That also depends on the person. Save for really fast moving things I can barely tell the difference between 30 and 60fps, and I cap out at 75 before I can’t notice a difference in any situation. One of my friend’s anything less than 75 gives them headaches from the choppiness.
aaaantoine@lemmy.world 5 months ago
On one hand, 360hz seems imperceptibly faster than 240hz for human eyes.
On the other hand, if you get enough frames in, you don’t have to worry about simulating motion blur.
ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
Clam_Cathedral@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
Yeah, personally playing games at 30fps feels disruptively laggy at least for the first few minutes. 60 is good, but the jump to 120 is night and day. I was shocked that going from 120 to 240 was just as noticeable an improvement as the last to me, especially when so many people say they don’t notice it much. Hard to find newer games that give me that much fps though.
DosDude@retrolemmy.com 5 months ago
I never worry about motion blur, because I turn it off. The stupidest effect ever. If I walk around I don’t see motion blur. Cameras see motion blur because of shutter speed, not the human eye.
Petter1@lemm.ee 5 months ago
Umm, well, there is something like motion blur experienced by humans, in fact, your brain creates the time bending effect based on picture 1 and picture 2
www.abc.net.au/science/articles/…/3647276.htm
There is a trick where you watch a clock that counts seconds and turn your head fastly away and back there (or something like that) and you will see, that the rate of seconds seem to be inconsistent
See “1. CHRONOSTASIS” bigthink.com/neuropsych/time-illusions/
DosDude@retrolemmy.com 5 months ago
Alright. I didn’t know, thanks. Though the human motion blur is vastly different to camera blur in my experience. And games that have motion blur look really unnatural.
Petter1@lemm.ee 5 months ago
I don’t know if there is scientific proof that every human experiences “motion bur” the same way. I would bet not.
VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 5 months ago
More realistic blur smudges things based on how the object is moving rather than how the camera is moving. For example, Doom Eternal applies some blur to the spinning barrels and the bullet belt on the chaingun while it’s firing, but doesn’t blur the world while you’re sprinting.
Fermion@mander.xyz 5 months ago
On the other hand, humans don’t see in defined frames. The signals aren’t synchronized. So a big part of perceived blurring is that the succession of signals isn’t forming a single focused image. There isn’t really a picture 1 and 2 for your brain to process discreetly. And different regions in your vision are more sensitive to small changes than others.
A faster refresh rate is always “better” for the human eye, but you’ll need higher and higher panel brightness to have a measurable reaction time difference.
But hitting really high refresh rates requires too many other compromises on image quality, so I won’t personally be seeking out anything more than a 120hz display for the time being.
Petter1@lemm.ee 5 months ago
I agree, human eyes register only change in light in an analog style way (no framerate more something like waves as I understood) compared to cameras, which register all light on every frame. I simplified that part with the “pictures” because I thought it was more understandable like that I guess better would have been something like „your eyes kinda shut down during fast movements of the head and your brain makes up for that by generating a nice transition“
ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
Motion blur in games gives me bad motion sickness and garbles what I’m seeing. I already have a hard enough time processing information fast enough in any kind of fps I don’t need things to be visually ambiguous on top of that
helenslunch@feddit.nl 5 months ago
Wave your hand in front of your face and tell me it’s not blurry