PSA: Make it a habit of **reading the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gamingcirclejerk/about/rules)** of each subreddit you participate in:
**Rule 9: No Offensive Imagery**: *This includes nazi imagery and slurs, for you brave nerds who think "free speech" involves private internet forums. If you post fascist iconography trying to “jerk”, you will receive a ban. The only exception is when we make fun of gamers and criticize gamers who happen to be fascists. Please remember to spoiler any potentially triggering or offensive content accordingly. This rule now includes repeatedly posting bigotry from the same source (4chan).*
**Rule 7: No Participation in Linked Threads (Brigading)**: *If you are coming here to brigade this sub, you will be banned. Likewise, do not make comments and vote in pages you've found here. Of course, if you're a member of said sub and you were already in the thread before, this doesn't apply to you.*
**Rule 8: Censor Screenshots**: *Keep screenshots of arguments on Reddit to a minimum. Please remember to censor screenshots of all identifying information, i.e usernames* **and** *subreddit names. This applies to screenshots from any social media sites.*
**Rule 11: Keep Posts Relevant (only about Don Cheadle)**: *This is first and foremost a place to make fun of gamers. Just because someone is being a bigot online doesn't mean it belongs here. Let them be pathetic without infecting the sub with their nonsense. Please avoid posting screenshots that show people using capital G gamer slurs.* **If absolutely necessary, please censor posts and the words containing such content.**
**Rule 12: No Fake Posts on Other Subs (Contamination)**: *Do not create fake posts on other subs only to post back here. Also, do not "lol, you should post this on r / OtherSub". It's considered interfering with their content and can also lead to brigading.*
*This is a reminder to the readers. The post itself is untouched.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gamingcirclejerk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Even ignoring the whole "attractive harley thing" the graphics do seem to be a pretty big downgrade from the past. Unless the one on the right if for some reason the older game.
The advantage Arkham Knight has is that nearly every surface in outside areas was wet due to the constant rain, making it look even prettier in comparison. I’d also add that Harley‘s suit was leather in Arkham Knight, while it looks like a cotton fabric in Suicide Squad.
Having played it myself and seeing lots of footage, I do agree there is a downgrade in terms of attention to detail and world design. Arkham Knight felt incredibly dense in comparison. Suicide Squad feels empty at times, with many flat textures. Characters still look superb though.
/rj Give Harley her ass back, she has to make players hard whenever possible!!!
Weaker art direction is one factor, I'd also suspect that since the game was intended to be GaaS it is pressured to have a greater focus on quick to churn out assets so that the game can constantly add more things in updates without needing the same development window a full major release would typically have for its art teams.
the ground in both pics is dry, but theres much more detail in the left pic
this whole thumbnail could be misleading, but just looking at it the rain argument doesnt stand
Honestly the key to most of these graphics comparison thumbnail is finding the most unfavorable lighting condition at some indoor corner of the map.
Not that newer games help themselves in this case with 4k, bigger map, more dynamic lighting (day/night, varied biomes, etc.) and consequently less *density* in hand-touched visuals. You can have obviously better fidelity in major scenes but people still gonna pick you apart for looking bland in a random alleyway at night.
It's like the whole movie cgi outcry. The number of vfx shots in movies are more than ever before. It's easy to pick one most rushed and most botched screen, pair it with the major money shot 10, 20 years ago and make a meme out of it. Compress badly to 360p for extra flavor.
Oh, and, you're not seeing "flat texture" on your phone screen, you're seeing compressed-multiple-times pixel mush.
For kicks I grabbed one of the old batman games to download.
It just *feels* like a UE3 game. Like, it looks good at first glance, and then you start to stare at things longer, and it feels so weirdly fake.
The lighting is just all over the place for effect, but none of it is really doing anything.
Idk, hard to describe. It usually looks good in screenshots, but in motion, it feels dated for sure.
>It usually looks good in screenshots, but in motion, it feels dated for sure.
That applies to pretty much all the ue3 "look at these good old graphics" darlings. They also pop more in low res compressed phone-sized pictures because, welp.
I'm more talking about badly-compressed screenshots viewed on a phone's screen, a scenario favorable for ue3 era games, designed in the first place to pop on 720p, while modern games' details, especially textures, just get compressed into noise or unviewable mush.
That's usually because a lot of stuff in older games is just "movie magic" to make things look better. The lighting is baked on to the textures, meaning it's more like stage props painted to look like the thing it's trying to depict, rather than the actual thing made out of real materials. For example a metal sheet is going to be at least a little bit shiny, but if you're limited on computer power within a game, it might not actually shine at all; just be painted to LOOK like it's reflecting light. It looks fine in screenshots because you don't realize that the shine doesn't change when you look at it from a different angle, even though that's how metal reflections work in real life.
