Diablo 3 and LCDs

[Ansive]

I'm wonder if diablo 3 will suffer as much from lcd motion blur as titan quest.

In TQ on my CRT monitor everything looked perfect all the time, I could perfectly read item names while I was moving. But on my lcd pretty much everything but the character is blurred while moving. It really hurts to watch the road or the grass. Item names at 1920x1200 are unreadable when moving.

FPS and racing games don't suffer from this since they don't have a top down view (where the whole image moves).

Is my 24" 2ms lcd too slow or are other people experiencing blur in top down games?

[TheWanderer]

I never had such problems while playing Titan Quest on an lcd. Maybe your brightness is too high.

[Ansive]

It's simple to observe. Go to Greece just out of Helos. Look at the grass while stationary, then while moving. It looks blurry/out of focus to me. My brightness is about 25%... Resolution 1920x1200 2xAA 16xAF.

Just took off all movement speed modifiers, when moving vertically it is hardly noticeable, but when going left or right it all gets blurry.

Also tried diablo 2 (at 1600x1200 glide). I can't read any item names while strafing horizontally.

Doar my LCD response time **** or is it normal?

[Terenas]

...Doar my LCD response time **** or is it normal?
Either those 2ms are a fake or that + the high resolution.
I played TQIT on a 20" @ 1680*1050 and I had no problem.
Have you tried turning your AA off ?

[TheWanderer]

I've tried it with AA on and have seen some slight blurring but it goes away when AA is off. Try taking a screenshot in the middle of your movement. If its all clear then its a problem with your monitor. Item names are usually not seen easily as they are not in bold type like D2.
How did you get 2AA and 16xAF? Did you change it in your graphics card settings or is a feature in Immortal Throne? btw I have only a monitor doing 1280x800 so I can't realyy test it out really.

[Ansive]

I can notice blurring with or without AA. Screenshots look ok. The ingame setting is 2xAA. I force 16xAF from CCC since the game looks much better at no performance hit. (triple buffering is disable from the game, all else is at high)

See here

http://img21.imagevenue.com/loc1048/th_39814_Tqit_2009-05-05_18-42-48-44_122_1048lo.jpg (http://img21.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=39814_Tqit_2009-05-05_18-42-48-44_122_1048lo.jpg) http://img18.imagevenue.com/loc652/th_39820_Tqit_2009-05-05_18-43-16-85_122_652lo.jpg (http://img18.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=39820_Tqit_2009-05-05_18-43-16-85_122_652lo.jpg)


You can try the Eizo monitor test.
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/testsoftware/eizo-monitor-test.html

At slide 19 the square at 400px/sec looks pretty good, the one at 800px/sec does not. I wish I had a digital camera... might buy one soon.

[In the name of Zod]

Response times are not the issue at 60fps you only need a response time of 16ms to keep up (1000ms/60frames). Diablo 2 runs at a disgusting 25 frames per second so you can't expect anything to look good when the screen moves period. If the problem occurs mainly when going left or right then it could be 1 of 2 things. Either your card or monitor. If it only happens with certain settings like 2xAA then it is almost certainly your card.

edit: You might want to turn off 'force vertical sync' just for checking purposes. Do you get any tearing of the image? Does this ever occur in first person shooters?

[Ansive]

I get very noticeable tearing in Titan quest if I leave Vertical Sync off. Not only that, but the movement isn't fluid, it's like the picture jumps.

I even set details to low at 1920x1200. I get about 125 frames and still the movement does not look fluid. VSync fixes this.

It's an lcd thing... I remember playing Spell Force... when I scrolled the map everything was a blurry mess.
I even loaded warcraft 3 now. I would say the monitor can keep thing looking good up to almost the speed of an undead acolyte. (maybe 300-400px/s). The faster things move the more out of focus/blurry they look. (issued a move command then clicked on the portrait to get the same motion like in d2).

I believe the resolution also aggravates things a little. If I play at 1920x1200 and in a game I move from A to B I'll do so at X px/s. But if the resolution would be smaller getting from A to B should require a smaller px/s speed.
I see a slight improvement in playing w3 at 800x600 over 1600x1200 (I can set the lcd to shrink the viewing area according to resolution).

Heck... here's the easiest test of them all. If I drag this forum window across the desktop area I can only read up to a certain speed. The faster I drag it, the more smudged the text gets.

I need to see top down games on other lcd monitors and also crt.

But most importantly I need to find a digital camera... Nothing compares to pictures.

And about the 16ms response time... LCD manufacturers vastly overestate that number... I'm afraid I'm way over 16ms. Just use the Eizo monitor test . (is the moving square still sharp or is it blurred at 400px and 800px/s?). Going from a CRT to an LCD is really painful...

[TheWanderer]

What's the brand and model of your monitor? Have you tried the computer on any other monitor?

