90 comparison screenshots. Is there any difference?

[LordDeimosIV]

Since we are seeing a lot of videos showing very little to no difference I decided to take a look myself and here are the screenshots. a) is for Re-Reckoning and b) is Reckoning Original.

For easy reference: screenshots with ESC Level Up show the original game.

Part One Imgur 1 [imgur.com]

Part Two Imgur 2[imgur.com]

There are definitely changes that have been done. How can anyone say the game looks exactly the same? Sure, not all textures have been re-touched, but quite a few have. The lighting had been changes and the draw distance has been increased as well. Texture filtering is much better as well. Maybe not as much of an upgrade as some people want but not as bad as some of the videos floating around make it out to be.

EDIT: The screenshots with "ESC level up" are the original game.

In case there are too many screenshots to load for some people here are a few. a) Re-Reckoning and b) Reckoning original:

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

a) Imgur 1 [i.imgur.com]
b) Imgur 2 [i.imgur.com]

[LordDeimosIV]

Some people will always see what they want to see and believe what they want to believe as long as it affirms their position. No amount of proof will sway them no mater what.

Origineel geplaatst door HextechMagikarp:

Most comparison videos on YouTube doesn't even show this. High Quality pictures of the both games is what people needed to see on store page. This makes me relieved so every video I seen was captured blurry or too bright.

Yep and they are trying to show that as proof. I'm just giving a balanced picture of what the remaster actually looks like. Whether it looks good enough is up to each individual to decide.

[Trouser_Dune_Worm]

Origineel geplaatst door DuX1112:

Origineel geplaatst door Trouser_Dune_Worm:

That's literally the definition of a remaster (improved visuals and slight changes)... This game is not a REMAKE.

The game has improved textures, improved shadows and lighting. The more I play the game the more I realize it is a nice improvement in the look of the game compared to the original.

The added "very hard" difficulty and new mob scaling is fantastic. I'm only in the second zone and I have actually been REQUIRED to craft healing potions because I am forced to use them. I have also died more times that I think I ever did in an entire original playthrough, lol... I got ambushed by a bear and it wtf owned me which was great.

The argument is that it is a bad remaster, not that it is not a remaster. The improvements are not enough, especially not considering the price. The difficulty could've been a patch for example, because it's a tweak.

That's entirely subjective though. For me it is enough. The screens really don't do the game justice vs when you're in the game playing it. I actually saw a reviewer that had said that same thing, and I shrugged it off originally. But it's actually true. Visuals are very nice in game (better than original by far). I also didn't purchase this for "uber next gen cyberpunk graphics".

99% of the people complaining don't even own the game and just want to ♥♥♥♥♥ about something.

[BlowFish]

Origineel geplaatst door amberjeanwolfe:

Thank you for posting these comparison shots! I've only played the game a half-hour so far, but I'm so happy with it and knew they'd touched the graphics some. It hurts me that so many people are complaining about the graphics rather than enjoying the refined gameplay. I mean, finally Kingdoms of Amalur is getting the breath of fresh air it desrves and of course others are whining that the graphics haven't been completely revamped. Why would they need to be revamped? They look perfectly fine as is with the new touch ups. Does everything have to look ultra-realistic to be good these days? :(

The ‘refined gameplay’ is about as refined as the ‘stunningly enhanced’ graphics are stunningly enhanced. It comprises an extra difficulty and a fix to level scaling.

This is a cynical cash grab.

[MAXXPRO]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/102500/discussions/0/2953754543763919541/

rtx reshade it (works with original one)

[DuX1112]

Origineel geplaatst door Trouser_Dune_Worm:

Origineel geplaatst door DuX1112:

The argument is that it is a bad remaster, not that it is not a remaster. The improvements are not enough, especially not considering the price. The difficulty could've been a patch for example, because it's a tweak.

That's entirely subjective though. For me it is enough. The screens really don't do the game justice vs when you're in the game playing it. I actually saw a reviewer that had said that same thing, and I shrugged it off originally. But it's actually true. Visuals are very nice in game (better than original by far). I also didn't purchase this for "uber next gen cyberpunk graphics".

99% of the people complaining don't even own the game and just want to ♥♥♥♥♥ about something.

If it can be measured (textures have resolutions, improvements can be counted etc. these are all numbers that can be quantified), so it's really not that subjective. Now sure, you can be fine with this, but I'd argue that the fact is that this is an objectively "not good enough" remaster. Or in other words, a very basic one. A remaster for the sake of remastering, kinda.

I respect your opinion don't get me wrong. Maybe I'll cave in and buy it too and give it a try. But overall, they could've done a MUCH better job.

[BlowFish]

Origineel geplaatst door LordDeimosIV:

Some people will always see what they want to see and believe what they want to believe as long as it affirms their position. No amount of proof will sway them no mater what.

Origineel geplaatst door HextechMagikarp:

Most comparison videos on YouTube doesn't even show this. High Quality pictures of the both games is what people needed to see on store page. This makes me relieved so every video I seen was captured blurry or too bright.

Yep and they are trying to show that as proof. I'm just giving a balanced picture of what the remaster actually looks like. Whether it looks good enough is up to each individual to decide.

For me having bought the original at full price this looks like poor value. To call it stunning is a stretch. The images do look different sure, but it really looks like the scope was pretty limited. Predominantly it’s an upscale and some post processing. THQ are no strangers to re releasing stuff with little effort (in the case of Titan Quest iPad it was zero effort).

