Imo there's no excuse for the remaster to be running any less than 60fps when the game is 7 years old with minimal improvements to the graphics overall. Especially when many brand new games that look better (Halo 5 for example) run at 60fps on the current generation.,
It's ridiculous. These games especially Asylum should easily be hitting 60, not 30 with frame drops. I don't care about the graphics I just wanted 60fps
So you don't see the updated textures, the added geometry to batman's character model, the better filtering and color correction method, the added particle effects, the anti aliasing method, the skin subsurface scattering effects, the drastic change in improved lighting and shadow rendering {which artists do lol you know nothing). There are lazy remasters but this isn't one of them, clearly you have to know what you're looking at in order to tell the difference graphically, so in short one who knows nothing, understands nothing.
JaG You're right. I couldn't tell that from this comparison. It must be because all that tech on top barely makes a difference and, at the end of the day barely affects gameplay unless you're used to the spotlights being in a different part of the room. If you have to know PRECISELY what to look for, if you have to be staring at microscopic differences on HD displays, it's a worthless exercise and a money grab. Again. Too many of these re-releases disguised as new experiences. It's the same experience as the first time around. Pointless. They should be creating new IPs and games instead of wasting talent and time on this shite. Or even better - Make Arkham Origins and/or Knight PLAYABLE on PC.
Badumz-Tutorialz DE AMD doesn't include PhysX because they don't have Cuda Cores in GPUs and Nvidia Closed Source the technology. So AMD will never have a full PhysX support
The question isn't why can't they, it's why won't they. They could've very easily ported it to PC, but they didn't feel like it would have made them enough of a profit.
PC = 60Fps, PhysX, better resolution PS4 = Better textures, better reflections, better 3D models I'm surprised that the PS4 version is running at 30fps considering that it is a remastered game from 2009, i mean consoles are very lazy in terms of power
They ported the game to a newer engine(UE4), hence the graphics. Consoles SHOULD be able to run this at ATLEAST 30fps, considering there are better looking games using the same Engine. Its just Bad optimization
Andycarus that screenshot with Gordon is mislabeled. the PS4 version has far more detail and alot of extra shading. look at Batman in that screenshot u can clearly see it's the PS4 version. Look at the screenshot of the guard where his facemask is up, the difference in detail is enormous. It's not a good comparison because they're comparing an old game to a remater
We compare #Batman #ArkhamAsylum original on PC with the PS4 #ReturnToArkham Remaster. If you like our videos, please support us! Like the video or subscribe us or visit us here: Candyland on Facebook: facebook.com/candylandGS Candyland on Twitter: twitter.com/CandylandGS
I think this game suffers a similar issue that Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 had when they were ported and remastered where the lighting kind of ruins the atmosphere and look of the game. The Arkham games were inspired by that Gothic feeling where the color choice and lighting are supposed to reflect that. I think they could have done a better job trying to remaster these games for newer consoles while still keeping that original atmosphere.
I can partaly agree, but as someone that grew up with the ps3 generation, ive sorta gotten sick of that washed out, gray and dark colour tone. I played it on pc and i would much rather have the option to use the remasters lighting during gameplay. In some parts like the hallway, the remaster lighting adds more depth to the shadows, while some other materials like the suit and character model skin tones look worse in some ways.
I have to admit the remaster does look pretty sharp outside of cutscenes, but I can't go back to 30fps for these games after playing them at 60 on PC. If there was a PC port of the remasters I'd pick it up.
The Bat 'Mouth and Chin' look horrible on the PS4 Remaster, looks like a completely different person, It's like they couldn't get the original actor to 'play' Batman again, if this was a movie that is... 2:053:59 Also that sickly looking green color which is responsible for a lot of creepy atmosphere in the game is gone in the console remaster... 2:28 I'll stick to the 7 year old and superior game on PC thank you.
I'm so split with his remaster. A lot of the time the remaster looks way better with everything (usually inside buildings), and the rain in the asylum looks friggin amazing! But then again, going outside it feels like the atmosphere of the original is lost in favor of a more realistic approach. And the character models look shit. And the cutscenes look horrid. And, the fps isn't an issue if you have the disc version. Just insert the disc without updating, turn off wifi, and you'll get a 60fps. Yes, it's an unstable 60fps on PS4 and Xbone, but it'll be a solid 60 on ps5 and series x
+Enhanced shading and PostFX +More shadow casting light sources +Some form of Parallax mapping on certain textures +Improved texture filtering +Higher resolution vanilla textures +Improved light refractions on transparent textures
They should have just changed the models and the maps to Arkham Knight models, that would have been extremely impressive. They kinda did that in some places but I wanted more y'know?
