He responded to me via an edit instead of a reply. So I'm going to go ahead and quote that.
jimbo1qaz Wrote:NaturalViolence: Antialiasing only makes the edges fuzzy, which is... um, sorta blurring it.
I suppose that would depend on your definition of blurring. It yields a more accurate (closer to correct) color. Without AA each pixels color is inaccurately represented by a single sample point instead of multiple sample points. This results in a stronger contrast with neighboring pixels (sharper edges) but it's not supposed to look like that and AA is not the same as a blur filter.
jimbo1qaz Wrote:And it kills your graphics hardware
Explain. Do you mean that is reduces your hardware's lifespan or that it reduces your framerate? Both should not be an issue if your hardware is sufficient.
jimbo1qaz Wrote:and is pretty much unneccesary for playing in high resolutions sitting a normal distance away from the monitor/TV.
That's a matter of opinion. Virtually everything in 3D graphics is not "necessary". That doesn't mean we should constrain ourselves to poor image quality when our hardware is capable of producing much better image quality.
I and many others have good vision and even at 1920 x 1080 at a normal viewing distance cannot stand it. Plus with a monitor it should be very noticeable at normal viewing distances.
jimbo1qaz Wrote:It could make the textures look better, but that's not the purpose.
Debatable. Things can have multiple purposes. And even if you're right, does it really matter whether that was intended or not? It improves image quality, and therefore it is an advantage.
For the record I'm completely ok with people holding the "purist" mentality that image enhancements are bad. I may completely disagree with it but I understand the logic behind it. But your original post implies that you do not see any reason to use AA.
slax65 Wrote:Why did this had to end up in a discussion whether AA is better or not ??
For me it's fine and a great option of Dolphin .. Call me crazy or not when I use x9 SSAA ..
I just wanted to know if this f**** steam can be removed with an action replay code ..
Sadly, it seems not ..
Well the answer is no so what else are we going to talk about?
slax65 Wrote:Therefor I got some more questions ..
Since the two versions, that fixed antialiasing at x4, in many games the textures are black if you
don't disable the alpha pass ..
Why is this the case now?
Because it wasn't properly tested and not all configurations support the feature. It's a bug. Rodolfo is aware of it and is working on it as we speak.
slax65 Wrote:And the commit says, that games should run faster, but I only
got even more slowdowns ..
Sometimes developers implement things that they think will boost performance based upon theories. And sometimes those theories turn out to be false or the implementation turns out to be bad. It happens all the time. Just look at openCL for example.
slax65 Wrote:Though I don't think that it's completely fixed, for me it still looks rougher
than it used to look like (before it got broken)
I have used screenshot comparisons with r6505 I can assure you it looks just like it did before.
You can simply try OpenGL (or D3D11) backend. Its 16xQ CSAA is much cheaper than SSAA but provides a comparable quality.
midncircus Wrote:but provides a comparable quality.
It does not. It only removes geometry aliasing. Texture aliasing, transparent texture aliasing, shader aliasing, etc. are completely unaffected by MSAA. Plus openGL and d3d11 are usually slower than d3d9, particularly when a game makes extensive use of efb ram copies (like WW does), which usually negates the performance advantage. If he's ok with MSAA I suppose he could try it.
(04-01-2013, 01:07 AM)Starscream Wrote: [ -> ] (04-01-2013, 12:54 AM)Damned Wrote: [ -> ]Ummm, yeah. I am definitely a person and I do not use Dolphin (or any other emulator for that matter) for graphics enhancing options. If I want games with nice looking graphics, I'll play a PC game. I play games on emulators to play games that I happened to love as a kid, and I want my games to look and sound as close as possible to the actual console/handheld I am emulating and I make sure as soon as I download a new emulator to check for any attempts to "spruce up" the graphics and turn all of them off.
Well, you're not in the majority then, that's for sure. As far as I know, most people would be extremely happy to have their emulated console game running in 1080p. From what I've seen, most people don't go out of their way to make their game look worse if they can help it. Anyway, the game is still going to play and look exactly like it would normally, it's just not going to be blurry and horrible to look at.
I'm well aware that I am not in the majority and quite frankly I don't care. I'll play games and emulate them the way I decide I like and I will not change my preferences just to please some close-minded individuals.
No, it is not going to look the same if you are enhancing the graphics. That is the whole point of those options, to make the game look nicer than it would have on the console.
What you find horrible and blurry I find authentic and desirable.
@ Damned
If you had a bobby car as a child and now a porsche, you would still say
"No, I wanna move the car by using my feet so I have my childhood feelings back"??
Poor analogy. In your case you are comparing two completely different types of products and state that I would desire a feature in product B because it was available in product A at an earlier time in my life. My case is me desiring to be able to reproduce the features of a product on an attempt to reproduce the same exact product that has enhanced features because that is what the original product provided, or in other words, desiring the features of product A on a reproduction of product A but with enhanced features.
(04-04-2013, 10:22 AM)Damned Wrote: [ -> ]No, it is not going to look the same if you are enhancing the graphics. That is the whole point of those options, to make the game look nicer than it would have on the console.
What you find horrible and blurry I find authentic and desirable.
I agree with you about authenticity. Especially with old 8/16-bit systems. I've never used filters and such.
Actually the only emulators in which I use enhancements are PCSX2 and Dolphin. And sometimes I play without them (except for Wii games
).
So if I had to vote between authenticity and improvement I'd probably choose authenticity. But I'm not 100% refractory to improvement and I can admit that a lot of people
want their games to look more beautiful
It's like between rich and poor people here ..
