Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
Nvidia's response to TressFX?
wh.......?
It looks almost photorealistic. Have you seen a dog with a nice coat before?
The only 'unreal' thing is that in the wild a wolf would probably have a dirtier and not so well groomed coat.
I thought the wolf with the fancy effects looked worse. It didn't look real. I thought it had some kind of energy shield over its fur. I liked the way the fur moved but the overall effect was weird. I think it was the sheen from reflecting light that I was noticing.
What. Are you kidding? That's seriously fucked. Crysis 3 cannot look that good that you would need so much power (there is nothing better than TITAN right now isn't it?) That is seriously 'cked up... I see nobody talking about Crysis 3 graphics. o_o
I hate that stance, sorry but I do.
"Oh it doesn't look real", same with TressFX, same when one of the companies show off a tech demo for water or something "Oh but it doesn't look real" - So. what?! Currently we have NOTHING or something incredibly ugly and static. Water is just 2D surfaces in some games, we have NOTHING in terms of these technologies and when someone finally implements it, when someone finally does a job of improving it tenfold it's just "Oh it didn't look real" -- So graphically and technologically we can never please anyone or progress anywhere because if it doesn't look real, why not stick with an ugly 3D model with average textures because the massive step up isn't 1:1 with real-life.
What. Are you kidding? That's seriously fucked. Crysis 3 cannot look that good that you would need so much power (there is nothing better than TITAN right now isn't it?) That is seriously 'cked up... I see nobody talking about Crysis 3 graphics. o_o
APEX hair predates TressFX by over a year.Nvidia's response to TressFX?
Yes, I am crusading for this technique to be banned until such time the human brain cannot distinguish from computer generated content and the real thing. Jesus, its like some of you didn't even read my post.
Read your post? You said it was WORSE, you said "It didn't look real". No one was talking about crusading or you calling for a ban, you are just making that up but the fact that you are calling it worse looking and that it doesn't look real is a travesty and especially the not looking real point leads back to my post; so the fuck what
It has the best motion stability and temporal aliasing reduction in its performance class.Well then, what's so awesome about TXAA?
Its called an opinion. Deal with it?
I thought it had some kind of energy shield over its fur.
Yeah, if you can't actually defend your position and just talking rubbish, the "Deal with it" stance is always preferred.
Its called an opinion. Deal with it?
Will this be AMD compatible like TressFX is compatible with Nvidia cards?
Or will it be another PhysX exclusive clusterfuck?
Will this be AMD compatible like TressFX is compatible with Nvidia cards?
Or will it be another PhysX exclusive clusterfuck?
OC it and you should be good. I hope. Don't care if the shadows are on high not very high but I have to get that fur at glorious 74fps.GTX 670 am cry ;_;
OC it and you should be good. I hope. Don't care if the shadows are on high not very high but I have to get that fur at glorious 74fps.
As a side note, I just read on the official forum that the press demo was running on a PC with a GTX 680 equipped.GTX 670 am cry ;_;
Nvidia so salty they even copied AMD stuff twelve months in advance.APEX hair predates TressFX by over a year.
GTX 670 am cry ;_;
FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU.
I will force this on my AMD card.
The game is a year away at best. You could put a few bucks away each day and upgrade when the time comes, even less if you just want to upgrade your GPU.
But what if I want to upgrade to an AMD card. : (
You can add a second card for dedicated PhysX, still has a performance hit thoThese things take up too much resources. Why won't they make a Chip where effects like this are rendered on additional dedicated areas of the GPU that don't affect the overall performance. Like a DSP. I don't know much about tech stuff, I might be far off on this one.
I'm most likely going to buy an Nvidia GPU regardless of that, but yeah, I would like to see Nvidia opening this proprietary crap, for the sake of everyone in the gaming industry.Damn. That is seriously impressive. I really do wish Nvidia would be less restrictive with their tech; I love how AMD made TressFX compatible on any graphics card (though it does run notably smoother on AMD due to compute power).
Damn. That is seriously impressive. I really do wish Nvidia would be less restrictive with their tech; I love how AMD made TressFX compatible on any graphics card (though it does run notably smoother on AMD due to compute power).
GTX 670 am cry ;_;
FXAA is definitely a typo for the Witcher. Any game can use FXAA on any card. TXAA actually requires the devs to configure it.
Pretty sad after seeing what the PS4 can do. PC extremeists will pay 2x money for 1/2x the power of a console.