qUINT

What do you mean by "Windows 10 seems to force HDR for games, even when they or your screen doesn't support it" ? Is it possible to apply MXAO to Witcher 3 without flickering? Is there a functional preset like that somewhere?

Windows 10 appears to force rgb10a2 backbuffer in some games, no matter if your screen supports it or not. It'll just get quantized if you have a regular 8 bit screen. I noticed that because I used to store data in the backbuffer alpha channel in MXAO and ADoF, which then got borked because I assumed the alpha channel to be 8 bit, but it turned out to be 2 bit. That's why I made qUINT in the first place, having a header where I can declare shared textures to workaround this.

I don't know anything about flickering in Witcher 3 of MXAO, can you elaborate?

Regarding flickering in W3, I also had that problem a few months ago (actually since the W3 launch maybe), don't know if it's the same.
It almost seemed like the depth buffer was jittering and there were halos lagging behind the main PC.
There were other depth buffers that worked better, but there were a few objects missing.

So I put that down as a depth buffer problem.

Hey Marty there is a way to keep the AO strength but make the AO color more greyish not deep black?
Maybe there's a line that set the AO color on the shader file?

Thanks in advance!

Hi guys,

I'd like to know if the indirect illumination is now cut from the MXAO shader or only something available to Marty McFly's patreons? I've tried the MXAO in qUINT and the older version that reShade downloads for you and cant seem to find the settings for IL. thanks!

Dr.J wrote: Hi guys,

I'd like to know if the indirect illumination is now cut from the MXAO shader or only something available to Marty McFly's patreons? I've tried the MXAO in qUINT and the older version that reShade downloads for you and cant seem to find the settings for IL. thanks!

IL or RT shader is still in developement. As far as i know the plan is to keep it for pateron's for as long as it is in developement and releade it to public one's finished.

@Marty: I have downloaded the outdated version from - snip- to test a little. One thing i have noticed is that the RT shader applies to depth map as well as to foliage.
Similar to MXAO the RT shader cause a lot of noise on the alpha channels of foliage. Is this fixed in the current version? If not fixable, is it possible to have the effect only apply on 3d surfaces?

Dr.J wrote: Hi guys,

I'd like to know if the indirect illumination is now cut from the MXAO shader or only something available to Marty McFly's patreons? I've tried the MXAO in qUINT and the older version that reShade downloads for you and cant seem to find the settings for IL. thanks!

Unless you were using an ancient ReShade version, enabling IL in MXAO has always been behind a preprocessor toggle, namely MXAO_ENABLE_IL. When it's disabled, the respective UI controls are also gone. Do note that the MXAO_HQ mode doesn't have IL as of now, it's still a work in progress.

@Faustus86: The version you illegally pirated is probably one of the earlier versions, the newest ones are mostly flicker free. There distinction you draw between foliage and 3D models is not there, flat plant leaves or such are still 3D models, just shaped differently.

I don't have a strong rig to play on wich limit's my personal use for your product. No reason for shaming me.

Does RT have slider's for sharpening / blurring the effect?

I issued a one day ban for piracy.
Information and support for the RT shader can be found on my Discord for the Patrons. No support for illegally acquired versions.

Thanks Marty! Love your work, its making replaying my old games a blast !

Marty McFly wrote: I issued a one day ban for piracy.
Information and support for the RT shader can be found on my Discord for the Patrons. No support for illegally acquired versions.

Actually i wasn't asking for support. I have edited the question in so you could end on a positive note, advertise your stuf etc.
I found your shader at a time where you had it behind a 20$ paywall and i was interested in what all the fuzz is about, but as i say'd, i can't even actually use it. Also i didn't liked the result's wich looked nothing like anything you advertise on your channel.

Speaking of thing's that are illegal and promoting stuff.
You are advertising your shader with video footage that was "taken ingame" and is "just the early alpha" version of your shader and i have a few question's about this. Since you nowadays tend to bann people for speaking up to you without beeing a member of your private club, i will ask everyone else but you instead.



