What's with Linus' hate for Motion Blur?

[Spindel]

Oh another camera artifact that games put in that needs to die along with lens flare and motion blur is chromatic aberration.

 

DAMIT JUST STOP IT WITH CAMERA/LENS ARTIFACTS IN GAMES!!!!!!!!!

[DistortAMG]

On 10/2/2020 at 3:39 AM, Sampajama said:

They dedicated 20/78 slides to motion blur, so obviously it wasn't some dumb effect that made it look worse if they put THAT much effort into making it look good.

 

 

 

This is what pretty much made your whole post completely loose all legitimacy to be honest.

 

The logic you are trying to convey is that it has to be good because they put so much time and effort into it. That logic is laughable and bewildering at best. 

 

Let me educate you with a fantastic word in the English language. Very relevant here. 

 

subjective

influenced by or based on personal beliefs or feelings, rather than based on facts:

 

 

 

[GoldSrc]

Motion blur is hated because a) It's never done right in most games or b) you can't turn the damn thing off.

The same for chromatic aberration, it doesn't make a game "look good". Your eyes don't have chromatic aberration, most decent camera lenses don't have too much of it and it considered a bad quality lens if it has too much.

And add lens flares and lens dirt to the list, I hated that crap in BF3 when it came out and I still hate it lol.

 

It made me remember of the time GRID 2 added compression artifacts every time you had a collision, like, bruh? That crap made people think there was a problem with the graphics card.

 

I will always keep motion blur off, it's never done right, and if I ever turn it on, it's because it's done right and per object is some games, specially if it only applies to the wheels on racing games.

[strajk-]

This thread is pretty cringe, can't wait to build my next high end rig to max every setting out, run it on a high refresh rate monitor with the lowest latencies possible just to smear the image quality and tank the performance with some shitty camera lens gimmick that is incorrectly implemented 99% of the time.

You like bad features? All the power to you, go ahead, it's all subjective anyways.

[Karones]

On 10/15/2020 at 8:19 PM, Vitamanic said:

That’s not how per object motion blur works at all. If you’re tracking an object in the game it isn’t blurred.
 

As in real life, if something is moving across your field of view (while your focal point is elsewhere) and is close/fast enough, it will blur. If the character itself is moving fast enough over terrain (like a in a speeding car) outside of your focal point will blur, again like real life. If you’re stationary and a character is at a distance walking... it’s not going to blur because the game logic calculates speed, field of view, perspective, distance and so on.

 

You may have had a point in the year 2002, but we’re no longer playing PS2 games. Things haven’t worked that way (frame based blur) for almost 20 years.

Yes, you are correct in what you said. But my point is, if something is moving across my field of view and my focal point is not elsewhere, it will not blur, the problem is that the game doesn't know where I'm looking it so it will blur those moving objects, same thing with movies where the camera moves around and you look at something in the background.

[sebastian___]

I felt like I had to reply because I worked on a personal 3d motion blur implementation back in 2010 in Crysis.

It's like the OP said, I think most perceive motion blur as this blurry slime covering your entire screen, because of previous bad experiences, and would not even consider trying motion blur in new or better games. Because "I haven't bought this expensive rig just to turn it into this blurry mess".

 

Well, do you see blurry mess here ? Everything looks sharp, but that propeller would look bad and confusing or flickering without motion blur.

 

 

 

And here's a comparison from my motion blur in crysis. Again those insects would look weird as you can see in the ON OFF comparison gif. And there are lots of other examples.

 

 

 

[mousesnob]

Motion blur is for people who dont mind being bad at videogames.

[Mark Kaine]

3 hours ago, sebastian___ said:

I felt like I had to reply because I worked on a personal 3d motion blur implementation back in 2010 in Crysis.

It's like the OP said, I think most perceive motion blur as this blurry slime covering your entire screen, because of previous bad experiences, and would not even consider trying motion blur in new or better games. Because "I haven't bought this expensive rig just to turn it into this blurry mess".

 

Well, do you see blurry mess here ? Everything looks sharp, but that propeller would look bad and confusing or flickering without motion blur.

 

 

 

And here's a comparison from my motion blur in crysis. Again those insects would look weird as you can see in the ON OFF comparison gif. And there are lots of other examples.

 

 

 

I think that kind of motion blur you usually can't even turn off?

