Can You Solve The Riddle Of Batman’s System Specs?

Batman has an AMD card and is NOT HAPPY

The wailing and gnashing of teeth regarding Batman: Arkham Kerniggut’s PC port continues, as the publisher/developer’s first attempt to improve matters involves essentially telling everyone to turn all the settings right down for the time being, then make do with a game running in 720 at 30 frames per second. Oy gevalt.

So, hardware which many feel should be capable of running the game with most of its bells and whistles on is now deemed capable only of much lower settings, and ones which fall a long way short of the console version. This might be but a short-term measure, but it does feel a little like being told to eat your posh dinner off a paper plate.

Here are the settings Rocksteady/WB Games now say you should expect if you want a mere 30 frames per second on minimum hardware:

Resolution: 1280×720
V-Sync: Off
Anti-Aliasing: Off
Texture Resolution: Low
Shadow Quality: Low
Level of Detail: Low
Interactive Smoke/Fog: Off
Interactive Paper Debris: Off
Enhanced Rain: Off
Enhanced Light Shafts: Off

I.e. Rockbottom rather than Rocksteady. Minimum hardware, by the by, is this:

Processor: Intel Core i5-750, 2.67 GHz | AMD Phenom II X4 965, 3.4 GHz
Memory: 6 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (2 GB Memory Minimum) | AMD Radeon HD 7950 (3 GB Memory Minimum)

Not a cutting-edge system for sure, but not a bad one either. Everything on minimum, only 720p and 30 frames per second seems pretty punitive. The resolution’s a particular misery, given upscaling 720p to 1080p (or higher) monitor tends to look like someone threw a Pot Noodle at your screen.

Recommended specs and settings is where it gets really murky, though.

Resolution: 1920×1080
V-Sync: On
Anti-Aliasing: On
Texture Resolution: Normal
Shadow Quality: Normal
Level of Detail: Normal
Interactive Smoke/Fog: Off
Interactive Paper Debris: Off
Enhanced Rain: Off
Enhanced Light Shafts: Off

Quite a few compromises there, and that’s for this system or thereabouts:

Processor: Intel Core i7-3770, 3.4 GHz | AMD FX-8350, 4.0 GHz
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 – 3 GB Memory Recommended

That fairly beefy system would, according to Rocksteady, get you “an experience on par with the current generation of gaming platforms.” I.e. not as good as a good PC should be capable of, and even then only at 30 frames per second. Not too much more should perhaps be expected from a 760, though it does give PS4 and Xbone a run for their money, but the lack of 60FPS is upsetting and you’re not going to feel good about your i7 CPU. If you’re an on AMD card at Recommended, things only get worse: “users can expect some minor texture pops, occasional loading symbols during fast-paced scenarios, and some hitches & stuttering when gliding or driving the Batmobile. To help alleviate this, AMD users using Rec Spec GPU’s should turn Texture Resolution, Shadow Quality, and Level of Detail to Low.” Oof. They also advise against a resolution higher than 1080p, which is bad news for those of us with 1440p screens.

Exactly what settings entail ‘Ultra’ hasn’t yet been revealed, as Rocksteady have gone back to testing to work out what’s capable of what, but they do say you’ll need this hardware:

Processor: Intel Core i7-3770, 3.4 GHz | AMD FX-8350, 4.0 GHz
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
Graphics Memory: 4 GB

That’s a lot of a graphics card, and as yet they’re not talking about 60 frames per second – in fact, they actively recommend against editing ini files to remove the 30 FPS cap.

Various other advice and warnings can be found here, but while some people are claiming to have few problems on their mega-PCs, plenty of others are deeply unhappy that they need to play a game on very low specs when they feel their hardware is more than capable of more.

It is, however, important to note that this advise is just how to get the game running better right now, without any meaningful patch yet released. Matters may improve later on: “WB Games is working diligently with our development teams, NVIDIA and AMD, to identify and fix the issues as quickly as possible.” WB/Rocksteady also note that, so long as you’ve not played too much of it yet, you’re entitled to a Steam refund if you’re unhappy. That may well be worth doing if you don’t have faith that everything will be cleared up, but clearly it’s a giant bummer.

For the record, if you care about the size of my e-genitalia: I’ve got a first-gen i7 running at 4GHz, 8GB RAM and an overclocked-to-near-980-levels GTX 970. If I leave the 30 FPS cap on it’s mostly happy at 1080p with every setting at max, but to run it at my monitor’s 1440p native I need to turn all the Interactive/Enhanced doohickeys off, and that’s just for 30FPS. If I turn anti-aliasing off too it tends to sit around 45-50 most of the time. None of this is quite a deal-breaker, but it looks awful if upscaled from 1080p and I am distracted by not having all the whizzbang stuff turned on.

