Batman: Return to Arkham Graphics Comparison
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- This video shows the graphical differences between the PS4\Xbox One versions of Batman: Return to Arkham and the original versions of both Arkham games on PC.
The PC footage included in this comparison video has been captured with all graphics settings set to max, that's because at the moment the PC version of Arkham Asylum and Arkham City is considered the best-looking version, and personally I think it's the perfect version to compare with the upcoming New-Gen edition - which technically should be graphically superior.
Batman Return to Arkham includes Batman: Arkham Asylum, Batman: Arkham City and all previously released DLC with visually enhanced graphics. This bundle will be available on July 26th, 2016 for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One.
===================================
Follow BatmanArkhamVideos on:
● RUclips - / batmanarkhamvideos
● Twitter - / arkhamvideos
● Facebook - / batmanarkhamnews
For more info and videos, visit www.Batman-Arkh... and www.Games-Serie... 
Игры
Is it me or does the original look better in several comparisons?
+Godzillarex Yeah it's...odd. I feel like on the comparisons with say Joker, Catwoman--the remasters have better... lighting? But the originals look like they have more detailed touches. Harley looks better remastered, Twoface even and some of the scenery but...eh that's just my take on it.
+SibilantWhisper Yeah, you can definitely tell the render engine is better - but some of the tweaks to the models to match that weren't done with quite the attention to detail the originals were.
+Godzillarex I'd say the original looks better in almost every case. There are definitely some details/textures in the remaster that are beyond what the original was capable of producing and a few character models like Harley Quinn do look noticeably improved, but in general, the lighting, details, and overall art direction of the original makes it look superior to the remaster.
+Godzillarex I WAS JUST THINKING THAT! Thank god it's not just me.
your right
The orignal looks better, i think you got the two mixed the wrong way round
+MrRushhour4 I've spent hours recording all the clips on PC and editing the video, I can assure you that I haven't mixed them up.
+Batman Arkham Videos Then you can safely conclude that these games are better on last gen lol. And please upload videos of you playing them on current gen.
+Batman Arkham Videos
its just that several clips look better on last gen, im little skeptical is all
In some cases yes, but almost all of the remastered pieces look better
+Kakka Carrot Cake Good one.
is it me, or do some of the original pieces look better than the remastered?
+James Clissett no, no no no no
Ha but the resolution is better on the remastered
+ThatPixelatedGamer I see that, and it looks like they are using effects that they used in arkham Knight which look really good.
looks like the lighting is the biggest change here, and some visual effects and particles as well.
+ThatPixelatedGamer its better on PC; the PC versions actually supports resolutions beyond what the PS4 and XBO are capable of. If they made a comparison vs PS3/360 versions, I think that would have been a better comparison - but I get that they wanted to show the remaster off vs. the best specs the previous games were capable of. Still impressive overall, considering they aren't building the games ground up, and they are essentially ports.
roccerfeller yeah but i don't have a pc like that and i like arkham games
Remastered version of Batman's face at Arkham asylum looks hilarious.
All I could think of is that he looks like as if he saw a huge chunk of shit in his Bat-computer.
Agreed, at 1:54 looks like Buzz Lightyear cosplaying as Batman.
He looks constipated
I know I definitely preferred the old version
One thing going for the remastered --> the outside portions looked significant better looking. The cliche "use fog to hide poor graphics" has been removed completely.
+AverageOwen it probably isn't, they still have 2 months to complete all the models
+simplemanrobertson I liked the fog in the arkham games though. It suited the atmosphere.
I think these games were just meant to be on last gen haha
+I Do Monologues no
+simplemanrobertson yeah. Now it's don't use fog even if your buildings could be used for shaving most sensitive bikini area...
+simplemanrobertson I feel like that is part of the Arkham games tho... even Knight has fog.. It just makes the game look more gritty..
Is this a joke? Almost none of the remaster looks better.
Is it just me or the graphics look more like batman Arkham knight?
+Neckbeardicus Except for Harley Quinn.
+Neckbeardicus IMO remaster did two things better: colours, and Harley Quinn. But damn! That Catwoman in 4:13... she looks terrible in remastered version.
+Penturion yeah that's what I think too, but I've got to say batman looks like less of a plastic figurine in asylum than he did before
+Neckbeardicus exactly
I SWEAR the original looks much better on the characters parts, especialy with the joker and Hugo strange
+Daniel Zanella Valenzuela I agree, I also WAY prefer Catwoman's original look. Sure the post-processing looks good, but you can get some that looks better on PC with SweetFX.
+Daniel Zanella Valenzuela Was thinking the same thing. The old shading had more details or at least hid some imperfections especially with Hugo Strange early on in the video. Remastering def makes the backgrounds and rain effects look better though. I wish they'd do more than just remaster the games though. Maybe add on more missions or something to make it feel at least a little like a new experience.
I feel like the production team is still adding touches on it though. But if this is the finished product I agree, most of the shots shown look much better prior to the remaster.
+Daniel Zanella Valenzuela he must have the labels wrong. no way its the way it's listed
+MIAPhilly Those labels definitely must be wrong.
The remastered versions have much better environments and lightings but the original has better character designs.
Honestly Joker from Arkham asylum is the only character to me that looked worse
LOOK AT HUGO STRANGE JESUS CHRIST. REMASTER MY ARSE.
So true
HAHAHHA
They screwed up the lenses on everything that acts like glasses too. They are to thick looking. How are people supposed to see through them? What the fuck Rocksteady?
Rocksteady isn't doing the remaster, It's virtuos. Do some research next time man.
+spetsnazcammando I'm sorry
huh am I the only one noticing better visuals on original on someone of these ?
