Regarding the whining about anti aliasing not working....

[icarus]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

That does put things into prespective.. Thanks mazex

Yes it does. It means CoD is worse than SWTOR. At least you can force it on that game.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/12/20/en...-simple-steps/

[Liz Lemon]

Originally Posted by FFCW_Urizen

SSAA with ATi cards works only on DX9 Engines.

BTW, how do you set SG- or OG- MS(SS)AA with ATi cards??

Through drivers, sure

But there are other ways to force it

http://www.tommti-systems.de/start.html

And there are other ways beyond tommti tool - like powerstrip down sampling. But I haven't messes around with that much.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by icarus

Yes it does. It means CoD is worse than SWTOR. At least you can force it on that game.

Worse?

I think you missed the whole point of the post..

That being that even a big software project with a big bugets and big teams are missing some so called 'standard' features that were not fully implimented upon release.

Not a mater of better or worse IMHO

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by icarus

This is completely untrue.

I wouldn't say that, because what might be true for one may be false for another.. That is to say beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

Originally Posted by icarus

I have 2x GTX 580's and a 30" monitor. CoD shimmers like crazy even on 2650 x 1600. This is the only game I have that won't allow the video card to force it.

Sounds like you have a hardware issue.. Because I have 1xGTX570 with a 3840x1024 monitor and I get no shimmers.. And very good frame rates.

So what does this prove?

Only that PCs and people are different.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

I wouldn't say that, because what might be true for one may be false for another.. That is to say beauty is in the eye of the beholder!


Sounds like you have a hardware issue.. Because I have 1xGTX570 with a 3840x1024 monitor and I get no shimmers.. And very good frame rates.

So what does this prove?

Only that PCs and people are different.

I have no hardware issues. But your res is really low. 1024 vertical res is WAY lower than mine. Perhaps you are just used to low quality.

SWTOR has it CoD does not. Proves the op is wrong.

AA makes a big difference in picture quality and to deny it is just dishonest or incorrect, otherwise you would not have gone to all the trouble to find alternative solutions.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

That was the easy part.. The guys to thank are the guys who made the tools and the guys like Buchon who spent alot of time using the tools to find the best settings for CoD

Well, a BIG THANKS to ALL parties involved. I really appreciate the shared work.

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by icarus

I have no hardware issues. But your res is really low. 1024 vertical res is WAY lower than mine. Perhaps you are just used to low quality.

SWTOR has it CoD does not. Proves the op is wrong.

AA makes a big difference in picture quality and to deny it is just dishonest or incorrect.

The sim does have problems. Understanding the reasons behind the problems can help understanding why they take so long to get fixed.

Or we can just pretend that the gameplay mechanics and view distance requirements of a 3rd person, low altitude camera game are the same as a flight simulator so we can complain a bit more, to no feasible gain might i add

It's pretty clear from the preceding posts that AA today is a whole lot more complicated to implement if we want DX10 and above special effects, plus the separate pros and cons of each method factor in the choice of the implementation depending on the requirements of each gaming engine.

And since people have selectively short memories, let me refresh them a bit by citing an example of a currently successful sim: Does anyone remember RoF a couple of years ago? Shimmering land textures at distance, no AA and no dual-GPU support. Does it sound familiar maybe?

Most of those problems took about 18 months to sort out, with a team of comparable size to the CoD project and a product that had a more "aggressive" marketing model (meaning, an incremental yet near constant cash flow during the first few months).

In other words, if we want AA done correctly without having to buy add-ons on a per-flyable basis we have to either give them time to work and welcome the fact that a sequel is in the works to boost their cash flow, or code it ourselves.

I don't mean to sound harsh here, it's the realities of flight sim development that are harsh.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

The sim does have problems. Understanding the reasons behind the problems can help understanding why they take so long to get fixed.

Or we can just pretend that the gameplay mechanics and view distance requirements of a 3rd person, low altitude camera game are the same as a flight simulator so we can complain a bit more, to no feasible gain might i add

It's pretty clear from the preceding posts that AA today is a whole lot more complicated to implement if we want DX10 and above special effects, plus the separate pros and cons of each method factor in the choice of the implementation depending on the requirements of each gaming engine.

And since people have selectively short memories, let me refresh them a bit by citing an example of a currently successful sim: Does anyone remember RoF a couple of years ago? Shimmering land textures at distance, no AA and no dual-GPU support. Does it sound familiar maybe?

Most of those problems took about 18 months to sort out, with a team of comparable size to the CoD project and a product that had a more "aggressive" marketing model (meaning, an incremental yet near constant cash flow during the first few months).

In other words, if we want AA done correctly without having to buy add-ons on a per-flyable basis we have to either give them time to work and welcome the fact that a sequel is in the works to boost their cash flow, or code it ourselves.

I don't mean to sound harsh here, it's the realities of flight sim development that are harsh.

I agree with you 100%. Thats not what I am arguing. I'm taking issue with the lie that AA does not matter and has little or no benefit to visual quality, thus those who want it are just whiners or have hardware problems. I'm not complaining about the devs. When we get it, CoD will look better than it does now, thats all.

[tintifaxl]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

I wouldn't say that, because what might be true for one may be false for another.. That is to say beauty is in the eye of the beholder!


Sounds like you have a hardware issue.. Because I have 1xGTX570 with a 3840x1024 monitor and I get no shimmers.. And very good frame rates.

So what does this prove?

Only that PCs and people are different.

What grafics settings have you got?

[mazex]

Originally Posted by icarus

SWTOR has it CoD does not. Proves the op is wrong.

Well, I played SWTOR a lot in December when it was released and then it did not have it, even though it had an option in the settings it did not work, just like CloD. I haven't played it since early January and it didn't have it then but I realize from other posters here that it got it in version 1.1? Anyway, I played to level 28 without it and really enjoyed it anyway.

My point was that at release, SWOTR did not have it as using a lot of fancy Dx10 effects makes AA a lot harder than in the Dx9 days as aliantd and others have explained in detail in this thread. I just wanted to point out that fact as many remember that all games ten years ago had AA, and say stuff like "come on, it's not 2001 - how can a game get released in 2011 without it! ". That's the point, games with 100 times the budget of CloD do get released without it today, but not in 2001...

Mazex