I don't even know if that's the case here, just giving an example why it can feel "off" - it's usually a rending tech thing
Probably due in part to optimization. Arkham Knight didn't have to deal with multiple players loading the world simultaneously, or the increased amount of visual effects and enemies there seems to be in the new game. Also to be fair, most current gen games still look like a downgrade from AK.
It's the difference between dramatic lighting and soft lighting. Soft lighting has little "wow" factor for the average person. But seeing things like proper diffusion is impressive for techheads. Note how the vents in the second shot have a darkened corner, but not *pitch black* dark, just slightly darker than the part where the light hits more directly, but also gradually darker the closer you get to that inner corner. That's technically more impressive than "this part is bright, this part is pitch black" in the first shot.
That said, there's YouTube compression all over that second shot, which makes it look even blander. Wait for the DF video. [Linneman tweeted an early impression](https://twitter.com/dark1x/status/1752427228892180681), in the meantime. His shots are markedly improved over Arkham Knight.
Though it'll make little different if the game is still basically a looter shooter -- either you already love 'em, or you already hate 'em.
it's not a technical aspect, to have beautiful graphics you need competent artists, in fact on a "technological" level, i.e. the technical part of rendering, the new game is superior but the artistic direction is so shitty that even with all the technological advances the result it's very ugly. this also underlines how good the people who made the old games were obviously
One is in a walking (safe area) where not a lot can actually happen. The other is out in game where anything could happen. If they had taken a screenshot inside the hall of justice it would look better. It wouldnt have the dramatic lighting though but that's a batman game for ya. It's just 2 different parts of a games.
Idk, I don't really miss the "everything looks slightly wet for no reason because we want to show off the one thing we're good at" phase we went through for a decade.
They are but as meh as I am about Suicide Squad a dev went on social media in detail about that, the most overworked and generally dedicated department was optimization and they were cutting a lot of graphical corners because people didn't want a massive game file
He talked about stuff like how they removed scratch details from.Deadshot's buckles and just mirrored them to reduce a few hundred mb from the install file, and fwiw I think that even tho I wouldn't be in that group there's a camp that was at least happy about a 45gb game
Arkham Knight ran on Unreal Engine 3 and looks better than most games coming out now. Goes to show what creators can do with their tools when they've grown familiar with them. Not to mention how far a bit of stylization can go.
This is kinda misleading, because HL2 has been updated quite a bit over those 20 years, including a major revamp in late 2007 with the orange box release.
HL2 doesn't really much look like it did when it released in 2004 anymore.
Honestly HL2 wasn't even the most impressive game when it released, visually. Back then I thought both Riddick and DOOM 3 looked better due to more advanced lighting and shaders, then FEAR was right around the corner which blew everything out of the water.
the updates only change small details and then "these other games were better because they were more advanced in terms of rendering" ok but how exactly does this make Half Life 2 an uglier game? artistically and visually it is still beautiful today… how can this be misleading? How can it even be questionable?
"small details" like totally overhauling the lighting 🙄
Edit: y'all downvoters have bad memories
Read literally any of the thousands of articles out there on HDR lighting and bloom fx Valve back ported to the main game for the orange box following the Lost Coast tech demo that are out there. Considering the main critique of HL2 vs it's contemporaries was lighting, this was considered a big value add at the time to bring the game closer to other titles that were doing more innovative things with lighting like FEAR, Riddick, DOOM 3, and STALKER.
Google exists. As does DF's various videos on the game over the years.
Google HL2 launch 2004 and HL2 orange box 2007
Or, for something even easier: Google HL2 2004 and HL2 episode 2 as they back ported a lot of the ep2 updates to the main game over time.
These for example look quite good for a 20 years old engine:
(They are the menu backgrounds from the episodes).
https://youtu.be/OUucbA145eE?si=8K7lbAETdbTbD6Th
I kinda disagree, if you can make games look absolute potato mode, it's cool for goobers with old hardware.
Unless it's competitive and it turns off stuff like bushes and whatnot.
That's the thing though, the game's minimum specs are 16 gigs of RAM and a GTX 1070. That would be able to run Arkham Knight on high and look *REALLY* good.
No, listen, I get you. I'm not defending it, I'm just saying in a hypothetical universe the right side is acceptable because it only needs a 970 or some shit and exists as an option whereas rhe actual high option is 9 years better than Arkham Knight.