+Abdullah Al-Marhuby Nope i am too
Only on some like Hugo strange is the worst but other than that none stand out to me
I agree
Yes. I think they should of just left it on last gen.
it really seems like they were lazy whyle doing the joker design for Arkham asylum... I. mean, let alone all the details they just discarded, look at his hair!!! Original looks super detailed and realistic, the other one seems like something I could draw in Photoshop in an hour
Looks like the original was intentionally gritty, and all they did in the remaster was colorize to make it more cartoony.
That's what I said. The originals look is the best.
I am wondering if the video editor messed up the labels on most of them. The original is overwhelming the overall best in most close up pics. I have noticed a pattern with remasters that they just tend to up-rez and never put the same detail into the textures the original devs did. So while it is smoother, and maybe more effects are on it, the subtle details the original devs put into the textures is lost.
Game Loot So true.
Game Loot
There are a few areas where the loss of detail is an improvement IMO:
Two-Face, Ivy, and turning Arkham City into Arkham Knight.
Everything else (Harley's tattoo, Catwoman's "cat suit", etc) just look wrong.
The original games were cartoony to begin with.
One more thing, at 1:54 REMASTERED JOKER IS MISSING HIS BOTTOM FRONT TEETH. WORK ON YOUR HYGIENE MAH BOI.
You got the magic eye bruh
WTF you right
Yeah I'm not looking forward this game
THIS TOOTHBRUSH IS WHAT ALL TRUE SUPERVILLAINS STRIVE FOR!
hey, how about you try and brush your teeth while the batman is beating the shit out of you
Original looks better too me. Nicer colors (less yellowish), more readable...
Samee
same here
same here too
+Somebody
For framerate, as I recall. Not graphics.
Right
I didn't know the PS2 was still getting games. Wait...
The PS2 could do better
***** Nah
+xXL3g3NdLaloXx he ment as joke. The remastered looks Worse Then the originals. Smartass
+Jørgen Stensrud not all of the pics, some of them he just paused at weird frames and it ends up being blurry
jajajaja GOOD one :D !!!!
I don't care how bad some of the remastered graphics look as long as cat woman's ass is in high quality
+Augs For President They messed with the lighting so much, that judging by the way she looked here I would be shocked if her ass has more definition in the remastered version
+Brandon Pearce I know these graphics look like it was made for a 3DS or a cartoon
Yeah agreed! What bugs me is how inconsistent they are! Some places looks amazing and ten times better than the original. Others looks like a 3DS got ported poorly to a PC and the original looks wayyy better. UGH!!
+Brandon Pearce 100% agreed
truth
The original looks better though.......
No it's just we aren't used to them.
Liam Pritchard
Judging by the 200 other comments that say the same thing that I just said, yes, the original looks better...
+CeeWorld69 No it doesn't, and the people with common sense were proven right when the comparison video went out.
Nathan
yeah.....the original looks better
+CeeWorld69 You'll still buy the game it's ok.
I think the remaster looks just a bit to clean at some points
yea. it really ruins the atmosphere of Asylum. just going to stick with PS4 for AK and PC for the others
+ETHAN BRADBERRY Your joking right?
+SpaceMechanic Biatch He means that some of the details have been flattened, and colors brightened. It looks a little better at some places, but others look a bit too shiny, and loose the dark artistic feel
+Lawrence Gill I agree
Yeah I do think Arkham City do look better.
At first I didn't pay attention to the words above the screen and I thought the right side was remastered.
nope right side is 2011 PC version
Me too man! Haha
yes this is written in the description
IKR
Same happened with me.
"WE INCREASED THE SATURATION; GIVE US 60$ NOW".
Jabronie Johnson you spelled "Jabroni" wrong in your user name.
Why buy a remastered version when I can just play them in my ps3 ._. total cash grab people, You're literally playing the game again but better graphics. *Face Palm.*
+Mikleo The Water Seraphim
Its for People Who has only PS4
Mikleo The Water Seraphim THE GRAPHICS ARE NOT EVEN BETTER. A LOT OF THEM LOOK WORSE THAN THE ORIGINALS.
Lol you are getting 2 games all the DLC ever released (and you know it's a lot because it's WB) for the next gen consoles for 60 bucks.
"Sooooo... We gave you less shaders, less lighting effects, high saturation, and 60 fps. That'll be 60 dollars!" Seems legit.
I really don't like the removal of the fogginess in Arkham City. I don't know if that was "game fog" making a comeback, but I took it as ice fogs, which made the whole city look like it was freezing....which it was supposed to be
You do realize that the fog was just added in to help the game run better right?
I don't know. I partially agree with you, but it also felt like rocksteady put the fog into the game to cover up the graphical imperfections, which is not to say it wasn't justified. The game looked better because of it. However, cold weather does not always come equipped with fog, and for the most part, due to the nature of cold weather, we here in North America usually end up with cP, that is, continental polar weather, which comes to us from the North Pole. Meaning that it will be cold in the winter, but you don't get as much cloud coverage or precipitation as you would between April-June, when the weather is unstable due to seasonal transition. Sorry to go all science-y on you. My intention was not to belittle, but to inform in a friendly way. :)
Malik Crim That's fine if it was, but it also added atmosphere to the city. Intended or not it made the city look colder
+arkayen666123 you are perfectly right in that regard. I'm, however, excited to be able to see the full render distance of the city, in all of its glory. I do wish, however, that they would've changed the skyline to match Arkham Knight with greater accuracy.
are we sure the video is labeled correctly?
indeed
I think they swapped the labels
No, they didn't swap anything! IT'S LEGIT. REMASTER IS UTTERLY UTTERLY PATHETIC.
