[Quaz51]

Originally Posted by deepbrown

Interesting - gets a little confusing doesn't it! Which screenshot did you use to come up with 640 vertical?

no confusing, it's 640 vertical

[deepbrown]

Originally Posted by Arwin

Actually so totally not confusing! It's exactly like GTA IV, as expected.

I know I know. Just when you say 640, you expect 640p, but it's 644p =) It makes perfect sense when you understand what's being talked about.

[xgen]

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/510...0516183425.jpg
WOW, the 360 version screenshot of RDR looks rather sharp, is it 4xAA?

[Neb]

Originally Posted by xgen

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/510...0516183425.jpg
WOW, the 360 version screenshot of RDR looks rather sharp, is it 4xAA?

Looks more like 2x and also sharpening applied by image editor or as a filter ingame.

[nightshade]

Originally Posted by assurdum

We are not in neogaf here...based on what you said that? Because you have the game are you more reliable? The screens in the net not showing texture so massive incredible in RDR in terms of resolution. I am talking only of technic, I am not judging the overall graphic.

I'll agree in that FC2 has considerably more detailed textures, RDR has the liberty of being a TPS. And anything from bad to avg looks great for a TPS while for an FPS it needs to have above avg textures to even get noticed as good.

With that said, RDR doesn't has a very aggressive LOD system, its quite efficient in masking pop ups & the view distance is phenomenal/insanse ! But on the other hand most of the area are almost empty with nothing but cactus & small shrubs everywhere. If someone asked me then I'd put both of them at the same level, both have their pros & cons (why must we always have to choose ? )

[Shifty Geezer]

Non-analysis talk moved here.

[Schaden]

Does PS3 Red Dead Redemption use AA ?
The aliasing stands out but other times some objects appear to have smoothed edges.

Also I've noticed if you're outside in the daylight and hold the L2 button to zoom in with the weapon, and push the right stick left or right to slowly rotate on an axis, Marston's model switches between two image quality "modes". One looks sharp and the other is blurry.
Everything else in the scene looks consistent.

[assurdum]

Originally Posted by Schaden

Does PS3 Red Dead Redemption use AA ?
The aliasing stands out but other times some objects appear to have smoothed edges.

Also I've noticed if you're outside in the daylight and hold the L2 button to zoom in with the weapon, and push the right stick left or right to slowly rotate on an axis, Marston's model switches between two image quality "modes". One looks sharp and the other is blurry.
Everything else in the scene looks consistent.

QAA

[MasaC]

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/510...0516183425.jpg

Much green tint over the picture in the 360 version. Not so in the PS3 version?

[Tap In]

Originally Posted by MasaC

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/510...0516183425.jpg

Much green tint over the picture in the 360 version. Not so in the PS3 version?

cloud cover, exact time of day, moon waning all affect tone

[Butta]

Originally Posted by assurdum

QAA

I don't get this QAA thing... isn't it just 2AA+blur why not just leave it at 2AA and not enable the blur?

[Rolf N]

Originally Posted by Butta

I don't get this QAA thing... isn't it just 2AA+blur why not just leave it at 2AA and not enable the blur?

This would be the best solution, I agree. Somehow devs are still under the impression that a destructive full-screen uniform blur constitutes an image quality enhancement.

[Sigfried1977]

Originally Posted by Rolf N

This would be the best solution, I agree. Somehow devs are still under the impression that a destructive full-screen uniform blur constitutes an image quality enhancement.

If applied correctly, QAA can lead to some very pleasing results. I think Ubisoft's Prince of Persia 08 and also Tomb Raider Underworld (a game of which I was fairly certain it ran with nice 4xMSAA instead of QAA) do benefit a great deal from the improved edge smoothing.

[Rolf N]

Originally Posted by Sigfried1977

If applied correctly, QAA can lead to some very pleasing results. I think Ubisoft's Prince of Persia 08 and also Tomb Raider Underworld (a game of which I was fairly certain it ran with nice 4xMSAA instead of QAA) do benefit a great deal from the improved edge smoothing.

It "smooths" everything indiscrimately, not just edges. It destroys every kind of detail, not just aliasing. It's shit.

[Sigfried1977]

It probably destroys far less than an lcd panel does with its shitty response time in motion.

[Neb]

Originally Posted by Sigfried1977

It probably destroys far less than an lcd panel does with its shitty response time in motion.

