Can we get the ugly projectile trails removed?



  • Seriously, the look ugly as heck, are useless, and don’t help people spot archers anyway.
    They’re useless on arrows and beyond useless on throwing axes/knives.

    UDK has object motion blur (http://udn.epicgames.com/Three/MotionBlur.html) which is already being used in Chivalry
    (I think). Take more advantage of that instead, if you want to create a realistic, believable blur.

    Watch this video from Mount and Blade, and stop it at 1:20
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi1y-uQWAjI
    M&B does it right. The arrows are still visible, but they are blurred because they move FAST. And it’s not like you can’t see where they are coming from.

    And now look at this shot from the movie 300 (should start at 2:15)
    http://youtu.be/qdDdHMwhU2s?t=2m15s
    Do you think the scene would have looked half as good with the arrows being replaced by almost invisible projectile trails? I think not.

    And before someone says “but motion blur is stoopid” try to move your finger around left and right very quickly, notice how it is blurred (now stop it you look stoopid). Or look at a spinning fan or something. Yes, motion blur exists people.

    For the record, I almost never play archer.



  • agreed on all accounts



  • Motion blur is stupid under 60FPs. Because then its already blurred.



  • I like the trails.



  • @lemonater47:

    Motion blur is stupid under 60FPs. Because then its already blurred.

    It’s the other way around.



  • @FrankHH:

    It’s the other way around.

    Cap your game at 30 FPS and turn motion blur on. You’ll see what I mean.

    A high framerate on a screen doesn’t blur. It looks unnatural because of it but many people like that feeling. It also does give you an advantage as you can move your mouse very fast and still see things crystal clear.

    Wave your hand in front of your face. You’ll see it naturally blurs. Now record your hand doing that at 120 frames per second and play the video on a 120hz monitor. The camera would of picked up much less of the blur recording that fast which is 4 times faster than most cameras if you could record it at a higher frame and play it back on a screen which refresh rate is the same as the videos frame rate you would get to a point where it wouldn’t blur on the screen yet of you wav your hand in front of your face it blurs. The “ideal” framerate for movies is 42-48 FPS on a 50hz screen for maximum immersion and realism. Any lower it doesn’t look right it looks like a movie. Any higher and its too smooth you get that uber gaming PC feeling.

    Things on a screen are not moving objects. Its a 2D image that’s changing really fast. Just at a certain speed “over 15FPS” you perceive movement though its not actually moving.



  • I hate motion blue.

    In real life my eyes have awesome sauce tracking firmware. When I quickly move my head, my eyes will lock onto an object and everything blurs around it but not the object.
    When I wave my hand in front of my face, my eyes follow the hand. My hand doesn’t blue everything else kind of does.

    Simulated computer game motion blur doesn’t even come close to these effects and generally looks like shit and totally detracts from everything, as it ALL blues when you move. Pfft, sif ever have it on.



  • @lemonater47:

    Cap your game at 30 FPS and turn motion blur on. You’ll see what I mean.

    A high framerate on a screen doesn’t blur. It looks unnatural because of it but many people like that feeling. It also does give you an advantage as you can move your mouse very fast and still see things crystal clear.

    Wave your hand in front of your face. You’ll see it naturally blurs. Now record your hand doing that at 120 frames per second and play the video on a 120hz monitor. The camera would of picked up much less of the blur recording that fast which is 4 times faster than most cameras if you could record it at a higher frame and play it back on a screen which refresh rate is the same as the videos frame rate you would get to a point where it wouldn’t blur on the screen yet of you wav your hand in front of your face it blurs. The “ideal” framerate for movies is 42-48 FPS on a 50hz screen for maximum immersion and realism. Any lower it doesn’t look right it looks like a movie. Any higher and its too smooth you get that uber gaming PC feeling.

    Things on a screen are not moving objects. Its a 2D image that’s changing really fast. Just at a certain speed “over 15FPS” you perceive movement though its not actually moving.

    Let’s analyze your posts:
    1. you say that motion blur looks stupid under 60 frames, which implies that it looks good with high FPS
    2. then you explain that there is no blur with a high FPS camera
    3. so you think that there should be MORE blur when we have high FPS, even though you gave me a clear example that there is LESS blur with a high FPS camera? U nuts?

    You’ve contradicted yourself, by unknowingly confirming that, like I said, IT’S THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

    There can always be blur, you can have a 10000 FPS camera but if something moves super duper crazy fast there is always gonna be some light accumulation.

    Also, movies are usually recorded at 24 FPS, and have a lot of natural motion blur. With special effects, they can only simulate it though.

    You seem to have fundamentally misunderstood the point of motion blur in games. Sigh, where do we begin…
    The human eye perceives the world with light, when there is a fast moving object that’s close to you, the light “accumulates” and you can see motion blur.
    http://youtu.be/5vWrEmpRX_Q?t=2m9s (motion blur example in RL, should start at 2:09)

    Games are made of rapidly changing frames that give the illusion of movement. However, with frames there cannot be light accumulation, like you said:

    Things on a screen are not moving objects. Its a 2D image that’s changing really fast. Just at a certain speed "over 15FPS you perceive movement though its not actually moving.

    which means there can’t be motion blur, so the only way to give games a more believable feel is to simulate blur between frames.

    Most games don’t do it right though, these are the ones that only have a crappy camera-based blur implementation (BLUR EVERY F*CKING THING WHEN THE CAMERA MOVES!!!11111)

    But there is a few that do it right. Planetside 2 is the only game that has achieved the most believable motion blur I’ve ever seen, no other game that I know of has come close to that.

