Eyes seeing at 22fps and motion blur making it less choppy hehe

[MumsALizard]

Hes been arguing with me HARD about this I even got the Linus video out here! 

He then said it tries to simulate a higher frame rate (which it doesn't)

 

Its an effect that tries to emulate the way we perceive light, nothing to do with Frame Rate!

 

If anything its adding more latency in the meantime and dropping the frame rate! It does the reverse of trying to make it feel like a higher frame rate. Your eyes do not work in FPS so the effect is not simulating more FPS but a visual effect!

 

 

Car games it can be cool but its not there to make your game feel like its running at 60fps when your chugging along at 22fps with your 22fps eyes trolololol

[leegypt]

My point is, motion blur tries to disguise low FPS, as I said in the above conversation.

 

It's most often (but not exclusively) found in cross platform games, because console games are so often locked to 30fps, it's a cheap trick that attempts to make these 30fps appear smoother. As I've said all along, higher fps is better, and I always turn motion blur off.

[minibois]

Well kay, i have a clever response! It's behind this tree

 

The only thing behind that tree is air and dirt, because that's what your arguments are made of .

*Hehehe..*

 

 

(dis is all jokes by the way.. Please don't take this serious..)

[Godlygamer23]

My point is, motion blur tries to disguise low FPS, as I said in the above conversation.

 

It's most often (but not exclusively) found in cross platform games, because console games are so often locked to 30fps, it's a cheap trick that attempts to make these 30fps appear smoother. As I've said all along, higher fps is better, and I always turn motion blur off.

You also stated your eyes see about 22-23FPS. No, they don't.

[MumsALizard]

Lee an imposed special effect cannot increase perceived frames per second as each frame is still rendered at the same rate or perhaps even lower! It just blurs what information is rendered that is all. Saying that this makes it look like a higher frame rate is worng.

 

Its intended purpose is not to make a game look like its at a higher frame rate. But to give the gamer a perception of motion.

[leegypt]

You also stated your eyes see about 22-23FPS. No, they don't.

I may have been generalizing a little there, but our debate was centred around the purpose of motion blur in lower frame rates, and not what our eyes can perceive.

[leegypt]

Lee an imposed special effect cannot increase perceived frames per second as each frame is still rendered at the same rate or perhaps even lower! It just blurs what information is rendered that is all. Saying that this makes it look like a higher frame rate is worng.

 

Its intended purpose is not to make a game look like its at a higher frame rate. But to give the gamer a perception of motion.

It's to make lower frame rates appear more fluid/smooth.

[Godlygamer23]

I may have been generalizing a little there.

It was major generalizing.

[MumsALizard]

I may have been generalizing a little there, but our debate was centred around the purpose of motion blur in lower frame rates, and not what our eyes can perceive.

 

Generalizing a little / Failing a lot

 

It's to make lower frame rates appear more fluid/smooth.

 

Just no....it is not... It's impossible to do that

 

please re-read my previous comment.

[as96]

[MumsALizard]

Sorry Lee one more.... 

 

[leelaa14]

thats why i get lower frame rates when using lightboost at 120fps?......

[leegypt]

It was major generalizing.

It was generalizing for the sake of argument, which is fine given that it wasn't the topic of discussion, and given that there's no straight forward answer to this.

 

Sorry Lee one more.... 

 

 

This proves nothing more than the fact that you're incapable of having a logical argument!

 

Putting a meme doesn't make you right!

[Godlygamer23]

It was generalizing for the sake of argument, which is fine given that it wasn't the topic of discussion, and given that there's no straight forward answer to this.

The answer is: We don't know the maximum number of frames per second the eye can perceive but it's certainly higher than 23, 60, and 120.

[MumsALizard]

It was generalizing for the sake of argument, which is fine given that it wasn't the topic of discussion, and given that there's no straight forward answer to this.

 

LOL!!!! 

 

Its fine is it?

 

Fine to be completely and utterly wrong about something and mark it down as generalization?

 

 

This proves nothing more than the fact that you're incapable of having a logical argument!

 

 

There was no LOGICAL argument in the first place haha!!

[Stomplar]

id love to slap both of them to be honest. 30fps makes him vomit? then stop being a little bitch and be a man

[as96]

Putting a meme doesn't make you right!

It wasn't intended to make me right, I didn't even write anything, and if I offended you I'm sorry, I can edit the post if you want.

Anyway motion blur is used to simulate what happens in real life (both with cameras, and with eyes) with objects that moves at high speed (or when you or the camera do)

[MumsALizard]

id love to slap both of them to be honest. 30fps makes him vomit? then stop being a little bitch and be a man

 

Bit of banter mate...

[leegypt]

LOL!!!! 

 

Its fine is it?

 

Fine to be completely and utterly wrong about something and mark it down as generalization?

 

 

 

 

There was no LOGICAL argument in the first place haha!!