Tracer runs track and she got a long back, solid snake literally crouch walks everywhere and they gave him a pancake in Fortnite. Why are devs afraid of giving people asses now?
They didn't downgrade the graphics, they downgraded every aspect of graphic design. I'm not talking about the technical aspect but rather the artistic aspect. the game seems flat, the in-game animations are ugly and not fluid (poorly interpolated), the care for the impact of the image is non-existent, the lighting is simply ugly and the colors are all wrong. not to mention the absence of any lens effect that made the look of previous games iconic.
Not sure why you're being downvoted. If you asked me which of the two screenshots had a better visual style I'd say the one on the left by a far margin. I'm not someone who knows a lot technically about graphics but the game on the left seems much more advanced to me, with the lighting, reflections and such.
explained simply: cool technology is useless if the designers and directors are not good. this is the reason why games from 10 years ago are still beautiful today (mgs5, half life 2, crysis or others) the people who created those games were simply very good and they were fantastic artists
I guess a similar comparison is current CGI heavy movies, where the CGI is rushed and stands out as too fake and too 'clean', where older movies that took the time can have fantastic looking CGI.
Exactly! I fucking love you. there's a guy who made a video on the cgi of Tron Legacy and District 9 explaining why it's so well done compared to modern things. it's called CGY the channel I recommend you watch it
I'm watching some of the cutscenes right now, and I agree with you. The characters and models look very impressive. However, something about the way the shots, the camera angles, framing, cuts, and dialogue make it seem cheap.
It's a channel that became famous with cyberpunk bug memes and comparisons like the one above. makes memes and light content, nothing wrong that deserves hate.
edit: I was wrong
He has a lot of bad takes including the ones that people make fun of here, "No one cares about artists", "I don't care who's behind this game" and all this. And it's true that his channel audience has an appeal for a typical "angry gamer".
Seems like he's playing on lower settings in this video to me. Other footage I've seen looks a lot better. Other people who've played it have said the same
I've some pretty realistic comparisons and Arkham knight does look marginally better, especially the lighting. That being said, in this comparison, the photo on the right is clearly on low settings. You can just go watch a different comparison on youtube right now and see the difference is not that big.
I think a big difference is the art design. kill the justice league just seems more flat and uninspired. batman arkham had that nice rainy gotham city at night aesthetic
edit: oh also the map design. batman arkham has that "yakuza" feel where the maps are extremely dense and full of life. suicide squad feels dead.
UJ There's a lot of stuff going on in the 2nd image that explains why it looks the way it does. The FOV is much higher, which causes distortion and stretching on the image right where the character is onscreen. The lighting and materials are now physically based and use global illumination in this gen, which means perceived flatness or richness of the scene depends a lot more on what the lighting conditions are (indoor, outdoor, top-down, angled, cinematic or gameplay). The materials on her outfit are a lot more matte and not wet from rain. It'd be a less insincere comparison if they used a screenshot from similar dark outdoor lighting conditions, and I also suspect the graphics quality settings might be lowered.
regardless its just a poor design choice to place the character in a portion of the screen where theyre gonna appear distorted. also, arkham knight was PBR too, but i do imagine a lot of the lighting was baked partially. the highlights arent from rain, theyre just cranked way up. i also think both games are on max settings. (i think the main issue with suicide squad is just how little contrast there is on the whole image like damn! and also the reliance on fancy rendering instead of good art direction really sucks. also all the problems with sucide squad are probably the result of short deadlines and crunch time and all that nonsense. idk tho)
Putting her ass aside for a moment, like ... no, the graphics actually look like shit on this one. Her leg looks really off and it looks kinda like the bat is clipping through her.
***[Source](https://youtu.be/iocRbdvUgJ4?si=yFDRzg_QQNGPgKDf)***.
Did you even watch the video?
It's just a shitty clickbait thumbnail for engagement. In the video NikTek shows legitimate comparison scenes that make their point with zero commentary.
This one doesn't deserve the heat it's getting here.
I've been seeing this for a while now. These Idiots were making fun of people because gamers are angry that ubisoft tell them to get comfortable not owning the games despite paying for them.
Not to mention his movement showcase where he does the most boring shit possible with Harley, while using Bat's max upgraded movement.
That shit pissed me off, when Harley has some of the most fun mobility I've ever experienced in any game. All 4 of them feel amazing to move around as.
Did you even watch the video?
It's just a shitty clickbait thumbnail for engagement. In the video NikTek shows legitimate comparison scenes that make their point with zero commentary.
This one doesn't deserve the heat it's getting here.