Mr. Riddler Jim Carrey breathe, calm down mate, enough with the caps lock for fucks sake, you don't get sarcasm do you?
No Body
Of course I do! what do you take me for? the Riddler has the highest IQ unimaginable xD ;D
People need to appreciate your videos more. You play the entire story for only one thing and that takes hours to do. You work so hard for these videos. Thank you for everything BAV
+Momin Jafri Thanks to you.
+Momin Jafri I mean he plays games for a living, I bet more people wish they could do that than actual work, but okay lol.
+Momin Jafri dude, EVERYONE plays these games all the way through, you make it sound like a chore xD
+Batman agreed 100%
Jax Dagger Yeah, I must've played Origins at least 8 times, and City at least 5.
The originals look better 90% of the time because that's the way the game was designed, around those visuals. Messing them up like the remaster did makes it looks bad because it doesn't fit the game.
There are ways to keep the style and tone of the originals, but they completely messed it up...
WHAT THE FUCK WB
This has to be a joke, right? The "remastered" looks like garbage.
Agreed, orginal still way better
IKR I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST ME?!?!
It's because you're looking at video of cutscenes and not gameplay. The game didn't look like that in game... it looked much worse. It's a way unfair comparison.
I'd say they just confused the screens. Right side is remastered. Looks way better and this is what you expect from a remaster.
The worst was the Hugo Strange fuck up I like everything else it gives more Lighting
Aren't remasters supposed to look better than the original?
+Dandy_DNA Exactly my thoughts. I think I'll stick with the originals on PC. Look much better imo. Some comparisons did show an improvement but too many looked worse, and they probably want $40-60 for this. lol
+MetalhedDT 50$
Exactly. I think this is really intended for people that only have AK on the PS4 or XB1 and haven't played the earlier games. It's funny, that a PC game from 2009 looks 10x better than a brand new "remaster" on current-gen consoles though. No scenes actually showed improvement either. Some seem to show the city clearer...but it's not, it's an illusion. They basically just removed all the environmental effects like fog, to give the illusion that the graphics are "sharper" when they aren't. It'll probably run at 30fps too.
Yeah, I agree these remaster pics look definitely worse than the original pics
+Akaihiryuu77 Its not exactly just a PC game. it was on ps3 and xbox 360. I have played the game and beat it on both consoles and it looks better on them than it does on this "remaster." its not the ps4 and Xbox ones fault. The game could look WAAY better on them than this. I guess the devs were really lazy or something
Is it me or is the original better than the remastered
+Edwin Arzola Are you European Keegan
dumbass
In a few frames yeah, i noticed that too
You can see the difference at 2:10
+Edwin Arzola you are right now I am such a fan I will still buy it to play on the newer systems.
remastered: less cleavage shadow
They should've updated the graphics to Arkham Knight quality.
+Bruce Wayne just need patience lol
The remastered version is on the same engine as arkham knight, not asylum and city. They actually did make it look just like arkham knight if u look at the tid bits of gameplay and not the cutscenes
+Dylan Carter oohh that would be awesome.
+vicecityrocks1 Arkham Knight was Unreal Engine 3. Return to Arkham is Unreal Engine 4. Not the same.
Exactly, killer croc and scarecrow looked badass. It would be cool to see killer croc take on scarecrow in the asylum using arkham knight graphics.
in some ways original is better
funny joke
+Kai look at Hugo Strange at 0:54 . he looks a lot worse in the Remaster.
Zam Dev now that i think about it the original does look better
The game is finished, it got released years ago. The fact that what work they've done already looks visibly worse (barring color saturation changes) should really be an alarm that you should probably treat this as a lame cash grab.
+Cunnilingus “Condi” Rice look at joker on 1:55
It's literally just changed around lighting.
it's rebuilt in unreal engine 4
I agree. The original is more detailed
Read the description
+parkourgamer193 There is nothing in the description that mentions anything about the original being more detailed
Lighting, but also textures.
The original... yup, it's better.
I also think he messed up editing with the Hugo Strange comparison cos the original looks MUCH better
+ClickzyyGaming Who messed up?
+SpideyFan1993 Batman Arkham Videos
+ClickzyyGaming Nope he didn't mess up. In the original, Bruce's reflection is in Hugo Strange's glasses.
Nope, if you look at the original trailer for Xbox 360/ps4 Hugo Strange looks the same with the original so they just downgraded the graphics for some reason on some of them
Jinx is right. Go look and compare yourselves.
They fucked up big time. The originals looked much better.
the remastered characters eyes don't look right at all. just fully black with no detail. ill stick with the original thanks
no you won't
+mr swag They look almost exactly the same. I prefer the original too.
+mr swag fuck up
+mr swag I have the PC version so it already looks better than the 'Remaster'
+KeyeGamer no it doesn't lol
In some of these the original looks way better
Like at 0:55
The fuck is up with those eyebrows?
+MyNameIsSladeWilson I think he messed it up. The one on the right is the Remastered screenshot. Just look at the textures closely.
+TheRealCMPUNKFan Uhm it's the left one you can see it in the trailer. Saying Batman Arkham Videos has messed up is saying that Armageddon is coming.
+TheRealCMPUNKFan Uhm it's the left one you can see it in the trailer. Saying Batman Arkham Videos has messed up is saying that Armageddon is coming.
+TheRealCMPUNKFan Nope, the one on the right is the original. Boot up the game, or watch a walkthrough, and you'll release this in the first few minutes. You incorrectly assume the remastered version will be the better looking.
smt2542 Lose the condescending attitude.
