IYO, which is more important, Less Jaggies or Sharper Textures?

In your honest opinon, which do you think is more important for HD Gaming: Less Jaggies or Sharper/vibrnat textures?

For instance, lets put it like this. Most 360/PS3 multiplats are like this: 360 has less jaggies, but not as sharp/vibrant textures, while the PS3 version of the game has maybe more jaggies, but has more Sharp/Vibrant Textures than the 360 version. If you owned both consoles, which would be more important to you?

Umm.... Less Jaggies usually lead to sharper textures...-D3MO-

Umm.... Less Jaggies usually lead to sharper textures...-D3MO-

Actually I find too much AA can make textures look blurry, especially distant textures, but as long as shapes are still recognizable (example a distant sniper can be identified, doesn't look like a messy blend of pixels) that just doesn't matter.

Is there middle ground with both of them:( I would much rather have AA then ultra high res tectures.Pro_wrestler

Buy a top of the line pc.

[QUOTE="-D3MO-"]Umm.... Less Jaggies usually lead to sharper textures...Corvin

Actually I find too much AA can make textures look blurry, especially distant textures, but as long as shapes are still recognizable (example a distant sniper can be identified, doesn't look like a messy blend of pixels) that just doesn't matter.

Again I said usually. Also I IMO the perfect amount of AA is 8X, 4X is great as well. 16X AA is just overkill.

Also FSAA does a great job at preventing texture blur

As long as the framerate is steady I would probably take less jaggies. Mainly because I feel having a lot of jaggies in a game takes away from the point of HD resolution; that you can see further in to the distance with less distortion (this does wonders for fast racing games like Burnout where you can clearly see the road and traffic further down the street and plan your route).Corvin

That's not really the case. If you have jaggies, it's because the jaggies are caused by the square (or rectangular) pixels of your TV (or of the console's rendered resolution). It's impossible to show more detail than one pixel, so even if you get rid of the jaggies by using AA, you're not gaining any more detail. In fact, you might be losing detail.

Umm.... Less Jaggies usually lead to sharper textures...-D3MO-

Jaggies are on the vertexes of the object, how does that affect the surface?

Art Direction and level/world desing > all other aspecs of graphics.Marka1700

Well in that case pong > all

Less Jaggies.

Textures look really nice blurred too, unless they are muddy like in the PSP and PS2.

[QUOTE="-D3MO-"]Umm.... Less Jaggies usually lead to sharper textures...Marka1700

Jaggies are on the vertexes of the object, how does that affect the surface?

If the edges are jaggie the texture is distorted. We are past the days of a single plane holding the ground texture.

Less jaggies.

Upscaling a 720p game to 1080p creates enough jaggies as it is.

So long as it isn't so bad that it's distracting, I can live with it.

In your honest opinon, which do you think is more important for HD Gaming: Less Jaggies or Sharper/vibrnat textures?

For instance, lets put it like this. Most 360/PS3 multiplats are like this: 360 has less jaggies, but not as sharp/vibrant textures, while the PS3 version of the game has maybe more jaggies, but has more Sharp/Vibrant Textures than the 360 version. If you owned both consoles, which would be more important to you?

black_awpN1

not true, usually the ps3 verison has less of each....lol

[QUOTE="Corvin"]As long as the framerate is steady I would probably take less jaggies. Mainly because I feel having a lot of jaggies in a game takes away from the point of HD resolution; that you can see further in to the distance with less distortion (this does wonders for fast racing games like Burnout where you can clearly see the road and traffic further down the street and plan your route).mjarantilla

That's not really the case. If you have jaggies, it's because the jaggies are caused by the square (or rectangular) pixels of your TV (or of the console's rendered resolution). It's impossible to show more detail than one pixel, so even if you get rid of the jaggies by using AA, you're not gaining any more detail. In fact, you might be losing detail.

For really, really far off objects, maybe. However HD resolutions have certainly increased the distance we can clearly see in to the distance in a game, and too many jaggies will distort distant objects, turning them in to messly lumps of pixels. I agree that too much AA will make things more blurry. The proper amount of AA can give the illusion that the resolution is actually higher than it is.

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"]

[QUOTE="Corvin"]As long as the framerate is steady I would probably take less jaggies. Mainly because I feel having a lot of jaggies in a game takes away from the point of HD resolution; that you can see further in to the distance with less distortion (this does wonders for fast racing games like Burnout where you can clearly see the road and traffic further down the street and plan your route).Corvin

That's not really the case. If you have jaggies, it's because the jaggies are caused by the square (or rectangular) pixels of your TV (or of the console's rendered resolution). It's impossible to show more detail than one pixel, so even if you get rid of the jaggies by using AA, you're not gaining any more detail. In fact, you might be losing detail.

For really, really far off objects, maybe. However HD resolutions have certainly increased the distance we can clearly see in to the distance in a game, and too many jaggies will distort distant objects, turning them in to messly lumps of pixels. I agree that too much AA will make things more blurry. The proper amount of AA can give the illusion that the resolution is actually higher than it is.

Yes, the ILLUSION, but not the reality. Instead of squares in the distance, you'll see blobs in the distance. It's easier on the eyes, but in no way does it increase detail.

Higher res textures, however, ALWAYS increase detail, especially up close where it's most important.

[QUOTE="Corvin"][QUOTE="mjarantilla"]

[QUOTE="Corvin"]As long as the framerate is steady I would probably take less jaggies. Mainly because I feel having a lot of jaggies in a game takes away from the point of HD resolution; that you can see further in to the distance with less distortion (this does wonders for fast racing games like Burnout where you can clearly see the road and traffic further down the street and plan your route).mjarantilla

That's not really the case. If you have jaggies, it's because the jaggies are caused by the square (or rectangular) pixels of your TV (or of the console's rendered resolution). It's impossible to show more detail than one pixel, so even if you get rid of the jaggies by using AA, you're not gaining any more detail. In fact, you might be losing detail.

For really, really far off objects, maybe. However HD resolutions have certainly increased the distance we can clearly see in to the distance in a game, and too many jaggies will distort distant objects, turning them in to messly lumps of pixels. I agree that too much AA will make things more blurry. The proper amount of AA can give the illusion that the resolution is actually higher than it is.

Yes, the ILLUSION, but not the reality. Instead of squares in the distance, you'll see blobs in the distance. It's easier on the eyes, but in no way does it increase detail.

Higher res textures, however, ALWAYS increase detail, especially up close where it's most important.

Then we have to agree to disagree because I have done enough tweaking before with my video card and AA and AF settings and different resolutions, along with my 360 at different resolutions, and proper AA WILL make distant objects more clear. It removes that ambiguous jagged edge between two surfaces so you know which is which. I don't see why this is difficult to understand, its the very reason AA exists. Yes, sharper textures help. Not as much if there are lots of jaggies.