Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
TBH using Riva Turner to limit your FPS would give you a lot smoother experience than using that maxfps setting. I dunno why, but the maxfps setting looks like it's throwing away frames, causing some kind of weird stutter.
I mean, feels fine to me, some weird stuff at 144 and maxfps 125 makes it feel as good as its gunna get
Well I've not tried it in over a year, maybe they fixed it. But it used to cause very jittery frames, like frames were missing which is quite logical if you just throw frames away.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited February 2018
It really hasn't always been fine @Nordic. It used to have quite an obvious frame stutter I just don't know if this has been fixed in the last year, or rather previous 2-something years since I last tried the command
On topic though, and FPS slider is a pretty good idea in any case...
HandschuhJoin Date: 2005-03-08Member: 44338Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Community Developer
edited February 2018
If you have 144hz I recommend trying maxfps 147 for the optimal "smoothness"... my fps usually go below those 147 after the game goes on a while.
That is why I tried using 120hz with maxfps 120-123... but even with lower fps: 144hz with 100-120 fps still feels better than 120hz with 123maxfps.
However, in general I think a setting for limiting FPS would be helpful.
In ns1 you could write that in your config, so it always persists OR when you use the console you had "autotext" so when you write something like "fps" or "max" it suggests you "autotext"...
Since both of that is missing it is kinda annoying in ns2.
I didn't know about the launchoption till now, so I had to always use a bind to limit my fps to 147 manually per bind....
@Handschuh How much improvement do you get with 144hz vs 120hz? I can't ever go back to 60hz, but I assumed the leap from 120hz to 144hz isn't as drastic. You've tried both, what do you think?
HandschuhJoin Date: 2005-03-08Member: 44338Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Community Developer
edited February 2018
Don't know why, but especially in the earlygame... it feels like quite the improvement .... (in the earlygame I actually have above 150fps)
60Hz horrible -basically everytime
75hz kinda better - you can predict where skulks jump to (even with 60hz Screen you can get 75hz mostly if you use specific resolutions )
100/120hz feels good, I can actually track good
144hz feels best - everything can be smooth (if I handle the FPS)
Basically my accuracy goes downwards with 120hz already beause I have more troubles tracking normal lerks
Basically it's not to much, even with 60hz I could have 30%+... but with higher hz I can have 35%+
The main difference is with 60/75hz it wasn't just tracking - I rather predicted where the alien moves... if I'm wrong I miss hard... especially dodgy lerks... If I get against a supergood lerk I still need to predict in order to Hit, but I can rely much more on my trackingabilities...
But that all might be in my head, since after a hard/long workday I can get as low as 20-25% as well^^
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited February 2018
I still find this frequency war amusing, even if they do indeed improve your "smoothness feel". However, I'm beyond capable to land most shots on 60Hz with great ease and pubstar the hell out of fast paced twitch shooters. I've had a look at 100Hz and 120Hz and while they do feel/look smoother, which was neat, it did not up my game in any noticeable way. I know of godlike HLDM and Quake players who used to play on 75Hz, they were simply an unstoppable force, rubbing shoulders with the world's elite of FPS gamers. It sounds to me like 50% placebo marketing and 50% feeding the need for "smoothness". And there's the diminishing returns, the higher the frequency..
I do believe it's still a lot more dependent on the person behind the KB+mouse, their situational awareness and actual aiming/movement skills and of course the mouse used, instead of the monitor frequency It sounds like it's all based on theory crafting about microscopic advantages measured in milliseconds, conveniently disregarding the latency in your PC from your GPU/CPU/Monitor/Mouse&KB input and using anecdotal evidence as the main source. Not even mentioning mention glossing over the fact that G-Sync and Freesync (any sync) also adds latency regardless.
