Alan Wake!!! This comfusion i am very positive that raised the hype , and the game sales will see a new level!!! ;p

Even if it isn't exactly 720p, isnt good looking enough?

scat398 said: BioDomePoo said: selnor said: JaggedSac said: The plot thickens guys.  Some people are seeing geometry at 640p and now 720p.  And they are claiming this isn't a bullshot:   Maybe because Alan Wake is the only Console game ever to have 4XMSAA it's confusing people with uber smooth edges. LOL. This is just sick when people have to magnify things that we would never see with our eyes so much to prove a point that doesnt matter.When i look at alan wake it looks better to man than uncharted 2.Now if uncharted 2 was 1080p or whatever it wouldnt change its the graphics not just the resolution its everything thats going with the game. I agree, I'm loving the way this game is looking.  Can't wait to get it.

well only 360 console game,

GT5Prologue have msaax4 1280x720p

selnor said: bobobologna said: d21lewis said: Once upon a time, looking good was good enough. Not anymore.  We have to figure out who's e-penis is bigger. About 720p vs 540p vs 640p:  The 640p was for Halo 3.  Not sure how it got mixed up into the conversation at Beyond3D (I didn't check the whole thread).  I am quite certain that the original pixelcounters were right, and the game is rendering at 540p. About 960x540 with 4xMSAA being equivalent to 3480x2160:  Just plain wrong.  Wrong in so many ways.  First off, assuming that it were supersampling, not multisampling, it would still just be the equivalent of 1920x1080, no AA.  And supersampling is considerably more taxing than multisampling. For the people who think the graphics suck because it's low resolution:  There are tons of games with lower than HD resolutions, including every Call of Duty game, Ratchet and Clank, and GTA4 on the PS3.  I hope you weren't one of the ones who defended one of these games.  I will concede that 960x540 is one of the lowest, if not the lowest resolution "HD" game yet though (I think Star Ocean might have a lower resolution during battles).  Let's be honest, most of these people are probably PS3 fans. For the ones who think that the graphics are great despite it's low resolution:  I hope you thought the same thing about GTA4 on the PS3.  Or any PS3 game that might come in the future with great post processing effects, but lower rendering resolutions.  Or Quincunx AA (prevalent on the PS3) which many people complain blurs an image (and I agree).  Because again, let's be honest, most of these people are probably XBox360 fans. My final thoughts:  The game still looks great, but I'm disappointed by the lower resolution, and I'm 90% sure that I would have noticed.  It annoys me that so many PS3 games use QAA because it blurs the overall picture, and I'm pretty sure I would have noticed such a low resolution, no matter how much AA it uses (AA is never going to add detail to a texture rendered at low resolution).  I'm also 90% certain that Uncharted 2 will continue to be the best looking console game after Alan Wake releases, even if reviewers say otherwise.  I'll be very interested to see what Digital Foundry has to say about Alan Wake from a technical perspective after they get some time with the game. As we know from Remedy. Geometric resolution does not determine the resolution of textures. In fact there is 50+ parts of an image which all have varying resolutions in their native states.

I'm fairly certain that textures are rendered with the geometry (like 99% sure).  It's not like you just render a wireframe model when rendering geometry, you are rendering the textures on the triangles.  Also, it makes zero sense to render the geometry at 960x540 and render other effects at higher resolutions.  It does make sense to render geometry at 1280x720, then have lower resolution framebuffers for certain effects, like particle effects, or depth of field.  In fact, most games go this route, including Killzone 2 and the MT engine from Capcom.  Both of those use quarter resolution (640x360) buffers for things like particles and such.  They just blur and smooth out the effects so that the low resolution of those elements isn't as noticeable.

selnor said: The best part is, the media loved the preview. Calling it impressive anti aliasing. I cant wait to see everyones face when Alan Wake has comments like "simply the best graphics on consoles yet" or "best graphics this generation". Because it will get those. It's destined to. The funny bit will be if it gets those and is indeed 960x540. Man some people here would melt down there brain with that info.

lol.........................hahahahahhhahaha.........................yeah, remember MW2 *smirks* what a royal fail of epic proportions that was LMFAO!!!

 

 

 

get a powerful pc dude, get crysis, and I promise, you'll finally be able to say BETTER GRAPHICS THAN TEH PS3!!!!................................and actuall be correct imo

