Why do we not have MSAA?

pc

#1

A game that looks this good deserves capable antialiasing, and out of the three options we have, two look terrible (TXAA and FXAA are blurry - thanks NVIDIA), and one just doesn’t cut it (SMAA 1x).

Why is there no support for MSAA?


#2

Uhh, I don’t know :confused:

@Shaners?


#3

Just a few quotes I got off the internet.

SO it looks like:

  • FXAA ignores polygons and line edges, and simply analyzes the pixels on the screen.
  • MSAA renders a scene at a higher resolution, and then downsampling to a lower-resolution output.
  • MSAA Most modern GPUs are capable of this form of anti-aliasing, but it greatly taxes resources such as texture, bandwidth, and fillrate.

The way current technology is, not everybody has an “up to date” GPU, so this has the potential to exclude most players. Secondly, it looks like MSAA has horrible repercussions, like taxing resources such as texture, bandwidth, and fillrate.

Now I know nothing about antialiasing, and I run the game on max settings, so this MSAA must be gold if you want it that bad, but TRS says otherwise because it’s not implemented (unless it was recently developed within the past year, after Evolve came out).


#4

Thanks Xplo :slight_smile:


#5

Like I said, I know nothing on the subject, but this could very well be a case of pros vs. cons.

Also on the article for MSAA:


#6

@XplosionIncorporated @The_Specialist This is a good explanation of how MSAA works. As an option, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be available (especially since the game runs on CryEngine). Saying “let’s not have that because not everyone would be able to run it” is like saying “let’s make everything console quality so as not to alienate the console players, even though computer hardware is more capable”. Does that sound at all reasonable to you?

FXAA looks like trash. SSAA renders the scene at a higher resolution and then downsamples (hence the name, supersampling), which is why it’s so expensive; MSAA, on the other hand, is somewhat similar but it doesn’t brute force the problem as much. It’s widely regarded as the best-looking reasonable performance aa option as far as I know.

SSAA definitely looks best, but you need an absurd amount of power to use that. I could render the game in higher resolutions with NVIDIA’s DSR (which kinda does the trick), but that introduces some scaling problems (especially in multi-monitor setups); MSAA looks “second-best”, but doesn’t need nearly as much power. TXAA is a bit like MSAA but it’s also faster (if memory serves), but it adds blur; FXAA is just bad and blurs out everything.


#7

FXAA and TXAA are like vaseline on your screen. God awful. You can enable better AA through drivers or injectors. Not a big issue imo.


#8

MSAA is an extremely old and unoptimized tech, you better off downsampling with either NVidia or AMD drivers.

As for TXAA is an improved version of FXAA exclusive to NVidia GPUs if I’m not mistaken, SMAA is an improvement from MLAA (AMD Tech) that works on both brands.

I use SMAA with Downsampling and have a clear image.


#9

@MrStrategio @ArPharazon Will probably know more! :slight_smile:


#10

Rendering programmer says: we cannot support MSAA because the lighting options we use (tiled lighting), and our use of compute shaders, is incompatible with MSAA.


#11

I have a 980ti graphics card, so I really don’t see any use for any AA. I just have mine set to ‘none’ and I don’t see any changes when I switch to any AA.

From what I hear, AA is the cheap way to increase resolution, and since I run on max settings I have no need for it. People with crappier cards might need it, so I dunno.

Anyways, ArPharazon answered the question.


#12

Please let me know if you have more questions, or if I can close this topic. Thanks!!


#13

Yes, you can close the thread. Thanks for the replies, @Shaners and @ArPharazon!


#14