Image Quality and Framebuffer Speculations for WIP/alpha/beta/E3 games *Read the first post*

if only someone cam update halo reach with FXAA..... the ghosting effect is the only thing that ruins the great visual in the game.

No "eye" visible ghosting if you have a CRT, I keep a Sony monitor CRT for check.
Problem is to more LCD TV have to more latency and ghosting image, so Temporal AA add some more in.
 
do they have spare resources? the game dips below 25fps very often and temporal aa afaik is basically free

for taa i think you have to hold onto the previous framebuffer unless they somehow do it inplace. so theres that cost of the memory footprint, fxaa im pretty sure you can do inplace and many devs have stated that they've gotten it down to .8ms.

30hz is 33ms per frame

somewhat bad and innaccurate example but if you were add .8ms to every frame 33+.8ms=33.8ms

1000ms/33.8ms=29.58 fps
 
for taa i think you have to hold onto the previous framebuffer unless they somehow do it inplace. so theres that cost of the memory footprint, fxaa im pretty sure you can do inplace and many devs have stated that they've gotten it down to .8ms.

30hz is 33ms per frame

somewhat bad and innaccurate example but if you were add .8ms to every frame 33+.8ms=33.8ms

1000ms/33.8ms=29.58 fps
Yea but you got to keep it in mind that games locked at 30fps alot of times run at higher frames than 30fp,like 24-28ms but still at 30fps because its locked,so that 0.8ms wouldn't bring frame rate down.
 
ya i know 33ms is a hardcap since your display will poll the frame, just trying to give a perspective on its impact. since it gets really complicated if i did.
 
Moved from the Gears 3 thread, regarding the comic-con trailer.

That was probably filmed some time ago,not to long but not exactly this week I would guess.Still,that doesn't mean it will have it,just sayin.

Well, I dunno. The footage here doesn't look too bad at all with respect to edge aliasing or shader aliasing. I know several of the never-before-seen stuff is 720p native as well, so it's not your typical bullshot recording.

And some of the edges have a slight blending/blur to it, but that can be due to other post-processing (fog, light shafts, DOF, bloom).

Take this image for example: http://www.abload.de/img/img003raao.jpg

You can tell immediately that it's native rendering with her hair, but just have a look at all the other edges (near her gun, by the sandbags, on the building edges...).

Trailer is a mish-mash of footage anyway. *shrug*

http://www.abload.de/img/img016az7u.jpg This one is kind of interesting. You can tell in a couple spots where it's definitely 720p native (lower left of his finger, stage-left shoulder - the part of the armour that's against the DOF'd background), but a number of edges are definitively blurred.
 
Some edges definitely look very smooth,while there are some misses(on the roof,below her gun).The situation below her gun looks interesting,some times it seems like FXAA misses diagonal edges,right?
 
So it's FXAA or something?

Seems like it. Most of the footage involves cut-scenes though, so I'm not clear if that'll be different from in-game (pre-recorded or real-time or different engine settings between the two).

Compared to the beta, the edges are definitively smoother, but again, it's not a like-for-like comparison of scenes.

Anyways, there's a pretty high chance of it being FXAA as it was recently added to UDK, and it's a fairly trivial thing to add to a game (just a shader). We also all know that many things that are added to UDK/UE3 are added because they intend to use the feature in the next released game. e.g. cascade shadow maps, the new motion blur, Lightmass, flocking tech (for rendering masses of characters), pseudo-environment destruction, GPU tessellated fluid simulation, fleshy objects (meatcube!), enhanced bloom control. We'll probably see the bokeh shader used in the pre-rendered sequences too.
 
Yeah... kind of hard to spot the differences. You'd probably have to compare the shadows and maybe some of the pixel shading or how they handle transparency effects.

It's really bizarre that they don't just use regular MSAA on PC.
 
So it's FXAA or something?
If it is, it doesn't seem good at all.
2wvmA.jpg
 
That shot clearly has nothing applied. Given the timultous nature of development, you're going to have to specify when that shot was taken before judging an implementation so blindly. Was there a point in picking a shot that wasn't from the comic-con trailer for analysis? You know that FXAA was only a recent addition to the engine, so please.
 
That shot clearly has nothing applied. Given the timultous nature of development, you're going to have to specify when that shot was taken before judging an implementation so blindly. Was there a point in picking a shot that wasn't from the comic-con trailer for analysis? You know that FXAA was only a recent addition to the engine, so please.

It was from the same video you were talking about on the previous page, VidDoc 2 - Crescendo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
a video can have footage from multiple times during development. that has noAA so not sure how you could even judge fxaa based on that shot.
 
It's downscaled. The vertical res of the image itself is non-standard, but I'm getting something like 1536 x 1018 or 1010.
 
I hope Bethesda stop using 4xMSAA for Skyrim and go with FXAA instead - perhaps that'll also allow them to push out the draw distances and LOD.

It's pretty trivial to substitute FXAA isn't it? They wouldn't have the tiling overhead and would get some RAM back as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top