90 Comments

  1. Cyroch says:

    I don’t know if its because I am tired today or just slow in general or if I missed something, but I don’t get why you call it Arkham Kerniggut (word by word translated from german: robust/full-bodied/great good.)?
    Would someone come down to my level and explain it to me?

  2. Hitchslapped says:

    Looks like another game that’s better to be torrented insead of bought since it’s most likely you won’t even be able to play it with an acceptable performance.

    Big developers are complaining about PC gamers illegally downloading their games but they hire another studio to do a shitty port because it was most likely much cheaper to do so. If they don’t give a shit about PC gamers why should PC gamers give a shit about developers?

    • iainl says:

      Alternatively, it’s another game that looks awful on release when the pirates will hack it, and then subsequently becomes more tolerable down the line, but only for those who can access the patching system.

      In other news, Aldi have got great deals on tinfoil at the moment.

    • micro_explosion says:

      That’s not a reason to pirate it, it’s a reason not to get it.

      • Carra says:

        This. Or wait a year and pick it up for 5 euros in a year in a steam sale.

      • ironhorse says:

        Uhhh.. if pirating it removes the previously not mentioned Denuvo DRM which has caused serious performance issues for other recent games that have used it (like Lords of the Fallen)…or even avoid the rumored hardware damage it can incur for SSDs… then *yes*.. it is a reason.

        I also like how the uninformed in these comments aren’t aware that pirated games often receive updates to download when new game patches come out..

        • reggiep says:

          Yes, everyone *else* is uninformed. Let’s talk about the SSD issue first, since your brought that up without a shred of evidence that it exists. The theory is that the DRM causes the exe to be rewritten to disk over and over again and thus will wear out an SSD. Anyone who believes this is uninformed about how SSDs work to distribute writes across the whole disk and the fact that they can be written to on the order of hundreds of petabytes. You need not worry about any SSD damage unless you have a really, really shitty SSD.

          As for the performance issues, this is a rumor that has been unsubstantiated. Everyone seems to be saying the same thing “Lords of the Fallen had Denuvo and it had performance issues, therefore Denuvo causes performance issues.” You don’t need to be a logician to see through that specious reasoning. That’s like saying “That car has Goodyear tires and engine trouble. Goodyear tires must cause engine trouble.”

          You’ve basically just demonstrated how people will come up with all sorts of shitty arguments to justify software piracy. You’re not entitled to the game. If you don’t support it, ignore it. Pirating it doesn’t send a message. It only makes you feel better. So, don’t mask your selfishness in shitty arguments. Just have some integrity and tell everyone that you pirate because you’re cheap or it makes you feel cool.

    • fish99 says:

      To be fair I think piracy started before dodgy PC ports, so you could swap that around and say why should they care about making a good PC port if people are going to pirate it anyway?

      • Hitchslapped says:

        But I do think people are less likely to torrent a game if it works properly at release and doesn’t want to get more money out of your pocket by selling you 40€!!!!! Season Passes.

      • Shadow says:

        My guess is people are also less likely to torrent a game if it’s such a poor port it’s not even worth the bandwidth otherwise used to pirate it.

        But anyway, seriously, this is like the fifth Arkham Knight article in 2-3 days. How can it possibly deserve this much spotlight?

        • ironhorse says:

          Bingo. These days I “test” a game before purchasing.. often because of reasons like this one or *shudders* Duke Nukem Forever type releases. Besides, you never know if it’s going to have custom controls, inverted mouse, be without horrid frame times etc. Basically, there is a lot that can go wrong with variance in hardware, moreso with shoddy ports.. it’s best to try before you buy.

          But always support those that did their due diligence… or else there will never be change in this industry.

      • silentdan says:

        why should they care about making a good PC port if people are going to pirate it anyway?

        Because they’ll make a ton of money off the people who don’t pirate it. Is this something that people weren’t aware of? That good PC games often make money? I assure you, it happens, even with piracy going on.

        Many studies and reams of real-world experience have taught us that timely, affordable digital delivery is the single greatest weapon that can be wielded against piracy.

        To the broke-ass youngfolk who pirate games because they have no money: I can’t judge you. I did it, too. Just try to give back a little when your financial situation improves.

