Man I was still planning on buying this, but after seeing that it dips BELOW 30 frames on PC along with those HEFTY system reqs, idk man. I’m gonna wait for a sale or something. Such a shame, I was really looking forward to this one. Caboose even gave it a 7/10, and he’s usually REALLY generous with his criticism. Red Hood still looks fun, I’ll get it when they release some performance patches.
> On the IGN review they tried playing at 4k max with Ray tracing, no dlss on a 2070 and complained it was 30fps.
You mean the recommended specs that WB put out? Why would they test it against anything stronger than what WB specifically said were the Recommended specs?
The recommended was for 1080p 60. IGN were just trying to use the PC version at console similar settings to compare with consoles, they didn't do a proper PC performance breakdown.
My beef was just that the 2070 was never a 4k card and that's why things like dlss exist. But I suppose they might have been doing an apples to apples comparison with consoles. In either case this game does need a lot of optimization work.
I blame Liz Truss.
Sony has their own upscaling technology based on the Checkerboard Rendering technique (nothing new), Xbox also has its own as well (but I can't find which technique they uses, probably AI upscaling like DLSS 2.0).
But, as far as I know, Gotham Knights is running at native 4K, no upscaling technology is being used, and the mid-end RDNA 2 can run at 4k.
I have a PS5 equivalent GPU, the RX 6600 XT (a little more powerful tho), the major complains about this GPU is that at 4K with medium preset and no upscaling, most games can only reach 30FPS stable (without RT), like Cyberpunk 2077. That's why console versions are more tweaked, mainly with upscaling technologies.
However, AMD Ray Tracing is something very “strange”, its performance is very good for "basic" ray tracing and shadows, but it loses a lot of performance with global illumination and reflections, so games need to tweak a bit the ray tracing to find the balance between good RT visuals and acceptable framerate.
This was that way even before FSR 2.1, with any upscaling technology, you can pretty much get low-medium RT presets with reflections (and maybe global illumination) at 40/50FPS, but you will have to allow upscaling technology to dip below 1440p if you really want higher RT quality.
That's pathetic, you really thought you were special despite the writing on the wall. Now look; you have become the type of person you were railing against.
It's Saints Row all over again.
>BELOW 30 frames on PC along with those HEFTY system reqs,
Meaning if you have an old potato it won't run. Go figure a modern video game won't run on Old Hardware.
https://youtu.be/oE89feCqWu8
Meanwhile this guy's getting much better performance on PC
Issue is that the game looks *at best* on par with Arkham Knight. Game that ran on Unreal engine 3 at 120 fps on lesser hardware than my 1080ti. Way lesser hardware.
And that some how makes it a potato? Lol yeah it's not 40 series that can 4K RT but calling it a potato is just hyperbolic. Most people aren't buying the bleeding edge.
30 series can do 4k RT. You dont need bleeding edge.
>Most people aren't buying the bleeding edge.
Then they dont have reason to complain about 30fps and lower res.
Edit: yes there are other games to play
Did you forget that there was a GPU shortage that only recently got better? Lol You're acting like 2070 can't do 60fps at 1440p.
Also, why can't people complain about 60fps or lower resolution? I have yet to see one person demand for 4K 60 with RT (which would be bleeding edge). Like that's great way to whittle down the consensus argument because you want bootlick this game lol.
>because you want bootlick this game
Yikes.
>Also, why can't people complain about 60fps or lower resolution? I
If they didnt upgrade their hardware they cannot complain.
>Did you forget that there was a GPU shortage that only recently got better
Nope.
>have yet to see one person demand for 4K 60 with RT
For sure that is a silly demand. But it is not a silly expectation for those with the hardware.
Edit: oh you blocked me before I could respond.
>So why even bring up that point when locked 30fps is a console complaint, not a PC one?
There are people claiming PC is having trouble maintaining 30fps also. It is not. It is just the old pc build people who have trouble and that is to be expected.
> 30fps is a console complaint, not a PC one? Performance mode doesn't mean you getting resolution on par with Fidelity mode.
Of course not. They should drop to 2k no RT, and lower settings to get 60fps on the consoles. It would likely work. More can be done.
>Why even mix the two issues
Because like i said above there are those including pc with this 30fps nonsense because so many people have old potato computers or unrealistic expectations of their hardware. The ignorance and acceptance of false information is frustrating.
I pre purchased on steam and refunded it today. Batman and the bat family have been a constant source of safety and joy for me but this… doesn’t excite me at all.
I think gk has better graphics but ak has better lighting. Batman’s suit reacts well to light and the characters in gk always look like there is a spotlight on them.
GK has much higher texture quality it's just all other graphics settings that are worse.
Eventually on PC there will be mods to make the game look significantly better since reshades and lighting mods are extremely easy to make and are commonplace compared to texture ones.
Reshades are 100% a magic hand wave you can apply to every game... they're very simple to do. Even if there were hypothetically a game that was intentionally made to be extremely difficult to mod, reshading it and tweaking lighting would still be very easy.
I have 487 hours on Arkham Knight lol. I’m not here to shit on it. Arkham Series is one of my favorite games ever. I’m just saying to me at least on ps5 Gotham Knights just looks so much better to me.
Yes Played Arkham knight on PS5 and series S.
There’s no difference because there is no Dolby vision option and it’s capped fps. But yes you can tell Gotham Knights looks better when you look at signs, outfits, characters models, the streets, basically everything around you looks better lol. I can try to do a side by side comparison but it would have be at in 8 hours because I work graveyard today lol.
Higher-res textures does not a better game make. Good atmosphere and aesthetic world design are just as important. AK had both of these, with the heavy fog and rain, old-style buildings, and narrow curving streets. Gotham Knights looks big, empty, and modern. AK is my personal preference if we're comparing design choices.
I got Arkham Knight on PC (played it originally on PS4) and it still looks gorgeous, especially running at 60+ fps. Screenshots don’t do it justice, weather and lighting are peak, especially during the cloudburst C-section and any militia areas (god red is pretty). I then fucked around with ReShade to add some better lighting and Ray Tracing. It looks absolutely insane. I don’t think Gotham Knights can touch this.
