The Future of Anti-Aliasing

Digital Foundry: The current HD console generation is maturing, and developers are looking for ever more ingenious ways of extracting better-quality visuals from the fixed hardware configurations available, while conserving as much system performance as possible.

One of the key components in a quality, polished graphical presentation is anti-aliasing - the process whereby the distortion effects generated by rendering a higher-resolution image into a lower-resolution framebuffer are diminished. The most infamous - and perhaps the most off-putting - aliasing artifacts are of course the dreaded edge "jaggies".

[Inside_out]

.
I know there are differences and to different degree's but it seems that it has more to do with design decisions and artistic style than anything else.

I mean...just look at this footage on what is suppose to be the inferior and lowly little 360...Crysis 2...

http://youtu.be/kF67XFXq_ys

They had to recreate a REAL city with many straight lines and it looks INCREDIBLE!!!

I here what they are saying but taking a image and expanding it 150% means very little to me. If people didn't even point alot of this stuff out, who would notice.

People killed Alan wake including DF, who recanted after the fact but the damage was done. Alan wake was 540p with 4xAA which was chosen because of all the atmospheric reasons and looked fantastic on the big screen...does this look bad???...lol

http://youtu.be/Hr7fuTXednc

Gears of war 3 apparently doesn't have any AA...O_o...then why does it look INCREDIBLE...

http://youtu.be/efYjoNaEA5c

M$ and lionhead were excited about this tech demo and it edge smoothing technique...Ok, I guess...

http://youtu.be/D3vf1CPaR38

I'm in the if it looks good, then leave it. Who cares what the pixel counters think.

[SkittlesLikesPopcorn]

you are completely clueless... why do you even bother writing?

Looks the same? Get new glasses. All those jaggies are immersion breaking ugly POS.

AA is awesome.

Ofc you wouldnt think that b/c u game on ancient consoles rofl.

[JsonHenry]

I wish they could "Downsampling" or something like Witcher 2's "Ubersampling". AWESOME. But a huge hit to performance.

[MysticStrummer]

I'd say AA reached a "good enough" point this gen. I don't really notice jaggies most of the time, no matter how many people claim their eyes are bleeding. I'd rather more resources were put into things like AI than to try and make AA marginally better.

[Stewie2k8]

yes he doesn't really know what he's on about but this is where you sound like a pc elitist POS

"Ofc you wouldnt think that b/c u game on ancient consoles rofl." go back fiddling yourself while playing crysis... >.>

[HardCover]

"I'd say AA reached a "good enough" point this gen."

I strongly, strongly disagree.

GTA IV, even on PC, offends my eyes at times.

And how about those Gran Turismo shadows from the cockpit view? Worst jaggies since the PSX.

Infamous was another culprit I clearly recall.

And those are just games that I strongly enjoyed, yet was constantly reminded that anti-aliasing has a long way to go for general gaming.

[DaTruth]

All I can say is that MSAA is probably better. But on my PS3 I have a choice of 2xMSAA, 4XMSAA and lower resolution or performance, or 8xMLAA(equivalent) with good console resolution(720p) and good performance!

Whatever works best for the hardware involved, but for those saying MLAA blurs textures, you obviously never played GOW3, because there is no blurring whatsoever anywhere... the game is renowned for its AA and textures in console gaming!

[Denethor_II]

@DaTruth I game on the PS3 and PC a lot, and agree that GOW3's Visual are amazing.

Personally I'm reaching the stage where I use my PC more for gaming because when you start to get used to 1080p gaming it's very noticeable, and going back, with exception of the likes of Uncharted, GOW3 and the like, is very hard.

[Angrymorgan]

Hardly any difference, but I guess it's more noticeable in motion, also I'm looking at I tiny iPhone screen : )

[MaxXAttaxX]

of the bunch.

[room414]

"Ofc you wouldnt think that b/c u game on ancient consoles rofl."

If you aren't gaming on "ancient" consoles you're missing out on a lot of the best games this generation.

I laugh at pc fangirls.

[Ravenor]

@Skittles

Generally it's easy to make inside_out look like an idiot, without resorting to lame platform insults.

I do always get a laugh out of his Crysis 2 example.

[evrfighter]

someone make a gif. btw in motion jaggies are hell on my eyes.

http://www.tweakguides.com/...

[karl]

no game today with all this new tech has immerse me like some games from the 90's

like maybe silent hill RE the first Fahrenheit
u know.. good old games that were not FPS =P

was forgetting the longest journey .. cant remember them all way to many..

