EPTAnd they don't use "gaming mice", sorry Razer.
Unless you're playing SC at a professional level I don't think your type of mouse matters that much.
Gaming Mice - Page 2
| Blogs > DefMatrixUltra |
|
Loanshark
China3094 Posts
And they don't use "gaming mice", sorry Razer. Unless you're playing SC at a professional level I don't think your type of mouse matters that much. | ||
|
Kenpachi
United States9908 Posts
If you have a limited mouse movement area or your too lazy to swing your arm every game, put it to full. (More useful for Starcraft) ALSO! For Vista (idk if other computers have this option), underneath the Mouse Motion is an option to "Enhance Mouse Presicions" If you dont know what it does, it slows down the mouse (if your mouse speed is fast) for more accurate click/movement or it increases the speed lightly (if your mouse speed is slow) for quicker movement, but no one wants a mouse that goes .2 mph | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On August 27 2009 21:07 Kenpachi wrote: If you like to swing your arm while playing SC like a FPS game, just change mouse sensitivity in Control Panel to Medium/between Middle - Max. If you have a limited mouse movement area or your too lazy to swing your arm every game, put it to full. (More useful for Starcraft) ALSO! For Vista (idk if other computers have this option), underneath the Mouse Motion is an option to "Enhance Mouse Presicions" If you dont know what it does, it slows down the mouse (if your mouse speed is fast) for more accurate click/movement or it increases the speed lightly (if your mouse speed is slow) for quicker movement, but no one wants a mouse that goes .2 mph It's Enhance Pointer Precision and it's mouse acceleration. OP didn't talk about laser vs optical, negative acceleration, mouse prediction, polling rate or any of that. CPI increases are pretty irrelevant, but 500/1000hz polling rate makes a noticeable difference in mouse movement (reduction in lag by 6-7ms.) | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
Underwhelmed wrote: I guess this would be a personal preference thing. For me, weight distribution doesn't really matter at all because I'm a fairly low sensitivity palmer, so my movements nearly all involve zero rotation and a large contact area with the mouse. [1] Still not convinced on the friction issue - let's say that my mouse is moving and needs to stop as quickly as possible. It has a momentum of m*v, bringing it to rest means we need to apply enough impulse to cancel that out (mu*m*g*t from friction and f*t from the hand). With a bit of algebraic manipulation we can see that the time needed to come to rest asymptotically increases to the ratio between the velocity and kinetic friction coefficient times the normal force as mass goes towards infinity. [2] Personally I advocate a lower sensitivity - human movements are limited in precision, but by decreasing your sensitivity, your half centimeter overshoot has less of an effect in-game. If you sample the top FPS population, I'd bet their sensitivities are considerably lower than the general population. In fact, I'd attribute your smoother drawing not to the rounding effects, but the lower sensitivity. Obviously there are limits on how low you want your sensitivity to go, but I know my aim has gotten a lot better since I made the switch. [3] Distorting your physical movements' translation to the program generally strikes me as a bad thing. There's no reason to lower your Windows sensitivity when you can simply adjust it in-game. [4] [1] Weight distribution matters a lot more if you do not use palm grip. It's a huge deal because only your fingers are controlling the motion of the mouse (and your wrist rotation). [2] Your physical reasoning is proper, but this problem has more to do with the external details. If you are using a setup where you plant your wristbone down and just use fingers + wrist rotation, the mouse is much easier to stop the closer the weight is to the weight of your hand. When you try to stop the mouse, you are basically just matching your hand momentum against the mouse momentum. This is easy to do quickly if the mouse is closer to the weight of your hand. Keep in mind that the problem is actually more complicated because you are also using your hand to increase the normal force. This is not useful in RTS, in my opinion. I only use this concept when playing FPS. [3] I agree with pretty much everything you have said here. FPS is easier at low cursor speed. The examples that I used in the writeup were for Starcraft, though (I used this because this is a Starcraft website). The speed at which my cursor had to move at the different settings was my Starcraft cursor speed. I'm not really sure of your meaning of sensitivity here (it's kind of a vague term that has many different meanings in different contexts), but the smoothness in the drawings had to with the spacing of cursor points. If you cut every setting all the way down to its minimum, you will have maximum smoothness despite any interpolation going on. In all of those drawings my cursor moved at the same speed - that is, it moved at a pace that I was familiar with for playing Starcraft. [4] It is a bad idea in general, but it gave me better results. Also, you can't change the sensitivity in Starcraft. I know you're talking about FPSs, I just want to make it clear to anyone else. + Show Spoiler + Loanshark wrote: Anything the SC pros use = gaming mouse. And they don't use "gaming mice", sorry Razer. [1] Unless you're playing SC at a professional level I don't think your type of mouse matters that much. [2] [1] I want to make a few things clear here. My post is not about Razer. It has pretty much nothing to do directly with Razer. There seems to be a lot of Razer hate here, which surprises me since FakeSteve works for Razer. For some reason, someone even asked if I worked for Razer, even though the only mouse that I have used in this writeup is a Logitech