this sort of stupidness they will just try and push the bar that little bit more.

When that bar is pushed other devs/publishers are watching to see the reaction..

it's only $10 who cares.

next time...

it's only $15, I work so it does not bother me.

next time..

It's only $20, and I get 5 hrs worth of gameplay so it's still good value for money.

Next time...

It's only $40, think of the poor starving devs they need to put food on the plate for their poor families.

no doubt there will be people who will defend this.

I really don't mind. With the Witcher out I am not in a rush for Batman. I bought the first two games day one, preordered and everything. This may just get picked up pre-owned end of the year, if I even care for it by then.

Yi-Long3278d ago

I'll wait for a GOTY edition, if that ever comes, and until then I'll enjoy The Witcher 3 and a few other games which don't try to nickel&dime me through these sickeningly greedy DLC practices.

If they won't release a GOTY, I'll go out of my way to buy the game 2nd hand, just so these greedy devs/pubs won't get a dime out of me.

I won't support this crap. Never have. Never will.

thekhurg3278d ago

A season pass that expensive just costs them a sale from me in the short term. I'll wait for a GOTY edition in a year or two and get everything.

$40 is absurd and I hope it blows up in their face.

raWfodog3278d ago

@ Yi-Long and thekhurg

The GOTY editions are definitely the route I go when buying games that have a lot of DLC. Sure I have to wait much longer to play the game but I already have a huge backlog and not that much time to play as it is.

breakpad3278d ago

one word ....Boycott.... the game itself and the DLC

ifistbrowni3278d ago (Edited 3278d ago )

Yeah, guys!! Let's stick it to Warner Brothers and buy their other game, Witcher 3!

That'll show them that they can't F*** with us! /sarcasm

Guys, I'll be seriously surprised if Witcher 3 doesn't have "short-cut" packs or something to purchase. If it launches with no controversial DLC I will be soooo surprised.

So far, Mortal Kombat and Arkham Knight have controversial DLC. The Witcher 3 already had a bit of controversy when they announced their season pass, but I expect that was the "calm" before the storm.

Warner Bros showed their greed with Mortal Kombat and I said during that outrage that I wouldn't be surprised to see they ruined Arkham Knight and Witcher 3 with DLC. Well, today they confirmed Arkham Knight.

Honestly, I'm still buying Arkham Knight. IDC how many people stealth disagree with me for saying it. Batman has been my favorite franchise since I was a kid and the Arkham series make for some awesome gameplay/stories in the Batman Universe. Sorry if I hurt the gaming industry by not purposefully missing out on one of my anticipated GOTY over some optional DLC.

I'll buy the game at launch, if the DLC proves to be something significant, I will buy it. If it proves to be standard DLC, I will wait for the DLC to go on sale OR buy the complete edition. What I won't do is avoid my personal favorite franchise over some optional DLC.

If the DLC is insignificant, I'll buy game day 1, take my time in the universe and beat it/get the platinum trophy and then trade it in and forget all about the DLC ever existing.

BeefCurtains3278d ago

There you have it folks! Publishers officially have no respect for gamers and this is their big middle finger to the consumer!

"Yeah, take half a game and like it! Now sit and wait for months while we roll out patches to make the game work. Yeah, you like that don't you! Take it! Yeah, here's some crappy DLC for you dirty little gamer!!!"

Taero3278d ago

@1.1.7 ifistbrowni

http://www.ign.com/articles...

There you go, 16 DLCs including cosmetics and quests, things that other devs would have packaged as pre-order incentives or a few dollars here and there. They WILL be releasing two paid DLC packs later on but those are expansions to the existing game much as we would have bought expansions for games in the past.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3278d ago
avengers19783278d ago

I never buy season passes for anything, and hardly ever buy DLC

yellowgerbil3278d ago

I know right, I can't understand why everyone is up in arms, I've only ever bought 1 DLC Fallout 3 Broken Steel no other DLC has ever been worth a single cent to me and consider playing the game without SKINS and extra online maps and other things I don't use anyways pointless.

PX543278d ago

Yeah, if the developers didn't consider it worthy enough to go into the game then why should I consider paying extra for it? There's very little DLC that has ever enticed me, and they're only additional full game modes/story missions never just skins or maps.

Perjoss3278d ago

Great thing about Arkham Asylum and Arkham City is they have aged really, really well, so I'm just going to go ahead and play those again and just grab Arkham Knight for cheap in a steam sale whenever.

Yi-Long3278d ago

I still haven't played Arkham Origins cause I've been waiting for a 'GOTY' including all content.

