Nitpicking graphical trends

Avatar image for dimebag667
#1 Edited by dimebag667 (1302 posts) -

I'm sure this will just come across as whinny nonsense but these couple trends have worn out their welcome.

1. Overuse of particle effects

2. Sunrise/Sunset in mp

The overuse of particle effects has been bugging me for a while now and it needs to stop. This is a bit hyperbolic, but it feels like every bit of magic, every campfire, hell, even certain doors getting kicked in have an inordinate amount of particle flair added for no discernable reason. One example would be from the new MW trailer where the breaching team kicks open a door and for some reason particles go flowing everywhere. I know it's minor but it ruins my sense of immersion. The old standard of "less is more" should apply here.

And the over usage of sunrise/sunset is frustrating from an actual gameplay perspective. I'm assuming it's prevalence is because of every tv trying to push hdr and all their nits!... but it doesn't added immersion for me, just annoyance. Being blinded by the sun in a firefight is about the last thing I would ever consider being fun. My preference would be that all mp levels adhere to the noon/night rule that I just made up.

I know there are way bigger problems to cry about, but seeing how many games these days focus on graphics over gameplay, I think these changes would be for the positive.

Do you guys agree, disagree, or have your own takes on the graphical trends in gaming?

P.S. Another topic would be games looking very similar to each other because they use the same engines. Discuss

Avatar image for with_teeth26
#2 Posted by with_teeth26 (9616 posts) -

How about chromatic aberration and AA techniques that blur the image to hell? Both make games look way worse and are pretty common

Avatar image for dimebag667
#3 Posted by dimebag667 (1302 posts) -

@with_teeth26: yeah some of that is terrible.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#4 Edited by uninspiredcup (34917 posts) -

Ah, maybe a shitty example, it's a 10 year old game, but the depth of field in The Witcher: Enhanced Edition during conversations is overdone.

I think even on consoles they should have an option to turn DOF off, it just looks plain horrible and overdone sometimes making it looks like a bad green-screen set than characters connected to the world around them.

Risen 3
Risen 3

Piranha Bytes especially. It's like someones set the blur-tool in Photoshop to max and scrubbed shit all over your image.

Nonsensical as well.

One of Piranha Bytes best strengths is a highly detailed world environment. Where as their models generally look and move like shit.

Avatar image for warmblur
#6 Posted by warmblur (2978 posts) -

I hate film grain with a passion.

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#7 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3418 posts) -

@warmblur said:

I hate film grain with a passion.

Me too! It bugs me even more in 4K UHD blurays. I can understand if its a stylistic choice like in Detective Pikachu, but please stop using actual film in movies. It looks like ass on todays tv's. People are paying thousands of dollars to look at 4K images that look like they're made out of sand... Stop it

Avatar image for davillain-
#8 Edited by DaVillain- (37978 posts) -
  • Motion Blur (30fps on, 60fps off)
  • Film Grain
  • Bloom
  • Lens flare (J.J Abram loves his Lens flare)
  • Ambient Occlusion (always a framerate killer, and while it looks undeniably nice turned on most game engines, it's a big performance hit cost)

I always leave Depth of Field on, (depending on the game, I'll mostly turn it off) Depth of Field can increase immersion. Unless it decreases the fps. Some games implement it well, and for first-person-shooter games with mostly close combat, it makes it more cinematic.

As for Shadows, the thing is, lower shadow quality is more realistic. Shadows in real life are blurry, not sharp or defined. I usually turn it up high depending on the game itself of course.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
#9 Posted by R4gn4r0k (31580 posts) -

I dislike:

- sub 30fps choppy gameplay

- motion blur (only fits high speeds i.e. racing games)

- depth of field

- blur in general

- FXAA

- blur everywhere

- chromatic aberration

- blur

Avatar image for ten_pints
#10 Posted by Ten_Pints (3902 posts) -

Any effect that tries to mimic a camera lens is shit, what they should be going for is to simulate the eye.

I don't mind if they implement a subtle use of depth of field, for example if you get close to something or some gets close to you quickly then it should blur the image at that focal point to simulate the eye refocus,

But constant use of DoP is not how I view the real world.

Avatar image for saltslasher
#11 Posted by SaltSlasher (1303 posts) -

1-Survival/Overly Realistic/RPG-lite

Everyone thinks they need to make their game more survival like, feels like more and more are opting for over-realism than arcadey feel. Example is like if Doom or Wolfenstein made you collect random shit to craft health and better guns. If gonna do it, just go all out. BotW is basically epitome of everything you shouldn't do, cel shaded shit show trying to be realistic and have lite-survival even though you can pause and heal anytime which have to do since your stupid weapons break all the time.

Avatar image for Gatygun
#13 Posted by Gatygun (1586 posts) -

Bloom is another one, nintendo seems to be really on that 20 year old hype train with there games. It's trash.

Avatar image for jasonofa36
#14 Posted by JasonOfA36 (1321 posts) -

I hate motion blur.
I hate Chromatic Aberration.
I hate DoF outside of cutscenes.
Also, shitty textures annoy me.

Avatar image for djoffer
#15 Posted by djoffer (1451 posts) -

@saltslasher: pretty sure you missed the topic...

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#16 Posted by mrbojangles25 (44352 posts) -

@ten_pints said:

Any effect that tries to mimic a camera lens is shit, what they should be going for is to simulate the eye.

Pretty much agree with this 100%. At least for first-person games.

Games played from third-person or overhead I think can afford to take some creative license and go for certain "movie" or "camera" effects.

But anything played from first-person should go for realism, not exaggeration. No film grain, no motion blur, no excessive depth-of-field, shadows should be soft not sharp, and there should be no "vaseline-on-lens" effects to save resources everything should be sharp.

Avatar image for Yams1980
#17 Posted by Yams1980 (3600 posts) -

100% agree with all these mentioned.

Especially them using sloppy and fast AA like TXAA/TAA/FXAA. All blur and degrade the image on the screen so much, it makes no sense at all to use them.

Bugs me a lot they don't include SMAA in games as an option. This antialiasing mode is fantastic, barely no performance hit, knocks off most noticeable edges and doesn't degrade the image. It's basically what 2x AA used to do in dx9 games, but 95% less performance hit.

Unfortunately you almost always have to use reshade/sweetfx to get SMAA in a game and having directx injection gives you a moderate performance hit.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
#18 Posted by R4gn4r0k (31580 posts) -
@mrbojangles25 said:
@ten_pints said:

Any effect that tries to mimic a camera lens is shit, what they should be going for is to simulate the eye.

Pretty much agree with this 100%. At least for first-person games.

Games played from third-person or overhead I think can afford to take some creative license and go for certain "movie" or "camera" effects.

But anything played from first-person should go for realism, not exaggeration. No film grain, no motion blur, no excessive depth-of-field, shadows should be soft not sharp, and there should be no "vaseline-on-lens" effects to save resources everything should be sharp.

Yeah I'm gonna +1 this as well.

Games trying to emulate a camera lens, but you are looking through someone's eyes is really weird.