We ever going to get the graphics of this game fixed?

[Krude]

The TAA is god awful ghosting and blurry mess.

Rendering distance is bad for some things.

Lighting and shadows sometimes bug out or don't show on some maps.

SSAO can be buggy.

It's just such a damn shame that such a potentially gorgeous game looks so bad when maxed out.

[Lamp]

Have noticed this as well. Certain AA will cause this abrasive, 'jiggling' until you crank up the res. It's especially bad on some units like shielded warriors of Khorne, certain hero weapons, etc.

Think I was only getting it on 1080x1920, but on 4k it and my framerate were gone.

[Krude]

I meant effects not showing after zooming out a bit, like for example the ROR dragon princes fire effects.

but also the units yeah. I'll try out VSR and look into that mod, thanks.

[Krude]

Ah can't seem to use VSR as the resolutions in game are only up to 1920 x 1080, I'm guessing there's a way to unlock higher resolutions?

[Lamp]

Originally posted by Krude:

I meant effects not showing after zooming out a bit, like for example the ROR dragon princes fire effects.

but also the units yeah. I'll try out VSR and look into that mod, thanks.

Ah yeah, that old chestnut. Is definitely noticeable how quickly WH3 goes to LOD models. Gonna give that LOD mod a whirl, thanks Nugget.

[Krude]

oh that did it, and my god the difference... with VSR set to 2k it's night and day difference. Thank you so much!

[Zeek]

Yeah the AA is pretty bad.

A lot of people use ReShade but if you have an nvidia card you can apply more sharpness via the overlay and make it look a lot better

[Krude]

Originally posted by nugget80:

Originally posted by Krude:

oh that did it, and my god the difference... with VSR set to 2k it's night and day difference. Thank you so much!

Glad to hear it!



I think this is where the whole "WH2 looked" looked better idea came from. WH2 + MSAA does look better than WH3 + TAA High.

Maybe MSAA would be too much performance impact when WH3 is rendering alot more and wasn't included as option. Put WH2 on max setting and set MSAA to 8x. It will impact FPS more than WH3 at max setting. But it sure looks cleaner than than WH3's TAA High.

WH3 does look better than WH2 for sure, with the right settings in Nvidia/AMD control panel but at a higher impact to GPU.

I'm not so sure, It's becoming/become a trend to use TAA and honestly the fact it messes specifically with 1080p the most makes me wonder if it's easier workload wise to design a game around TAA.

Because I think compromises have been made, I tried playing with anti aliasing for a bit and it looked nothing like how I remember playing tw:w2 without AA, felt more jagged etc

I suspect devs are designing games around 2k with TAA and it's honestly an incredibly short sighted way of moving forward as 2k isn't the standard, not even close.

1080p makes up 62% of steam users resolution, 2k only makes up like 13%

If you are designing your games to look good on 2k but not on 1080p, you are aiming at the wrong audience of gamers.

when I watched some pharaoh gameplay I noticed some TAA woes, but not as bad as this at least.

Devs shouldn't push 2k. ESPECIALLY now in this economy & with this generation of gpu's being in some areas lacking.

[Mazisky]

Originally posted by Krude:

Originally posted by nugget80:

Glad to hear it!



I think this is where the whole "WH2 looked" looked better idea came from. WH2 + MSAA does look better than WH3 + TAA High.

Maybe MSAA would be too much performance impact when WH3 is rendering alot more and wasn't included as option. Put WH2 on max setting and set MSAA to 8x. It will impact FPS more than WH3 at max setting. But it sure looks cleaner than than WH3's TAA High.

WH3 does look better than WH2 for sure, with the right settings in Nvidia/AMD control panel but at a higher impact to GPU.

I'm not so sure, It's becoming/become a trend to use TAA and honestly the fact it messes specifically with 1080p the most makes me wonder if it's easier workload wise to design a game around TAA.

Because I think compromises have been made, I tried playing with anti aliasing for a bit and it looked nothing like how I remember playing tw:w2 without AA, felt more jagged etc

I suspect devs are designing games around 2k with TAA and it's honestly an incredibly short sighted way of moving forward as 2k isn't the standard, not even close.