[SkittlesLikesPopcorn]

I game on PC and PS3 so dont get your panties in a bunch. Im a big fan of GOW series and some other PS3 games.

Just dont spout bs for the sake of doing it... no need for that.

@Ravenor

That was one hell of a funny comment. Thanks.

[nveenio]

God of War 3 sold me on MLAA.

[starchild]

Anti-aliasing is extremely important to the image quality of our games. The following quote nearly sums up my feelings on the matter:

"Furthermore, the most realistic a computer-generated image is, the more important it is to have a near perfect anti-aliasing. When you were looking at a low-poly character five years ago, the appearance of the graphics looked rather synthetic. You didn't care about aliasing, as there were bigger graphics problems to look at.

"However, with current rendering advances, when you look at photo-realistic game content, aliasing may reveal that the image is synthetic and not real. So, in the future, as the realism of graphics continues to evolve, the importance of having high-quality anti-aliasing will become more and more important. We won't want the jaggies to destroy the illusion created by a perfectly animated and rendered character, revealing that it is, in truth, just a bunch of vertices smartly put together."

[ViserysTargaryen]

Try playing BC 2 at 1080p max and 4X AA on the PC with 60 fps, then switch to BC 2 on the PS3. It's like you're going for Bluray to DVD. The difference is there all over the place. But it's not just AA that makes the difference, it's all of the above.

[ProjectVulcan]

Their advantage over MSAA is that they are faster and cheaper. I still prefer MSAA though as a PC gamer. All the MSAA i can possibly get, it beats these post processes out.

You can still see how they mostly miss clearing up sub pixel edges, they still struggle. This is not good, because in many ways this is THE most noticeable type of aliasing, shimmering edges on wires or grass.

http://images.eurogamer.net...

http://images.eurogamer.net...

The thinnest sub pixel grass right slap bang in front of the camera, glaring aliasing as a broken stepped line as obvious as ever.

MSAA can and does fix that if you have enough whereas as you can see, neither the highest FXAA or MLAA does. For consoles these are great solutions, but for ultimate quality, MSAA wins hands down and i'll stick with it everywhere i possibly can on a PC with the performance to spare.

[zero_cool]

MLAA has a different results on playstation 3 then it dose pc because playstation 3's has entirely different architecture from other platforms.

[ProjectVulcan]

Not really. The difference is mainly because the MLAA in Sony's SDK has been customised to run on PS3's CPU and then the developers have taken it and tailored it to their individual game. It works better when it is integrated at the design stage. Whereas PC versions that currently exist are not bespoke solutions, they are one size MLAA fits all.

Most PC developers aren't creating an MLAA solution specifically for their game that'll run in an x86 environment or on a DX11 GPU. FEAR 3 on PC does have an FXAA mode though, not that its as good as the best MSAA mode. The reason PC devs haven't is because MLAA just isn't a big deal for PC games because the extra performance and more advanced hardware is there to do MSAA without the problems that result on limited, aging console hardware.

Whatever way you look at it though it doesn't matter because MLAA is still weak on sub pixel aliasing versus MSAA, regardless of what game it runs in on PS3, or 360, or PC.

[JBaby343]

Where does SSAA fit in? I've heard it is better than MSAA but uses too many resources but then I've also heard that it is old now and newer implementations of MSAA are better. It is better than MLAA? Please clarify.

I do agree with your comment that small things like wires and poles as well as foliage are the most noticeable areas of aliasing to me.

[ProjectVulcan]

Super Sampled Anti Aliasing is about as good as it gets regards quality for AA above even MSAA but as you correctly said, it uses massive resources especially at higher resolutions.

By rendering the image at a higher resolution than native and then downsampling it (shrinking with filters), you get near perfect anti aliased scenes with superb image quality. This is mostly employed by developers bullshotting their games to make then look better in stills. Basically taking a 1280 x 720 console game, rendering it at some massive res on a PC devkit @ like 5k x 3k then downsizing it back to 1280 x 720. Released as an 'in game' shot whereupon it looks fantastically smooth, far better than actual in game visuals. Bullshot.

You can do this in real time games with enough power. Lots of it. Because if you wanna run a game 1920 x 1080 with say just 4 x SSAA (2x2) that means you are actually rendering this at 3840 x 2160 with the extra filters on top.

This is of course, a massive res of over 8 million pixels a FRAME, nearly 250 million pixels a SECOND if you want 30 frames, a huge framebuffer memory size, and a whopping great chunk of bandwidth being ate up.