I appreciate the effort put into the colors, animation frame rate and some other aspects but the original simply looks better, it had more realistic textures/lighting, the eyes weren't all locked in one position, there was a slight blurriness or lens flare in many circumstances that made things look better and more realistic because realistic things don't tend to be perfectly textured and even. Things like character faces looked slightly more three-dimensional in the originals, a lot of it just comes down to the lighting and textures.
I'm not sure whether this had anything to do with the change to a new engine or a different team within the company working on this to the team who worked on the original two, funding changes, etc: But I'd suggest releasing an update, at least changing the graphics to the way they were in the last gen.
That being said, there were about 3 or 4 shots I liked more than the original. There's a lot of promise in the large environmental shots and some of the shaded areas.
0:54 this is pathetic...
+legopieface lol and also 2:40 look at her remastered eyes
And that is from the same guys who made the original..
+James Hang wow I never notice that before. I was just to busy looking at her boobs.
+legopieface Devs "Needs less symbolism, needs more bushy eye brows"
+Champion Triumph And fake beard LOL
1:55 is it just me or does the original look better?
I agree the original looks better
All of the originals do and should look better because they were from the PC. The only thing changed in the new version is higher res textures, which PC already supported
Joker's head and hair look better on the original, but I think everything else on the remastered looks better.
0:00 - 6:26 is it just me or does the original look better?**
1:40 is it just me or does the original look worse?
Yeah, anyone else think the "original" and "remastered" versions are switched?
+Thomas Woodrow nope. PC will always have the better visuals.
+RandomBlackGamer What visuals? The comparison was between PRE RENDERED scenes and actual in-game footage that the Remastered is using. The same pre-rendered scenes were the same on all platforms.
+QuickTimeGamer90s go check your eyes
+HeavySandvichGuy1 Dude pre rendered is a movie clip that plays. It is not the same as in engine wherr the game actually uses the hardware to render the frames in real time. Most of these shots are pre rendered cgi used in the original vs actual in engine footage.
+Garry Maidment No you moron they are not. The origina - what was shown here - is mostly cgi cutscenes from the games. That is why it looks the same on ps3/x360 during sequences like entering arkham with the batmobile, clayface appearing, joker pulling the gun, batman dodging the elevator, bane enraging etc.
the graphics are terrible compared to the ones from the last gen consoles, GREAT JOB ROCKSTEADY!👏😤
and no you don't have to care about my opinion
The graphics is terrible in comparison with PC version of City and Asylum, PS3 and X360 had much worse graphics. And the "Original" here is exactly PC version of the game.
rocksteady didn't developed this
rocksteady isn't remastering it
Then who is?!
the original is WAYYY better
the remastered looks like a batman made by a chinese company
definitely. if they added the lighting from the remastered version to the graphics of the original, it'd look fantastic.
LOL. I like the look of the original better. The characters in the remaster look to polished, and out their while the originals gave them a nice, dirty look on their clothes and faces which is something I've always liked. The only thing that looks better are the physics and lighting and even on some parts they did it wrong.
+qubeh the lighting from the original is better
Dragonfxgaming On some parts like the joker aiming his gun at batman at the theater in city. But the scene where batman steps out of the asylum for the first time in the moonlight, and with the mansion in the distance looked beautiful. The lighting, the look, the visuals, I wanted more of that not character models that looked like they were drawn on crayon. I want them to keep the dirty style of the original while creating arkham knight-ish looking graphics. That's one of the things I think the original did justice. They way everything looked it was really old, gross, but it built a great atmosphere (mostly asylum). I hope they don't screw that up.
Actually this remake of Batman's character in unreal engine 4 was made by a chinese company named virtuos.
Batman: Return to money
hahahha, fuck dude.. fuckin right
hahahha, fuck dude.. you´re right
so true
so true.
Im not buying a remastered version. When I can just go back to ps3 to just play it :3 these remastered version of games are cash grabs. Companies are desperate for money.
1:54 They have to be kidding us - the colors are gross, the details less; I mean, what the fuck?!
2011 PC versus 2016 ps4
Nope. Simply a piss poor remaster job using a new engine. I played these games on PS3 and on PC and aside from higher resolution textures and a crisper image, the actual artistry, depth and detail is far better in the originals, no matter where you play them. If PS4 can run Uncharted 4, there are no excuses IMO.
yes you're right but uncharted 4 is a game developped and optimised only for the ps4
PS4 is about as simple to develop on as it gets by all accounts. There are no excuses man
Loving Jokers teeth.
I'm still going to buy the remaster, even though I already have Asylum and City, because I want to play the game on PS4, not compare the graphics. To me, it seems it's just the in-game cutscenes that look worse, but I don't care.
same here especially since it's only 8 bucks on the ps store right now which is like a fucking steal
People like you are why companies keep putting out garbage. If you'll just buy it anyway, then there's no reason for them to do better.
Call me crazy if you like, but I think the original looks better.
I'll agree except in the large outdoor areas.
same! I think its just a fake video, you know with all the PC settings turned on ultra high pretending its current gen but its PC
+MiniBullDoZer z Nope, it isn't. Playstation and many other legitimate channels released trailers to it, this videos just compares the graphics in the trailers to the originals. Like in 0:06, on the right side is pc maxed out on ultra settings.
Imo asylum looks better on ps3, bc it lacked any color and had a perfectly fitting atmosphere that the remasters completely take away from it. and now its raining in asylum -_-
While I think City looks way better with more vibrant colors.
To be fair its just trailers though, the actual game could look much different.
I'm rambling, sorry :P
You're not crazy, you're right about the original being better! Remastered is just amateurs who made the game look way worse!
Either they don't know how to optimise the game for the new unreal engine for or they just couldn't be bothered.
WTF? The Original looks so much better here, this has to be a mistake...
