News Article

Performance of Batman: Arkham Origins Wii U Version Compares Unfavourably to 360 and PS3

Posted by Thomas Whitehead

"It's hard to recommend the Wii U game at all"

Just recently we published our Batman: Arkham Origins review, and for multiple reasons we felt that it fell below the standards of its predecessors. We also suggested the visuals were "shaky", though tech-heads now have a full Digital Foundry face-off to consider for the Caped Crusader's latest adventure; the Wii U version doesn't fare well.

As expected the comparison takes in all versions for the Wii U, PS3, Xbox 360 and PC. Naturally the PC iteration runs away with the gong for the best performer — while on a decent gaming rig — while Nintendo's system lagged behind in pretty much all areas. Streaming of assets is worst on the system, with lower-resolution textures remaining on screen the longest before being resolved, while particle effects and heavy alpha have a noticeable impact on performance.

That impact on performance naturally affects the framerate, which endured its worst dips on Wii U.

The situation is considerably worse on the Wii U. On the plus side, screen-tearing is completely eliminated due to the inclusion of a locked v-synced presentation, but disappointingly the result of this is a frame-rate that fluctuates somewhere in the mid-twenties on a regular basis, producing constant judder and a serious reduction in the responsiveness of the controls. The number of enemies and the inclusion of a weaker CPU seems to be the cause for this on Nintendo's system - perhaps the console simply can't keep up with handling all of the AI and physics routines under load. The result is that gameplay is heavily compromised to the point where we found the experience far less enjoyable as a result. At times the PS3 version suffers to a similar degree, but this happens far less frequently compared to the Nintendo platform.

Issues also arise when traversing the environment. While the 360 manages to mostly stick closely to the desired 30fps target, both the PS3 and Wii U drop significantly when exploring detailed locations with extensive draw distances. Most notably we encountered pauses of several seconds a handful of times on the Wii U game throughout our playthrough, contained amongst the heavy frame-rate drops. At these points, we heard the console's disc drive frantically chugging away - as if it was trying to keep up with streaming in the large amounts of data required to generate the moderately large environments. The problem of steaming data fast enough from a Blu-Ray disc also appears to cause performance issues on the PS3 - albeit to a much lesser degree than on Wii U - and that's despite the mandatory 4603MB installation.

It's also noted, as it was in our review, that the usage of the GamePad is surprisingly scaled back from its features in Arkham City Armoured Edition, while the performance issues and absence of online multiplayer make the Wii U version a tough sell.

The conversion work is generally solid too where the 360 and PS3 are concerned, although some of the frame-rate and stuttering issues on Sony's system do distract from the action when the engine is put under stress, and some of the srteaming issues across all formats are perhaps indicative of the UE3 technology being pushed to its limits. Unfortunately, the Wii U once again disappoints with considerably worse performance than the other formats. This is a shame, as the use of lower-resolution shadows and greater texture streaming problems could all be overlooked if the game ran far more smoothly. The pared-back GamePad features and the lack of multiplayer also comes across as a disappointment, making this version hard to recommend if you own multiple platforms.

On the whole Arkham Origins is a fitting finale to the series on the older consoles, before Rocksteady returns with a Batman title designed for next-gen. While it's less innovative than the first two instalments, the solid combat and familiar mix of stealth and action-based gameplay is well worth investigating. While Xbox 360 arguably offers up the smoothest gameplay experience on console, PS3 owners get exclusive DLC that includes the Nightfall challenge maps and extra Batman costumes based on the 1960s TV series and the classic comics' Knightfall story arc. Given the major frame-rate issues it's hard to recommend the Wii U game at all unless you have no other option. Meanwhile, as expected, the PC version stands alone in terms of performance and quality features, making it the default choice for enthusiast gamers.

Do you have Arkham Origins on Wii U, and if so what do you think of its performance?


From the web

Game Screenshots

User Comments (118)



Dpullam said:

Big surprise. This seems to be the story of many third party Wii U games lately.



Grubdog said:

These guys are great at using weasel words to make a big deal out of nothing.



Kid_A said:

I never had any issues with the frame rate when the game first launched, but for whatever reason I've had a heck of a time with it this week. Just in the past couple hours it has frozen on me twice. I wonder what gives? There must have been an update I wasn't aware of.

Try turning off "camera assist" and "miiverse auto posting" from the Game Options menu. I tried it as an experiment and it seems to run a lot smoother for me now.



sr388survivor said:

That's funny because everywhere else I read that the Wii U version was the best of the consoles. lol.
I did notice framerate issues but all the versions had that. And a few framerate hiccups are nothing compared to losing your whole save file, which is what many 360 owners had to deal with.



