Pick one to eliminate forever, the rest are made twice as bad

Motion blur 100%.
I turn off that shit every time.
Chromatic aberration is cancer too but I can live with it.
Bloom and ambient occlusion aren't a big deal imo

motion blur

(OP)
SSAO is the worst form of ambient occlusion but things (generally) look better with it on than off.
Bloom is fine when used sparingly, like in situations where something is meant to be ungodly bright or your character is temporarily disoriented and sensitive to light or some shit; if it's being used when you're just outside while it's sunny then it's AIDS.
Motion blur can be tastefully executed only when it's tied to animations like sword swings and whatnot, rather than just panning the camera to the side and turning everything into a blurry mess.
Chromatic aberration is an abomination of an effect and ruins anything it touches. There's nothing to be gained from using it unless you're canonically using a shitty camera in-game, like looking through camera feeds in stealth games or something like Kane & Lynch where the whole point is supposed to be that it's found footage from a shitty phone.

Chromatic Aberration is the most offensive but Bloom is the most disruptive.

chromatic aberration, easy choice

NTA but the clue will be a pillowcase filled with bricks in the drawing room

TAA if it was an option, otherwise motion blur

why do these things even exist? Do some people really think they look good?

I like bloom when used sparingly. I still love how Demon's Souls looks.

> SSAO bad

Spotted the underage simple-minded middle-school dropout faggot who has 0 knowledge abut graphics design and only heard some surface things and now imagines he knows everything

Typical pathetic Yea Forums kid

>reddit spacing
lol

Is this famous American education? Education, people drop everything for and move into Muttlandia?

Chromatic aberration. My fucking eyes bleed every time I play Elden Ring

MP1+2 is the only game that make motion blur looks good and it happen during a slow mo camera make it a less intrusive and a reasonable slowmo effect.
Meanwhile the otherwise happen in Vanquish game where you dash around at the speed of light and with full blown nauseating motion blur happening at your screen 24/7 and the same thing still exist in PC port because the blur is coded into the game engine because it used to hide the fact that PS3 can't handle vanguish at over 30fps so they need the blur to hide it.

Don't reply to me ever again, faggot.

Whatcha gonna do abut it underage faggot?

Motion blur and Chromatic Aberration, mainly because I couldn't stand those being twice as bad.

SSAO stops objects from looking like they're floating, it doesn't cause it. It's calculated in a completely different way shadows are, to get the same effect with real time shadows it would tank performance.

It's really one of the greatest things to come to video games in the past 20 years and the only graphical effect you need for your world to not look like complete shit.

I warned you. Square up, you crusty ass queer.

*draws sigil with salt*

*begins chanting in tongues*

Nope, this picture would be completely white if SSAO was disabled. SSAO being enabled does some rough calculations to add "pre-baked shadow areas" where the geometry of the location would have less access to light. SSAO (+ conventional shadow techniques) helps give depth to the picture the viewer sees.

SSAO doesn't HAVE to be there, I mean you can have games like Mario 64 that are 3D and predate SSAO, but walls and surfaces will have "flat lighting", so to say, where the wall's colors/shade is uniform throughout, even at angles, which if that's your goal as a game dev, go for it, but SSAO is essentially one of the many necessary tricks needed to imitate realistic lighting in today's rasterized games (pre-fully raytraced lighting engines, which could help eliminate any need for SSAO)

Attached: 1624130745031.png (600x470, 116.72K)

>(pre-fully raytraced lighting engines, which could help eliminate any need for SSAO)
Any RTX memes still use forms of AO because it is INCREDIBLY expensive to calculate indirect scattered atmosphere light and its shadowing
This wont change for a decade going forward.

Bad ssao is the worst, though.

no idea what your console game is but you don't need motion blur if your fps is high enough, your eyes already do some motion blur you don't need to add more on top of that

>ssao
how come games from 10-20 years ago could do shadows while today you need a bootleg replica that doesn't even look right

Attached: 1647966780087.webm (1600x900, 1.83M)

I'm a retarded ape. What am I looking at with SSAO?

also
>chromatic aberration
>your eyes don't do it
>cameras try to avoid it as much as possible
>but in games it's hip and cool
why
bootleg shadows under the car

Maybe, but bad SSAO like in the pic is extremely ugly and distracting. If you made it 2 times worse it would be unbearable. Literally evey object having black aura around it.