Whoever has a good graphic card is making a show at what level of AA he's able to run games at full speed and the ones with lower cards are just refusing AA because they'd like to but they can't ..
I think using AA depends on whether you are using a TV as a computer monitor (like I do) or a regular PC Monitor ..
The bigger the size of the screen the more you notice the edges of rendered objects ..
That's why I don't want any of the current consoles, there is nothing about AA from Playstation 3, XBox360 and the WiiU ..
I hope they will change this with the Playstion 4, although it's very stupid to make advertisment for the console with 4k-compatibility .. And this only for videos ..
Nintendo and Sony better would merge so that Mario games will be available for the PS4
(04-04-2013, 10:30 PM)slax65 Wrote: [ -> ]It's like between rich and poor people here ..
Whoever has a good graphic card is making a show at what level of AA he's able to run games at full speed and the ones with lower cards are just refusing AA because they'd like to but they can't ..
Not 100% true. Read my post. I can but I don't necessarily use them
slax65 Wrote:It's like between rich and poor people here ..
Whoever has a good graphic card is making a show at what level of AA he's able to run games at full speed and the ones with lower cards are just refusing AA because they'd like to but they can't ..
Many people have higher end hardware yet still prefer to have terrible image quality for the sake of authenticity(as evidenced by Damned). I do this sometimes with 2D systems however there is a key difference between 2D and 3D systems. On 2D systems the art assets have already been rendered (sprites). No additional information can be added/created. Filters merely distort the existing information to produce something that looks different that what the artist intended. But on 3D systems everything you see is rendered by the hardware not an artist using base assets created by the artist. The accuracy of the representation of those base assets is limited by the resolution. So unlike filters for 2D systems increasing the resolution here actually allows you to generate both more information (thus improving image quality) and a more accurate representation of the art assets.
So I do not use high resolution rendering and AA "just because I can" or to show off. Just as Damned does not avoid using these enhancements because he can't. We both have valid reasons for our choice.
slax65 Wrote:I think using AA depends on whether you are using a TV as a computer monitor (like I do) or a regular PC Monitor ..
The bigger the size of the screen the more you notice the edges of rendered objects ..
There is a lot more to it than that. Distance from the display, properties of the objects being rendered, resolution of the display, etc. In general aliasing is supposed to be less noticeable on HDTVs despite the larger screen size because of how far away you are from it. But of course in your case that's not true. I have good eyes so I'm pretty sensitive to it at almost any distance/size/resolution.
slax65 Wrote:That's why I don't want any of the current consoles, there is nothing about AA from Playstation 3, XBox360 and the WiiU ..
To be fair that has nothing to do with the game console and everything to do with the game developers. Most games on current gen. consoles have some form of AA. It's just that the developers tend to choose very fast forms of AA so they can spend the saved processing time on other things. Good forms of AA are supported on all of these platforms. The developers simple choose not to use them since they aren't a priority for them.
slax65 Wrote:I hope they will change this with the Playstion 4, although it's very stupid to make advertisment for the console with 4k-compatibility .. And this only for videos ..
If they made the jump from 1280 x 720 to 4096 x 2160 now there would be almost no improvement in quality in any other area of rendering. There decision makes perfect sense. Consumer HDTVs still cap out at 1080p so rendering at a resolution above that is just a waste of processing power. Considering the size and viewing distance used by HDTVs FXAA will be effective enough at that resolution to do the job adequately for most consumers.
In this generation most games were rendered at resolutions between 600p and 720p with widespread support for upscaling up to 1080p. This was a big upgrade from the previous generation which was rendered at 480p and supported upscaling to 720p (some games and platforms only, rarely supported). Now this coming generation will have games being rendered at 720p to 1080p with upscaling up to 4096 x 2160 most likely widely supported. The generation after this coming generation will likely support rendering at 1080p to 2160p. So we're still moving in the right direction at a fairly decent pace. We're more limited by the pace of display hardware innovation at this point. Game developers didn't do 1080p rendering this generation because their statistics showed that only a very small percentage of their user base had 1080p capable displays. And they would have had to reduce the quality of the art assets to compensate for 1080p rendering, a feature that most of their user base wouldn't be able to see a significant benefit from anyways. Like wise this generation they aren't going to bother with 4k rendering because of how few of their users have them. 1080p will likely be a far more popular choice this generation now that hardware performance has improved and significantly more users have 1080p capable displays.
slax65 Wrote:Nintendo and Sony better would merge so that Mario games will be available for the PS4
Even if this did happen I'm skeptical that this would have a positive impact on the quality of the product. There are some serious advantages to having the hardware developers and software developers working at the same company. Plus they can use the profits from the hardware sales to help fund lots of creative game development projects if they ever need to "test the waters" as they have done in the past. This helps them stay innovative. Not to mention the lower development costs of Wii development probably helped them insure higher quality as well.
Quote: We're more limited by the pace of display hardware innovation at this point.
Huh? 1440p monitors are pretty cheap now. 4k might be a bit much to ask for, but limiting to 1080p is just dumb.
Quote:If they made the jump from 1280 x 720 to 4096 x 2160 now there would be
almost no improvement in quality in any other area of rendering. There
decision makes perfect sense.
Only if they need to make concessions to handle such a high resolution. They wouldn't for all games. About the only thing they need to do to allow rendering at such resolutions is to not explicitly disable it. They should let the developers decide on their own. If a game can run fine at 4k, let it render at 4k. If anything higher than 1080p lags too much, then i guess it'll have to be rendered at 1080p.
![[Image: w5O3Ihq.png?1]](http://i.imgur.com/w5O3Ihq.png?1)