        To the people who have an adequate entertainment budget but continue pirating out of inertia: please think that over. If you find that your justification for operating outside the system has gone away, perhaps it’s time to give the system a second look.

        To the people who pirate as an act of civil disobedience: it is far, far better to reward the good actors in the industry (many indies, Valve, CD Project Red, Paradox, just to name a few that I personally admire) by buying and playing their games, while ignoring the bad actors and their products outright.

        To the people of a grim dystopian future in which Microsonyendo controls all gaming, and arrests anyone who doesn’t buy the season pass: yes, now we’re into civil disobedience territory. Go nuts, and good luck!

        • fish99 says:

          I’m just saying people shouldn’t use bad ports as a justification for piracy. I wasn’t seriously asking why devs should make good quality ports :)

          • silentdan says:

            Upon re-reading your post, I think I may have misinterpreted your tone. Sorry for the condescention. :)

          • ironhorse says:

            Why pay for crap?
            It’s not like it hasn’t been said before a hundred times, *but piracy does not count as lost sales.* Those sales were never going to occur anyways.

            Bottom line: A good game gets good sales.

        • lutjasuki says:

          Paying for PC games has been almost completely optional since broadband became widespread. But PC games continue to make lots of money. That seems to be mostly because of steam. It seemed as though single player(piratable) pc games were dying out before steam became popular. The DRM that steam offers (and which gog also offers) has nothing to do with system breaking restrictions but has everything to do with making the gaming experience through steam (or gog) better than the piracy option. Easy to buy, fair prices, patches always applied, no broken disks or unseeded torrents, community all in one place. It is exactly the same as netflix and music services have been shouting at their media overlords. if you make the paying customer’s experience better and easier than the pirate’s then most people will happily pay you.

          there is also the thing where most gamers really do want to give money to the people that make their entertainment (but this is morally relative F*ck warner bros, love rocksteady) Legally this has no merit but people generally could not care less if someone steals from walmart (or such) but would wish all the wrath of law to fall on someone that robs a little privately owned shop.

          • lutjasuki says:

            (new here, no edit function) Steam technically has the bs type of drm built in but it is so feeble and easily circumvented that i think it is only still there for bullet-point purposes when persuading idiot managers to sell their game on steam.

        • Neutrino says:

          Valve don’t qualify as a ‘good actor’ until they at least fix Family Sharing so that different members of the same household can play _different_ games from a library at the same time.

          Until that time they are the Great Satan.

          • Apocalypse says:

            As long as family sharing works across nation borders and steam-sales make games so cheap that buying them several times is no issue at all, I consider them still chaotic neutral. ;-)

            Sure, it is sometimes annoying to have your steam library blocked because someone is playing some game of it. It is a perfectly valid reason to not exclusively buy from steam as for this reason alone it seems important to have alternative digital stores like the far superior gog.com.
            At the same time, the framework from steam used to be quite handy, the DRM methods are normally fair and at least the store pages mention 3rd party drm and lastly the prices. Our family has gigantic steam libraries and several of those combined via family sharing and we did for sure never consider steam as a source to pay full-price games as you basically still just rent games from steam. The price and convenience is good.

            But hey, our gog.com libraries are nearly as big and half our steam games are originally from humble bundles, which means that the whole messed up family sharing is not a big deal in our household.

    • Moraven says:

      Iron Galaxy has done PC work and did the PC port of Arkham Origins.

      AK is a more heavily modified UE3 that skipped 360/PS3 low specs.

      Also does not help that Nvidia’s latest GameWorks is a hot mess.

      • Baines says:

        Iron Galaxy broke Redacted’s story mode in Divekick in a patch last year, and haven’t fixed it yet.

        Keits finally acknowledged the issue on Christmas, over a month after it was introduced, saying that he’d get Iron Galaxy to look at it after they got back from vacation. I don’t believe anything at all has been said since then.

    • Solidstate89 says:

      Or you could just not play the game at all. The only excuse I’ll grant anyone for piracy is for stupid distribution models, But this game is available in pretty much every major digital distribution method, and it’s available in physical model as well. There is no excuse to pirate this game. Just excuses to not play it.

      • ironhorse says:

        You’d have a point if every game provided a demo before [s]being tricked [/s] purchasing it.
        I have regretted many a purchase.
        Now that steam allows refunds, this all may change finally..

        • Apocalypse says:

          Every Game on steam provides a demo now.
          Every game on origin provides a demo since ages.
          Every game on gog.com provides a demo since ages.

          Refund policies of the major distribution platforms cover your butt.