That might explain why SSAA is not a common method...

[JBaby343]

Thanks for clearing that up vulcan. Very good explanation. I appreciate it. Always nice to learn something new.

[Mr_Lu_Kim]

24x/32x with edge detection and morphological filtering.

:-)

as much as I can get.

[AWBrawler]

Yeah it all looks so similar to me, that I wouldn't mind it one way or another. Some people just look to hard for something to nag about

[badz149]

But my god, no matter how many times I see it, GoW3 still amazes me till this day!

[Dee_91]

i prefer the zxxaa over the tuaazz
but the xaatuv is the best of the ztsuvaa

[Zimmerman]

When I was a young kid and every game looked like garbage, my imagination was enough to keep me immersed in the game world. Hell, I got immersed in the 2d sonic games somehow.

Where has that gone? Why does "edge shimmering" matter so much to everyone all of a sudden? I understand that it's an improvement, and can see it myself, but if that's taking you out of the game you're playing it wrong imho.

[YogiBear]

Because this is the internet age where everyone either complains or has an opinion. And everyone, I mean everyone knows more about something than you.

[50Terabytespersec]

I WILL GLADLY TAKE NATIVE 1080p over this jargon anytime!!!!
Take a look at GT prologue on a Bravia 37" at 1080p and see what I mean!!
(although GOW3 does look phenomenal) hehe

[fatstarr]

my friend you love jaggies thats all i can say.
do some research b4 you post.
but yes once you game on a pc you notice things i guess.

sheesh AA and tessellation wont be known until next gen

[the_best_player]

@Inside_out

lol talking about 360s graphics
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[john2]

The future is simple. SSAA 2x2 or 4x4 (that is if the next-gen consoles can handle it) ;)

[Shanks]

"MLAA's expensive computational algorithms have hitherto made it suitable running on PlayStation 3 only, with the super-fast SPUs working in parallel to process the image in around 3-4 milliseconds. But MLAA is now being developed for Xbox 360 and PC too in the form of Jimenez MLAA"

"Jimenez MLAA runs on GPU, and there have been suggestions that the technique loses an element of quality as graphics cores handle somewhat simpler code than SPUs."

Since the PS3 version of MLAA runs on 5 SPUs in parallel it'll always be the superior one. The SPUs are total monsters when working in parallel.

[Shaman]

Parallel doesn't mean what you think it means...Developers go parallel with SPUs because of lower latency and because their rendering setup is that way.What I mean is,5 spus=20 ms of SPU time,each SPU will have to dedicate 4 ms of its time to complete the job if going parallel,it doesn't mean that suddenly you will go from 20ms to 4 ms time just because you went parallel,you will still lose 20ms of SPU time,its just that you will lose 4ms on each of those 5 SPUs and not 20ms on one.

You should have quoted the rest too..
"

"In our tests, it produces results on par (when not superior) to CPU MLAA. One of our best features is that we are very conservative with the image: we only process where we are sure there is a perceptible edge; and version 1.6 does a pretty good job searching for perceptible edges. This allows preserving the maximum sharpness while still processing all the relevant jaggies.""

[Shanks]

THANK YOU FOR STATING THE OBVIOUS!

Stop trying to sound smart, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. even if it's still 20ms, each SPU has more rendering time when they work in parallel. 20ms over 5 SPUs = 4ms for each SPU. but MLAA is not the only code that runs over 5 SPUs, talented devs can make the SPUs work in parallel most of the time with lots of different codes. such thing is called CODE EFFICIENCY.

And why would I quote the rest? they're probably referring to the PC version. the Xenos is not fast enough to match an SPU-based MLAA.

[Shaman]

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about so I should just leave you alone.But,just to simplify.In parallel it means your rendering setup will be divided across multiple SPUs doing the same thing,its better that way because there is less latency than going by dividing your rendering setup to each of SPU.

Example...

Parallel setup

SPU1
-----(5 ms of 33ms of rendering time)
SPU2
-----(5 ms of 33ms of rendering time)
SPU3
-----(5 ms of 33ms of rendering time)
etc

You can do it like that in parallel or you can do it like this

SPU1
---------------(15ms of rendering time)

Its how you choose to setup your rendering setup,it wont fasten your rendering times,you will just divide cost across multiple SPUS BUT still taking the same time to finish operation.MLAA on one SPU=20ms,MLAA across 5 SPUS=4 ms EACH,meaning 20 ms in total.