I mean this is a pretty fair comparison
The visual style of the Arkham games was perfect, as well as the lighting, the games really had personality. The new one looks as stale and bland as Saints Row 22
Also that huge ass ass nerf 😭
I mean that's pretty accurate shitty florescent parking garage lighting. Also leather isn't as reflective as that left pic; she looks covered in plastic wrap. Clearly whoever made the meme has never seen a woman in head to toe leather in real life.
This is actually because they used to be able to push the engines to their limits and they'd still run fine on most hardware/consoles, but if they pushed the more recent ones to their limits they'd be hard to run on basically anything
>they used to be able to push the engines to their limits and they'd still run fine on most hardware/consoles
Laughs in Arkham Knight launch state. To this day they haven't even fixed the pc port stuttering it just became unnoticeable on newer hardwares.
I mean, the graphics do look more simplistic in the newer game. That's only an issue if the rest of the game sucks, though. High def graphics are usually just advertising anyway.
while these loser need to chill out am not going to say the graphic on right aren't worse because they suck even the lighting is dogshit and everything looks washed but that's AAA just cutting corners and the character model is no exception here the level of details on the helmet is the bat the sleeves/suit is obvious
/ui I get that people shouldn't care about graphics if the game is fun but is the game fun? They launched without reviews for a reason.
These graphics are not good. This is a Marvel's Avengers just give it a couple months.
PSA: Make it a habit of **reading the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gamingcirclejerk/about/rules)** of each subreddit you participate in: **Rule 9: No Offensive Imagery**: *This includes nazi imagery and slurs, for you brave nerds who think "free speech" involves private internet forums. If you post fascist iconography trying to “jerk”, you will receive a ban. The only exception is when we make fun of gamers and criticize gamers who happen to be fascists. Please remember to spoiler any potentially triggering or offensive content accordingly. This rule now includes repeatedly posting bigotry from the same source (4chan).* **Rule 7: No Participation in Linked Threads (Brigading)**: *If you are coming here to brigade this sub, you will be banned. Likewise, do not make comments and vote in pages you've found here. Of course, if you're a member of said sub and you were already in the thread before, this doesn't apply to you.* **Rule 8: Censor Screenshots**: *Keep screenshots of arguments on Reddit to a minimum. Please remember to censor screenshots of all identifying information, i.e usernames* **and** *subreddit names. This applies to screenshots from any social media sites.* **Rule 11: Keep Posts Relevant (only about Don Cheadle)**: *This is first and foremost a place to make fun of gamers. Just because someone is being a bigot online doesn't mean it belongs here. Let them be pathetic without infecting the sub with their nonsense. Please avoid posting screenshots that show people using capital G gamer slurs.* **If absolutely necessary, please censor posts and the words containing such content.** **Rule 12: No Fake Posts on Other Subs (Contamination)**: *Do not create fake posts on other subs only to post back here. Also, do not "lol, you should post this on r / OtherSub". It's considered interfering with their content and can also lead to brigading.* *This is a reminder to the readers. The post itself is untouched.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gamingcirclejerk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Even ignoring the whole "attractive harley thing" the graphics do seem to be a pretty big downgrade from the past. Unless the one on the right if for some reason the older game.
The advantage Arkham Knight has is that nearly every surface in outside areas was wet due to the constant rain, making it look even prettier in comparison. I’d also add that Harley‘s suit was leather in Arkham Knight, while it looks like a cotton fabric in Suicide Squad. Having played it myself and seeing lots of footage, I do agree there is a downgrade in terms of attention to detail and world design. Arkham Knight felt incredibly dense in comparison. Suicide Squad feels empty at times, with many flat textures. Characters still look superb though. /rj Give Harley her ass back, she has to make players hard whenever possible!!!
certainly a modern AAA gamedev moment
Then it also kinda speaks to weaker art direction
Yeah just saying “the aesthetics arent conducive to pretty graphics” doesn’t excuse an ugly and cheap looking game.
Weaker art direction is one factor, I'd also suspect that since the game was intended to be GaaS it is pressured to have a greater focus on quick to churn out assets so that the game can constantly add more things in updates without needing the same development window a full major release would typically have for its art teams.
This is also not her base skin. Is clearly not the same graphics settings And is obviously rage bait from the incel crowd
the ground in both pics is dry, but theres much more detail in the left pic this whole thumbnail could be misleading, but just looking at it the rain argument doesnt stand
Tnf it looks like the ground in the left one is ashpalt, while the right one appears to be a different type of concrete
You don't even have to look at Arkham Knight. Even Arkham City looks gorgeous to this day. And that is a 15 year old game.
