StarCraft II + Anti Aliasing: ATI's Official Response

**SKYMTL** · 07-26-2010, 07:20 PM

Since this game is being released in a few hours, I thought you might want to see ATI's official response to their lack of control panel AA settings.

I'll let you draw your own conclusions but I can see where they're coming with this to a certain extent.

AMD constantly strives to deliver great gaming experiences for our customers and the upcoming launch of Starcraft II is no exception. Blizzard’s focus on incredible game play for all, means that gamers using ATI Radeon(tm) products can enjoy smooth HD gameplay and industry leading image quality with our current generation of ATI Radeon products as well as many of our past generation cards.

In discussions during the development of StarCraft II, Blizzard indicated that they would not initially include options to set levels of in-game anti-aliasing (“AA”). This meant that support for AA within StarCraft II would only be made possible by including it in the driver, an approach that could significantly impact performance......

Read More

**Pontos** · 07-26-2010, 07:35 PM

Why did Blizzard make it so AA can't be natively enabled in-game?
That is 100x more efficient than letting the driver add AA everywhere...

Also, does anyone have $60 to spare? T_T

**SKYMTL** · 07-26-2010, 07:38 PM

Blizzard historically likes to roll out these things in updates for some reason. I personally have no idea why...

**Solus Corvus** · 07-26-2010, 07:55 PM

It's a weak statement on ATI's part. But if Blizzard adds AA later it won't really matter.

I want ATI to work on the quality difference. Is there any improvement in 10.7?

**STEvil** · 07-26-2010, 08:20 PM

so...... has anyone renamed the exe and tested AA?

**SKYMTL** · 07-26-2010, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by STEvil

so...... has anyone renamed the exe and tested AA?

That wouldn't work since there is no AA option in the game itself so there is nothing to trick.

**STEvil** · 07-26-2010, 08:28 PM

rename game exe to something that supports AA, force AA in drivers... who cares about the option in the game?

**Kanabanoid** · 07-26-2010, 08:30 PM

what i want to know is when the heck are they going to release Diablo III : (

**grasskicker509** · 07-26-2010, 08:41 PM

Originally Posted by Kanabanoid

what i want to know is when the heck are they going to release Diablo III : (

+1

**Loque** · 07-26-2010, 08:46 PM

lol, zillions of cash and forgot to include AA ?

**Newblar** · 07-26-2010, 10:25 PM

Originally Posted by Loque

lol, zillions of cash and forgot to include AA ?

and they still cant fix the damn maxed shadow problems in wow
-.-

**Dahmer** · 07-26-2010, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by Kanabanoid

what i want to know is when the heck are they going to release Diablo III : (

+2

**zanzabar** · 07-26-2010, 10:35 PM

Originally Posted by STEvil

so...... has anyone renamed the exe and tested AA?

that normally only works on the same engine, i dont get why u would want AA on that game though it wont effect game play

**~~Shadov~~** · 07-26-2010, 11:21 PM

If Blizzard dosent see AA as a needed option for the game then I guess there is nothing to discuss here.

Personally im not a fan of forced by drivers options, since that tends to have a lot of unexpected visual problems and glitches.

**saaya** · 07-26-2010, 11:47 PM

guys, we are talking about blizzard here...
they have always had the WORST engine at the time of release for a new game, and focus on gameplay only...
what did you expect?

i mean jesus christ, wow mostly looks like a dx7 game...

**RejZoR** · 07-27-2010, 12:47 AM

I don't understand ANY game that has no AA support in year 2010. FSAA was something casual back in lets say 2005 and having jaggies you can cut yourself on in 2010 is just a huge leap back. What good is all this awesome shading and effects if you still see those damn jaggies.

**eric66** · 07-27-2010, 01:05 AM

what kinda embesile doesn't include in game aa in 2010 ?

**570091D** · 07-27-2010, 01:11 AM

this isn't crysis guys.... the game was made to run on the most computers possible. just like WOW. you can't sell a billion copies of a game if there are only 100 computers out there capable of playing it.

**Frontl1ne** · 07-27-2010, 01:11 AM

You don't see the SC2 guys talking 'cause they're all busy playing and not worrying about jaggies that no one will notice overall.

:p

**RejZoR** · 07-27-2010, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by 570091D

this isn't crysis guys.... the game was made to run on the most computers possible. just like WOW. you can't sell a billion copies of a game if there are only 100 computers out there capable of playing it.

No one is forcing you to use AA, especially if you don't have hardware that is fast enough. But if you don't have a choice of AA and you're running high end card or even a CF-X or SLi, then that is pretty lame. Because there is plenty of power for AA.

**eric66** · 07-27-2010, 02:20 AM

Originally Posted by 570091D

this isn't crysis guys.... the game was made to run on the most computers possible. just like WOW. you can't sell a billion copies of a game if there are only 100 computers out there capable of playing it.

what kinda connection is there between crysis and aa ? aa is common thing in pc industry since i don't know 2000 or something

plus nobody forces you to use it every primitive game has an option to disable/enable it

**lizardmech** · 07-27-2010, 02:36 AM

It's just MW2 all over again, region locked muiltiplayer, game split into parts, no lan and no AA. As long as it's not totally unplayable Activision's marketing will make it sell regardless of the questionable things they did.

**ExodusC** · 07-27-2010, 02:52 AM

Edit: On topic, I love AA in my games. I agree that AA is a feature almost all games have, and every game should have. I'll try StarCraft 2 at a friends or something. I don't think I can justify paying $240 to ActiBlizzard for a game with no LAN play and no AA, as well as ActiBlizzard owning any maps I could make with the map editor. Additionally, the rumors of Battle.net having pay-to-play features in the future is just icing on the cake.

Originally Posted by lizardmech

It's just MW2 all over again, region locked muiltiplayer, game split into parts, no lan and no AA. As long as it's not totally unplayable Activision's marketing will make it sell regardless of the questionable things they did.

It's so sad, but it's true.

When you have a man like Robert Kotick, you know he'll disregard fun and playability in favor of sales every single time. It's just so sad that with enough marketing, he can sell garbage (not saying SC2 is necessarily garbage) and turn a profit.

It's not consoles killing the PC gaming, it's not DRM killing the gaming industry, it's Bobby Kotick and his repackaged garbage and "culture of fear" killing innovation, and therefore killing gaming as a whole.

**Sn0wm@n** · 07-27-2010, 03:03 AM

Originally Posted by 570091D

this isn't crysis guys.... the game was made to run on the most computers possible. just like WOW. you can't sell a billion copies of a game if there are only 100 computers out there capable of playing it.

exactly .. i dont see why the fuss is about it .... starcraft II was made only because starcraft I had a huge following .... and wow does too .... blizzard is in a business of pleasing its bank account ... not nerds ....