If you're able to hold the refresh-rate of your monitor, just limit the FPS to the screen frequency -1. The way I understand it is that your GPU will always have at the very least one buffered frame and this buffered frame will display using this method and you wont get any tearing. Also you could potentially enable the infamous V-sync, however you won't get any added input lag. What it does is, it adds that buffered frame to your FPS, turning it into the FPS+1 == Monitor refresh-rate. So just go ahead and disable all those fancy lag inducing monitor specific sync nonsense, they are only needed if you dip below the frequency but do add latency. The marketing would have us believe otherwise
Although I am looking into these 35" 100Hz Ultrawide monitors, those are some sexy beasts
In-game fps limiting is supposed to be the best solution, but often times it is implemented poorly and Rivatuner fps limiting usually ends up being better.
@Kouji_San I used to pubstomp on my 80fps laptop.. Yea you can pubstomp without having a 120hz monitor, but that aint saying much brother.
It is NOT just a "smoothness" feel - and "it's a placebo effect" sounds, to anybody who plays with these monitors, exactly like the guys that like to argue that "your eyes can't see past 60 fps anyway".
It's pretty much impossible to go back to a 60hz monitor once you've gotten used to the 120+hz. Like seriously, ask anybody.. You can even do this test: Find a friend with a 120hz monitor, change his refreshrate to 60hz without telling him, wait and see how long it takes for him to notice. It's like you get physically ill looking at a 60hz monitor. It truly is that big of a difference.
You should not expect to see an instant improvement, as you play on a 144hz monitor your first time.. Just like, if you are used to a ballmice and you now get a Zowie FK1, you won't instantly see improvement. That doesn't mean the two mice are just as good. One is clearly better than the other. You have to get used to your new equipment. It doesn't happen instantly, expecting otherwise is kinda dumb. So when you say "oh I tried a 120hz monitor and it didn't up my game"... That doesn't mean anything. Come back here after a month of using such a monitor.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited February 2018
Don't just assume I'm pubstomping. I actually tend to leave a server if other players are way below my skill level or switch teams to try and even out the teams. And sometimes I dial the seriousness back and just start fooling around to create a fun atmosphere for everyone. I actually want to play against people of similar skill and even love it when up against vastly superior players, cause I can learn from them.
Also I've played on higher refresh rates for a while at a LAN party, it's pretty neat and noticeable to around 120hz, iI never disputed the "smoothness". Although even 100hz vs 120hz is not nearly as impressive. Besides I knew the refresh rates, which obvious has some kind of influence on judging these rates. I would love to see an unbiased test with people trying to see the difference between 100hz/120hz and even 144hz.
However, I'll definitely dispute the various claims saying it makes aiming and tracking significantly easier. I simply did not see any noticeable improvement in my aiming, twitch tricks or tracking. That's where the placebo comes in, because this is entirely based on practice and skill level. Especially when you look at where most of these claims come from, the casual gamer who tend to accuse us practiced vets as cheaters. Or at least that's where I see most of these discussions taking place
Well OK @Kouji_San , I did shoehorn in this paragraph in an edit (sorry), but it seems like your response didn't account for it, so I'm gonna post it here again.
You should not expect to see an instant improvement, as you play on a 144hz monitor your first time.. Just like, if you are used to a ballmice and you now get a Zowie FK1, you won't instantly see improvement. That doesn't mean the two mice are just as good. One is clearly better than the other. You have to get used to your new equipment. It doesn't happen instantly, expecting otherwise is kinda dumb. So when you say "oh I tried a 120hz monitor and it didn't up my game"... That doesn't mean anything. Come back here after a month of using such a monitor.
Don't just assume I'm pubstomping. I actually tend to leave a server if other players are way below my skill level or switch teams to try and even out the teams. And sometimes I dial the seriousness back and just start fooling around to create a fun atmosphere for everyone. I actually want to play against people of similar skill and even love it when up against vastly superior players, cause I can learn from them.
I jerk around too when I am playing with much less skilled players than myself. I love flying around as a lerk or running as a skulk and basically land on peoples heads and follow them until they notice me.
