BIOSHOCK REMASTERED GRAPHICS COMPARISON PC

The texture work is often not a direct recreation at a higher resolution, but I think for the most part the spirit of the original scene is retained. After thoroughly looking over each screenshot, I gotta say, I think Bioshock 2 Remastered holds up a lot better compared to the original than their work on the first Bioshock. That said, I'm going to continue my playthrough with the original version for me, the (often drastic) new texture design sullies the game's original art direction.Ĭlick to expand.jorimt, you're a champion for doing that! Fantastic comparison. And would it have killed them to add a simple AO solution? Some water and lighting effects could also be considered superior to the original, but in most instances, to me, end up looking different, not better or worse. Positives of the remaster? The physics tick rate seems to scale with the refresh rate (mine's 144hz, and it looks perfect in motion), along with the slight poly-count increase. Also, to answer your question, it appears both versions of Bioshock 2 don't feature the exact specular effect seen in the original Bioshock. Blind Squirrel took massive liberties with texture design, and instead of recreating the original textures in a higher resolution, they flat out changed them many of which look arguably inferior to the originals. Sad to say, while the remaster can look better, it more often looks worse, or at best, different. And unlike Bioshock 1, the remaster's surround sound options remain intact. Neither have FoV options, so the default is being displayed in both (I had the original at 90 via an ini tweak, but reverted it for these comparisons). First off, both versions are set to equivalent maximum settings. But I'll show you a comparison of my own that I posted in the other thread:Īlright, I just made a few comparisons between Bioshock 2 original/remaster in the beginning area.

BIOSHOCK REMASTERED GRAPHICS COMPARISON PC

The only real reason to play the remasters over the original PC versions is the physics tick rate fix (which can also be fixed in the original Bioshock, by the way) and the slight poly-count increase. As for the so called 'improvements,' the new texture work is revisionist at best, and the specular effects (arguably along with some of the original water effects) appear to be entirely missing. The ancient Unreal 2.5 engine remains unchanged, as do the sound issues, mouse acceleration issues, lack of FoV slider, etc. As such, these 'remasters' aren't done out of love of the originals, but are cash-ins contracted out to a company who has basically done a glorified texture mod. 2K retains the rights, and much like what Konami is doing with the Metal Gear series, they can't just let one of their largest properties sit there they have to make money off of it. The fact is, the original creators of this property have moved on.

In my opinion, people are looking at these 'remasters' in the wrong context. Also, the remasters only feature stereo audio, though this can apparently be fixed in the ini files (haven't tested it myself). The specular effect that gives the appearance of wetness is entirely missing in the remaster.

Bioshock remastered graphics comparison