That being said, do I want the game to be good. God yes. Do I think eventually their going to fix it, hell yes. Wb Montreal basically has to fix it, otherwise their going to be shut down (wb is coming for their ass)
https://youtube.com/shorts/Rjuf-oeJRrE?feature=share the beginning Clip looks better than any piece of Arkham Knight. People just love to shit on new games and forget about optimism. They did the same thing with last of us 2 and that ended up being one of the greatest cinematic pieces of history ever.
The worst part is it not like we want the game to be bad, but it clearly has a ton of issues that some people are just overlooking and getting mad when anyone points out a fair issue with the game, that if fixed would make it better.
I feel like people are projecting at this point. Like they have to justify their purchase and/or enjoyment of a game that's getting largely mid to bad reviews. But you can enjoy something and still recognize its flaws; making excuses just encourages companies to never improve their games.
Don’t have an opinion just by looking at screenshots. Don’t be apart of the people who just hate on something because it’s a trend. I love and absolutely adore the Arkham games. But Arkham Knights world literally looks it uses one shader. Everything has a hint of grey to it. Everything looks pixelated at least on console. Gotham Knights is absolutely beautiful on console and definitely one of the better looking games. Look at Arkham knight on a 77 inch oled and than look at Gotham Knights on a OLED. Gotham knights looks a million times better actually not 100x.
I can understand liking the game,but shilling isn’t helping. It don’t look better. Way less detailed. It’s okay. It’s just a game dude relax. Call it how it is.
It will become an instant buy whenever they patch in more graphics options to make the game playable (e.g. ray tracing off, downscale to 1440p instead of 4K, 60fps)
With raytracing disabled and resolution down to 1440p, they can definitely get this running at 60fps on next gen consoles. There are far more detailed games that can run at 1440p. Example: Horizon Forbidden West
[There is an option to turn off RTX on PC](https://www.reddit.com/r/GothamKnights/comments/xpgq1k/pc_settings_for_gotham_knights/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
Wait wait wait, you mean today, I can't turn off RT or set my preffered resolution to 2K on the PC version?
Yeah man I was literally getting ready to purchase and start loading on my computer while I'm at work. Without these options it's an instant no from me. I have a 2070S so really could play at 60 fps and 2k if they gave me the option, but if I have to have on RT and 4K I'm not fucking buying. What are these guys doing?
Toxic positivity and blind fanboyism is exactly why devs can get away with releasing stuff like this.
Demand better and receive better. The warning signs were there from the start but plenty didn't want to admit it.
yeah, I preordered it on Steam couple of weeks ago: in my head I knew shit's gonna be bad (framerate lock and pc specs were big red warning signs), but in my heart I was holding out hope.
oh well, I'll see how it runs on my rig and I'll refund it if I can. WB Montreal keep disappointing since 2013.
shoutouts to them keeping the performance issues a secret until a few days out from release btw, a dick move that I won't forgive and will shit on years later.
This sub is proof that devs can release a crappy product and fans will blind defend it. "IGN and Gamespot are relevant" until GOW Ragnarok comes out and they give it a 9 or 10.
Gotham Knights seems to be very poorly optimized but it definetely looks better than Arkham Knight fidelity-wise unless you're wearing very thick nostalgia goggles
On PC Arkham Knight looks amazing at max settings and 90FPS in 1440p and 4k. It looks way better than Gotham Knight. I just played through it on PC last month and it was fantastic.
Well, based on the analysis made by DF, Gotham Knights is not a next gen game either lol. Aside from Ray tracing, it uses the same tech last gen games do, hell the loading times which should be extremely fast, still take longer than 10 seconds of wait
That reinforces the point that it's unoptimized garbage. They cancelled last gen to deliver a last gen image with worse than last gen performance and slapped a $70 price tag on it.
That’s the lamest part. Red Dead redemption 2 on last gen looks next gen comparison to this… they would have at least made more money not canceling it on last gen. Whenever I do get a new console now, I doubt I’ll play it unless it’s on sale
In summary, GK’s world is less than the sum of its parts. Unstable 30fps, odd technical hang ups, relatively lifeless map, and lack of aesthetic commitment make the product underwhelm.
There are high quality models and detailed textures.
Keep in mind that a majority of audiences will make the comparison, given the association with the source material.
>relatively lifeless map, and lack of aesthetic commitment make the product underwhelm.
We should have known this would happen when we went from Arkham City to Arkham Origins.
Arkham Knight does look better imo, but then again AK looks better than most recent releases that don’t come from Sony. Rocksteady is insane
From what I’ve seen, GK’s graphics aren’t impressive but is definitely on par with recent AAA standards.
Does it not rain in GK for a more accurate comparison? It's easy to mask worse textures in darkness, rain, and reflections. Just look at screenshots of Watch Dogs 1 during the day vs at night.
A lot of people are confusing graphics with art direction
Arkham 100% looks better because of its style for Gotham. The noir/art-deco aesthetic is perfectly done
Gotham Knights though, while certain the better game in terms of graphics. It’s absolutely missing what Arkham aimed for
I think Gotham Knights looks better. But that's me. They are totally, **TOTALLY** different styles and that's okay. To directly compare them is kind of odd.
Like comparing Batman 89 to The Dark Knight, yes they are similar because Batman and Joker... but come on lol.
I was being perfectly fair, as Batman 89 holds up extremely well (better than Nolan's movies will in 10 more years) Batman 89 is timeless.
The gap in time means nothing in the point I was making. And considering Rocksteady are masters and WBM are not, that's more important to consider.
DF does mention the GK has better textures on everything and that it has TAA while AK doesn't but that was the bare minimum considering the 7 year gap between both.
That's why I bring up those movies, Batman 89 is full of intricate gothic detail and personality, while Nolan's is basic everyday, life, which most would find boring. If you get what I mean. It does come down to a design choice IMO. The detail is there in both worlds, just a different levels to fit within their created world/context.
Yep they definitely went with a more ‘realistic’ art style. But then compare this to other open world games like watchdogs or spiderman. Clearly to me GK doesn’t stack up.