[Msalgado]

The fact that, after a few images, I could not remember if PIC A our B was the new version...

AND that I could see a difference, but not really decide on which one was BETTER makes me sad.

I have the original and was planning on buying this one, but was not enough of a difference.

[Schizm]

It definitely looks different I'll give it that but it has a lot of problems I have with Texture mods for most games. It doesn't look like they belong in the game if that makes sense. KoA has a very specific art style and the new textures are far to realistic making them feel a bit out of place.

[Tainted_1]

Just wanted to say, thanks for this. This makes it clear that they've made changes, but the art style doesn't allow much visibility for those changes at a glance.

[Aglara Andune]

Thanks for these images. it was interesting to see the games side by side. I will say that I wish they had done more in terms of graphics, but I realize the rights to this game couldn't have been cheap. Combine that with a focus on lower level stuff like balance and engine tweaks, and the state of the original releases engine, there was only so much they could do while making it profitable. Another point that I've seen neglected in this thread though, what exactly are these people looking for? The changes are subtle because the art style doesn't really allow for major changes. If you went full ham on bringing it up to 2020 graphics standards, a great deal of the charm that the art style brings would be lost. Any major change would stick out like a sore thumb, unless you rebuild every single asset from scratch. Sure, they could have redone all the NPC animations, but that's expensive work and in trade we probably would have lost a bunch of QOL features that the remaster brings to the table.

[LukanGamer]

I mean I seen mods in some games do just as much, but ya any1 says there is no difference for sure needs glasses or needs to not exaggerate themselves.

[michoko]

Amazing work. Thank you so much for taking the time to make and posts all those screenshots. Now I think this is pretty obvious there was a nice work on textures. I like the way they kept the spiritt of the original design, while enhancing it.

[John]

Such improvements I can see the changes but its not worth the price. Maybe for you console players though.

[Woofy]

Origineel geplaatst door Vagabundo:

other then higher resolution textures, menus handling higher resolutions, level scaling and some bugs fixes i don't think much else has changed. now i wouldn't mind if it was you know 10-20 euros, but 40 euro's for this is just asking to much..... the new mafia 1 remake cost the same and that was build from the ground up lmao

It's only 2,000 yen in Japan, which is about 15 Euros (I think). It's 60% off, so that price sounds a little high.

I have the original game. The Higher discount might not apply if you don't have it...

P.S.
The Screenshots are helpful - Thanks!

[Onikage]

Origineel geplaatst door DuX1112:

Origineel geplaatst door Tiasmoon:

There's like half a dozen good reasons why a screenshot like that is invalid for any kind of comparison. Most comparisons make novice mistakes. But yours is just a noob comparison.

That said, your core argument (this silly screenshot aside) has a point. Most of the differences aren't noticable for people unless they know where to look. This is at 4k. I dont know how the differences compare at 1080p. Since to be fair 1080p is the far more common res used, if its more noticable there then the OP has a better point.

Relative to the drop in performance the improvements certainly aren't noticable enough. I suspect the stylised textures are part of the problem there. Better textures or rendering tends to matter a lot more for ''realistic'' games, whereas for ''wow style'' games it honestly barely matters in comparison.

Put in another way: the visuals of the game already held up well enough in the Original, despite the graphics being so dated.

Look, I agree, but the screenshot reflects a real problem. If they're going to upscale a 2012 game's graphics to 4K, they could've bothered to make these "effects decal" textures better too.

Even a WoW style game won't have a low-res blur, it will have a high-res stylized effect decal. Just look at Darksiders or any other game with a similar style. Just because the style is cartoony, doesn't mean the graphic assets should be blurry, low rez or low quality. Hell, look at Borderlands.

My point is NOT about that specific graphical oversight, but the oversight proves a wider point I'm getting at here - that this was a rushed remaster. They have overlooked quite simple, quite noticeable QOL fixes too. They have overlooked something as obvious as spell effects!

I mean noticing all of these things takes just playing the game. But they have been overlooked. Which means they rushed this remaster and pulled it off quite poorly. And no amount of accusations, insults, or fanboy blindness or zealotry will make me believe otherwise.

Is it good the IP got saved and the game got re-released? Yes.

Is it a good remaster? No.

Does it make the IP look good? No.

Is it good enough to honor Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning justice? No.

Does it make THQN look good? No.

Will it make enough purchases in this sorry state to justify an Amalur 2? Probably no.

Why? Because they rushed this remaster and ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up, that's why. Tons of people find it barely playable, with loading times that last for minutes, and huge FPS drops as soon as they reach the first village.

So... The point is not about the blurry effect texture they left from 2012. The point is they didn't try hard enough, they left it, and that's indicative of how this whole remaster was treated. Sure, some resolutions are improved, there's an FOV slider now and camera adjustment. Very Hard mode and some balancing tweaks.

That is it. That's all. It's a low effort, rushed project. That's why it's getting a Mixed rating now. They can turn this around but it will mean a much more work. If No Man's Sky managed to go from Very Negative to Mostly Positive, every game can be turned around.

I hate to say it, but I think he hit the nail on the head. It sure does seem like the remaster was rushed taking everything into account, and what I've personally encountered in game as well. Well said, good post.