1080p makes up 62% of steam users resolution, 2k only makes up like 13%

If you are designing your games to look good on 2k but not on 1080p, you are aiming at the wrong audience of gamers.

when I watched some pharaoh gameplay I noticed some TAA woes, but not as bad as this at least.

Devs shouldn't push 2k. ESPECIALLY now in this economy & with this generation of gpu's being in some areas lacking.

To be honest whoever plays on 1080p to this day shouldn't expect good graphics, it is like having a Fiat 500 and complaining it doesn't reach formula 1 speeds.

[Krude]

Originally posted by Mazisky:

Originally posted by Krude:

I'm not so sure, It's becoming/become a trend to use TAA and honestly the fact it messes specifically with 1080p the most makes me wonder if it's easier workload wise to design a game around TAA.

Because I think compromises have been made, I tried playing with anti aliasing for a bit and it looked nothing like how I remember playing tw:w2 without AA, felt more jagged etc

I suspect devs are designing games around 2k with TAA and it's honestly an incredibly short sighted way of moving forward as 2k isn't the standard, not even close.

1080p makes up 62% of steam users resolution, 2k only makes up like 13%

If you are designing your games to look good on 2k but not on 1080p, you are aiming at the wrong audience of gamers.

when I watched some pharaoh gameplay I noticed some TAA woes, but not as bad as this at least.

Devs shouldn't push 2k. ESPECIALLY now in this economy & with this generation of gpu's being in some areas lacking.

To be honest whoever plays on 1080p to this day shouldn't expect good graphics, it is like having a Fiat 500 and complaining it doesn't reach formula 1 speeds.

Most braindead reply I've seen all year.

We've been gaming on 1080p for how long just fine? and there ARE games today that do it perfectly fine lol.

100% you have to be a troll or projecting something.

Also that analogy is wild, for something like 1080p vs higher resolutions, where 1080 literally translates to faster speeds lol

I dunno if that's the most ironic part, or the part where in tw:w3 you use the potato mod lol

https://steamcommunity.com/id/Mazisky/myworkshopfiles/?appid=1142710&sort=score&browsefilter=myfiles&view=imagewall

here's the description of that:

"This mod is intended ONLY for those having a very old PC-Video card and struggling with campaign performances,

It sacrifices visual quality in order to desperately boost some additional FPS in the campaign.

THE GAME WILL LOOK UGLY WITH THIS MOD"

maybe get back to this conversation when you can actually talk from experience about games looking good lol.

[MrSoul]

Originally posted by Krude:

Originally posted by nugget80:

Glad to hear it!



I think this is where the whole "WH2 looked" looked better idea came from. WH2 + MSAA does look better than WH3 + TAA High.

Maybe MSAA would be too much performance impact when WH3 is rendering alot more and wasn't included as option. Put WH2 on max setting and set MSAA to 8x. It will impact FPS more than WH3 at max setting. But it sure looks cleaner than than WH3's TAA High.

WH3 does look better than WH2 for sure, with the right settings in Nvidia/AMD control panel but at a higher impact to GPU.

I'm not so sure, It's becoming/become a trend to use TAA and honestly the fact it messes specifically with 1080p the most makes me wonder if it's easier workload wise to design a game around TAA.

Because I think compromises have been made, I tried playing with anti aliasing for a bit and it looked nothing like how I remember playing tw:w2 without AA, felt more jagged etc

I suspect devs are designing games around 2k with TAA and it's honestly an incredibly short sighted way of moving forward as 2k isn't the standard, not even close.

1080p makes up 62% of steam users resolution, 2k only makes up like 13%

If you are designing your games to look good on 2k but not on 1080p, you are aiming at the wrong audience of gamers.

when I watched some pharaoh gameplay I noticed some TAA woes, but not as bad as this at least.

Devs shouldn't push 2k. ESPECIALLY now in this economy & with this generation of gpu's being in some areas lacking.

You can buy a 4k tv for as low as $400 Canadian. Can buy a 4k card for as low as $800(amd, 6900).