[Ansive]

Acer 243W (24" clearly)

I tried the games on my old 17" CRT some good months away. It was then I noticed the difference. CRTs don't blur the image, every frame persists for a very short amount of time. That's why at least 75 Hz/s are needed on a CRT. Anything lower than that and you can see flickering (transition from frame to frame).

[Ansive]

Taken with a camera phone...
It's not as bad as it looks.



http://img252.imagevenue.com/loc8/th_84043_10052009088_122_8lo.jpg (http://img252.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=84043_10052009088_122_8lo.jpg) http://img111.imagevenue.com/loc666/th_84047_10052009089_122_666lo.jpg (http://img111.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=84047_10052009089_122_666lo.jpg) http://img150.imagevenue.com/loc1029/th_84053_10052009094_122_1029lo.jpg (http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=84053_10052009094_122_1029lo.jpg)
http://img215.imagevenue.com/loc32/th_84061_10052009095_122_32lo.jpg (http://img215.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=84061_10052009095_122_32lo.jpg) http://img134.imagevenue.com/loc351/th_84067_10052009114_122_351lo.jpg (http://img134.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=84067_10052009114_122_351lo.jpg)

http://img228.imagevenue.com/loc375/th_84063_10052009106_122_375lo.jpg (http://img228.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=84063_10052009106_122_375lo.jpg)http ://img256.imagevenue.com/loc224/th_84064_10052009107_122_224lo.jpg (http://img256.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=84064_10052009107_122_224lo.jpg)


I believe the problem is with image persistence.
Looked at a friend's laptop... same story. I'll try to test the LCDs from college.

[Farmrush]

I've never had any problem with LCDs so I'm not sure what's going on here tbh.

[Ansive]

Here's what I'm talking about...

Can you read the text? (no tricks like moving the window or pausing the animation)

I most definitely can't. 24" lcd.

http://img1.lesnumeriques.com/pub/autopromo/Remanence60.swf

Do you have an LCD or a CRT monitor?

[Akse]

I could read one of the words quite easy but not the smaller ones. It was a bit fuzzy tho.. but the text itself wasnt really sharp when I stopped the animation and looked at it.

This might be caused by the low Hz of lcd's.. 60hz generally. Even tho it affects LCD's differently than CRT's people say that 100hz LCD is a lot better for games than 60hz(the usual). I guess there is some point because LCD tv's have started to be 100hz or even 200hz. 100hz LCD TV should be a lot better than the general 50hz for watching Sports for example where there is a lot of fast movement going on.

[Ansive]

You were able to read it, but you didn't mention if have and lcd or a crt.

The number of hertz pays no importance in LCDs. I'm not sure we could tell the difference between 60 and 75 frames. I believe 60 frames per second are enough to represent fluid motion in a game.

CRT flash the image for a brief period of time, then there's darkness I believe. At 60Hz most people can see flickering on a CRT. At 85Hz the screen is updated more often and the flickering is minimized.

LCDs on the other hand draw the image and it stays there, "hold and sample" I think it's called. It only needs to change the color of the pixels by moving "some crystal mechanism thing". The time it takes to change a pixel depends on the original and end color.

Most LCDs aren't very fast at changing the colors... and you get ghosting... blurring and smearing. I've yet to see an LCD that can compare to a CRT when it comes to movement. (I haven't seen many though)

So that's why I was curious if anyone with an LCD can read the text. Or if CRT users have issues reading it.

[Akse]

You were able to read it, but you didn't mention if have and lcd or a crt.
Well LCD. Some acer 22" with 60hz.. i'm not at home atm.

The number of hertz pays no importance in LCDs. I'm not sure we could tell the difference between 60 and 75 frames. I believe 60 frames per second are enough to represent fluid motion in a game. Yeah thats what I thought but some people say it does. But it also depends on humans eyes too. Some people are fine with 75hz CRT and other can't stand it and they need 85hz.

Well I should get to see the difference by myself. Got some 22" samsung syncmaster 2ms at home 60hz. If i'd place another screen next to it and test it out with 100hz or something I'm quite sure I'd be able to see some difference.

Anyways in LCD's only the changing dots are being drawn again.. when in CRT the whole line always is drawn again. If there are a lot of dots that need to be drawn again like in games it's basically the whole screen that is refreshing all the time.

[Ansive]

As far as I know 120Hz LCDs introduce black frames. This should really help with afterglow / blur / ghosting. And it does... too bad it's only for LCD TVs.

The afterglow has sometihng to do with our eyes but still I think the LCDs are to blame. You usually get 3 to 5 images of the same thing while it's moving.

Can't wait for the day when an LCD will finally be able to match up against a CRT.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/641-3/1rst-lcd-at-100-hz-the-end-of-afterglow.html

[Ansive]

YES, finally found a good LCD tester.

http://www.prad.de/download/pixperan_english.zip


One thing is certain. I'm going to buy a new LCD monitor.
The one I have right now has 2 frames input lag (~35ms) and pretty bad afterglow.
This is input lag http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnApFzmd9NY

I want a 24" LCD with 0 input delay and CRT like reactivity. I'll have to raid the whole http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6 website but I'll find one!