This Remaster is really weird. In some cases it does look better (especially shadows, some shaders and some textures) and in others it looks like a massive downgrade (at 4:02 or 2:29). I think it would've been better to get the Remaster running at 60fps instead of changing the graphics so much.
@@franciscobutte It's not the faces, but rather the animations. They animations are meant for the original model, the remastered model has a higher poly-count and subtly different features, which causes the facial animations to be mapped incorrectly
I was waiting for this...PC versions are super cheap on Steam sales. I bought them for 3-5 bucks each. Ok this is really a remaster and not just an rescaled version (GoW3 Remaster), I'll wait the performance test to made up my mind.
Rhys Clark Film & Media I know. What I meant some equivalent physic effects. I refuse to believe that PS4 are unable to simulate physics PCs did 8 years ago. Like I said.. pretty lame they didn't figure it out.. or simply were too lazy to try.
+Jeevus Chrust No, Arkham Asylum on the PS4 is not an old game, it uses Unreal Engine 4 instead of Unreal Engine 3 like the original version, hence why it couldn't run it at 60 fps. Still, I would have liked to have the remaster on PC for a real HD version.
sometimes the pc/ps4 label are on the wrong picture. for example at 4:02. PC = PS4 and vice versa Bad that they dont have the nvidia physics ported over....
the batman games have never had the best ports and often sold badly, they have no real reason to because it would be a waste of resources to them to port it themselves rather than work on another game and most 3rd party porting studios do a shit job
When did the Arkham games sell badly on PC? Arkham Asylum : 2.9 million sales (2.8 million of the GOTY version) Arkham City GOTY: 3.3 million sales Arkham Origins: 2.1 million sales (despite being almost unplayable) Batman: Arkham Knight 831k before it was pulled from sale... RESOURCE: steamspy.com/search.php?s=arkham And that's just Steam sales. That doesn't include hard copies or sales from other retailers. So I've no idea why you're spreading horseshit that the games didn't sell well on PC. You probably read that lie in some console magazine. Despite these fantastic sales, WB continue to treat the ports like shit though. They're a fucking joke at times.
2:28 Sure, the remaster is just objectively better in a lot of ways in terms of detail, but removing the greenish filter and distant blur was a cardinal sin. The filter and the blur add so much to the atmosphere!
There's very few moments from these shots and vids where the PS4 remaster looks remotely as good as PC. Check out that brick work in the beginning of the vid. PC still has higher quality textures and tessellation while the PS4's textures look muddy and flat.
more polygon and detailed textures are great in PS4 but it misses that green tone and atmosphere in pc which sets the mood for the game. ps4 graphics is more brighter which spoils the moody atmosphere set by the original
Hopefully we can get Return to Arkham on PC eventually, I'll take the loss of Nvidia PhysX if it means more accurate and better lighting. This for being a normal remaster is pretty damn noticeable and looks waaay better.
Seems better shadows or they added more, different color palette and less blur - which maybe was an intentional effect. They added rain and more detail Batsuit scratches. Still, it's lacking from a few cool PhysX effect. Leaf, paper, smoke.
Why would they release a remastered version of this game only to have it run at the same capped 30fps on the consoles? They're definitely capable of handling 60fps with those graphics.
So the new game has better lighting and slightly better textures, but you're still stuck with 30fps (from what the video shows) and drops in frame rate on the PS4. I'd still get the old version on PC for $20 on steam, or wait for a sale when it can drop down to $10 or lower (got mine for $5.99). At least then I'd have more than 60fps, higher resolution, and a solid looking game.
When u have a i7 7700k at 4.0 ghz , overclocked cpu , a asus pro gaming motherboard , GTX 1080 8gb graphic card , 32 gb ram , 500 SSD with liquid cooling ...u don't give a damn abt consoles ....i "was" a console fan once ..but when i started playing on this confrigration ...console seems to be nothing ...
*Remastered looks better during gameplay and some specific cut-scenes. *Joker and Gordon looks way better on PC, Xbox 360. *PC version is unlimmited FPS during gameplay. *Cutscenes on PC are pre rendered and looks better, but locked to 30 FPS and it can't go above 1080p. *Remastered is 30 FPS even though Ps4/Xbox One is capable of 60 FPS even after adding advanced graphics. Can't actually say which is better. A lot of problems on both sides.
