🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2016-09-07, Justisaur <just...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 09:06:02 +0100, Toby Newman <goo...@asktoby.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2016-09-06, Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 14:28:31 +0100, Toby Newman <goo...@asktoby.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2016-09-06, Spalls Hurgenson <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 05 Sep 2016 10:52:01 -0400, Rin Stowleigh
>>>>>> <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Buttery framerates are one of the most overlooked aspect of gaming, a
>>>>>>> lot of folks don't realize how much the subpar framerates of
>>>>>>> underpowered GPUs detract from immersion, until they get accustomed to
>>>>>>> high framerates and then try to go back.  There seems to be the need
>>>>>>> for a reference point for comparison.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my experience it's less /high/ framerates and more an issue of
>>>>>> /stable/ framerates. If the game is jumping from 15 to 30 to 60fps, I
>>>>>> notice it far more than if it's a rock-steady 30 (or even 20) fps.
>>>>>
>>>>> 20fps? What is this, Powerpoint?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Age probably helps too; them youngsters swear there's an amazing
>>>>>> difference between 30 and 60fps, but I can't see it at all. And don't
>>>>>> get me started on the whole waste-of-money ultra-HD thing; 1024x768
>>>>>> should be enough for anyone ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> 60 is OK, it gets much better the faster you go. And I'm in my late
>>>>> 30s. Anything less than 60 bothers me greatly.
>>>>
>>>> Same here, a consistent 60 is minimum acceptable.  I do find that
>>>> beyond about 90-100fps there are somewhat diminishing returns.
>>>>
>>>> It really depends on the game though.  Something like Battlefield or
>>>> Doom really benefits from the smoothest mouselook you can get out of
>>>> it.  I find this to be much less the case with certain games, like
>>>> slower-paced stealth games, third person shooters, or just first
>>>> person games which typically don't involve as much twitch movement.
>>>>
>>>> An example of the latter is the Rainbow Six games.  Usually the action
>>>> is so focused and intense that the player doesn't find themselves
>>>> panning all around the room at rapid speed with the mouse.  Its more
>>>> like you set up position to guard a hostage or control point, and be
>>>> prepared to cover one or more choke points.  Or, you're infiltrating a
>>>> building by rappeling up the side, then swinging in via a window, and
>>>> proceeding slowly/carefully down a hallway with your sights staying
>>>> aimed at a relatively narrow angle.  I typically don't enable heatmaps
>>>> for my Razer mouse, but if you examined the difference between the
>>>> typical mouse movement heatmap for Doom vs. Rainbow Six games, the
>>>> difference in the type of game becomes much more measurable.
>>>>
>>>> It is kind of nice that the game supports high framerates, but they
>>>> aren't a dealbreaker in that particular game simply because of the
>>>> nature of the contest at hand.
>>>
>>> I find that polygons feel more solid at higher framerates. Something
>>> snaps in my head and my perception goes from "animation" to "object",
>>> above a certain FPS threshold.
>>
>> Yes, I think that's a big part of it.  When my eyes pan or look
>> quickly around whatever my environment is, there is no blurrying,
>> jerkiness, or similar issues, so the closer that fluid real life
>> movement is replicated on the screen, the more convincing everything
>> on the screen will be to me.
>>
>> I never even understood the "motion blur" effect in many games,
>> supposedly it is to mimick some visual characteristic of eye movement,
>> but real life objects either don't blur with my vision (*) no matter
>> how fast I pan my eyes, or the blurring effect occurs so quickly I
>> can't see it.
>>
>
> Actually it mimics film movies. Our eyes don't see like that, but the 
> blur within cels makes the 23 fps of movies look more like movement 
> instead of single pictures. If your game isn't stuck at 23 fps (or 30 
> perhaps) then there's no reason to use it.  It tends to be way overdone 
> in games too, it should be blur between the two frames to either side 
> time wise of the frame it's playing, but they make it blur over an 
> entire second or so usually (i.e. 22 or more frames too much).

In new Doom you can adjust the blur length. I spent a little time
playing with it and found I preferred having it on, on it's lowest
setting, despite already being pinned at 120fps. On fast pans you can
still see discrete frames at 120fps, and it mitigated that a little.

-- 
-Toby
Add the word afiduluminag to the subject to circumvent my email filters.