Disable Motion Blur?

[Pedro]

Is there any way to disable motion blur? I dont like it at all, just like noone should.
totally destroys the game for me.

[SmithDoc]

not to my knowledge, no.

[Rise]

1: Moion Blur turns off after the awakening sequence
2: People love motion blur and you can't change that
3: Second degree burns from your toxicity.

[Pedro]

Dont be an idiot, noone likes motion blur. Except when you are an idiot of course. So might be true in your case.

[Batman]

Originally posted by Pedro Pizza:

Dont be an idiot, noone likes motion blur. Except when you are an idiot of course. So might be true in your case.

I hate motion blur too but you shouldn't be an idiot about it.

[@R+5]

Originally posted by Pedro Pizza:

Dont be an idiot, noone likes motion blur. Except when you are an idiot of course. So might be true in your case.

The only reason someone could be actually an idiot for liking motion blur would be someone that liked it in a racing game, while playing, because only in those games it affects negatively gameplay from making hard to look where you are going (and that only happens with screen with poor framerates), and is usually uneeded (except maybe for replays with special camera effects). In fps and survival horror games blur is also rarely present, unless it has a purpose.

In most games, when motion blur happens its an aesthetique device, and will rarely be present unless its needed to increase tension or adding dramatic effect: it may annoy you, but thats actually part of the point (ie to make you feel closer to the character lack of focus under adrenaline rush, and the sort); that means, that while it may be annoying, its presernce isnt stupid at all: the problem is that unlike most people you may have a hard time handling it or getting why its there.

[Baines]

Originally posted by @R+5:

In most games, when motion blur happens its an aesthetique device, and will rarely be present unless its needed to increase tension or adding dramatic effect: it may annoy you, but thats actually part of the point (ie to make you feel closer to the character lack of focus under adrenaline rush, and the sort); that means, that while it may be annoying, its presernce isnt stupid at all: the problem is that unlike most people you may have a hard time handling it or getting why its there.

There are legitimate issues with motion blur in video games.

Something that goes beyond personal opinions is that the motion blur in nearly every video game is simply done wrong. Rather than spend the processing power and effort to properly mimic the real world effect, various shortcuts are taken. In the worst case, it is the equivalent of smearing Vaseline on the screen or can be physically nausea-inducing in some viewers. But even the better cases are still subtly wrong, and that unnaturalness can affect the viewer in a negative manner.

Motion blur also gets used in situations where it would not actually occur. The prime offender here is in first-person view games, where many games will apply motion blur if you turn quickly. People will even defend this practice, arguing that it is realistic. After all, it is what happens when an external force spins them, and it is what happens when turning a camera, and it is what various media (movies, TV, games) show. But human vision is not a video camera (see also the inappropriate use of camera artifacts such as lens flare in FPS view games.) You can even prove it in a couple of seconds; just quickly turn your head. The human brain is actually wired to shut down the processing of vision when you turn your head quickly, your view will "snap" from the start position to the end position with nothing between.

And just because a creator uses an effect doesn't mean the effect is used well. Just look at movies, games, and TV. Even the best directors make mistakes, using an effect inappropriately or just overusing it. The vast majority of creators are not on the level of the best directors. Further, there is the bandwagon effect, where an effect explodes into popularity and seemingly everyone will overuse it for years before it dies down to more reasonable (but still often over or inappropriate use.) And thus we end up with stuff like the lens flare era of film, which became such a running joke that director JJ Abrams ultimately issued an apology for his overuse of the effect in his Star Trek films. Or so many video games sticking in a chromatic aberration effect. Or film directors' addiction to slowing the camera for action scenes. Or overuse of color correction in films. Or bad CG in films. Or motion blur in games. Or...

[@R+5]

Originally posted by Baines:

Something that goes beyond personal opinions is that the motion blur in nearly every video game is simply done wrong. Rather than spend the processing power and effort to properly mimic the real world effect, various shortcuts are taken.

The first sentence is partially right, and for some of the reasons you exposed; still doesnt apply to this game, because the blur isnt excessive to block view completely: it reduces it, so the player understands the character is focused in escaping or sprint.

The blur then has a lot of sense in relation to the nature of the game: is not a shooter; its about strategy and stealth. If the current blur wasnt an obstacle for the player, then he or she could move the character with a lot more ease, and that would impact negatively gameplay because one of the main obstacles in the game is avoiding groups of enemies, and planning ahead how you are going to explore or attack. the easier to improvise, the less risk the ai has.