    • Urthman says:

      Ugh. My time is worth at least as much as my money. Why would I want to torrent a broken game?

    • Dale Winton says:

      Or instead of doing that ,you just not buy it

  3. ahac says:

    They also RAISED the price on Steam for their EU2 zone from 50€ to 55€ (EU1 is still 50€).
    That’s right: the poorer EU countries have a higher price now!

  4. Cross says:

    This whole mess Warner Bothers me.

    • Morlock says:

      True. Why cape the framerate?

      • Apocalypse says:

        Parts of the physic engine are directly linked to the FPS, meaning you will see anomalies if your game is not running at 30 fps.

        That fine for the console versions and the guys who did the port did not wanted to touch this. They were to cheap basically to fix the engine and apply basic stuff that PC gamers expect.

        In other words, PC gamers simply have higher standards and demand better, but all we got was the console version of game. They can keep that version, it not worth the time. And in this regard the most important reason against piracy is: If it is not worth my money it is for sure not worth my time either.

    • Premium User Badge

      Grizzly says:

      Have you been able to sleep well at knight?

    • Cyroch says:

      What they were thinking when coming up with this port is a riddler to me. It was obviously a bat idea

    • Tinotoin says:

      It’s an absolute joker.

    • wyrm4701 says:

      They’re basically just robin honest customers.

    • MacTheGeek says:

      Buncha two-faced jokers, if you ask me.

    • Vayra says:

      I know right, it’s just really bat, man.

    • pilouuuu says:

      I’m sure it runs even worse on the penguin system.
      Na na na na na na na na na naaa Bad-pooort, bad-pooort, bad-pooooort!

    • underscore says:

      I’m sure they’ve found it a pretty Bruce-ing experience.

  5. Drew says:

    I’ve got a 980 card and while admittedly only an i5 it runs at 3.5ghz.
    I’ve also got 24GB of DDR3 RAM.
    So, while I can run at 4k (and I tweaked the ini to allow it to run at 60fps) with occasional chugging when the action turns up a bit the second I turn on any of the fancy nVidia settings the whole thing dies on its arse.
    It also crashes whenever I summon the Batmobile if I’ve got the fancy smoke/fog effects on.

    • TechnicalBen says:

      So after 20 years of gaming…

      … no change?

      /really bad puns… but true.

  6. DanMan says:

    Soundtrack:

    link to youtu.be

  7. Sorbicol says:

    At this point I feel compelled to point out that Dragon Age: Inquisition has suffered from very similar PC performance problems since launch for some people, and the second patch for others (myself included by which time it was far too late to claim a refund)

    Take a gander at this thread in the EA Answers HQ forum. Remarkably similar problems that basically appear to be caused by incompetent ports from PS4/Xbone games to PC. The solution there is also to basically downgrade your PC to run like it’s an Xbone.

    EA / Bioware have buried their head in the sand about it too – nothing has been forthcoming either in acknowledging the problem or trying to fix it. I wouldn’t hold your breath tbh.

    • Wulfram says:

      While DAI had it’s issues (enough that I sneakily used Origin’s refund policy as a free trial before buying it somewhere with a sensible price) I don’t think they were as extensive as this.

      People at or near minimums (like me) weren’t being told to run at 720p, and those minimums weren’t 7950s

      • montorsi says:

        Yeah, um, Inquisition has much better texture work, looks fabulous and runs at a capped 100 FPS with everything maxxed and heavy DSR. I don’t even get the comparison. Arkham Knight runs at about 60 with dips into the 40 range during heavy batmobile action. While it looks OK there are some effects missing and it’s clearly not the looker that Inquisition is.

    • Baines says:

      Sadly, consoles shifting to more PC-like hardware could mean years of equal or worse ports rather than better.

      It is still a mess to go from a game running on a fixed hardware set-up to a game running on the various combinations of hundreds of components that modern PCs are. Meanwhile, you’ve probably got execs and company heads being promised that PC ports are easier than ever, unaware of the numerous issues that are almost guaranteed to appear. The ports themselves still get farmed out to companies that are half the time only mediocre in ability. And all this combines with the increasing attitude that console performance is the standard to aim for.

      (Adding to the mix are the number of PC gamers who just assume that their old or lower end PC or laptop should be able to run the latest console games at better than console quality, just because it is a PC. Without any thought or concern given as to why that might not be true.)

    • Dale Winton says:

      Except of course the fact that DA:I ran perfectly fine

      • Sorbicol says:

        Erm. No, it didn’t. Not for a lot of people. As that thread I linked to shows. It run horrendously for me (constant stuttering, fps drops, CTDs) despite my specs being comfortably above the reccomended specs.

