Please consider the implementation of the following optional visual effects for a better visual fidelity:
Thanks
Example:
Most modern or upcomming games (like unrecord for example) which are considered as “Realistic” have either these options or both filters are always active without being even optional.
If both of those distort the image in some way, how would they improve the visual fidelity?
These are options I turn off immediately in most games.
They do, and I have no idea why one would want a game’s graphics to emulate visual artifacts that come from using poor/old camera equipment.
All games which are considered “realistic” or “cinematic” have both filters implemented.
The games are looking way more vivid and less static than without those post-effects.
Objects and surroundings are blending way better into each other than without CA and it helps to break unnatural sharpness on objects or biomes.
Example:
Not saying this should be an option or not, but where do you get that LE is a “realistic” or “cinematic” game?
I can never tell the difference unless the slider (between on & off) is going past…
Objects become unnaturally sharp and everything looks more unnatural without CA.
It’s actually a so called Psychovisual effect.
And like with everything, the dose is also important, too much is too much 
Yeah, I gathered that when I googled it originally, I just can’t tell the difference. 
Realistic is a relative term, but i mean rather “more advanced look and feel” than 1:1 copy of real life objects.
Wolcen for example uses also CA and FN and looks visually georgeus.
Once you turn both things off in wolcen (via text editor) it’ll turn into a visually medicore game.
I’m like @Llama8 where I can’t really see the difference. I don’t have an issue about this being an option. I think anything that helps the visuals is a good thing. But I don’t think it’s a priority right now, considering the time/effort required to place it in the game.
I don’t need it tomorrow either, but i think the devs should consider it in my opinion.
Other than that it’s not a venture at all, it won’t cost much time to implement it, maybe an hour or max. two of work for 1 person while drinking a cup of tea or such.
You mustn’t be a programmer. It’s highly doubtful it would take so little time. Just testing to check if it didn’t screw anything up would take longer than that.
An old programmer joke is that if some task requires you a week to complete you tell the client it takes 2 weeks, so that when you deliver it after a month he won’t be so pissed off 
But yeah, graphics options to make the game pretty are all good, even though I don’t really care about them (I still play D2 regularly) and would prefer they focus on gameplay first.
first of all i’m a frontend developer (WEB) and Graphic designer (C4D, Ps etc.) but not a game dev tho, so i think i can at least slightly assume the implications.
It depends basically on the engine they use.
If they use a highly modular game system than even just max an hour for implementation and maybe an hour extra for basic performance testing (simulated) and adjustments.
I totally agree.
Same/Same, I still hope we get something like Greater Rifts from D3! That would be really awesome in my book.
Really? I know that each player likes different things, but I always found greater rifts really boring. They’re basically the same thing over and over where the only difference is the amount of health/damage mobs have/deal. At least LE monos or PoE maps have mods that spice things up. And LE monos will even get revamped a little with 1.0 and, presumably, even more further down the line.
Not trying to bash on you or anything, I just always thought that the fact that D3 only had that for endgame is a huge part of what made it boring. And I’ve always preferred maps to them (and now monos).
Same, it’s all good we’re doing just some old school convo
As for me i like the simplicity, matchmaking (sans bots ofc) and the scaling of Greater Rifts and that your solo or group performance is directly connected with a ladder ranking system.
It’s imho a starightforward experience with a straighforward objective and even better if played in a group.
On the other hand, i really don’t like if ARPG’s are getting way “too” grindy like POE for example.
First you have to get the maps, then the currencies to reroll them and rinse and repeat, i rather simply just want to jump right into the action without meanwhile the need to make my Ph.D. or to take Excel courses for PoE just to grind for hours to get and to be able prepare (reroll) maps which i prefer to play, that’s something were i say that fun turns often very quickly into work.
Disclaimer: i am myself a Grandmaster Supporter
Yes, I can see what you mean. And, to be fair, I found GRs boring but in D2 I spend most of my time spamming the same bosses/areas 
What’s your opinion on monos, then, as compared to both GRs and maps? Personally, I like monos better than both of those. You get variery compared to GRs and they’re simpler than maps.
Only numerically (how corruption/modifiers affect the difficulty of a mono).
As for me they are only there to keep one busy with the grind for gear, but that’s actually it and things are getting really stale after a while just by doing the one and thesame thing over and over.
So to cut it short, Monos are serving actually just one purpose in my opinion - you can get gear!
And what should one do with all his BIS items now?
Upload a Youtube video or post the screenshots into a forum just to show the reaped fruits of your grind? Well i hope you get my point 
I think LE needs urgently something “like” GR’s or let’s call it maybe competitive “expeditions” to keep the long term motivation for people like me up.
Ok. My point was that monos, to me, are actually better than GRs. You say that they’re just grind for gear, but how is that different from GRs? And just like GRs, mono also just keep scaling up (probably in a more satisfying way once 1.0 comes and they change the corruption/mods formula).
The main difference in terms of goals is that GRs gave you an ultimate goal of level 150, while monos just keep scaling basically infinitely. But that is a goal in itself, to see how far you can push them, if you want.
I’m just trying to understand why you think GRs are more exciting than monos, because my personal experience is the exact opposite