G5. My post is also not about emulating progamers in order to become them. My post is simply a writeup with information about what it means to be a gaming mouse and why some mice can make your gameplay better. Yes, progamers are incredibly skilled and can whip anyone with any mouse - my post is not about being able to beat progamers by using certain mice. I realize that Boxer used a ball mouse at his prime. Ball mouse for 2009 Bonjwa? Some mice are just plain better than others. A lot of progamers use a G1 and an LMO. I've never used an LMO so I can't comment, but a G1 is a fantastic mouse that I would rate very highly. [2] Your mouse always matters. Whether you're a progamer or you're a proud grandma, a mouse that suits you better is a mouse that suits you better. Even if you do nothing but check email and write word documents, having a more comfortable mouse with better tracking and a better grip will just make your life easier. + Show Spoiler + Jibba wrote: OP didn't talk about laser vs optical, negative acceleration, mouse prediction, polling rate or any of that. CPI increases are pretty irrelevant, but 500/1000hz polling rate makes a noticeable difference in mouse movement (reduction in lag by 6-7ms.) I don't have too much to say on laser vs. optical or mouse prediction, but I plan to add something about them later on, just not sure where exactly. Are you talking about negative acceleration in terms of software/hardware limits on tracking? There is a section under Tracking called Polling Rate. I disagree with CPI increases being irrelevant. That was actually almost the entire point of the Tracking section - to show how more CPI can be used to make your mouse motion smoother and still have the same cursor speed. ---- Thanks to everyone for your input, I will update the OP with some of these points addressed. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
CPI translates into cursor speed/sensitivity. Assuming everyone sits at 6/11, I can't imagine that most people would be better off with the 1800 CPI setting instead of 900, because the range of sensitivities that games input is just not big enough to handle that. The biggest increase in accuracy will be from overclocking the USB port (which doesn't have to be natively found on the mouse.) Incidentally, smooth movement is actually less accurate. Every mouse comes with mouse prediction enabled by default and it makes your movement much smoother than what humans are actually capable of doing. Whether it's good or not is up to debate, and probably a matter of preference. People have issues with Razer (and Steel can be thrown into the same category) because they're generally more expensive, more flashy and overhyped and historically they've had worse reliability than MS or Logitech. The majority of CS/Q3 players still use IME3.0/WMO1.1a/MX518 which are all much cheaper than most performance mice that come out today. That said, I've owned all those mice and I just got a Deathadder and it's the best mouse I've ever used. Still, I wouldn't have gotten it if it didn't come with a 2yr warranty (doubled by CC, so 4.) | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On August 28 2009 05:42 Jibba wrote: Well, to date optical sensors beat laser in performance. [1] Negative acceleration is a tracking error when you're moving the mouse too quickly. Your G5 definitely has it, some have gotten rid of it through drivers. CPI translates into cursor speed/sensitivity. [2] Assuming everyone sits at 6/11 [3], I can't imagine that most people would be better off with the 1800 CPI setting instead of 900, because the range of sensitivities that games input is just not big enough to handle that. [4] The biggest increase in accuracy will be from overclocking the USB port (which doesn't have to be natively found on the mouse.) [5] Incidentally, smooth movement is actually less accurate. Every mouse comes with mouse prediction enabled by default and it makes your movement much smoother than what humans are actually capable of doing. Whether it's good or not is up to debate, and probably a matter of preference. [6] People have issues with Razer (and Steel can be thrown into the same category) because they're generally more expensive, more flashy and overhyped and historically they've had worse reliability than MS or Logitech. The majority of CS/Q3 players still use IME3.0/WMO1.1a/MX518 which are all much cheaper than most performance mice that come out today. That said, I've owned all those mice and I just got a Deathadder and it's the best mouse I've ever used. Still, I wouldn't have gotten it if it didn't come with a 2yr warranty (doubled by CC, so 4.) [7] [1] In what way? From what I've seen, lasers track better on more varied surfaces (mostly useless) and tend to have longer liftoff (bad), but are easier to raise CPI. Is there something else? [2] It does, but only indirectly. It increases the number of points that make up the path, but does not affect their spacing. [3] This is an assumption I did not make when doing my experiment and actually got better results (most certainly better when actually in use) from a non-default position setup. The default position at a lower DPI was my 2nd favorite, though. I encourage people to experiment heavily with their settings to find the one that feels just right. [4] I'm not sure I understand your wording. I'm confused as to what you are trying to say here. [5] Are you saying you can effectively increase the polling rate without having a better polling rate on the mouse? [6] This is a semantical disconnect between smooth/smooth/smooth. I gave a working definition of smooth having to do with the point density. This meaning of smooth here just means "the mouse tends to track along the horizontal and vertical orthogonals". That's actually completely different from my definition. You could have a perfectly straight line and my definition wouldn't necessarily call it smooth because mine depends on the point density. I feel that the point density definition of smooth is more useful because whether a line is smooth or not using that definition determines how natural it feels/how easy it is to use the mouse properly. [7] Interesting input on the mice there. I personally think that a WMO is a terrible mouse because the surface becomes slimy with any amount of sweat. A lot of people use the 518s in my experience. I've actually just ordered a Deathadder too and will hopefully get it tomorrow. I might repeat my experiment and be a little more thorough to see if I can find more exact results. | ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