Might as well pick that up somewhere cheap. WB doesn't want my money, cause they couldn't be bothered releasing a complete version, so I'll make sure I'll pick up a 2nd hand copy. I don't want them getting any of my money, when they try to nickel-and-dime me like that.

Vote with your wallet.

PX543278d ago

@Yi-Long Arkham Origins was never going to win GOTY - mainly because the developer said they weren't fixing functionality bugs, instead were concentrating on DLC.
Even though it's made by a different Dev than Asylum and City, it's largely the same game but frustrating as hell when you do run into a bug - I couldn't progress in the game because it wasn't giving me one of the objectives, I had to restart and work my way back to that point.

rainslacker3278d ago

I would only buy this game day one if the batmobile edition became available again. I like the series enough, but I know within a year of release I can pick it up for $40 with all the DLC included.

GordonKnight3277d ago

Games cost too much to make in this day an age. Say, hello to the industries way of pricing games at $100. the initial price is $60, but the complete game is $100.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3277d ago
ERFO3278d ago (Edited 3278d ago )

I won't buy it (the season pass, that is. The game I'm totally buying) That money will go toward another game. There are too many awesome titles on the horizon to waste my money on the chincy extension of a game that I've already Purchased.

BellePelouse3278d ago

Spider Jerusalem is always right

re2_apocalypse3278d ago

Someone who speaks logic and common sense instead of those that are saying "eh... I guess I will wait for the GOTY edition or whatever"

ERFO3277d ago

I called someone a sheep on a similar thread for saying "don't tell me what to do" concerning the DLC and it was labeled trolling. When 7 people agree with a troll its status as a troll should automatically be cancelled.

3278d ago Replies(2)
endzeitkind3278d ago

wtf. no... noho hoho oho no way. wellcome, to the future. its like buying two games.

One-Shot3278d ago (Edited 3278d ago )

The Witcher 3 expansion pass with 30 hours of new story content - $25

Batman AK season pass more super-villains, Batmobile skins, advanced challenge maps, extra character skins, new story missions, and race tracks. -$40

...yeah the former sounds a lot better.

Show all comments (90)
120°

6 Games That Genuinely Deserve A Current-Gen Upgrade

Games such as Mad Max, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Batman: Arkham Knight desperately deserve a modern-day revisit.

thorstein1d 13h ago

Mad Max is underrated. Such a fun game.

Cacabunga19h ago(Edited 19h ago)

RDR2 still looks astounding on PS4 Pro. i cannot imagine how it could look with a next gen upgrade.

JonTheGod14h ago(Edited 14h ago)

Probably not very different.

No idea why this article is highlighting recent beautiful graphically-advanced games and saying they need current gen makeovers. They already look better than most new releases; just compare Arkham Knight and Suicide Squad!

Yi-Long15h ago

It's obviously never gonna happen since Sony killed the game and studio, but Driveclub. Even in its current state, 10 years after release, it still puts many competitors to shame ...

Demetrius4h ago

I'm not into racing games but yeah I even looked at gameplay of that sometimes

Demetrius4h ago

Mad max ikr! Far cry primal, it amuses me how ubisoft just left ac unity hanging, sadly most of the good staff left from rocksteady while being forced to make that abomination smh

160°

15 Single Player Games That Divided Fans

One way or another, these games provoked strong reactions.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
banger886d ago

I don't think Days Gone divided fans. For the most part, gamers loved it. It was the reviewers who were divided. Self-loathing racist pieces of shit that took exception to the main character being white. This was a fantastic game, one of the best open-world games I ever played, and I've played them all.

Cacabunga6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

Second you on this.. I had absolute blast playing this game!! Memorable!

TLOU 2 I thought was utter s***.. I still haven’t finished it and stopped about halfway (apparently).

It wasn’t fans divided around The Order, it was a period where xbox fanboys were thinking Rise was a more engaging game so they were spreading a lot of hate..
Today they are hibernating with nothing to play
The Order was short, no denying, but a great game with huge potential

shinoff21836d ago

I enjoyed days gone and last of us 2. PeoPke trippin.

I always thought the order was kinda whack seeming so I never tried it. Id like to now though.

Jon615866d ago

No thr order was a short, clunky mediocre yet visually stunning game. I thoughts so and pretty much every other reviewer did too.

thorstein6d ago

The Order, where length was a criterion for rating a game, but only this particular game and no others.