Captain_Gonru said:

@Dpullam I would ammend that to say "multi-platform" third party games. It seems anything made with the Wii U as its target runs just fine. I wonder if the architecture is just too different to make truly equal quality ports possible. Note that I said "different", not "better" or "worse".



Dpullam said:

@Captain_Gonru I personally feel that they simply don't put enough effort into the Wii U ports of multi-platform games since they haven't been selling incredibly well on the Wii U, but the architecture could also have something to do with it. Either way, I hope the quality of third party ports improves over time as the Wii U is finally figured out by multi-platform developers.



AdanVC said:

Wii U is beyond 360/PS3 in all aspects. The results of this perfomance comparisons doesn't make Wii U a weak console, it just reveals how lazy 3rd Party developers are to bring quality game experiences on Wii U, they just don't care and I'm super sick of that. The same goes for CoD: Ghosts, I'm sure Infinity Ward could have make the Wii U version to be almost as good as the PS4/Xbone versions (in terms of graphics/framerate, etc.), but nope, they prefer to bring a lazy port to the console... This is like a disrespectful way of saying: -Ok let's bring our game to Wii U but let's just work for a bit on it and if there's bugs, framerate problems etc, we would leave it that way, lol). Wii U is powerful technically, but 3rd Party devs just don't take the enough time to polish their stuff properly and the results are awful and then they are complaining of why their games don't sell on Wii U... Sigh.



Einherjar said:

Again, i hevent had any problems, be it glitches or framerate issues with this version of the game. I read that the fighting made some problems in other versions (models not lining up for scripted attacks like counters) but i have not seen something like that even once in my playtime (roughly 5+ hours)
I have no idea where these analyses are coming from and why people make such a big deal out of eventual dips in framerate. I would understand it, if games would slow down to a snails pace, but a minor, fracture of a second stutter ? Whats the big deal about it ? Even worse, making a big deal about it when everyone whos played it didnt notice anything major.
What i also find quite ironic is, that mostly the console itself is blamed for such ports and never the developer itself. Missing Multiplayer in Origins ? Its the WiiUs fault, or even worse, its the communitys fault for not buying 3 consoles + 5 games each. No one asks WB games what a bunch of lazy folks they are for not making this version on par with the others although they could have very well made it like that.
Its Nintendo this, its the WiiU that, its the consumers, its you developer, its only you to blame if there is naything wrong with the game.



unrandomsam said:

Did they test the Wii U version as a download or only from the disk ? (Do they not have forced installs on the other platforms ?)

Its annoying that usb 3.0 and a SSD is not a viable option.

Deus Ex and All Stars Racing Transformed seem to be just great on the Wii U.



unrandomsam said:

The whole point of using a console should be so it is tight and never glitches. (The price difference between PC and console means to me if I am going to get the console version it must be perfect).



Daemonite said:

wow, is it really that much harder to port the game to WiiU? Developers really aren't trying anymore, are they? They probably knew the sales for the WiiU-version were going to suck. Why did they even bother, i wonder?



tsm7 said:

I own it and although I agree with what they said it doesn't seem that bad playing the game. The matter of fact way it is put makes it sound unplayable. Overall, it's just not as engaging as the other Batman games. I'm halfway through and have really lost the desire to see the game to the end. The gameplay has become repetitive, the story isn't as interesting, and the side quests seem more like a chore rather than adding to the experience.



glitch256 said:

The problems with 3rd parties lie with with the tough architecture of the nintendo dev kit. Same as as ps3. So these 3rd party games will be lackluster. I enjoyed zombi u very much. It used the wii u well. Its a shame that people who do own Wii Us rarely purchase these games because now if we do get a multi platform game its gonna look like crap.




Lies, pure lies

I have played batman AO on both PS3 and I own it on Wii U and I know 100% which version runs and looks better and it aint PS3.

This and what they said about the Wii U version of splinter cell leave me in no question that DF have a bias against the Wii U.

As a person that has played both versions, I really don't know how DF can tell people that the Wii U version is the worst ??

Credibility 0%



Eldoon said:

It's hard enough to recommend the game at all. Stick to the first two.



cyrus_zuo said:

DF pointed out that Most Wanted U and Trine 2 were both best on WiiU. I don't think there is strong enough data to show a negative DF bias at this time.
On the other hand there is a clear negative bias in the media and it's obvious WiiU versions of games aren't getting much love (from developers or consumers honestly).



kidicaroots said:

Saying 3rd party developers are lazy is wrong. The decision on how much time will be dedicated to optimizing each version of a triple A game is a money decision above all. I think Wii U owners should get the games they want to play, but they should also take into account the quality of the port when it's a multiplatform game.

