-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What's going on with Nintendo games and their lack of anti-aliasing?
- Thread starter family_guy
- Start date
Caayn
Member
Switch games generally operate at a higher resolution than 360 and PS3 games. Eating costly GPU power and bandwidth.
I genuinely don't understand why people get so worked up about AA, I actually prefer it if I can see sharp edges and the shape of the polygons, that's how you know you're playing a game. Games with AA just look a bit fuzzy and mushy to me. I have a sneaking suspicion that Nintendo feel the same way.
I am more concerned about their lack of decent texture filtering.
Well whynotboth.gif
FXAA can be good enough in GPU heavy games but the lack of even that is disappointing to say the least.
If that is the case, Nintendo would not have priortized hardware edge AA on the DS instead of texture filtering. This resulted in DS games having a softer look that I always appreciate.
For me, even most post process AA is not enough. I demand MSAA in all games (and/or good temporal AA like Uncharted 4). Don't you notice the serious shimmering in today's games when the camera moves? It hurts my eyes!
Well whynotboth.gif
FXAA can be good enough in GPU heavy games but the lack of even that is disappointing to say the least.
If that is the case, Nintendo would not have priortized hardware edge AA on the DS instead of texture filtering. This resulted in DS games having a softer look that I always appreciate.
For me, even most post process AA is not enough. I demand MSAA in all games (and/or good temporal AA like Uncharted 4). Don't you notice the serious shimmering in today's games when the camera moves? It hurts my eyes!
Militant17
Member
Really? I assume this is a serious post but i just can't tell anymore.
I think you didn't looked to good AA. Supersampling or MSAA don't look fuzzy at all, like FXAA
Backfoggen
Banned
Nintendo tech threads on here are often painful.
Absolutely. Personal preference I guess, but I really can't see what it is that looks bad about games like MK8 on the Wii U that apparently look terrible because a lack of AA.
family_guy
Member
If the Switch docked is 2 to 3 times more powerful than a Wii U, which was as powerful or more powerful than a PS3, using these new modern APIs and graphics engines everyone seems to say allows the Switch to punch above its weight, then I don't see why it wouldn't be able to.
Prithee Be Careful
Industry Professional
The argument always goes "gameplay >>> graphics", with which I somewhat agree (The Order: 1886 being a breathtaking example of getting your priorities backwards), but I'm genuinely fascinated to know what the benchmark is for Nintendo fans - I mean, if the Switch had worse graphics than the WIiU, woud they still maintain their argument?
What about if it was Wii level or GameCube level? What is the cut-off point where the visual are genuinely unacceptable? Or isn't there one?
There you go. Two generations ago for me. But even then, Talented art design always roflstoms cutting edge graphics. It's why certian games that "were" bleeding edge looks dated, and why fantasticly styled games age significantly slower, like Okami or Jet Set Radio. BOTW is going to be one of those games for sure.
Militant17
Member
I get that it's a personal preference, but it was your reasoning behind your preference that made me do a double take. It seemed overtly apologetic, as if you were making a joke at the expense of some people in this thread.
They don't look terrible. But they would look better with AA
Yeah Snake Pass, and to me it looks horrible and blurry! Give me an option to play it with no AA and 60 FPS and I'd take that any day.
Yeah this is kind of the issue. They use strong often flat colours to make what is a really cogent look that also accounts for the technical capabilities of their hardware.
Then they drop the ball in the last mile.
Snake Pass runs at a really low res on the Switch and AA isn't the reason that it isn't 60fps.
What I am questioning (and a lot others) is not about Nintendo not caring about graphics. They clearly do. I love the materials and lighting in MK8.
It is the little peculiarity like lack of any AA or texture filtering that is really annoying.
It impacts the image quality in BotW and MK8 and it is not something that is hard to fix (like awful art direction. That would be impossible to fix).
For BotW, adding FXAA/texture filtering may impact performance, but then no one stops them from implementing some kind of adaptive vsync/buffering system, or cut back on the SSAO a bit.
For MK8 which is a game running at constant 60fps, I don't think adding these would impact performance that much. Even if that is so I would trade them with some other sacrifices.
It is the little peculiarity like lack of any AA or texture filtering that is really annoying.
It impacts the image quality in BotW and MK8 and it is not something that is hard to fix (like awful art direction. That would be impossible to fix).
For BotW, adding FXAA/texture filtering may impact performance, but then no one stops them from implementing some kind of adaptive vsync/buffering system, or cut back on the SSAO a bit.
For MK8 which is a game running at constant 60fps, I don't think adding these would impact performance that much. Even if that is so I would trade them with some other sacrifices.
I mean, AA is expensive. They clearly care more about what a game looks like in motion vs screenshots. It's just a tradeoff. You can't wave a magic wand and get AA without sacrificing something else.
Lack of AA is super noticeable in screenshots, but really hard to tell (at least for me) in motion in a game like Mario Kart 8.
Lack of AA is super noticeable in screenshots, but really hard to tell (at least for me) in motion in a game like Mario Kart 8.
molnizzle
Member
You can slap some FXAA on anything for just about free.
There's no excuse to not at least have something these day.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
It just dawned on me that I haven't even seen MK8D on my TV yet.
I prefer no AA to FXAA vaseline.
Many of those first party games ran at half the framerate Mario Kart does.
Also, Zelda was clearly built for the Wii U on the archaic powerpc architecture and porting it to ARM in a small window for launch likely meant not enough time to implement AA and optimize without taking framerate hits.