I've definitely seen those things with motion blur off in some games (maybe there was a separate setting idk) 

 

I mean the thread title isn't 'stop hating on per object motion blur' it's 'stop hating on motion blur because I said so'... 

 

 

It's never gonna happen motion blur is blurry and it suuuxxx.

 

 

PS: in your comparison picture it should be definitely both ideally, or even just the wings ... Then it'd be perfect imo! 

 

 

Oh and welcome to the forums!

[sebastian___]

2 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

It's never gonna happen motion blur is blurry and it suuuxxx.

 

Oh and welcome to the forums!

I think it could be done in a "right way" where it's not blurry and does not suuuxxx  : )

 

And thank you  : )

[sebastian___]

2 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

 

PS: in your comparison picture it should be definitely both ideally, or even just the wings ... Then it'd be perfect imo! 

But an insect beats it's wings so fast, so you should not be able to see it. Only a blur. Same with a helicopter propeller, a missile flying close to ground, a formula 1 car passing by, a fast bird again passing by, or as in my next gif comparison - a tornado spinning super fast. Just imagine that as a setting for a multiplayer fps : )  Objects grabbed by the tornado and flying and moving super fast. Without blur these would look fake.

[Mark Kaine]

58 minutes ago, sebastian___ said:

But an insect beats it's wings so fast, so you should not be able to see it. Only a blur. Same with a helicopter propeller, a missile flying close to ground, a formula 1 car passing by, a fast bird again passing by, or as in my next gif comparison - a tornado spinning super fast. Just imagine that as a setting for a multiplayer fps : )  Objects grabbed by the tornado and flying and moving super fast. Without blur these would look fake.

Yea, that's what I meant the wings should be 'blurred' but not its body because if the whole insect is blurred it doesn't look right either.. A viewer would think 'I should be able to see its body (and feet) more clearly' 

 

I get that's a lot of work for something so tiny and likely not important in the grand scheme but all those little details are important and can be a deciding factor if a game is "great" or "mind blowing"...

 

And yes you know it very well a lot of games have motion blur all over the screen or what I often see on the sides... And often without any context except 'movement'. 

 

 

Some outrageous examples (don't know if you've played them) 

 

Nier Automata (pc version) 

 

Tomb Raider 2013 (on consoles) 

 

Both have absolutely atrocious motion blur implementation, in the case of TR making it literally unplayable (to me) 

 

And also funny how it seems totally platform agnostic and all over the place, literally and figuratively... 

 

^ just some examples, for I guess to show that motion blur applied to the full screen or even just most of the screen rarely works, especially not if it's constant... It doesn't make sense, looks 'like Vaseline' and is very tiring for the eyes... 

 

 

Counter examples where motion blur doesn't bother me :

Resident Evil 2 and Monster Hunter World.

 

Tho especially MHW *is* a bit blurry no matter what, mostly down to "dynamic resolution" which probably only could be avoided with much better hardware.

 

Still the motion blur itself never bothers me in those games, generally don't even notice tbh so I think it's a very light implementation or indeed 'per object'. 

 

1 hour ago, sebastian___ said:

And thank you  : )

And welcome! : D 

[dilpickle]

4 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

I think that kind of motion blur you usually can't even turn off?

Yeah exactly. If we are talking about object specific blur like that it should be up to the game and I don't think most people have a problem with that.

 

We are talking about whole screen motion blur which is what the majority of games do when you enable the "motion blur" option in graphics settings.

[sebastian___]

15 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

Some outrageous examples (don't know if you've played them) 

Yes many games I wouldn't say they have motion blur, but a sort of "effect" like smear or accumulation which is NOT motion blur. Motion blur is expensive which is why many games don't have it, but have a fake motion blur. The fact is expensive could be also a reason to turn it off, because of course it eats frames per second.

But if the motion blur is "real" it should be left on because it can make the world realistic. At least if you have processing power to compute that realistic motion blur.

 And of course the more fps you have, the smaller the motion blur should be.. But I'm not sure all the game compute and make that adjustment correctly. The blur you have for a 24 fps should be very different from a blur for 90 fps. The blur for 90 fps should be almost invisible except for very very fast objects.

And about full screen motion blur and object motion blur.. hmm the lines are  - blurred - here  : )
This was another example I tried with motion blur, the tornado, I think it could be a cool environment for a game, and mostly just the objects are blurred, but when the objects fill the screen, you could say almost the whole world is filled with blurred objects.

