Kingdoms of Amalur: Re-Reckoning has just been released and below you can find some comparison screenshots between its original and its remastered versions. These screenshots will give you an idea of the visual differences between these two versions on Max Settings.
In order to capture these screenshots, I used an Intel i7-6700k CPU@4.5gh with 32GB RAM and an nVidia RTX 2070 Super. And, believe it or not, I had performance issues on this PC system.
For comparison purposes, I’ve also included MSI Afterburner in my screenshots. As you can see, the original version runs with silky smooth framerates at 1080p/Max Settings. On the other hand, performance is halved in the remastered version.
Things are even worse in 4K. While my system was able to run the original version with more than 100fps, the remastered version was frequently dropping below 50fps. Again, the visual differences aren’t that great to justify this performance hit, so I really don’t know what is going on here. Here is a 4K comparison, with the original version on the left and the remastered version on the right.
Now, this wouldn’t be an issue if the game actually looked better than the original version. However, and as you will immediately notice, the graphical differences are really minor here.
To be honest, this feels more like a re-release and nothing more. In fact, some custom HD Texture Packs may bring a higher graphical improvement than what this re-release actually achieves.
I’ll talk more about the differences of the Original and the Remastered versions in my upcoming review. Until then, enjoy the following comparison screenshots. The Original version is on the left, whereas the Remaster is on the right.
Stay tuned for more!
Stephen is our resident kung fu master and reviewer. When he’s not kung fu fighting, he’s playing games, and has been since the atari 2600. He also runs his own YouTube channel called Particular Pixels, where he creates a variety of content related to PC gaming. He goes by the nickname Shaoling (not to be confused with Shaolin), which comes from his favorite PC game of all time, System Shock 2.
There is certainly some work put into it. But they are too subtle to be actually noticeable. Well, the better camera positioning, fov & level cap fix is enough for me, though I don’t appreciate them charging in steam for those. Should’ve just patched the older game in steam.
True, especially for the people who actually bought it
So they fixed the camera and it doesnt look at the floor most of the time? Also what did they do to the level cap?
because so far the only reason to get this is to get the upcoming expansion in 2021 which is gonna be modern uninspired boring and realistic sjw trash with pronouns, i bet.
Camera no longer looks at the floor. You can adjust height and zoom, plus FOV. They removed the level capping from areas thus they don’t lock the scaling, so you can actually quest wherever you want now.
noice. This means that perfomance aside is the superior version. I lost so much interest when i maxed out in the first dlc.
Thnx for explanation, I may play Remaster after all.
So which one is the remastered version?
the one that doesnt have a gigantic hud made for consoles.
Nope! LMAO
The one with the giant pixelated HUD is the Remaster. The original scaled the HUD with your screen which makes it hard to read on high res screens. So their solution? Scale it up.
LOOOOOOOL
thats the joke.
If you have to explain it, you failed.
nop the old version was dx9 the new one is dx11
You got that backwards chief. Big HUD = remaster.
Both have hud made for consoles.
The one that runs at half the frame rate but looks almost the same.
The one that occupies more hard drive space and less fps rendere.d.
Maybe you were kidding, but actually, I had to read the article to understand that the original was on the left. ?
Just play the original and pretend this doesn’t exist.
That’s a Reshade Preset and not a good one as well.
Well that’s a let down. But what are the gameplay changes they said they would make?
LOOK ALMOST thez same KEKW
I literally couldn’t tell the difference
Very lazy remaster
They should’ve just given this to previous owners free and charge for the upcoming 5 hour DLC. Not gonna spend $40 for something already sitting in my library
Another joke. Messed up the performance, made the color-grading or bloom a little “colder”, left the unplayably low FOV the same, probably messed up compatibility with mods. Good thing I got the original before they took it out of the store. Playing it with fixed FOV and good performance.
it’s so weird to see the remaster with dimmer lighting, but the saturation is still cranked up, giving off a still saturated bloom effect, but without the brighter lights. It just doesn’t make any sense, and this is probably the first case I’ve seen of this.
Wow, the original actually looks better. What an absolute disgrace.
And the new Remastered crashes more then a kid learning to ride a bike. Seriously, its so fricking annoying.
:insert “they are the same picture” meme:
Same picture, half the fps, quadruple the hd size.
54FPS in a cave that looks it is from the PS2 era….Wow
wonder what these people were thinking when the first screenshots of that crysis remaster came out?
everyone: remaster!? worst ever!
KoA devs: hold my beer!
The same sh*t but the Original: 10.5 GB & Remaster: 40 GB
^Main reason for not bothering with it, low fps being a close second.
https://www.moddb.com/mods/unreal-gold-remake-in-gzdoom
might worth covering
half the frame rate and some of the textures look even worse than the original. Wtf were they thinking with this?.
The lighting looks a bit toned down, but the saturation issue is still present. With the bugs currently present, I’m far better off just playing the original game.
How many years has this site been running, and you guys STILL don’t know how to do comparison screens. SMFH…
They also fixed the problems we can find on PCGamingWiki article. And the game looks good once you get into the cinematics and conversation.
Not bad, besides, it seems to be cheaper than the original on Origin.