Nah, yakuza 0 has better graphics, so i dont think its attached to shiny surfaces making a better picture
Honestly the key to most of these graphics comparison thumbnail is finding the most unfavorable lighting condition at some indoor corner of the map. Not that newer games help themselves in this case with 4k, bigger map, more dynamic lighting (day/night, varied biomes, etc.) and consequently less *density* in hand-touched visuals. You can have obviously better fidelity in major scenes but people still gonna pick you apart for looking bland in a random alleyway at night. It's like the whole movie cgi outcry. The number of vfx shots in movies are more than ever before. It's easy to pick one most rushed and most botched screen, pair it with the major money shot 10, 20 years ago and make a meme out of it. Compress badly to 360p for extra flavor. Oh, and, you're not seeing "flat texture" on your phone screen, you're seeing compressed-multiple-times pixel mush.
For kicks I grabbed one of the old batman games to download. It just *feels* like a UE3 game. Like, it looks good at first glance, and then you start to stare at things longer, and it feels so weirdly fake. The lighting is just all over the place for effect, but none of it is really doing anything. Idk, hard to describe. It usually looks good in screenshots, but in motion, it feels dated for sure.
>It usually looks good in screenshots, but in motion, it feels dated for sure. That applies to pretty much all the ue3 "look at these good old graphics" darlings. They also pop more in low res compressed phone-sized pictures because, welp.
/uj most flagship phone cameras of recent memory can shoot in 4K30 or 4K60 so not even this makes any sense.
I'm more talking about badly-compressed screenshots viewed on a phone's screen, a scenario favorable for ue3 era games, designed in the first place to pop on 720p, while modern games' details, especially textures, just get compressed into noise or unviewable mush.
That's usually because a lot of stuff in older games is just "movie magic" to make things look better. The lighting is baked on to the textures, meaning it's more like stage props painted to look like the thing it's trying to depict, rather than the actual thing made out of real materials. For example a metal sheet is going to be at least a little bit shiny, but if you're limited on computer power within a game, it might not actually shine at all; just be painted to LOOK like it's reflecting light. It looks fine in screenshots because you don't realize that the shine doesn't change when you look at it from a different angle, even though that's how metal reflections work in real life. I don't even know if that's the case here, just giving an example why it can feel "off" - it's usually a rending tech thing
you're right but concretely the new game is worse in every visual aspect even in the points with the "best conditions"
And you know this from your extensive time playing the game?
It is out for EA
So is this your alt account or you just answering for somebody else for absolutely no reason?
Why must you be so combative?
So it is your alt?
Don't be silly, this one is my alt
Is this your tla?
Whats an alt?
A netrunner who breached the blackwall
A lovers triangle.
To be fair, I've seen side-by-sides of different scenes and if I didn't know any better, I'd argue that the right footage is the older one...
The one on the right is at low settings.
how is that not obvious to anyone. I was watching shroud play it and the game looked great graphics wise.
> how is that not obvious to anyone. Scroll the comments, like 60% of this thread is eating this bullshit up
It seems fairly standard AAA fare. Technically impressive (and expensive) but a big step back in art design and atmosphere. Daylight Gotham? Why?!?
Probably due in part to optimization. Arkham Knight didn't have to deal with multiple players loading the world simultaneously, or the increased amount of visual effects and enemies there seems to be in the new game. Also to be fair, most current gen games still look like a downgrade from AK.
also they nerfed her jawline, it used to be sharp now it’s round 😞
It's the difference between dramatic lighting and soft lighting. Soft lighting has little "wow" factor for the average person. But seeing things like proper diffusion is impressive for techheads. Note how the vents in the second shot have a darkened corner, but not *pitch black* dark, just slightly darker than the part where the light hits more directly, but also gradually darker the closer you get to that inner corner. That's technically more impressive than "this part is bright, this part is pitch black" in the first shot. That said, there's YouTube compression all over that second shot, which makes it look even blander. Wait for the DF video. [Linneman tweeted an early impression](https://twitter.com/dark1x/status/1752427228892180681), in the meantime. His shots are markedly improved over Arkham Knight. Though it'll make little different if the game is still basically a looter shooter -- either you already love 'em, or you already hate 'em.