    Chivalry’s MB isn’t that bad, the only flaw in it is that it causes some ghosting on the first person weapons when you move around fast. And that shoudn’t happen, only rapidly changing pixels should have motion blur (search on youtube “per-pixel motion blur” for awesomeness).

    I hate motion blue.

    In real life my eyes have awesome sauce tracking firmware. When I quickly move my head, my eyes will lock onto an object and everything blurs around it but not the object.
    When I wave my hand in front of my face, my eyes follow the hand. My hand doesn’t blue everything else kind of does.

    I also hated motion blur like you at first, but that’s only because most games do it wrong (like I said above). I only enable blur in the (very) few games that do it right.
    Chivalry’s MB, while having some unnatural ghosting, doesn’t blur objects that are at the center of the screen.
    Try it with a friend. Let him run around you, try to follow it with your character, and notice that everything in the background naturally blurs, except your friend (given that you follow it well with your mouse).
    Of course you need to have motion blur enabled in order for the experiment to work.

    You think your eyes are too awesome to have blur? Spin around as fast as you can in your chair (if it has wheels of course). Surprise! Motion blur!
    Or you could just look at a spinning fan, and tell me if you can clearly see the blades or not (SPOILER ALERT: you can’t)

    And it’s BLUR, not “blue”.

    Back to the topic, what was this thread about?



  • Or you could just look at a spinning fan, and tell me if you can clearly see the blades or not (SPOILER ALERT: you can’t)

    Actually you can, you have to buzz your eyes around with the fan quickly, if you get the timing right you can catch individual blades for a few moments.

    Fair enough about chiv I haven’t tried it, I just turn it off ASAP. I really don’t like it. I’ll give it a go next time.



  • I could tell you how to turn off those tracers but I would have to kill you.



  • @FrankHH:

    Words

    I tried simplifying my explanation down. As by your first post it didn’t sound you were particularly knowledgeable. Problem was you were so you mis-interpreted what I said completely

    Play a game at a lower FPS. Then put motion blur on. Looks awful regardless of the game. At a higher framerate it looks better. That what I was trying to say. I was not trying to say there should be more blur at higher frame rates I don’t know where you got that idea from.

    A game is dynamic while a movie is not. Way easier to work with to get good looking motion blur. And dude its 2014 30FPs is the new industry standard.

    Even planetside 2 isn’t perfect. He’s its good but I still have it turned off. I don’t like it at all it doesn’t look natural.

    Yes there will theoretically still be light accumulation at high framerate recordings but its negligible. Essentially none.

    They don’t have motion blur that is dynamic to make it look good at all framerates. And the framerate isn’t constant either in games.



  • the only motion blur i have ever liked was the one in source games that only blurs the screen when you turn too fast



  • Personally I think the trails do help locate where the archer is, especially if he’s ducking into cover.



  • @lemonater47:

    I tried simplifying my explanation down. As by your first post it didn’t sound you were particularly knowledgeable. Problem was you were so you mis-interpreted what I said completely

    Play a game at a lower FPS. Then put motion blur on. Looks awful regardless of the game. At a higher framerate it looks better. That what I was trying to say. I was not trying to say there should be more blur at higher frame rates I don’t know where you got that idea from.

    A game is dynamic while a movie is not. Way easier to work with to get good looking motion blur. And dude its 2014 30FPs is the new industry standard.

    Even planetside 2 isn’t perfect. He’s its good but I still have it turned off. I don’t like it at all it doesn’t look natural.

    Yes there will theoretically still be light accumulation at high framerate recordings but its negligible. Essentially none.

    They don’t have motion blur that is dynamic to make it look good at all framerates. And the framerate isn’t constant either in games.

    I didn’t mis-interpret what you said at all. You simply said that there should be more blur at high FPS, while nature clearly shows that there is more light accumulation at low FPS, and less with high FPS, which is what you explained with the high FPS camera example (again, you’ve contradicted yourself).
    If you think that blur looks worse at low FPS, either the games you’ve played had wrong motion blur, or your eyes are f*cked up.

    Motion blur looks better to me when I get lower framerates in games, because the blur makes the low FPS appear smoother. If I lock Planetside 2 at 24 FPS, motion blur looks much more natural to my eyes than it does at 60 FPS (not that I like to play at 24 FPS, and it still looks good at 60).

    This is something that you explained in your second post, remember? The higher the framerate the less the blur you see? You sound like someone who just says stuff without really having tested it.

    Actually you can, you have to buzz your eyes around with the fan quickly, if you get the timing right you can catch individual blades for a few moments.
    Fair enough about chiv I haven’t tried it, I just turn it off ASAP. I really don’t like it. I’ll give it a go next time.

    Yup, that’s doable, but my point is that you can’t catch individual blades for more than a few moments.

    Personally I think the trails do help locate where the archer is, especially if he’s ducking into cover.

    Which is cheap and removes any sort of credibility the game has.
    Actual 3d model of the arrow without the trail would help you spot the archer anyway. I can do it in Warband without a problem.

    I could tell you how to turn off those tracers but I would have to kill you.

    tell pls



  • I’m still not saying there should be more motion blur at higher frame rates lol. 2nd time I’ve had to say that.

    Motion blur works better at higher frame rates than it does at lower frame rates. That’s what I’m saying. At least with chivalry it does. It depends what you do your motion blue to.



  • Yup, that’s doable, but my point is that you can’t catch individual blades for more than a few moments.

    Well when it goes slow enough, fan setting 3 out 5 is about my limit, crushed is totes 5/5 but.


Log in to reply