Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

Why are people complaining about anti aliasing?


Recommended Posts

Who doesnt like Alias??? Jennifer Garner is a hottie!!!

I'm not anti-aliasing anything at the moment.

EDIT:

This post is where this thread is at the moment. Who cares what monitor you have or what card you have that does this or that. Do you care what hardware I have? I think not. Take your hardware problems and deal with them, like the rest of us. THIS IS ONLY A ###### DEMO PEOPLE!!! GET A GRIP!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Now look at another game, lets say Rainbow Six: Lockdown, I'll admit its not the best game out there but IMO the engine is much more mature.  RSE's engine supports AA, and numerous whiz-bang graphical features, just like GRIN's.  The Red Storm engine is far more scaleable, allowing more people to play the game *cough5xxxseriescardscoughcough*, it doesn't cripple people's high end machines, and the game looks just as good, if not better (the R6 team character models blow GRIN's away). 

I agree RSE's engine is more mature, but it does not matter if this engine can create a matrix like environment if the games produced with it are going to play like LD, splinter cell, ect. At least for this player who wants a tac sim game.

Im not defending grin here, but they have stated thaat one of the reasons they were able to produce the game with the time restraints placed on them was because they were using thier engine that they knew inside and out. Ideally, I would have love to see an Igor 2, but only if it was in the hands of Grin, RSE to me has proven they have no interest in producing challenging gameplay or tacticallly stimulating gameplay like grin has. And its the gameplay im after.

Edited by smokin
Link to post
Share on other sites

You missed the whole point of this thread. We are not discussing gameplay, which I have said twice before in this thread. The LD engine was only brought into this discussion as a point of comparision, just like Source. And I don't see you saying negative things about Valve. Maybe you should read everything that has been said in this thread before throwing around the anti-RSE stuff. :thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im not defending grin here, but they have stated thaat one of the reasons they were able to produce the game with the time restraints placed on them was because they were using thier engine that they knew inside and out. Ideally, I would have love to see an Igor 2, but only if it was in the hands of Grin, RSE to me has proven they have no interest in producing challenging gameplay or tacticallly stimulating gameplay like grin has. And its the gameplay im after.

OMG I post again here :whistle:, but why do you think RSE is not producing challenging gameplay? I doesn't own a 360, but for what I can see in the videos GRAW on 360 is challenging it is different to the PC version but esp. the MP levels in Nicaragua and the gameplay showed looked challenging more than in other FPS games on the box. RSE is concentrating on the consoles, this is a business decision by Ubi I think. You need the manpower to build a game only for one platform. Please don't bash people if you don't have heir work todo.

Back to the topic, does anybody with a TFT tried to run the game one resolution step below the native TFT resolution? I have two TFT's here one notebook and a standalone. When I run the game on the notebook (1600x1200) the jaggies still there. If I run it at 1280x1024 I have a smoothed interpolated image but not all colors (looks like crazy color mapped). When I run it on the standalone TFT (native 1280x1024) with 1024x768 I have a smoothe image and no visible jaggies. Ok for a TFT user the image looks blurry then ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the topic, does anybody with a TFT tried to run the game one resolution step below the native TFT resolution? I have two TFT's here one notebook and a standalone. When I run the game on the notebook (1600x1200) the jaggies still there. If I run it at 1280x1024 I have a smoothed interpolated image but not all colors (looks like crazy color mapped). When I run it on the standalone TFT (native 1280x1024) with 1024x768 I have a smoothe image and no visible jaggies. Ok for a TFT user the image looks blurry then ;)

Yeah, you are just blurring the image out. THat's why no jaggies, but everything else goes with it. :)

-John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the topic, does anybody with a TFT tried to run the game one resolution step below the native TFT resolution? I have two TFT's here one notebook and a standalone. When I run the game on the notebook (1600x1200) the jaggies still there. If I run it at 1280x1024 I have a smoothed interpolated image but not all colors (looks like crazy color mapped). When I run it on the standalone TFT (native 1280x1024) with 1024x768 I have a smoothe image and no visible jaggies. Ok for a TFT user the image looks blurry then ;)

Yeah, you are just blurring the image out. THat's why no jaggies, but everything else goes with it. :)

-John

Ups you're relplied again in this thread :)

I know it's just interpolating done by the panel electronics, but for people with jaggy allergy this could be an option esp. if you run a native 1600x1200 on 1280x1024. But the result depends on the panel electronic. Some look good some ######.

Edited by Striker-1991
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ups you're relplied again in this thread :)

I know it's just interpolating done by the panel electronics, but for people with jaggy allergy this could be an option esp. if you run a native 1600x1200 on 1280x1024. But the result depends on the panel electronic. Some look good some ######.

Doh! You got me. :D

Yeah, it could work for some.

-John

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you may be onto something.

We could kill a few birds with one stone, here.

For TFT monitors, run below your native resolution and the resulting softness with mask the jaggies.

For CRT monitors, simply alter some of your OSD settings to blur out the jaggies. You'll also reap the added bonus of achieving a fullscreen depth-of-field affect.

Best of all, no video card upgrade needed! :P

Edited by DisgruntledArchitect
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know if anyone ells have noticed or if it has been said before but I’m seeing a trend here with the lack of frames per second. I have seen two people with similar CPU’s get very similar performance and they have very different GPU’s, one can have an ATI 9800 and the other a GeForce 7800 GTX. Now those are two very different GPU’s and if this game was GPU intensive there would be a large gap between the performance of the two computers but there isn’t which tells me one thing, it is not GPU intensive it’s CPU intensive. IMO Fear is the most GPU intensive game I have ever played. I two used to have a ATI 9800 and couldn’t get fear to run smooth above low settings for that GPU so I upgraded only my GPU to a GeForce 7800 GS no I can run fear with every thing maxed out and still get an “average†of 40 FPS now that is a big improvement and all I changed was the GPU. That tells me that fear is a GPU intensive game. At this point GRIN need to do one of two things, change the recommended specs to a higher CPU, to around 3.2 GHz. Then at leased if you can’t turn up the GFX all the way up you can still get some good frame rates Or optimize the engine more toward the GPU.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...