+Angel Perez nope i see it to, the original in the first joker scene, pause and watch the hair, the remastered looks like 2009
Not at all what are you talking about? Have you seen the rain effects in the original?
Dranosh Saurfang no no i mean the original looks better
+Angel Perez no, Rishil definitely has a point. The scene with Hugo Strange, his glasses are much more reflective in the original and you can even see Mister Wayne's reflection in them. Have fun wasting your 50 bucks.
***** you cant even see batman's reflection in hugo strange's glasses, in the remastered version
The Remastered version looks like a Cartoon, the original looks more realistic
And the Remastered version doesn't have shadows!
It's exactly one of the things I commented on
Isn't better nor worse. it's literally the same game.
+Spectre 2013 No it definitely looks like a completely different game. The bat shit looks so different it is crazy. Look at his suit and face at 1:55 you can see the dramatic and worse changes
other way bro
Hugo Strange lookin' like he came out of a 2K game.
Looks worse... what were they thinking?
they are compering the orginal with pc max setting to the console remaster edition...pc always win...but if you played the orginal on ps3 or xbox360...the remaster version will look way better
+iraqy boy , on the ps3 it looked the same as the right picture it's not max setting on pc it's the ps3 look at Hugo strange and tell me it doesn't look terrible it looks like plastic and the eyebrows with the skin and detail and lighting it's just bad, all and all maybe it's not finished
I just had to copy and paste to proof you wrong.
learn to read the description: " This video shows the graphical differences between the PS4\Xbox One versions of Batman: Return to Arkham and the original versions of both Arkham games on PC."
+Grims Gameplay I don't give a shit I don't care if still think the remastered version looks like shit
The remaster look great compering it to the ps3/xbox360... but in the video they are compering it to pc max settings and the pc version look way better
Gotta say, it's impressive that some things look much better in the original
It just goes to show how bad the "remastered" version of Arkham City and Asylum are.
+Flying Snail compared to max graphics on pc yeah. Compare it though with the PS3 or XBOX 360...
I'll just stick with the original, yet why for the life of me couldn't the developers just made them backwards compatible for both systems. Seriously why?!
because $$$. they want you to re-buy games you already bought
Doesn't work like that, the console would need to be made to play PS3 and 4 discs for that to work.
+barrymk400 actually I'm not sure if it could. They'd expand the game and make it bigger so their would be a larger storyline to keep players busy whilst they focus on other projects
yo original is ps3 and remastered is Xbox 360.. I've played them on both consoles. I'm A freak at it 😂 I just do it to see the differences
Because it's a business
For the Remaster it looks like they just raised the contrast to a million
The assessment I have come out with watching this is that the cutscenes look better on the original games. The in-game stuff has been improved a lot. Just looking at Batman on the gargoyle whilst panning around the city looks so much better on the remastered version. I will say one thing though, I really don't like how they simplified Batman's character model. In Arkham Asylum Batman looked like a really dirty and gritty comic book character. There was so much going on in his design whereas in the Remastered version his character model has been reduced to something so simplistic and plain.
Couldn't say it better myself.
I've noticed that some of the clips are mixed around if you look closely
Weakest Batman Arkham remaster! what did those lousy developers think? Of course this won't be approved by anyone, it's a joke!! When can we expect a new release date? I really want Rocksteady to return & work on this disgraceful remaster. Everyone expects compensation in some way or form. "Origins" & add everyone's all time favorite Bat suits, we want to see 1992 anime Batman + revamped version. Why isn't Anime Bat skin already unlocked in Arkham Asylum?!!!!
at least all the DLC's are included
Hfgchg t.
only harley quinn and grundy are looking better on remaster the others looks shit especially hugo strange
true i hope they fix this
Looks like very rough remastered not worth $60
+Gaming Magic
*$50
Yeah. And that still at 1:53 is just criminal for a remaster...
Mr Freeze looks good
0:55 where is god damn reflection in the glasses? Where? This is first remaster what I ever see with less details than original.
+robert3579 "This video shows the graphical differences between the PS4\Xbox One versions of Batman: Return to Arkham and the original versions of both Arkham games on PC."
So it's 5-7 year old PC graphics vs current console graphics.
+VidarUlv I'm guessing you don't own a console
0:28
Harley Quinn looking fine though
HAHAHAHAHA! The original looks a million times better.
how?
Quac Tro Thanks. You saved me a lot of typing. Totally agreed.
If it were a million times better, the remastered would be pixilated. But yeah. The remastered does look downgraded in some areas.
said no one
+mr swag but it does.
am i the only one who thinks remaster looks worse ?
No. It not only looks worse, it looks MUCH worse. It looks like they removed all the nifty background environmental effects like fog, severely reduced texture quality, then just added some bloom and shine and called it a day. Oh, and put a crappy texture on Batman's cape to make it look like they changed something. Oh, and the lighting effects are like 10x worse.
These stupid comments are getting annoying, instead of posting something as stupid as this why don't you read them first.
bladerj Why do you care what I say to this person? Unless you're one of those shit stains that think you're so original by posting the same message as him.
you replied to me not him Juan Alcantara
My bad, about that person but still, this stupid comment is getting old way too quick, there are a lot of people posting almost the same comments as you yet you try to be so original lol.
Hmm some cutscenes looked worst with less detail and blurriness, but then some cutscenes looked better, mixed bag much?
+Swatkiller546 My point exactly. In certain aspects it looks much better. In others it looks worse than before.
+Swatkiller546 Agree 100%!They are just trying to make an easy buck that's all.Unless they are going to give it away for free...no point in wasting the time/money.