In this video linked in Marty's signature, there are a few thing's that seem to be off. Maybe someone can explain it to me.
First, the quality. This video existed in this form at a time where Marty's shader looked (to me) more like a flickering mess of black and orange. Has anyone achieved result's that come even close to what is depicted in the video? To me it look's like the video show's footage that is actually raytraced on an GTX graphic's card, but the description clearly say's this is ingame footage from the alpha version of the shader.

Lucas wrote: This is a short showcase of the ALPHA version of Marty McFly's aka (Pascal Gilcher) RayTraced Global Illumination shader for Reshade.

All footage was captured in-game.

To support the ongoing work on the shader and access to the ALPHA please visit:

I have watched many uploaded video's but these seem to be the only one's that have this quality. Not just the images. The camera slide's too. It almost look's like it was rendered in Blender.

Another thing i wonder about is that this "Alpha shader" seem's to know different materials. At 1:48 to 2:07 the video show's glass tables. Apparently this "alpha version" doesn't just have an astonishing quality. It even calculates realistic mirrored images on glass surfaces but no where else. I am surprised that a shader without engine access could do something like this. Has no one else (i am aware of) found the "right setting's" to do this, or is this actually false advertisement, luring people into thinking they would get these result's if they are willing to pay 20$ per month?

I have no issue with people making money. I like Marty's shader as much as everyone else. But there are also dozens of other people around who do great stuff and don't use shady method's or abuse their power to make a statement.

shady-doo dy-doo, where are you ?

@Faustus86 Try out the qUINT_SSR shader Marty makes. I hear it make some kind of Screen-Space Reflections appear in-game. Also, look at the wall on the right in the distance next to the telescope of truth. So it's not only the table.

I do not understand where the "illegal," is coming from. It's a video on youtube showcasing his RT shader. The Youtuber made some decisions on how each scene should look. Then somehow Marty is to blame? Please try to understand. As a developer, we can't control everything a user does with our work.

But, really all you did is catch a mistake. I suggest you relax. If your really upset contact that YouTuber and ask him why he made this choice.

"luring people into thinking they would get these results if they are willing to pay 20$ per month........" - Faustus86
Image results in shader are dependent on many factors. Let me list some.

Hardware, User Settings, Resolution, Love, and etc. But, sure let's say you have LowSpecGamer level of hard hardware Do you honestly expect to get the same image quality like that, "showcase?"

Just to check

BlueSkyKnight wrote: Hardware, User Settings, Resolution, Love, and etc. But, sure let's say you have LowSpecGamer level of hard hardware Do you honestly expect to get the same image quality like that, [/img]

Well. That's why i asked if anyone else was able to get result's that come even close to what is depicted.
No a modder can not control what user's make of his work, but he can control what he is marketing with and if he want's to add any correction's. As a modder you should know you own product and the quality of it. If someone post's video's that show "the real shit" and you link this and say this is your shader with no correction whatsoever, then you are associate's. These video's look way to good to be real and i don't like to be fooled. Maybe i am a bit sensitive but i think it is hypocrite to use video material for marketing wich is an obvious fake (also from what i have read in the forum's with all the flickering and such) and then come around and blame people for testing the shader from Independent sources.

I will join this breakfast club and see what i can squeeze from the newest version but the old one i have tested. Well, as i say'd. And no shader's doesn't have to look 100% the exact same on every computer. But these video's do not show the shader i have seen, not even close.

Actually i wasn't asking for support.

Yet you asked questions about it. Answering those would be support.

so you could end on a positive note

This is either satire or delusion.

Since you nowadays tend to bann people for speaking up to you without beeing a member of your private club, i will ask everyone else but you instead.

Piracy is against the rules of this forums. I have banned exactly 1 person due to that (you), crosire banned someone as well when it becamoe obvious from posted logs that they used pirated games. The decision was made in line with the other admins.

In this video linked in Marty's signature, there are a few thing's that seem to be off. Maybe someone can explain it to me.
First, the quality. This video existed in this form at a time where Marty's shader looked (to me) more like a flickering mess of black and orange.

It might have been a flickering mess of black and orange in your hands. Lucas does CG stuff professionally and is quite frankly better than I am myself at configuring my RT shader. I chose to gave a smaller YouTuber a chance. Yes, he used some other stuff as well, but all of that is freely available and also work of mine (the reflections are precisely the SSR shader BlueSkyKnight mentioned).

