Ghosting, 360 & latest LCD's.

[razu]

Some of the post-processing you can do with PC cards and the next-gen consoles makes a huge difference to picture quality. For instance, HDR lets you make the sky a hundred times brighter than a building and as a result the sky eats into the edges of the building, masking the fact that it's built out of flat triangles. And when you turn and look into an area of shadow with the sky out of view you gradually see more and more detail, in a simlilar way to how your eyes work in real life.

However, turn a corner in a racing game and no matter what effect you apply 30fps will stutter when compared to 60fps.

What I want to know is whatever happened to the learned reviewer? When I were a lad reviewers would comment on slowdown and sprite collision quality. No more. Now if you talk about frame rate on a forum dedicated to not just videogames, but NTSC videogames - that would imply a love for pure, full speed gaming - and you get a earful of 'stop moaning, you can't tell the difference' and 'film this, film that'. **** film, I play games. At 60 frames too.


An internet post wouldn't be complete without some parallels being drawn, here we go:

Some people can't tell the difference between red and green, that doesn't mean we should do away with green.

or

Some people are tall and some people are short, and some can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 frames a second so should shut their face on the subject.

or

Bees are small and buses are loud, GOTHAM RUNS AT 30 FFS!!!!!!!!!!

[Mr Fujisawa]

whats all this anti-motion blur stuff. u do realise that ALL CGI in films uses motion blur, if it doesnt things just look fake.

[Space Monkey]

http://freespace.virgin.net/hugo.elias/graphics/x_motion.htm

I haven`t seen any games that employ genuine motion blur so should probably "shut my face on the subject", I don`t even know if its genuine motion blur thats being applied in the mentioned 360 games. The above page is quite interesting though.
A couple of quotes:

"Take a look at some computer animations that do not contain rendered motion blur, and you will see that fast movement looks jerky and unrealistic"

"We are all so used to seeing motion blur in TV programs and films, that to see motion without it looks a little unrealistic. The lack of motion blur is one of the (many) reasons that computer generated animation can look unreal. This lack of realism is caused by the sharpness of motion in computer animations, is quite noticeable, and can really spoil the effect."

And

"Some computer games try to simulate motion blur by blending the current frame with the previous frames, so that previous frames are still visible for a moment. This makes moving objects smear across the screen. This is not real motion blur; it does not look good and is a waste of processor power."

[Rushy]

i hate to see that a lot of the 360's games are using a ghosting/motion blur effect to help with the frame rate

You picked the wrong game to cite then as CoD2 on the Xbox360 runs at a solid 60fps (see the video interview at xboxyde). Why they would need to use other effects to 'help' with such a frame rate is beyond me...

The bigger problem here is that there isn't a wide enough range of HD sources at reasonable prices other than LCD, and LCD is still in it's infancy and in my opinion still has a long way to go before its satisfactory (e.g. comparable to a good CRT).

[TreeFrog]

I haven`t seen any games that employ genuine motion blur so should probably "shut my face on the subject", I don`t even know if its genuine motion blur thats being applied in the mentioned 360 games.

'Genuine' motion blur does look lovely indeed, but in order to get it looking good, you have to render the screen MANY times per frame, which means you have to sacrifice detail (or framerate) to get it.

If any of you have 'Shox' on PS2 then watch the attract movie for that (and compare to the in-game renderer) - it was rendered using the game engine, with (IIRC) 32x temporal supersampling and 4x spatial supersampling. If people were happy with current-gen geometry levels, there's nothing to stop next-gen games using this type of efffect in real-time (although in realtime, you'd probably want to halve the exposure time, as it was cranked up slightly in that video for effect).

[Shin Gouki]

won't that be from an interpolated video?

and if you don't know what I mean....

I mean that the game is running at 60FPS, buuuut the video has been encoded at 30FPs and has information from 2 frames merged into one, so the feel of the higher frame rate is still there.

The video runs at 105.8 fps.

Tell me something guy's? Download the video of CoD2 then watch it when there are fast movments. Then play Unreal Tournement (or any pother great FPS that runs at 60fps and beyond) and tell me that when you turn it looks jerky or unatural.

UT on my pC is smooth as a babies bum and there is no ghosting/bluring effect used at all. I would much rather see solid objects when i make sharp turns as opposed to ghosting and blurring. Not only does the effect in CoD2 look ****e but it also makes my eyes ache.

There's been nothing wrong with all the other FPS games that run at 60fps so why are they using this ghosting/motion blur effect now? To me it does'nt look "REAL" at all. It looks like exaclty what it is....addded ghosting.

And to those who tell me not to make comments on a game that isnt finished, well, it's obvious that they are almost done with this game. The effect is there and will stay there.

The only time i get double vision (ghosting) or blurring in reality is when im either drunk or on Acid.

