Why is motion blur even a thing that exists?

>>385611567
Because it exists in real life.

>>385611597
this. OP is a fucking tardo

>>385611597
Not an argument.

>>385611567
its a neat gimmick develoeprs use to get extra frames on a shitty optimised game

>>385611704
the human eye cant see above 24 fps so why does it matter

Screen space is there to hide bad framerate for plebs who can't tell the difference.

Per object is fantastic when done right.

>>385611567
I always check the options for film grain and this when I start up a new game so I can disable it. Also enable subtitles which are always off by default for some reason.

>>385611785
>Per object is fantastic when done right.
Is great on extremely fast enemies which would only be on the screen for 2-3 frames.

If you don't like motion blur you're a fag with bad eyesight. Your shitty opinion is discarded if you have inferior genetics.

>>385611567
Because it looks nice
/thread

File: ௵.jpg (2KB, 124x87px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 124x87px

Why is chromatic aberration a thing that exists?

>>385611597
So is having to take a big fat ogre shit.

File: 33333.png (156KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 800x450px

>>385611849
Yeah this looks great
>>385611870
Because it's a stylistic choice that doesn't obscure your vision.

>>385611704
Anon it's a post-effect.
You baitin?

>>385611767
The human eye might not be able to truly see it, but it certainly can detect changes even at 240 fps.

The game is not even good to begin with. I've played previous alhpas/betas and couldn't care less about iit now that it's coming out.

>>385611959
He worded it poorly but i think what he meant to say is that it hides the fact that the game is running on toaster framerate.

>>385611930
If it didn't look good in motion it wouldn't be used in games
/thread

>>385611794
same with subs, but what game except mass effect has film grain?

>>385611567
because when there's no motion blur it looks less realistic and more like a cartoon

File: motionblur_31pk.jpg (61KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1024x576px

>>385612057
>when things are used it's always because they are good

not at argument.

File: cinematic_experience.webm (3MB, 1280x696px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x696px

>>385611849
Here have some 10/10 'nice' cinematography.

>>385612059
Lots and lots of games, im playing Dying light right now for one which has it.

>>385612015
no, don't fall for his bait, that statement has been proven wrong a thousand times over since that argument surfaced. the human eye doesn't see in "fps" btw you fucking rocket scientists

>>385612129
>when things are used it's always because they are good
Who are you quoting?
Misquoting someone isn't an argument
>>385612134
Not a video game

>>385612232
>thinking greentext is used strictly as a quote function
how's your first month on 4chan going anon?

>>385612232
Oh you were just shitposting, got it.

File: 1497800009178.gif (2MB, 540x297px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x297px

Motion blur exists because, as one anon said, it exists in real life. The reasoning devs use it is because (allegedly) it helps prevent headaches when things are moving quickly across the screen. Racing games are a main offender of this. When it comes to screens, our eyes don't blur things the same way they would in real life, so motion blur is then added to make up for that.

>>385611567
Blurring can help to make rough camera movement that caused by low frame to look more smooth in motion, but some dev took it way too far because they think it'll make their game looked more artistic.
Motion blur wasn't so bad compared to chromatic abberation and film grain.

>>385612232
>If it didn't look good in motion it wouldn't be used in games
I.E if something is used it is because it is objectively good, not for ulterior motives or because of bad taste.

>>385611683

Yes it is, actually.

>>385612319
But you don't view your life in third person. I want to be able to look at the environments while i move without the game turning into a cataract simulator.

I have more of a tolerance for DoF for "realism" reasons but not motion blur

When does motion blur happen in real life?

>>385612514
when you get up from your couch too fast after a bottle of dew and doritos.

>>385612514
have you ever looked outside of a moving vehicle? and I'm not talking about ahead or behind you, but directly to your side

>>385612514
When you turn 360 degree and walk away in high speed.

>>385611597
Crushing loneliness and crippling depression is also something that exists in real life.

It's a great way to get better performance when you switch it off.

>>385612295
>>385612316
>>385612343
>3 replies
>not one argument
amazing how ez it is to triggered /v/ users

>>385612340
>>385612319
Motion blur is a very interesting effect to look into because different engines and devs treat it so differently
Here's a good example, in left 4 dead 1 and 2 (and most valve games) motion blur is on but only sometimes in very specific situations
Some motion blur looks awful but not because it's motion blur but because it's done poorly
The new crash game has fantastic motion blur, so does uncharted 4, it adds to the game
It's just down to the developers and if they suck

>>385612035
/thread

File: maxresdefault (6).jpg (53KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1280x720px

Wow! this Motion Blur™ looks great.

This is just like how real life looks whenever i run!

>>385612675
>Some motion blur looks awful but not because it's motion blur but because it's done poorly
The new crash game has fantastic motion blur, so does uncharted 4, it adds to the game

>doesn't explain how or why he thinks this

not an argument.

