By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Digital Foundry: Arkham Knight on PS4 is a technical tour de force

PS4 version runs at 1080, while the Xbox one runs 900p.
PS4 has a more stable frame rate and generally higher fps than the xbox one version.

PC version,... you need a Titan X to run 60fps at 1080p with everything on.

Def. one of those games you want to get the console versions of.

 

"The current controversy over the shockingly poor launch of the PC version is a terrible disappointment bearing in mind how solid the PS4 version is. Previous Rocksteady-helmed ports were worthy, accomplished pieces of work, but the outsourced Arkham Knight looks terrible to the point where reports suggest that even Titan X-equipped PCs cannot sustain 1080p60." - DF



Around the Network

I personally don't game on PC. there is a few games I play, but I prefer consoles personally. This is going to continue to happen when the piracy rate on PC is so high.
Unexcusable for people that do buy the game, but devs need to pursue the avenues that get them paid.



All I really hope is that we can finally put to rest the whole argument that "X game runs better on Y console, which means that Y is clearly the superior platform."

I think we've all learned by now that when there is a significant performance gap between the console versions, it is almost always because one game has the advertisement rights to that particular game.

Optimization is just as important as hardware, and if one of the companies gets the exclusive marketing rights, it means that they are also getting the game optimized for their system.



I wonder if it had to do with that marketing deal? DUN-DUN DUN...



patronmacabre said:
All I really hope is that we can finally put to rest the whole argument that "X games runs better on X console, which means that X is clearly the superior platform."

I think we've all learned by now that when there is a significant performance gap between the console versions, it is almost always because one game has the advertisement rights to that particular game.

Optimization is just as important as hardware, and if one of the companies gets the exclusive marketing rights, it means that they are also getting the game optimized for their system.

Tell that to previous PS3 games with marketing deal running worst than 360 or even now Xbone games with marketing deal running worst than PS4.

Hardware counts.



Around the Network
BlueSlippySocks said:
I wonder if it had to do with that marketing deal? DUN-DUN DUN...

No.

That has to do with the Publishers... they give the PC port to a small 3rd company that just couldn't reach the same level of quality that Rocksteady reached with PS4/Xbone.

Rocksteady worked only on PS4 and Xbone versions.



BlueSlippySocks said:
I wonder if it had to do with that marketing deal? DUN-DUN DUN...

There has never been a case where a company pays to have the other platform worse off. They may pay or provide assistance on their version, but never to de-value the platform's release.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Well seems like I have the console of choice for this game.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

This is something i dont get, wasn't the x86 ps4/xone to actually benefit pc ports? There were a time ago I enjoyed playing on pc, but I believe I'll keep my 2012 Xps for indie and last gen titles and just a ps4 already.



399 well spent