Posted - 2011.07.10 19:05:00 - [31]

 

Originally by: Blane Xero

---

Then there were two **** snipers.

---

boom!

Nice comeback :)

Posted - 2011.07.11 11:24:00 - [33]

 

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Please explain how the delay of your monitor would make strafing more effective for you? Why would it be harder to hit you for enemy snipers? In theory (i still doubt it tbh) it could make it easier for you to hit them since you can faster see what they are doing, but it doesnt in any way affect what they say or when they see it.

The only way it could have any affect is if you look at which way their gun points to determine your strafing pattern, and then I call BS. Even if you would do it, then a few more ms delay from the monitor can be ignored compared to all the other delays that are far longer.

---

Input lag is reduced to pratically nothing and also the monitor is 120hz, meaning my rig got 120 fps.

The sequence is this:

a)I move
b)sniper moves mouse to aim at my head
c)I move
d)repeat

Because I am the thing someone else is trying to aim and shoot at, I am at the advantage because I am in control of them. Also because I can see them I can move unpredictably like r,l,r,l,r,r,r,l,l,r,l,r,r,r,l,l,l,l,r,l so it becomes a dance. I try not to bunnyhop where I would land in direct line of sight of a sniper though, as this is a predictable arc that any good sniper would know and be able to get a shot.

If the input lag is too high, you cannot do the above effectively. If input lag is non-existent and you are playing against people who are using laggy monitors, then you can. It gives you an advantage.

The difference is very real and I've said it before; if all you do is game on fps, this BenQ is the one to get.

I am a little surprised there is not anyone else in these forums which has played on one of these monitors to be honest, with all the "why isn't Dust coming to PC grrr, CCP sucks" bs we've seen recently, I figured more people would have played fps.

BenQ YouTube Watch this if you want to here it from someone else other than me.

AK

Posted - 2011.07.11 12:54:00 - [35]

 

Originally by: Blane Xero

---

Yeah. **** snipers. Proper snipers anticipate your move. It's really not as hard as you think, ad no amount of random dancing will help you. The moment you move left, a good sniper should have already fired his first shot in the general area your head should be by the time you go to move again. If that fails, he compensates and continues until you are dead (at most, no matter how random YOU are, 4 shots)

---

Blane, you can't predict with that level of accuracy where someone is going to be, so long as the target keeps moving in random sequence, it would be pratically impossible for anyone to hit them in the head if they are following my movements.

If they keep their aim in one place which is between two maximum points where I am moving between and are 'duckshooting' then what you're saying might hold some water, but even then there is no predictability in that.

Since snipers will move their aim to where the person is, they cannot hit you, as you will always be ahead of their aim or ahead of their reaction time. TF2 does not have inertia in strafing, and I'm not sure of any games that do - your movements are immediate without any delay in sideways movements.

We are going off the point here, and I do not understand why you are arguing with me about something I know to be true - "I was there". I know what happened in that example, on top of this the game was improved to amazing levels overall, not just the one small example of the two snipers.

AK

Posted - 2011.07.11 13:47:00 - [37]

 

Originally by: Blane Xero

---

Originally by: AlleyKat

---

Originally by: Blane Xero

---

Yeah. **** snipers. Proper snipers anticipate your move. It's really not as hard as you think, ad no amount of random dancing will help you. The moment you move left, a good sniper should have already fired his first shot in the general area your head should be by the time you go to move again. If that fails, he compensates and continues until you are dead (at most, no matter how random YOU are, 4 shots)

---

Blane, you can't predict with that level of accuracy where someone is going to be, so long as the target keeps moving in random sequence, it would be pratically impossible for anyone to hit them in the head if they are following my movements.

If they keep their aim in one place which is between two maximum points where I am moving between and are 'duckshooting' then what you're saying might hold some water, but even then there is no predictability in that.

Since snipers will move their aim to where the person is, they cannot hit you, as you will always be ahead of their aim or ahead of their reaction time. TF2 does not have inertia in strafing, and I'm not sure of any games that do - your movements are immediate without any delay in sideways movements.

We are going off the point here, and I do not understand why you are arguing with me about something I know to be true - "I was there". I know what happened in that example, on top of this the game was improved to amazing levels overall, not just the one small example of the two snipers.

