![anti-aliasing on anti-aliasing on](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/antialiasing-170208141207/95/antialiasing-6-638.jpg)
So I think it's probably time to debate whether the PBR passes, lighting remasters and various Engine improvements going through make any sense if some options that should be considered basic (Anisotropic, Motion Blur, rendering distance (i.e.
![anti-aliasing on anti-aliasing on](https://static.tweaktown.com/news/4/0/40191_01_nvidia_s_new_anti_aliasing_technique_mfaa_is_better_on_your_gpu_full.jpg)
![anti-aliasing on anti-aliasing on](https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/images/AA-GeometryAliasing.png)
Then again, and I never bothered into looking into it before, because reasons the AF implementation in Warframe is not that good (I guess it's a concscious move to improve performance) and has this weird cascade effect thing while the Nvidia one looks better (at least, for now).
#Anti aliasing on Patch#
If that is the motivation, and everything points towards it (just check a few Twitter convos Steve had with some people around the last couple months and some Forum posts, imagine what Support goes through, the comment in patch notes about "saving people from themselves") I have to say this has to be the worst one they could have taken. Note that what I'll say is speculation, but most likely the decision was funded by, and I really hope I am wrong as hell, because people keep pestering and reporting issues with lower end machines while having the Anisotropic Filter set at 16, so this way they kind of get rid of a chunk of "damn I can't run Fortuna" posts and messages from people who unfortunately don't know better. We spent hard earned $$$ on our computer rigs and why DE won’t allow us to experience Warframe in it’s visual glory? If your Rig can’t handle it turn it off, no need to argue here. I am done with this thread and off for a beer. Yes i will be using this from now on because apparently we've reached a new era of peasantry where 16x is too taxing and people want blurry textures.Īs for the SMAA intensity, those cant be forced though the CP in warframe, so at least give us those and possibly different methods of AA. I've tested this multiple times on multiple scenes an the fact remains- forced 16x provides the best results because it filters every texture as it should.
![anti-aliasing on anti-aliasing on](https://i.stack.imgur.com/K51sE.png)
Implying I would change my resolution to prove that Warframe has S#$ filtering and does not filter very texture to save performance. Im just sitting here laughing my kindneys off. Once again, he doesn't know what he's talking about and he's made a fool of himself. You can't improve the clarity of geometry with anisotropic ( texture) filtering. That surface is 3D it's geometry, not a flat texture. The change he's showing in his comparison shots is a change of resolution, not filtering quality. Locking us to only use 8x is stupid and makes me sad, I like being able to crank my graphics settings to the max and still easily go over 72fps. You shouldn't outright remove graphics settings to improve visuals because a few people using potatoes will lag if they try to use them, that just makes the game worse for everyone else. Pretty much all modern hardware can handle 16x with no issues. And at that point, you'd be better off just disabling it altogether, along with pretty much every other option that makes the game look more pretty. And as for performance impact, that's hardly a factor, AF barely impacts performance at all, if it is impacting yer performances then you have a really bad video card or you don't even have a video card and are using the integrated GPU on yer motherboard. If you have a really hi-res monitor it also makes it significantly easier to tell as well. I agree with Cheeki, You can see the difference between 8x and 16x, Note the lines on the ground and how they are much more crisp and sharp in 16x vs 8x.