Demetrius6d ago

I agree on my 2nd playthrough, ps5 this time

RavenWolfx6d ago

While I enjoy what is there in Days Gone, I mourn what was lost. The first trailers for Days Gone showed a morality system that looked interesting. For example, in the beginning when you are chasing down Leon and after you caught him, you could choose to shoot him or leave him for the freaks. You can see hints of it in other places, like if you catch a bandit unaware sometimes they will disarm and it seems like Deacon had the option to shoot them or let them go (he automatically lets them go).

Crows906d ago

Whatever...those systems unless revolutionary don't add much...they rarely do in games that do have them.

anast6d ago

For the most part, when it comes to Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most.

Days Gone is a great game and it was attacked by the leftist socialist people that are actually closet fascists. As a great poet once said: "Socialism is the mother of fascism."

The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans.

Out of these 3, Last of Us 2 stands above as being a work of art. It's still generating a ton conversation to this day.

coolbeans6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

-"Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most."

It's so weird & cringe to see other gamers paint this broad brush of *who* didn't like Part II. Why take the "most who disagree with me are Hitler" type of mentality over game tastes?

-"The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans."

No other community I've dabbled in - be it social media or gaming forums - has built up such a dedicated defense for The Order like N4G. This attitude fundamentally blows my mind, especially in the face of similar older titles (hello Uncharted 1) that already did a marginally better job at storytelling and gameplay. It almost feels like some N4G group chat made this reflexive defense as a meme and a bunch of posters are still playing along with it. No offense to genuine Order fans, but I simply can't shake that feeling.

Yui_Suzumiya6d ago

Well to be fair, I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it. Over time it seems opinions have changed about it.

anast6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.

I got:

Letizi, R., & Norman, C. (2023). “You Took That From Me”: Conspiracism and Online Harassment in the Alt-Fandom of The Last of Us Part II. Games and Culture, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/155...

You're up. Maybe you can change my mind.

Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming.

thorstein6d ago

Yeah Yui, it was "the game to hate" at the time. What was bizarre was the, as usual, journalists that were lying about the game and their stories were approved.

It was all clickhate all the time for the Order. I defended it too.

coolbeans5d ago

@Yui

-"I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it."

That could've been the case right at release, but you should see more recent opinion articles on here. There's a pretty substantial cadre who defend it on here as being "unfairly tarnished" that I simply don't see elsewhere.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5d ago
Skuletor6d ago

Most of the backlash against The Last Of Us 2 was people upset that Joel was killed off, simple as that.

anast6d ago

There is that too, but the other groups pilled on too, which increased the numbers. I really don't see why we have to ignore everything but Joel being killed.

Inverno6d ago

I didn't like Part 2 and I'm not any of. The game sold like crazy, it's just hard for people to understand that most found the story to be arse.

anast6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

Prove what I say is wrong. I will need evidence. I didn't not say all. Your exception rule doesn't work. Find evidence that counters mine. So, we can have a real discussion.

Inverno6d ago

There are plenty of legitimate criticism in hours long analysis videos and reddit posts actually critiquing Part 2. The people you're talking about are such a minority, and they attack just about everything because they see the "wokeness" in the most subliminal ways. They're insignificant because the game still sold pretty well, and reviewed well regardless. Keep in mind the game released world wide, and western politics and views can't be applied to every corner of the world. I can agree that Days Gone was attacked, and unlike Part 2, due to these sites being so heavily political biased it did do some damage.

anast5d ago

I am at least showing the group was large enough of a concern for a journal to publish an article.

Where's your evidence?

Crows905d ago

He's not looking for evidence. Don't bother with him.

Crows906d ago

The last of us part 2 was bad story wise. Not some nonsense that you speak of...most of the negative people were random...lots of the critical reception from anything other than mainstream journalism thought that the game had huge problems.

Angry Joe and skill up being prime examples of that...unless of course like most socialists out there you wanna just lable people.

anast5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

Where's your evidence?

Crows905d ago

@anast

Oh geez...Twitter is full of trolls...common sense.
The YouTube critics I mentioned are innocent till proven guilty. And proven with facts not opinions. I gave you evidence of 2 prominent youtubers and yet you ask for more...either you can't read or you aren't looking for evidence.

As far as groups being "large" for journos to get their panties all tied up...well then again you must be extremely gullible. As if we haven't seen thousands of articles claiming players are offended, angry or backlashing based solely on 1 or 2 posts. They love grabbing very specific individuals and using them to represent a much larger base....whatever is convenient to them making the case that gamers bad and journos good.

coolbeans5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

-"saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise."