Not really though it affects the eyes differently. One is like excessive ugly motionblur and the other blurred image. Just turn Qunincunx on/off with your 7xxx series GPU and see the big difference. Quite alike the PC GTAIV "P" blur filter on/off difference. You really dont know how much it blurs until you get a proper reference by disabling it. ATI users have similar effect if they enable IIRC "wide tent". Sure you get accustomwd to it after a while but disabling it really shows what you lose (Qunicunx on my sec PC). I thought about taking screenshots but Quincunx blur effect is not present in grab... so far.

[Sigfried1977]

I know the difference. Thing is I don't play console games sitting 60 cm away from a computer monitor looking at still images. I play them sitting on a couch 2.5 meters away from the screen. A screen with a much higher native resolution no less so there's already all kinds of scaling going on and things generally move around a lot. A slightly blurred image (like I said: put some thought into applying QAA. Don't use it no matter what) is far less distracting from a certain distance than jagged edges. That's how I feel anyway.

[Neb]

But all relative to distance and screen size. No mather screen the blur removes detail and if upscaling and bad screen quality is present then it affects it even more. But as I said one gets accustomed but there is no doubt it removes detail and quite noticably to when you see alterantive without QAA (I have my 7900GT PC hooked to a 46" SHARP AQUOS HDTV). But a mather of taste and tolerance.

[betan]

Originally Posted by Butta

I don't get this QAA thing... isn't it just 2AA+blur why not just leave it at 2AA and not enable the blur?

It's not just 2AA+blur. In effect, that "blur" is applied before MSAA samples are resolved, leading to better edge quality at the expense of detail loss on other pixels. If you don't have high resolution textures, it may be a viable alternative.

[Sigfried1977]

Originally Posted by Nebula

But all relative to distance and screen size.

Exactly. I wouldn't enable it on my PC monitor as the native resolution is already a lot higher, so "Teh Jaggiez" aren't quite as noticeable to begin with, plus I have plenty of horse power to spare for MSAA passes anyway. 2.5 meters away from my tv QAA is simply starting to become a non-issue for me. I actually prefer the smooth image of Assassin's Creed 2 to Uncharted 2's very visible aliasing in high contrast scenes (and my tv is neither bad nor small. 50 inches and got a kick-ass built-in scaler in fact)

This is also getting really off-topic, isn't it?

[assurdum]

Edit. Misunderstanding

[Schaden]

Lens of Truth has their article up.
Decisive edge to the 360's higher resolution, draw distance on shadows, and denser brush.
They liked the depth of field and shadow smoothness in the PS3 version.

[Rolf N]

Originally Posted by betan

It's not just 2AA+blur. In effect, that "blur" is applied before MSAA samples are resolved, leading to better edge quality at the expense of detail loss on other pixels. If you don't have high resolution textures, it may be a viable alternative.

All it leads to is detail loss of every pixel. It does not and cannot blur aliased edges any differently than it blurs non-aliased edges and texture detail. It's a purely destructive process.

If Quincunx enhances quality, we should all get our eyes lasered to include a bit of myopia. But it does not, and we should not.

edit:
To demonstrate, how many aliased edges do you see in this image?

[assurdum]

Originally Posted by Rolf N

All it leads to is detail loss of every pixel. It does not and cannot blur aliased edges any differently than it blurs non-aliased edges and texture detail. It's a purely destructive process.

If Quincunx enhances quality, we should all get our eyes lasered to include a bit of myopia. But it does not, and we should not.

It's interesting your theory of destructive process. And the blur not has nothing similar of edges aa. If you know a filter with the same cost of QAA and the same edge quality please inform the others developers. The taste of AA I don't think is a technical matter.

[nightshade]

It sure does reduces the jagged edges rather effectively compared to 2*MSAA, the blur is another story.

For some games its pleasing to look at & the blur is minor enough to negate (like TRU, AC2 PS3), for some games it suits the environment rather nicely (like KZ2 & cel shaded games) ...but for some games its a destructive process as far as sharpness goes. This is why I believe if done right, QAA can be a rather good solution.

Also aliasing & shimmering hurt the IQ just as much as a blur does...& this is where it ultimately comes down to what you'd prefer, or which case is more sensitive to your eyes:

1) A more aliased, shimmering look.
2) A less aliased & sort of blurry look.


QAA is not just 2*MSAA+blur btw, the edge smoothing quality is identical to 4*MSAA but one of the samples here is a blurred sample. This is the cause for the blur in IQ.