In all seriousness though, just an option to turn it off for the rest of us would be great.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
WHOEVER it is that keeps saying "Oh, we should put chromatic aberration in this game!" Needs to reconsider
- Thread starter "D."
- Start date
In all seriousness though, just an option to turn it off for the rest of us would be great.
It serves no good purpose, and does nothing but degrade picture quality, just like film grain. Why do we want games to look like we're viewing them from cheap cameras? Why do people obsess over 4K, HDR etc, but then want graphic settings that make the picture worse?
That's one thing I love about PC versions of games, they have graphics settings that let you turn off the crap.
That's one thing I love about PC versions of games, they have graphics settings that let you turn off the crap.
I've grown to appreciate chromatic aberration despite how silly it is (seriously, it's just offset R,G,B channels by like a few pixels); I have started to view it less as something that occurs in other technology, and rather an effect unto itself; like, grain. I fucking hate grain, right, but I realize people can appreciate the general aesthetic it brings.
Under no circumstances should games be released where you cannot choose to turn any of these off. Image quality is important, and these techniques disturb the integrity of image quality by their very nature (even in the case of sharpening, color and vibrancy is lost). But I'm done arguing against their inclusion on an optional basis, especially if the devs feel they're important in achieving a feel. It's just, their importance should not override user choice.
Under no circumstances should games be released where you cannot choose to turn any of these off. Image quality is important, and these techniques disturb the integrity of image quality by their very nature (even in the case of sharpening, color and vibrancy is lost). But I'm done arguing against their inclusion on an optional basis, especially if the devs feel they're important in achieving a feel. It's just, their importance should not override user choice.
To expand on this post with my own thoughts, I think people should realize that video games are an interactive medium unlike any other type of art, and as such the players should have a (reasonable) say in how their games look in the same way they have a (reasonable) influence on how the game plays out.
Obviously game developers can't please everyone in that regard the same way they can't give infinite options to tweak gameplay, but small things like toggles for certain visual effects definitely should be made available to players on all platforms.
lol well I see it here but can usually never tell in games. I guess that's a good thing.
Feels like I need to be wearing 3D glasses lolOuter Worlds had hilarious implementation of it, the game had significant amount of CA in normal gameplay and would turn it up 1000% during slow mo mode, on top of distortion effect and changing the hue of the scene...as if messing up the image in one way wasn't enough to convey the shift in mode. Thankfully it can be removed on PC via ini edit, unfortunately consoles don't get these options most of the time. All games that do anything to significantly muck up the image should give the option to turn those effects off.
The said slow mo mode:
The art team decided this was their artistic vision and the best way to convey a bullet time mode, I totally disagree and think the art team was wrong. Just because they chose it and made the game does not mean they were right. And calling it out is not backseat game designing. Here's how the same thing looks without CA:
It's obviously different from "normal" mode as you can see a tinted hue and distortion around the edges, that's enough. Please tell me what was lost in terms of artistic vision and design in removing CA here.
As always, this is the answer. A lot of developers start out by overdoing the graphical 'fashion' of the day. Remember bloom?
Actual chromatic aberration on lenses is nowhere near the levels we see in some games. It's also usually rendered very harshly in games, without the smooth falloff of real lenses. Most importantly, real CA will ONLY appear in areas of high contrast (instead of a screen wide filter or vignette that many games do).
But done correctly and tastefully (eg The Order 1886), CA adds a cinematic and vintage flavour to the art design.
Last edited:
Let's make all games look like you're playing on a misaligned RCA projection TV and undo decades of display quality advancements.
Besides the eyestrain, I'd say this is the second biggest reason why I don't like it. It's immersion breaking. You aren't experiencing the world and locations yourself now, the art director has decided you're watching events taking place in a film. In an interactive medium, that's fairly limiting.
But again, if that's their decision that's fine. Make it the default, but give an option to disable it.
Some games it works okay for me, but sometimes it doesn't. Glad most games let me turn it off
Motion blur that's applied to the environment when I look around is God awful though. Sometimes it's so bad it's disorienting.
I get devs want their games to feel more cinematic, but I think there are limits to what should be borrowed from film as games are a fundamentally different mediums.
Motion blur that's applied to the environment when I look around is God awful though. Sometimes it's so bad it's disorienting.
I get devs want their games to feel more cinematic, but I think there are limits to what should be borrowed from film as games are a fundamentally different mediums.
Had the same experience. Lost my glasses one day, went into LensCrafters, got upsold on the featherweight ultra-durable anti-glare coated whatever lenses like a sucker. I specifically asked them if there was any sort of downside to those lenses, and they were like nope, all good. Didn't take long to notice the horrible chromatic aberration. I didn't really have time to get them redone right away, so I ended up ordering cheap 10 dollar glasses that ship from China. Those were much better, took the other glasses back and got my refund. Well after arguing with them for like 20 minutes of course. But hey, if your salespeople are gonna lie to me and you offer a 30-day refund, I'm taking the refund and I'm not giving you any more business.
