Uh.... no AA? Are you nuts? Without AA, most of the terrain textures in VIP look like absolute shit.
adobemedia Wrote:Uh.... no AA? Are you nuts? Without AA, most of the terrain textures in VIP look like absolute shit.
I doubt that AA can change that. >_>
adobemedia Wrote:Uh.... no AA? Are you nuts? Without AA, most of the terrain textures in VIP look like absolute shit.
You're thinking of texture filtering, not AA.
cyst Wrote:adobemedia Wrote:Uh.... no AA? Are you nuts? Without AA, most of the terrain textures in VIP look like absolute shit.
You're thinking of texture filtering, not AA.
Kieranator Wrote:adobemedia Wrote:Uh.... no AA? Are you nuts? Without AA, most of the terrain textures in VIP look like absolute shit.
I doubt AA could do much about that. Texture filtering takes care of that.
You're both wrong. It's skill that makes your textures look good, not some setting or feature.
If your textures look like shit to begin with, neither AA not any kind of filtering will improve them.
Bink Wrote:You're both wrong. It's skill that makes your textures look good, not some setting or feature.
If your textures look like shit to begin with, neither AA not any kind of filtering will improve them.
Thanks for the dripping condescension, but even otherwise good-looking textures look like shit without filtering, which is why every modern graphics card supports it.
AA, on the other hand, doesn't change the way the textures look at all, regardless of texture quality.
cyst Wrote:but even otherwise good-looking textures look like shit without filtering
OH! You're absolutely right, of course!
http://www.garry.tv/img/cssource/texture-filtering.jpg
Notice how the screen on the left looks SO much worse!
http://images.tomshardware.com/2004/06/03/ati/pic05.png
And this one! Almost unplayable!!
I wouldn't know what to do without texture filtering!
It sure improves modern games a lot and only slows them down by about 20-40 FPS, depending on the scene complexity and the number of textures, which is, of course, worth it, because it's the future and therefore awesome, right?!
</bullshit>
Bink, is there a point to your abrasiveness? Because it seems to me that you're jumping all over this guy for his (sometimes mistaken) opinion.
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot that this is how the internet works. My Bad.
I realize that without great looking textures (and maps, of course), effects like anisotropic filtering and FSAA won't do jack. Even so, if the textures are already good, it improves them even more. Icing on the cake, if you will.
Bink Wrote:cyst Wrote:but even otherwise good-looking textures look like shit without filtering
OH! You're absolutely right, of course!
http://www.garry.tv/img/cssource/texture-filtering.jpg
Notice how the screen on the left looks SO much worse!
http://images.tomshardware.com/2004/06/03/ati/pic05.png
And this one! Almost unplayable!!
I wouldn't know what to do without texture filtering!
It sure improves modern games a lot and only slows them down by about 20-40 FPS, depending on the scene complexity and the number of textures, which is, of course, worth it, because it's the future and therefore awesome, right?!
</bullshit>
Not unplayable, just ugly. The textures in the left pane of your second pic are grainy as all hell, and I'm sure it only gets worse when the camera is moving around. Even in the right pane (with mipmapping) you get ugly bands where the mipmap level changes.
Your first pic shows trilinear vs. anisotropic filtering, so there's no unfiltered textures in that pic at all (and even the trilinear has some problems with the floor texture)
[
Update: I may have made a mistake in assuming that you had something at least a little bit helpful to say. If your only point was to imply that "your textures look like absolute shit anyway" then you aren't really contributing to the conversation and I should have just ignored you. If you actually think that it's possible to make a good looking modern computer game without some kind of texture filtering, feel free to continue.]
Hurry up Brian! I go back to College in a week! :P
cyst Wrote:Bink Wrote:You're both wrong. It's skill that makes your textures look good, not some setting or feature.
If your textures look like shit to begin with, neither AA not any kind of filtering will improve them.
Thanks for the dripping condescension, but even otherwise good-looking textures look like shit without filtering, which is why every modern graphics card supports it.
AA, on the other hand, doesn't change the way the textures look at all, regardless of texture quality.
Though I don't subscribe to Bink's method of saying it, I disagree with this. The overall look of the game is going to be better with fancy-schmancy effects like AF and AA, but it's the heart of the texture that is the primary deciding factor.
Yes, AF and AA make your game look better, and spice up screenshots especially, but it shouldn't be a crutch to lean on. Top quality textures are top quality regardless of the effects use, and bad textures are bad, no matter how much you lay on 'em.