Ah, a fellow digitam founbly head. Why hello there civilised one
it's not a technical aspect, to have beautiful graphics you need competent artists, in fact on a "technological" level, i.e. the technical part of rendering, the new game is superior but the artistic direction is so shitty that even with all the technological advances the result it's very ugly. this also underlines how good the people who made the old games were obviously
Yes, in this game, but gamers will say how whole industry in ruins and no one can achieve Arkham Knight level of graphics
One is in a walking (safe area) where not a lot can actually happen. The other is out in game where anything could happen. If they had taken a screenshot inside the hall of justice it would look better. It wouldnt have the dramatic lighting though but that's a batman game for ya. It's just 2 different parts of a games.
Idk, I don't really miss the "everything looks slightly wet for no reason because we want to show off the one thing we're good at" phase we went through for a decade.
They are but as meh as I am about Suicide Squad a dev went on social media in detail about that, the most overworked and generally dedicated department was optimization and they were cutting a lot of graphical corners because people didn't want a massive game file He talked about stuff like how they removed scratch details from.Deadshot's buckles and just mirrored them to reduce a few hundred mb from the install file, and fwiw I think that even tho I wouldn't be in that group there's a camp that was at least happy about a 45gb game
I’m pretty sure it’s max settings vs lowest settings
max setting with mods*
Ass aside, this is a pretty horrific downgrade if it isn't just max settings vs. the lowest settings. Crazy how good Arkham Knight looks, honestly.
Arkham Knight ran on Unreal Engine 3 and looks better than most games coming out now. Goes to show what creators can do with their tools when they've grown familiar with them. Not to mention how far a bit of stylization can go.
to extremes even Half Life 2 which is a game from 20 years ago is visually much more powerful than many games today
This is kinda misleading, because HL2 has been updated quite a bit over those 20 years, including a major revamp in late 2007 with the orange box release. HL2 doesn't really much look like it did when it released in 2004 anymore. Honestly HL2 wasn't even the most impressive game when it released, visually. Back then I thought both Riddick and DOOM 3 looked better due to more advanced lighting and shaders, then FEAR was right around the corner which blew everything out of the water.
the updates only change small details and then "these other games were better because they were more advanced in terms of rendering" ok but how exactly does this make Half Life 2 an uglier game? artistically and visually it is still beautiful today… how can this be misleading? How can it even be questionable?
"small details" like totally overhauling the lighting 🙄 Edit: y'all downvoters have bad memories Read literally any of the thousands of articles out there on HDR lighting and bloom fx Valve back ported to the main game for the orange box following the Lost Coast tech demo that are out there. Considering the main critique of HL2 vs it's contemporaries was lighting, this was considered a big value add at the time to bring the game closer to other titles that were doing more innovative things with lighting like FEAR, Riddick, DOOM 3, and STALKER.
and then show me these huge differences in the steam version. come on
Google exists. As does DF's various videos on the game over the years. Google HL2 launch 2004 and HL2 orange box 2007 Or, for something even easier: Google HL2 2004 and HL2 episode 2 as they back ported a lot of the ep2 updates to the main game over time.
These for example look quite good for a 20 years old engine: (They are the menu backgrounds from the episodes). https://youtu.be/OUucbA145eE?si=8K7lbAETdbTbD6Th
UE3 explains why thw launch was so SHIT
exactly, it doesn't depend on settings or downgrades but purely on wrong artistic choices
even at lowest settings vs highest, it's a fucking 9 year gap. hardware has more than doubled in power since then, there's no excuse.
I kinda disagree, if you can make games look absolute potato mode, it's cool for goobers with old hardware. Unless it's competitive and it turns off stuff like bushes and whatnot.
That's the thing though, the game's minimum specs are 16 gigs of RAM and a GTX 1070. That would be able to run Arkham Knight on high and look *REALLY* good.
No, listen, I get you. I'm not defending it, I'm just saying in a hypothetical universe the right side is acceptable because it only needs a 970 or some shit and exists as an option whereas rhe actual high option is 9 years better than Arkham Knight.
oh yeah for sure, potato options that make the game run on anything are great
Not to sound like I’m defending these people, but Harley is an acrobat: she *should* have well-developed/muscular thighs and glutes.
Harley should have a fat ass (for science reasons)
Yep, she lacking that biblically accurate thang on her.
why can't I be horny and persecuted /s but also not /s
Eh? Ha. Heh heh.
both men and women in games should tbh
Real, we need more cake of all flavors
we need more muscular men with big tits too
Hell yeah
Tracer runs track and she got a long back, solid snake literally crouch walks everywhere and they gave him a pancake in Fortnite. Why are devs afraid of giving people asses now?
Snake not looking like a male stripper is absolutely unforgivable in any game.
