Zainstaluj Steam
zaloguj się
|
język
简体中文 (chiński uproszczony)
繁體中文 (chiński tradycyjny)
日本語 (japoński)
한국어 (koreański)
ไทย (tajski)
български (bułgarski)
Čeština (czeski)
Dansk (duński)
Deutsch (niemiecki)
English (angielski)
Español – España (hiszpański)
Español – Latinoamérica (hiszpański latynoamerykański)
Ελληνικά (grecki)
Français (francuski)
Italiano (włoski)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonezyjski)
Magyar (węgierski)
Nederlands (niderlandzki)
Norsk (norweski)
Português (portugalski – Portugalia)
Português – Brasil (portugalski brazylijski)
Română (rumuński)
Русский (rosyjski)
Suomi (fiński)
Svenska (szwedzki)
Türkçe (turecki)
Tiếng Việt (wietnamski)
Українська (ukraiński)
Zgłoś problem z tłumaczeniem
XeGTAO really impressed me. In the specific scene I was in, foliage had improved shadows, but crates and ceilings lost some of their depth.
HBAO+ is always a safe bet, but man, I’ll probably be switching between the two for a bit.
SSAO and XeGTAO have superior performance but look subjectively worse than HBAO
After testing this in several areas of the game, including interior spaces, landscapes, villages, and so on...
HBAO+ does appear to be a little bugged. Shadows on a few surfaces will disappear entirely while active. Whereas, XeGTAO is more consistent across the board -- maintaining accurate occlusion.
Coz this game is extremely heavy on horizon based light sourcing for most of its WOW moments, HBAO+ is the way to go, supposedly.
They are right. However, we shouldn't need DF to notice and confirm this. Anyone should easily see that the current HBAO+ implementation in this game is the worst or probably broken. SSAO or XeGTAO is currently the way to go. And among these two, for me, the XeGTAO method would still result in slightly better image quality in this game.
I think with that DF video, they were trying to say that SSAO is more faithful to the game's intended style/appearance, compared to XeGTAO.