-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Batman: Return to Arkham delayed / no new release date
But WHY change engines if it's going to look WORSE? It looks really bad, man. I would have rather just had 1080p60 straight ports of the PS360 version with anti-aliasing. Insane.
Noisepurge
Member
they probably had 2 weeks to do the port, so they just had to dump in the lowest quality assets to get it running at an acceptable framerate :/
Probably some WB exec thought that "The first Arkham games on UE4" would be a good selling point for the game.
Revolutionary
Member
Wow, WB actually taking the initiative and making sure the product isn't a total train wreck like it seemed. Another reminder of how bad this port was looking:
That said, I highly doubt they're adding Origins because of the state they left that game in (they gave up on patching it at a certain point).
Neff
Member
At a guess, I'd say that the first two games' cutscenes aren't usable for a remaster since they were FMV, and that they don't exist in a higher resolution than 720p, so they're trying to recreate them in real time in 1080p, only they're not doing a great job of it.
I can appreciate that remasters and ports often have to make sacrifices and adjustments, even when going to theoretically more powerful hardware, but I was shocked by how bad the ports looked, and offering comparisons themselves really didn't do them any favours.
What the hell?
Corpsepyre
Banned
Add in Origins and make it look better. I doubt that'll happen though.
Speaking of the PC versions, is there any way to add mods? Texture mods, extreme grasphic mods, etc?
Speaking of the PC versions, is there any way to add mods? Texture mods, extreme grasphic mods, etc?
tokyocrusher
Banned
Remember virtuous is making the game WB is just a publisher
Jangowuzhere
Banned
Still shocked at the level of praise that Origins gets around here. Other then the boss fights, everything else about it was just a low quality carbon copy of Arkham City.
Despite my strong dislike for that game, I think it's lame to not include it. $50 is pretty damn pricey for two old games.
Despite my strong dislike for that game, I think it's lame to not include it. $50 is pretty damn pricey for two old games.
...I swear to God, NeoGAF is the only place where Arkham Origins is a masterpiece.
Regarding the lack of support for that game, I'm pretty sure the multiplayer doesn't even work anymore because they stopped updating it or something. At least on PC. Not that anyone plays it anyway, but...
Regarding the lack of support for that game, I'm pretty sure the multiplayer doesn't even work anymore because they stopped updating it or something. At least on PC. Not that anyone plays it anyway, but...
Neff
Member
Some people greatly prioritise story over gameplay and design in videogames these days. Origins' story was a significant step over Asylum and City, even if everything else (detective scenes and maybe character designs aside) was a significant step under.
If we're including DLC, the Mr. Freeze fight is also a low quality carbon copy of Arkham City.
If you're about that gameplay, yes, it is that bad.
bonchooski
Member
It's not bad at all, yeah it's an Arkham game not made by Rocksteady but it's not trash. If you enjoy the other Arkham games you'll enjoy it but you won't be blown away.
MekaDragon
Member
This is just unacceptable, WTF is that "lightning"? And that false beard haha. Wow, Batman Arkham games are coming to PS2.
Nope. It's my least-liked entry in the Arkham franchise because of the poor level and puzzle designs, bugs, and some other things, but it's not bad bad. It's like pizza. Even if it's not good, it's still kind of good. To me, it's got the best story, boss fights, character designs, and score. They introduced some cool things too, such as the Case File system (although they screwed it up with one little red triangle) and the Bat Cave.
Way better then Arkham Knight
Spring-Loaded
Member
The remaster somehow managing to look worse than the last gen versions in key ways fits with the series' insanity theme
Barry Burton
Member
I wouldn't say so. I think it's roughly on par with City, maybe just a tad beneath it, and I liked it a lot more than Knight (Asylum is still my fave).
But it just felt like an unnecessary stop-gap between City and Knight. It just didn't do enough new or different from City. I don't think that makes it a bad game in its own right, but its existence feels entirely redundant.
WhiteRabbitEXE
Member
I'm seeing literally nothing that isn't actively worse in that comparison. Holy shit.
Regginator
Member
Arkham Aslyum remastered looked amazing, but the Arkham City one looked terrible compared to their PS360/PC counterparts. It makes you wonder what exactly it is from AC that doesn't sit very well with UE4...
DoctorFling
Member
I think Amazon leaked a game of the year edition a while back.
It looks worse in almost every possible way.
Someone needs to compare it to low settings on PC.
KojiKnight
Member
If Arkham Origins was the only Arkham game, it would be praised as the single greatest Batman game of all time... but unfortunately, it's not. It's a bloated expansion pack for City that was charged retail for... and never had all of the bugs fixed on it. That's the only reason it really gets hate... not that that isn't a good reason.
That's my guess as well. The 360 version had a bug that erased your save file, and they never fixed it. If they didn't address such a huge problem at the time, I can't imagine they'd spend the time to address all the issues now.
#1 defender
Member
I'm ok with this. I was itching for a remaster of these games on PS4, but not like this.
I enjoyed AO a lot, but they should do the other two justice first, before adding a third one to the collection.
I enjoyed AO a lot, but they should do the other two justice first, before adding a third one to the collection.
wesleyshark
Banned
It's an awful game
KojiKnight
Member
This is hyperbole to the extreme.
MilkyJoe
Member
Better than Knight, better character designs than city.
Neff
Member
No, it's a reasonably solid game.
It lacks the density, smarts and polish of Rocksteady's titles. It's rough around the edges, there's far fewer puzzles, it's buggy, and is by and large more repetitive then Asylum, City and Knight. But it does build on City's crime scene analysis mechanic significantly, and as is often mentioned, the story is very compelling, with novel twists on classic characters. The DLC is very good, although the Wii U version (the most polished version ironically) doesn't have it. Thing is, Rocksteady made such a good formula that even when someone else comes in without the experience or talent, a good game still comes out of it.
Yeah, it's decent. A fair 8 compared to the effortless 9s (and I'd even give Knight a 10) in the rest of the franchise.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Some people hate the tweaks to the combat, but as a vet of the first 2 the added challenge was very welcome in Origins. You had to relearn some of the timings and perform better in the base game, whereas the other two you could sort of sleep walk through them and only got tested in the challenge levels mostly.
#1 defender
Member
Is it known what they're currently working on?
Neff
Member
I agree. I probably prefer Knight's combat now because it adds so much, but at the time, Origins was a real sink or swim moment on hard setting. The stricter timing for the counters alone and the faster pace of the fights in general was refreshing after Asylum and City.