That's because this remaster was not released for PC, if it was released, then the comparison would be valid ... imagine this remaster on PC, the difference it would be, with the improvement and effects of PhysX. Compare Arkham Knight to see the difference. An accelerated batmovel grinding tire is enough to finish the comparison. Not to mention that if you have good VGA, it runs on native 4k, everyone in the arkham series has this possibility on PC.
Why can't people just agree that each platform and version has its benefits? The PS4 has better textures, lighting and effects. The PC version made in 2009 is obviously not gonna look the best, but it runs at 60 FPS and utilizes NVIDIA PhysX if you have the dedicated machine. All in all a very even match. If you want the cheap version that can run at maximum textures at 60fps and Physx then buy PC version. If you don't have the money for a decent PC and you have a PS4 like me (I have both systems by the way) then buy it for console. Either way you get to play a masterpiece of a video game
So THAT'S how you make a console game look better than PC. You wait 7 years, then remake the whole game in the latest engine on a NEWER console, but don't update the PC version to match. And STILL the characters look better in the SEVEN YEAR OLD version on PC. Especially batman himself. Looks much more realistic, more detailed, with better textures and all round nicer look in general.
pc version have physx that alone already wins :) we don't need more static stuff in our games is not 2008 anymore. we need more physics, and interactive scenario :)
Soul Mystique i do i really love physics when well done in games, (like batman series) sadly some games do in a way that is not worth it :P the scarecrow scene for example without physx is very crap. (ah what i mean by physx is just physics in general not the proprietary thing, like i also love dead rising interaction with scenary objects not static that u have in consoles as well)
I know a lot of effort must of gone into this remaster, especially since they ported the game to a new engine, but by god is this largely a downgrade rather than an upgrade. I'm aware Unreal Engine 3 games are difficult to port to PS4, but they seriously should of just straight ported the original PC versions of Arkham Asylum & City to Xbox One and PS4 rather than this garbage. The only thing that looks better are some of the non main character NPCs. Besides that this remaster compromises the tone, atmosphere, and many of characters' designs like Gordon, Quincy, Batman, and especially Joker.
PhysX isn't a disadvantage in my opnion... And about the locked 60 fps, no need for console, 'cause it never reaches the sixties anyway... I like to think that is locked on 30 by hardware 😂😂😂
The PC version was made in 2009, it also did have PhysX from the start, also 4k 60fps is not needed, you wouldn't play a game like KOTOR in 4k 60fps would you? You wouldn't because higher resolutions make older games look worse some of the time.
Ill never understand how they managed to make the remaster look better and worse at the same time. Like the lighting on some parts feel off and there are some missing details (like jokers face)
You should clarify that the PC version is 2009, many kids believe that the games came out the same year and say that their shitty consoles are better only because the remaster looks better, which is obvious, that's what it should be a remaster
ill give it to the ps4, the remaster does actually look better, its not like some other games that call it a "remaster" and then just port the pc version over
Of course. Even on Unreal Engine 3, framerates be damned on the PlayStation 4. IMHO, I think the visuals in the original Arkham City would've looked passable on the PS4 as a 60FPS title :x
Wow! It's like the PC version has no shadows... Really bad. The lighting, rain effect, draw distance, textures make the PC version look like a 3ds game lol.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
![Самое быстрое прохождение Need For Speed: Most Wanted [Спидран в деталях]](/img/1.gif)
Jesus what the hell happened to Gordon
Runar Gisli he seems very ugly in ps4
He was remastered 🤣🤣 looks young
He looks younger
@@carlosdruiz07 he look like a 7 year old with a mustache
what the fuck is going on at 4:19
Ps4 remaster looks good, but that 30 fps is a game breaker for me.
It's not a FPS.
I think that the fps isn't a problem for most of people. What I didn't like was the changes of some characters like in Gordon
Was thinking the same thing, I like the look of the remaster more but 30fps?, cmon a remaster should be 60
Imo there's no excuse for the remaster to be running any less than 60fps when the game is 7 years old with minimal improvements to the graphics overall. Especially when many brand new games that look better (Halo 5 for example) run at 60fps on the current generation.,
It's ridiculous. These games especially Asylum should easily be hitting 60, not 30 with frame drops. I don't care about the graphics I just wanted 60fps
I'm convinced that half the time these "remasters" are just some programmer moving the light sources around the room.