I don't mind graphics I'm just over the moon about the existence of a long awaited port :)
Sure sometimes the graphics are more advanced, wich is what to be expected with a new generation. But most of the time it''s not really such an improvement, In several cases though the remastered version is just flat out worse in my opinion.
For example look at Hugo Strange at 0:55 .
The original just looks so much better! I don't know what they did to his eyebrows and beard and his face looks much more detailed. You can see a reflection in the glasses and they've managed to capture his expression a lot better.
But also at times when the remastered graphics are undoubtedly a bit more advanced i still prefer the look of the old. They've managed to capture the grim gray feel of Arkham, where as the remastered version tries to make all the colors stick out and focus on a graphically advanced setting rather than a good look.
The Hugo Strange remaster model looks like it was done by a high schooler for their com tech class.
a actually Hugo strange face on the original was supposed to be on the remastered side. I mean, sine you obviously can't spot the difference, it's understandible. just think before commenting.
Tj277
Are you sure about this? I can't speak for how it is on console but the face that looks better with the text "Original" looks exactly as i remember it looking on PC a while back when i played. So by what i found online and in my memory the picture with Hugo Strange with the text "Original" is the one found in PC Arkham City. But i cannot speak for how it looked on console so maybe they just took what they had on PC and put it into PS4??
That would be kind of Strange though :/
See what i did there???
Tj277 They're titled correctly. Way to be a condescending jerk. How about you think before commenting?
+Andrew you sure
Is this forreal? Did they mix up the original and remastered screeshots? Theres like absolutely no ambient lighting in the remaster and the models look really polygonal. Jokers bottom two teeth are just missing. There's no blood from Batman hitting him, there's no evidence of on Batman of a fight either, his teeth are just gone? What is this? There is so much more detail in the original models too. The corsage on Joker in the remaster looks like a wilting flower I could make in Blender. The original looks dirty and gritty and has amazing lighting on it. Joker's outfit is so much more detailed, as well as the world in general. I never played any of the Arkham games, but this is terrible. I'll buy the originals before I buy this mess.
someone wants attention lol
+mr swag He's pointing out flaws in the remaster which makes sense because a remaster is suppose to look better, seems like you're the one who wants attention.
+Austin Mora His teeth are not missing, but his tongue is clipping through.
That's a lot typing.
That's a lot typing.
The hell? The original looks better. Rocksteady, what the fuck? I REALLY hope this isn't the final product, the have time until july to fix that shit.
Difference is, the cutscenes in the original were pre rendered I'm pretty sure the ones in remastered are real time
Rocksteady isn't making this. If they were the graphics would probably be on par with Arkham Knight. They're working on an unknown new game.
+al112v5 Exactly
Rocksteady isn't in charge of the remaster. Virtuos is.
UpintheAir1395 yeah whoever the feck they are
WTF happened to this 'remaster'? I'm just gonna skip this and buy Batman Telltale Series.
You can buy both. I'm gonna buy it even if the graphics aren't better
Telltale?.....hahaha
That serie is worst
@@juice8683 Money doesn't grow on trees dude
But it just looks brighter and more saturated with colour. Some of the shots look worse, like the Joker's face close-up near the beginning.
Edit: Example at 1:14 .
+Spartan Nugget Harley would still sit on him tho.
+Spartan Nugget He is ugly in general I only like the origins version of him that model shows a true evil homicidal psycho
+12 Year Old Juggie lol ok
Remaster: add lens flare, add lighting and water effects, add a few more polygons, up the res on the textures. Oh, and ignore the colour palette, artistic intent, the atmosphere. Yes the graphics are better, but the aesthetics are lost. While I love me some eye candy the idea of that is that it has to be bringing something to the media rather than for the sake of itself to the detriment of the rest. But I guess the plan is to cash in on LENS FLARE? Happy with what I've got in the original. What a pity.
X ray vision looks pretty good though, I guess.
Like seriously the positioning of "END" at 5:50 - how would anybody look on those two and say "you know I think we've brought advances while staying faithful to the nuances of the original" - the point of a remaster is to improve the media with the means afforded by advances in capability since the original, not to ignore the artistry of the original piece.
That's one of the weird things, though. In a lot of the shots, the texture quality does look better - but in quite a few, it looks worse! And look at the hair on pretty much everyone.
Yeah that beard on Strange looked like old wrestling game hair lol.
*****
the texture on Catwoman's outfit is muuuuuuuch better in the original. The remaster just looks black and texture-less, except for bizarrely shiny boobs
X-Ray Vision? I think you mean Detective Mode.
Wtf, joker is missing teeth at 1:53 in the remastered version
+TAPE971 raised? He also has a lot less wrinkles in the make up
And batman look like he shaved
+CaptainCeleb Batman is making a weird duckface thingie while also having the smoothest skin possible. I dunno, I prefer original batman with his old-man "I have seen some SHIT"-wrinkles
+CaptainCeleb Lol have you seen Catwoman's eyes at 2:40?
It's a shadow.
i recently learned that the release for the remastered versions has been postponed
surely rocksteady will be continuing to work on the graphics a bit more, right?
Did they change ?
It’s not rocksteady you muppet
@@Zug8415 What is it then?
@@mett1520 Virtuous Studios did this "Remaster"
3:53 Okay now I'm really starting to see some of the improvements here - check out Batman's boots in the old vs the new. The geometry is definitely more detailed. Also his forearms, his waist, etc, not to mention a lot of details on Freeze's suit, it's definitely been upgraded. Clearly this isn't a finished product (I hope), this is just where they're at now, this seems really promising.
did u like it?
Don't fix what isn't broken.
But the mooney...
would be nice to get it on ps4 though, but I do have ps3 and pc, and pc looks remastered.
