wook

Revisiting Anti-Aliasing

Hello everyone. I did as many searches as I could regarding this issue. I would like to revisit this because of recent V9 changes I've experienced and get some input from the community.

 

I remember reading how broken AA was (and still is) in UE4. I used SMAA in V8 and honestly it looked pretty good. A little blurry but most of the jagged edges were gone. However, in V9 this option was removed. I tried FXAA and it looks absolutely terrible. I can tolerate it, and it is better than no AA, but viewing distant enemies is severely hindered when compared to previous versions where I used SMAA. On top of that, alot of edges (especially in foliage) have white outlines which is very distracting when running. It basically flickers when moving through the environment.

 

I installed Reshade and played around with SMAA and FXAA but had no success in removing the jagged edges or flicker completely.

 

Has anyone had success with this? What settings should I use to alleviate this problem? I don't care about color correction or anything like that (personally prefer the washed out colors).

 

Thanks in advance!

 

GTX 1060 6GB

i5-6600k @ 4.5ghz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

try using TXAA and sharpen the image with the help of ReShade - that's how I do it.

p.s. I use Lumasharpen (strength of the effect is 0.75 while clamp is 0.30)

Edited by iDrag0n

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I used TXAA and its all blurry and on top of that when i look quickly to the left or right it creates a stream of past images of my weapon ... this is the worst AA ive ever seen ... SMAA with resolution scale of 150% was fine, but now you can decide if you want a mess of edges or a blurry psychedelic trip 

This is most noticeable on maps with foliage 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too reinstalled for V9 and found out nothing has changed with AA. You either play with it enabled and can't see shit because of blurriness or you play without it where the game looks terrible and it still looks horrible at distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Major Trouble said:

^+1

 

It's amazing what a little LumaSharpen + SMAA can do.

 

I will revisit my Reshade settings and see what I can do. Setting Super Sampling Resolution to 1.25x helped a ton as well.

 

Thanks for the responses everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Melbo said:

Use. ReShade.

 

That's great but it doesn't solve Squad having shit AA options, so when will this end?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, banOkay said:

 

That's great but it doesn't solve Squad having shit AA options, so when will this end?

 

When Epic sort it out I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reshade works but no improvments for the anti alaising or  blurryness with TXAA.

I still hope that v10 comes atleast with some improvements for this issue :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at other games (Planetside 2, Insurgency, Day of Infamy, Battlefield 2/3/4, etc) and even with no AA on they look 10x better than Squad. UE4 is by far the worst looking engine I've ever seen, a muddy pixelated mess you think would've been a priority to change. It'll be a while before we get a game that looks like it should imo, but I'm looking forward to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Arduras said:

UE4 is by far the worst looking engine I've ever seen, a muddy pixelated mess

 

I have no idea what you're talking about, unless you're specifically referring to the sub-par anti-aliasing implementation

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Arduras said:

I look at other games (Planetside 2, Insurgency, Day of Infamy, Battlefield 2/3/4, etc) and even with no AA on they look 10x better than Squad. UE4 is by far the worst looking engine I've ever seen, a muddy pixelated mess you think would've been a priority to change. It'll be a while before we get a game that looks like it should imo, but I'm looking forward to it.

Unreal Engine can be photo realistic. Can you make a 5km square photo realistic map with thousands of trees & buildings and expect to be anything other than a high school slide show? The answer is no. None of the games you listed have huge battlefields. Download the Unreal Editor and start tinkering if you don't believe me. By using low res textures the devs are trying to make a game that is actually playable.

Edited by Zylfrax791
grammer & speeling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Zylfrax791 said:

Unreal Engine can be photo realistic. Can you make a 5km square photo realistic map with thousands of trees & buildings and expect to be anything other than a high school slide show? The answer is no. None of the games you listed have huge battlefields. Download the Unreal Editor and start tinkering if you don't believe me. By using low res textures the devs are trying to make a game that is actually playable.

Large battlefields? Battlefield as several km^2 maps and Planetside has 1-2k players on any given continent and manages to look better. (sure the landscape is less "active" but there's not nearly as much aliasing even with the aliasing options disabled.)

