Low fps. Same thing as every game, if you have low fps you can see the obvious jitter if its low enough. For me it seems to be under 95-100 fps where i start to notice it so much it becomes annoying, anything above that is okay with still slightly smoother when matching with monitors refresh rate.
Having your mouse jitter is a pretty big deal when the pistol and rifle dont effectively have any spread, so the only factor there is your tracking ability and that is obviously heavily affected if your mouse doesnt work smoothly. Its obviously playable with lower fps, but it also definitely hinders your playing.
Low FPS is anything under 30. Good FPS is anything above 60. Excellent FPS is anything 100 or higher.
If you're getting a consistent 30 FPS, that is, around a stable 30 FPS +/- 4, you shouldn't notice any jitter on your mouse unless you're using a poor play surface(Some surfaces if you're using an optical mouse, or if you're using a ball mouse: either it, or the play area is dirty), unless your mouse sensitivity is TOO high*, or your mouse has high DPI.
It could also be a programming bug, but I don't know enough about lua to judge that accurately.
*At higher sensitivities, something as simple as moving your desk a little bit can cause your crosshair(mouse) to move. I find that mashing the mouse button furiously causes my aim to be off, but this is not the fault of the game.
<!--quoteo(post=2061113:date=Jan 16 2013, 05:59 AM:name=Frothybeverage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Frothybeverage @ Jan 16 2013, 05:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061113"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Low FPS is anything under 30. Good FPS is anything above 60. Excellent FPS is anything 100 or higher.
If you're getting a consistent 30 FPS, that is, around a stable 30 FPS +/- 4, you shouldn't notice any jitter on your mouse unless you're using a poor play surface(Some surfaces if you're using an optical mouse, or if you're using a ball mouse: either it, or the play area is dirty), unless your mouse sensitivity is TOO high*, or your mouse has high DPI.
It could also be a programming bug, but I don't know enough about lua to judge that accurately.
*At higher sensitivities, something as simple as moving your desk a little bit can cause your crosshair(mouse) to move. I find that mashing the mouse button furiously causes my aim to be off, but this is not the fault of the game.
That's what you'd call a pebkac problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dont know how to explain it simpler but, its simply from the low fps. Its pretty logical that the motion is choppier when you see less frames per second. It has nothing to do with mouse surfaces or sensitivities, but just the fact that you dont get to see enough images for smooth motion.
Maybe the term "jitter" was being missused by me here, better would be "choppy". As in the motion on the picture caused by moving your mouse looks noticeably choppy when having low fps.
<!--quoteo(post=2061116:date=Jan 16 2013, 06:04 AM:name=Davil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Davil @ Jan 16 2013, 06:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061116"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Works for me, I limit my fps to 100 and it doesn't usually go above like 101 or 102.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It will limit it all right, but also makes the game extremely choppy and stuttery even when you limit it to 120 fps or so.
<!--quoteo(post=2061082:date=Jan 15 2013, 07:52 PM:name=elmo9000)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (elmo9000 @ Jan 15 2013, 07:52 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061082"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The difference is pretty huge though. You need around 95-100 fps for the game to look smooth/not see small jitter constantly when moving your mouse. Dont know why you think the game doesnt get any smoother with higher frame rates, as its pretty logical that things look smoother when the movement in the image from frame to frame is smaller.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Correct. You'll need a 120hz monitor to notice anything above 60 fps though. That's what people don't understand when they claim over 60 makes no diff. Lot's of mac's, but not all, use a 120hz monitor which is why you see very smooth interface, for PC acer, benq, and a few other companies make these monitors but they arent cheap.
edit: This is why people should not spend so much money on the latest and greatest GPU and cpu until they've got a 120hz monitor to actually make use of it. Like right now I've got an i7 3770k, but *only a gtx 560 (nonti) - i'll be getting a benq 120hz sometime in the next few weeks, and THEN i'll get the AMD 8xxx series, most likely the 8870 or 8950, when it's released this March. The 560 i have had since october 2011, and no 120hz monitor = no reason to upgrade, till now :)
<!--quoteo(post=2061129:date=Jan 15 2013, 07:50 PM:name=Rich_)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rich_ @ Jan 15 2013, 07:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061129"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>You'll need a 120hz monitor to notice anything above 60 fps though.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not even the slightest bit correct. Take Counter-Strike for instance. I have a 60hz monitor. I can noticeably tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. In movement and overall feel.