[fullmetal297]

LOL thanks for the laugh Shaman. Part of the reason why I visit this site is to see this kinda ownage. =D

[Voxelman]

the Xenos has 48 shader cores so theoretically it could be run on 40+ cores in parallel, so much for the CELL eh

parallelism isn't everything and add in the part you left off

"In our tests, it produces results on par (when not superior) to CPU MLAA. One of our best features is that we are very conservative with the image: we only process where we are sure there is a perceptible edge; and version 1.6 does a pretty good job searching for perceptible edges. This allows preserving the maximum sharpness while still processing all the relevant jaggies."

You would see that CPU MLAA isn't all that and for image quality MSAA/SSAA are still the best, unfortunately current consoles can't handle them with good image quality

[DaTruth]

"the Xenos has 48 shader cores so theoretically it could be run on 40+ cores in parallel, so much for the CELL eh"

LOL!!!!

This entire topic is being taken over by fanboys who are arguing for whatever technique is used on their system of preferred gaming!

[BeastlyRig]

mlaa sucks.. I rather a cleaner image not blurrier..

[nickjkl]

point one article that says mlaa blurs the image

thats right you cant

only rumours of people saying it blurs the image

[iamgoatman]

But it DOES blur the image, it's essentially an edge based post processing filter thats applied to an image to reduce aliasing. Although it may have an advantage by having relatively low overheads, it still has significant drawbacks like blurring textures.

It's not rumors or mere speculation, it's a FACT that it blurs the image, and you only need to find some screenshots taken using MLAA to see that. Google is your friend btw.

[nickjkl]

i said point to an article i see you have failed to provide proof

why should i look for something that doesn't exist

[Hotel_Moscow]

Damn xtreampro_REVENGE! , nickjkl was only asking for a sauce you didnt have to attack hm/her like that.

[monkey nuts]

Er have you not played god of war 3? The game uses mlaa and the image on screen is cleaner and sharper than something that is also very clean and sharp, like a knife or something similar. For instance. I also remember a digital foundry review of the process when it was first implemented in the saboteur and they likened it to x16 AA.

[BlackKnight]

Considering we have never seen a NON-AA screenshot of GoW3, how do we know if it's blurring or not?

People never seem to have a screenshot comparison, they are just talking out their ass.

[kaveti6616]

@nickjkl

Did you read this particular article by DF, where it is stated that, ""Because it's search-based and uses a large set of patterns, it's expensive but can do a fantastic job when it finds a genuine edge; blurring only that edge and nothing else producing a flawlessly anti-aliased edge. However, when it finds 'false' edges - for example, finding an edge in a noisy texture that it really shouldn't blur - it will exaggerate noise since the blur effect will change direction from frame to frame (different patterns will be matched on each frame), exaggerating temporal aliasing."

There you go.

[GrumpyVeteran]

MLAA has been on the PC for ages, lol.

But with that said, I hate MLAA so much. It kills performance and looks like absolute crap.

Crysis 2 uses Temporal AA or Post-MSAA which is another form of FSAA which just blurs everything, minus the performance impact. It still looks terrible though.

In the end, MSAA provides the best AA imo. 8x AA max for ATI cards, 16x for Nvidia(That might've changed actually, could be more now). It works well, and looks good.

EDIT:

To add, PC users have more options than just MSAA

SSAA for example... ATI can get up to 24x SSAA Edge Detect.

Unsure about Nvidia though, sorry.

[Grip]

r u Kiddin me ? in these Image No AA is better!
http://images.eurogamer.net...
http://images.eurogamer.net...
http://images.eurogamer.net...
and really FXAA Sucks!! so much blurs

[theonlylolking]

MLAA looks way better than FXAA and no AA.

@maxmill
I have a tv that is connected to my PS3 that auto blurs edges. It does not have really any lag latency added on it so I dont turn it to game mode.

[kramun]

Yes, those jaggies are far better. You should be a dev, you know your stuff.

Every game looks better with jaggies, just ask Grip because he knows what he's talking about.

If a game hasn't got jaggies that could cut out your eyes, it's not worth playing.

[bozebo]

lol. You provided links to screenshots that prove yourself wrong.

[M1chl]

Prefer MSAA in any cases. Look at games like RE5, DiRT 2/3. In this games MSAA works like a charm, even on consoles. They both look amazing, have no performance problems whatsoever. So why other developers can be like this?
---
On the other hand, I am fan of MLAA implementation in GoW 3.