>is extremely ugly and distracting
I spent like a minute looking at the picture and I don't notice a thing. Don't be an autistic fag obsessing over meaningless things. You'll be happier that way

Maybe don't post in graphics thread if you're blind.

Attached: file.png (640x360, 281.99K)

Is this Alan Wake?

Why do devs even use chromatic aberration?
The only time it was properly used was in kane & lynch 2.

Far Cry 3

oh god, this looks like one of those shitty hdr photos

Attached: 0xuqqt5n2bg31.jpg (2773x2090, 926.44K)

I was making a joke about the shadowing.

It looks cool in some games. Alien Isolation and SOMA come to mind.
holy shit what the fuck
that pic gives me a headache

Camera motion blur is ass, but animation motion blur is a nice stylistic element. I assume op is referring to camera motion blur.

Volumetric Light vs Traced Light:

You can think of volumetric Light as like putting a lighbulb in a container of water, it doesn't scatter but rather "fills the container" and the shadows are just "a bounce of a bigh light"

Ray/Path wathever we are using, traces individual rays of light it needs immense power, and it isn't real, because in reality a Ray of light isn't so mathematically correct, it has many variables interfering, like gravity which makes the light go slightly slower/bend, and even if there is hoy air it changes completely how light "shows", this requires huge amount of power to calculate every single Ray of light scattering across the "scene/view".

Think of it like this:
Volumetric Light has more fidelity in what the developers tought the scene should look like, ray/Path is more "random" and it gives you more sense of reality. If you ever played GTA and GTA Remaster(ignoring everything else) you can see how the light is completely different, while it looks like shit and the characters look like plastic, the light makes the simulation more "natural" as there is(are) more shades of light(light paths) as opposed to one big light.

But I agree, older games have that feel of being more "scenic" because you had to make the big light perfect.

>Motion Blur gone
>Any game able to hit 44fps takes 0 visual hit and performance increases substantially because of how hard its performance impact balloons with high framerates
>Ambient Occlusion gone
>I literally don't need to explain why this cancer improves fucking everything

Attached: 21736981723961.gif (500x565, 581.3K)

You have that the other way around. Old games baked shadows out of necessity but tried to do it in a way that emulated real ones. Modern real-time techniques do a better job than either baked or SSAO, but are expensive

You can't eliminate any of them or people will see that your console game is fucking ugly and run on 24 FPS.

>motion blur and bloom are good
no
>go watch the new Kingdom Hearts 4 trailer
fuck no

>Motion blur can be tastefully executed only when it's tied to animations like sword swings and whatnot
are there even any games that do this?

Motion blue outside of racing games is unnecessary and just looks like shit.
Motion blur in racing games though makes it feel much faster

That's a good point user.
Motion blur is fine when you're in a vehicle or moving quickly.
But when you are just standing around and turn the camera (ostensibly the actors head) and the world turns into a blurry mess that's just stupid.

None of these are inherently bad if implemented correctly, except maybe chromatic aberration, though even that can find its place in contextual situations.
Ambient occlusion is a crucial part of modern graphics in particular.
Motion blur, especially per-object motion blur, can look great if it isn't applied like retards who just made their first CryEngine mod.
Same goes for bloom, if you use it to accentuate small elements, instead of plastering it all over the image, and even then, it can be used in peculiar artistic directions, like Fumito Ueda's games, to give an ethereal vibe to certain locations.

How is this even a hard decision? Chromatic aberration is the only one that has such narrow application it may as well not even exist. The other three are fine. They've always been fine. It's just a dumbshit retard meme to pretend there's something wrong with them. They can be used poorly but so what? Anything can be used poorly.

Bloom

What exactly is the point of chromatic aberration?

I'm sorry, are you actually trying to claim when STALKER was released the lighting for the game was so good it had "natural" ambient occlusion and didn't need any tricks to achieve it? Are you fucking retarded?

I want a game to add astigmatism as a video option.
Let's see what the normies do when all the lights explode into crosses.

film grain

Motion blur 100% has to go

All of them only exist cause consoles can't hit 60fps consistently, just get rid of all of them.