I would wholeheartedly recommend Deus Ex, even to those not familiar with the series. I've heard only good things about the Wii U version.



ocarinaoftime said:

I own the wii u version and its smooth...its hard for me to belive that everyone is on the wii u hate wagon...nintendo life only prints negative articled about wii u anymore..i know they will day its someones opinion but lest state your own....



Falchion said:

@AdanVC 3rd parties arent lazy, they just go where the profits are. If games sold well on wii u they would make better ports. But if they dont make better ports, no one will buy them... So its a catch 22



Mr_Nose said:

Getting really tired of this. I heard it all before about Arkham City, and had ZERO problems, it runs smooth as glass for me.

Can we have some positive articles, please? I mean there are plenty of places to get the negative ones.



Nico07 said:

@Captain_Gonru I agree, depite several bad reviews on Sonic Lost World the game runs great even with dual screen two players. I'm actually enjoying the game quite a bit. The new platformer feel is fun and there are still many elements from the older and newer 3d Sonic games.



Nico07 said:

@SirGreatNose Negative reviews on the Wii U seems to be the order of the day or year. I also noticed no issues with Arkham City on Wii U. I bought Batman Origins and havent noticed any issues, though not being far into the game.



Mr_Nose said:

It's funny, and this post will probably 'vanish', but find me ONE negative article on the sister site...
even the ones that skirt around the launch problems are surprisingly forgiving.



Yodelman64 said:

People do need to realize that the wii u has only been out die a year, companies are not even close to figuring the full potential of the wii u. But with the Xbox 360 they have had years and years to figure it out .



Yodelman64 said:

This game was obviously rushed anyways , you can tell from all of the bugs and glitches. I bet if they spent more time on this game, all of the consoles, wii u included, would be able to run the game alot better



Shiryu said:

Well I have it, I love it and my only complaint so far is that I unexpectedly had to work the whole weekend (IT... it's not a job, it's an adventure) instead of playing this. Besides, I only own the Wii U as a console capable or running the game so for me was a no brainer. Besides, no online MP meant it was cheaper (45 €uros) and if I can still have the same awesome single player experience as in other consoles with a few less FPS... I really can't complain, that much but respect anyone who disagrees, after all, our money is worth the same as other console and PC owners, but even if this run on the old and trusty Unreal Engine, the Wii U is only about 1 year old unlike the 360 and PS3 so yes, I'm gonna cut the programmer some slack... this time.



suburban_sensei said:

This is extremely surprising to hear. I went through the entire story mode without a lot of trouble. I think once the screen froze on a black screen when I booted it up, and another time the frame rate dropped a bit. After I completed the game, I know one night I had issues with the framerate dropping so bad, it literally looked like it had frozen. On reddit, I remember reading that a lot of people said Wii U played better than the 360/PS3, I don't remember hearing about corrupt saves and things like that. Anyways, I am a Batman fan, so technical issues a side, I am still glad I picked this up.



Captain_Balko said:

This actually surprised me. I remember reading that the Wii U version didn't suffer the same slowdown before cut-scenes that occurred on the other versions. Anyways, I've been enjoying it a lot, regardless of these "issues", although I did notice that occasionally a building would look really fuzzy when I go near it before the textures loaded properly, which was a little jarring to say the least.



Neram said:

The game is cheaper on Wii U, so I think that makes up for it a little bit. I'm fairly certain this version was not handled with as much care as the PS3 or 360 versions, and that's all it has to do with this version performing below standards. I'm sure there will be people blaming it on the Wii U's tech, but all you have to do is look at other ports to see that this isn't always the case. In my direct comparison of Mass Effect 3 for PS3, 360, and Wii U, I found that the 360 and Wii U versions were on par performance wise, where the PS3 versions framerate dropped drastically during action scenes. It's all about the developer, and how much they care about polishing their efforts on Wii U.



JoostinOnline said:

This is the opposite of everything that I've read. The Wii U version, while lacking multiplayer, had the fewest glitches and the least amount lag. It looks beautiful too.

Edit: And yes, I have played and beaten it.



Charley_U said:

I only have the Wii u, but at one point I experianced a glitch to where my map did not show up on the game pad, the inconvienance of constantly pausing to look at the map was enough to make me glad I have the Wii u version. The game was a blast to play by the way.



n057828 said:

PS4 COD has frame rate issues too apply patch walk away simple.
360 stores some data on data so less noise!



larry_koopa said:

I have played 6 different third-party games on my Wii U and every one of them had serious performance issues – and not just frame rate dips, but full-on system freezing/crashing. But yet the three Nintendo published games that I have played on my Wii U have worked flawlessly. I am perfectly happy with my Wii U because I only have it to play “Nintendo” games, but it’s unfortunate that it doesn’t seem to run third-party games nearly as well as rival systems that have been on the market for 8 years. There’s no shame in being a Nintendo fanboy while getting your third-party fix elsewhere. That’s what my PS3 is for.