Johnny Organ
100% agree.
+Resolution
+ENB
+Lighting Tweak
-any extra content
=profit
programmer do coding and programming job
Dude, hope you live at a no fixed address...can't be giving away secrets like that!!!
So you don't see the updated textures, the added geometry to batman's character model, the better filtering and color correction method, the added particle effects, the anti aliasing method, the skin subsurface scattering effects, the drastic change in improved lighting and shadow rendering {which artists do lol you know nothing). There are lazy remasters but this isn't one of them, clearly you have to know what you're looking at in order to tell the difference graphically, so in short one who knows nothing, understands nothing.
JaG
You're right. I couldn't tell that from this comparison. It must be because all that tech on top barely makes a difference and, at the end of the day barely affects gameplay unless you're used to the spotlights being in a different part of the room.
If you have to know PRECISELY what to look for, if you have to be staring at microscopic differences on HD displays, it's a worthless exercise and a money grab. Again.
Too many of these re-releases disguised as new experiences.
It's the same experience as the first time around. Pointless.
They should be creating new IPs and games instead of wasting talent and time on this shite. Or even better - Make Arkham Origins and/or Knight PLAYABLE on PC.
Remaster = better textures and models, PC = amazing physx effects and 60 fps.
AMD dosnt wanted to include the Physx because there are sloth idiots!
Badumz-Tutorialz DE AMD doesn't include PhysX because they don't have Cuda Cores in GPUs and Nvidia Closed Source the technology. So AMD will never have a full PhysX support
Why can't they port the remake to PC?
The question isn't why can't they, it's why won't they. They could've very easily ported it to PC, but they didn't feel like it would have made them enough of a profit.
60 fps? You do know you can unlock the fps on PC right? 200+ fps in this game on PC dude.
PC = 60Fps, PhysX, better resolution
PS4 = Better textures, better reflections, better 3D models
I'm surprised that the PS4 version is running at 30fps considering that it is a remastered game from 2009, i mean consoles are very lazy in terms of power
RumbelBoss
The fps is not stable.
Its unlocked and goes from 16-48, its just a horrible port!
For more Check out Digital Foundry's Video
rulewski33 my god, that's even worse than solid 30fps, i would absolutely rather 30fps solid as a rock than unstable fps going from 50 to 20.
RumbelBoss
Yep!
and i am fine with stable 30...
Ps4 has remastered version which just came out
They ported the game to a newer engine(UE4), hence the graphics. Consoles SHOULD be able to run this at ATLEAST 30fps, considering there are better looking games using the same Engine. Its just Bad optimization
just one of those games that didn't really need a remaster and the original still looks incredible on pc.
it looks ok on pc
it looks better the the remaster. It fits the feel of batman alot more. The remaster just didn't need to happen@@Aidan977
FOR INFORMATION !!!
PC version 2009
so before saying "WTF pc is horrible" and read the title !
Yeah I just saw. dx
Pc still looks really good with being able to play at whatever resolution you want plus all the ultra/very high details
stagm3 But it just looks ugly
Triggered much?
dissident du jeu video We are not dumb, we know this isn't a remaster version on pc, i haven't seen anyone say the opposite.
Characters look much more better in original version. However rain effects and city towers look better in ps4. I Still prefer the original look.
no they don't
everything looks better on ps4, except the frame rate
That "more" isn't correcr
Characters in the original version just looks like the people are made of plastic
1:56 why did they have to change the color of the knuckles on batman's gloves.. seems stupid to me.
Wow Gordon, are you okay ?
Andycarus that screenshot with Gordon is mislabeled. the PS4 version has far more detail and alot of extra shading. look at Batman in that screenshot u can clearly see it's the PS4 version. Look at the screenshot of the guard where his facemask is up, the difference in detail is enormous. It's not a good comparison because they're comparing an old game to a remater
The screenshot is not mislabeled. Secondly, with what should we compare the remaster, if not to the original game? Any intelligent suggestions?
Roasted
Gordon looks a overly happy twin gay brother
wow you have to stop the Q-tip where there is resistance
They added rain, hign res textures. - not bad. At least it's better than BioShock.
and new character models, and bump mapping, and dynamic lighting
30 fps tho
Goddamn the pc version still holds up for something thats 8 years old at this point, very well done.
