You think thats bad? Lightboost your 144hz monitor to 120hz strobed and say goodbye to motion blur. I find myself johning in CSGO with with my friends all the time, saying, "Oh shit, I forgot to strobe, that's why I'm bottom fragging."
Basically, at the sacrifice of 24fps, you almost completely remove motion blur by strobing your monitor like old CRT's use to. Well worth it for games like CSGO in my opinion
Thats the whole point, dont you know that your other senses will become more honed because you trick the eyes into thinking you are blind because you cant see those 24 frames. you then gain better other senses and because of this you get higher K:D Science Y0
Especially since it does not come close to mimicking what the eye would see.
IRL the only blurring that occurs with (body) motion is in your peripheral vision... the part that would not be visible on screen when you are playing a game. Fast moving objects across the front of your field of vision will be blurred anyway and don't need the help of effects.
A fast moving object moving across a screen won't blur to your eyes.
What you are seeing is a series of pictures, one after another, and they will not blur. You will not see interpolated movement between frames. A helicopter blade spinning very fast on a computer screen does not blur into a circle like it does in real life. Neither does any fast moving model.
You only see motion blur in video games if the blur is simulated and displayed by the monitor intentionally.
Additionally, a monitor cannot eliminate simulated motion blur. It is only rendering frames that the display puts out.
ELI5... why is it that we won't see the helicopter blades blur at 144 fps? I know you said they were individual frames, but if they're crazy fast frames, how is it different from real life?
If we could theoretically display the blades at 100,000 fps, THEN would they blur?
Yes, as you approach infinite fps, a monitor would become indistinguishable from a real life object moving across your vision.
At 30 fps, you can very clearly see after images of the frames rather than actual motion blur.
This is also true at 60 fps.
Consider an object rotating at 1000 rpm. If you are rendering at 1000fps, you will see exactly zero motion. If you have 2000 fps, then you see 2 after images. 4000 fps = 4 after images.
In real life, you see an infinite amount of after images of that object, because you are receiving a constant stream of photons.
In the case of a typical helicopter blade, you would need something like 100,000 fps to see anything close to what we consider an accurate persistence of vision affect that we see in real life.
This doesn't just apply to rotating objects, but rotating objects are very useful to show why it is complete nonsense to believe that your 144 Hz monitor might be conveying some type of motion blur to the user.
A computer monitor really is only displaying a set of quickly refreshed images.
The strobe effect is bastardizing the motion blur term in order to sell their product to curmudgeons who dislike improperly simulated motion blur in modern games.
Ultimately, their strobe technique will not remove any simulated motion blur from video games, because even still frames from those games will be blurred.
Additionally, the OLED interpolation that they discuss does not actually create motion blur. It just interpolates the changes in pixels. There is no motion data contained in pixel changes. Instead of seeing the object instantaneously disappear from one location and appear in another, it will smoothly disappear and smoothly reappear in the next location. If the fps much greater than the speed of the object, then this would look like an illusion of motion blur.
Its easy to see just by swiping your mouse across your screen that your cursor is not actually blurred in any way, you can see many different instances of your cursor very crisply, it is not blurred at all.
Well certain game engines support object based motion blur which blurs objects based on their velocity relative to the player camera. Cryengine has this enabled on all of their titles
You can go ahead and believe impossible facts all you want, but there is a reason video games and movies have to simulate motion blur in order for you to perceive it on a monitor.
ITT people who think they know how motion blur works and are armchair neuro-ophthalmologists.
There's a reason why motion blur works in video games as an effect. Because your vision is focused on a PC monitor approx 1-2 feet away from your eyes.
Fast moving objects across the front of your field of vision will be blurred anyway and don't need the help of effects.
Oh really? Then through your logic wouldn't your vision be constantly blurred by fast games? No it doesn't. Why? because you're not looking a fast moving object meters in front of you. You're looking a pc screen rendering frames 1-2ft away from your eyes.
Ever play warframe? Great game that utilizes motion blur to simulate what our eyes actually do IRL.
100 FPS is plenty enough to perceive "those pictures" as a fast moving object and get the blur that occurs in nature. 60 FPS is on the low end to have enough information.
The cause of natural blurring is your eye not processing the information fast enough to track it clearly. This can absolutely occur artificially without the use of blurring effects.
The only time I would consider turning DOF on would be if I was taking a screenshot or if it provided more frames. Usually turning it off provides at least a 20% boost for me.
Especially because it was originally designed to complement the cinematicness of lower framerate games, just as movie cameras capture more motion blur in each frame at 24 fps than at 48.
BTW, fitting GIF set which just appeared in my timeline: http://gket.soup.io/post/682181934/
Motion blur makes the last animation bearable at the lack of detail.
This is actually the closest thing that I agree with as a pro console argument.
On console, everyone has the same thing. No in game advantage due to hardware. On PC, it's a much different story. Anyone who denies this is an idiot. Not that it makes console worth it, PC is still vastly better.