Well OK @Kouji_San , I did shoehorn in this paragraph in an edit (sorry), but it seems like your response didn't account for it, so I'm gonna post it here again.
You should not expect to see an instant improvement, as you play on a 144hz monitor your first time.. Just like, if you are used to a ballmice and you now get a Zowie FK1, you won't instantly see improvement. That doesn't mean the two mice are just as good. One is clearly better than the other. You have to get used to your new equipment. It doesn't happen instantly, expecting otherwise is kinda dumb. So when you say "oh I tried a 120hz monitor and it didn't up my game"... That doesn't mean anything. Come back here after a month of using such a monitor.
Yep it might seem "dumb" or anecdotal, since you don't know where I came from. But I have a long history of gaming and loads of experience just like most veteran FPS-ers on this here forum.
So, how about this. I used to have a 17" 1024x768 100Hz CRT @ 800x600 110/120hz (not sure what brand it was, probably a Samsung or Liyama) for quite some time, talking ancient times here However I sold it, when I updated my rig back then to the super awesome AMD K7 Thunderbird 1400Mhz & GeForce3 TI500. Picking up a way more portable, higher resolution 17" Samsung 171P @ 1280x1024 75Hz/25ms, freeing up quite some space on my desk and having more screen space. Not giving it a second thought, well maybe one second thought which quickly evaporated once I looked up the prices for high frequency/res monitors back then!
And while I did notice the decrease in frequency and pure blacks initially, I did not notice my tracking skills deteriorating from the moment I hooked 'em up and starting blasting the same fools I used to play against on my favorite servers Which is why I'm in "higher refresh-rate looks to me a placebo" camp, where trained skills like aiming/tracking/twitch/movement and situational awareness are concerned. And the ability to know the game mechanics to such an extend, where you can basically predict stuff.
TBH sound is so much more important than these fancy refresh rates, but that's an entire story in and of itself *ahem* A3D Aureal Vortex 2 *cough* But don't worry Santa, I'm coming back to the fancy camp once I decide on which ultra wide 100Hz to get
Yeah I actually love to walk behind people who are so damn deaf, because of wrong sound settings. Or just mess with em by side stepping their aim, while not shooting back, usually so others can shoot em. However that is mostly fun for me, pretty sure they don't like it when you fool around like that...
So if I am using 144hz with Gsync, but my fps tend to fluctuate below the refresh rate, is it better for me to keep using Gsync, use “maxfps” instead, or some combination of the two?
The instant the games fps goes over your monitors max refresh rate g sync is disabled unless you have v sync on in Nvidia CP which will cause the games fps to cap at the monitors max refresh rate when g sync is on as well, v sync adds input lag so keeping it off is why someone would need to use maxfps cmd or a frame limiter at a number under 120 / 144Hz because the frames will go as high as your rig can push them /w v sync off which always disables g sync.
HandschuhJoin Date: 2005-03-08Member: 44338Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Community Developer
Everyone I know (including myself) got 5% higher accuracy just by using 144hz... actually^^
You basically can react faster to the move the opponent does.... I could feel the difference between 60 and 75hz as well...
This stuff you only notice when you fight insanely fast flying objects... when I see leapskulk or celerityfade blinking by me it's so much easier to find the perfect moment to give him a meatshot than with 60hz.
Of course if you don't have the skill to begin with to actually time that shot somehow you miss anyway, but still...my average accuracy skyrocketed.
Because I had such an old GPU I had much lower fps on my 144hz at first (since it said waiting for gpu), but after I got a better gpu by a friend I could definitely feel the difference against lerks... tracking lerks - even bad ones was a lot harder... I doubt that my skill skyrocketet like that ;-)
144hz feel basically much closer to playing with my old CRT in ns1 times.
OK so I do want to throw @Kouji_San a little bit of a bone here. I disagree with Handschu a little bit here when he says you only notice it with insanely fast object. I too had no problem tracking things on my 60hz laptop, that's not where the benefit manifests as far as I'm concerned. And it's not about reaction times either.