I’m not arguing in favour of elitism in gaming but is an argument to future proof your game engine etc as like, no diff when 1080p hit the scene; think peeps didn’t think that was elitism at first too? Cos we did. Before we all finally bought a 1080p display…

Oh and not defending TAA, does look like trash in this game so use FXAA and upscale. Prob solved. No way can run it on 2k anyways without major frame loss cos simply was not properly implemented within this game engine.

[Zeek]

Originally posted by Mazisky:

To be honest whoever plays on 1080p to this day shouldn't expect good graphics, it is like having a Fiat 500 and complaining it doesn't reach formula 1 speeds.

1080p is by far the most common resolution today and can have perfectly good graphics.....

[Krude]

Originally posted by Mr.Soul:

Originally posted by Krude:

I'm not so sure, It's becoming/become a trend to use TAA and honestly the fact it messes specifically with 1080p the most makes me wonder if it's easier workload wise to design a game around TAA.

Because I think compromises have been made, I tried playing with anti aliasing for a bit and it looked nothing like how I remember playing tw:w2 without AA, felt more jagged etc

I suspect devs are designing games around 2k with TAA and it's honestly an incredibly short sighted way of moving forward as 2k isn't the standard, not even close.

1080p makes up 62% of steam users resolution, 2k only makes up like 13%

If you are designing your games to look good on 2k but not on 1080p, you are aiming at the wrong audience of gamers.

when I watched some pharaoh gameplay I noticed some TAA woes, but not as bad as this at least.

Devs shouldn't push 2k. ESPECIALLY now in this economy & with this generation of gpu's being in some areas lacking.

You can buy a 4k tv for as low as $400 Canadian. Can buy a 4k card for as long as $800(amd, 6900).

I’m not arguing in favour of elitism in gaming but is an argument to future proof your game engine etc as like, no diff when 1080p hit the scene; think peeps didn’t thought that was elitism at first too? Cos we did. Before we all finally bought a 1080p display…

Oh and not defending TAA, does look like trash in this game so use FXAA and upscale. Prob solved. No way can run it on 2k anyways without major frame loss cos simply was not properly implemented within this game engine.

I'm playing on a 6950, maxed out graphics this game doesn't hit my refresh rate at 2k with large armies and everything cranked, if you want to play at 60 fps that's fine, I value and will always value 120/144 or in my case 165 fps over 2k/4k as that's easier on the eyes in smoothness.

Plenty of people regret 2k and 4k because it IS much more expensive, it DOES add up in costs, watercooling, more power draw, more expensive gpu (amd ones are great but aren't perfect, have more power draw, the downsides of a strong cpu such as with intel for example the insane heat hence as I said before water cooling aio.

And for what? having to replace all that in a couple years when ray tracing is replaced by path tracing?

I got a friend who has a 4090, decked out system, his system with the path tracing & path tracing portal was pulling 400 watts for his gpu, that stuff adds up in prices.

And the worst part is it's not perfect, you have to use dlss or fsr to make that stuff playable and at what cost? sometimes artifacts, sometimes ai gen does weird stuff etc

and for how many games is that even worth it?

The pursuit of 4k, decked out systems is an enthusiast thing for people who want to mess with the above and I hate to break it to you but any IP that targets specifically that is going to go bankrupt pretty damn fast, as the amount of people with that powerful a system?


make up barely above half a percent of the userbase, not the games userbase, STEAM on a whole.

even if you don't want to grab the hardware to do that stuff, what's the point of 4k for competitive gaming?


Like I'll be real, the only appeal of 4k that I can see is if you sit on a sofa playing games with an OLED that you'll replace once every year or two when burn in becomes an issue with pixel refreshing giving diminitive returns on fixing that.

Otherwise, sitting at a pc playing, 27 in 2k is a push, 25 in 1080p is perfection.

Like the whole 4k generation are just people who don't realize they got marketed into an idea that honestly they didn't need, just told they wanted it and being good walking wallets they cashed in.

UNLESS you into the whole path tracing/ray tracing stuff from a technical point of view in which case, go for it.