>>385612753
>you
>running
>ever

>>385612753
I'd like to run in 3rd person, what cheat are you using?

>>385612675
Not every reply needs to be structured like an argument. It may come as a shock to you but there exists in the world something called civil discussion

>>385612417
They're both shit & get disabled.
The mouse is attached to my hand, not my eyeballs, let me look at the whole damn screen.

>>385612340
Yeah chromatic abberation is shitty if you can notice it.

But film grain is the least-offensive post-effect, much less than blur/dof.
If anything it can improve the look of low-res/shit models/textures.
Cheap gimmick sure, but the other contenders are far more obnoxious.

>>385612880
Exactly my point senpai, see >>385612417

>>385612753
>h-he's fast!

>>385612897
Nice damage control

>>385611597
objects in motion, not drunk vision

>>385612589
Guess what nigger. Stop staring blankly into the distance & instead focus on a point as it passes you and you'll find you can make it out clear as day (for a few seconds).
Motion blur is forcing the camera to behave like it's your eyeball, staring out perfectly straight where the mouse is pointing.
But that's not how your eyeball behaves, and it's NOT how your eyeball looking at the screen behaves. Unless you stare dumb-founded at the very center of the screen at all times.

>>385612981
My first reply wasn't even argumentative. Nice buzzwords bucko

>>385613080
stop giving him (you)'s retard.

>Motion blue: Off
>Depth of field: Off
>Y-axis: Invert

>>385612917
I don't have much complain when film grain is used bare minimum, i just hate it when they decide to cover entire screen with it, usually found in horror games.

>Motion blur
>Bloom
>Chromatic aberration
>Depth of field
>Mouse acceleration
>Film grain
Post the absolutely worst

>>385613392
that Alien game had really bad CA.

>>385613392
Blood screen to indicate damage. Mostly cause there's never an option to disable it.

I miss huds with things like lifebars.

>>385613421
>I didn't play the game
Okay

>>385611849
Weak bait

>>385613392
From all of those effects, i can't think any good thing that can come from CA.

>>385613392
(you), dumb casual.

>i hate things that make a game look good

tell us about other faggy things in your life, op

It makes games feel "smoother". In all honesty it's not a big deal. Back when it was a novelty it was poorly implemented and people weren't used to it but nowadays outside of some extreme cases like>>385612753 it's well implemented and improves the graphics.

>>385612753
>Time to mission: 6h
>There's not much time left. Gotta go.

>>385611567
To mask how absolutely shit we are at making good graphics.

>>385613629
No, it's never improved graphics, and continues to do nothing but degrade them.
The only reason to use it is if you want to keep 'cinematic 24' palatable & you use the blur as lifesupport.

>>385613836
Motion blur can make things look better though.

If a game runs at 30 fps motion blur does make it look better.
In 60 fps games, applying blur to specific things can look good, see DMC4. Applying it to the whole picture is awful though.

>>385612393
not him, but its not.

>>385613901
feel free to backup that claim. So far anything anyone pro-blur here has said is "it makes games look better" despite every picture here proving otherswise,

File: XVPS4_3.webm (2MB, 800x374px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 800x374px

>>385613854
Well I have a counter point, here is a clip from FFXV captured off a PS4, but with motion blur from "RSMB" added to it. Compare this webm to just base PS4 footage of the same scene here without motion blur.

https://youtu.be/naCXYTrZu00?t=7s

With the motion blur added to it in the webm here it makes that clip look almost CGI like.

>>385613392
All these are shitty tricks to fool mongoloid casuals into thinking the game looks nextgen™, while everything it does is hide the edges and super low fps behind a deep and ugly cover or blur and garbage.

File: Shutter speed compare.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>>385611930
it looks blurry and bad in a screenshot but it looks better during gameplay than no motion blur.
No motion blur looks unnatural.

File: no mblur.webm (3MB, 1088x612px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1088x612px

>>385611567
you can turn the motion blur 100% off in Uncharted 4 and it looks like this

>>385614304
I want 4000 fps gaming to be a thing

>>385614473
that gameplay is sped up, you can tell by the fast camera pan at 6 secs. I played UC4 without the blur off and it was great.

>>385614473

Awesome

>>385611567
It makes games look better in motion and more accurate to human sight of moving and panning objects. Of course, though, if you only know games from their screenshots it appears to look bad.

The real problem is having shitty 30fps, cause no amount of motion blur can fix tha.

>>385614473
Much better.

>>385614080
not him, but it is.

File: wombo.png (425KB, 457x610px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 457x610px

>>385611926
Yes? You're only proving yourself wrong.

>>385614539
more like that player just plays with higher sensitivity

it's not sped up at all. And if it were it would look more fluid.