It's rather when you are "flicking", ie. changing targets, the high refreshrate significantly reduces "motion blur" for a lack of a better term. In NS2, I see a lot of players, even seasoned veterans, make the mistake of over focusing a target, instead of trying to spread and maximize damage. But when you do get in to that habbit, of seamlessly switching from target to target and back (you know as skulks jump in and out of cover ie.), that is when you will truly notice the benefits of high refresh rates.
Tracking ONE target mainly comes down to your ability to predict the movement and your hand-eye coordination, refreshrates are not important in this instance, like theoretically you could do this with your eyes closed provided you have a sufficient enough understanding of the mechanics. But when you are flicking from one target to another, that reduction in "motion blur" allows you to sort of "reset" (I'm not sure how to articulate this concept, I hope you get what I mean tho) your aim as you switch targets.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited February 2018
@SantaClaws Yep, I definitely understand your point on twitch flicking and a higher refresh-rate do help keep the targets nice and crisp. I guess, I'm so used to lower 60/75hz refreshrates that I somehow compensate or am able to predict their movement based on knowing the game speeds and mechanics inside and out. It kinda becomes second nature
The funny thing is, twitch shots and snapping to targets is what I'm best at compared to tracking. Which shouldn't make sense. As what you're describing makes more then sense, so to speak
But hey, I've always been an oddbal. Or so I'm told
60hz to 120hz I noticed a difference immediately, but it didn't seem that dramatic. Turning on lightboost to reduce motion blur was like night and day. Suddenly I could see the skulk when they got close. I still might not be able to kill the skulk but at least I know where it is.
60hz to 120hz I noticed a difference immediately, but it didn't seem that dramatic. Turning on lightboost to reduce motion blur was like night and day. Suddenly I could see the skulk when they got close. I still might not be able to kill the skulk but at least I know where it is.
I didn't even know what lightboost was. I gave it a try, it's actually not bad. I think I notice a little bit of input lag, but I think the anti-blur might actually make up for it. However, it removes your color settings on your monitor and that sucks
Anyway, thanks for bringing that up, I think that's a pretty interesting and useful piece of technology right there.
FrozenNew York, NYJoin Date: 2010-07-02Member: 72228Members, Constellation
edited March 2018
I played better than i ever could now on a macbook with 30fps at launch into season 3. Cause i wanted to, and the fps never stopped me until the devs "improved the game" and introduced stutters.
Gsync with 144hz monitor just feels better when I limit to at most 135 or so. So i usually do 125.
Since I started 144hz gaming I can notice very easily if it is less than that. But I feel as though it is helpful but not necessarily necessary. I understanding your mouse movement is much better than getting more fps. Take professional csgo gamers for example. They seem to be really good in all fps games. Why? Because they have their in game mouse movements down to a science. They honed their skills and muscle memory to exact mouse settings and stick with them, using rulers and such to determine exactly how much movement it takes to do a 360 or look up and down. Then they practice with those settings until it is ingrained.
Its like the quote from Bruce Lee
"I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times."
High Fps, low input lag, and high refresh rate are all great things but skill and practice are the most important.
60hz to 120hz I noticed a difference immediately, but it didn't seem that dramatic. Turning on lightboost to reduce motion blur was like night and day. Suddenly I could see the skulk when they got close. I still might not be able to kill the skulk but at least I know where it is.
I didn't even know what lightboost was. I gave it a try, it's actually not bad. I think I notice a little bit of input lag, but I think the anti-blur might actually make up for it. However, it removes your color settings on your monitor and that sucks
Anyway, thanks for bringing that up, I think that's a pretty interesting and useful piece of technology right there.
My only problem with it is that you can't use it with gsync. Both aim to solve different problems. Gsync monitors have a newer and better implementation of lightboost called ULMB mode. I don't have a gsync monitor and I wonder how much of a marginal difference the ULMB mode would make when I don't have the skill to really make use of the potential added information.
Comments
This works for m.
