Great game, a bit badly optimised for amd cards with 2gb or less

Woo! Saw this for £12.99, but decided to wait and see if it dropped in price! :smile: Glad I did. Cheers for the heads up! :smiley:

Steam shows the game as 80% positive in the last 30 days with most saying it runs great now :smiley: Good price!

It includes season pass - Instant HEAT!

I paid 11.99 and it was totally worth it. 9.99 for premium edition, do I need to say more. I run game on Intel i7 6700k, msi r9 290x 4gb vram, everything on ultra settings, game runs at 60 fps, sometimes dips to 57 fps for few seconds, 11 hours I to the game, zero crashes.

Been waiting to pick this up for under a tenner. Cheer OP.:smile:

Absolutely great game, finished off the Arkham series with a big bang, whilst IMHO there's too much Batmobile (How can there be too much Batmobile he says ? ?) It has it all, the combat, the enemys, the story, Its a really solid game after the shocking launch!

Have fun getting that "True" 100% for the extended ending (Riddler, you nause!)

This is truly a shame of a game, initially ran like a one legged gerbil but tried it again recently on my trust but old GTX650ti and it really played well. If it had been like that at the start then I'm sure it would hold its price even now. Good time to get it, a great end to the series.

*update* I do have 16gb of ram though so varying mileage and all that...

£11.99

Amazing game. Finished it a few months ago and it ran really well with zero crashes. Nvidia GTX970 (3,5GB!)

Running at mostly 60fps for me on a 780ti and 3770k & 16gb Ram. Default geforce experience settings for the most part

Yours, like mine, has 3.5GB of high speed RAM and 0.5GB of lower speed RAM which wouldn't be a problem except the game believes it is 4GB of high speed RAM which causes issues when it tries to use over 3.5GB of it.

I really cannot feel any problems also supported by the fact that I use the r9 290 C/F. They feel the same. They use slower ram but it is fast enough to cover the problem well enough I thing. They done too much bad publicity about unless MSI is used something better.

When it first released and nobody knew about the difference in tech to what was claimed, it was a problem. A lot of the launch issues with Arkham Knight I had was because of the 3.5GB RAM. Now I assume that devs know to make the game not try to use more than 3.5GB RAM if a GTX970 is present.

I have not the game but I believe that you try to maximize and even with an sli or cf would be stattering /lagging at low fps. The batman series is very notorious for being demanding. Saying so and provided you play at a decent fps, then there is something wrong with the game. I use fraps a lot, that is the only way to inform me of my current frame rate and act accordingly. I would never play at less than 60fps middle 50's at worse on a 60hz monitor and in order to reach that I would need to lower the settings even in sli/cf and I like to maximize whenever is possible. I think I got a clear picture of what you doing, you trying to play a demanding game at the possible highest settings and obviously you would be stattering/lagging because of that and as I said, not even an sli or cf could compete with this kind of game but not because of lack of ram. The gtx970 is very capable to use the full 4gb ram and it makes no difference if 512mb are slower. I agree they should have made in clear before purchase

No, you don't understand what I am talking about. Now Arkham Knight plays at a steady 60fps on 1080p however when it first launched it was buggy as hell and a big issue was when the game tried to use over 3.5GB of RAM. Don't take my word for it, just Google the issue and you can read all about it. The conflict was games trying to utilise 4GB of the card's RAM because it is essentially a 3.5GB card the way it has been partitioned.

Now do you believe me??

http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-settles-gtx970-false-advertising-lawsuit/?utm_content=bufferab0af&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=buffer_pcgamerfb

still does not make any difference and if it does it is imperceptible and remember that we have made good comparisons against our amd 290's, cannot spot a fault at all. Anyway, I always agreed that they done something they should have made clear. Uhmmm, interesting, we got 4 of these cards and I will be interested in the £30x4=£120 cashback, will keep an eye, lol. Thank you for the info.

Easy 90fps (locked) at 2560x1440 maxed out on a GTX 1080.

Much better than it used to be.

An awful stuttery unplayable mess on my Fury X :disappointed:

Was worth a punt though at less than a tenner.