4 ms·
More importantly, why the heck does a city-builder game need motion blur? It's usually a pretty obnoxious effect even in action games, the first thing to turn
by bluescrn 3y ago
More importantly, why the heck does a city-builder game need motion blur?
It's usually a pretty obnoxious effect even in action games, the first thing to turn off if the option exists...
- scotty79 3y agoI don't really get it. Games without motion blur (esp FPP) look so choppy and nasty for me. Event at 4k, 120fps/hz. Motion blur looks like a movie. Without it it's just a slideshow no matter how quick.
- bluescrn 3y agoReal life doesn't look like a movie. Fast action doesn't turn into a shaky smeary mess, and there's no '24fps camera panning' judder as you look around
- scotty79 3y agoIn real life your eyes do the blurring on fast moving objects. Real life is nothing like a game without motion blur. Swipe you hand fast in front of your face fast. Do you really see it sharply all that time through the movement? Or just the beginning and the end? At 24fps motion blur in games or 3d movies is bad. But at 120fps or more motion will never look well without it.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 3y agoI do not understand motion blur. I am paying top dollar for these pixels, let me see them all. That it is a negative performance impact makes my decision all the easier.
- iopq 3y agoApparently it makes the game feel "faster" in racing games because it adds to the movement illusion. I don't know why you would use it in other games, though
- bluescrn 3y agoIt was used to try and make 30fps console racing games look less juddery, but didn't really work. Racing games are a genre that really does need 60fps+ to feel good. Even in the 90s, the developers of 3D arcade racing games were well aware of this, ensuring that the original arcade versions of games like Ridge Racer, Daytona, and Sega Rally ran at 60fps, rather than sacrificing that smoothness to add more detail. And those games looked spectacularly good for their time.