It doesn't "prove" it, but I have a solid success rate with the term - which seems to be the case here too. With regards to your article, I should break this down into parts:

1.) For starters, bleating for countering "evidence" after brandishing a media analysis paper (or papers) shouldn't be treated as some kind of trump card. That's not to say these researchers did nothing, mind you. Only that expecting counter-ideologies within this field who'll make this specific kind of work for TLOU Pt. II is absurdly demanding on its face. Nevermind the probability of non-progressive types getting the administrative approval being next to nil, but that's another can of worms.

2.) While I have critiques about x or y (some anecdotes being more flimsy than others, GG speculation, etc.), let's say for this argument that it's a solid piece overall. Having read the whole thing, there is literally *NOTHING* that validates the broad brush with which you painted TLOU2 critics in your first comment (speaking as someone who thinks it's a good game). The discussion about alt-fans, anti-fans, etc. does paint an ugly picture about the TLOU subreddit, Twitter users, certain YouTubers, and more; however, there's no positive declaration about TLOU2's critics ending at these particular clusters either. Even if you say "most, not all" in your first comment, that still seems overly broad compared to the text I read. (EDIT: That's not to disregard the nastiness or modest size in its own right.)

It's also worth noting how much of that paper's material is inspecting a pre-/at-release sort of backlash. But the game's been out for several years now. More and more people who AREN'T incels, homophobes, closet Nazis have played it past 2020 and you don't really see this new broad consensus about its accomplishments; in fact, you see more of a continued split over whether or not it deserves such monumental praise. Here's just a few other sub-communities near its release that don't fit your description:

- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...

-"Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming."

Correct, but you're just solidifying my point. Even PS fans elsewhere (social media or gaming forums) don't go to bat for The Order with the enthusiasm and consistency they do here in my experience. That's what makes your assessment of "anti-Sony Xbox fans" so fascinating to me.

anast5d ago

1) Speculation and emotion

2) Speculation and emotion

2a) Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research. By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved.

The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine. The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this. Instead you wrote a sermon, which is a shame because maybe you had something with point "2a: It's also worth..." But this point still tries to side step actual events.

The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange.

coolbeans4d ago

-"Speculation and emotion"

I mean... okay? Where am I wrong on 2.) though? Asking for a conflicting media studies research paper on this specific topic is already a random ask, given the environment with which these are made.

-"Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research."

Wait. Just so we're clear: a research paper that focuses most of its attention towards a subreddit and social media comments to Neil Druckmann means you get to sustain your overly broad claims while contrary social media sources that don't exhibit the same kind of "alt-fan/anti-fan" rhetoric can't be counted? Now I feel even more confident in my initial assessment b/c all you're after is just whatever can be found with some accreditation behind it - regardless of quality.

-"By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved."

That's the thing: I never said they wasn't a sizable contingent of that either. From the start, my response was just how wild it was to paint *MOST* detractors with such a broad brush. I still don't think I'm off-base in saying it's cringe to just say "most people who shit on x game are closet Nazis or bigots of some sort," especially when your research doesn't really validate that.

-"The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine."

Bro, you literally responded with "Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.... You're up. Maybe you can change my mind." I don't really see how I'm speaking out of turn there given this and your original comment.

-"The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this."

If no other people *HAVE* researched this phenomenon, then I don't see how the next best option is highly-popular sources which counter your original claim. Given that all you're promoting is a media studies paper hyper-focusing on a specific cluster of media, why wouldn't other forms of media work as some kind of substitute? That's not side-stepping events in the slightest.

-"The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange."

I don't know what that first sentence means, honestly.

Look, I'll just put it like this: try to have a frank conversation about The Order on some other non-N4G gaming forum. There isn't going to be this clean split between 'Sony fans' and 'Xbox fans' that love it or hate it. Ask Sony fans how they'd feel about paying full-price for it and you're not going to get the ardent defenses compared to some of its most popular comment sections here.

anast4d ago

Still no evidence. I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable. This is what you are missing. We are thinking in two different universes.

You are writing sermons, which is a waste of everyone's time including yours. Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions.

coolbeans4d ago

-"I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable."

But I literally read YOUR evidence and it doesn't support the broader claims you made at the start. I'm not sure where else to go with that.

-"Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions."

Bro, leveraging this kind of language is so wild in the face of what you've provided. It's like unless those different communities I linked where fused together in a random media studies paper, you'd magically consider it valid. I don't understand how you're leveraging that, especially when it doesn't fortify your initial claim. You're basically retorting to me writing too much, regardless of the content itself. Just the oddest conversation with you thus far and I don't quite get it.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4d ago
D0nkeyBoi6d ago

Amazing gameplay, but TLOU2 had one of the worst, most convoluted and uneccessary plots I ever seen in a sequel. Terrible story and the characters were forgettable. I didn't give an F about anyone in the story.