It's an interesting question, and Nintendo somewhat answered it in the early talks when it was still the NX, saying that graphics have come so far, there is no meaningful debate to the average consumer between Gen 7 and Gen 8 graphics. Kinds of like HD and 4K. For many, last gen is still good enough.
On top of that, depending on who you talk with and the argument they wish to make, the switch can be compared to Nintendo's last console, to current console power, or to the handheld market. Pretty much confirms that the Switch is it's own thing and is marketed to the 'blue ocean'.
Except lack of temporal stability makes it look even worse in motion.
molnizzle
Member
It's not like Nintendo games are using super high-res textures. They already have the vaseline.
In any case, nothing is worse than shimmering pixel crawl. On PC I'll sometimes inject both SMAA and Nvidia FXAA if a game has no other options. Whatever it takes.
professor denim
Member
BotW looks fantastic
Certain Nintendo mainline games like Super Mario World 3D have experimented with a weird mixture of AA solution. I'm guessing image integrity it often kept more important which is why they try to avoid employing AA such as FXAA and TAA (the latter can produce artifacts at high speeds) and instead use some sort of custom AA solution.
FallingSputnik
Member
I own a high end gaming pc and breath of the wild iq doesnt bother me at all, Nintendo isn't about high end graphics, it's about the game above all else, and let me tell you, it's amazing. If you really care about graphics that much go play it in pc, people are emulating the game in 4k and it looks fantastic.
The usual trolls nevera miss the opportunity​ to shit on Nintendo.
LinkSlayer64
Member
They're using an advanced technique known as anti-anti-aliasing.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Did many N64 games ever actually use anti-aliasing? It was pretty much that we didn't know proper terminology at the time and said "anti-aliasing" when what we were seeing was bilinearly filtered textures.
I find it more noticeable, but it probably varies by how sharp each of our televisions are relative to the Switch screen.
AA (unless it's the horrible FXAA) costs a lot of performance, if you want to run a game at 1080p@60FPS then you will have to make cuts in the budget here and there. Take Nier Automata for example, it's a 60FPS game on the PS4 yet it doesn't feature Anti Aliasing(at least from what I've seen so far) and only runs at 900p but it targets 60FPS and looks only a bit better than a PS3 title.
Mario Kart 8DX wouldn't be able to feature rock solid 60FPS at all times on the Switch if it were to use Anti Aliasing, I am quite sure of it.
As for Zelda, well the game was developed with the WiiU in mind, while the Switch(at least after the lates patch) got the superior version of the game, its still taxing with its dynamic shadows and lighting. If the game were created for the Switch from the ground up it would probably be running at 1080p instead of 900p and would still not have Anti Aliasing though.
I don't think it's a huge problem though, I enjoyed BotW very much on the big screen and it has its moments where you just look at it in awe, much like I did with the Witcher 3 which I've played downsampled from 1440p on my 50" TV. The artistic style and the lighting is just awesome, we should apreciate what Nintendo did there, it's their first real HD-Zelda too.
If there was something that was disrupting, then it was the fact that the game has many pop ups, I sure hope they can get them in check for the next title and still keep that awesome view distance alive.
FXAA is horrible though, I'd prefer not to have it, if possible.
Mario Kart 8DX wouldn't be able to feature rock solid 60FPS at all times on the Switch if it were to use Anti Aliasing, I am quite sure of it.
As for Zelda, well the game was developed with the WiiU in mind, while the Switch(at least after the lates patch) got the superior version of the game, its still taxing with its dynamic shadows and lighting. If the game were created for the Switch from the ground up it would probably be running at 1080p instead of 900p and would still not have Anti Aliasing though.
I don't think it's a huge problem though, I enjoyed BotW very much on the big screen and it has its moments where you just look at it in awe, much like I did with the Witcher 3 which I've played downsampled from 1440p on my 50" TV. The artistic style and the lighting is just awesome, we should apreciate what Nintendo did there, it's their first real HD-Zelda too.
If there was something that was disrupting, then it was the fact that the game has many pop ups, I sure hope they can get them in check for the next title and still keep that awesome view distance alive.
FXAA is horrible though, I'd prefer not to have it, if possible.
I didn't notice much aliasing with the game either, I wonder, is it running in 720p and has a downsampled 900p source? All the screenshots I upload to twitter are 720p -but that might be a thing twitter does, should check the SD card at some point.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Regardless of whether you're docked or not, Switch screenshot button takes 720p pictures.
Not exactly - temporal supersampling (and similar algorithms) are actually fairly comparable in cost to various screen-space filters, and in their best iterations give rather impressive results.MTC100 said:
It's the main reason they've become so ubiquitous - and get used even in VR games, where AA cycles are at a real premium.
That said - the % cost at 1080 will still be higher on Switch than any other contemporary hw - but given the history of AA in Japanese-developed games in general, I don't think it's primarily a cost driven decision - I actually suspect aesthetic reasoning is still a part of it.
staticneuron
Member
Yes but of course. Except for the part that mentions the internal rendering resolution being near 4k
http://www.capcom-unity.com/gregaman/blog/2012/11/05/okami-hd-powered-by-technical-innovation-love
I noticed the Jaggies but I am forgiving because of the architecture of the switch. Again, it is a mobile SOC. I am sure considerations for heat was made when they underclocked the console so as long as it is stable, I am ok with the jaggies.