This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Is it just me, or are DoF and Motion Blur a waste of resource?

#21arleasPosted 4/27/2014 7:23:05 AM
If it doesn't ruin my framerate and it doesn't bother me while playing, it stays on. If it bothers me while playing I turn it off regardless, and if it ruins the framerate I turn it off because it's one of the things i'd miss the least.

It really depends on a game by game basis though.
---
http://raptr.com/badge/arleas/uc.png
http://www.speedtest.net/result/3201564081.png
#22MackorovPosted 4/27/2014 7:32:45 AM
I have no problem with Motion blur and some games even has it forced enabled so you just have to deal with it. It does help in dampening mouse lag though.

Depth of Field, however, is a waste of resources IMO. Not everyone likes it and it eats up a huge chunk of framerate. Only reason to have it on is for cutscenes or taking pretty screenshots
#23Kokuei05Posted 4/27/2014 7:36:31 AM
Motion Blur if done right is great to immerse speed. The bad thing about it is that it's difficult to implement only certain scenes with motion blur and others without.

It's the same with Depth of Field. The distance is really situational. In different scenes; the distance where the blur should be or shouldn't be is detrimental to looking appealing.

With that said; I prefer both off unless it's a Racing game where I leave both on.
---
Xeon x3220 @ 3.3Ghz [367*9] | Hyper 212 EVO | GA-EP45-UD3L | Mushkin 4GB DDR2-800 | EA-430W | 1GB 560 AC Twin Turbo II | WD 500 GB | AL1916W | G400s | HTF600-S
#24Sir_Meowcat_EsqPosted 4/27/2014 7:37:22 AM
Motion blur is gorgeous and natural looking at the proper framerate (40, and arguably even 30). At 60, it just further "enhances" the unrealistic sense of motion. Sub-30, it just looks slow and bad.

DoF, depends on the implementation. Two Worlds 2 in particular had the worst DoF I've ever seen and warranted turning off, but most high-end games use it well.
#25Killah PriestPosted 4/27/2014 7:47:14 AM
I dislike it because of how its generally overused.
---
Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and you weep alone.
The armory of god is guarding me but all you can see is holographic artistry.
#26Scisor50Posted 4/27/2014 8:03:47 AM
I like DoF. However I've recently gotten to hate motion blur with Outlast. It made me feel sick.
---
"WHAT THE HELL IS AN ESPORTS?!" -Mr. Torgue
#27Jo_JoaninePosted 4/27/2014 8:23:53 AM
snesmaster40 posted...
Lonestar2000 posted...
I always disable both of them.
#28biohazard1775Posted 4/27/2014 8:29:33 AM
I have mixed feelings on DoF and I always turn off motion blur.
---
http://i.imgur.com/AuuOUVo.png
#29CELTEKKPosted 4/27/2014 8:30:41 AM
I turn both on before I start playing; and if it looks like garbage while I'm playing I'll tune it, leaving either one or both off.
---
psn:celtekk|steam:celtekk
3770k@4.8
#30cody4783Posted 4/27/2014 9:17:27 AM
Motion blur has very, very few examples where it's been done well enough to be accepted, IMO. Certain games like the original Crysis, or I believe the Metro games did it well. Others, it's just mudding of the visuals.

DoF is something I despise in gameplay, and only really tolerate for scenic screenshots. It makes it annoyingly hard to distinguish things moving between foreground and in the distance, and really f***es up my situational awareness in games. Not to mention it seems like an excuse to hide ugly skyboxes or just not bothering to put in distance scenery.

I'm actively playing Dark Souls and *HAD* to turn off the distant DoF effect, because I got tired of getting to a nice looking landscape or seeing out in the horizon, and just seeing everything blurred out into oblivion, and looking worse than the damn sewer I just crawled out of.
---
PC: http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/cody4783/cody4783.jpg