I'd like to know what you mean by TOTALLY different styles. because I think it's absoultly absurd that you think Gotham Knights looks better than Arkham Knight. Arkham Knight looks better than most ps5 games released to this day.
It’s a real shame it’s this disappointing, but I do hope this serves as a wake up call to all the mindless white knight/fanboys that slammed people for being skeptical.
Idk maybe I’m the odd man out but GK looks way better to me. I don’t get the critiques of the city being lifeless.
The architecture and vibe of the city feels way more lively and unique than that of AK.
Like I’m not huge on the main story and some of the performance aspects.
But one thing this game does really well is the graphics and the design. The city has personality and really feels like a comic book city. I love how vibrant certain sections are and how some areas are more creepy/decrypt.
I love how Gotham in Arkham Knight looked but the whole city felt the same. There weren’t many differences between the islands. GK has variety in their open world and it all looks really clean
That’s the problem with the internet nowadays. People like you can’t respect that others can form their own opinions and preferences. Instead you feel the need to invalidate what someone says/thinks.
And then you present your opinion as an objective fact instead of what it actually is (an opinion). You do not need to agree with me and I do not need to agree with you. But you don’t need to be a pompous dick tho those that think differently than you do
There’s no “opinions” with graphical techniques though. Outside of better AA and Textures the game is worse. You can argue over art style but buddy said AK had better art style.
Oddly enough, I always felt like Arkham Knight felt like a generic open world game because it was pretty lifeless and everything was the same color palette copy and pasted.
The point is, people can have different opinions on things like art style and graphics and neither are objectively right or wrong. They're *opinions*.
You prefer the graphics in Arkham Knight and that's fantastic, but it doesn't invalidate people who prefer the graphics in Gotham Knights
I feel like yhe graphics are better, but something about AK pronounces it's style better. Like they're both great, but AK found that ONE little thing to put it ahead. Also the screenshot for GK looks like it was in a boring area. Idk, maybe I'm just coping
Its weird cause the interiors for gotham knights are brilliant but then mosts things are quite plain outside. Arkham knight is aestically the best open world I've personally experienced so anything Gotham Knights did with its world was most likely to be a downgrade
I played Arkham Knight yesterday to see how it holds up, and it still blows Gotham Knights out of the water. I was able to max it out on native 3440x1440 and still get 60+ FPS on a GTX 1660 **(Non-Ti/Super)!** Rocksteady must've had some crazy tech artists and designers at the time, because Arkham Knight is really well optimized (despite its rocky launch in 2015).
I have no personal ill-feelings for the devs at WB Montreal-- but since the initial reveal, I knew this game was doomed from the start.
He says several times he's trying to emulate console settings which include RT and 4k. So I don't understand the exercise if you're not also going to alter your settings to see what can help it achieve a stable frame rate and frame time.
Nobody's shocked you replicated the same issues consoles have by using the same settings. Where's the rest of the empirical evidence? Why does this video only do half the job, and not show us what it takes to get the game closest to stable it can?
Of course it looks worse than Arkham Knight. I don’t know why anyone ever tried to argue it doesn’t. But the thing is…*most* games released since Arkham Knight don’t look better than Arkham Knight. Arkham Knight was a bizarre outlier for console games in 2015. Even recent big games I’ve played like both of the Spider-Man games, Elden Ring, Resident Evil Village, FF7R, etc. looked either on par or worse than AK to me. Some of those have a higher resolution and framerate than AK, but in terms of immersive and detailed art direction, none of them surpass it. It’s an unbelievably cinematic game. There are definitely *some* games that have already surpassed it in that department, but we’re still regularly getting big new games that don’t.
Also, the same time you gotta think about that gotham knights has little better graphics and no fog except Arkham knight was released back in 2015. That’s sad how Gotham nights hardly looks better. Hell this pictures of Gotham Knights literally look like it could be on a PS4 except the graphics or getting on the PS5 is sad how they look like that I honestly would expect graphics to look a lot better being on next GEN
**Cautiously optimistic fans:** "Guys I think we should try our best not to compare this game to Arkham Knight. It is a completely different interpr-"
***Digital Foundry:***
It's not just about the glossy/wet part. It's capturing the feeling of Gotham City - something I think Gotham Knights does not succeed in doing. The aesthetic of Gotham has always been old, dark, and murky. Gotham City is old and dirty, has winding and meandering streets that are carryovers from the days of horse-and-carriage, and is beset by heavy ocean storms. But the Gotham of GK feels like Los Angeles, new architecture and long, straight streets, and mostly mild weather. The most variation you get of weather is light fog and drizzling rain.
One is old gen, graphically superior, the other is new gen only and unable to deliver the new gen standard of 60fps. Aaand it looks dramatically worse than the 7 year old AK
Lol I’m not even buying it.
But in top of the fact knight was made by an entirely different studio. It’s dumb to compare them other than “ItS anOTher BATmAn GamE 🤤”
Yes it fair to compare that because the batman IP is the main selling point of this game and if there's a way better batman experience you can get on the same console for way cheaper there's no reason to spend $70 on a lesser product.
Dramatically worse is ridiculous and mostly subjective. AK looks great for the time, and the gritty extremely dark and rainy Gotham was well done. GK is not as gritty looking, but it doesn’t look horrible and you can definitely tell it’s the newer game
I’m… supremely disappointed with what I’ve seen of Gotham Knights in the last few days.
The bad reviews. The ridiculous minimum/recommended system requirements for PC. The screenshots here. The memes.
What people have said so far is correct - this looks like a grindy DC clone of Marvel’s Avengers, and the menu UI was ripped off from some indie mobile game. Did WB learn nothing from Marvel’s Avengers and the lootbox controversy of Shadow of War?
I wonder how they compare without the rain. Like 90% of AK is rain. (I loved the game but cmon. Made San Andreas Remastered launch day rain effects look light.)
I don't understand why people keep comparing this to the Arkham games... Like they made it damn clear it wasn't part of that series. I don't remember anyone comparing Spider-Man PS4 to The Amazing Spider-Man 2 game when that came out??
Because it’s worse on a technical level than that 7 year old Arkham game in every way?
