DF Weekly: Arkham Knight on Switch is disastrously poor
DF Weekly: Arkham Knight on Switch is disastrously poor
by Turbostrider27
39 Comments
Sad-Lawfulness6831
Never would have guessed lmao
Heisenmack
It plays perfectly fine installed on internal storage. Not great, but perfectly fine and enjoyable IMO.
Everyone is so focused on “teh framez” that they completely overlook whether the game is actually fun to play or not, and knight definitely is.
Either way, there are definitely opportunities to fix on this port, but it’s not nearly as bad as these “technical reviews” state.
Bootychomper23
Switch 2 when?
OtherOtie
What about Asylum and City though?
500DaysOfSummer_
Big if true
skylu1991
Didn’t this game or Arkham Origins already come out in WiiU?
Was the performance this poor back then as well?
To be honest, if games like the Witcher 3 or even the two most recent Doom games can run better on Switch, a large part of the problem is the developer and not the (obviously underpowered) hardware!
Strat_MM_Gaiden
why didnt they sell more copies?? are they stupid?
Writhing2
As expected. The Switch hardware simply isn’t powerful enough to run it. Arkham City also has huge issues with frame rate in certain areas, especially when traveling quickly via zipline / gliding in high up areas.
onehell_jdu
I’m waiting for full reviews, but I always take DF with a grain of salt because they’re like the people at car & driver who will review a minivan based on its performance in a slalom course. I’m a 90s gamer and in my day, we put up with WAY bigger graphical downgrades from, say, arcade originals to their 16 bit incarnations. And for portability? Well look at OG game boy, we’d even put up with sacrificing color to get handheld!
If all the content is there, playable*, and not riddled with bugs, then its a good port in my book.
*And “playable” to me does not mean “FPS never dips even one frame below 30.” The question is whether such hiccups are are so bad that they cause you to die a lot when you shouldn’t or the resolution drops to the point where you can’t make out enemies from the scenery and stuff like that. Playability means that the parts that should be hard are hard and the parts that should be easy are easy, IMHO.
The_Legend_of_Xeno
Can’t fathom the guys who spent all that money on such a terrible version of a $5 game.
Chief_Lightning
Never understood why people think 3rd party AAA games are going to run perfectly on a handheld.
fender0327
For what it’s worth, I’ve seen extensive videos of people who have played Asylum and City. Both seem to run fine. It’s just Knight that’s the issues.
SuspiciousSkittlez
This is disappointing, but I’m not surprised. I was kinda shocked when I saw that it was part of the Trilogy in the first place. This game didn’t run very well on last Gen consoles, so hoping that it would perform on a tablet was a bit of a pipe dream.
Johnnylemo
The game ran dreadfully on PC back at launch, so much so I had to refund it. Not surprised here.
Ok-Bug-7481
I think most people saw this coming. If they didn’t want to port it to the ps3 /360 at the time because of the hardware who would have really thought the switch would be a good idea. They should have just done the first two games and called it there
YarnhamSunrise
But it’s portable !!!
Ttm-o
I am still interested in playing the first two titles. Going to wait for a discount but it’s on my wishlist.
bulbasaur_pudding
I mean…yeah?
ZestyGene
Arkham is poor and Hogwarts is pretty good. Weird how that is
KARURUKA2
Typical WB
legalizethesenuts
I mean, there’s a reason they didn’t release it for 360 and PS3 back in 2015, only two years before release of Switch
McWaylon
Asylum and City do run just fine (more so City), but the fact that cant buy them separately is an outrage.
Throwaway753045
I just completed the main story, will share my thoughts later
MassiveReach9890
Beat asylum ran fine, in city and running fine. Played about an hour of knight and it’s tolerable in portable.
blazingchaos91
There is still hope for a patch. At least city and asylum run good. GTA trilogy ran like ass but they eventually patched it up. I also played Pokemon Scarlet on launch, so I’ve dealt with a badly optimized game. Arkham Knight made a lot of PC players rage. Steam gave everyone refunds and even took it down off the store for a while until they fixed it.
Hacker76589
I’m just so surprised
motorboat_mcgee
Really surprised they even tried. Asylum and City make sense to bring over, but Knight is just wild to even try. Somewhat wonder if they were intending it to be a Switch 2 release, then since it was delayed and they had deadlines to meet, they had to just push out whatever they can for Switch 1
Icycold157
I cant believe history is repeating itself
Eebo85
Surprise!!!
Accessx_xDenied
I find this all disastrously hilarious.
Jamesvai
People quick to blame the switch but this is less of a switch issue and more of they were lazy doing the port. Plenty of demanding games have been ported much better.
Spider-ManOnThePS1
Literally just bought the entire trilogy + DLC for €10 on PlayStation. This seems like an unfathomably poor option to go for.
afredmiller
Just out of curiousity here for anybody playing Arkham Knight on Switch now. Is the batmobile has bad driving as they are saying in other areas? Have only seen gameplay footage of when you get the batmobile to start off. Guess I am wondering if it is as bad everywhere else
damattdanman
My guess is they didn’t want to miss the holiday purchase window. Patch it later. They likely delayed to optimize the first 2 as much as possible and threw a band-aid on Knight to get it out in time. I would be surprised if they just leave it as is.
vhavoc11
Time is a circle
so_often_empty
I mean.. it was mess on the initial release, and Nintendo hardware is usually a generation behind as it is. I’m not sure why anyone expected differently.
gg-ndrew
It’s not an impossible game to port it’s just lazy porting, how can this game not run on switch while other big games like witcher 3, borderlands 3, doom eternal can run fine
Inevitable_Gas2077
everyone: “Switch is more powerful than <insert console from two gens ago>.”