Jarod said:

i have it, didnt encounter any problems never felt like the frame rate dropped at all the entire game and it looked great



FineLerv said:

Well, by that rationale, it's also hard to recommend the non-PC versions at all...



divinelite said:

I'm sorry if my opinion might not good for some but if the difference is not that game breaker (like so larggy port of Jak hd on vita) I hope no one boycotting 3rd party in wii u

This year and next will be a turning point for most 3rd party regarding wii u port. If it's still not good they won't make again for wii u, as ps3/xbox360 is not made again later

Sure, devs are reluctant to port them in best work but maybe it's because of arcithecture and so. But if it's still quite good, St least don't boycott by not buying them



S7eventhHeaven said:

they fail to grasp that the game isnt a must buy on any console in any version. its no where near as good as arkam asylum or city and the mutiplayer is forgettable. buy deus ex human revolution directors cut and enjoy one of the best games released in the last 5 years



Charley_U said:

Oh one more thing, when I read these complaints, I remember playing the megaman games on NES. When too many enemies came on screen the sprites would blink and the whole game would slow down considerably, that didn't make it not enjoyable to play, same situation here, these are such minor issues compared to the great piece of interactive art and entertainment that we are being exposed to this day and age.



billychaos said:

I absolutely agree. I bought this game day one. I was not bothered by the lagging framerate, however I ended up trading the game in after roughly 25 minutes of gameplay. I was so disappointed that the developers did nothing with the Wii U gamepad. They just slapped the map on it and called it a day. Batman Arkham City took advantage of the gamepad features more than most Wii u games out there (it served as the bat computer entirely). It shows that the developers made this game for one console, then just quickly copy-and-paste the code over to another with very few modifications. This was a major disappointment from the special features Arkham City showed us. I read through the manual and posted all over the miiverse hoping I was mistaken. Such a shame...sold it for Deus Ex Wii U (it actually uses the gamepad well).



MAB said:

See this is another classic case of how physical discs are lame and will be on the way out very soon... None of these games will be worth diddly squat on Ebay in the future because they are inferior choppy framerate glitchfests




creative92 said:

People forget that Sony and Microsoft are powerhouse companies that come from the PC domain in hardware and software. Nintendo is NOT in the PC, Tablet, TV, and Smartphone business. Can we really fairly compare Nintendo against these two?

I purchased Batman AO and am having a great time with it. People put way too much of an emphasis on things like "textures". Do lower rez "textures" affect gameplay? No not really. If they bug you, then go with a PC then, and forget the other PS4/XBOne/PS3/360.

I went with the Wii U version because at least Nintendo is introducing alternative ways of gameplay, the traditional controller is great and all, but how much more can it do except add more buttons.



DanMan82 said:

I never had any problems with the game besides frame rate issues in cut scenes and occasionally a few drops in game. It runs pretty good on Wii U IMO. Funny how the people that did the comparison never talked about this:

Subscribe to Nintendo Life on YouTube

This is on the PS3 version. While I think this is technically a "glitch" it seems to be a PS3 exclusive glitch. While some haven't experienced this, if you look in the comments, there are many others that have. There's another video that isn't anywhere near this bad, but at times, its like he's playing the game in slow motion.

EDIT: Supposedly there was supposed to be a patch for this, but I don't know if it has been released yet for sure.



GamerGleek47 said:

This is all because developers are L A Z Y! They use to work only on two consoles, but now they have to work on three and even five if they want to port it to PS4/XBone and of course the hardest one to develop (Wii U version because of the GamePad) will get the worst treatment.



IronMan28 said:

Eh, I heard this game wasn't that good compared to AC anyway, I'll probably get the next one from Rocksteady (provided it comes to Wii U) and hopefully this studio will get their stuff together on Wii U by then.



GamerJunkie said:

The Wii U is a piece of trash for anything other than 1st party games.

All 3rd party stuff is missing features, missing DLCs or runs poorly. Now with PS4 and XB1 no 3rd party games will be out for it.

I will get 1st party Nintendo stuff, probably 2-3 games a year, but thats all its good for.



SCAR said:

You obviously have no idea...

Did they have the digital copy by chance? This sounds like a common problem with the disc versions of games. They just aren't optimizing this stuff. That's factually all there is to it.