I think the words "Original" and "Remastered" are backwards.
I thought the same
no he hasnt switched them up. People asked before
ye on a few i think
Keep in mind: The original footage of the game was taken on PC with maximum settings, that's why the original in most senses looks better than the remastered
You'd hope so, but unfortunately they aren't :/
original looks waaaaaaayyyy better
Both versions look great. Batman's cape is noticeably better in the remaster.
And you can clearly see more details like rain effects, motion blur, and more realistic lighting effects
+Juan Lara funny thing is I saw how great the rain effects look. But then I remembered, the Arkham Asylum game didn't have rain in it.
+thedarkrocker333 I think they wanted rain in Asylum but the Xbox360 or PS3 couldn't process that much complicated shit when the games first released
+Juan Lara Maybe. Idk, I kinda preferred no rain. Every other Arkham game was either snow or rain. It was nice to see one without anything. Just clear skies. But the rain in the remastered looks great.
+thedarkrocker333 Yeah asylum was suppose to have rain, glad this remastered studio followed rocksteady's wishes
Either the labels were accidentally swapped or this remaster looks horrid. Also, is this remaster locked at 30fps?
labels r wrong lol
Drileyj I only gave that option to be nice, I know damn well that the labels weren't accidentally switched.
RecliningWhale ikik
Is that like proven? That they are switched?
Mark D No, I'm saying if they aren't switched this remaster is horrible.
The only thing that looks better is the batsuit
The in game world looks a little less washed out though, and in some instances the shading is a tad better, and for others it's a bit worse. These are mostly cut scenes though, and the in game stuff actually looks a tad better. Honestly this remaster kinda looks a mess.
Gotham looks a little better. I just think the faces look a little worse.
+Matthew Scooby and Catwoman looks less hotter in the remastered version too😂
two face as well in my opinion
and harley
It looks less like a remaster and more like they put a bad filter on the game
Wait, why is Joker MISSING TEETH here? 1:55
+barrymk400 Well, he did leave a lot of them around the asylum.
+barrymk400 Looks like they screwed up Joker's model in the game. The distance between the upper teeth and lower teeth are farther and the lower teeth looks like it's mssing some because it clipping through Joker's lower lips. This seems to be a shoddy remaster work and Warner has not learned it's lesson. They're gonna try milking gullible gamers again with a rushed product.
+Lerios What?
Did they purposely make the remaster look worse so that Arkham Knight would look better in comparison?
It's really cool. But the hair and beards looked better in the old ones
I think that's what people aren't realising. I think alot of things look better, and the batman suit and rain effect look amazing but the hair is awful
MAGAMER1300 Yeah. I'm happy with everything. It looks a lot beautiful and well detailed. But the only bad thing i see are the hairs and beards nothing else
+MAGAMER1300 In some cases it's better. Hugo's beard now looks less artificial for example.
+Nathan I think Hugo was an overall embarrassment. there was no blending or anything, it just looked like black spikes on his face
+Nathan and those eyebrows.. how was that allowed?!
MOST of the originals look wayyy better.
wth!?
What are you crazy? The rain effects were so bad in the original, the graphics have been increased tremendously what are you talking about? Also A.A has been increased.
W
+Dranosh Saurfang 0:52 so what's this?
+Hanif Halimi Yeah, the remastered looks too bright and make the models look faker as a result. And the old graphics felt more realistic as a result but maybe the remastered graphics aren't finished and they'll tone done some things. But that's wishful thinking.
Ikr
Wow -- very surprised by the lack of improvement given the generational upgrade (both in console and engine). Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I'm _really_ disappointed by how much motion blur seems to be in-use in the remaster. I thought that motion blur was put in place to help with frame rate issues and to hide graphical fidelity problems, yet the re-master is hiding all the supposed texture upgrades by obscuring them behind a blur that wasn't present in the originals. I don't know -- maybe the average gamer likes motion blur and they were just trying to tap into a thing that most players would enjoy. Just my opinion.
There _are_ spots where the remaster shows _definite_ improvements in texture and detail, but both AA and AC have lost that dark, gritty haziness that made them so atmospheric! Just because we _can_ make "clearer" scenes doesn't always mean we _should,_ and I know that flies in the face of my "motion blur" comment, but in this case I'm referring to the atmosphere and not character textures/motion.
At this point, I'd be _very_ surprised if Virtuous can deliver a remaster worth picking up. I feel really bad saying this (because I'm sure they're hard-working, nice people), but _I'm not even sure they could release something that looked as good as the last-gen offerings_, at the moment.
They have effectively removed the "noir" style lighting, and that's part of the life of the game.
Such a shame.
100% original graphics are better
Atleast on some
The original cutscenes are better, but the gameplay graphics are better
yea I agree with you
+Deadshot I agree to it looks like the original graphics suit the game better on some instances but the remaster still looks somewhat good.
yea they could do better but I'm glad they remastered it on current gen
I think there's something we're all overlooking. Arkham Asylum and City often used pre-rendered cinematics. In Arkham Knight, everything was in real time. I'd assume that in this remaster, cutscenes play out in real time as well.
But at the same time I think they fucked with the overall aesthetics of the game as well, so I'm not too happy either.
I highly doubt they would do real time cutscenes. But the least they could do is improve the framerate as sometimes I experience frame rate drops when playing Arkham City.
is it just me or is the original looking better than the remastered?
Is it just me or do the originals look better almost every time?
Just remember if you think it looks worse thats because the OG version was captured on max settings and so its not a comparison between say the ps3 and ps4 version, its PC against PS4, PC will always have better graphical potential no matter what.
