They both sucked. Irredeemably so. Plotless, incoherent, full of stupid and unlikeable characters (including Batman himself), Catwoman as a hooker in both, and DKR marked the beginning of Miller's nonstop Superman bashing. There's no difference in quality between those and Miller's subsequent Batman stuff, unless becoming more entrenched in his own stupidity counts as a difference.
They were good, If you notice, in DKR, Superman was still portrayed as a pretty likeable character, who's love for the people put him into a bad situation (he decided to work for the government, in exchange for still being allowed to save people)
Batman himself wasn't nearly as psychotic in these titles as in Miller's later exploits. It took allot more to push him over the edge, and was generally less willing to use lethal force He also relied more on his smarts
"stupid and unlikeable" you basically described the vast majority of humanity here The characters being jerks does not mean the story is bad, real humans tend to be even worse
Face it, Miller was a good writer at one point, but he got stuck in his own conventions and clichés, believing his own hype
Don't tell me what I did or didn't notice. Those books were TWILIGHT-level Mary Sue garbage and that's that. I will NOT be told to like books that offer nothing of value. And I will NOT be told to "face" that a talentless writer was ever good when his work is consistent across the board in its failings.
You have no right to talk to me like this. Don't ever do it again.