KillScottKill said:

I'll criticize the Wii U when it deserves it, but this has everything to do with the developer and the effort that was put into the Wii U version of the game.

Take AC4 for example. The Wii U version of that game is outstanding, and comparison reviews have it crushing the PS3 and 360 versions (especially 360), but still lagging the PS4. Ubisoft has done good work with the Wii U and have treated it fairly, so it's no surprise that a multi platform title from them on Wii U holds up well.

The same can't be said for other devs.



gojiguy said:

This is the opposite of what I've heard from people playing this game... weird...



Senate_Guard said:

I stand by the Wii U version being the best. Its ten dollars cheaper than on other systems, and it doesn't have the sloppy (from what I've seen and heard) multiplayer mode. All versions of the game have numerous bugs, so it was obviously a failure on WB Montreal's part.

The biggest drawback is of course, the severe lack of efficient Gamepad use like in Arkham City; which is disappointing. I remember reading WB Montreal was stating they were "adding special additions to the Wii U version."



Nintend0ro said:

another lazy port isn't it? Though I love graphics of the game on Wii U. Game is gorgeous



powellwiiu said:

@creative92 I agree' I Love Textures and graphics dont get me wrong! But if anyone really thinks about it. While your playing; graphics are not really noticed, GAMEPLAY IS! And Nintendo has always put that as there focus and kept up to par no doubt with Graphics!



D3athBr1ng3r187 said:

@SirGreatNose So what the hell that got to do with this post do you have that much hate and jealously of PushSquare at least those guys are mature enough to take in problems rather than the crybabies on this site.



jayclayx said:

so the question is, this is something about a weak cpu? or lazy debs?, I do understand the 360 is a 7 year old hardware so the ps3 and by many developers comments the 360 is stronger than ps3 in power terms, last year it was about hearing people saying the wii U its just a baby and developers don't know the full capabilities yet but now is already a year and they must know the hardware better so is this for real? I mean really the 360 has better cpu than the wii U?



Kifa said:

@jayclayx Yes, from what little technical data about Wii U's CPU we know, it is far weaker than the X360 CPU, or the Cell chip used in PS3. Basically it's just three tweaked Wii processors stuck together with clocks boosted two times and some additional cache. That's it. Wii U's GPU, on the other hand, seems at least three to four times more powerful than that used in X360 or PS3, but I think that was a very poor design decision by Nintendo. That way it's very difficult to utilise the full potential of the GPU, because the CPU can't feed it data quickly enough. And if we try to compensate with GPGPU functions (which requires a lot of additional coding) we eat up graphics resources anyway, so it's somewhat a vicious cycle.

Then again - we have Nintendo and Shin'En games keeping a smooth 60 FPS at 720p with some pretty intense action on both screens sometimes, so... I don't know what to think. But it certainly wouln't hurt anyone if Wii U had a little bit mor power CPU-side...



CasuallyDressed said:

I think a lot of this - especially things like texture streaming - is down to the fact that you can't install games to the hard-drive on Wii U.



Morph said:

I will never understand how nintendo couldn't foresee issues with developers not wanting to spend a lot of time trying to get multiformat games working with wii u's cpu/gpu combo. In an ideal world they would get the games working great and spend lots of time fine tuning them for wii u, but practically that wont happen. They could have resolved this by just putting in a better cpu which might actually have encouraged more developers to work on wii u



Judgedean said:

Nintendo shouldn't have been such tight arses with the CPU. They scaled it back from the original specs



MAB said:

@CasuallyDressed Yep, it's funny reading posts about weak CPU, GPU, GO-GGO or whatevers when the real culprit all comes down to reading discs off the slow CD drive... All my games are DIGITAL 4 LYFE versions that run smooth, glitch free and load quick



heathenmagic said:

so I am a little curious. Those on this thread that have a smooth running version, are they all using the download version? Wasn't the drive supposed to be faster than PS3 though?



Peach64 said:

The point of a digital foundry analysis is to go into stupid levels of detail beyond what you can tell just by looking at the screen. When they say a version performs worse than others they're not saying it's trash. If you only have a Wii U it's fine. DF is for multiplatform owners with extreme OCD.



datamonkey said:

It's a shame Nintendo didn't make the Wii U a bit more powerful so that it could compete properly with PS3/360.

I originally planned to buy multi-platform games like this on Wii U to support Nintendo but I haven't as they are inferior products with either poor load times, poor performance, have content missing or a combination of all... I'm not going to shoot myself in the foot just so I can support Nintendo while I can get a better experience somewhere else.

Sorry Nintendo but my loyalty doesn't extend that far and it is you that has made your bed to lie in...