Well I've not tried it in over a year, maybe they fixed it. But it used to cause very jittery frames, like frames were missing which is quite logical if you just throw frames away.
On topic though, and FPS slider is a pretty good idea in any case...
That is why I tried using 120hz with maxfps 120-123... but even with lower fps: 144hz with 100-120 fps still feels better than 120hz with 123maxfps.
However, in general I think a setting for limiting FPS would be helpful.
In ns1 you could write that in your config, so it always persists OR when you use the console you had "autotext" so when you write something like "fps" or "max" it suggests you "autotext"...
Since both of that is missing it is kinda annoying in ns2.
I didn't know about the launchoption till now, so I had to always use a bind to limit my fps to 147 manually per bind....
75hz kinda better - you can predict where skulks jump to (even with 60hz Screen you can get 75hz mostly if you use specific resolutions )
100/120hz feels good, I can actually track good
144hz feels best - everything can be smooth (if I handle the FPS)
Basically my accuracy goes downwards with 120hz already beause I have more troubles tracking normal lerks
Basically it's not to much, even with 60hz I could have 30%+... but with higher hz I can have 35%+
The main difference is with 60/75hz it wasn't just tracking - I rather predicted where the alien moves... if I'm wrong I miss hard... especially dodgy lerks... If I get against a supergood lerk I still need to predict in order to Hit, but I can rely much more on my trackingabilities...
But that all might be in my head, since after a hard/long workday I can get as low as 20-25% as well^^
I do believe it's still a lot more dependent on the person behind the KB+mouse, their situational awareness and actual aiming/movement skills and of course the mouse used, instead of the monitor frequency
If you're able to hold the refresh-rate of your monitor, just limit the FPS to the screen frequency -1. The way I understand it is that your GPU will always have at the very least one buffered frame and this buffered frame will display using this method and you wont get any tearing. Also you could potentially enable the infamous V-sync, however you won't get any added input lag. What it does is, it adds that buffered frame to your FPS, turning it into the FPS+1 == Monitor refresh-rate. So just go ahead and disable all those fancy lag inducing monitor specific sync nonsense, they are only needed if you dip below the frequency but do add latency. The marketing would have us believe otherwise
Although I am looking into these 35" 100Hz Ultrawide monitors, those are some sexy beasts
It is NOT just a "smoothness" feel - and "it's a placebo effect" sounds, to anybody who plays with these monitors, exactly like the guys that like to argue that "your eyes can't see past 60 fps anyway".
It's pretty much impossible to go back to a 60hz monitor once you've gotten used to the 120+hz. Like seriously, ask anybody.. You can even do this test: Find a friend with a 120hz monitor, change his refreshrate to 60hz without telling him, wait and see how long it takes for him to notice. It's like you get physically ill looking at a 60hz monitor. It truly is that big of a difference.
You should not expect to see an instant improvement, as you play on a 144hz monitor your first time.. Just like, if you are used to a ballmice and you now get a Zowie FK1, you won't instantly see improvement. That doesn't mean the two mice are just as good. One is clearly better than the other. You have to get used to your new equipment. It doesn't happen instantly, expecting otherwise is kinda dumb. So when you say "oh I tried a 120hz monitor and it didn't up my game"... That doesn't mean anything. Come back here after a month of using such a monitor.
Also I've played on higher refresh rates for a while at a LAN party, it's pretty neat and noticeable to around 120hz, iI never disputed the "smoothness". Although even 100hz vs 120hz is not nearly as impressive. Besides I knew the refresh rates, which obvious has some kind of influence on judging these rates. I would love to see an unbiased test with people trying to see the difference between 100hz/120hz and even 144hz.
