No Hardware Anti-Aliasing under DirectX 11?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiggy

FFXIV is well known to use deferred rendering which prevents most forms of AA. They would have to re-code the engine entirely to change this method.

---

That's completely false, it's a partial code adjustment. NOT a complete engine re-write, that's a complete fallacy.

It's a simple render priority fix and a few other minor adjustments. It's not that big of a deal to adjust. I can assure you. It's something that every major company that wanted to add Hardware AA had to do.

As professionals, they're entirely aware of the process needed to do this, well within their capabilities.

I was disappointed with the lack of additional AA options in the DX11 benchmark as well. I'd love to see better AA added to the game, and/or a dev comment on the issue.

Disappointed with FXAA, it doesn't matter how great DX11 looks if jaggies are everywhere.

That was a good read op but your showing the differences between no AA and hardware AA. I'm still not sold on the whole hardware AA should be here because I still haven't seen an example of how hardware AA is better then software AA.
A comparison of no AA vs AA gameplay is a drastic improvement but show me a comparison of what software vs hardware AA looks like

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hali

That's completely false, it's a partial code adjustment. NOT a complete engine re-write, that's a complete fallacy.

It's a simple render priority fix and a few other minor adjustments. It's not that big of a deal to adjust. I can assure you. It's something that every major company that wanted to add Hardware AA had to do.

As professionals, they're entirely aware of the process needed to do this, well within their capabilities.

---

Regardless if I was wrong about it being a complete rewrite doesn't change the fact they'd have to rewrite the engine at least in part. Focus on the important part is the message instead of nitpicking.

I assure you that your assumptions about how minor it is are exactly that. Assumptions. You know literally nothing about the renderer to even make that determination. You have absolutely no idea how much work it is. Yet you talk to me about fallacies.

It might be theoretically easy, but in the end you know nothing about what is actually under the hood. Also try to remember this is on multiple systems. You have no idea how the different renderer are intertwined with other parts of the engine. All you have are assumptions.

FFXIV is now Nvidia GameWorks, where's my TXAA support Squenix and Nvidia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IveraIvalice

That was a good read op but your showing the differences between no AA and hardware AA. I'm still not sold on the whole hardware AA should be here because I still haven't seen an example of how hardware AA is better then software AA.
A comparison of no AA vs AA gameplay is a drastic improvement but show me a comparison of what software vs hardware AA looks like

---

I can't show the difference between No AA, Hardware AA and FXAA in FFXIV, because we don't have it. That's why this thread exists.

I'm sure there are plenty of examples online comparing something like FXAA to MSAA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiggy

Regardless if I was wrong about it being a complete rewrite doesn't change the fact they'd have to rewrite the engine at least in part. Focus on the important part is the message instead of nitpicking.

I assure you that your assumptions about how minor it is are exactly that. Assumptions. You know literally nothing about the renderer to even make that determination. You have absolutely no idea how much work it is. Yet you talk to me about fallacies.

It might be theoretically easy, but in the end you know nothing about what is actually under the hood. Also try to remember this is on multiple systems. You have no idea how the different renderer are intertwined with other parts of the engine. All you have are assumptions.

---

Quote:

---

Regardless if I was wrong about it being a complete rewrite doesn't change the fact they'd have to rewrite the engine at least in part.

---

Quote:

---

I assure you that your assumptions about how minor it is are exactly that. Assumptions

---

I do it for a living, so yes I can assure you that it's a simpler task than you think it is.

Quote:

---

You know literally nothing about the renderer to even make that determination.

---

There's only one Deferred Rendering Method. Occasionally there's a few extra layers depending on the lighting/shading system in place, but the method still results in the same thing.

Quote:

---

It might be theoretically easy, but in the end you know nothing about what is actually under the hood. Also try to remember this is on multiple systems.

---

It's an almost identical process for DirectX and OpenGL, as I said there's only one real method for Deferred Rendering, it doesn't differ. The same adjustment needs to be made.

Quote:

---

You have no idea how the different renderer are intertwined with other parts of the engine.

---

Now I'm pretty sure you're unaware of what you're discussing, because this is the most vague use of "I'm trying to make it seems like I know what I'm discussing" If I've ever seen one.

Quote:

---

You have absolutely no idea how much work it is. Yet you talk to me about fallacies.

---

Sadly not, I have a degree and several projects converted from DirectX 9 > DirectX 11 to prove the point. It's not as drastic a change as you think, and it's minimal at best. Yes it's work, but it's no substantial work to the point where you'd sit and go "Oh god, this'll take us two months!!"

At most a few shaders may need recompiled and adjusted, but that's unlikely at best. It's a simple task that wouldn't require a large time investment, but time is short for the Development team. That's why this is a request, no-one is forcing them to do, no-one is demanding it. The point of the thread is to express that there's a want for it, not a need

Haven't tried the benchmark yet but if there are no new aa options that's kind of a let down. I've been playing with a sweetfx profile and disabling it is shocking at how blurry fxaa makes the base game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raelgun

Only for a console user, PC users have enjoyed high resolution for years now beyond that of 1920x1080.

How many years have the likes of 2560x1440 monitors been in existence?

And if you enjoyed the opportunity to downsample from a higher resolution, you will notice a increase in visual fidelity, the very reason some of us who spent money on the likes of a Nvidia 780 could enjoy, why spend money on something like that and stick to stone age settings?

---

Why spend money on something that can render at higher resolutions only to downsample the crap out of it?

Yoshi has said before that resolution doesn't replace image quality, and he's right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Why spend money on something that can render at higher resolutions only to downsample the crap out of it?

Yoshi has said before that resolution doesn't replace image quality, and he's right.

---

Says the person that has not tried it, I am down sampling FF14 right now and check my link above, the evidence is right there, the reason to down sample is that many games are not being released with hardware AA, so the next best thing is to down sample, these type of hardware handle is just fine and are designed to have games cranked up a notch while still maintaining performance.
Also jaggies make the image quality look bad, making the image sharper improves the fidelity, theres always ways to improve the image quality and going beyond 1080 p is part of that and this has always been true, its been a proven fact, why you are contesting this I have no idea, us PC players can benefit from the extra bits of DX 11 AND increased resolution, we can have all of the cake and eat it.