Marshi said:

I just dont understand these comparisons,because everyone comes up with a diferent answer! I couldnt wait and bought the ps3 ver of this game and it ran horribly. I swapped it for the wiiu ver 2 week later(it was delayed in eu) and noticed a dramatic improvement on textures particle effects and framerate. I will say however that the game generally runs terrible no matter what system you play it on with gamebreaking bugs and glitches,so its kind of a moot point to argue over which runs "the least terrible!", again with ac4 is widely reported to be second only to the ps4 ver,yet you guys said it runs bad! Same with cod,same with splinter cell!
At the end of the day unless you have games running at 15fps as aposed to 30fps your really not guna notice too much diference in quality



BertoFlyingFox said:

I beat the game and started New Game+ a couple of days ago. While I encountered some problems, none of them completely broke the game for me.

Traversing: Throughout the whole main campaign, I only experienced screen stutter a handful of times that were about 1-2 seconds long. This usually happened right after grapnel boosting over an obstacle and gliding.

Combat: I think the game in general just has janky combat, with Batman not targeting the right enemy on occasion. This is where I experienced the most hiccups that lasted maybe a split second which was enough to not register certain button presses.

Predator sections: My favorite part of this game (along with the story). I didnt experience any hiccups in these sections, I was able to use all gadgets as intended and not once did anything stutter or glitch out.

Overall I would say my experience has been slightly buggy (I would rate this game a 7) but nothing that soured the entire experience. I gotta say though, those night-vision goggled snipers are friggin' annoying as hell



eza said:

Why would anyone play this on anything other than the PC?
You have the option of X360 or PS3 - both hardware from seven years ago.
Or the Wii U - with its weak CPU and different architecture.
It's obviously a graphically and cpu-intensive game. Probably could do with some optimisation, but it was never going to be great on any 'current gen' consoles.

Shin'en Soft make pretty games that run at 60fps because there's next to nothing happening on the CPU side in them. They can pile on the graphical effects because that's where the strength of the console is.

And regarding the number of negative articles at the moment: I'm sure that if there was more positive Nintendo news around at the moment then NL would be happily posting it and sticking it as featured.
I'd rather get an unbiased view that's not sugar-coated. It's one of the reasons I come here.



AugustusOxy said:

I don't blame the paintbrush for a poopsydoodoocacapoopledoople painting, I blame the artist.
Please watch the profanity — TBD



unrandomsam said:

@AugustusOxy Thing is with games it is different. The people designing and making it don't have any say in what happens. If they say we want to delay it then it will be ignored. (Contrast that to making a film where a top director can delay it if necessary).

Knights of the Republic 2 is a great example. There is a mod to re add most of the missing content but it was forced out of the door before it was even close to finished. The Bioware first one wasn't rushed. (I suppose Rocksteady are in a similar situation now in that they can take their time).



dumedum said:

I'm 100% sure that I would never notice any differences. I'll be too busy playing the game and grateful to have a map on the game pad (it's unplayable to me otherwise).



mercurio2054 said:

@Einherjar @I-AM-REGGIE @ocarinaoftime
I don't know why nintendolife brings this "news" and not the video posted by @DanMan82 . . .
i know, they have to be critics, but, not say every sht that they find on other webs, that clearly work against Nintendo.
i never see a news here like: "AC4 looks and runs better on wii u than ps3; developers're staring to take advantage of the hardware...."



Blue_Yoshi said:

Does this mean that Arkham City sucks too? Because I was really thinking about getting that too.



TrueWiiMaster said:

I stopped trusting Eurogamer because of articles like this. They've lost their objectivity, and seem to be motivated to bash the Wii U at every opportunity. Polygon said the Wii U version was easily the best version of the game, and said the PS3, 360, and even PC versions were virtually unplayable due to all the glitches and technical problems. They rated the Wii U version 3 full points higher than the other versions because of this apparently drastic disparity.



Einherjar said:

@mercurio2054 Yeah, i wondered why news like this rarely finds its way around here. The same happened to the Armored Edition of Arkham City. Instead of saying that the game is much more enjoyable because of the gamepad features, gyro aim etc, it seems that all that matters is the framerate. Granted, it ran a tiny bit less smooth on the WiiU, but not in a way that made it unplayable. It was only noticable in scripted cutscenes while the gameplay was totally fine.
People get so biased towards graphics and such, and totally neglect playability and gameplay enhancements.
I wouldnt want to play an open world game without a constant map on my second screen anymore to be honest. Just look at Wind Waker. Having the map constantly displayed on your gamepad drasticly lowers the time spend on the ocean, switching between the menu screen and the actual gameplay.
Its just so much more enjoyable and that also applys to both Batman games on the WiiU. If it werent for the shortcommings like the missing co-op mode, it would definitly be the version to go with.



