How do you know for sure?

That's a standard feature of modern videocards. Not sure how far back it goes but you can't go out and buy an ATI or GeForce videocard these days that doesn't have that feature.

That's wierd, because it doens't work on GRAW and Vegas (I have a 7800GTX OC).

It may work on the new 8800 Series, but if the software doesn't allow it, the videocard can't override that.

I can only speculate, but I do believe that GRAW, SC:CT/DA, and R6 (all Ubisoft, Unreal engine variations from what I understand) couldn't force FSAA due to the engine limitation while utilizing SM 3.0.

**EDIT** - A little researched and I stand corrected. GRAW uses an-in house engine by GRIN.

I haven't played Chaos Theory in a while, but I remember first loading it up with SM 3.0 and saying "Woah, this lighting, colors, and the shadows look really cool". The icing faded quite fast and I started noticing lots of the jagged edges due to lack of AA. I remember dropping the shader model option down and all of a sudden the in-game AA options opened up (were greyed out or something before).

Now take the Source engine. IIRC DoD:S was able to have the HDR option on with AA. Again, I haven't played these games in a while (no longer on my HD, either) so my information may be off, or completely wrong. Basically what I'm saying is that I'm with you Ark. If I have to turn off some of the post eyecandy and HDR to be able to enable FSAA then so be it. I have a 7800GTX KO ACS like you, so I know it can't support both simultaneously (if SHIV even supports them simultaneously with the newer 88xxx series cards). I think some of the HDR/bloom effects are kind of overdone in same games. Oblivion was nice, though.

I think you're right about SM 3.0 being the issue. IIRC, I read that from a dev. on the GRAW forums (it's been a while though).

I also agree about some of the effects being overdone. I do like the look of Oblivion and WWII Online though, both seem to strike a pretty good balance.

enyone want to waste that 50 billion s.o.b???:nope::nope::nope::nope::nope::x:|\\

Developers don't even have to develop for Vista if they don't want too.

Btw, MS can't directly mandate the business practices of other business. They aren't the federal government. ;)

Without him, you'd have a MAC. :D

Actually, I do believe M$ can dictate if they wish to (and they do).

1st, the Graphic Card Mfgr's are making the Cards for VI$TA (a M$ Product).
2nd, To fully utilize VI$TA features, they have to build in DirectX 10 drivers (also a M$ Product).

It is because of these 2 points, M$ can dictate who creates what for VI$TA. Direct X will control the Video features so that puts M$ in a unique position to dictate what Cards can and can't do.

Now, if a company wants to create a Card for another OS, they can do what they want, just like it used to be.

All this started to really change when M$ created this "Games for Windows" push. M$ is even try to get pushy with retailers to dictate where on the shelves "Game for Windows" titles will go for maximum visibility, leaving other titles a little harder to find.

Don't take my word for it. do the research. It has been already published in PC Gaming Mags already.:know:

The only control they have is over software submitted directly to them, hence the confines set up for XBox 360 develpment. MS told game developers who wanted to develop for the XBox 360 to work within a set of guidlines so that functionality and ease of development existed. With regards to the PC, if developers want their games to function inside of the Vista environment, then they obviously have to work within the confines of that enviroment. MS isn't "forcing" anybody to do anything.

MS simply can't just control whoever they want. The only companies MS can have direct control over are the companies they own a majority of the stock in. MS can't force any of the other companies to do anything they don't want to do. That's not how business works. What MS can do, is put restrictions on the development of items that will be used on their hardware like the XBox 360. MS is by no means forcing anybody to do anything, since nobody is forcing game developers to develop for the XBox 360 in the first place.

As far as MS dictating where their items go on the shelf, that has always been there, in fact, there are other game producers that do the same thing (at least with regards to CompUSA and EB Games while I worked at both places quite a while ago). How? Easy, because they pay for the shelf space. You didn't think retailers put items on the shelf for free did you? ;)

With regards to your initial 2 points:

1. Do you think they are doing that becuase MS told them too? No. Videocard manufacturers are gearing up for DX10 because they want thier games to look better then the other guy's. MS is a moot issue to a videocard manufacturer or game developer....the only thing that matters is the bottom line and how it effects their fiscal earnings. MS provides the environment, it is up to everybody else how they work within it.