 

[TehDwonz]

On 10/2/2020 at 3:39 AM, Sampajama said:

Edit 2: Ok so this post was featured in an LTT video, which all my friends pointed out to me immediately. My point is, Motion Blur isn't for everyone, but it isn't objectively bad either. I feel like for benchmarks, its important to use all the features to be objective.

Motion blur is terrible, but you don't have to have it on to be objective. You just need to be consistent for benchmarking - that's what matters. He's always turned it off (at least in recent memory), and mentions that he's turning it off each time. There is nothing wrong with doing that, and it doesn't stop the test from being objective.

If this is making you angry, seek help.

[TehDwonz]

On 10/16/2020 at 8:40 AM, Spindel said:

Oh another camera artifact that games put in that needs to die along with lens flare and motion blur is chromatic aberration.

 

DAMIT JUST STOP IT WITH CAMERA/LENS ARTIFACTS IN GAMES!!!!!!!!!

100% agree. My eyes are not camera lenses, so adding glass lens effects is damned annoying.

[steelo]

It's just personal preference, I guess. I too can't stand motion blur, but my wife likes it on her games.

[dfsgsfa]

motion  blur = lower resolution

[sebastian___]

1 hour ago, TehDwonz said:

100% agree. My eyes are not camera lenses, so adding glass lens effects is damned annoying.

If you look with your real eyes, and not a lens -  at a fan in motion, do you see the blades like in the first pic or the second ?

 

 

 

[thermalgoop]

16 minutes ago, sebastian___ said:

If you look with your real eyes, and not a lens -  at a fan in motion, do you see the blades like in the first pic or the second ?

 

 

 

If I blink at it I can see the individual blades.

What we need is not motion blur on or off. We need selective motion blur, instead of global. No motion blur on the environment when you move, or the things you're trying to shoot/avoid, but sprinkle some on the visual goodies where it won't get in the way. 

[TehDwonz]

23 hours ago, sebastian___ said:

If you look with your real eyes, and not a lens -  at a fan in motion, do you see the blades like in the first pic or the second ?

Neither.

[EpicEric]

It's just bad. Unless a game REALLY does it well.

[Spindel]

On 10/23/2020 at 9:20 PM, thermalgoop said:

If I blink at it I can see the individual blades.

What we need is not motion blur on or off. We need selective motion blur, instead of global. No motion blur on the environment when you move, or the things you're trying to shoot/avoid, but sprinkle some on the visual goodies where it won't get in the way. 

Well actually if you have the fan moving at realistic speeds in game (and have a high enough refresh rate) you will get the same effect that you are trying to point at. 

[sebastian___]

On 10/26/2020 at 11:22 AM, Spindel said:

Well actually if you have the fan moving at realistic speeds in game (and have a high enough refresh rate) you will get the same effect that you are trying to point at. 

I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but try looking at how many types of fans you like, if you have a PC you should have a few fans right close to you, and you will only be able to see a blur.

Impossible to see a clear shape of a blade, no matter how good your vision is. Unless you have a fan moving at a very unusual slow speed.

We have many objects in our life which we are only able to see as a blur. Like blades in a blender, a front loading spinning washing machine, a train speeding right next to you or a car... and so on.

[ParanormalBanana]

I was about to give my humble cinematographer's opinion, highlighting the importance of motion blur when shooting motion pictures and the reasons why motion blur needs to be captured in camera using the right amount of frame exposure, for desired effect of natural, smooth motion of an actor's face, or to the contrary, jerkiness and precise sharpness of a war or sports scene.
But I clicked on the video that was provided in the original post and it really explained everything there is to know about it very well.

I still do have one comment though. I'll always try out motion blur before deciding to use it or not, and most of the time, it'll end up disabled... The reason for this is most motion blur is configured to look good at a console's 30 fps, not PC's 60. Most of the time, when i'm trying to run a cinematic type of game in 4k and it runs in the 30-40 fps, I will enable motion blur for smooth motion and it works wonders. (shadow of the tomb raider for example)

[Orange1]

2 hours ago, Caroline said:

Motion blur makes me feel dizzy, I'd rather play without it

Linus makes me dizzy, but motion blur would make me dizzy to so I get it.