39 Comments
Never would have guessed lmao
It plays perfectly fine installed on internal storage. Not great, but perfectly fine and enjoyable IMO.
Everyone is so focused on “teh framez” that they completely overlook whether the game is actually fun to play or not, and knight definitely is.
Either way, there are definitely opportunities to fix on this port, but it’s not nearly as bad as these “technical reviews” state.
Switch 2 when?
What about Asylum and City though?
Big if true
Didn’t this game or Arkham Origins already come out in WiiU?
Was the performance this poor back then as well?
To be honest, if games like the Witcher 3 or even the two most recent Doom games can run better on Switch, a large part of the problem is the developer and not the (obviously underpowered) hardware!
why didnt they sell more copies?? are they stupid?
As expected. The Switch hardware simply isn’t powerful enough to run it. Arkham City also has huge issues with frame rate in certain areas, especially when traveling quickly via zipline / gliding in high up areas.
I’m waiting for full reviews, but I always take DF with a grain of salt because they’re like the people at car & driver who will review a minivan based on its performance in a slalom course. I’m a 90s gamer and in my day, we put up with WAY bigger graphical downgrades from, say, arcade originals to their 16 bit incarnations. And for portability? Well look at OG game boy, we’d even put up with sacrificing color to get handheld!
If all the content is there, playable*, and not riddled with bugs, then its a good port in my book.
*And “playable” to me does not mean “FPS never dips even one frame below 30.” The question is whether such hiccups are are so bad that they cause you to die a lot when you shouldn’t or the resolution drops to the point where you can’t make out enemies from the scenery and stuff like that. Playability means that the parts that should be hard are hard and the parts that should be easy are easy, IMHO.
Can’t fathom the guys who spent all that money on such a terrible version of a $5 game.
Never understood why people think 3rd party AAA games are going to run perfectly on a handheld.
For what it’s worth, I’ve seen extensive videos of people who have played Asylum and City. Both seem to run fine. It’s just Knight that’s the issues.
This is disappointing, but I’m not surprised. I was kinda shocked when I saw that it was part of the Trilogy in the first place. This game didn’t run very well on last Gen consoles, so hoping that it would perform on a tablet was a bit of a pipe dream.
The game ran dreadfully on PC back at launch, so much so I had to refund it. Not surprised here.
I think most people saw this coming. If they didn’t want to port it to the ps3 /360 at the time because of the hardware who would have really thought the switch would be a good idea. They should have just done the first two games and called it there
But it’s portable !!!
I am still interested in playing the first two titles. Going to wait for a discount but it’s on my wishlist.
I mean…yeah?
Arkham is poor and Hogwarts is pretty good. Weird how that is
Typical WB
I mean, there’s a reason they didn’t release it for 360 and PS3 back in 2015, only two years before release of Switch
Asylum and City do run just fine (more so City), but the fact that cant buy them separately is an outrage.
I just completed the main story, will share my thoughts later
Beat asylum ran fine, in city and running fine. Played about an hour of knight and it’s tolerable in portable.
There is still hope for a patch. At least city and asylum run good. GTA trilogy ran like ass but they eventually patched it up. I also played Pokemon Scarlet on launch, so I’ve dealt with a badly optimized game. Arkham Knight made a lot of PC players rage. Steam gave everyone refunds and even took it down off the store for a while until they fixed it.
I’m just so surprised
Really surprised they even tried. Asylum and City make sense to bring over, but Knight is just wild to even try. Somewhat wonder if they were intending it to be a Switch 2 release, then since it was delayed and they had deadlines to meet, they had to just push out whatever they can for Switch 1
I cant believe history is repeating itself
Surprise!!!
I find this all disastrously hilarious.
People quick to blame the switch but this is less of a switch issue and more of they were lazy doing the port. Plenty of demanding games have been ported much better.
Literally just bought the entire trilogy + DLC for €10 on PlayStation. This seems like an unfathomably poor option to go for.
Just out of curiousity here for anybody playing Arkham Knight on Switch now. Is the batmobile has bad driving as they are saying in other areas? Have only seen gameplay footage of when you get the batmobile to start off. Guess I am wondering if it is as bad everywhere else
My guess is they didn’t want to miss the holiday purchase window. Patch it later. They likely delayed to optimize the first 2 as much as possible and threw a band-aid on Knight to get it out in time. I would be surprised if they just leave it as is.
Time is a circle
I mean.. it was mess on the initial release, and Nintendo hardware is usually a generation behind as it is. I’m not sure why anyone expected differently.
It’s not an impossible game to port it’s just lazy porting, how can this game not run on switch while other big games like witcher 3, borderlands 3, doom eternal can run fine
everyone: “Switch is more powerful than <insert console from two gens ago>.”
Jetson devs: “Uhm ok. lol”
oops, wrong sub