2. Videocard manufactures are designing DX10 drivers because they are required in order to utilize DX10 features down the line. Vista is the next evolution, albeit a rather crappy one, IMO (except for Office 2007...that rocks).

Videocard manufacturers don't have to develop for Vista. They have to if they want to use DX10 features...nobody is forcing them to create DX10 products. Having the best graphics card on the planet that runs the latest DX is good for their business....they are the ones getting paid when their cards sell.

MS: Hey, if you want to run DX10, you are going to need to develop in a Vista environment.

Nvidia: We don't want too.

Answer 1: MS: Ok, it's your business. <---True.
Answer 2: MS: Nope, you MUST develop for us now, even though we don't own you, don't control your board of directors, don't own a majority of your stock, don't have any employees working for you, and have no actual bearing on your bottom line. <--False

See what I'm getting at?


I'm really tired, so if the above doesn't make sense I have an excuse. I get loopy when I'm tired. lol :D

Meh not having AA won't bother me, I always turn off AA anyways, I had AA on in guild wars once but I didn't knotice any difference in graphics and it hit my frames to hard so I turned them off.

(yes I never post on these forums anymore :P)

Ark, I would almost agree with you but then that would not explain what happened to Creative Labs Audigy drivers not working in VI$TA.

If what you say is true, that M$ has no control over manufacturers, then all the end user's (us) have to do is install the Audigy drivers in VI$TA and you have sound. It would make no difference if VI$TA had the drivers pre-installed or not.

Guess what, M$ decided since Creative did not contact M$ in a timely manor, the drivers were omitted and now will not work until M$ decides they will by reaching some agreement.

One would think, if M$ worked like any other company, they should have contacted Creative, not the other way around.

Case in point, if you created a Sim and wanted to use Audigy sound drivers, do you think Creative would contact you 1st.:hmm:

I understand about the issue with Graphic Cards needing DX10 drivers if they want to utilize the best graphics in VI$TA but if I am not mistaken, it was because of the battle between the Graphic Card companies that pushed the industry standards and they were the ones that created things like AA and Shadows and Shaders, not M$.

Now all Graphic Cards Manufatures will be told what to develop by M$ where as before M$ had no control over it. No more then UBI has control over the MODs created by Subsim members.

You can keep thinking M$ has no control of any kind and that's fine, but you would still be wrong.

I for one hope the Manufatures continue to work with XP or even Linux. But if they want to work in VI$TA, they will be told what to do. That puts control in M$'s hands, not there's.

Do a little research. I do not say these things because I dislike M$, I say them because these facts have been published in national magazines like "PC Gamer" and "Games for Windows" (formaly known as "Computer Gaming World").

The creative thing does not surprise me... they have gotten really bad recently, they cannot even fix a crackling issue many are having, I was having it as well but a different motherboard fixed it.

But, to get back on subject, I normally turn it down as well, but in a game like this with wires... I would try and have it on.

You can get AA to run in anygame on PC wether it's in the game already or not. I would recommend using a program like Nview to control things that arn't controlable ingame, as it has alot more options. The blurry look that you get in games if you force AA is due to it running in super sampling AA Nview alows you to chose the non-blurry multi sampling which only AAs the edges of textures.
So I would recommend using a program like Nview for nvidia or something similar for ATI and you can use it for all your games if you want as it gives you full control of AA AF vsync ect and overrides all driver and game settings ,quite useful
Also if SHIV uses the HDR lighting like Oblivion you won't be able to use AA with it on unless you have a card that supports it like Oblivion. If it uses the HDR like source engine or SHIII which is less complex you can still use AA.

Not if it's GRAW, Vegas, and possbily the newer SC game.

FSAA, no matter what 3rd party program you use, just doesn't work. The engine used by GRIN just didn't allow it. IIRC, even when we dropped the shader-model down we couldn't get FSAA to work. That's why they added in a "smoother" option in one of the patches.