Gordon looks WORSE on PS4 and Xbox One, Gordon is better looking in the original!
A little less?
umm thats why he looks worse on the remastered edition you just proved his point
It's fake it said y as the counter when Batman was fighting the goons
Batman mouth's also off in ps4
We compare #Batman #ArkhamAsylum original on PC with the PS4 #ReturnToArkham Remaster.
If you like our videos, please support us! Like the video or subscribe us or visit us here:
Candyland on Facebook: facebook.com/candylandGS
Candyland on Twitter: twitter.com/CandylandGS
Candyland can you do xbox one vs pc next
aclara eso en el titulo.
Jess NE This is English!
Forever Young fuck you
I think this game suffers a similar issue that Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 had when they were ported and remastered where the lighting kind of ruins the atmosphere and look of the game. The Arkham games were inspired by that Gothic feeling where the color choice and lighting are supposed to reflect that. I think they could have done a better job trying to remaster these games for newer consoles while still keeping that original atmosphere.
Also Commissioner Gordon, what the hell happened to you?
I can partaly agree, but as someone that grew up with the ps3 generation, ive sorta gotten sick of that washed out, gray and dark colour tone. I played it on pc and i would much rather have the option to use the remasters lighting during gameplay.
In some parts like the hallway, the remaster lighting adds more depth to the shadows, while some other materials like the suit and character model skin tones look worse in some ways.
I have to admit the remaster does look pretty sharp outside of cutscenes, but I can't go back to 30fps for these games after playing them at 60 on PC. If there was a PC port of the remasters I'd pick it up.
The Bat 'Mouth and Chin' look horrible on the PS4 Remaster, looks like a completely different person, It's like they couldn't get the original actor to 'play' Batman again, if this was a movie that is... 2:05 3:59
Also that sickly looking green color which is responsible for a lot of creepy atmosphere in the game is gone in the console remaster... 2:28
I'll stick to the 7 year old and superior game on PC thank you.
mitrooper the ps4 batman face makes me feel sick, his lips are weird
PS4 Batman is worse, PC is best forever
Lax Raj no way you need to see actually bat,an has shining effect on ps4 and Xbox but on pc it looks so dum😂🤣😂🤣
4:00 those changed faces are a hate crime against humanity
I'm so split with his remaster. A lot of the time the remaster looks way better with everything (usually inside buildings), and the rain in the asylum looks friggin amazing!
But then again, going outside it feels like the atmosphere of the original is lost in favor of a more realistic approach. And the character models look shit. And the cutscenes look horrid.
And, the fps isn't an issue if you have the disc version. Just insert the disc without updating, turn off wifi, and you'll get a 60fps. Yes, it's an unstable 60fps on PS4 and Xbone, but it'll be a solid 60 on ps5 and series x
remaster aka the same game with sweetfx
+Enhanced shading and PostFX
+More shadow casting light sources
+Some form of Parallax mapping on certain textures
+Improved texture filtering
+Higher resolution vanilla textures
+Improved light refractions on transparent textures
+improved character models
+ bump mapping for wall textures
They should have just changed the models and the maps to Arkham Knight models, that would have been extremely impressive. They kinda did that in some places but I wanted more y'know?
30FPS on remastered, Seriously?
This Remaster is really weird. In some cases it does look better (especially shadows, some shaders and some textures) and in others it looks like a massive downgrade (at 4:02 or 2:29).
I think it would've been better to get the Remaster running at 60fps instead of changing the graphics so much.
The remster looks a lot better but the cutscenes got worse
@@mpakalikosa.efuggi7923 They messed up Batman’s face too they made him ugly af for some reason lol
in remaster everything is good texture and shadows ... but in the original game faces of characters its have reality much better
4 years later, I'm waiting for a 60fps update for Batman Arkham Asylum, City and Knight for PS5
omg look at batman's face... wtf did they do
Alexandre Boeri they ruined Batman's face
They came all over his face
It's always happen with remaster. They fuck up faces.
@@franciscobutte It's not the faces, but rather the animations. They animations are meant for the original model, the remastered model has a higher poly-count and subtly different features, which causes the facial animations to be mapped incorrectly
This game has to much violence in it ima play some batman bible asylum
Excuse me bitch!
yea shut up Flanders
Stupid Flanders!
stupid sexy flanders!
How diddly-dare you sully this holy language with slang?
At 1:17 the old version has a big poster on the metal bridge
It's not there in the new version. Truly????
