PDA

View Full Version : Do DoF, AO and other settings do anything?


sea-
11-03-2011, 11:08 AM
I'm not sure if it's just me, but depth of field, motion blur and ambient occlusion seem completely broken. Switching them on and off yields no changes, even during cutscenes. Running the latest NVIDIA drivers and a GTX 470 on Windows 7 x64. Has anyone else noticed this? It's clear just from the preview and trailer footage that this game has more visual depth to it on the consoles than PC, at least as long as these graphics settings don't work.

Effects on:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10680698/Pictures/witn%202011-11-03%2014-05-21-41.jpg

Effects off:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10680698/Pictures/witn%202011-11-03%2014-05-41-49.jpg

Moving the camera results in no motion blur, and cutscenes are unaffected as well. AO also appears broken, as you'll notice that there is no such effect on the corners of walls, where it is most commonly seen.

D4t4v4mP
01-05-2012, 04:19 AM
I am having the exact same problem on a GTX 570 (290.53 drivers).
The video options do absolutely nothing.

Anyone got any info on how to fix this?

ryanl2299
01-05-2012, 03:19 PM
I messed with the settings a little and didn't notice anything either but really, it's like gold plating a turd anyway. It would take a lot more than a couple of cinematic effects to make this console game look good.

hairbautt
01-05-2012, 08:11 PM
I noticed that there's no anti-aliasing setting...I dunno about ya'll, but this game looks like it could be ran thru a few filters...

D4t4v4mP
01-06-2012, 01:07 AM
It's strange that there hasn't been a major discussion on this matter.

I searched the official forums and although there are others with the same issue (http://www.warinthenorth.com/forums/showthread.php?23273-Graphical-Errors) there hasn't been an official word on this.

Even this reviewer (http://www.gamebanshee.com/reviews/105587-the-lord-of-the-rings-war-in-the-north-review/page-3.html) from Gamebanshee noticed the same thing.

I agree that some visual filters wouldn't make a night and day difference, but if you offer these options in the menu, they better work.

If anyone has an account on the official forums can they post this over there too?

(Off topic: Man i hate it that WB had to publish this. They pulled the exact same ♥♥♥♥ on F.E.A.R 3. One patch that did some superficial fixes then it's over. It's hilarious that cloud support had some complications on that title and their fix was to disable it altogether.
It's a damn shame because this game is quite addictive gameplay wise if i may say so.)

ryanl2299
01-06-2012, 10:04 PM
I noticed that there's no anti-aliasing setting...I dunno about ya'll, but this game looks like it could be ran thru a few filters...

And make it look even less sharp? The game lacks definition and vibrancy. I think to make the game look any better it would have to be built on a better engine or something. I can't really say too much because many games these days look just like their console counterparts. The developers didn't put much into the PC release of this game and it shows. If the action parts of the game looked just as good as the dialog "choice" areas then there would be nothing to complain about.

D4t4v4mP
01-07-2012, 03:47 AM
And make it look even less sharp? The game lacks definition and vibrancy. I think to make the game look any better it would have to be built on a better engine or something.

The problem here is not the engine itself; i do not know what Snowblind's engine is capable of when tweaked.

The problem is that none of the video settings work.

I turned everything to minimum/off, restarted the game and everything looks exactly the same as it does with everything turned to max/on.

The game has 16 options in the video settings for Christ's sakes. Everything from texture detail to motion blur, dof, etc.

Apparently, since they are there they were supposed to do something. Maybe they are not properly hooked with the config/engine and that's why they don't work.

I don't know. What i do know is that they are useless at their current state.

The hero select screen looks low rez/jaggy. In game menus look low rez/jaggy also (weapon/item icons in the inventory look pixelated ffs).

And that is with everything turned up to max/on @ 1920 x 1200 on a 24" monitor (as if it makes any difference).

Anyway, i've started a thread on the official forums -> (here) (http://www.warinthenorth.com/forums/showthread.php?24653-PC-Steam-Video-settings-do-nothing).

If you are facing the same issue please take the time to create an acc over there and help us bring this matter to light.

I hope that someone from Snowblind sees that and answers.

Fingers crossed.

dishymars
01-13-2012, 09:36 AM
From what I can tell on my system... turning everything to minimum and it does improve the framerates somewhat. Especially in combat with a few enemies on the screen it goes from like 20-25 fps (full settings) to more like 30-35 fps... a little less sluggish.

Obviously the shadows you can tell a difference, if you disable them completely. It seems like there is more lighting and shadow effects on the characters when everything is at full, but as long as you have maximum on the textures and materials, it still looks really well done.

Also after testing out the foilage and grass setting it seems that the maximum uses more highly detailed leaves etc, not more of it. Also it seems that there may be more highly detailed meshes on the ground for maximum foilage.

It seems like the far off background and skybox is kind of like a painting which in and of itself looks pretty good. I think if you put em all to max it it puts some kind of lighting filter over it which makes it look a little better. Also there is some noticeable distortion effect around the characters with that on but I dont think you really need it.

Overall I can tell a difference though with all the settings to max.. everything does have a more quality 'drawn' look, as if everything is being rendered in higher detail.. it seems to be a combination of subtle lighting effects and shadows on the character models themselves as well as on the environments.

But I think the issue is that the textures and models are all very highly detailed and still look quite good w/o any of those subtle lighting/shadow effects...so I think thats why people are saying they don't work.

But if you put everything to max and look closely at everything and then put it all to minimum (aside from texture and material detail, leave those at max) you can notice an overall difference.

Also I suggest forcing anisotropic X 16 through your video card, it makes things look alot more detailed at a distance.

Another thing you might try that works nicely for me was using your color settings in the nvidia control panel. Turning up the vibrancy a bit and making some adjustements with those sliders made a very nice difference in the visuals.

D4t4v4mP
01-13-2012, 10:46 AM
Most of your suggestions are valid.

I must say however that i expected a more drastic difference between the medium and maximum settings (hardly noticeable for me to say the least).

There are settings however that do not work (or at least they don't do the same thing that they do in other titles that include them).

These are:


Motion Blur. Immediately noticable when playing with the camera under normal circumastances. No difference in this game.

Depth of Field. Should be immediately noticeable when zooming in with the bow/staff, leaving the zoomed in image crisp and clear whilst the peripheral objects remain blurry. Doesn't do that in this game.

Ambient Occlusion. Should make an immediate difference to the shadowing (more realistic/pronounced). Again no difference.

I don't know if this is a widespread issue but it sure present in my system (relevant specs above) and apparently in other people's systems too .