I will play diablo 3 as it is supposed to be played!

[Ansive]

Finishing up. The answer to my question. (I've stated a lot of incorrect facts in this thread, but I think I finally have it)

Yes, Diablo 3 will look like crap on my LCD and on a lot of other LCDs due to the fact that the whole image moves whenever the player moves, making ghosting very, very noticeable.

The solution...

1. get a CRT (0 ghosting, ha ha)

2. get a really fast LCD (not talking about milliseconds)
http://www.digitalversus.com/article-358-3802-36.html (little ghosting)

3. get one of those new 120Hz LCD monitors
http://www.digitalversus.com/article-358-4495-36.html (almost no ghosting at all)

La la la http://img1.digitalversus.com/articles/502/gif2(212)(1).gif

[ThulRasha]

Soon we'll see a lot of 120Hz 22" LCD displays but according to FUD Zilla, 24" panels with this feature won't arrive anytime soon. These are the type of displays you need for the NVIDIA GeForce 3D Vision technology.

We've spoken with several monitor manufacturers and despite announcement of 120Hz 22-inch monitors planned for late January, you won't see anything much bigger than this anytime soon. LG should come out with a 23.5-inch display with 1,920x1,200 resolution at 120Hz, but we've been told not to expect any larger monitors anytime soon.

So maybe a 1920x1200 LG soonish. Will probaby be pricy ;)

[FreshMeat]

I could only say it is a matter of your screen quality.

I know a year ago, LG had a superior PVA 24" screen. only buy pva or mva. If you have a lot of cash, buy IPS.

if you dont know what these are/mean, you shouldnt buy a monitor yet. I would guess your current monitor is TN film. TN film has fast response but has severely less colors showing, much less than a 50 dollar crt from ebay. seriously. also it has bad viewing angles. All 32" name brand 2009 lcd tv's use PVA. I think one brand has MVA. a slight upgrade on pva in a way. Only panasonic has a 32" IPS panel. it is the best gaming monitor to buy for 32". (only ips tv out so that's why)

my monitor is a h-ips. it is 60hz. 120hz is a complete gimic. inserting of a black frame sounds fine, but doesnt improve much. (it can improve image on constant motion objects however, yet playing a shooter only has brief moment of constant movements). I would bet the 1000 dollars I spent on this monitor, Planar px2611w, that a 120hz regular brand monitor has more motion blur and less clarity than my 60hz one. It's the quality of the monitor that reduces those things.

also, input lag. only the LG 24 that is PVA has low input lag at reasonable price. crt's have 0 input lag just about. (ips monitors like mine normally have 1 frame or less. Most pva's and some tn films have 2-4 frames of lag, that's a lot)

[Painman]

I have an H-IPS like FreshMeat (mine is an NEC). Blur is definitely a function of the panel, the panel type and quality, quality of any Overdrive implementations, etc. and has nothing to do with video card or the game (though blur may be more evident in one game than another, due to the nature of the game or its graphics).

I imagine that any blur won't be too horrid in D3, simply due to the type of game it is. Just like in D1 or D2, there will be lots of times where the screen is mostly static, and the only movement would be monsters and visuals from attack effects. Blur is far more noticeable in an FPS or other types of game where there is constant, rapid full screen movement. Diablo isn't quite as frenetic in that respect.

[mr burns]

i have a 22" mitsubishi diamond pro 2040u CRT that i might look to replace soon. i mainly got it for photo/graphics work but i play games a lot too. i've held out as long as i could before getting an LCD, but it looks like they're finally coming around. some good info in here.

[Ansive]

My tip... test before you buy.
Get the Eizo monitor test to check for dead pixels, viewing angles, color accuracy, backlight bleeding, and all that stuff.

If you're interested in gaming also test out pixperan on the monitor, make sure there isn't more blur than you can handle. Some fast moving movies might also benefit from low ghosting. Also don't buy a monitor with more than one frame of input lag if you're going to play games.

Finally you might also check out some reviews try digitalversus.

http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/testsoftware/testsoftware.html
http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=303&mo1=343&p1=3215&ma2=36&mo2=458&p2=4495&ph=12

[mr burns]

my only problem with LCDs is that it seems like you can't get a monitor that is both good for color/photo work and also good for gaming. you have to choose one or the other. with my jumbo CRT i get the best of both worlds.

[amerikhan]

If you purchase a consumer LCD monitor make sure you purchase one that doesn't have ghosting/backlight bleeding issues. Both are detrimental to any forums of fast paced multimedia.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=31&threadid=2041849 (read Fallen Kell's post)
http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/backlight-bleeding.php

[StrikexForce]

Im going to be buying a LCD in 2011 when D3 comes out. Ive been looking at the Dell 24" ones, so Ill probably be buying the next model of that series that comes out.