Laxeybobby said:

What do you expect from a game that is an after thought port of a game who's engine was made to run optimally on another console.

The day digital foundry give the WiiU a glowing report on a cross platform game is when that game was primarily designed and built for the WiiU first then ported to the others which lets face it is laughable and will never happen.



Laxeybobby said:

@Omarsonic9 The reason they are so bad is two fold; lazy behavior called porting! & Money.
Instead of building the game engine ground up using the WiiU specific architecture then add the graphics that are the same across all platforms, they take the game engine, built for the Xbox or PS3 and make it work on the WiiU with a couple of tweaks and twerks (bodging) and hence the game is the worse of all platforms. This demonstrates the laziness and the money saving or grabbing (depending how you view it) as its cheaper to do this than develop a WiiU specific engine.



unrandomsam said:

@Laxeybobby It has already happened. All Stars Racing Transformed and Deus Ex Directors Cut. (PC versions have a little bit better textures apparently but I cannot really tell the difference.)



Alshain01 said:

Pretty much this, even if the PC and Wii U editions were perfectly identical.... the PC version will run for decades, the Wii U version will be gone when the Wii U is gone. Regardless of game, if it isn't console exclusive I buy it on the PC.



unrandomsam said:

@moroboshi It is not weaker if you actually optimise properly for what you release on.

Problem is they choose the worst possible method.
(i.e ignore the PS3 SPU's run everything on one core at 3.2ghz).



Platinumhobo said:

@AdanVC yeah, my post right there. Maybe they'll change once we start getting more PS4 and One multis the developers will stop being so lazy.



Zael said:

I'm not surprised because there were frame rate problems also on arkham city on wii u.
The third party politic is terrible on wii u, better look forward to first party and nintendo games
But if we compare this fact with the wii 1's third party politic then we see that the situation isn't worse because on wii 1 there weren't games like batman, darksider, mass effect etc.
At least we have conversions, bad conversions, but is it better to have bad conversions or nothing?
But when the multiplatforms will be games like ff 15, battlefield 5 or ac 6, the hardware gap will be larger and probably there won't be other conversions, so the wii u will become a kind of wii.
At the end the wii u will continue the wii politic about third parties, it is useless to hope in something and be disappointed about those bad conversions because in about 6 months the wii u won't be able anymore to support multiplatforms (which will be on ps4 x1), so I say, at this point, a good batman or a bad batman won't change nothing.
About first party we can hope in great games because they will produce them directly on the wii u devkit, so, for example, I give for granted that a zelda u or a xenoblade or a bayonetta will run well.
The wii u will be this, better accept the fact
Difficult to say if in the future the next nintendo console will be at high standard in terms of hw, but, if they will learn from their mistakes, it will.
The only problem is that nintendo never learns from it's mistakes



unrandomsam said:

@Zael Thing about those ports is they don't run acceptably on any console. (They only run well on a PC with orders of magnitude more power than they should need).



JudgeMethos said:

Really? I had NO idea the Wii U version was the worst one. Weird that I've passed it and unlocked everything on my Wii U. I enjoyed the hell outta this game. Hmph.



unrandomsam said:

They should test the download version (But I don't think Digital Foundry are in the business of impartial). Or particularly scientific.

(Some of the comparison videos on Youtube don't even support the HTML5 player which is needed for 60fps).



Tiberius30 said:

This is very informative on which version of the game I should get, and for which console...

I'll choose none of the above, thanks...



WhiteTrashGuy said:

I have ARKHAM CITY for both 360 and WiiU. It does run smoother for me on the 360, but being able to play on the gamepad is really nice. WB Montreal knows how to code for the WiiU; obviously they were instructed to focus on the separate consoles in order of their installed bases: 360, PS3, WiiU. And since the PC uses DirectX, same as the 360, both versions could use the same resources. After multiplayer was dropped from WiiU I called WB and explained that I was boycotting all AO titles, even though I also have a 360 and 3DS. If I do ever play this game I will pick it up used for $15. I really hope Rocksteady is working on a SUPERMAN game.



JaxonH said:

Never understood these unfavorable recommendations.

I don't count frames, I enjoy games, and I'll be ****** if I give up that gamepad for an extra 2 fps, and no, not even for another multiplayer mode I'll never play. When it comes to what I look for in a game, I care about campaign modes and how fun that campaign mode is. For me, the Gamepad advantage far exceeds any enjoyment from an extra fps. Maybe that's just me, but yeah...

Granted, there are a select few games I do in fact want online multiplayer for, but thus far every one of those games have included it.