<!--quoteo(post=2061131:date=Jan 15 2013, 07:55 PM:name=StriderNS2)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (StriderNS2 @ Jan 15 2013, 07:55 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061131"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not even the slightest bit correct. Take Counter-Strike for instance. I have a 60hz monitor. I can noticeably tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. In movement and overall feel.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=2061131:date=Jan 15 2013, 07:55 PM:name=StriderNS2)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (StriderNS2 @ Jan 15 2013, 07:55 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061131"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not even the slightest bit correct. Take Counter-Strike for instance. I have a 60hz monitor. I can noticeably tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. In movement and overall feel.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Anyone who games a lot can.
Go from MW2/MW3 to Halo 3.
60 to 30 fps, you can see the difference. But if you get used to one framerate, you don't even notice the chop anymore.
The thing is, you have to have a consistent FPS. 24 consistent(read: Solid) FPS will look less choppy than 15-40 FPS.
<!--quoteo(post=2061073:date=Jan 15 2013, 05:38 PM:name=NeoRussia)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NeoRussia @ Jan 15 2013, 05:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061073"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Most skilled players notice their aiming ability dropping off below 80fps, care to benchmark how much you are getting?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Since you asked: <a href="http://www.mediafire.com/?gsl8f2957kkgvy1" target="_blank">http://www.mediafire.com/?gsl8f2957kkgvy1</a> I average 42 FPS, max settings@720p.
Theres more than one type of frequency in a monitor's system, of the type discussed here, there is more than just one 'direction' ... aggghh it crumbles into symantics .....
<!--quoteo(post=2061131:date=Jan 15 2013, 09:55 PM:name=StriderNS2)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (StriderNS2 @ Jan 15 2013, 09:55 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061131"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not even the slightest bit correct. Take Counter-Strike for instance. I have a 60hz monitor. I can noticeably tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. In movement and overall feel.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nope. That 60hz monitor will not display any more than 60 frames per second. It might feel less laggy for your fps, but it's still only 60 per second.
I've got a 120Hz and its a great thing because everything between 60 ans 120 fps without vsync seems to be clean and almost without any tearing. I play every game with stable fps locked to 60, 80 or whatver, for example in Skyrim i forced 60fps with the Nvidia Inspector-Tool. In BF3 i used 80fps and in NS2 too. For the last weeks I went down to 60 because i had a temperature problem with my GTX680(sending it back today), it was still fluent and end fights were still aimable(Raw input on, mouse accerlation off, ingame sens at 1/8 of the bar, vsanc off, maxfps 60, Logitech G500 at highest dpi)
Docking was the best map out there, what's the immediate need for change? It seems like strong popular opinion that this is a great map, while cave, refinery, and (in some ways) veil are in dire need of rebalancing and deboringification. Tbh, from looking at this half a year of development (in many instances, not just this) , it seems like UWE has a staggeringly poor sense of what most players want to change in this game. Only very rarely will you see an new feature, rebalance, or bug fix for which are endlessly cried out for in the forums or pubs. Instead it's a haze random and unneeded changes which only the devs have considered. It's a degree of neglect and ignorance to the community. And you are encouraged to chase whatever collective vision you may have for the game, you're going off dead reckoning by being this out of touch with the end-users. How about a player's choice patch where you improve only what the players view as needing the most attention?
<!--quoteo(post=2061194:date=Jan 16 2013, 02:50 AM:name=yehawmcgraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yehawmcgraw @ Jan 16 2013, 02:50 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061194"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Docking was the best map out there, what's the immediate need for change? It seems like strong popular opinion that this is a great map, while cave, refinery, and (in some ways) veil are in dire need of rebalancing and deboringification. Tbh, from looking at this half a year of development (in many instances, not just this) , it seems like UWE has a staggeringly poor sense of what most players want to change in this game. Only very rarely will you see an new feature, rebalance, or bug fix for which are endlessly cried out for in the forums or pubs. Instead it's a haze random and unneeded changes which only the devs have considered. It's a degree of neglect and ignorance to the community. And you are encouraged to chase whatever collective vision you may have for the game, you're going off dead reckoning by being this out of touch with the end-users. How about a player's choice patch where you improve only what the players view as needing the most attention?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Departures starting hive was a bit too close to marine starting point. On pubs you'd see half the marine team continously rushing towards it, which resulted either in a quick egglock for the aliens, or marines would keep hitting a wall in east wing while the aliens took over the rest of the map. And marines also had very quick acces to lockers. So their changes make sense.