If you are running a game in an absurdly high resolution, sure, you'll benefit with the registry that high DPI brings - but you only need that kind of resolution for the kinds of games you wouldn't play seriously in any sort of competitive situation. That being the case, why buy the mouse at all? In older games like CS, Starcraft, Quake, UT, etc, or even newer games that you intend to play at high refresh/framerate so you can play at a competitive level, you are going to want a more reasonable resolution, and should not need more than 800 DPI for ANY reason. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
3. What set up are you using? You said 6/11 is the 1:1 position for units:pixels. 4. Increasing polling rate has a bigger impact on mouse performance than raising CPI (and having to cut sensitivity.) It's probably the single best upgrade you can make to a mouse and [5] yes, you can do it manually without specific mouse hardware. Some might not be able to hand constant 1000hz, but 500hz gives you only a 2ms lag so it's still very good. 7. You were a Q3 player, so how familiar are you with ESReality? o.o You'll get raked over coals if you talk about WMO that way over there. http://www.esreality.com/?a=longpost&id=1300293&page=4 | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On August 28 2009 12:02 Vedic wrote: Anything over 1600 DPI is overkill for any game that isn't running with at least 2000+ pixel width resolution, no matter your in-game/windows/driver settings. Attempting to scale down pixel response through drivers/in-game/windows will leave you with missed mouse movements, which is the same as using low DPI with high sensitivity. The only way to get accurate results with high DPI is with a 1:1 movement to pixel ratio. If you are running a game in an absurdly high resolution, sure, you'll benefit with the registry that high DPI brings - but you only need that kind of resolution for the kinds of games you wouldn't play seriously in any sort of competitive situation. That being the case, why buy the mouse at all? In older games like CS, Starcraft, Quake, UT, etc, or even newer games that you intend to play at high refresh/framerate so you can play at a competitive level, you are going to want a more reasonable resolution, and should not need more than 800 DPI for ANY reason. Very many people would agree with everything you said exactly - a few weeks ago, I would have as well. I plan on doing more and different kinds of experiments with different kinds of data so people can give more critical feedback to me. Maybe I will prove you right in that keeping the cursor point location free from rounding is the best. But for now, I am using a setting that disagrees with the fundamental premise of your argument - that rounding (below the default position) is necessarily worse than not rounding. I have rationalized my improved results (after the fact) by figuring that closer point spacing (even if rounded) is better than farther point spacing in pretty much every situation. So my viewpoint (before I do any more experiments) predicts that if I could cut every speed slider down to 0 and find the correct velocity by raising the DPI ever higher that I would have the best possible mouse tracking. So my theory is that closer point spacing = smoother = better - I then use DPI to make up for the slow speed by adding more points. A practical drawback of my theory is that extremely-high DPI engines require much more processing power. Your theory (and the theory shared by very many others and, until recently, me) is that any changes to the mouse point placement outside of the mouse engine itself will inherently make the point placement less accurate (this is true by definition, since rounding will occur). My objection to this (after seeing the results of my own experiment) is that rounding done above the default is terrible, yes, - but rounding done below the default has a smaller and smaller effect the closer you get to 0. Additionally, since I get not only equal but better results, I would guess that the default position is not always exactly a 1:1 mapping or has some other characteristic which makes the tracking less smooth. There are a lot of other variables in play as well. It could be that the prediction on my mouse becomes more useful when the point spacing is smaller - or some combination of other things. Hopefully, I can think of some clever experiments to figure out exactly what is going on. If anyone has a really good way to test these kinds of things, I would like to hear your ideas. | ||
|
AoN.DimSum
United States2983 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