FullbringIchigo said:

I never noticed any problems with it and as for multiplayer I never wanted it in this game anyway, why everyone thinks they have to tack on a multiplayer portion to increase the life of a game is byond me, if your game is good you won't need to add other features



Kruger85 said:

LMFAO the Wii u is so dead!!!
EVERY 3rd party game is worse than the 360 PS3 versions which proves developers cannot be bothered with the Gamepad!!
Gamepad was the worst idea in Nintendo history!!The Wii was the most genius is really bad how they got the Wii U so messed up!!
In over a year ZERO games have been made that utilise the Gamepad....If Nintendo are not gonna show the way on how to make games for the gamepad....then why would any 3rd party?
They need to ditch the U and start again!!



Jimonfire said:

The Dev's brought it upon themselves for this game not selling well on the Wii U. There is no reason why this should be an inferior version and leaving the online mode off??... I'm Happy with Arkham City.



Sampras said:

It's a media-induced condition. Competitors pay to FLOOD media outlets with biased and negative opinions about the state of wii u 3rd party support and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, because, lo and behold the continuous stream of BS scares off companies from making quality games in the first place, let alone allow consumers to buy them.



Sampras said:

That's a good point. Even if it were true the Wii U version has more frame rate drops, that doesn't mean the Wii U is to be blamed. How about the developer?

By the way I haven't noticed any horsepower issues at all. And I certainly haven't noticed any horsepower issues to claim, as one reviewer said, the Wii U version is "not recommendable".

That's just pure inventing a problem to blow out of proportion.



Sampras said:

@I-AM-REGGIE @SavantSupreme
I agree. People who can not form their own opinions and need others to tell them what to think are weak. Sorry to say, but that's true. But unfortunately the mountain of misinformation leveled against Nintendo is so high, that it's only solidifying my support for the only console system that continually demonstrates a strong independent streak, gaming based on fun, creativity, and inventiveness rather than stooping to relying on rigging media outlets to misinform consumers and developers about their competitors.

In short, seeing all these low blows thrown only makes me root for the only guy who is fighting a clean fight.



Sampras said:

TOTAL negative bias toward Nintendo in American and British media.

By the way metacritic has become a joke. They've basically become for games what Yelp has become for restaurant reviews. Most sane people will give a 10s and 9s, then they'll have a trolls who gives it 5s and 6s just to bring their average score down. Take all Nintendo related scores with TON of salt, because of the looney toon "reviewers" out there.



Sampras said:

Here's the catch 22 you're describing:
1) Nintendo competitors pay so-called "reviewers" to talk trash about Nintendo-related things.
2) Inevitably some people believe these "reviewers."
3) Nintendo competitors achieve less demand for Nintendo.
4) Developers get scared to put the time needed into a port.
5) Start all over again.

It's exactly like a political campaign of BS. The sad part is so many people believe BS.



Sampras said:

It probably is. Even if it isn't, you'd need a microscope to find much difference technically. So where's the biggest difference? The stuff they never talk about - the dual screen experience, the miiverse experience.



Sampras said:

Can't come up with creative ways to use the gamepad? Oh come on! Where do I start?
How about put it beside you and use it like a shifter in a car by drawing shift motions on the screen?
How about using it in conjunction with the tv for surprises and scares in horror games?
How about using it in a game like star fox to view around your cockpit in 3dimensions?
How about drawing on the screen?
How about using the gamepad like a mouse for selection in rpgs?
Foosball was really creative in wii party u.
Okami-like commands in W101 were creative.
Trauma Team-like games.



Einherjar said:

@Sampras Now that i have played quite a lot longer, i can report that the framerate never really dropped. but i noticed a short "full stop load time" when entering a new quadrant of the city....that is, if i manage to get there in super human speed, using the acellerated grapple in every opportunity i get so the game has simply no chance to stream everything zooming by.
But to be honest, i guess these framerate drops exists if you datadive into the running hardware. But to the average player without super nerd vision and the tendency to agree to everything the mainstream game press says, its not noticable at all.
I would definitly recommend this version despite its shortcommings, simply because the gamepad map makes the experience so much more fluent.



Sampras said:

Regarding the PS3 footage: Woah that's slow.
And did that entire crane just POP UP out of nowhere after being in front of it for like 10 seconds??



creative92 said:


I was referring to the typical controller, not the gamepad. The gamepad is a great idea to incorporate into gaming. Foosball is cool in Wii Party, the baseball too!



Russel said:

Haven't noticed any problem with my Wii U version yet. Liked that it was $10 cheaper (didn't care about multiplayer.) I don't see the problem with it I think it's a bunch of malarkey!

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...