It's not wrong, it's a generalization based on the fact that recorded film frame rates start to look 'smooth' at about that rate. When was the last time you watched a film (filmed at 24fps) and thought "gosh this film's frame rate is low!"? And I know what you're going to say... but don't bother giving me that speel "motion blur in recorded film isn't the same as motion blur in rendered pictures because it's not natural" or anything to that effect, because ***spoiler alert***  NO rendered effects are real, and nor are they identical to reality or recorded film, but they are often an attempt at it. While we're on the subject, when you get water on your screen in game, yeah... that's not real either! and neither is lens flair for that matter... there's no lens when something's rendered don't you know? shocker right!?

 

I think you might be taking this as a personal attack on your 120HZ screen... it really isn't. As I've said quite clearly, motion blur is for lower frame rates. It has little - no purpose at higher frame rates. I've also already stated that higher frame rates are always ALWAYS better.

[leegypt]

It wasn't intended to make me right, I didn't even write anything, and if I offended you I'm sorry, I can edit the post if you want.

Anyway motion blur is used to simulate what happens in real life (both with cameras, and with eyes) with objects that moves at high speed (or when you or the camera do)

No no! No need, I was talking specifically to MumsALizard! I agree with what you're saying, it's exactly the point I've been trying to make. 

[leegypt]

id love to slap both of them to be honest. 30fps makes him vomit? then stop being a little bitch and be a man

I assumed he was joking! lol. I've never heard of anyone vomiting from a bit of motion blur!

[IdortMasterRace]

 

You're both plebs.

 

He is clearly misinformed and spouting something he knows nothing about, trying to look smart and in the know.

 

But you clearly just want to circlejerk the conversation on here in a "look I'm so smart, he's so dumb, am I rite guise!" way pretty obnoxiously.

 

Why not just correct him instead of being a dick about it, spouting memes and text-sighing at him? Was it even necessary to post the conversation you had with him in public? I bet people think you're a great friend.

[MumsALizard]

It's not wrong, it's a generalization based on the fact that recorded film frame rates start to look 'smooth' at about that rate. When was the last time you watched a film (filmed at 24fps) and thought "gosh this film's frame rate is low!"? And I know what you're going to say... but don't bother giving me that speel "motion blur in recorded film isn't the same as motion blur in rendered pictures because it's not natural" or anything to that effect, because ***spoiler alert***  NO rendered effects are real, and nor are they identical to reality or recorded film, but they are often an attempt at it. While we're on the subject, when you get water on your screen in game, yeah... that's not real either! and neither is lens flair for that matter... there's no lens when something's rendered don't you know? shocker right!?

 

I think you might be taking this as a personal attack on your 120HZ screen... it really isn't. As I've said quite clearly, motion blur is for lower frame rates. It has little - no purpose at higher frame rates. I've also already stated that higher frame rates are always ALWAYS better.

 

Lee please stop digging...... You said eyes see in 22fps and they just don't see real life, games, porn, through binoculars, sunglasses, telescopes and anything else in FPS! Generalization or no generalization the fact of the matter is you are wrong about that.

 

 

Onto your next point.... I am aware that things in games are not real, but thank you for clearing it up anyway. I think you missed my many points I have made however....

 

Let me break it down really simply for you....(here's where it gets a little confusing it seems for you so please pay attention)

 

Motion blur in FILM = NATURAL it is a natural phenomenon which is created by the camera capturing the light. No method of blurring pixels via software is used.

 

Motion Blur in GAMES = ARTIFICIAL, A blurring EFFECT not blurring's NATURAL occurrence as a computer doesn't capture light from the games code and then display it it renders the picture pixel by pixel from what is programmed within a games code as per MB off. THEN VIA SOFTWARE EFFECT (NOT REAL LIFE) it blurs the imagines pixels in certain areas. This gives the impression of momentum. It does not however reproduce how it works in films. Therefore the two methods work differently and it is impossible for the in game effect to provide frame transitioning smoothing effect like real motion blur does in low frame rate movies!

 

I do hope you follow me.

 

Your attempt to mock my intelligence by saying water on the screen is not real to further your argument makes you look a bit silly now. Since everything is an attempt or a simulation yet you are trying to use motion blur in games as if it is not fake, as if it actually works like it does when capturing real world footage via camera.

 

RIP in pepperoni 

[MumsALizard]

You're both plebs.

 

He is clearly misinformed and spouting something he knows nothing about, trying to look smart and in the know.

 

But you clearly just want to circlejerk the conversation on here in a "look I'm so smart, he's so dumb, am I rite guise!" way pretty obnoxiously.

 

Why not just correct him instead of being a dick about it, spouting memes and text-sighing at him? Was it even necessary to post the conversation you had with him in public? I bet people think you're a great friend.

 

Why not correct him? I did several times and he flat out said I was wrong.... So I took it to a tech forum not to insult or mock him but to show him I was infact telling the truth and trying to educate him on it yes I threw in some banter about it for a laugh.

 

Then he insults me above so....

[IdortMasterRace]

Why not correct him? I did several times and he flat out said I was wrong.... So I took it to a tech forum not to insult or mock him but to show him I was infact telling the truth and trying to educate him on it yes I threw in some banter about it for a laugh.

 

Then he insults me above so....

 

Then just stop discussing it with him. If he wants to stay ignorant, so be it.

 

You could have also actually provided him evidence or sources behind your statements, rather than just posting it here to prove him wrong.