Lot's of fixes in here that were asked for by the community.
<!--quoteo(post=2061147:date=Jan 16 2013, 06:01 AM:name=turtsmcgurt)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (turtsmcgurt @ Jan 16 2013, 06:01 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061147"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=2061131:date=Jan 16 2013, 04:55 AM:name=StriderNS2)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (StriderNS2 @ Jan 16 2013, 04:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061131"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Not even the slightest bit correct. Take Counter-Strike for instance. I have a 60hz monitor. I can noticeably tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. In movement and overall feel.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't think so. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> But it's true. In a lot of games, especially FPS, you can totally tell the difference between 60 and 100+, even if your monitor can't display them. It's simple: the more, the better. It's not playable at all for me at 30 and for the majority of experienced players, especially on a multiplayer game.
Why do people keep arguing about that each time? We had numerous topics about that and it's kinda depressing to see how people keep misleading other people in bull######...
Comments
Having your mouse jitter is a pretty big deal when the pistol and rifle dont effectively have any spread, so the only factor there is your tracking ability and that is obviously heavily affected if your mouse doesnt work smoothly. Its obviously playable with lower fps, but it also definitely hinders your playing.
Good FPS is anything above 60.
Excellent FPS is anything 100 or higher.
If you're getting a consistent 30 FPS, that is, around a stable 30 FPS +/- 4, you shouldn't notice any jitter on your mouse unless you're using a poor play surface(Some surfaces if you're using an optical mouse, or if you're using a ball mouse: either it, or the play area is dirty), unless your mouse sensitivity is TOO high*, or your mouse has high DPI.
It could also be a programming bug, but I don't know enough about lua to judge that accurately.
*At higher sensitivities, something as simple as moving your desk a little bit can cause your crosshair(mouse) to move.
I find that mashing the mouse button furiously causes my aim to be off, but this is not the fault of the game.
That's what you'd call a pebkac problem.
Works for me, I limit my fps to 100 and it doesn't usually go above like 101 or 102.
Good FPS is anything above 60.
Excellent FPS is anything 100 or higher.
If you're getting a consistent 30 FPS, that is, around a stable 30 FPS +/- 4, you shouldn't notice any jitter on your mouse unless you're using a poor play surface(Some surfaces if you're using an optical mouse, or if you're using a ball mouse: either it, or the play area is dirty), unless your mouse sensitivity is TOO high*, or your mouse has high DPI.
It could also be a programming bug, but I don't know enough about lua to judge that accurately.
*At higher sensitivities, something as simple as moving your desk a little bit can cause your crosshair(mouse) to move.
I find that mashing the mouse button furiously causes my aim to be off, but this is not the fault of the game.
That's what you'd call a pebkac problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dont know how to explain it simpler but, its simply from the low fps. Its pretty logical that the motion is choppier when you see less frames per second. It has nothing to do with mouse surfaces or sensitivities, but just the fact that you dont get to see enough images for smooth motion.
Maybe the term "jitter" was being missused by me here, better would be "choppy". As in the motion on the picture caused by moving your mouse looks noticeably choppy when having low fps.
<!--quoteo(post=2061116:date=Jan 16 2013, 06:04 AM:name=Davil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Davil @ Jan 16 2013, 06:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061116"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Works for me, I limit my fps to 100 and it doesn't usually go above like 101 or 102.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It will limit it all right, but also makes the game extremely choppy and stuttery even when you limit it to 120 fps or so.