To me this effect looks untaural and stupid. If i make a sharp movment in a FPS game, or any other game, i dont want to see two of whats infront of me, i want to see one. if i wanted ghosting then i would buy an old crapy LCD, get drunk or drop an acid tab.

[Shin Gouki]

Some of the post-processing you can do with PC cards and the next-gen consoles makes a huge difference to picture quality. For instance, HDR lets you make the sky a hundred times brighter than a building and as a result the sky eats into the edges of the building, masking the fact that it's built out of flat triangles. And when you turn and look into an area of shadow with the sky out of view you gradually see more and more detail, in a simlilar way to how your eyes work in real life.

However, turn a corner in a racing game and no matter what effect you apply 30fps will stutter when compared to 60fps.

What I want to know is whatever happened to the learned reviewer? When I were a lad reviewers would comment on slowdown and sprite collision quality. No more. Now if you talk about frame rate on a forum dedicated to not just videogames, but NTSC videogames - that would imply a love for pure, full speed gaming - and you get a earful of 'stop moaning, you can't tell the difference' and 'film this, film that'. **** film, I play games. At 60 frames too.


An internet post wouldn't be complete without some parallels being drawn, here we go:

Some people can't tell the difference between red and green, that doesn't mean we should do away with green.

or

Some people are tall and some people are short, and some can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 frames a second so should shut their face on the subject.

or

Bees are small and buses are loud, GOTHAM RUNS AT 30 FFS!!!!!!!!!!

[andrewfee]

whats all this anti-motion blur stuff. u do realise that ALL CGI in films uses motion blur, if it doesnt things just look fake.

Yes, but you're just watching a CGI film, not trying to interact with it.

"Proper" motion blur probably wouldn't be so bad, but I just don't see that happening. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

It's kinda like depth-of-field effects though; yes, they're more realistic in a sense, but in other ways they just kill the effect. When you're just looking at your character or whatever, sure it looks great - but normally if you wanted to look at something in the distance your focus would change; doesn't happen in a game. Sometimes you just feel that while the effect works sometimes, you would rather it wasn't there.

Now I loved Wind Waker, but its depth of field effect really wasn't nice on your eyes sometimes. (you'd try to focus on something but couldn't)

As for the CoD2 shot; like I said earlier, and as someone else has since said, I'm sure that's just an artifact of the video encoding (or the camera) rather than being something in the game. I've noticed it happen to a lot of videos of games which don't use the effect.

[Shin Gouki]

"Some computer games try to simulate motion blur by blending the current frame with the previous frames, so that previous frames are still visible for a moment. This makes moving objects smear across the screen. This is not real motion blur; it does not look good and is a waste of processor power."

Damn, it looks like the developers of CoD2 dont know wtf they are doing because that desciption above is exactly what's happening in the screen shot i posted.

oh and since when did pausing a DVD look like this? http://ntsc-uk.domino.org/attachment...achmentid=5629

The "effect" they are using in CoD2 is a joke, !

It's not motion blurring, it's ghosting, and it looks ****e.

[Shin Gouki]

As for the CoD2 shot; like I said earlier, and as someone else has since said, I'm sure that's just an artifact of the video encoding (or the camera) rather than being something in the game. I've noticed it happen to a lot of videos of games which don't use the effect.

Mate, it's a HD video encoded at 105.8fps at 720p and it;s not tkaen with a camera. It's about the best quality you can get hence its huge file size too.

The ghosting/blurring/whatever you wnat to call it only happens when you make sharp movements, and it only happens to objects that are close to you. Its nothign to do with the video encoding. Like i said the encodign is perfect. If it was to do with the video encodign it would happen all the time on all the objects, but it does'nt. Just downlaod the video and see for yourslef. http://www.fileshack.com/file_downlo...ted.x?fid=7682

[Shin Gouki]

All people need to do is read the quote Spacemonkey posted and then look at the screenshot i took. Nothing more needs to said! They need to remove this effect from the game because 1, it looks like ****e, 2 it's not motion blurring. If they think this is motion blurring then they need to read that quote. The descritption in the quote sums up that screen shot perfectly.

"Some computer games try to simulate motion blur by blending the current frame with the previous frames, so that previous frames are still visible for a moment. This makes moving objects smear across the screen. This is not real motion blur; it does not look good and is a waste of processor power."

[TreeFrog]

Yep - I'll agree with you there, Gouki.
About the only use for that effect is to do player is drunk/dazed effects (i.e. where it's meant to be blurry and confusing

[Freddo]

theres no way the video is encoded at 105fps, for starters it'd be gigantic, and secondly very few pc's could decode it.

[El Leone]

Although everything which has been said in this thread is true, Its a bit unfair (omfg, fanboy attack) On the 360 when Im sure the same effect will be used on the PS3 and Nrev.

Ghosting, Next Gen & Latest LCD's .

[Shin Gouki]

theres no way the video is encoded at 105fps

Yes it is.