[ATiElite]

As far as the PC goes.....MSAA or SSAA for the superior AA with total clarity and no quality reduction. All modern GPU's have the power to run at least 2xAA.

Consoles...who knows? as the PS3 and 360 become more PC like next gen they may acquire the power to do proper AA which would be 4xMSAA at 1920 x 1080p. this allows for a great clear picture.

FXAA and MLAA are a blurry mess at times! I suggest some people here study these videos more cause i can see the tell-tale signs of MLAA in the videos.

just look for the clear plastic looking blur patch over vertical and horizontal lines and that is MLAA at work. the technique does clear the jaggies without a huge performance hit but you loose some quality. MLAA is great for this gen consoles. FXAA is an option that Nvidia has but again you loose quality.

MSAA and SSAA eat up frames per second but are crystal clear. AMD and Nvidia offer alternative AA such as FXAA and MLAA to allow the gamer to decide the best way to play.

PC = all AA options available
Consoles Now = MLAA is the best way
Consoles Next Gen = depends on the GPU- AMD MLAA Nvidia FXAA or they may have the horsepower for MSAA

[maxmill]

dont know what blur you PC gamers are ranting about but i dont even see AA in ps3 games.

Its jaggy central, but ive heards there are tv out there that can do it for you?

[Bolts]

What? There are TVs that can do AAs for you?? Heh, that would be awesome. The new TVs are getting more PC like with their apps and stuff that I wonder if a gaming TV isn't coming soon.

[Lazy_Sunday]

These were terrible games to show a comparison on. Stylistic games that use the lack of AA to their advantage make the games appear more crisp and stylized. AA is good for realistic approaches to games, like Crysis, BFBC2 and DiRT 3--smoothing those unpleasant pixels--and that's only when the game has at least 8xAA and 16x anisotropic filtering. MLAA by comparison is crap, and a better GPU would solve jaggies in a split second.

[QuantumWake]

Hmm... FXAA-console seems to get the short end of the stick. While it does seem to get rid of the jagged edges, it blurs the quality quite considerably. The Castlevania comparison shows that FXAA does mess with the quality (the quality of the foliage in the background is really noticeable). MLAA does seem to do a better job cleaning up the jaggies but also retaining image quality.

For consoles, it seems to be a fight between performance cost vs image-quality cost. FXAA is 1ms on both consoles, the Xbox 360 version of MLAA is 2.4ms while the PS3 is 3-4ms. Devs who implement FXAA will be impressed with the performance, but the quality, not so much. The PS3 benefits more with the implementation of FXAA as you now do not have to waste rendering time on the SPUs for MLAA and just go with GPU rendering for FXAA. And now the devs would have spare SPU cycles instead of it getting filled up trying to find 3-4ms for MLAA.

PC gamers obviously get the bigger end of the stick. But imo, I think this article is more about the future of post-processing techniques rather than hardware AA. With deferred rendering becoming a more widely used on consoles, it becomes apparent that MSAA will just never cut it. The memory and bandwidth cost would simply be to high.

Anyways, cheers to all these talented programmers that develop these AA techniques! Looking forward to SIGGRAPH 2011 and getting more info on these.

[Shaman]

Thats actually how you choose to use FXAA.There is FXAA default and FXAA sharp.The sharp one won't blur the image because it won't work on sub pixel level,while default will blur it because it works on sub pixel level(vegetation,wires etc.).FXAA(sharp) is considarably better IMO,very similar to MLAA-good antialiasing of edges and no blurring of sub pixel stuff.But DF choose that one,dunno why...Here is the comparison,straight from the guy who made FXAA.

"Certainly some developers and users will have different preferences on the aliasing vs softness trade-off. For this FXAA 3.9 Quality algorithm has a tuning knob: FXAA_QUALITY__SUBPIX. The "No Contrast Reduction" images were produced by zeroing this tuning knob."

http://timothylottes.blogsp...

[QuantumWake]

After sharp settings, it's now an aliasing cost vs softness trade-off. It seems that after tweaking the sharpness, transparencies become affected as you and Timothy point out. Subpix AA is toned down compared to default FXAA which handles sub-pixels perfectly (and then at that point again we deal with the blurring cost).

So overall, MLAA seems to be a perfect choice if you want sharper image-quality & FXAA if you want less of a performance hit. But at this point, I really don't care. It's 2011 developers, it's time to stop releasing games without AA.

