The Still New What Did You Last Do Thread

[Dancso]

now we just need some mouse acceleration and delicious motion blur

[Nash]

I would very much like motion blur actually, not even joking. I don't mind ultra-subtle MB. I have MB left on to the default settings in Doom 4 and it didn't affect my playing experience negatively at all.

[comet1337]

i keep annually finding a tiny spider in my apartment
then again, i'd rather have one spider rather than a dozen actual pest insects

[Dancso]

Well, there's the ReShade effects to produce motion blur (found it under GemFX.cfg)

I personally have a distaste for motion blur because it often hides small details that can be very important. Though admittedly it makes little difference in non-competetive games.
On the flip side though, i find that motion blur tricks my eye into thinking the footage is much higher fps than it is. A couple of times now I've been watching a video of the new Doom and thought to myself, "hey I dont get that kinda smooth gameplay" then I rush into the game to check, only to find out I AM getting 60 fps

Makes sense though when I think about it, the human brain does fill in the gaps between the percieved positions of a moving object by blurring it.

[Nash]

This time with less eye-bleed

[InsanityBringer]

I don't tend to mind a lot of post processing, but I really do hope all of this skips out on the depth of field. I don't like my screen being covered in vaseline.

I liked Wolf TNO as much as anyone else, but I did find the post processing to be a tad obnoxious in places, DOF being the biggest annoyance. (also the screen space color correction just didn't look good at all when you entered a different area and suddenly the entirety of the world changes color)

[NeuralStunner]

Bloom is a poor substitute for actual specularity, but a substitute nonetheless I suppose. Subtle bloom is okay, if rather pointless in most situations.

I think my favorite moment in lighting effects is when I realized that Skyrim does the "eyes adjusting to light" effect when you go between dark and bright areas. This would be an interesting way to deal with bloom.

Also motion blur is a disgusting bandaid for low framerate caps. Some games won't let you turn it off, because they suck. It doesn't look good. It makes my eyes hurt. (That's not even hyperbole.)

[Captain J]

So you're not the only one who didn't liked the overwhelming present fancy effects. Neat.

[leileilol]

Motionblur is fine as long as you're not taking the lazy buffer/feedback route so many (console) games have forced you to suffer through in the 2000s. It's better to have mutliple buffers, blended with lighter color values only, and try to predictively shader it on everything you can to get it effective in 60fps (cryengine3 does this very effectively, and it shows in Doom4), so it's more like motion blur and less like imbeingthedruggedplzhelp blur (seemingly popularized by GTA3). Some games in the 90s even avoided that technique and just have position tween stretching on flares (Driver, Outtrigger) and stars (Freespace) to fake the good motion blur

[wildweasel]

I imagine bloom effects would make The Sky May Be an even more psychedelic experience. Heh.

[Nash]

Oh god the GTA3 "motion blur" was so annoying, at first I thought my PS2 was broken (I was like 16 at the time) then I realized I could turn it off.

[dpJudas]

GZDoom with post processing is lit fammmm (I exaggerated the bloom for the LULz but of course the CVars are user-adjustable and GZDoom ships with very subtle defaults so don't worry)

Haha, that's how I started out with the values too. The bloom probably will only look really great when maps are made specifically for it. Otherwise you get the "early 00's fake bloom" thing.

Need to quiz Graf or some of the other devs on what it would take to allow sector values above 255. That, along with 16 BPP textures, would really allow HDR age Doom maps.

[dpJudas]

I think my favorite moment in lighting effects is when I realized that Skyrim does the "eyes adjusting to light" effect when you go between dark and bright areas. This would be an interesting way to deal with bloom.

Actually gzdoom does do this now - except that I cheated a bit and made it grab the "eyes adjusting to light" from the sector you stand in rather than what the eye is seeing. Maybe in a future update I'll add that it properly grabs the exposure from what is rendered.

Personally I think Skyrim really had one of the most awful implementations of this feature - I could never get used to how the light kept fluctuating up and down all the time.

[Nash]

The bloom probably will only look really great when maps are made specifically for it. Otherwise you get the "early 00's fake bloom" thing. :)

This is what I have been trying to say the whole time, basically. Copy-pasted from another conversation...

This opens up a whole new realm of mapping aesthetics - if you want to design your visuals to look good with processing, it's like a whole new art form trying to balance the contrast between dark and light areas as doing so will completely change how the blooming reacts to the scene

I understand what it means for modders/content creators to have these as tools that they can use to further enhance the visuals for their projects; I don't see these as player/user-only enhancements (although of course users can choose to do whatever they want with the postprocessing, too). With careful design, this stuff can really make a scene look amazing, WITHOUT cringe-worthy hackery that will make the devs cry. :P

This is why I've been so supportive and positive about the whole post processing built into GZDoom from the get-go and not jumping on the naysaying wagon (as I /do/ realize there's a fair share of people who immediately shoot down this stuff on first sight and AGAIN - I do understand where the hate is coming from, as so many high profile examples have done it completely wrong and left a bad impression to a lot of people)...

It's pretty much the same with modern engines like Unity or Unreal Engine really - you see a lot of crappy amateur 3D crap, but the ones who DO know what they're doing - the visuals are simply stunning.

[InsanityBringer]

Need to quiz Graf or some of the other devs on what it would take to allow sector values above 255. That, along with 16 BPP textures, would really allow HDR age Doom maps.

I can't speak for what would need to be done internally , but from a mapping perspective UDMF would make it incredibly easy to change the field size or type without much issue, which is cool