        I agree for a lot of people it works fine. But for a lot of others it doesn’t. In some cases despite having identical spec machines using the same versions of windows and the same gfx drivers. Which, if I’m reading the Batman article correctly, is a remarkably similar set of circumstances.

  8. fish99 says:

    Just played the first 30 minutes, was going fine until the first Bat-Tank section, then stuttering galore. GTX970, 3570K, 12GB, game on full settings with an older nvidia driver. The actual framerates weren’t bad though, and the cut scenes were also fine, and the game does look pretty stunning.

    Guess I’ll try the new driver and turning off each gameworks setting one by one.

    On a side note the motion blur is horrible. Who actually wants their game to blur every time they rotate the camera?

    • gunny1993 says:

      Same people who are happy to play at 30 and under FPS I guess

      • Mindestens says:

        I’ve beaten Witcher 2 with 6 to 9 FPS the whole game and I would not accept motion blur at any time.

        • gunny1993 says:

          You’re clearly insane and using you in any set of results would be irresponsible

        • Ejia says:

          Are you sure you were playing a game and not watching a curiously interactive Powerpoint presentation?

        • Premium User Badge

          DelrueOfDetroit says:

          There’s a video on YouTube where a guy gets the game to run on a 1.7ghz system. It looks like a PS2 game. It’s quite charming in low resolution.

    • fish99 says:

      New (i.e. current) nvidia drivers fixed my stuttering. Still got all the gameworks stuff on. Now to try the framerate unlock.

      • fish99 says:

        After unlocking the framerate I’m getting 60 fps most of the time with occasional dips. I also tried turning off motion blur in that same ini file but the game then crashes on loading. They definitely need to add a graphics option for turning that off.

        Honestly though, get the latest drivers, unlock the framerate, and if you’re with nvidia you should be fine, definitely if you have a 970, equivalent or above. That’s only first impressions though, I’ve only played an hour.

  9. Wedge says:

    Just staying true to the action style of the recent movies, yeah? If everything is blurry you just assume cool stuff is happening.

    • Premium User Badge

      DelrueOfDetroit says:

      I watched Batman Begins at a drive-in theatre. It was basically a radio play.

  10. Vandelay says:

    I think rather than instructing people that their beastly computers need to be running on medium settings at only 30fps, Warner Brothers should be removing the game from sale on PC until this mess is resolved. I don’t own the game (with no chance of me doing so on a i5 2500 and Radeon 6950,) but if the accounts are accurate of the performance for the majority then there is no way this was ready for release. Continuing to earn money from something that is not fit for sale is incredibly deceitful.

  11. SuicideKing says:

    Well, seeing that a Core i5-750, a Phenom II X4 965, a GTX 660 and a Radeon HD 7950 are more powerful than the hardware in the PS4, I can draw the following conclusion:

    IT’S A BAD PORT. BAD, UNOPTIMISED, INCOMPLETE, BROKEN PORT.

    Honestly, I don’t think they should see any money from this at all – for sale at $5 or whatever. This is pathetic.

  12. pilouuuu says:

    Arkham Knight was one of my candidates for GOTY, alongside The Witcher 3, Metal Gear V and Fallout 4. It’s no need to say that it’s no longer part of that list.

    • Surlywombat says:

      You make a GOTY list before you play the games? In JUNE?

  13. Jp1138 says:

    Well, I´m using an old i7 920, 12GB RAM and GTX 970 and it runs reasonabily well at 1080 with all the nvidia things on. Even the smoke only makes the game loose an aceptable amount of frames. I suppose I´m one of the lucky ones, or am less susceptible to low frame rates after years of playing 286 only games on a 086 clone on the early 90s :)

  14. alvysingerUK says:

    Has anyone used the in-game benchmarking?

    Ran a test last night, while doing some work, and on my mostly modest PC (i5 at 4.2, 8gb, GTX970) it was a rock solid 59FPS throughout. Not a dip in sight.

    Why include benchmarking up to 60FPS but cap it at 30 in-game? Baffling.

    Wish I could get a refund but bought my key from a reseller, so lesson learnt there I guess.

    • fish99 says:

      If yours is running OK why would you want a refund? It’s supposed to be an excellent game.

  15. Synesthesia says:

    Please tell me people are refunding this shit en masse? WB needs a roasting for this, this is no way to release anything.