Holy shit, what did they do to Batman's face?
He looks like a giant toe in the remaster. The original Batman model was actually believable
@@JJS595He does indeed look like a toe... with lip injections.
Also, this comment is almost old enough to go to school.
I was waiting for this...PC versions are super cheap on Steam sales. I bought them for 3-5 bucks each.
Ok this is really a remaster and not just an rescaled version (GoW3 Remaster), I'll wait the performance test to made up my mind.
It's pretty lame that PS4 couldn't have the PhysX effects from the PC version. WTF is wrong with this console generation?
PhysX is nvidea....ps4 uses an amd processor
Rhys Clark Film & Media I know. What I meant some equivalent physic effects. I refuse to believe that PS4 are unable to simulate physics PCs did 8 years ago.
Like I said.. pretty lame they didn't figure it out.. or simply were too lazy to try.
Thiago Vidal well thats amd's job then
the CPU can't handle that maybe gpgpu
+Jeevus Chrust No, Arkham Asylum on the PS4 is not an old game, it uses Unreal Engine 4 instead of Unreal Engine 3 like the original version, hence why it couldn't run it at 60 fps.
Still, I would have liked to have the remaster on PC for a real HD version.
The remasted version of the guard at 2:54 is fcking scary...
PC = 60 million fps, showing its age.
PS4 = Runs like shit, looks reeeel good.
Will Liang Pretty much.
Who cares about FPS in Casual Games?
I run this Game on my Laptop with 20FPS on Medium Settings Dude...
Kidspartitpo I couldn't, it's like when they say "once you go black you can't go back", I can't play this game, or any game lower than 30fps.
Kidspartitpo That's good for you, no way in hell could I do so. Anything lower than 30 is pretty much unplayable to my eyes.
ur mom
I like the lighting in ps4 at 1:39 to be honest
sometimes the pc/ps4 label are on the wrong picture.
for example at 4:02. PC = PS4 and vice versa
Bad that they dont have the nvidia physics ported over....
is there going to be a remaster for pc
the batman games have never had the best ports and often sold badly, they have no real reason to because it would be a waste of resources to them to port it themselves rather than work on another game and most 3rd party porting studios do a shit job
When did the Arkham games sell badly on PC?
Arkham Asylum : 2.9 million sales (2.8 million of the GOTY version)
Arkham City GOTY: 3.3 million sales
Arkham Origins: 2.1 million sales (despite being almost unplayable)
Batman: Arkham Knight 831k before it was pulled from sale...
RESOURCE: steamspy.com/search.php?s=arkham
And that's just Steam sales. That doesn't include hard copies or sales from other retailers. So I've no idea why you're spreading horseshit that the games didn't sell well on PC. You probably read that lie in some console magazine.
Despite these fantastic sales, WB continue to treat the ports like shit though. They're a fucking joke at times.
PC version is better why would you want the remastered version?
Arkham City on PC is (now) amazing. I heard it was bad at first but I play it now and it’s overall the best performing best looking game I have.
2:28
Sure, the remaster is just objectively better in a lot of ways in terms of detail, but removing the greenish filter and distant blur was a cardinal sin. The filter and the blur add so much to the atmosphere!
Cope
Darker, shinier and slower frame rate... I'm alright thanks!
all I see in the comment section is ps4 fanboys thinking ps4 is better than PC just because a remaster looks better than a original.
No it doesnt it really isnt better yes some things are but I like the pc version
Can anybody please explain why this remaster is getting so much hate? It actually looks really nice.
There's very few moments from these shots and vids where the PS4 remaster looks remotely as good as PC. Check out that brick work in the beginning of the vid. PC still has higher quality textures and tessellation while the PS4's textures look muddy and flat.
more polygon and detailed textures are great in PS4 but it misses that green tone and atmosphere in pc which sets the mood for the game. ps4 graphics is more brighter which spoils the moody atmosphere set by the original
Hopefully we can get Return to Arkham on PC eventually, I'll take the loss of Nvidia PhysX if it means more accurate and better lighting. This for being a normal remaster is pretty damn noticeable and looks waaay better.
I really wish this was available on pc i want to replay at 4k60 fps on my rig and the texture quality bump is something I want to see.
nah I still love the pc one. 'cause it has physics and it's 60 fps.
Ohhh cmon where are all the cool smoke and paper effects from the pc version they didnt manage it to get it in the console 7 yrs later really ??