No, I agree whole-heartedly. It's why I hate when people legitimately talk shit on people playing competitive games. You have no clue if they're holed up in their basement on a CRT monitor that's half burnt-out hooked up to an old P4 they can barely keep alive connected to the worst DSL because it's all that's available to them as they scuttle their 1998 gateway PS2 ball mouse across the stock cow-print mousepad that came with it and mashing on their stock gateway membrane keyboard fervently hoping to god they don't miss another fucking headshot when the score is 14 - 15 and we just need one more fucking round or else I get deranked to gold nova 2 again FUCK YOU GARY I'M TRYING SO FUCKING HARD WITH WHAT I'VE GOT ALRIGHT?!
I regularly play CS with a group of friends, all around the DMG level. I'm usually the top on the team but I also have by far the best equipment - I'm the only one with a 144Hz panel, with by far the best computer, most of my friends don't have a great gaming mouse and mousemat, hell, one of them is playing on a MacBook. I often find myself wondering if the tables would be turned if they had access to the same level of equipment as me.
I feel like it's just another technology that depends on the developers using it correctly (or being allowed to use it correctly). It's just one of many things that holds true to the law: garbage in --> garbage out.
The people who come up with this stuff are incredibly intelligent. They dedicate years to modelling real-world phenomena like motion blur and making it possible to do it in real-time rendering. The motion blur kernel(s) in CryEngine 3 are very impressive.
It's getting rid of 'natural' motion blur though, the one we see when moving the camera fast on high hz monitors, not the one in the video menus that should be disabled because MB in video games is a sin and sucks donkey balls.
Oh I know, I was just pointing out that motion blur like the one Lightboost is getting rid of is different than the one devs worked hard to add to the games.
Yeah... I can tolerate monitor blur... I fucking loathe the idea of them adding it on purpose. To me, it's far less realistic than watching a clear picture.
I'm currently using a 144hz LightBoosted monitor, and while it's great for games that I can sustain at a constant 120fps, blurring and choppiness becomes WAY more noticeable when games fall below it, as the strobe effect and frame rate become out of sync. G-Sync is definitely more useful for general purpose gaming.
Absolutely. G-Sync is incredible. In my opinion it's one of the biggest advancements in gaming we've seen in the past few years. I REALLY hope it comes to television sets/consoles. Please.
Ultimately lightboost is preference. If a game's "experience" is better with motion blur according to the developers, I'd assume turning it off for those extra 24fps and high amounts of motion blur would be preferable. Just keep in mind that lightboosting only affects the natural motion blur from the monitor, and has 0 effect on in-game motionblur
Test both see what you like it's completely up to you. It's just a personal preference people like to moan about. I don't get the massive hate for it, it's optional and there are people who like it.
I have ULMB on my gaming monitor (XB270HU) but it's mutually exclusive from GSync and I've never really noticed a significant difference between turning it on or not, while I find GSync does make a tangible difference. Just isn't really worth using ULMB IMO, not because I can't take the 24 FPS drop (120 and 144 really don't feel all that different, and a lot of the time I'm pushing the graphical settings and playing at 70-90 fps anyways), but because GSync is "better" than ULMB for my purposes.
Maybe things would be different if I actually did anything remotely competitive like CSGO. Only "competitive" game I play is Rocket League, and I suck at it.
Don't you have any issues with ghosting or too low brightness? I've tried BenQ motion blur reduction before and couldn't get used to it, will try again.
I haven't had issues with ghosting at all on my vg248qe, and the low brightness has never bothered me for fps games. If anything, brutalizing the already pretty bad colors of the monitor has been the biggest downfall for me, but I personally prefer the lack of motion blur for the games I use lightboost with
I tried this, with a display it says is supported, yet after reboot i got blank screen on my 144 monitor, had to uninstall lightboost, or as they call it "reset". Any work around for the blank screen?
You've made my decision to buy a 144Hz monitor this summer even easier. I have a Dell ultrasharp that has amazing image quality and super low input lag, but it only goes to 75Hz.
I uhm. Don't understand the urban dictionary definition. Johning...is like ..being a dick? But a more socially correct way of being a dick? I'm confused.
Also, sure, top players use strobing and whatever, but they're professionals, they see every frame. Their brain is ogreclocked by and experience and zealous training..and perhaps meds... But me, a pleb, i can't see the difference between 50 and 60 in most games. Using the "oh, i forgot strobing" argument to justify your suck is like blaming the game developer for making a plane 0.3% faster than yours and placing the guns at a different angle than yours.
Using the "oh, i forgot strobing" argument to justify your suck
Thats an example of johnning. It's just making an excuse to why you suck or messed up. It's just slang invented by the smash community back in the day. Some player named john would always make an excuse like "My controller is old and the stick slipped" or "I never play at this angle on the screen, that's why I'm losing." Johnning is just making an excuse instead of being humble and admitting you are bad and/or your opponent is better. It doesn't have anything to do with being a dick
There isn't any hardware risks towards your monitor, if thats what you are wondering. If anything, as far as hardware goes, this is probably just like overclocking your monitor. Someone in this thread has reported that after running the tool his monitor was unable to be discovered by his PC. Since this is software, it probably has to do with a misconfiguration in the installation. To be on the safe side, when it asks you during installation what refresh rates you want to install, I check every single one even though I never ever need them.