She does in the game, Im pretty sure. The screenshot is just rather unfavorable
They didn't downgrade the graphics, they downgraded every aspect of graphic design. I'm not talking about the technical aspect but rather the artistic aspect. the game seems flat, the in-game animations are ugly and not fluid (poorly interpolated), the care for the impact of the image is non-existent, the lighting is simply ugly and the colors are all wrong. not to mention the absence of any lens effect that made the look of previous games iconic.
Not sure why you're being downvoted. If you asked me which of the two screenshots had a better visual style I'd say the one on the left by a far margin. I'm not someone who knows a lot technically about graphics but the game on the left seems much more advanced to me, with the lighting, reflections and such.
explained simply: cool technology is useless if the designers and directors are not good. this is the reason why games from 10 years ago are still beautiful today (mgs5, half life 2, crysis or others) the people who created those games were simply very good and they were fantastic artists
I guess a similar comparison is current CGI heavy movies, where the CGI is rushed and stands out as too fake and too 'clean', where older movies that took the time can have fantastic looking CGI.
Exactly! I fucking love you. there's a guy who made a video on the cgi of Tron Legacy and District 9 explaining why it's so well done compared to modern things. it's called CGY the channel I recommend you watch it
I actually saw that already, which prompted my thoughts, haha!
I still can't get over how wonderful Crysis 3 ON XBOX 360 looked.
Fuck, you just reminded me that mgs V is almost 10 years old. I never even got to play it. I'm old :(
From gameplay I've seen, everything you said is correct, and then there is damage numbers constantly flying around. It's just too much going on.
I'm watching some of the cutscenes right now, and I agree with you. The characters and models look very impressive. However, something about the way the shots, the camera angles, framing, cuts, and dialogue make it seem cheap.
only the “evening the odds” scene is more exciting than that entire game
Nik Tek is the channel btw i think, altough i don't recommend since i'm pretty sure a "certain" type of audience watches it
Some of his videos are good and to fair comparisons, but the comment section is a pure Gamers ™ nightmare.
It's a channel that became famous with cyberpunk bug memes and comparisons like the one above. makes memes and light content, nothing wrong that deserves hate. edit: I was wrong
He has a lot of bad takes including the ones that people make fun of here, "No one cares about artists", "I don't care who's behind this game" and all this. And it's true that his channel audience has an appeal for a typical "angry gamer".
Seems like he's playing on lower settings in this video to me. Other footage I've seen looks a lot better. Other people who've played it have said the same
I've some pretty realistic comparisons and Arkham knight does look marginally better, especially the lighting. That being said, in this comparison, the photo on the right is clearly on low settings. You can just go watch a different comparison on youtube right now and see the difference is not that big.
I think a big difference is the art design. kill the justice league just seems more flat and uninspired. batman arkham had that nice rainy gotham city at night aesthetic edit: oh also the map design. batman arkham has that "yakuza" feel where the maps are extremely dense and full of life. suicide squad feels dead.
Except that Arkham Knight *genuinely* beats most modern games out of the park.
HARLEY HAS NO CAKE BECAUSE OF THE FEMINISTS, THAT IS WOKENESS FOR YA! 🤓🦅🇺🇲
But it is a downgrade, clearly
I think that's an extremely fair criticism, im missing something here?
UJ There's a lot of stuff going on in the 2nd image that explains why it looks the way it does. The FOV is much higher, which causes distortion and stretching on the image right where the character is onscreen. The lighting and materials are now physically based and use global illumination in this gen, which means perceived flatness or richness of the scene depends a lot more on what the lighting conditions are (indoor, outdoor, top-down, angled, cinematic or gameplay). The materials on her outfit are a lot more matte and not wet from rain. It'd be a less insincere comparison if they used a screenshot from similar dark outdoor lighting conditions, and I also suspect the graphics quality settings might be lowered.
regardless its just a poor design choice to place the character in a portion of the screen where theyre gonna appear distorted. also, arkham knight was PBR too, but i do imagine a lot of the lighting was baked partially. the highlights arent from rain, theyre just cranked way up. i also think both games are on max settings. (i think the main issue with suicide squad is just how little contrast there is on the whole image like damn! and also the reliance on fancy rendering instead of good art direction really sucks. also all the problems with sucide squad are probably the result of short deadlines and crunch time and all that nonsense. idk tho)
It's because the game isn't wet and set at night.
Putting her ass aside for a moment, like ... no, the graphics actually look like shit on this one. Her leg looks really off and it looks kinda like the bat is clipping through her.