Seems better shadows or they added more, different color palette and less blur - which maybe was an intentional effect. They added rain and more detail Batsuit scratches. Still, it's lacking from a few cool PhysX effect. Leaf, paper, smoke.
I think at 4:15 there's smth wrong
PC running 60fps is an automatic win, that being said, I'm still a console gamer lmao
Why would they release a remastered version of this game only to have it run at the same capped 30fps on the consoles? They're definitely capable of handling 60fps with those graphics.
After watching this comparison, I decided to play this on PS Now instead of Return to Arkham. The original graphics are better.
No they aren't remastered graphics are better in pretty much every thing except for character models not talking about pc
@@JuanCruz-in2bd yes they are look at gow 3 original and gow 3 remastered does remastered not look better and i also said i wasn't talking about pc
That rain drop effect looks really shitty.
2021 the PC version now has a 4K texture pack plus ray tracing reshade. Let's see if WB will remaster these games once again for PS5 and SX...
ps4 version = 30fps in the last scene?
PS4 = 30 FPS period on these remasters
@@Shadowman310 Blame the devs they are lazy ps4 can run 60 fps nicely
3:06 Which is worse, big eyes or panda eyes?
Batman Arkham Asylum + ReShade VS Return to Arkham Remaster
For sure Reshaded Batman will win! And yeah ... Batman stop fucking that grid 1:43
This is incredibly hit or miss, some parts look better on the original pc version, others look better on the remastered console version
Playing this right now on ps4... amazing improvements
And downgrades) =
So the new game has better lighting and slightly better textures, but you're still stuck with 30fps (from what the video shows) and drops in frame rate on the PS4. I'd still get the old version on PC for $20 on steam, or wait for a sale when it can drop down to $10 or lower (got mine for $5.99). At least then I'd have more than 60fps, higher resolution, and a solid looking game.
i'd love if they would bring this to the pc, it 100 looks better with the new lighting and getting Asylum & City to work on windows 10 is a nightmare.
better texture and lighting on the remastered but no physX on ps4, but is the remastered on pc two or console exclusive?
When u have a i7 7700k at 4.0 ghz , overclocked cpu , a asus pro gaming motherboard , GTX 1080 8gb graphic card , 32 gb ram , 500 SSD with liquid cooling ...u don't give a damn abt consoles ....i "was" a console fan once ..but when i started playing on this confrigration ...console seems to be nothing ...
Damn, your hardware from 3 years ago is better than my current PC!
joker345172 actually it’s i7 7700k*
@@Top10Amazings did you upgrade?
If I had those specs, I sincerely wouldn't. Maybe throw in a 256GB nvme ssd for the OS
joker345172 no by mistake I wrote 6400, it was 7700K, 500 SSD is for C drive, it has 1 TB separate
Gordon looks like anime character in console version
Did Return to Arkham Remaster come out on the PC, or only on PS4 and X-box one?
2:50 diference ??
They added rain, hign res textures, better light - not bad. At least it's better than BioShock.
*Remastered looks better during gameplay and some specific cut-scenes.
*Joker and Gordon looks way better on PC, Xbox 360.
*PC version is unlimmited FPS during gameplay.
*Cutscenes on PC are pre rendered and looks better, but locked to 30 FPS and it can't go above 1080p.
*Remastered is 30 FPS even though Ps4/Xbox One is capable of 60 FPS even after adding advanced graphics.
Can't actually say which is better. A lot of problems on both sides.
That's because this remaster was not released for PC, if it was released, then the comparison would be valid ... imagine this remaster on PC, the difference it would be, with the improvement and effects of PhysX.
Compare Arkham Knight to see the difference. An accelerated batmovel grinding tire is enough to finish the comparison. Not to mention that if you have good VGA, it runs on native 4k, everyone in the arkham series has this possibility on PC.
is that max setting on PC? I remember it looked better
Why can't people just agree that each platform and version has its benefits? The PS4 has better textures, lighting and effects. The PC version made in 2009 is obviously not gonna look the best, but it runs at 60 FPS and utilizes NVIDIA PhysX if you have the dedicated machine. All in all a very even match. If you want the cheap version that can run at maximum textures at 60fps and Physx then buy PC version. If you don't have the money for a decent PC and you have a PS4 like me (I have both systems by the way) then buy it for console. Either way you get to play a masterpiece of a video game
30fps vs 60fps
Remastered gameplay > Frame rates setting
@@HsienKoMeiLingFormerYANG absolutely the same gameplay with better graphics but with no PhysX and 60 fps. Yeah.