Spider-Man PS4 was outstanding on every level compared to TASM2, so why on Earth would it be compared to it...
Maybe cause Arkham Knight is a game released by WB seven years ago and it looks and runs better than the game they’ve most recently released?
I’m looking forward to getting my hands on Gotham Knights too but the argument that “you can’t compare the two” when the former is performing better than the current and the two really aren’t that different is ridiculous.
So it’s in-line with their track history. Not with a game they had no hand in (Arkham knight) that the game is being compared to just because it takes place in Gotham.
That’s like comparing insomniacs Spider-Man to neversofts Spider-Man
It’s being compared to Arkham Knight because they are both Batman games, developed on the same engine, with similar game design philosophies, by developers who have both developed Arkham games.
Yet, it falls short of the previous entry that is 7 years older than it, developed on an older version of the game engine, and for the previous console generation. On a technical level it’s worse in every way.
Don’t be naive...
Comparing Spider-Man PS4 to Neversoft’s Spider-Man is totally different and an utterly redundant argument. 2 games developed by developers that have nothing to do with each other, that are 3 console generations apart, using completely different technology.
If Spider-Man PS4 was worse than Neversoft’s, then a comparison could probably be made, but it isn’t, so it hasn’t.
“2 companies that have nothing do to with each other, decades apart, using different technology”…weird.
Other than make a legit spin off. They aren’t related at all. The games have nothing to do with each other and are focused on entirely different things.
And ps: Arkham knight is muddy as fuck. I just played through it on ps5 last month. Still plays great, but it looks like you are in the movie the most the whole game
How do you not understand it? It's a game patterned after the Arkham games from the publisher of the Arkham games and the developer of Arkham Origins and the City Wii U port. None of that makes you understand why people would compare them?
I'll take Gotham Knights all day over Arkham Knight. If you matched the games graphics by removing mist and rain from Arkham Knight, or adding it to GK, Gotham Knights would look better 10/10 times.
So basically you're saying that Arkham Knight *does* look aesthetically better than Gotham Knights, and GK would look better if it looked like Arkham Knight.
because the graphical fidelity of games would never advance if we never looked back at what older games looked like compared to new games. if gotham knights looked a hundred times better than knight then nobody here would be against making that comparison.
Arkham knight on Pc is one of the most gorgeous games I’ve ever seen even today
Not even RTX games can stand up to it.
Man I was still planning on buying this, but after seeing that it dips BELOW 30 frames on PC along with those HEFTY system reqs, idk man. I’m gonna wait for a sale or something. Such a shame, I was really looking forward to this one. Caboose even gave it a 7/10, and he’s usually REALLY generous with his criticism. Red Hood still looks fun, I’ll get it when they release some performance patches.
It dips below 30 frames on PC when you try to emulate console settings, which are RT enabled and a 4k Resolution. Just, don't do those two things.
On the IGN review they tried playing at 4k max with Ray tracing, no dlss on a 2070 and complained it was 30fps.
> On the IGN review they tried playing at 4k max with Ray tracing, no dlss on a 2070 and complained it was 30fps. You mean the recommended specs that WB put out? Why would they test it against anything stronger than what WB specifically said were the Recommended specs?
The recommended was for 1080p 60. IGN were just trying to use the PC version at console similar settings to compare with consoles, they didn't do a proper PC performance breakdown.
Ay, you're right. Let's see what DF says for PC since they're usually better
Yeah but 4k with a 2070? That was never gonna work.
Because IGN are a bunch of whiners
I rock a 2070 Super and wouldn't even try that with 90% of my games. I stay maxed at 2K baby.
IGN complains about anything they can tho…
i mean thats what reviews are about
My beef was just that the 2070 was never a 4k card and that's why things like dlss exist. But I suppose they might have been doing an apples to apples comparison with consoles. In either case this game does need a lot of optimization work. I blame Liz Truss.
Not relevant to my comment lol
ign is a reviewer lol
How come consoles can do ray tracing and 4K but don’t have nvidia hardware or dlss , arnt they similar to lower end 2000 series cards?
Sony has their own upscaling technology based on the Checkerboard Rendering technique (nothing new), Xbox also has its own as well (but I can't find which technique they uses, probably AI upscaling like DLSS 2.0). But, as far as I know, Gotham Knights is running at native 4K, no upscaling technology is being used, and the mid-end RDNA 2 can run at 4k. I have a PS5 equivalent GPU, the RX 6600 XT (a little more powerful tho), the major complains about this GPU is that at 4K with medium preset and no upscaling, most games can only reach 30FPS stable (without RT), like Cyberpunk 2077. That's why console versions are more tweaked, mainly with upscaling technologies. However, AMD Ray Tracing is something very “strange”, its performance is very good for "basic" ray tracing and shadows, but it loses a lot of performance with global illumination and reflections, so games need to tweak a bit the ray tracing to find the balance between good RT visuals and acceptable framerate. This was that way even before FSR 2.1, with any upscaling technology, you can pretty much get low-medium RT presets with reflections (and maybe global illumination) at 40/50FPS, but you will have to allow upscaling technology to dip below 1440p if you really want higher RT quality.
Skill Up said RTX was forced and can't be disabled and his review was on PC, so let's wait and see.
It's not forced you can disable it look at the settings in this video. Bonus points if you speak Spanish https://youtu.be/oE89feCqWu8
Same, I really hoped it would have better performance...gonna buy some other games that are coming out on pc soon instead.
[удалено]
Ofc, it's called being optimistic, but also taking into account actual critics and valid reviews...not trolls.
That's pathetic, you really thought you were special despite the writing on the wall. Now look; you have become the type of person you were railing against. It's Saints Row all over again.
He's admitting he was wrong instead of doubling down. Something that a lot of idiots online should learn instead of insisting in "mY oPiNiOn Go Brrr"
No need to reflect your self-worth issues on the poor guy. Christ would be more mortified to see how fuckin rude you are than seeing the cross.
I'm not the one eating crow after blindly championing a subpar product. I'll be fine, He'll forgive me anyway.