 

My point is, a player shouldn't feel like they're playing at 640x480 regardless of their resolution. If it's literally just the anti-aliasing, then how or why is it so absolutely terrible even compared to ancient engines like Source and others which again even without any AA enabled, look better

edit: I'm not talking textures here, I mean edges of objects, the weird bushes, the aliasing of objects (try to read the signs in the firing range without a scope, or spot anything in a window >50m away) for whatever reason it's like looking in an oil spill instead of 3D objects in 3D space.

 

I know this sounds like a really harsh analysis but with 1.5x SS it's not as bad but that's a huge performance hit to almost close the gap for what other engines can do without even trying.

 

Check out BF3, no AA. Then Squad, no AA. The difference is clear as day, and it's mainly the rendering, not the textures or models themselves.

A better comparison would be DayZ with it's huge, detailed map and Squad. No AA in either of these games and you can still see a huge difference. in DayZ a tree in the distance doesn't look like a pixel fractal. The devs are talented, and I'm sure this will get addressed eventually.

 

If I have to, I'll download DAyZ and take a series of screenshots on the lowest and highest settings in each game for comparison, but it wouldn't accomplish much other than show the difference I'm trying to explain poorly.

Edited by Arduras
clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BF3 is also based on the Frostbite engine, and they spend millions of dollars on developing the engine to make it look and feel the way it is.

 

I'm not sure if that's a fair comparison.

 

Squad has a lot of things that Battlefield doesn't have.  Tactics, real teamplay, etc.

 

In my opinion, graphics only go so far to entice a gamer to play consistently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soulzz said:

BF3 is also based on the Frostbite engine, and they spend millions of dollars on developing the engine to make it look and feel the way it is.

 

I'm not sure if that's a fair comparison.

 

Squad has a lot of things that Battlefield doesn't have.  Tactics, real teamplay, etc.

 

In my opinion, graphics only go so far to entice a gamer to play consistently.

 

No but they do go a long way towards your game feeling like a finished product - and when the mechanics suffer because the game simply cannot display the information you require, it's certainly a big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Arduras said:

Large battlefields? Battlefield as several km^2 maps and Planetside has 1-2k players on any given continent and manages to look better. (sure the landscape is less "active" but there's not nearly as much aliasing even with the aliasing options disabled.)

 

My point is, a player shouldn't feel like they're playing at 640x480 regardless of their resolution. If it's literally just the anti-aliasing, then how or why is it so absolutely terrible even compared to ancient engines like Source and others which again even without any AA enabled, look better

edit: I'm not talking textures here, I mean edges of objects, the weird bushes, the aliasing of objects (try to read the signs in the firing range without a scope, or spot anything in a window >50m away) for whatever reason it's like looking in an oil spill instead of 3D objects in 3D space.

 

I know this sounds like a really harsh analysis but with 1.5x SS it's not as bad but that's a huge performance hit to almost close the gap for what other engines can do without even trying.

 

Check out BF3, no AA. Then Squad, no AA. The difference is clear as day, and it's mainly the rendering, not the textures or models themselves.

A better comparison would be DayZ with it's huge, detailed map and Squad. No AA in either of these games and you can still see a huge difference. in DayZ a tree in the distance doesn't look like a pixel fractal. The devs are talented, and I'm sure this will get addressed eventually.

 

If I have to, I'll download DAyZ and take a series of screenshots on the lowest and highest settings in each game for comparison, but it wouldn't accomplish much other than show the difference I'm trying to explain poorly.

My personal opinion given Squad is an Alpha game still in development is that all the textures are basically placeholders. You can't compare finished games to Squad. Btw, didn't it take them a year to update DayZ and it mostly consisted of animated foliage and trees?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Arduras said:

 

No but they do go a long way towards your game feeling like a finished product - and when the mechanics suffer because the game simply cannot display the information you require, it's certainly a big deal.

You're also comparing a finished product that also has over 10 years of development to a much smaller team.

 

I don't think it's a a huge problem since this is still an Alpha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Soulzz said:

You're also comparing a finished product that also has over 10 years of development to a much smaller team.

 

I don't think it's a a huge problem since this is still an Alpha.

Like I said, I'm sure the devs will address this eventually ^^"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now