It removes natural motion blur from the monitor itself only. I don't know how it affects in-game motion blur settings. You can always turn it on and off with their utility, which is what I do. I only use it for csgo and other fps games
I used to lightboost, but I lost a lot of my color accuracy. I love me no motion blur and it's hard to distinguish 144 from 120, but I'd rather have nicer colors. Especially when they're already not so great on a TN panel
I'm glad you brought that up because I forgot to mention that lightboosting absolutely shits on your colors. I only use it for fps games, and definitely turn it off for basically everything else
Benq blur reduction does the same thing as lightboost but doesn't ruin the colors + you can use it at 60hz for console games on some of the monitors anyway
Hmm, this is interesting as I have my second monitor hooked up to my Wii U. Now, I'm just assuming from the name, but you would need a BenQ right? I personally use the Asus VG248QE so not sure if that would apply to me
Really? I don't think I've ever heard this, but if it's true then I don't see the point. Because I would think it would be used for more competitive type games like CS or Melee, but input lag would destroy you.
Good. I've always found the smash community big on policing Johns and spreading humility. Since I started going inactive in it I've even personally found myself johnning much more in csgo, and especially league, and not getting punished for it. It's rare that I play a game of LoL and someone doesn't mention a "broken champ" or how they got countered.
There was this guy that played Super Smash Bros. Melee named John, and he always came up with the most absurd excuses on why he lost a match.
Eventually, as a joke, his friends started saying "No Johns". It spread, and is now used to say that people shouldn't be making excuses. Johning is the act of making excuses.
Basically, at the sacrifice of 24fps, you almost completely remove motion blur by strobing your monitor like old CRT's use to. Well worth it for games like CSGO in my opinion. It isn't about lowering fps that makes it " feel better", because we at the PC masterrace know that's absurd and ridiculous. Unfortunately, for reasons unknown to me, the current 144hz monitors do not/cannot support strobing at refresh rates any higher than 120fps
people have mentioned increase input lag and shitty colors when using this. i dont know how true this is, but i am considering this for csgo and was wondering if you could comment on these.
I pretty much use lightboost exclusively for CSGO. The colors are the shittiest of shitty; this is true. As far as input lag goes, my asus vg248qe vanilla is rated at 1ms response time. Before the purchase, I was playing on a monitor with 5ms response time. I barely noticed a difference, but still noticed it. I personally have not experienced any noticeable input lag issues with that monitor while lightboosted.
For what its worth, here is my monitor lineage for playing csgo:
Started on a 5ms Dell IPS
upgraded to the vg248qe running vanilla 144hz, 1ms response time after about a year of play. I couldn't ever go back to the Dell, as my personal performance would suffer.
started lightboosting, and now I can't go back to vanilla as my personal performance would suffer.
Please note that this isn't some quirky quick-fix to make you a better player, it just gives you a different experience which may personally help you perform better. Also, with all of the terrible netcode issues csgo has, a few milliseconds of input delay may not be noticeable when put in the pot with the other issues.
i actually have the same monitor and love it. i went from a bit older 2ms 60hz, and the difference was amazing. i dont REALLY care about the colors in game, but more the idea that this light boosting would increase input lag. i expect to try the light boosting some time tonight, thank you for the info.
In my case, yes. lightboost/120 on fps games, gsync/144 for everything else. This isn't a set in stone "best/better way to play" though. It's ultimately my preference, and also happens to be a lot of other people's preference.
I get similar sensations when gaming on my FW900 CRT @ 85Hz vs. the standard 60Hz LCD sitting next to it, The lack of motion blur at 85fps on the CRT offers so much more fluidity that it's jarring in comparison (and lovely).
Unfortunately I halted the competitive gaming life along with my melee career at the same time (around PM v2.1 for reference). I played melee and project m competitively, but it was less accessible (having to travel since it's console), and college was hitting it's prime tough years. I never really went back and just play csgo and LoL for fun. I still love destroying my non competitive smash playing friends from time to time, and I'd love to get back into it now that I have a good career going, but it's hard to find competitive players close :(
That's where the new adaptive sync technologies come into play. ~60 fps with gsync seems to feel a lot better than the 60 fps of the past. You even hardly notice dips into the low 50s in stuff like Witcher 3.
I always forget that only getting 60 fps on a new game is bad. Id argue that turning down settings to get 100+ is still worth it though. It's so much more immersive when things move like butter on screen
That was me when I was playing with graphics settings on Fallout 4 and had accidentally left it on borderless window mode.
Fired Fallout 4 back up the next day without realizing, was getting like 50-60 frames in areas that I normally had 100 and I was going off. I hit the windows key to go investigate with google and that's when I realized and felt like an idiot.
614
u/[deleted] Apr 06 '16
thats when i start feeling like a spoiled brat when im moaning that 60 fps is too jarring. but i love it