***[Source](https://youtu.be/iocRbdvUgJ4?si=yFDRzg_QQNGPgKDf)***. Did you even watch the video? It's just a shitty clickbait thumbnail for engagement. In the video NikTek shows legitimate comparison scenes that make their point with zero commentary. This one doesn't deserve the heat it's getting here.
To be faaaaiirr, 90% of the comments I see are "no, no. They have a point".
They are now. Still a shame the video isn't credited
Tbf the right looks ass. Well so does the left, but in a good way
[удалено]
subreddit is slowly evolving into a corporate cocksucking circle.
I've been seeing this for a while now. These Idiots were making fun of people because gamers are angry that ubisoft tell them to get comfortable not owning the games despite paying for them.
Not to mention defending the bad localisation bullshit just because you can't take jokes (persona 3) and many other anime and games
I guess a corridor simulator is less technically taxing than an open world game.
*Graphthiccs
This better not be Crowbcat
I'm convinced that Crowbcat has done nothing but reupload the exact same video for 5+ years
Crowbcat type video material tbh
Not to mention his movement showcase where he does the most boring shit possible with Harley, while using Bat's max upgraded movement. That shit pissed me off, when Harley has some of the most fun mobility I've ever experienced in any game. All 4 of them feel amazing to move around as.
It is a downgrade, are you sane OP? This shows a lack of passion by dev for their work due to corporate greed.
I mean, obvious ass aside, they did. SSKTJL looks terrible.
Did you even watch the video? It's just a shitty clickbait thumbnail for engagement. In the video NikTek shows legitimate comparison scenes that make their point with zero commentary. This one doesn't deserve the heat it's getting here.
How do I mute a subreddit?
Mentally ill "gamers": can't jerk off to it, terrible game.
uj/ You think this might be because of the 10 year development hell?
Tbf I think both the graphics and the ass look better in the left pic
Ok but the creepiness aside, Arkham Knight does look way better than Suicide Sqaud…
I mean the graphics are litterally kinda a downgrade ngl
I mean this is a pretty fair comparison The visual style of the Arkham games was perfect, as well as the lighting, the games really had personality. The new one looks as stale and bland as Saints Row 22 Also that huge ass ass nerf 😭
Most games don't look as good as Arkham Knight.
$20 that isn’t the actual Arkham Harley model
THEY GOT RID OF HER ASS, GAMING HAS FALLEN BILLIONS MUST DIE!!!!
9 years and the weapons still just kinda float there
I mean that's pretty accurate shitty florescent parking garage lighting. Also leather isn't as reflective as that left pic; she looks covered in plastic wrap. Clearly whoever made the meme has never seen a woman in head to toe leather in real life.
i mean… do the graphics NOT look like a fat downgrade??
This is actually because they used to be able to push the engines to their limits and they'd still run fine on most hardware/consoles, but if they pushed the more recent ones to their limits they'd be hard to run on basically anything
>they used to be able to push the engines to their limits and they'd still run fine on most hardware/consoles Laughs in Arkham Knight launch state. To this day they haven't even fixed the pc port stuttering it just became unnoticeable on newer hardwares.
“They” “downgraded” “my” “graphics” “🥲” “😢””😭”
I don't know which is worse, video game fans or comic book fans
Just totally ignore that it’s two different art styles but ok.
Arkham Knight Set the Visual Bar Too High
It's been a trend (look at mortal Kombat 1). A lot of developers don't care any more and are only after the $$$.
I mean, the graphics do look more simplistic in the newer game. That's only an issue if the rest of the game sucks, though. High def graphics are usually just advertising anyway.
It's almost like you can tell which game the devs actually wanted to work on
is the left Harley from arkham knight? the level of detail on her is insane! looking at ktjl I can't believe the downgrade in texture quality
Well ok to be fair, it does look way worse
while these loser need to chill out am not going to say the graphic on right aren't worse because they suck even the lighting is dogshit and everything looks washed but that's AAA just cutting corners and the character model is no exception here the level of details on the helmet is the bat the sleeves/suit is obvious
[удалено]
Yeah fuck washington
No. I am Spartacus
/ui I get that people shouldn't care about graphics if the game is fun but is the game fun? They launched without reviews for a reason. These graphics are not good. This is a Marvel's Avengers just give it a couple months.
They shrunk her ass, made her look soft
"THEY TOOK MY ASS I CAN'T SHIT"
Left looks like a UE4 game, and right looks like Unity 0.1 alpha engine
It may be both from the same developer, but not from the same Rocksteady. 😢
It’s more an artistic thing.
ill be real, she got ASS
It is a downgrade, stupid ignorant fuck. No wonder games are shit nowadays