So THAT'S how you make a console game look better than PC.
You wait 7 years, then remake the whole game in the latest engine on a NEWER console, but don't update the PC version to match.
And STILL the characters look better in the SEVEN YEAR OLD version on PC. Especially batman himself. Looks much more realistic, more detailed, with better textures and all round nicer look in general.
pc version have physx that alone already wins :) we don't need more static stuff in our games is not 2008 anymore. we need more physics, and interactive scenario :)
As a PC gamer I must say fuck that noise :V Who gives a shit if I can move a cup from one side to the other?
Soul Mystique i do i really love physics when well done in games, (like batman series) sadly some games do in a way that is not worth it :P the scarecrow scene for example without physx is very crap. (ah what i mean by physx is just physics in general not the proprietary thing, like i also love dead rising interaction with scenary objects not static that u have in consoles as well)
Anderson Junior I get you. I can agree with that.
why would you compare remastered edition to original?
are the requirments same as original version
I know a lot of effort must of gone into this remaster, especially since they ported the game to a new engine, but by god is this largely a downgrade rather than an upgrade.
I'm aware Unreal Engine 3 games are difficult to port to PS4, but they seriously should of just straight ported the original PC versions of Arkham Asylum & City to Xbox One and PS4 rather than this garbage.
The only thing that looks better are some of the non main character NPCs. Besides that this remaster compromises the tone, atmosphere, and many of characters' designs like Gordon, Quincy, Batman, and especially Joker.
Is there a reason why PC never receives remasters? Do they assume we’ll just download graphics mods
Some areas where there is a lot of moon light look good, and other areas in the PS4 appear way to birght that it ruins the mood
Enjoy consolists... This is a rare case that you'll gonna see a console overcome the PC master race
Willian Capille there is no physx on console and no locked 60 fps
PhysX isn't a disadvantage in my opnion... And about the locked 60 fps, no need for console, 'cause it never reaches the sixties anyway... I like to think that is locked on 30 by hardware 😂😂😂
Is the Pc version the same from ps3/Xbox 360?
This is the best game comparison on this channel.
The remaster is what the game could've easily looked like in 2009 for the PC if it wasn't for PS3/360 holding it back. Damn peasants.
At 1:59 the ps4 wall textures actually look better then PC!
A drop of more colors and some some a litltle better lightning. And it's 7 years apart from original PC version.
NAICE...
They succeeded in the in-game, but failed in the cutscenes!!!
The cutscenes are now real time
Now put a graphic mod with ultra textures etc ,,, then put in 4k 60fps resolution + PhysX effects ,, Finally, compare to ps4 version LOL
The PC version was made in 2009, it also did have PhysX from the start, also 4k 60fps is not needed, you wouldn't play a game like KOTOR in 4k 60fps would you? You wouldn't because higher resolutions make older games look worse some of the time.
Ill never understand how they managed to make the remaster look better and worse at the same time. Like the lighting on some parts feel off and there are some missing details (like jokers face)
mejoraron las luces pero sacaron el efecto de vapor y niebla de muchos lugares.
You should clarify that the PC version is 2009, many kids believe that the games came out the same year and say that their shitty consoles are better only because the remaster looks better, which is obvious, that's what it should be a remaster
wtf batman's face looks so weird in the remastered version
arkhamholic they ruined Batman's face in PS4 remastered version
It looks like a whole different person,now it gaves me nightmares.
sad they never did the Batman: Return to Arkham version for PC
ill give it to the ps4, the remaster does actually look better, its not like some other games that call it a "remaster" and then just port the pc version over
this is riddiculous, why wouldn't they release it on pc?
Of course. Even on Unreal Engine 3, framerates be damned on the PlayStation 4. IMHO, I think the visuals in the original Arkham City would've looked passable on the PS4 as a 60FPS title :x
Why does 4:09 look like Arkham city?
Wow! It's like the PC version has no shadows... Really bad. The lighting, rain effect, draw distance, textures make the PC version look like a 3ds game lol.
QuickTimeGamer90s it's a 2009 version so yeah it's old.
I liked the addition of the rain and SOME sharper textures but other features were rubbish on ps4
4:21 they did Gordon dirty 💀
His face was way better on the original Arkham game.
The RAA switched the face and some details about his suit
How do you do a ground pound on pc?