Correct. You'll need a 120hz monitor to notice anything above 60 fps though. That's what people don't understand when they claim over 60 makes no diff. Lot's of mac's, but not all, use a 120hz monitor which is why you see very smooth interface, for PC acer, benq, and a few other companies make these monitors but they arent cheap.
edit: This is why people should not spend so much money on the latest and greatest GPU and cpu until they've got a 120hz monitor to actually make use of it. Like right now I've got an i7 3770k, but *only a gtx 560 (nonti) - i'll be getting a benq 120hz sometime in the next few weeks, and THEN i'll get the AMD 8xxx series, most likely the 8870 or 8950, when it's released this March. The 560 i have had since october 2011, and no 120hz monitor = no reason to upgrade, till now :)
Not even the slightest bit correct. Take Counter-Strike for instance. I have a 60hz monitor. I can noticeably tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. In movement and overall feel.
I don't think so.
Anyone who games a lot can.
Go from MW2/MW3 to Halo 3.
60 to 30 fps, you can see the difference.
But if you get used to one framerate, you don't even notice the chop anymore.
The thing is, you have to have a consistent FPS.
24 consistent(read: Solid) FPS will look less choppy than 15-40 FPS.
<!--quoteo(post=2061073:date=Jan 15 2013, 05:38 PM:name=NeoRussia)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NeoRussia @ Jan 15 2013, 05:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2061073"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Most skilled players notice their aiming ability dropping off below 80fps, care to benchmark how much you are getting?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Since you asked: <a href="http://www.mediafire.com/?gsl8f2957kkgvy1" target="_blank">http://www.mediafire.com/?gsl8f2957kkgvy1</a>
I average 42 FPS, max settings@720p.
Nope. That 60hz monitor will not display any more than 60 frames per second. It might feel less laggy for your fps, but it's still only 60 per second.
I play every game with stable fps locked to 60, 80 or whatver, for example in Skyrim i forced 60fps with the Nvidia Inspector-Tool. In BF3 i used 80fps and in NS2 too. For the last weeks I went down to 60 because i had a temperature problem with my GTX680(sending it back today), it was still fluent and end fights were still aimable(Raw input on, mouse accerlation off, ingame sens at 1/8 of the bar, vsanc off, maxfps 60, Logitech G500 at highest dpi)
i7 920@3800MHz, GTX680, 6GB, SSD
Tbh, from looking at this half a year of development (in many instances, not just this) , it seems like UWE has a staggeringly poor sense of what most players want to change in this game. Only very rarely will you see an new feature, rebalance, or bug fix for which are endlessly cried out for in the forums or pubs. Instead it's a haze random and unneeded changes which only the devs have considered. It's a degree of neglect and ignorance to the community. And you are encouraged to chase whatever collective vision you may have for the game, you're going off dead reckoning by being this out of touch with the end-users. How about a player's choice patch where you improve only what the players view as needing the most attention?
Tbh, from looking at this half a year of development (in many instances, not just this) , it seems like UWE has a staggeringly poor sense of what most players want to change in this game. Only very rarely will you see an new feature, rebalance, or bug fix for which are endlessly cried out for in the forums or pubs. Instead it's a haze random and unneeded changes which only the devs have considered. It's a degree of neglect and ignorance to the community. And you are encouraged to chase whatever collective vision you may have for the game, you're going off dead reckoning by being this out of touch with the end-users. How about a player's choice patch where you improve only what the players view as needing the most attention?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Departures starting hive was a bit too close to marine starting point. On pubs you'd see half the marine team continously rushing towards it, which resulted either in a quick egglock for the aliens, or marines would keep hitting a wall in east wing while the aliens took over the rest of the map. And marines also had very quick acces to lockers. So their changes make sense.
Lot's of fixes in here that were asked for by the community.
Not even the slightest bit correct. Take Counter-Strike for instance. I have a 60hz monitor. I can noticeably tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. In movement and overall feel.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think so.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But it's true.
In a lot of games, especially FPS, you can totally tell the difference between 60 and 100+, even if your monitor can't display them. It's simple: the more, the better. It's not playable at all for me at 30 and for the majority of experienced players, especially on a multiplayer game.
Why do people keep arguing about that each time? We had numerous topics about that and it's kinda depressing to see how people keep misleading other people in bull######...