 

selnor said: bobobologna said: d21lewis said: Once upon a time, looking good was good enough. Not anymore.  We have to figure out who's e-penis is bigger. About 720p vs 540p vs 640p:  The 640p was for Halo 3.  Not sure how it got mixed up into the conversation at Beyond3D (I didn't check the whole thread).  I am quite certain that the original pixelcounters were right, and the game is rendering at 540p. About 960x540 with 4xMSAA being equivalent to 3480x2160:  Just plain wrong.  Wrong in so many ways.  First off, assuming that it were supersampling, not multisampling, it would still just be the equivalent of 1920x1080, no AA.  And supersampling is considerably more taxing than multisampling. For the people who think the graphics suck because it's low resolution:  There are tons of games with lower than HD resolutions, including every Call of Duty game, Ratchet and Clank, and GTA4 on the PS3.  I hope you weren't one of the ones who defended one of these games.  I will concede that 960x540 is one of the lowest, if not the lowest resolution "HD" game yet though (I think Star Ocean might have a lower resolution during battles).  Let's be honest, most of these people are probably PS3 fans. For the ones who think that the graphics are great despite it's low resolution:  I hope you thought the same thing about GTA4 on the PS3.  Or any PS3 game that might come in the future with great post processing effects, but lower rendering resolutions.  Or Quincunx AA (prevalent on the PS3) which many people complain blurs an image (and I agree).  Because again, let's be honest, most of these people are probably XBox360 fans. My final thoughts:  The game still looks great, but I'm disappointed by the lower resolution, and I'm 90% sure that I would have noticed.  It annoys me that so many PS3 games use QAA because it blurs the overall picture, and I'm pretty sure I would have noticed such a low resolution, no matter how much AA it uses (AA is never going to add detail to a texture rendered at low resolution).  I'm also 90% certain that Uncharted 2 will continue to be the best looking console game after Alan Wake releases, even if reviewers say otherwise.  I'll be very interested to see what Digital Foundry has to say about Alan Wake from a technical perspective after they get some time with the game. As we know from Remedy. Geometric resolution does not determine the resolution of textures. In fact there is 50+ parts of an image which all have varying resolutions in their native states.

What he's saying is that if you render at a low resolution and scale up, you will lose detail, no matter how much AA you apply. If you have a 500x500 pixel frame, but all things you see in said frame are higher resolution (2048x2048 textures maybe, etc.), then the picture will still lose detail if you scale it up, because the scaling is applied after the frame has been rendered.

selnor said: MLAA as a premise is the same in GOW3. The devs a more than likely referring to how it's implemented. If it didnt use blending as it's tech, it wouldnt be refferred to as a modified 'morpholigical' AA. As in the dev saying its still morpholigcal means it's morphing. AKA blending.

Seriously... you shouldn't allow yourself to talk about this stuff without using Google or a dictionary first.

• Morphology means the study of shape and it has a very precise meaning in biology, linguistic and mathematics. Morphological is the corresponding adjective. MLAA takes its name from the fact that it works by finding the contour of shapes and can potentially reduce its aliasing "smartly" without touching the details inside that shape, differently from a blur filter. For example see here, and if you're in for the technical details see the linked Intel PDF paper.

• Morphing is an animation technique that creates a transition between two different shapes (thus its ethimology) and has nothing to do with MLAA.

• Blending pixel colour data at pixel scale is what all AA techniques are about.

And then, a few other lines of yours.

"Maybe because Alan Wake is the only Console game ever to have 4XMSAA it's confusing people with uber smooth edges. LOL."

Again? Here's the link to the thread of B3D that gathers data on resolution and AA for many console games. There are more than 30 games for the 360 to date on that list that employ 4xAA, mostly thanks to the eDram and excluding smaller downloadable titles. Most of them are 720p 4xAA, but of course AW might have had - I'll wait for the first-hand analysis of the game - to settle to a reduced resolution because the core of its aesthetic is in the lighting, foliage and post effects.

Support your claims, please. Or refrain from them.

"As we know from Remedy. Geometric resolution does not determine the resolution of textures. In fact there is 50+ parts of an image which all have varying resolutions in their native states."

Remedy isn't saying anything new when they talk about multiple buffers and deferred rendering. The whole point of the opaque geometry is the rendering of the textures on surfaces though. Why exactly should they render a naked, lower res geometry and then again render a higher res textured one that somehow doesn't quite cover the poly edges? The edges of textured geometry is what the pixel counters worked with.

PS:

The ironic thing is that you're the cause of your own distress here. If you had simply always loved and shown your enthusiasm for how AW looks as many did, the final visuals of the game would have most likely satisifed your subjective expectations. But since you went on a pseudo-tech tirade about only two engines discovering the use of eDram to get 720p 4xAA "for free", you're the one who is lkely to be bitten back by a spec change. Most other people will simply look at the total package and at what the engine excels at for the setting and style Remedy chose.

I might sound harsh, but I think that it's best for you first and foremost to learn to document yourself properly instead of losing to the technobabble and PR daemons.

I think it is sad that there are a million threads about Alan Wakes graphics.
i don't think there is any doubt about that the game will look great, and the resolution and whatnot does not in the slightest matter for the game itself.
it only matters if you need to compare it to other games, and i don't think that the people at Remedy had constantly in mind that they "need to beat some other game on some other platform".

Does anyone even care what this game is about? Has anyone made a thread about the Plot? What happens to Alan? Who or what is behind that darkness that possesses the people? Isn't anyone excited about that?