  16. aircool says:

    I’ve just got Shadow of Mordor (Steam sale), and that looks lurverly, plays smooth and is quite fun too… Isn’t that by the same people, or just the same publisher?

    Still, releasing a game this bad is such an epic fail on so many levels.

    • Vandelay says:

      That was Monolith, they of No One Lives Forever and FEAR fame. Rocksteady make the Batman games, although the PC port was palmed off to another company. Which isn’t a crime, as many games are, but the original developer (and publisher,) should be ashamed for letting this out the door with their name on it.

  17. onionman says:

    Just so people know, it’s not only a performance issue. There are no rain textures–in fact textures in general look like butt–no ambient occlusion, and generally there are huge swaths of missing features (that are present in the PS4 version, which also doesn’t have slowdown).

    I’m running a 980 Ti on a 3570K overclocked to 4.2 GHz, and I’m still getting occasional slowdown. And again, that’s without high-res textures and a whole bunch of other graphical features that are up and running on XBO and PS4–which have a laptop CPU and the equivalent of a Radeon 290, non-X.

    Heads need to roll.

    • fish99 says:

      The PS4 also has something the PC doesn’t though – 8GB of (effectively) vram (it’s actually combined ram but it’s all available to the GPU for rendering). A typical PC has 4GB of vram and 8-16GB of system ram, but that system ram doesn’t help render frames quickly. If the current area of the game is using say 6GB of textures and models on PS4, there’s no way to do that on PC with a 4GB card without constant swapping in and out of ram, which is where stuttering happens, and why the PC version could be missing effects/textures.

      We’ve seen quite a few PS4 ports struggle on PC – Watch Dogs, Dead Rising 3, Dying Light etc, possibly because of the same limitation.

      • onionman says:

        Actually, this is a common misconception. The PS4’s “8GB” is shared between system RAM and GPU VRAM, and the system takes a minimum of 1.5 GB (closer to 2-2.5GB on average). So developers generally work within a hard 6GB VRAM limit, and try to keep it under 5.5GB.

        That said, the architecture is slightly different, since it uses an APU rather than discrete CPU and GPU. I suspect the difference in architecture is what caused the shoddiness of the port. But there is no technical reason why the game shouldn’t run better on a 7- or 8-series Intel and 900-series GTX than it does on the PS4.

      • onionman says:

        Sorry, just to clarify: at no point are all of the PS4’s 8GB available for the frame buffer. Meanwhile the Titan X has 12GB of VRAM and still has these issues, so it’s not just a VRAM issue.

        • fish99 says:

          I know it’s combined ram, that’s why clearly I said so, and why I suggested a game could be using 6GB of vram and not 8GB. Ok, so you have a game using 5.5GB of vram on PS4 and then try to cram that onto a 970/980 with only 4GB. Something has to give somewhere. Either you’re swapping in and out of ram constantly which causes stuttering, or you lower some textures/effects, which is what it looks like they’ve done.

          As for why Arkham Knight is having problems on a Titan-X, that’s a separate debate, I’m talking about why effects may be missing, not why it runs poorly, but the game does work fine on my 970, even with the gameworks stuff on.

  18. Distortion says:

    I think the question that should be asked is…what kind of rig did Rocksteady do the initial QA testing on? Some kind of dark obelisk of gaming power with multiple titans, hundreds of gigs of ram a CPU forged from the heart of an orphan and liquid cooled with the tears of angels?

    I mean, they’re just NOW saying, oh here’s what you can run it on. Did they not even test it on anything different? I would imagine you’d at least test it on an Nvida and a AMD card right?

  19. CaptainDefault says:

    My PC runs AK fine, and aside from a GTX 970 it’s six years old and was middling when new. 1920×1080 and every setting at maximum, although after Geralt of Rivia’s hair killed my framerate I’ve steered clear of the nVidia exclusive settings.

    The problem the game has, at least for me, is that if the game’s been running for more than about forty minutes it stalls progressively more often whenever it tries to load new assets. It looks like a low framerate, but it comes in surges, and it disappears if I exit the game and reload it. (You can remove the unskippable logo sequence by removing the flash files they play from in your install directory.) Inconvenient, but the game runs perfectly otherwise.

    I’m curious if anyone else has the same result; rock-solid performance most of the time, reliably degrading after about forty minutes, fixable by restarting the game.

  20. Cloudiest Nights says:

    It looks like they suspended sales on steam now… Odd, but I guess it’d help with the backlash? Still seems kinda dumb though, because now there will be people complaining about not being able to play while others can…