Inverno6d ago

I don't think any of these divided fans, other than LoU2. The rest were either victims of biased reviews or just generally agreed that they weren't as good as they could've been or just overall disappointing.

160°

Batman: Arkham Knight Still Runs Poorly On Switch Despite Massive Update

Batman: Arkham Knight wasn't in the best shape when it swooped onto Switch at the end of last year. Fortunately, the game has today received a monster 16GB update, one that's guaranteed to fix all of its problems, right? Well...

Read Full Story >>
nintendolife.com
CrimsonWing6950d ago

I dunno, the game runs fine on PS4 and PS5… I think this might be a Switch thing.

_SilverHawk_50d ago (Edited 50d ago )

Batman arkham knight shouldn't be on the switch as well as many other titles on the ps4 and xbox one because the switch will have the worst version that always perform poorly

The switch 2 will have the same dilemma as the later years of the switches life cycle because any AAA multiplatform games on switch 2 will most likely be the worst version to own because that game will be available elsewhere with way better performance and visuals.

The switch gained quite a bit of success because it was the only portable console available to play a lot of AAA multiplatform games but today there are many alternative handheld consoles that are better than the switch 2. Nintendo will be Nintendo so hoping for the latest cutting edge technologies to be in the switch 2 isn't being realistic while knowing Nintendo likes to make quite a bit of profit on sales of their hardware

Knightofelemia50d ago

Because the game was built to run on the PS4 and the PS5 won't have issues because it plays PS4 games. It is a Switch thing this game is asking a lot out of the little hybrid hand held system.

_SilverHawk_50d ago

When it comes to Nintendos gaming systems people need to stop making excuses for games running poorly on it because the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld console that can also be docked to play on a television.

There are so many games I played on the switch where the performance is very poor dropping the frames per second into the teens constantly but reviewers and a lot of gamers excuse the issues as it's a weak Nintendo handheld.

I can already see that a lot of people will be making excuses for issues when it comes to the switch 2 when they need to be highlighted like games on other gaming platforms. These gaming companies have years to research and develop the necessary components to make gaming consoles and Nintendo shouldn't get a pass for making shoddy hardware.

Amplitude50d ago (Edited 50d ago )

Silverhawk: "the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld"

What? Yes it does. How do you have more agrees than disagrees? You expected a small inexpensive 2017 Tegra in a Nintendo handheld console with a heavy focus on battery life to be as powerful as a PS4 home console that's powered by a wall and plugged into a large TV? No offence man but that's psychotic. I doubt even the Switch 2 will be running anything close to God of War Ragnarok. The Steam Deck can come quite close in some aspects but jeeze. You're talking about a budget 2017 handheld lol seeing it run Arkham Knight at all is an insane feat. Probably shouldn't have even been attempted in the first place but it's at least kind of cool that it's possible

DLSS and potentially VRR could be a huge game changer for Switch 2 but power constraints in a handheld are a very real thing. Even in 2025 you're not gonna get what you're looking for in a handheld unless you go the expensive handheld PC route and suffer through brutal battery life. Certainly not from Nintendo lol that's not their thing.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 50d ago
Sgt_Slaughter50d ago

Another rushed port job, it's disappointing to see better looking games run/perform better than a game from 2015

Terry_B50d ago

To be honest. Batman Arkham Knight looked a lot better in 2015 than almost every..if not exactly every game released for the Nintendo Switch since 2017.

It needed a big downgrade like The Witcher 3 or Mortal Kombat 11, 1 to run well on this weak hardware.

Neonridr50d ago

if The Witcher 3 can run on this thing at a respectable framerate, there is zero excuse for other games.

But that's because the dev took their time and optimized it properly. It wasn't a rush job like so many 3rd party games.

Terry_B50d ago

@neoridr ..look how Witcher 3 looks in comparison to other versions. (Pretty much like a last gen version of it..but yes it runs well at least)

While Batman AK on Switch looks more like the PS4 /XB Versions but runs worse of course.

As said..it needed a big visual downgrade and did not receive it.Porting it to the Switch was a damn dumb idea anyway.

Knightofelemia50d ago

Dummying down a game that is meant to run on XB1 and PS4 is going to be challenging to run on a system that is probably as powerful as a PS3. I give them a congrats for bringing it to the Switch and I hope this challenge pays off for them. As for me grabbing Arkham Knight on the Switch I am good I have the PS4 version.

Phoenix7650d ago

Batman: Arkham Knight Still Runs Poorly On Switch Despite Massive Update........ But is still a better game than suicide squad *fixed the title*

Show all comments (16)