48 réponses à ce sujet

[johngaltjr]

I went into my graphics card settings and forced on 16x anisotropic filtering and... wow, the difference is really significant.  DA on the PC now looks much better than Mass Effect did on the 360, whereas before I thought DA looked outdated.  Apparently for most newer graphics cards there is almost no performance hit.  I would highly recommend trying this setting (plus 4x anti-aliasing if possible) for those with graphics cards purchased in the last 2 or 3 years.

I am curious though, for the "recorded" movies like the one at the beginning of the game, why didn't Bioware apply anisotropic and AA?  Since it's a recorded movie it would look nicer on everyone's system regardless of what graphics card they have.  On starting a game for the 2nd time I noticed the textures are so blurry in those recorded movies, the actual in-game engine cutscenes look far better on my rig. 

[Skellimancer]

post screenshots.

[Luchaire]

Yeah, AF makes a big difference (I kind of thought everybody just automatically enabled max AF these days anyway). I run 16xAF plus 24xAA (with adaptive AA) and the game looks great at 1920x1080 resolution, although the game still needs some texture improvement here and there.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I might try this. DAO doesn't even stress my GPU enough to get my extra cooling fan to kick in, so presumably it can take the extra load.

[the_one_54321]

where does one locate this option, exactly? i may have already turned it on. im not certain.

[Invalidcode]

Hmm interesting tips, thanks. I have to try it.

[johngaltjr]

If you have an nvidia card just right click on the desktop and select nvidia control panel. I'm sure it's something similar for ATI.

I just turned supersampling on and... whoa another big difference... grass actually looks like grass.   But my card isn't fast enough to run AA with supersampling Gotta stick with multisampling which is nice but not as nice

The above poster who's running at 24x and 1920x1080... I envy you! Though I don't notice much of a difference above 8x anti-aliasing, but at I'm only running at 1366x768 res.

Modifié par johngaltjr, 04 décembre 2009 - 11:50 .

[StupidWiz]

How about a lil screenshots, that'd be great thank you =)

[wonko33]

rats double post, must have hit quote instead of edit

Modifié par wonko33, 04 décembre 2009 - 11:54 .

[wonko33]

wonko33 wrote...

Yeah I was surprised that if didn't impact gameplay much, i kept going back in the menu and slowing increasing the AA and it didn't slow down, usually in FPS when I do that it's a real killer on framerate. ( i have an OCed geforce 260 btw)

Maybe framerate is just not a big issue in this type a game and the difference between 30 and 60 fps is not really noticeable,

[johngaltjr]

Yeah, this game 'feels' smooth at 30fps whereas something like half life really needs 40 or 50+. I could be wrong but I think the console versions are hard capped at 30fps anyway.



Too lazy to post screenshot just google anisotropic filtering and you'll see lots of well-done comparisons of other games, the increase in quality is about the same for Dragon Age.





The cool thing is, if your PC graphics card can run DA, it an almost certainly run 16x aniso with little to no performance hit. This makes you wonder why Bioware didn't just enable it by default. It's not like anyone is playing this game with a geforce2 or something.

[Morganlafey]

Thanks mate! I have an ATI Radeon HD 4800. Might give it a go and see what happens.

[Statue]

Nvidia users can use nHancer to force all kinds of niceness in games that don't give options for them. Can make for some startling improvements.

[Sloth Of Doom]

Running an Nvidia 9600 GT with the new drivers at 1680X1050:

Standard in-game settings at max:


Forced Antialiasing to 16XQ and supersampling:


Forced Antaiasing to 16xQ, supersampling and Anisotropic at 16x:


I see a mild performance hit with the third option but can;t confirm without further testing. Does anyone notice any significant differences here?

EDIT:  Here is a direct link with all 3 pictures available in full-size

Modifié par Sloth Of Doom, 05 décembre 2009 - 12:23 .

[Morganlafey]

Well... I do notice a difference. Pic on the left is simply with the in-game eyecandy jacked up to the max, and on the right is with the forced ATI Catalyst functions (anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, yada yada...) Check out the tattoos on her face as well as the outline of the armor. Much crisper. Haven't noticed much loss in the FPS, so it's worth it in my eyes. Thanks for the tippy, mate!

[johngaltjr]

hmm looking at those screenies (at least zoomed out) it actually doesn't seem the difference is that big, but for me personally the effect is much more noticable in-game when you're moving around and such.. what aniso does is make textures that are on an oblique angle (like the ground stretching into the distance) sharper. textures that are perpendicular to the camera aren't changed much, while textures that are parallel are much sharper.


difference between multi and supersampling is on transparent edges like grass or trees... most people can enable multisampling without much performance hit, but supersampling is for those with the real nice cards, of which i'm quite jealous

Modifié par johngaltjr, 05 décembre 2009 - 12:53 .

[Sloth Of Doom]

Yeah Morgan, the facial tat is way clearer. I notice on mine that some of my facial structure is aso clearer. guess i should have went for a character close-up but I was trying to get as many texture types as I could in one pic as well as effects like fire refection.

[Morganlafey]

Sloth, I checked out your pics and you do notice a big difference between the last pic and the previous one. Check out the armor reflection on the dude next to you. If y'all wanna have even greater in-game definition, this mod is suhweet!

[Dex1701]

Morganlafey wrote...
If y'all wanna have even greater in-game definition, this mod is suhweet!

Ooooh...shiny.  Downloading now. 

[Gliese]

I'll upgrade when I get a new gfx card. I run everything at maxed in 1900-something wide but that's about what my computer can handle, it's 2 years old so I'm not complaining.

Strangely enough the greatest performance boost I got was from turning off an exe for my itune-mp3 that was running in the background.

[Sloth Of Doom]

I've been playin for a about 10 mins with forced settings and in certain cases there is a huge difference once you are wandering around. The 'omgwolvez' random encounter looked 1000 times better, even the traps look totally different.

[Landozelig]

This thread really should be stickied. I played for 1/2 hour at my normal settings then tried what the OP suggested and WOW. It looks 100x better, not that it looked bad to begin with, but wow.

[Morganlafey]

Landozelig wrote...

This thread really should be stickied. I played for 1/2 hour at my normal settings then tried what the OP suggested and WOW. It looks 100x better, not that it looked bad to begin with, but wow.

Indeed... It's like chalk and cheese! And I agree with ya, mate! Mods, sticky this post... It's excellent advice. 

[DeepGray]

johngaltjr wrote...


I am curious though, for the "recorded" movies like the one at the beginning of the game, why didn't Bioware apply anisotropic and AA?  Since it's a recorded movie it would look nicer on everyone's system regardless of what graphics card they have.  On starting a game for the 2nd time I noticed the textures are so blurry in those recorded movies, the actual in-game engine cutscenes look far better on my rig. 

Yeah, it's a shame this trick doesn't work for the many console ports that come with no AA/AF options when they desperately need it.
And I agree, the movies look much worse than in-game cutscenes. Movies in video games usually have high quality graphics while during gameplay it looks worse, but it's the opposite in DAO.