"Releasing a game in 2010 without AA is a completely foreign concept to me. If the technique you're using makes it impossible to use AA then you're using the wrong techniques. As simple as that. Releasing a PC game without AA options is OK only if that means you can only have it enabled[...]" - Humus

[thewolf5]

AA is for people who cannot wait for the future and spend too much time with their face a few inches from their screen/monitor. Give your eyes a little break.

[RELIGHT]

Looks very similar IMO.

[Jocosta]

And this will make me enjoy the game more?

[yewles1]

LOL!!! After AMD screwed up their MLAA implementation, you can't blame PC gamers for going back to traditional AA methods. XD

[BenderDGreat82]

Unless you've played a game utilizing high AA, then you shouldn't be commenting on here.

It's amazing, unbelievable, and no doubt, the future of gaming.

If you have a powerful enough PC, you should download the Dolphin emulator or the PS2 emulator and put on AA...games that are 8 years old will seriously make your jaw drop (Kingdom Hearts 2, I'm looking at you). Also, if you've ever played Mario Galaxy on 1080p hi def with AA all the way up, you'll weep. It's a thing of beauty and it just goes to show all the hard work these programmers have put into their opuses.

Don't get me wrong, above graphics, gameplay perceivers above all, but having a shiny sparkly in super hi def is nothing to scoff at. It makes the world you're playing in all the more special and...real.

[RioKing]

Amen

[rob6021]

Well FXAA is going to be a huge player, Uncharted 3 is actually using the tech - and saying it's 'bluring' the image is quite a bit of reaching (unless you get your magnifying glass out). This will hopefully translate to more performance out of 360 and PS3, with PS3 still having the edge with 3rd parties as MLAA is essentially free on the PS3 since developers don't use the spus very much.

And guess what MSAA blur's the image too, that's the nature of anti-aliasing. It's just done with 3D data instead of 2D.

[fullmetal297]

I can understand AA being important to PC gamers since they will be close and notice all those details, but AA is less important to someone who is playing 10 feet away from their HDTVs. Anyways, I personally don't think MLAA is better than MSAA because MLAA does nothing more than blur the details of the game. I forced MLAA for bad company 2 and while the performance did noticeably improve, the details of certain would be too blurry. The engraving of my tommy gun was completely unreadable.

[Ulf]

What a horrid waste of GPU time and framebuffer memory.

16x MSAA is NOT worth it. The joke is that, in burning that much time to AA a scene, you may have well simply rendered it at a higher resolution, and done a less expensive AA technique.

[DNAbro]

am i the only one who can't see any difference?

[zero_cool]

A lot of people never seem to do their research on playstation 3 throughly & assume that it has typical console with computer parts so most assume it operates the same but that's simply not the case because it's a open platform with a very flexible & powerful hybrid architecture & the only way to take advantage of playstation 3's peak performance is when it's running in parallel.

http://www.blachford.info/c...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

http://www.alphaworks.ibm.c...

http://cell.scei.co.jp/inde...

http://charbax.com/2006/05/...

http://www.yostuffs.com/200...

http://www.realtimerenderin...

[HappyTrigger]

Dude, we get it. I see you post this all the time. What exactly does this have to do with the article?

[zero_cool]

Because people don't realize or refuse to factor in that the playstation 3 has a very flexible hybrid architecture that can efficiently optimized code to handle very intense graphical workloads which helps free up multi platform game studios from low fidelity limitations which means playstation 3 can & has output high quality visuals equal to that of a pc game on very high settings which isn't a lie but to deny that most multi platform games perform close to the same visual quality would be a lie.

[StarWolf]

nerds.........

I cant even notice a difference without focusing on the graphics for 10 minutes...and neither do the millions of people who buy games.

[parasit3]

PC

[Shinuz]

Am i the only one here who prefer the screenshots without MLAA or FXAA (quality)?
Its seem like its making things in the distance blurry and without it it looks a lot more sharp which i actually prefer.

[n1kki6]

In super slow mo its super awesome, but realtime gameplay i really don't give a shit. Just like the xbox ps3 screen shot comparisons.

[Bolts]

AA is soooo boring, PC gaming have been it doing it so long that nobody gives a shit anymore about AA is better and what not. Now a days the buzz word is "Tessellation".

I expect full scene AA with 1080p res from the nextgen consoles or bust. The question is, can they do tessellation too?

[TheStonedSheep]

Anyone else not see the difference?

[unicronic]

Yup, most people won't notice the difference and won't care either.

When AA quality has impact on game sales and reception the gaming industry will have hit an all-time low.

[fossilfern]

Castlevania is on the PC ?

[garotasdeprograma]

look