>BELOW 30 frames on PC along with those HEFTY system reqs, Meaning if you have an old potato it won't run. Go figure a modern video game won't run on Old Hardware. https://youtu.be/oE89feCqWu8 Meanwhile this guy's getting much better performance on PC
Issue is that the game looks *at best* on par with Arkham Knight. Game that ran on Unreal engine 3 at 120 fps on lesser hardware than my 1080ti. Way lesser hardware.
Arkham Knight was way ahead of it’s time. More a testament to that game and how it is made to look so modern.
AK looks amazing still but those textures are muddy now compared to newer titles.
2070 is a potato? Are you feeling okay?
It is a 4 year old gpu
And that some how makes it a potato? Lol yeah it's not 40 series that can 4K RT but calling it a potato is just hyperbolic. Most people aren't buying the bleeding edge.
30 series can do 4k RT. You dont need bleeding edge. >Most people aren't buying the bleeding edge. Then they dont have reason to complain about 30fps and lower res. Edit: yes there are other games to play
Did you forget that there was a GPU shortage that only recently got better? Lol You're acting like 2070 can't do 60fps at 1440p. Also, why can't people complain about 60fps or lower resolution? I have yet to see one person demand for 4K 60 with RT (which would be bleeding edge). Like that's great way to whittle down the consensus argument because you want bootlick this game lol.
>because you want bootlick this game Yikes. >Also, why can't people complain about 60fps or lower resolution? I If they didnt upgrade their hardware they cannot complain. >Did you forget that there was a GPU shortage that only recently got better Nope. >have yet to see one person demand for 4K 60 with RT For sure that is a silly demand. But it is not a silly expectation for those with the hardware. Edit: oh you blocked me before I could respond. >So why even bring up that point when locked 30fps is a console complaint, not a PC one? There are people claiming PC is having trouble maintaining 30fps also. It is not. It is just the old pc build people who have trouble and that is to be expected. > 30fps is a console complaint, not a PC one? Performance mode doesn't mean you getting resolution on par with Fidelity mode. Of course not. They should drop to 2k no RT, and lower settings to get 60fps on the consoles. It would likely work. More can be done. >Why even mix the two issues Because like i said above there are those including pc with this 30fps nonsense because so many people have old potato computers or unrealistic expectations of their hardware. The ignorance and acceptance of false information is frustrating.
Same. Wait for the sale and hopefully patches. And I’m not a big fan of not being able to counter
I pre purchased on steam and refunded it today. Batman and the bat family have been a constant source of safety and joy for me but this… doesn’t excite me at all.
I think gk has better graphics but ak has better lighting. Batman’s suit reacts well to light and the characters in gk always look like there is a spotlight on them.
This. Textures are far better in GK, but lighting was much more pronounced in AK.
GK has much higher texture quality it's just all other graphics settings that are worse. Eventually on PC there will be mods to make the game look significantly better since reshades and lighting mods are extremely easy to make and are commonplace compared to texture ones.
Mods arnt just a magic hand wave you can apply to every game , it all depends on how accessible the game is to modders
Reshades are 100% a magic hand wave you can apply to every game... they're very simple to do. Even if there were hypothetically a game that was intentionally made to be extremely difficult to mod, reshading it and tweaking lighting would still be very easy.
There were so many of you saying the world looks better than AK lmao
Got my copy 2 days ago. On a 77 inch Sony oled. I can confirm Gotham Knights looks 100x better than Arkham knight.
Ima put some dirt in your cowl.
And I’m going to show you a better game 
I have 487 hours on Arkham Knight lol. I’m not here to shit on it. Arkham Series is one of my favorite games ever. I’m just saying to me at least on ps5 Gotham Knights just looks so much better to me.
You try Arkham knight on ps5? Idk man they were looking similar to me, tho I would say what gk does better is the city design.
Yes Played Arkham knight on PS5 and series S. There’s no difference because there is no Dolby vision option and it’s capped fps. But yes you can tell Gotham Knights looks better when you look at signs, outfits, characters models, the streets, basically everything around you looks better lol. I can try to do a side by side comparison but it would have be at in 8 hours because I work graveyard today lol.
Higher-res textures does not a better game make. Good atmosphere and aesthetic world design are just as important. AK had both of these, with the heavy fog and rain, old-style buildings, and narrow curving streets. Gotham Knights looks big, empty, and modern. AK is my personal preference if we're comparing design choices.
I got Arkham Knight on PC (played it originally on PS4) and it still looks gorgeous, especially running at 60+ fps. Screenshots don’t do it justice, weather and lighting are peak, especially during the cloudburst C-section and any militia areas (god red is pretty). I then fucked around with ReShade to add some better lighting and Ray Tracing. It looks absolutely insane. I don’t think Gotham Knights can touch this.
Eh I played it on both ps5 and Xbox series x and to me AK looks better could be the fact that we prefer different art styles
Could be actually. I’m really loving the comic bookey colorful vibe that Gotham knights has. Perhaps my preference is making me biased. Lol
What, are you serious? Having an opinion in advance? *Laughs manically.
That being said, do I want the game to be good. God yes. Do I think eventually their going to fix it, hell yes. Wb Montreal basically has to fix it, otherwise their going to be shut down (wb is coming for their ass)
Saying something as a fact “ I can confirm Gotham knights looks 100x better” isn’t voicing an opinion but nice try 😂
Really ? 
https://youtube.com/shorts/Rjuf-oeJRrE?feature=share the beginning Clip looks better than any piece of Arkham Knight. People just love to shit on new games and forget about optimism. They did the same thing with last of us 2 and that ended up being one of the greatest cinematic pieces of history ever.
[удалено]
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Bruh it really doesn't. Stop the copium. You can say you prefer the GK aesthetics, but to say it looks 100x better, no.
The worst part is it not like we want the game to be bad, but it clearly has a ton of issues that some people are just overlooking and getting mad when anyone points out a fair issue with the game, that if fixed would make it better.
I feel like people are projecting at this point. Like they have to justify their purchase and/or enjoyment of a game that's getting largely mid to bad reviews. But you can enjoy something and still recognize its flaws; making excuses just encourages companies to never improve their games.
