So it more a case of Namco being super cheap rather than releasing a clearly unfinished game as WB did with Arkham Knight.
Uh.. It's the exact situation. Arkham Knight's port was outsourced, whereas Arkham Asylum and Arkham City were ported in-house.
It's a bad port but I have no idea what you mean by unfinished.
Edit: As for Dark Souls: Textures. Controls. You spin like Fox News.
Edit 2:
Come on, he even brings up DMC3, a port released in 2006. How desperate can you get?
Are you really saying that people have been investing their effort into innovating the technology and skills of porting?
Porting has been the same for years if not decades. There are good ports. There are bad ports. Nobody's running around putting in $$$$$$ into porting technology and optimization. There's going to be good and bad ports for the next decades, too. Pull your head out of your ass and actually look at the situation.
Bro, fucking WB, one of the industry's scummiest publishers, in a completely unprecedented move, decided to pull the game from Steam and retail because of how badly it was damaging their reputation. This is the level of fuck up we are talking about here. And yet here you are, still defending it with "other ports had problems too!". That you accuse me of spinning like Fox News is beyond hilarious, and makes me think this is all a huge troll. I dearly hope it's a troll really, the alternative is simply too horrid...
And what was wrong with textures in Dark Souls anyway? KBM controls were bad in a typical Japanese fashion, but could easily be fixed as well. Game was still a better deal at $20 than AK is at $60. And it is widely regarded as one of the worst PC ports of recent years, so arguing that it's almost as bad as AK really does you no favors, you know.