I don't always notice CA in games, but I'll usually turn it off when I do. It seems like it's usually way more subtle than what I experienced with shitty LensCrafters.
I recently played the game Virginia (which, if I can editorialize for a moment, is a good game and is only .99 cents on Steam, so c'mon!). When I turned it on I could feel immediately it was 30 FPS. Upon going into the settings menu I found an option for 60 FPS and Unlimited; switching to either of these prompted the game to inform me that while I could this, the game wasn't designed not intended to be played that way. Usually I discard this information, but after playing a bit I realized that during uncapped framerate portions on my machine there were certainly oddities in the gameplay experience, not the least of which traversing stairs or moving down them being in some way dependent on framerate causing the player model to sometimes be lifted off the ground.
The point? The option was there. It actually did make the experience a bit worse, and the developer warned me, but the fact that the option was there is important and ultimately colors my entire experience. The bugs and everything due to messing about with that option are less annoying to me than would have been a 30 FPS cap.
Also, I think we should be clear, here: many modern day post-process effects are designed in modern engines to be toggle-able. It does not put an undue burden on developers to include these things, or make them optional. So the argument that would have been a goto a long time ago really just doesn't stand up to scrutiny anymore.
The point? The option was there. It actually did make the experience a bit worse, and the developer warned me, but the fact that the option was there is important and ultimately colors my entire experience. The bugs and everything due to messing about with that option are less annoying to me than would have been a 30 FPS cap.
Also, I think we should be clear, here: many modern day post-process effects are designed in modern engines to be toggle-able. It does not put an undue burden on developers to include these things, or make them optional. So the argument that would have been a goto a long time ago really just doesn't stand up to scrutiny anymore.
I appreciate that many games now give you the choice of turning the effect down or completely off.
The worst instance of Chromatic Aberration I've ever experienced was Battlefield 4 on the PS4. It was a launch game and came out right when devs were going ham with it. It made it legitimately difficult to see enemies when combined with 900p resolution and a lack of a strong anti-aliasing implementation. Games didn't have the toggle to turn off CA at that point on consoles. You just had to deal with it.
The worst instance of Chromatic Aberration I've ever experienced was Battlefield 4 on the PS4. It was a launch game and came out right when devs were going ham with it. It made it legitimately difficult to see enemies when combined with 900p resolution and a lack of a strong anti-aliasing implementation. Games didn't have the toggle to turn off CA at that point on consoles. You just had to deal with it.
This is the key here really.
For an engine like UE4, CA is an individual toggleable setting and you would probably see the toggle in the default UI, so if a UE4 game doesn't have it then the devs went out of their way to not include it. Much in the same way when devs bunch up 3-4 different graphical features under one umbrella setting while designing the UI.
It made me legitimately sick to my stomach in DOOM 2016 (combined with the motion blur) which is to date the only 2D game to ever do so
I wonder, if you were to wear a pair of those red/green 3D glasses, would they filter the CA out?
Neither Jade nor Alyx are in your avatar. This is an imposter!
How about this: no effect should be overused. Careful thought and planning should be at the core of any visual composition. If CA is a tool the developers want to use to achieve the look they want to achieve, it sits in the toolbox right alongside bloom, lens flares, motion blur, etc: all elements which, when used effectively can help them achieve their aesthetic, and when overdone detracts from the comfort and effectiveness of the final image.
Still, It's ironic that the OP has chosen to make their point using a blast of hyperbolic vitriol, as that's roughly the conversational equivalent of overdone chromatic aberration roasting your eyes. Chill?
...this, however, could make for a far more interesting discussion. Proceed?
Still, It's ironic that the OP has chosen to make their point using a blast of hyperbolic vitriol, as that's roughly the conversational equivalent of overdone chromatic aberration roasting your eyes. Chill?
...this, however, could make for a far more interesting discussion. Proceed?
Last edited:
Don't make me go oldskool and revert back to my old avatar from 2007!
It got a CA toggle in the last major patch.
No Man's Sky uses it this way as a very subtle visor effect, most noticeable along the top edge of the screen, though after adding third-person view they kept it enabled for that viewpoint too for whatever reason. It can be disabled though so isn't an issue.
360 era - bloom
ps4 era - CA
I wonder what will be the next gen era mess? I'm hoping ray tracing will keep the devs busy enough for them not to implement some nasty image destroying tech.
ps4 era - CA
I wonder what will be the next gen era mess? I'm hoping ray tracing will keep the devs busy enough for them not to implement some nasty image destroying tech.
