Topic: LG's OLED TVs — recommended settings for the 'game optimizer' mode?

If you see the value in it, go for it - just bare in mind that it's simply a frame doubler.

Are we talking HDR or SDR? If you mean SDR, then perhaps you are right (if it's a setting that's otherwise greyed out). I don't aim for high brightness in SDR so not something I've looked at.

For context, I have my OLED Light set to 13 in Moviemmaker and in order to hit the equivalent light output in Game Optimiser it's set to 20.

Peak Brightness should be off for SDR but thats up to personal preference.

In HDR, with game optimizer on, the peak brightness setting is not available to the user. Previously it was the same thing in game mode but recent updates have allowed you to change it. Specular highlights and overall picture level are significantly dimmer with game optimizer(not just mode) on. Lowered brightness overall in game modes is pretty standard for OLEDs as well and, compared to a decent mini-LED, would be more noticeable on the OLED to the user due to the substandard brightness levels of OLEDs in general.

I have a C4 in my office but we have the Bravia 9 in the living room. The contrast ratio of the Bravia is close enough to OLED that, if I could do it over, I would have gotten one for the office based solely on how much better HDR is on the mini-led.

Eventually, 5 maybe 10 years from now, micro-led will come along and finally kill OLED for good.

I think you were referring to the overlay itself lowering brightness, I was confused so that's my mistake.

Agreed

Really? Because it's still set to High and greyed out on my G4 (my firmware is up to date).

Yes, this is true. Not disputing that, just that in the Optimiser/Game Mode preset there is no difference to the peak brightness whether the Optimiser dash is enabled or not - at least with my G4 (as demonstrated). It seems strange to me that it would be any different on a C4.

Perhaps it's not working correctly but I just checked and yea, it's still doing it.

I wish I hadn't jumped on the OLED bandwagon honestly. The contrast ratio is insane but I really miss the brightness. Eye searing specular highlights, where applicable, really sells HDR and you just can't get that on an OLED. Granted I have a mid-tier model(got a great deal brand new) but the cost to brightness ratio going up in model isn't justified for me. Would rather just wait micro-led out.

Plus every single OLED iPhone I've had has developed burn-in(battery indicator etc)so now I'm paranoid about the tv haha

I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet but Vincent from "HDTV test" has amazing videos on the LG OLED line up in combination with both PS5 and MS Series consoles. I can't recommend those videos enough.

I'm a long time follower of HDTV Test, before YouTube, when Dave Mackenzie was still involved.

His sense of "humor" though is so cringy it borders on the offensive. I prefer GamingTech for HDR info.

I may be doing it wrong but I don't see this on an LG C3 either. Disabling the optimiser seems to have no effect on the brightness.

I'm happy with the HDR brightness in game mode generally speaking and highlights look good to my eye, though I play in a very dark room.

@ChristopherPhD mentioned ColorControl - he might have made changes to the default operation of the display via the service menu.

The response time is a big factor too though. OLED just feels great to play on. Does Micro-Led match that because I wouldn't know?

@NetshadeX That's a good point and no, it doesn't. Not by a long shot. That said, I'm that guy who prefers 30 over 60 or higher anyway. I don't even notice the 30fps response time issue on OLED that a lot of people do.

There's a difference between input response and pixel response. An LCD's pixel response in slower, but that describes the transition from one frame to another, input response is about the lag between input and the frame displayed.

The first is subject to the panel technology, the second to the processing. So an LCD can have the same input response as an OLED (or lower/higher), but an OLED will always have a sharper transition between frames.

All this to say that an LCD won't feel any less good to play on, assuming the input response is commensurate with the OLED it's being compared to.

Thanks for clearing that up. I have 2 builds at my house, one in the living room hooked up to a LG C1 and an upstairs one to a MSI MAG274QRF. (1ms 1440p IPS panel). Both support g-sync and are played at 120Hz using the same Xbox controller. The feel these panels provide is a night and day difference. The C1 feels vastly more responsive in games where it matters like a Forza or Battlefield.

I can thoroughly enjoy a good 30 over 60 to in certain titles. 60+ will always feel more responsive in titles where pin point precision and/or twitch reaction is required but the downside is the more sterile (for the lack of a bettter term) look you get. Moody, darker, slower paced single player games like an Alan Wake 2 or Silent Hill 2 just retain more of that thick atmosphere when played at 30 imo.

…I didn't expect to read this on a DF forum. Mind you both elaborating on the "I prefer 30 frames" viewpoint when the modern displays have a relatively poor motion clarity — LCD suffers the most from the display motion blur at low frame rates, while the OLED produces "judder" and "choppiness" (for the lack of a better description) which the BFI can only alleviate to some degree.

When moving the camera in a 30-frame game, I'd go as far as to say that barely anything can be seen.

Additionally, why not to lock your display at 24 frames to match the cinema refresh rate, 12 which is to some degree used in the animation industry (e.g. Loving Vincent, 2017) or anything in between? How could 30 be near-100-percent optimal?

While I'm sure that the DF audience is aware of the UFO test (their examples better apply to 2D games), mentioned in any case.

@a-follower You sort of answered the question for us. Outside of VR, where it's necessary to achievemaintain the effect(even that is a stretch)nobody can elucidate why they prefer 60 or why 60 is "necessary" without resorting to personal preferences. It is "smoother" or it looks "better". I've always found this funny because people who prefer 30 are usually never afforded the same understanding for our preferences.

Plus I feel that the 60 or die gang, a good portion of them anyway, are only members because the internet told them to. Sort of like how physical is "better" than digital.

Until computing power becomes meaningless(Quantum not better upscalers) you will always lose something to hit 60fps. That's just a mathematical fact. Do I think a future comes where consoles specifically all say 60fps is the bare minimum? Probably but not this gen or next.

Ok, this will probably sound weird but some games are a more immersive experience at 30fps than they are at 60. I think it has to do with how the brain works for some people. To draw a parallel here, some people can't stomach the "soap opera" effect when watching a film an a tv that has some form of smooth motion enabled. It provides a clearer, better flowing image but at the same time makes a film look like it was shot with a handycam.

That's a similar affair to having some games run at very high framerates. I don't play Fortnite but I can imagine wanting to have that run at blistering speeds because it's a twitch shooter with cartoony graphics that is very well suited to a razor sharp and silky smooth image and you also want that latency as low as possible.

Cyberpunk 2077 on the other hand is an interesting one. While the gameplay begs for a high refresh rate and the resulting lower latency a high refresh rate really hurts the feel of Night City. At 30 fps the world feels more claustrophobic and gritty. Walking through the Kabuki section of the map on a rainy night at 30 fps really sells that dark noire atmosphere of those alleyways. There the loss of pristine detail is actually a big plus. Sadly, the combat becomes less responsive as a result.

I'm one of those people that are fine with 30fps during cutscenes, probably due to it looking more 'cinematic' and realistic, not to mention the fact that dropping to 30fps means you often get better looking graphics (on console anyway). I like the clear distinction between cutscene and gameplay, I guess.

I prefer higher framerates during gameplay, of course, though I played Final Fantasy VII Rebirth at 30fps because it was too blurry at 60fps on PS5.