>>385613392
Motion blur, DOF and film grain are all frequently used in professional photography and filmmaking. Anyone who hates on these things is retarded.

>>385611567
So consolefags don't notice 30 fps

>>385612015
>Hurr Durr

File: BB mblur.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

Bloodborne has good motion blur

>>385615110
Why do people who browse a video game board still compare video games to films?

They aren't the same thing, utility is more important than """""artistry""""" in video games, not so for anything else.

Just stop.

>>385611767
Shitty bait nigger

>>385613392
These are all used because games still look like garbage and they need no hide stuff and make it look nicer and more cinematic. When graphics get better (primarily in terms of lighting) you'll see less overuse of these.

>>385615268
>hurrr why do people compare visual mediums to other visual mediums
Stay retarded.

>>385614304
Reminder that this is a 30fps webm.

>>385615268
So go back to pong you mong. Graphics are still one of the biggest reasons people are interested in playing (and making) a game.

>>385611567
Because it's an option for anyone who wants to play with it
you can turn it off if you dont like it

the real question, why is OP still sucking dicks?

File: 1479335581679.jpg (568KB, 5000x5000px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 5000x5000px

>>385612134

File: mblur on.webm (3MB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 960x540px

>>385614636
not really
no motion blur really makes the 30fps frame rate stand out

File: bioware face quality v slav innovation.jpg (195KB, 1200x695px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1200x695px

>>385611597
>turn slowly
>the entire world blurs and can't see shit

>>385613392
I used to turn off DOF whenever possible but then I started noticing how fucking lazy modern devs gotten with backgrounds. Shit looks PS1 tier and is an eyesore without massive blur and fog

>>385615862

30 fps makes the 30 fps stand out

>>385615941
it happens really bad if you aren't focusing on anything and are just looking forwards with your eyes

In real life, the object of focus has the least amount of motion blur and has to be moving the fastest for you to notice it. You get a lot of motion blur in your peripheral vision

>>385611704
>Extra frames
Everyone turns it off because it makes more lag while looking like ass

>>385612057
>>385611849
You can't /thread your own post, newfags

>>385611567
To make hyper-sensitive spergs like OP complain

>>385615164
funny when crysis 1 was the first game to introduce it.

>>385616239
That's where you're wrong kiddo
/thread

>>385613392
>film makers spent years trying to remove these image defects from their works
>game developers come along "huuur gotta add shitty film grain makes it cinematic like movies hollywood will take me seriously now"

>>385615238
This

>>385611567
to mask shit graphics

>>385616336
>film makers try to remove motion blur, DOF and film grain
They literally add these things you stupid cunt.

>>385612134
Fun fact: that would have looked 10x worse without the motion blur.

>>385612015
science has proven that the human eye is 24 fps, so there is no need for 60 fps games to exist.

t. Sony fan

>>385611567
Better question, why the fuck is film grain a thing? Fucking Mass Effect

>>385611567
It's so the framerate doesn't look as choppy when you move the camera around

>>385616512
>muh more cinematic

>>385611597
Most games have absolutely terrible mblur implementation though. They simulate being on drugs and alcohol, not normal vision.

>>385611567
For I can have another thing to turn off in the options

>>385611567
It hides your shitty framerate

>>385612057
It's used to control the frame rate. You God damn retards.

>>385611597
Retard

>>385611567
Effective at hiding tearing.

>>385615238
Souls games and Bloodborne put the motion effect into the weapon swings and character movements rather than full screen effect.

>>385618140
It's never a full screen effect. The point is that things that move quickly across the screen have motion blur no matter if it's characters or the background. Pause that BB video in the middle of the camera pan and you'll see the background is blurred as well.

>>385617890
vsync is
motion blur has nothing to do with image tearing

File: 1497330877646.jpg (165KB, 439x550px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 439x550px

>>385611567

>lens flare

Immersion killer.

>>385615110
But a camera in a video game isn't constrained by those effects that come from a physical camera. It's especially egregious with lens flare, which is a fucking mistake in photography but some games program it in anyway

>>385618910
Adding camera defects is the whole point of trying to make games more filmic.

If you hate it so much keep playing weeb games instead since they have an actual reason for omitting this kind of post processes

>>385611567
to hide low framerate, often used in movies and fast console games

>>385614304
>no motion blur looks unnatural
Lies you're just used to shitty games

>>385618910
People have been intentionally using those "mistakes" and imperfections pretty much since the beginning, why shouldn't they be allowed for video games?

If you're making a realistic, cinematic game what's so wrong about trying to make it look less like perfect, artificial, clean, sterile CG?

>>385619583
Because it shits up the game too much and you're not just watching the game you're playing it.

