JaseMath
Member
I have never seen a video of TF2 before - looks awesome. That's how you do motion blur right.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Motion blur: are you a fan?
- Thread starter MrOogieBoogie
- Start date
I have never seen a video of TF2 before - looks awesome. That's how you do motion blur right.
Resistance 3's motion blur is pretty similar to that. It's all calculated based on speed and how close or far something is. It looks great.
Cow Mengde
Banned
If I get no frame rate drops, then I leave it on. If it drops my frame rate, fuck it.
Metroid-Squadron
Banned
Even at 60 fps motion blur looks great, so no.
Totally agree. It bothers me so many people think it's great when it's usually a mask for poor frame rate. It's a degradation in image quality.
Metalmurphy
Member
Only motion blur I like is per object motion blur. Blurring the whole screen when moving the camera makes no sense.
Done poorly: Witcher 2.
Not in TF2 atleast
Ciastek3214
Junior Member
Not really, but I guess that is subjective.
I've been gaming for close on thirty years and I've never seen motion blur contribute anything to the gaming experience. It eats computing resources, makes it harder to see what's going on, and is often just a terribble cop-out for a game already struggling with bad image quality. At least most PC games that use it also lets you turn it off. Console gamers it seems are not as fortunate.
Cryengine 3 has great object motion blur and best DOF I have seen. I hated object motion blur in UC2 but DOF was awesome. GOW III is also superb, it made huge changes with better post processing in comparison with demo.
Halo Reach had iffy motion blur, object based blur was only present when moving. Weird...
Halo Reach had iffy motion blur, object based blur was only present when moving. Weird...
Motion blur at 60fps is completely useless unless you want your image to be blurred.
I all cases I personally would prefer a sharper image.
SF4 disagrees with you.
SirButterstick
Banned
I turn it off. It's the only thing in PC FPS's that makes me feel nauseous.
The Darkness 2 was the worst. Insanely low FOV coupled with strong motion blur. I could only play it in 15-20 minute intervals before I had to take a break.
The Darkness 2 was the worst. Insanely low FOV coupled with strong motion blur. I could only play it in 15-20 minute intervals before I had to take a break.
I don't know why people keep saying this. Motion blur is almost never strong enough to really reduce clarity past the point where it makes gameplay harder and it simulates what your eyes actually do. 60fps with motion blur looks insanely smooth and is the closest to portraying what the human eye would actually see.
Battlefield 3 disagrees with you.
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
Motion blur makes me sick. I have to have an option to turn it off. If there isn't an option, the game is utterly unplayable for me.
If anyone has a 1080p/60fps of BF3 or smooth 1080p/DX11 Crysis 2 that I can download and will run on a PS3 I would be eternally grateful. My TV my only 1080p screen.
MultiCore
Member
We might be able to get you 1080p/24 or 1080p/30, but you won't be able to direct the action. Are you still interested? (Y/N)
Edit: You can always hook your PC up to your TV!
30 would be totally fine. I just want some HQ videos of them since I only have seen the the PC versions in sub-optimal conditions and lower resolutions.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
I like it. Motion blur was the big reason Crysis 1 even played decently on <30 fps.
Awesome, thanks!
I would do this if my computer wasn't a 4 year old Macbook.
Shai-Tan
Banned
To me our eyes are our lens not a video camera which has a fixed lens with a slow focus mechanism so any tech that tries to emulate a current video tech or ~24fps movie is lame imo.
The experience of full screen blur should be a lot less with small movements even if they are fast as you wouldn't see much blur at all especially if the plane of focus is the same. The latency for the blur to end should also be shorter and not kick in at such low velocity.
For per object motion blur it isn't enough for an object to have velocity to blur the crap out of it. A video camera doesn't even do that much blur as some of these games even with a (relatively) slow shutter. And if the object can be tracked smoothly as it moves it shouldn't have a massive blur unless it moves very fast like a wheel spinning or turret shaking. I don't mind it so much though when it's subtle like in TF2. Valve has good taste unlike Crytek.