AK

---

I'm merely saying that a 120hz monitor did not give you an advantage you didn't already have over the snipers. You did not suddenly become harder to hit, you simply felt so. Probably amplified by going up against two solidly **** snipers.

---

This. Ok, your display lag went down by 50ms. Your network latency is well over that, as is your keyboard/mouse input lag. A monitor doesn't take you from zero to hero in an internet game. This "awesomeness" you see is in your head.

Posted - 2011.07.11 21:41:00 - [39]

 

Originally by: AlleyKat

---

So, the ability to see twice the amount of frames per second

---

...Does not mean you see more things, just the same things in a little more fluid motion.

Originally by: AlleyKat

---

plus v.low display lag plus v.low input lag =

---

...Made mostly useless by your network latency, and does not give you as large an edge as you think.

Originally by: Alleykat

---

If everyone had the same lag overall, and 1 person had zero lag, who would get better results when acting and reacting to the game in your opinion?

AK

---

If those people = 5ms and that other person = 2ms then the only gain the person with 2ms display lag is a difference of 3ms. This is such a small difference in the grand scheme of things it was probably made obsolete by your M&K response times, along with the time it took your eyes to intake the image and your brain to flip it.

Seeing twice as many frames =\= seeing things happen before other people.

What you experienced was nothing more than a slightly more fluid experience (Which itself is nothing to scoff at) along with a Placebo effect of being more awesomer as a result.

Posted - 2011.07.12 01:03:00 - [41]

 

Originally by: AlleyKat

---

Originally by: Blane Xero

---

If those people = 5ms and that other person = 2ms then the only gain the person with 2ms display lag is a difference of 3ms. This is such a small difference in the grand scheme of things it was probably made obsolete by your M&K response times, along with the time it took your eyes to intake the image and your brain to flip it.

Seeing twice as many frames =\= seeing things happen before other people.

What you experienced was nothing more than a slightly more fluid experience (Which itself is nothing to scoff at) along with a Placebo effect of being more awesomer as a result.

---

Not trying to bait you here, but are you are saying there is a difference or not?

---

Of course. Just not a difference that makes it any easier to dodge a sniper in an FPS, or enhances your response time as a person.

Short story short:
Difference - Yes.
Makings of FPS-Moses - No.

Posted - 2011.07.12 11:54:00 - [43]

 

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Oh I play enough FPS, and I quickly learned that skill >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expensive setups.

But since there seem to be some misunderstandings, I just like to make sure everyone is on the same page. You do realise a monitor is an OUTPUT device and not an INPUT device? It just shows you the state of the game, your keyboard and mouse are the input. This is not affected by your monitor.

Your monitor has no influence at all on your ability to strafe, since you are just pressing buttons in a random way. Only way there could be any influence, which would still be so tiny that you wont notice it, but of course it is hard to argue with your very scientific N=2 measurement, would be if you use your false assumption that monitor refresh rate = fps (where I use the normal definition then of fps, the number of frames rendered per second). That is only the case when your rig has sufficient processing power to at least reach that refresh rate and you got vsync enabled. If your goal is simply a ****load of frames calculated per second, which it seems to be, it is alot easier to simply disable vsync than buying a 120Hz monitor.
Also alot cheaper and alot more effective.

btw it still wont make any significant difference

---

Please don't take this as an attack, but your understanding is inaccurate.

Display lag is easily measurable, it is the time difference between an input signal and the display updating the information. This is also known as input lag.

Then you have pixel response time, which is your GTG / B2W figures you see touted on a monitor, although most manufactuers will give you the lowest figure, typically the GTG times.

What I'm saying is that the BenQ has the lowest figures for both, and it also can refresh the screen 120 times a second.

This gives you the absolute best figures curently available for FPS on an LCD screen.

Keyboard and mouse updates are immediate, the GTG is sub 5 m/s, but peaks at 1 m/s and the screen is doing this are a blistering 120 frames a second (which my rig can more than handle - it's a dx9 game after all)

In some ways, I think it's great you are arguing with me - I'm a big believer in not taking information as fact and actually doing investigatory work to make up ones own opinion and not just beleiving everything one hears. So, go ahead and try it for yourself and just ignore what I'm saying on this topic, if I'm never going to convince you that's not a problem.

AK