File: 1445974527128.webm (2MB, 850x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 850x480px

I kinda like motion blur, but it's no replacement for a high frame rate which is what it's almost always used as.

File: ....................................................png (56KB, 633x874px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 633x874px

>>385611597
>>385611567
>be me
>decide I want to turn my head
>the world around me fades as I barely start to move my head
>everything becomes blurry and looks like shit
>heh, atleast I still have a smooth cinematic 20 fps

>>385619752
Name one game where any effect of this kind actually impacts gameplay in any real way.

Consoles can't do V-sync so they hide the screen tearing in half every time the camera swings around 5 degrees with motion blur.

>>385613392
Low/no adjustable field of view
I can stomach all of the thing you mentioned, but low Fov always gives me the worse nausea

Motion blur exists to display temporal information between frames to the viewer, as that ADDS data for our brains to process motion vectors and velocities. Pointless to mention this shit on /v/ though where no one cares about how things actually work.

>>385620104
nah. I've never seen image tearing on a console game. It's only on PC when I configure the settings myself. Locking to 30fps (a multiple of 60Hz refresh rates common in every display) prevents image tearing

That's why some PS4 games could do a variable 45-50 FPS but instead are locked to 30 - to prevent frame pacing issues (stuttering) and image tearing. I believe in Infamous Second Son you can unlock the frame rate from 30 and it becomes slightly more fluid at the cost of seeing lots of stuttering

>>385620796
I've never been a console player but I borrowed a PS3 a few weeks ago to play Heavy Rain and noticed occasional instances of tearing. Was using a PC monitor with HDMI-DVI though so maybe that's what caused it.

>>385613392
worst is definitely depth of field
it's nothing more than a handicap in any shooter where you can turn it off. The only time it looks good is during cutscenes. I remember in Unreal Engine 3 it made the graphics of any game look like vaseline smeared shit

>>385620754
It's not like the brain has its own set of dedicated time-keeping cells firing at distinct different intervals for that or anything. And probably a dedicated related subset of neurons developed solely from playing videogames on a screen.

Just say you like/prefer Motion Blur when it's available, equally valid as someone disliking and immediately turning it off if it's optional.

>play tf2
>turn on motion blur
>half of my deathcams are blurry fucks

>>385612059
D44M has it.

>>385612059
FEAR 2

>posting still images of something that only happens when you move

>>385621230
>It's not like the brain has its own set of dedicated time-keeping cells firing at distinct different intervals for that or anything.
That's irrelevant. Displaying frame after frame with no blur, regardless of interval, isn't how our eyes are used to perceiving vision. Human vision itself has a lot of motion blur that our brain does a good job of removing from our perception of "useful visual data". That's exactly why phenomenon like chronostasis exist. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronostasis )
Since our vision is (mostly) stationary when playing games, that motion blur can be artificially added to simulate the same smoothness.

I'm not saying I prefer motion blur personally. Some games implement it well and many do it horribly. There's cheap motion blur and per-object blur, the amount of samples used for motion blur also making a difference, etc. My argument is that most here hate motion blur because games generally implement it poorly. Doom 2016 has motion blur implemented very well, and I've yet to see someone complain about it (although I think you can disable it anyway).
Ultimately, higher framerates are the better solution, but quality motion blur is a better stopgap than none.

>>385619819
You won't get motion blur even at 200fps

>>385621230
The way the brain interprets visual input is more complicated than that and it has nothing to do with video games. Or do you seriously believe you just display a series of images and that's it? Nothing else matters?

There are reasons why the fps for movies settled around where it did. Too low fps makes it more difficult to interpret something as a continuous motion and motion blur alleviates that.

I like motion blur but there's so many devs did it wrong
>>385616512
Mass Effect is a tribute for old sci-fi, so they probably going for the old 70s sci-fi movies looks. But I do admit it gave me a headache.

>>385612134
How do filmmakers literally have no idea what looks appalling. I can only imagine watching this on a big screen, I think I would be sick

>>385622158
>headache from film grain
Literally what. The film grain was pretty shit in Mass Effect though, and they didn't manage to emulate any other classic film look or effect so it's a bit out-of-place.

The Evil Within has probably the most justified and best-looking implementation I've seen so far. Alien Isolation was also OK but they dropped the ball a bit because it looks more like noise from a mobile phone camera than the rough film grain they were probably going for.

>>385614304
>this image is not constrained by the refresh rate of your monitor or the fps of the webm

Motion blur makes me nauseous as fuck

>>385622930
Yeah, there's something about film grain effect and games that just gives me a headache. It makes the screen a bit hard for me to focus on what's happening on screen, compared to a regular crystal clear screen.

This and GTA TLAD gave me a headache. I forgot if K&L 2 has a film grain but it didn't confuse me so much. Never played TEW or Alien but I included on my backlog.