However, I'll definitely dispute the various claims saying it makes aiming and tracking significantly easier. I simply did not see any noticeable improvement in my aiming, twitch tricks or tracking. That's where the placebo comes in, because this is entirely based on practice and skill level. Especially when you look at where most of these claims come from, the casual gamer who tend to accuse us practiced vets as cheaters. Or at least that's where I see most of these discussions taking place
So, how about this. I used to have a 17" 1024x768 100Hz CRT @ 800x600 110/120hz (not sure what brand it was, probably a Samsung or Liyama) for quite some time, talking ancient times here
And while I did notice the decrease in frequency and pure blacks initially, I did not notice my tracking skills deteriorating from the moment I hooked 'em up and starting blasting the same fools I used to play against on my favorite servers
TBH sound is so much more important than these fancy refresh rates, but that's an entire story in and of itself *ahem* A3D Aureal Vortex 2 *cough* But don't worry Santa, I'm coming back to the fancy camp once I decide on which ultra wide 100Hz to get
@skav2 ya messed up the quote there!
Yeah I actually love to walk behind people who are so damn deaf, because of wrong sound settings. Or just mess with em by side stepping their aim, while not shooting back, usually so others can shoot em. However that is mostly fun for me, pretty sure they don't like it when you fool around like that...
You basically can react faster to the move the opponent does.... I could feel the difference between 60 and 75hz as well...
This stuff you only notice when you fight insanely fast flying objects... when I see leapskulk or celerityfade blinking by me it's so much easier to find the perfect moment to give him a meatshot than with 60hz.
Of course if you don't have the skill to begin with to actually time that shot somehow you miss anyway, but still...my average accuracy skyrocketed.
Because I had such an old GPU I had much lower fps on my 144hz at first (since it said waiting for gpu), but after I got a better gpu by a friend I could definitely feel the difference against lerks... tracking lerks - even bad ones was a lot harder... I doubt that my skill skyrocketet like that ;-)
144hz feel basically much closer to playing with my old CRT in ns1 times.
It's rather when you are "flicking", ie. changing targets, the high refreshrate significantly reduces "motion blur" for a lack of a better term. In NS2, I see a lot of players, even seasoned veterans, make the mistake of over focusing a target, instead of trying to spread and maximize damage. But when you do get in to that habbit, of seamlessly switching from target to target and back (you know as skulks jump in and out of cover ie.), that is when you will truly notice the benefits of high refresh rates.
Tracking ONE target mainly comes down to your ability to predict the movement and your hand-eye coordination, refreshrates are not important in this instance, like theoretically you could do this with your eyes closed provided you have a sufficient enough understanding of the mechanics. But when you are flicking from one target to another, that reduction in "motion blur" allows you to sort of "reset" (I'm not sure how to articulate this concept, I hope you get what I mean tho) your aim as you switch targets.
The funny thing is, twitch shots and snapping to targets is what I'm best at compared to tracking. Which shouldn't make sense. As what you're describing makes more then sense, so to speak
But hey, I've always been an oddbal. Or so I'm told
Different brain wiring or hardware, I suppose. @Kouji_San is lucky!
Anyway, thanks for bringing that up, I think that's a pretty interesting and useful piece of technology right there.
Gsync with 144hz monitor just feels better when I limit to at most 135 or so. So i usually do 125.
Doh!
Since I started 144hz gaming I can notice very easily if it is less than that. But I feel as though it is helpful but not necessarily necessary. I understanding your mouse movement is much better than getting more fps. Take professional csgo gamers for example. They seem to be really good in all fps games. Why? Because they have their in game mouse movements down to a science. They honed their skills and muscle memory to exact mouse settings and stick with them, using rulers and such to determine exactly how much movement it takes to do a 360 or look up and down. Then they practice with those settings until it is ingrained.
Its like the quote from Bruce Lee
"I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times."
High Fps, low input lag, and high refresh rate are all great things but skill and practice are the most important.
My only problem with it is that you can't use it with gsync. Both aim to solve different problems. Gsync monitors have a newer and better implementation of lightboost called ULMB mode. I don't have a gsync monitor and I wonder how much of a marginal difference the ULMB mode would make when I don't have the skill to really make use of the potential added information.