By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Motion Blur is awesome and saves you Money, stop the Hating

beeje13 on 16 November 2015

A finely tuned motion blur implementation can take the roughness from 30fps.

My favourite examples are The Order 1886 and Forza Horizon 2.

Motion blur can also be used (lightly) on 60fps titles to make them even smoother.



PS, PS2, Gameboy Advance, PS3, PSP, PS4, Xbox One

Around the Network
SvennoJ on 16 November 2015
Lawlight said:
SvennoJ said:
Motion blur doesn't add anything it only subtracts.
But yes it is necessary to hide certain motion aliasing effects, like wheels appearing to turn backwards, or repeating road textures appearing to move backwards at certain speeds. Beyond that, it only degrades the image quality. Your eyes track objects, you only notice blurring on rotating objects, not on anything you follow with your eyes.


Wrong. It's great when giving you a sense of speed.

It doesn't give me a sense of speed. I turn it off on pc, sense of speed is still the same with games running at 30fps. The only downside is when textures repeat and the road appears to move backwards. Yet blurry sides don't add anything to the sense of speed. Much better to turn it off and get a bit better fps.



Ruler on 16 November 2015
vivster said:
Motion Blur is bad and you should feel bad.

I can't understand how you can call it natural when it's the opposite. Why would I want to blur my vision?


because it is actually natural



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread

Lawlight on 16 November 2015
SvennoJ said:
Lawlight said:
SvennoJ said:
Motion blur doesn't add anything it only subtracts.
But yes it is necessary to hide certain motion aliasing effects, like wheels appearing to turn backwards, or repeating road textures appearing to move backwards at certain speeds. Beyond that, it only degrades the image quality. Your eyes track objects, you only notice blurring on rotating objects, not on anything you follow with your eyes.


Wrong. It's great when giving you a sense of speed.

It doesn't give me a sense of speed. I turn it off on pc, sense of speed is still the same with games running at 30fps. The only downside is when textures repeat and the road appears to move backwards. Yet blurry sides don't add anything to the sense of speed. Much better to turn it off and get a bit better fps.

It does to me. Running around on Aggro with it feels epic. And also, why do you think Digital Foundry liked it was kept in the Nathan Drake collection even with it running at 60fps?



Chris Hu on 16 November 2015

Don't mind it.  I like how Forza 6 did it there is only motion blur if the car goes over 250 mph.



Around the Network
vivster on 16 November 2015
Ruler said:
vivster said:
Motion Blur is bad and you should feel bad.

I can't understand how you can call it natural when it's the opposite. Why would I want to blur my vision?


because it is actually natural

It's natural when my glasses break. Motion blur in games is not comparable with the blur our eyes produce.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Zappykins on 16 November 2015

I think AA great can enhance an image, but motion blur. Meh, not so much.



 

Really not sure I see any point of Consol over PC's since Kinect, Wii and other alternative ways to play have been abandoned. 

Top 50 'most fun' game list coming soon!

 

Tell me a funny joke!
patronmacabre on 16 November 2015

Light motion blur is great. While I know this is blasphemy on the internet, I have difficulty telling the difference between a locked 30 fps with effective motion blur and 60 fps (though without motion blur, the difference is obvious). I don't play first person shooters, so I am generally not moving the camera around wildly.
Heavy motion blur (hellooooooo FF Type-0), however, gives me headaches.



Vasto on 16 November 2015

Loved the motion blur in Crysis 3.



SvennoJ on 16 November 2015
Lawlight said:
SvennoJ said:
Lawlight said:
SvennoJ said:
Motion blur doesn't add anything it only subtracts.
But yes it is necessary to hide certain motion aliasing effects, like wheels appearing to turn backwards, or repeating road textures appearing to move backwards at certain speeds. Beyond that, it only degrades the image quality. Your eyes track objects, you only notice blurring on rotating objects, not on anything you follow with your eyes.


Wrong. It's great when giving you a sense of speed.

It doesn't give me a sense of speed. I turn it off on pc, sense of speed is still the same with games running at 30fps. The only downside is when textures repeat and the road appears to move backwards. Yet blurry sides don't add anything to the sense of speed. Much better to turn it off and get a bit better fps.

It does to me. Running around on Aggro with it feels epic. And also, why do you think Digital Foundry liked it was kept in the Nathan Drake collection even with it running at 60fps?

DF likes visual effects, in the Dark souls 3 hands on they even seem to be sorry that chromatic aberration is missing. Running around on Agro with motion blur doesn't make any sense to me, it's a personal preference.
The problem is it's usually over done. It happens with cameras with long exposure times, yet the exposure time is still significantly less than 1 frame. Games often seem to smear two frames together. And even when it is kept in check, why bother, not worth the fps hit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRSIvSg84S8
I prefer no motion blur so I can make out the objects vs a blurry stream. Just like in RL you get glimpses of the actual objects when your eyes track them.