Has anyone even considered that this could be the games strength that surpasses other games in comparison?

I don't think Remedy deserves the treatment they receive right now, to be used as a novelty condom in a pointless e-penis fight!

WereKitten said: selnor said: MLAA as a premise is the same in GOW3. The devs a more than likely referring to how it's implemented. If it didnt use blending as it's tech, it wouldnt be refferred to as a modified 'morpholigical' AA. As in the dev saying its still morpholigcal means it's morphing. AKA blending. Seriously... you shouldn't allow yourself to talk about this stuff without using Google or a dictionary first. Morphology means the study of shape and it has a very precise meaning in biology, linguistic and mathematics. Morphological is the corresponding adjective. MLAA takes its name from the fact that it works by finding the contour of shapes and can potentially reduce its aliasing "smartly" without touching the details inside that shape, differently from a blur filter. For example see here, and if you're in for the technical details see the linked Intel PDF paper. Morphing is an animation technique that creates a transition between two different shapes (thus its ethimology) and has nothing to do with MLAA. Blending pixel colour data at pixel scale is what all AA techniques are about. And then, a few other lines of yours. "Maybe because Alan Wake is the only Console game ever to have 4XMSAA it's confusing people with uber smooth edges. LOL." Again? Here's the link to the thread of B3D that gathers data on resolution and AA for many console games. There are more than 30 games for the 360 to date on that list that employ 4xAA, mostly thanks to the eDram and excluding smaller downloadable titles. Most of them are 720p 4xAA, but of course AW might have had - I'll wait for the first-hand analysis of the game - to settle to a reduced resolution because the core of its aesthetic is in the lighting, foliage and post effects. Support your claims, please. Or refrain from them. "As we know from Remedy. Geometric resolution does not determine the resolution of textures. In fact there is 50+ parts of an image which all have varying resolutions in their native states." Remedy isn't saying anything new when they talk about multiple buffers and deferred rendering. The whole point of the opaque geometry is the rendering of the textures on surfaces though. Why exactly should they render a naked, lower res geometry and then again render a higher res textured one that somehow doesn't quite cover the poly edges? The edges of textured geometry is what the pixel counters worked with. PS: The ironic thing is that you're the cause of your own distress here. If you had simply always loved and shown your enthusiasm for how AW looks as many did, the final visuals of the game would have most likely satisifed your subjective expectations. But since you went on a pseudo-tech tirade about only two engines discovering the use of eDram to get 720p 4xAA "for free", you're the one who is lkely to be bitten back by a spec change. Most other people will simply look at the total package and at what the engine excels at for the setting and style Remedy chose. I might sound harsh, but I think that it's best for you first and foremost to learn to document yourself properly instead of losing to the technobabble and PR daemons.

Really. Professionals disagree with you. I know exactly how MLAA works because I wanted to know what it was more than 6 months ago. And was shown an article by A Reshetov from Intel Labs. The following is The purpose and the how in a nutshell:MLAA is designed to reduce aliasing artifacts in displayed images without causing any additional rays, it consists of 3 main steps.1. Find discontinuities between pixels in a given image.2.  Identify predetermined patterns. 3. Blend colours in the neighbourhood of those patterns. And be realistic. You know very well no console game till Alan Wake has done FS 4xMSAA. And no spec is biting back. All this forum has done is look for ways to disprove why AW wont beat U2 or GOW3. The review embargo lifts soon, so we will all see if I or you guys are correct.

selnor said: Really. Professionals disagree with you. I know exactly how MLAA works because I wanted to know what it was more than 6 months ago. And was shown an article by A Reshetov from Intel Labs. The following is The purpose and the how in a nutshell:MLAA is designed to reduce aliasing artifacts in displayed images without causing any additional rays, it consists of 3 main steps.1. Find discontinuities between pixels in a given image.2.  Identify predetermined patterns. 3. Blend colours in the neighbourhood of those patterns. And be realistic. You know very well no console game till Alan Wake has done FS 4xMSAA. And no spec is biting back. All this forum has done is look for ways to disprove why AW wont beat U2 or GOW3. The review embargo lifts soon, so we will all see if I or you guys are correct.

Sigh. You just quoted the paper I linked to.

I obviously read it and understood what it said and even stated in my post "Blending pixel colour data at pixel scale is what all AA techniques are about". The point is what do you blend and how much detail you preserve.

On the other hand, you mixed up morphological with morphing and you kept repeating that MLAA blurs textures, whereas the whole point of being, well, morphological is to blend edges but not the fillings.

Plus, once again: you claim that no console game before AW has done 4xMSAA. There's many sources on the contrary, I even linked to a synopsis of the results from B3D. Either show evidence that every one of those 30+ games is not doing 4xMSAA or you're just talking emptily.

And this is not about AW's overall visual quality nor even less about its overall game qualities, stop trying to turn this into "ps3 versus 360". It's me against pseudo tech talk.