To me it look's like the video show's footage that is actually raytraced on an GTX graphic's card, but the description clearly say's this is ingame footage from the alpha version of the shader.

I wouldn't waste my time with an inferior solution if that was possible. In most videos, the folks are just plain incompetent at configuring the shader, so obviously I use content made by someone who maximized the potential of the shader. You don't advertise paint brushes with a painting of a three year old, do you. I thought I was being transparent when I used third party videos and not my own recordings, guess people always find a way to twist this.

Maybe i am a bit sensitive but i think it is hypocrite to use video material for marketing wich is an obvious fake

It is and never has been a fake. I can get you in touch with the author of the video, if required.

TL;DR: The video has entirely been made with shaders made by me. 95% of the visuals are the RT shader, the rest are complementing things like SSR being very subtly used - it's showcasing a ReShade preset after all, who uses just 1 shader anyway. If I want to advertise meat from a local farm, and show a steak with fries, am I cheating because the fries didn't come from the animal? I'm so done with trolls and conspiracy theorists accusing me of god knows what.

Greedy idiot ... no, i never say'd that.
I am just saying what everyone say's. That you know exactly what you are doing.
In your position i probably would have done the same. Years of free work and then such an opportunity. This doesn't make you a bad guy.

To go forward from this point i suggest you contact Lucas and ask him to add all Mod's that where used for the trailer into the description, so you can use it as advertisement. In return i will join your patreon squad and try to help with your project.

Faustus86 wrote: I am just saying what everyone say's.

Argumentum ad populum.
"If many believe so, it is so."

Faustus86 wrote: To go forward from this point i suggest you contact Lucas and ask him to add all Mod's that where used for the trailer into the description, so you can use it as advertisement. In return i will join your patreon squad and try to help with your project.

You say this as if I had anything to lose or that you are correct in any way or I'm trying to win your favor. Keep your money, keep pirating the shader, just don't continue spreading misinformation. I showed this thread to Lucas already, he hasn't replied yet, maybe he will. If you bother replying, while you're at it, try answering one of my arguments.

Marty McFly wrote: You say this as if I had anything to lose or that you are correct in any way or I'm trying to win your favor. Keep your money, keep pirating the shader, just don't continue spreading misinformation.

... you have confirmed that the video footage you are promoting your shader with do not reflect reality. Not sure what to add or where i was wrong. Again i was just trying to make peace but it seem's you are way too much into black rhetoric to see.

This conversation doesn't serve any purpose anymore.

EDIT
I have re-read your previous post. You have edited some stuff. Now i understand what you have meant with "answer my argument's". But you can not confirm what i say in one sentence und say "stop spreading misinformation" in the next. That's just incoherent. Doesn't matter. You do you.

If you are half decent at configuring the shader, you can get quite closely with just the RT shader from Marty to what the video showed. Yeah, there is some extra dressing like the SSR, but given the video directly mentions in the title that it is about "indirect illumination" and not "reflections" there is no misleading content there.
Lucas probably chose the best scenes from his recordings and that's nothing special. If you present yourself or your work you show the best sides. You come into a job interview nicely dressed and not with your dirty shirt and 17 week old jogging pants you wear at home.

Your incapability to understand the matter at hand doesn't change the fact that many of your points were plain garbage and easily disproved.
What left is you harassing the developer, annoying the other users seeking genuine help, and in the worst case misleading some. Just sail off already.

Netrve wrote: Yeah, there is some extra dressing like the SSR, but given the video directly mentions in the title that it is about "indirect illumination" and not "reflections" there is no misleading content there.

Actually that's the exact definition of misleading. To go with the steak example. McDonalds can "dress" their food as they want to but if they put a burger with frie's on the menu the customer pay's for steak with fries.
Also i was talking about the early version of the shader. How does it come that most if not all people (even the developer himself) have flickering all over when even slightly moving the camera but the video it is marketed with has completely different result's. Because most if not all people are too stupid to move slider's correctly? Seriously? I didn't wanted to go down this road in the first place but my point's not "disprove" just because you disagree or don't like what i say.

Asking Luca's doesn't change the subject but actually i am quite interested in how he pulled it off. I will give his channel another visit.