Maybe ray tracing will be the nasty image destroying tech, and developers will do things like spam moving coloured light sources and reflective surfaces like mirrors and puddles to show that they have ray tracing up and running in their game.
The in-game lens frequently gets water splashed on, temporarily cracks among other things. The developers clearly uses the camera as lenses.
Yep CA gives me migraines I will never understand the obsession with it. Let alone not letting people turn it off.
It's complete trash. Just robs the game of detail for no particular reason. I get the idea of wanting to perhaps mask some of the artificial feel of game graphics, but TAA already does a nice job at blurrying everything enough for that, and it has the benefit of making the image very stable against shimmering and general aliasing. CA does that for no particular reason, and doesn't really help with shimmering.
Combining both is just overkill.
I'd never stop myself from playing a game I'd otherwise enjoy because of it, Bloodborne is my favorite game of all time, but it's always trash.
I'd really like to see an art director explaining their thought process on this, with specific examples. Just because I'm genuinely curious, because I just can't see the benefit. I'm not even against simulating cameras on principle, I love film grain and this kind of shit, but Chromatic Aberration accomplishes nothing that you wouldn't get from Film Grain + TAA.
Hell, the Darksiders remaster has Chromatic Aberration, how in the world is that part of the creative vision when the original game didn't have? It's more of a generational bandwagon, if anything.
Alien Isolation I'll accept as part of the art direction, as well as Cuphead. Bloodborne I suppose is, considering it's not a full screen effect, but I can't understand what they were trying to achieve at all. Some people mention "the dreamlike atmosphere", but Demon's Souls is way more "dreamlike" than Bloodborne and doesn't use it. So From knows how to achieve that airy look without CA.
Combining both is just overkill.
I'd never stop myself from playing a game I'd otherwise enjoy because of it, Bloodborne is my favorite game of all time, but it's always trash.
I'd really like to see an art director explaining their thought process on this, with specific examples. Just because I'm genuinely curious, because I just can't see the benefit. I'm not even against simulating cameras on principle, I love film grain and this kind of shit, but Chromatic Aberration accomplishes nothing that you wouldn't get from Film Grain + TAA.
Hell, the Darksiders remaster has Chromatic Aberration, how in the world is that part of the creative vision when the original game didn't have? It's more of a generational bandwagon, if anything.
Alien Isolation I'll accept as part of the art direction, as well as Cuphead. Bloodborne I suppose is, considering it's not a full screen effect, but I can't understand what they were trying to achieve at all. Some people mention "the dreamlike atmosphere", but Demon's Souls is way more "dreamlike" than Bloodborne and doesn't use it. So From knows how to achieve that airy look without CA.
OP
OP
Oh wow I didnt know that...yeah thats just dumb that they added that in
Bloodborne is one of the few games I think it works well in
How do you feel about anti-aliasing OP? That's also a post-processing filter.
Chromatic aberration can add fantastic atmosphere to a game, people have already mentioned Cuphead as a great example, I'll add GTA V as another, it gives the game a unique and enjoyable feeling.
It obviously started out as an accident because of the way lenses work. Guess what? It was enjoyable in many instances, and just like how the most realistic graphics aren't always the most enticing, so with chromatic aberration something that is different from how our eyes work can make things interesting
Chromatic aberration can add fantastic atmosphere to a game, people have already mentioned Cuphead as a great example, I'll add GTA V as another, it gives the game a unique and enjoyable feeling.
It obviously started out as an accident because of the way lenses work. Guess what? It was enjoyable in many instances, and just like how the most realistic graphics aren't always the most enticing, so with chromatic aberration something that is different from how our eyes work can make things interesting
Thank you. I hate it!
AA helps image quality. It reduces jaggies, which are an aberration of shapes rendered in a 3D virtual space.
By its very definition an aberration is a negative thing. Just because it's "interesting" doesn't mean it's good.
I've never really seen it where it gets as offensive as other people say it is for them. I've seen it in games, sure, but it doesn't really bother me
Let me put it another way. Remember how Instagram became a thing? It was because people want to put the filters over their pictures. Every filter made the photos less "real" in some sense - black and white, sepia, lots of different effects "corrupting" the raw image.
And yet people loved it. The raw digital photos looked really bad in comparison - the extra layer of filters allowed artistic expression in a way that greatly enhanced the experience of taking pictures.
Another modern trend is people using old-fashioned lens cameras in order to make use of effects including chromatic aberration in their pictures. We thought it was bad, but in the end people miss it because it adds a layer of art to things.
People who dont notice it are the same people who can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps, and those people are blind.
It's terrible, it also reminds me of my first TV I had as a kid which was faulty and had heavy CA like distortion in the top left corner. So it double sucks.
It's terrible, it also reminds me of my first TV I had as a kid which was faulty and had heavy CA like distortion in the top left corner. So it double sucks.