The idea that 4x series, and especially the older 6xxx series are "future proof" is wild in this age where AI is a thing and we about to see a ton of hardware and software evolutions.

in this bad gpu market, things like the 6xxx are king as price perf for future proofing 1080p and somewhat 2k.

but 4k? god no, that will struggle with maxed 4k gaming very soon.

Albeit unless you are a console gamer who likes 30fps kek.

[MrSoul]

Originally posted by Krude:

Originally posted by Mr.Soul:

You can buy a 4k tv for as low as $400 Canadian. Can buy a 4k card for as long as $800(amd, 6900).

I’m not arguing in favour of elitism in gaming but is an argument to future proof your game engine etc as like, no diff when 1080p hit the scene; think peeps didn’t thought that was elitism at first too? Cos we did. Before we all finally bought a 1080p display…

Oh and not defending TAA, does look like trash in this game so use FXAA and upscale. Prob solved. No way can run it on 2k anyways without major frame loss cos simply was not properly implemented within this game engine.

I'm playing on a 6950, maxed out graphics this game doesn't hit my refresh rate at 2k with large armies and everything cranked, if you want to play at 60 fps that's fine, I value and will always value 120/144 or in my case 165 fps over 2k/4k as that's easier on the eyes in smoothness.

Plenty of people regret 2k and 4k because it IS much more expensive, it DOES add up in costs, watercooling, more power draw, more expensive gpu (amd ones are great but aren't perfect, have more power draw, the downsides of a strong cpu such as with intel for example the insane heat hence as I said before water cooling aio.

And for what? having to replace all that in a couple years when ray tracing is replaced by path tracing?

I got a friend who has a 4090, decked out system, his system with the path tracing & path tracing portal was pulling 400 watts for his gpu, that stuff adds up in prices.

And the worst part is it's not perfect, you have to use dlss or fsr to make that stuff playable and at what cost? sometimes artifacts, sometimes ai gen does weird stuff etc

and for how many games is that even worth it?

The pursuit of 4k, decked out systems is an enthusiast thing for people who want to mess with the above and I hate to break it to you but any IP that targets specifically that is going to go bankrupt pretty damn fast, as the amount of people with that powerful a system?


make up barely above half a percent of the userbase, not the games userbase, STEAM on a whole.

even if you don't want to grab the hardware to do that stuff, what's the point of 4k for competitive gaming?


Like I'll be real, the only appeal of 4k that I can see is if you sit on a sofa playing games with an OLED that you'll replace once every year or two when burn in becomes an issue with pixel refreshing giving diminitive returns on fixing that.

Otherwise, sitting at a pc playing, 27 in 2k is a push, 25 in 1080p is perfection.

Like the whole 4k generation are just people who don't realize they got marketed into an idea that honestly they didn't need, just told they wanted it and being good walking wallets they cashed in.

UNLESS you into the whole path tracing/ray tracing stuff from a technical point of view in which case, go for it.

The idea that 4x series, and especially the older 6xxx series are "future proof" is wild in this age where AI is a thing and we about to see a ton of hardware and software evolutions.

in this bad gpu market, things like the 6xxx are king as price perf for future proofing 1080p and somewhat 2k.

but 4k? god no, that will struggle with maxed 4k gaming very soon.

Albeit unless you are a console gamer who likes 30fps kek.

so youre arguing against devs optimising 2k better so can hit that frame rate why exactly? Legit confused what your point is now.

Ya 60 is more than good enough for this game especially or any strategy game. And no I'm not a console gamer, havent bought one in over a decade, but nice arsehole comment when trying have a nice discussion...think we can tell who has the console kid mentality here...

[Krude]

I wasn't calling you a console gamer loool, it was towards them not you, you are way too sensitive.

And don't call me an ahole while saying it's a nice discussion, you literally are the only one being on so it's self defeating.

And I'm arguing for 1080p to be supported better, read.

[strike478]

Originally posted by Krude:

The TAA is god awful ghosting and blurry mess.
Antialiasing literally work through blurring jagged edges. Change settings use some more mild anti aliasing or if you have relatively high resolution in compare to your screen than just turn it off completely