Batman might have lower polygon models, worse textures and technically inferior lighting, but it has so much better art style and art direction it looks waaaay better as a whole IMO.
this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
136 points (87.8% liked)
Games
16697 readers
1103 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, texture fidelity is one metric but for textures really how good or bad they are depend much more on the skill and attention to detail behind making it more so than raw numbers. The models themselves is really the only part where the increased polycount actually shines through and makes it competitive because it is so important to make things like hands, hair and clothing look "right'. But the aesthetics of SS is just so bland and flat that it ends up looking like an old tech demo.
Well, even 2011 Arkham City looks better than Suicide Squad IMHO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvPgiSNQDS4
Ouch, why does Suicide Squad look so flat and washed out?
I think they went for more comics book instead of noire vibe. But it did not went well. It looks really bland, flat, washed out, call it howewer you like. It surely has some potentialnin it, but overall it just doesn't click. Maybe low contrast among other things?
At 2:30 did Harley get put back in the game with a Mario Bros bubble? Wtf
OMG 🤦♂️
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=YvPgiSNQDS4
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
People seem confused. The left one is the older game.
Wait…that’s a joke, right?
Nope, the left one is Arkham Knight.
I didn’t know graphics were even possible to be that good 9 years ago. How can that be
For one, the last 10 years didn't really do much in terms of graphical improvements, most games just have denser environments and more detail on the parts that need animating, like faces.
For 2, what you're looking at is not really a comparison of graphics, it's a game where a lot of care and dedication went into the art direction and aesthetics, versus one that looks like generic schlock.
A game with a great artstyle that works with what was available at the time instead of being limited by the technology level will age a million times slower.
Compare and contrast the old killzones on PS2 vs games like XIII.
Or look at Super Mario 3 on NES, which imo still holds up today. A well crafted game is timeless.
Oh for sure, but the reason i invoked those two specifically is that they're very similar outside of their approach to aesthetics, and that they came out at a time when looking for fidelity over having a real art style was becoming a possibility.
The work you're passionate about vs. the work corporate forces you to make.
Ass
0:28 is the deciding factor, clearly.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/iocRbdvUgJ4
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Bro, look at the bus stop "benches" at 1:33. What the fuck is that? I thought Metropolis was supposed the be "the city of the future."
Not sure if you're referring to the graphics or to the shitty bench design. If the latter...it's a real thing. :(
They're called "leaning benches" or "lean bars". This bench design is sort of "futuristic" in the sense that adoption has only recently started taking off around the world. They are a user-hostile design made specifically to prevent people (specifically homeless people) from lying down, sleeping, or otherwise, y'know, using it as a goddamn bench. Because removing the ability for anyone to sit down is apparently, in the eyes of authorities, a small price to pay to make homeless people's lives that much harder.
The Wikipedia article for "Leaning bench" redirects to hostile architecture, where you can read more about this and similar efforts, if you are in the mood to be enraged at the sheer malice of bureaucrats.
I've seen them in several cities across America. NYC starting rolling them out within the past decade and you'll see them in any recently renovated station. See https://www.nydailynews.com/2017/09/11/subway-riders-slam-brooklyn-stations-new-leaning-bars-as-incredibly-unwelcoming/ (scroll through the image slideshow to see the new).
Not sure if the image embed will work here but I'll try:
My city has both benches and these. I like these because I can lean on them without removing my backpack. I think it really depends on the City whether their hostile or not. I also noticed McDonald's has them in their order waiting area too.
It's pretty simple, if they're being used to replace benches to stop people sleeping there, they're hostile. I certainly wouldn't mind having them in addition though.
Right? Like maybe a normal bench, then a seat or two like this, in case someone actually decides to sit there.
Have you tried a backless bench?
They're good for people with mobility issues who would struggle to fully sit down on their own and get back up again, so they do serve a valid purpose. But they suck for everyone else.
and they keep smelly homeless people from bringing down propertyvalues, so everyone (with money) wins!
I already knew what it was irl-design-wise, I'm mostly shocked that the devs decided to use that style of bench for the bus stops in the game. Sort of like "I can't believe they're using this style as a way of normalizing it" kind of thing.
I cannot believe is the same studio
Well, it's not exactly the same people that worked on it
That is true.
I mean they should have the same model and everything, but I think that would have made it harder for them to do all other models
Did they use the same engine as DOOM?
Nope, it's Unreal, as the Arkham series was using UE 3 (and Origin some weird hybrid of 3 and 4.
Is this the same person that was spamming the reddit games subs with the same kind of title? Damn that was annoying.
Ah yes, enshitification...
Literally not
How so?
“Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die. I call this enshittification.”
The origin of the term. Note, "good to users" is things like undercutting local taxis a la Uber, or ad-free accounts a la Netflix, with the plan to abuse the established customer base later. A bad game =/= a company systemically abusing users for shareholders. It's just a shitty game.
...it's a live service game?
For me, enshitification should also include things like franchises, because we can see an obvious downward spiral of certain franchises, for instance Pokémon. Consumers in the videogame space also qualifies as users, to some extent.
So I think enshitification shouldn't just be about platforms and services.
Then again, people will stick to definitions like words are warfare. This is what politicians have been doing for quite some time.
But yes, yes. Textbook correct. Have a cookie.
If you broaden a word too much, it loses meaning. Eventually it'll just mean "things I don't like," and we'd need another word for the original meaning and the cycle repeats.
That's why the OP pushed back against it, and why I'm defending them.
Eh, I don't think the word loses meaning at all if applied to a franchise, especially since game developers insist games are services nowadays.
Besides, if it just encompasses online services, then it's a pretty useless word and just a marketing ploy for the blogger who wrote the article about it.
But hey, Lemmy/Reddit/Mastodon/Matrix is full of pedants and contrarians, so life goes on.
The next game in a franchise isn't opt-out, it's opt-in. Netflix adding ads to your tier is opt-out (you need to pick a higher tier to avoid them). They're not the same thing at all.
I could see if SS started as a non-live service game and then added live service nonsense later, but that's not what happened. It was released as live service from the start.
The word just means the product you purchased gets worse because of changes the manufacturer makes. I can perhaps see it being used for physical products like cars, where the next model year adds a monthly subscription to something that used to be included for a fixed price (e.g. heated seats, remote start, etc), so buying the same model but newer would result in a degradation.
SS is a new IP, so it's not really a new release of something that already exists, and it was advertised as having live service stuff from the outset. There's no bait and switch there, just bad bait, and the bait and switch is a pretty hard requirement for me.
So they get a pass because it's a reboot? For me, films and series become services at that point, because it is constantly servicing a fan base.
People could argue that SS is apart of the RockSteady series, because that's how I interpreted it, that Arkham City didn't lead to a natural conclusion of that iteration of Batman, which is standard in the comics industry.
Every story has a beginning, middle and end. When failing to come full circle, as just another IP to continuously milk, with no regard for overarching plot or any conclusion to any arc, at that point it's a service.
I was hopeful for this game, because RockSteady's Batman games have been some of my favourite story based brawlers. After reading that I won't be getting any resolution to the plot threads or character arcs, I feel like I've sort of wasted my time paying attention.
At that point it's become like Marvel films, which is technically just a babysitter - and that is a service.