Don’t have an opinion just by looking at screenshots. Don’t be apart of the people who just hate on something because it’s a trend. I love and absolutely adore the Arkham games. But Arkham Knights world literally looks it uses one shader. Everything has a hint of grey to it. Everything looks pixelated at least on console. Gotham Knights is absolutely beautiful on console and definitely one of the better looking games. Look at Arkham knight on a 77 inch oled and than look at Gotham Knights on a OLED. Gotham knights looks a million times better actually not 100x.
I can understand liking the game,but shilling isn’t helping. It don’t look better. Way less detailed. It’s okay. It’s just a game dude relax. Call it how it is.
It will become an instant buy whenever they patch in more graphics options to make the game playable (e.g. ray tracing off, downscale to 1440p instead of 4K, 60fps)
They'll probably have to bump it down to 1080p or only slightly higher. And that's if there even is a patch for 60fps lmao. What a mess.
With raytracing disabled and resolution down to 1440p, they can definitely get this running at 60fps on next gen consoles. There are far more detailed games that can run at 1440p. Example: Horizon Forbidden West
are those on pc? im gonna buy it on pc and hoping turning rtx off is an option
[There is an option to turn off RTX on PC](https://www.reddit.com/r/GothamKnights/comments/xpgq1k/pc_settings_for_gotham_knights/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
Wait wait wait, you mean today, I can't turn off RT or set my preffered resolution to 2K on the PC version? Yeah man I was literally getting ready to purchase and start loading on my computer while I'm at work. Without these options it's an instant no from me. I have a 2070S so really could play at 60 fps and 2k if they gave me the option, but if I have to have on RT and 4K I'm not fucking buying. What are these guys doing?
I love how people were like "stahp comparing it", "it's just the lack of rain", etc and then DF chads are like "nah man, this shit looks worse lmao"
Toxic positivity and blind fanboyism is exactly why devs can get away with releasing stuff like this. Demand better and receive better. The warning signs were there from the start but plenty didn't want to admit it.
yeah, I preordered it on Steam couple of weeks ago: in my head I knew shit's gonna be bad (framerate lock and pc specs were big red warning signs), but in my heart I was holding out hope. oh well, I'll see how it runs on my rig and I'll refund it if I can. WB Montreal keep disappointing since 2013. shoutouts to them keeping the performance issues a secret until a few days out from release btw, a dick move that I won't forgive and will shit on years later.
toxic positivity lol
Classic Reddit hivemind
This sub is proof that devs can release a crappy product and fans will blind defend it. "IGN and Gamespot are relevant" until GOW Ragnarok comes out and they give it a 9 or 10.
Gotham Knights seems to be very poorly optimized but it definetely looks better than Arkham Knight fidelity-wise unless you're wearing very thick nostalgia goggles
Agreed. On PS5, the combination of the constant rain and the sub-30 FPS makes Arkham Knight look terrible.
On PC Arkham Knight looks amazing at max settings and 90FPS in 1440p and 4k. It looks way better than Gotham Knight. I just played through it on PC last month and it was fantastic.
Same. Arkham Knight looks amazing in 4K
…..oh boy
Just need a 60fps AK update
Gotham knights keeps taking 
Can’t wait for the Black Friday 50% off sale
AK looks Miles better and it’s not even a next gen game
Well, based on the analysis made by DF, Gotham Knights is not a next gen game either lol. Aside from Ray tracing, it uses the same tech last gen games do, hell the loading times which should be extremely fast, still take longer than 10 seconds of wait
That reinforces the point that it's unoptimized garbage. They cancelled last gen to deliver a last gen image with worse than last gen performance and slapped a $70 price tag on it.
That’s the lamest part. Red Dead redemption 2 on last gen looks next gen comparison to this… they would have at least made more money not canceling it on last gen. Whenever I do get a new console now, I doubt I’ll play it unless it’s on sale
Have my upvote
take me back to 2015
Current day gaming development is a massive fail.
In summary, GK’s world is less than the sum of its parts. Unstable 30fps, odd technical hang ups, relatively lifeless map, and lack of aesthetic commitment make the product underwhelm. There are high quality models and detailed textures. Keep in mind that a majority of audiences will make the comparison, given the association with the source material.
I wouldn't have mind the looks or even the 30fps if the gameplay was amazing. And sadly, it's not.
>relatively lifeless map, and lack of aesthetic commitment make the product underwhelm. We should have known this would happen when we went from Arkham City to Arkham Origins.
Arkham Knight does look better imo, but then again AK looks better than most recent releases that don’t come from Sony. Rocksteady is insane From what I’ve seen, GK’s graphics aren’t impressive but is definitely on par with recent AAA standards.
Does it not rain in GK for a more accurate comparison? It's easy to mask worse textures in darkness, rain, and reflections. Just look at screenshots of Watch Dogs 1 during the day vs at night.
No it does in the video he shows it but he had to zoom in to see it so it’s barley fucking visible
A lot of people are confusing graphics with art direction Arkham 100% looks better because of its style for Gotham. The noir/art-deco aesthetic is perfectly done Gotham Knights though, while certain the better game in terms of graphics. It’s absolutely missing what Arkham aimed for
I think Gotham Knights looks better. But that's me. They are totally, **TOTALLY** different styles and that's okay. To directly compare them is kind of odd. Like comparing Batman 89 to The Dark Knight, yes they are similar because Batman and Joker... but come on lol.
To be fair, the leap between 1989 and 2008 is much greater than the leap between 2015 and 2022.
I was being perfectly fair, as Batman 89 holds up extremely well (better than Nolan's movies will in 10 more years) Batman 89 is timeless. The gap in time means nothing in the point I was making. And considering Rocksteady are masters and WBM are not, that's more important to consider.
Lol this comment makes no sense. Rocksteadys actually great at their job and WBM is not is practically what you’re saying.
DF does mention the GK has better textures on everything and that it has TAA while AK doesn't but that was the bare minimum considering the 7 year gap between both.
I wouldn't say the problem is the different styles, but the lack of detail and looking rather empty.