+CLFGY We're talking about PC games released in 2009 and 2011 compared to a remastered version that will be released in July 2016 on new-gen consoles.
***** Do you know if the remaster will be in 60fps because if not then I have no clue why the graphics and lighting is not up to par with the PC version.
+CLFGY I don't know, sorry. I mean 60fps would have been a great selling point, but there's no mention of it, so I guess that both games will only run at 30fps
***** Well hopefully it is because that could explain why the graphics are not bumped up more to make it look as good as the PC version.
You people......
Textures are more detailed on renastered, yet I like the lighting effect on the original more, more realistic for me.
*remastered
And certain textures don't all that improved to me in the remastered imo, would stick to the original
+MuzikiHeart Yeah, they basically put a layer over top of it without actually enhancing anything, or redoing graphics. That's why it looks terrible, you can already buy these games on the PlayStation store, no need buying the remastered edition.
+Jonas Nordin exactly
The map and the colors totally go to remastered. Also the movement of batman's cape during combat and the appearance of the detective mode. The characters faces look better in original but there are some characters better in remastered (Robin, penguin, Mr.freeze, two-face and batman in some parts).
Also, expect better graphics from remastered because the release date has been delayed for improvements.
Why does it look universally worse?
Because the guys in charge of the remaster, instead of just porting the PC versions which would have looked better and cost way less, instead upgraded both games to the new Unreal Engine, which i'm guessing didn't play nicely.
Looks like a horrendous idea since even Arkham Knight was still Unreal Engine 3. They're wasting the engine...You don't just port it over to another engine...where are the advantages of Unreal 4, such as physically based shaders and amazing particles? I see none of that.
This company doing the remaster must be shit.
Was Iron Galaxy Studios in charge of porting this game to consoles?
Still waiting for the easter egg video!
+35Antonio who isnt????
Yeah we are still waiting new easter egg videos
On What
+T for Tony Arkham Knight. Probably won't happen though, sadly.
well look at City's easter eggs so Knights is gonna take a while
So... the remaster is more colorful, has better damage/scar effects, has less shadows on characters, made the detective mode in Arkham City OP like in Asylum, terrible hair effects, better city textures from far away, and Scarecrow looks like someone made his textures in Microsoft paint. Please tell me I could at least turn down the saturation/brightness... please?
how is detective mode in city like asylum
A game of Manus and other s*** 3:38
How you could see everything including small details/textures without the color.
Like so
www.theaveragegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/BatmanAA-DetectiveMode.jpg
hugo stranges face looks like a silly drawing from someone who's 6
I'd hate to criticize you guys because you made my 2 favorite games of all time but in some shots the original looked better
+Kid from Chicago
Criticism is by no means a bad thing, keeps artists _trying_ to be good instead of becoming conceited.
Besides, Rocksteady isn't handling the remaster themselves.
+Kid from Chicago No need to feel guilty, it's made by Virtuos studios not Rocksteady, and I don't think they've done the originals justice.
+Kid from Chicago "some"
it's not remastered by rocksteady it's by some other game studio
SuperSaiyan3985
That's the thing, though. This is newer, more powerful hardware they have to work with. There shouldn't be _any_ sections that look significantly worse, especially since the visual design is the strongest aspect of these games. If this is the final product, it looks like a lazy cash grab they just threw out without giving it the polish it deserves.
Why is the remastered version looking crappier? Shouldn't it be the other way round?
I wouldn't say it looks completely crappier some screen shots look better but then some look worse
probably not finished all the way, this is probably just to get the word out that it is official, but i could be wrong and theyre might not be any changes by july
+King Trevs look at 1:20 at the Joker, the remastered looks like garbage.... You can't not see that.
honestly the original looked better
the remastered just looks less detailed
it's like when u turn up the color on your tv and weird hair and eyebrow textures
+devast8or yep or like a bad Instagram Filter
The remastered looks so much better, just look at the non cutscene comparisons.
+hobo 13 1:20 is one of the best examples of worse graphics
Originals looks better in character models, but in scenarios and colors the remasters.
Ok, so the Remastered version doesn't technically improve the graphics, but it gives the game more color than the original. Just look at the Rhas al Ghul part and you'll see what I mean
in the remaster, the characters have no details, the only thing that's better is the lighting of the city
Or the Hugo strange
+McTheMan Or on the first Penguin clip
Description states the original footage was from a PC on max settings.
+GhostDragonHQ Yes it does. It improves them greatly. Thing is a lot of these comparisons are from in engine UE4 (remastered) vs PRE RENDERED cinematics.
people will actually pay money for this shit
amazing
*****
enjoy your shitty $400 20 fps machine I guess
+Marcus Aurelius Severus Antoninus Augustus ew dude that was cringy
+Scarecrow That's what people said about Sonic when the Xbox 360 and PS3 were new.
+Scarecrow if the graphics dont matter then why buy a new gen console?
go buy a ps3 or an xbox and play arkham there then
SuperSaiyan3985
lol
A remaster that looks significantly worse than the original. As if Arkham Knight wasn't enough of a kick in the teeth...
+Replay Games yeah
+Replay Games yeah
AK was phenomenal you fucking toad.
except the main villain..and ending..and half of the batmobile things
Speaking of a kick in the teeth... 1:52
I'll probably pass on this, since the only difference is the tone of saturation and shadowing. It's a great buy for people who have never played the originals, but I'll just wait until they release a GOTY Edition for Arkham Knight.
Sorry... original looks WAY better to me. I don't know what they were thinking when they made those big changes because it looks like they downgraded it more than they upgraded the games. Holy crap.
IKR?
+King Gem the original is pc not xbox360 or ps3
+King Gem look at the description
+King Gem see?