LCD monitors have very poor motion resolution in the first place so for all of us that are using an LCD panel in our computer or television there isn't anything pristine to see anyway which is where the fake blur is nice as the blur from poor motion resolution just makes things hard to focus on or lacking in detail.
The experience of full screen blur should be a lot less with small movements even if they are fast as you wouldn't see much blur at all especially if the plane of focus is the same. The latency for the blur to end should also be shorter and not kick in at such low velocity.
For per object motion blur it isn't enough for an object to have velocity to blur the crap out of it. A video camera doesn't even do that much blur as some of these games even with a (relatively) slow shutter. And if the object can be tracked smoothly as it moves it shouldn't have a massive blur unless it moves very fast like a wheel spinning or turret shaking. I don't mind it so much though when it's subtle like in TF2. Valve has good taste unlike Crytek.
LCD monitors have very poor motion resolution in the first place so for all of us that are using an LCD panel in our computer or television there isn't anything pristine to see anyway which is where the fake blur is nice as the blur from poor motion resolution just makes things hard to focus on or lacking in detail.
It's funny, I cannot stand LCD motion blur but properly implemented motion blur in games looks great to me. I have no idea why but I swear my mind processes them completely differently.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I used to think it was annoying, but then I discovered Bloom and feel almost nothing could ever seem horrible by comparison.
Betta Lines
Member
Best motion blur = Valve games since Episode... One? I think so yes. It's very subtle. I like that.
Worst motion blur off the top of my head = Enslaved.
Worst motion blur off the top of my head = Enslaved.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Unreal Engine and MT Framework have by far the worst implementations I have seen.
I still think GOW3 has the best implementation of motion blur in any game to date.
MT Framework? Hell no, the blur looks awesome in games like RE5. Lost Planet was one of the first games to deliver great per-object motion blur.
It does NOT look good in Unreal Engine, however.
What's wrong with this implementation? It's fairly artifact free, it looks great in action, and it isn't overdone.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
MT Framework? Hell no, the blur looks awesome in games like RE5. Lost Planet was one of the first games to deliver great per-object motion blur.
It does NOT look good in Unreal Engine, however.
What's wrong with this implementation? It's fairly artifact free, it looks great in action, and it isn't overdone.
Agreed. I've been impressed with MT Framework's blur since Lost Planet. DMC4 was great, and RE5 looked good, too.
I can't remember much about any UE3 games, but Gears 3 presumably had motion blur and I don't remember disliking it (the blur).
Angry Fork
Member
It's okay depending on how heavy it is.
The worst blurry shit in games is artificial depth of field. I can't stand this shit. It's all over Infamous 1/2 and you can't see shit in the background except muddy blur. I hate that I don't understand it. When you fly up in a helicopter in GTA4 you're able to see everything clearly, imagine if GTA4 decided to only have a clear picture in one small area and everywhere else is blurry. It's ridiculous.
The worst blurry shit in games is artificial depth of field. I can't stand this shit. It's all over Infamous 1/2 and you can't see shit in the background except muddy blur. I hate that I don't understand it. When you fly up in a helicopter in GTA4 you're able to see everything clearly, imagine if GTA4 decided to only have a clear picture in one small area and everywhere else is blurry. It's ridiculous.
It's used to clean up backgrounds that would otherwise be pixelated and full of pop-in. Using a bit of a distance blur hides some of those issues without covering up the world entirely. I actually thin it looks great too, when used properly.
I disagree. Object motion blur looks natural. When you wave your hand in front of your face at a high speed it blurs together.
Furthermore, CG and film both make heavy use of the technique already so applying it in games produces a more realistic image (or at least one that more closely resembles film). It also helps with games running at lower framerates.
ii Stryker
Banned
yes, if done properly it can give the player a great sense of speed.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
MT Framework? Hell no, the blur looks awesome in games like RE5. Lost Planet was one of the first games to deliver great per-object motion blur.
It does NOT look good in Unreal Engine, however.
What's wrong with this implementation? It's fairly artifact free, it looks great in action, and it isn't overdone.
Try using an actual screenshot rather than a pr one. Preferably from the two on two fight. It looks fucking horrendous.
Similar threads
- Poll