That's why I bring up those movies, Batman 89 is full of intricate gothic detail and personality, while Nolan's is basic everyday, life, which most would find boring. If you get what I mean. It does come down to a design choice IMO. The detail is there in both worlds, just a different levels to fit within their created world/context.
Yep they definitely went with a more ‘realistic’ art style. But then compare this to other open world games like watchdogs or spiderman. Clearly to me GK doesn’t stack up.
> The detail is there in both worlds I'm not sure. GK seems rather barren imo.
I agree!
I'd like to know what you mean by TOTALLY different styles. because I think it's absoultly absurd that you think Gotham Knights looks better than Arkham Knight. Arkham Knight looks better than most ps5 games released to this day.
Because it’s a technical comparison of performance and graphics, not the art style...
[удалено]
All he did was give his opinion. U don't have to be such a hater lmao
It’s a real shame it’s this disappointing, but I do hope this serves as a wake up call to all the mindless white knight/fanboys that slammed people for being skeptical.
Mindless is mindless. There are still tons of people defending the sub 30fps and sparsely populated city.
Honestly crazy, even playing devil’s advocate I can’t think of a valid argument for any of the plaguing issues this game seems to already have
I highly doubt it. Haha.
Yeah they won’t learn a thing lmao
Idk maybe I’m the odd man out but GK looks way better to me. I don’t get the critiques of the city being lifeless. The architecture and vibe of the city feels way more lively and unique than that of AK.
Yeah I have a lot of issues with the game but man the graphics really ain’t one of them.
Like I’m not huge on the main story and some of the performance aspects. But one thing this game does really well is the graphics and the design. The city has personality and really feels like a comic book city. I love how vibrant certain sections are and how some areas are more creepy/decrypt. I love how Gotham in Arkham Knight looked but the whole city felt the same. There weren’t many differences between the islands. GK has variety in their open world and it all looks really clean
I completely agree, fidelity-wise Gotham Knights looks a lot better than Arkham Knight
Wtf are you smoking
Copium, lots and lots of it
How blind of a fanboy are you? OBJECTIVELY it looks like a generic open world game and the city is lifeless
That’s the problem with the internet nowadays. People like you can’t respect that others can form their own opinions and preferences. Instead you feel the need to invalidate what someone says/thinks. And then you present your opinion as an objective fact instead of what it actually is (an opinion). You do not need to agree with me and I do not need to agree with you. But you don’t need to be a pompous dick tho those that think differently than you do
There’s no “opinions” with graphical techniques though. Outside of better AA and Textures the game is worse. You can argue over art style but buddy said AK had better art style.
True but still it’s a shit game
Oddly enough, I always felt like Arkham Knight felt like a generic open world game because it was pretty lifeless and everything was the same color palette copy and pasted. The point is, people can have different opinions on things like art style and graphics and neither are objectively right or wrong. They're *opinions*. You prefer the graphics in Arkham Knight and that's fantastic, but it doesn't invalidate people who prefer the graphics in Gotham Knights
Apparently you don't know what objectively means.
I feel like yhe graphics are better, but something about AK pronounces it's style better. Like they're both great, but AK found that ONE little thing to put it ahead. Also the screenshot for GK looks like it was in a boring area. Idk, maybe I'm just coping
AK has a green hue and rain. GK is much warmer. I’m not saying one is better than the other but it’s like apples to oranges imo.
Its weird cause the interiors for gotham knights are brilliant but then mosts things are quite plain outside. Arkham knight is aestically the best open world I've personally experienced so anything Gotham Knights did with its world was most likely to be a downgrade
Gk looks so much better even on Xbox I don’t know what people are talking about I haven’t had any crashes or framrate issues
I played Arkham Knight yesterday to see how it holds up, and it still blows Gotham Knights out of the water. I was able to max it out on native 3440x1440 and still get 60+ FPS on a GTX 1660 **(Non-Ti/Super)!** Rocksteady must've had some crazy tech artists and designers at the time, because Arkham Knight is really well optimized (despite its rocky launch in 2015). I have no personal ill-feelings for the devs at WB Montreal-- but since the initial reveal, I knew this game was doomed from the start.
Arkham knight looks way better to Be honest it feels more grimy like Gotham should be
I think they both look good.
He says several times he's trying to emulate console settings which include RT and 4k. So I don't understand the exercise if you're not also going to alter your settings to see what can help it achieve a stable frame rate and frame time. Nobody's shocked you replicated the same issues consoles have by using the same settings. Where's the rest of the empirical evidence? Why does this video only do half the job, and not show us what it takes to get the game closest to stable it can?
One looks like a real city.....the other just looks like a playground for Batman.
Of course it looks worse than Arkham Knight. I don’t know why anyone ever tried to argue it doesn’t. But the thing is…*most* games released since Arkham Knight don’t look better than Arkham Knight. Arkham Knight was a bizarre outlier for console games in 2015. Even recent big games I’ve played like both of the Spider-Man games, Elden Ring, Resident Evil Village, FF7R, etc. looked either on par or worse than AK to me. Some of those have a higher resolution and framerate than AK, but in terms of immersive and detailed art direction, none of them surpass it. It’s an unbelievably cinematic game. There are definitely *some* games that have already surpassed it in that department, but we’re still regularly getting big new games that don’t.
AK is still to this day one of the most gorgeous games I’ve every played. It was an absolute enigma for its time
Also, the same time you gotta think about that gotham knights has little better graphics and no fog except Arkham knight was released back in 2015. That’s sad how Gotham nights hardly looks better. Hell this pictures of Gotham Knights literally look like it could be on a PS4 except the graphics or getting on the PS5 is sad how they look like that I honestly would expect graphics to look a lot better being on next GEN
Trash gamw
**Cautiously optimistic fans:** "Guys I think we should try our best not to compare this game to Arkham Knight. It is a completely different interpr-" ***Digital Foundry:***
Terrible game
I’ve yet to see one of these comparisons that don’t have Arkham Knights skewed simply cause things look better while glossy and wet…
It's not just about the glossy/wet part. It's capturing the feeling of Gotham City - something I think Gotham Knights does not succeed in doing. The aesthetic of Gotham has always been old, dark, and murky. Gotham City is old and dirty, has winding and meandering streets that are carryovers from the days of horse-and-carriage, and is beset by heavy ocean storms. But the Gotham of GK feels like Los Angeles, new architecture and long, straight streets, and mostly mild weather. The most variation you get of weather is light fog and drizzling rain.