If this was a shooter, it could still be ok, depending on how the gameplay and level design of the game was.

Originally posted by Baines:

In the worst case, it is the equivalent of smearing Vaseline on the screen or can be physically nausea-inducing in some viewers. But even the better cases are still subtly wrong, and that unnaturalness can affect the viewer in a negative manner.

Motion blur also gets used in situations where it would not actually occur. The prime offender here is in first-person view games, where many games will apply motion blur if you turn quickly.

In real life if you move your head fast, you will perceive some motion blur. motion sickness happens in part to be unable to focus in something, but mostly because the "gravity sensors" inside your ears are moving a lot. If a game can produce motion sickness, where motion sickness is needed to match the action, and as long as most people are able to be ok with it, then is not bad design. You cant make everything accesible to everyone and every taste. thats why some games include a warning about flickering lights, rather than removing them. In few games some effects can be turned off, but motion blur usually isnt, because it would give unfair advantage to some players.

If a player is turning a lot, and the motion blur annoys him or her, but most people and pro players are able to play the same game ok, then the player with the problem should search another strategy to plan ahead and reduce the need to do unecessary turns or improve the precision of control.

You should be able to notice that if you spend a few minutes watching different fps players, and with different levels of skill. Players who lack experience playing a game (fps or not) will make more unecessary turns and movements (this is also easy to notice in racing games or fighting games).

Originally posted by Baines:

But human vision is not a video camera (see also the inappropriate use of camera artifacts such as lens flare in FPS view games.) You can even prove it in a couple of seconds; just quickly turn your head. The human brain is actually wired to shut down the processing of vision when you turn your head quickly, your view will "snap" from the start position to the end position with nothing between.

Flares are visual effects and part of optics, which also affects your eyes. You may rarely notice flares in life, but you can notice them directly with your eyes under the right conditions (an example could be having hair in front of your face, and be exposed to light in the proper angle, or having bad eyes).

The brain doesnt "shut down the processing of vision when you turn": you are still watching, but your perception changes, for the very same reason motion blur happens in film (the cells in your eyes arent fast enough to process the changes; we have a "framerate" too). Our eyes are also pretty much like the lenses of cameras, but we wont notice how similar they are, unless you understand that vision is not entirely something related to the eyes, but how the mind builds images.

Originally posted by Baines:

Even the best directors make mistakes, using an effect inappropriately or just overusing it. The vast majority of creators are not on the level of the best directors. Further, there is the bandwagon effect, where an effect explodes into popularity and seemingly everyone will overuse it for years before it dies down to more reasonable (but still often over or inappropriate use.)

When a film becomes very popular, and popularizes a genre, most directors trying to follow the style will attempt to emulate it to get the "feeling" while also trying to do their thing; they will use similar tools and effects, because film is about visual narrative. This is why bad directors will overuse a special effect, and others will be more moderate.

The chromatic abberation effect is popular for many reasons, and has been abused in some cases, because has been common in different styles and genres that either focus in psychedelics, retro style, or increase "realism" to make a video look it was recorded with a low budget camera (maybe old).

The slow motion, just like previous examples, is common in some sequences, because it is the best way to expose some details and increase the amount of information available to the viewer, so they can understand the tension of the moment. And just like with your other examples, one of the reasons they are overused, is emulation of style. If a studio wants to make an action or sci-fi film, but they dont have a good script, or director, and so on, they will rely on bad writers, directors, and so on; their job is to make a film, and they will use tropes and the visual styles linked to those tropes, without caring much about the story. They will try to force the narrative into the visual sequences that could help a trailer become attractive to allow the movie to make money.

imo, A good writer, and good directors, will still use the tropes and visual effects that are linked to them, but they will spend time in making the story flow. Every succesful effect will become part of a gag or a "running joke", because thats how film and narrative evolves too. Each period and genre of visual content (or any kind of artistic media), has and will have overused effects and methods, because one or two people may be able to find a way to use it great, but most will include it to attract viewers that liked the style.

Spend some time reading about how to write scripts and how to create stories, and maybe then you wont care much about oversued effects: they are unavoidable, like bad music after a small group of musicians (or a small group of music bands) have become popular and are highly effective with their style or genre. Poor emulations will happen, and will be more common than good one. Thats how art evolves.

By the way, you might want to read a book called "mind hacks", so you can update some of your ideas about vision.