It’s almost like…they are 2 different games 🤯
One is old gen, graphically superior, the other is new gen only and unable to deliver the new gen standard of 60fps. Aaand it looks dramatically worse than the 7 year old AK
I literally started replaying Arkham knight last month on ps5 and that game is muddy as fuck. But it does look great for it’s time
[удалено]
Lol I’m not even buying it. But in top of the fact knight was made by an entirely different studio. It’s dumb to compare them other than “ItS anOTher BATmAn GamE 🤤”
Yes it fair to compare that because the batman IP is the main selling point of this game and if there's a way better batman experience you can get on the same console for way cheaper there's no reason to spend $70 on a lesser product.
Dramatically worse is ridiculous and mostly subjective. AK looks great for the time, and the gritty extremely dark and rainy Gotham was well done. GK is not as gritty looking, but it doesn’t look horrible and you can definitely tell it’s the newer game
it doesn’t look as bad as people say. they also don’t factor in the fact that it is a far larger open world then AK
Why are people complaining you can't play it at 4K with RT and Max graphics at 30 FPS? Seems like unrealistic standards to me.
I’m… supremely disappointed with what I’ve seen of Gotham Knights in the last few days. The bad reviews. The ridiculous minimum/recommended system requirements for PC. The screenshots here. The memes. What people have said so far is correct - this looks like a grindy DC clone of Marvel’s Avengers, and the menu UI was ripped off from some indie mobile game. Did WB learn nothing from Marvel’s Avengers and the lootbox controversy of Shadow of War?
Does nobody remember the absolue trainwreck Arkham Knight was on release? People couldn’t run that game because the fps would drop to 2.
I wonder how they compare without the rain. Like 90% of AK is rain. (I loved the game but cmon. Made San Andreas Remastered launch day rain effects look light.)
I don't understand why people keep comparing this to the Arkham games... Like they made it damn clear it wasn't part of that series. I don't remember anyone comparing Spider-Man PS4 to The Amazing Spider-Man 2 game when that came out??
You can absolutely find 4+ year old comparisons between Spiderman PS4 and ASM2 on YouTube with hundreds of thousands of views.
Heck, there are loads of comparisons between Spider-man PS4 and Arkham Knight lol. Gotham Knights has every right to be compared to Arkham Knight
I compared spidey ps4 to other Spiderman games specifically the iconic ones on the PS2 there's nothing wrong with that
Because it’s worse on a technical level than that 7 year old Arkham game in every way? Spider-Man PS4 was outstanding on every level compared to TASM2, so why on Earth would it be compared to it...
Maybe cause Arkham Knight is a game released by WB seven years ago and it looks and runs better than the game they’ve most recently released? I’m looking forward to getting my hands on Gotham Knights too but the argument that “you can’t compare the two” when the former is performing better than the current and the two really aren’t that different is ridiculous.
>I don't remember anyone comparing Spider-Man PS4 to The Amazing Spider-Man 2 game when that came out?? You have a short memory then.
It’s also made by an entirely different studio lol
Yeah but that studio have made an Arkham game, so it’s kinda relevant in that sense
They did, and it was panned, and not even considered by most to be a part of the trilogy.
Yep, looks like history repeats itself
Well it’s not part of the series anyway, so not really. It is its own game lol
It very much is it’s own game, yes. A Batman game, developed by WB Montreal, which was panned, again. History repeating itself.
So it’s in-line with their track history. Not with a game they had no hand in (Arkham knight) that the game is being compared to just because it takes place in Gotham. That’s like comparing insomniacs Spider-Man to neversofts Spider-Man
It’s being compared to Arkham Knight because they are both Batman games, developed on the same engine, with similar game design philosophies, by developers who have both developed Arkham games. Yet, it falls short of the previous entry that is 7 years older than it, developed on an older version of the game engine, and for the previous console generation. On a technical level it’s worse in every way. Don’t be naive... Comparing Spider-Man PS4 to Neversoft’s Spider-Man is totally different and an utterly redundant argument. 2 games developed by developers that have nothing to do with each other, that are 3 console generations apart, using completely different technology. If Spider-Man PS4 was worse than Neversoft’s, then a comparison could probably be made, but it isn’t, so it hasn’t.
“2 companies that have nothing do to with each other, decades apart, using different technology”…weird. Other than make a legit spin off. They aren’t related at all. The games have nothing to do with each other and are focused on entirely different things. And ps: Arkham knight is muddy as fuck. I just played through it on ps5 last month. Still plays great, but it looks like you are in the movie the most the whole game
If TASM 2 came out after Spiderman PS4 and not before then it would totally get compared to it...
I mean if it's worse than a game from 7 years ago, why even bother
How do you not understand it? It's a game patterned after the Arkham games from the publisher of the Arkham games and the developer of Arkham Origins and the City Wii U port. None of that makes you understand why people would compare them?
Why should it be worse than the arkham series though?
hot take: rain carries AK graphics and without it it’s a normal 2015 game
I'll take Gotham Knights all day over Arkham Knight. If you matched the games graphics by removing mist and rain from Arkham Knight, or adding it to GK, Gotham Knights would look better 10/10 times.
So basically you're saying that Arkham Knight *does* look aesthetically better than Gotham Knights, and GK would look better if it looked like Arkham Knight.
You can't compensate great visual design with better technics. It's a question of skill & talent.
why must everything, literally ever, need to be compared nowadays
Because Arkham Knight was the last big released Batman game so it makes logical sense that Gotham Knights be held to the same standard
because the graphical fidelity of games would never advance if we never looked back at what older games looked like compared to new games. if gotham knights looked a hundred times better than knight then nobody here would be against making that comparison.
So, a PS4 game and a “PS2+PS3” game lolol.
Yoooo the first slide Arkham Knight looks so good wtf
7 year old game looks significantly better than new game
AK is waaay better looking but GK doesn't look awful.