On August 28 2009 12:33 DefMatrixUltra wrote: Your theory (and the theory shared by very many others and, until recently, me) is that any changes to the mouse point placement outside of the mouse engine itself will inherently make the point placement less accurate (this is true by definition, since rounding will occur). My objection to this (after seeing the results of my own experiment) is that rounding done above the default is terrible, yes, - but rounding done below the default has a smaller and smaller effect the closer you get to 0. Additionally, since I get not only equal but better results, I would guess that the default position is not always exactly a 1:1 mapping or has some other characteristic which makes the tracking less smooth. It's not a theory, but I think you misunderstand the basic problem with high DPI. DPI is just a translation of distance to pixels. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "better results" (personal opinion?), but it sounds more like a personal experience rather than looking at the math behind it. If you have low DPI on a much higher resolution, you require a higher scaling of pixels moved to distance the mouse has moved. As such, you lose out on accuracy because the computer has to skip pixels in order to get more out of the same hand movement. If you have high DPI on a resolution lower than the DPI, the only thing that can scale is the software. The software can only scale down input by either choosing to ignore a small movement, or by calculating all movement into subpixels (which is still ignoring the movement, but at least queuing it). Either way, this means you end up with almost the exact same issue as the first example with a too low DPI. You CAN'T escape this issue without using a 1:1 ratio. ESReality is probably the best place for discussion about this, as there have been dozens of blogs digging to the very core of how each mouse works, and their viability for gaming. | ||
|
AoN.DimSum
United States2983 Posts
On August 28 2009 14:26 Jibba wrote: First, see if mouse acceleration is on. Slide your mouse slowly a set distance across your mouse pad, and then do the same thing very quickly. Does the cursor move the same amount? ahhh thank you!!! I turned off mouse acceleration so and i will try it out now! | ||
GHOSTCLAW
United States17042 Posts
| ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
On August 29 2009 02:14 GHOSTCLAW wrote: very good read, although it's not very applicable over starcraft. Much more useful for fps games, as it allows you to adjust your sensitivity of the mouse for different points in the game/match. Yeah... I thought SC was such a low res game a good mouse and a cheap mouse aren't going to have a noticeable difference. | ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On August 29 2009 03:07 Chef wrote: Yeah... I thought SC was such a low res game a good mouse and a cheap mouse aren't going to have a noticeable difference. A good mouse is not necessarily expensive. I'd say the advantage of a good mouse in a low-res game like SC is comfort. A mouse with a good grip that clings to your fingers manuevers more easily. @Jibba: Thanks very much for the ESR link. It seems I have missed a lot of development of mouse hardware ideas in the past few years. I've been reading on ESR in my spare time trying to gather ideas to update my post. They seem to be 100% mouse sensor, though, and don't seem to care about comfort at all. @Vedic: I noticed you are a regular on ESR. Could you explain to me the good qualities of a WMO? I feel like if I posted asking that over there I would just get flamed or ignored as a troll. Every time I think of that mouse, I literally cringe because of how bad its surface is. I can see the IME being comfortable, though I've never owned one so I can't really comment. I appreciate your input, and I intend to learn everything there is to know on ESR before updating my post here thoroughly. Hopefully I can get your input afterwards as well. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a154/eastcoasthandle/mousegriphu7.jpg) | ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
On August 29 2009 07:21 DefMatrixUltra wrote: @Vedic: I noticed you are a regular on ESR. Could you explain to me the good qualities of a WMO? I feel like if I posted asking that over there I would just get flamed or ignored as a troll. Every time I think of that mouse, I literally cringe because of how bad its surface is. I can see the IME being comfortable, though I've never owned one so I can't really comment. I appreciate your input, and I intend to learn everything there is to know on ESR before updating my post here thoroughly. Hopefully I can get your input afterwards as well. First, you should read this thread, which was done by Sujoy. It's a bit old, and people have been dying for an update to it, but it gives you a good range of info. Many older mice merely have a very stable sensor, which only adds to the fact that most people seem to like the shape. I personally do not, but the sensor does provide everything you need in a competitive level mouse. I previously used a Razer Krait, and currently use the Razer Salmosa - both using low DPI. I wouldn't hesitate to make a post with questions/concerns/ideas on ESR, as you're going to get trolled there no matter what you do. You'll just have to pick through and look for the constructive feedback. They're very elitist, but it's the go-to place for in-depth mouse information. Attempting to use the search function is an effort in futility, so just make a new post and see where it goes. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
On August 29 2009 08:27 Vedic wrote: First, you should read this thread, which was done by Sujoy. It's a bit old, and people have been dying for an update to it, but it gives you a good range of info. Many older mice merely have a very stable sensor, which only adds to the fact that most people seem to like the shape. I personally do not, but the sensor does provide everything you need in a competitive level mouse. I previously used a Razer Krait, and currently use the Razer Salmosa - both using low DPI. I wouldn't hesitate to make a post with questions/concerns/ideas on ESR, as you're going to get trolled there no matter what you do. You'll just have to pick through and look for the constructive feedback. They're very elitist, but it's the go-to place for in-depth mouse information. Attempting to use the search function is an effort in futility, so just make a new post and see where it goes. I have read that thread to its completion already. As a physics student, I can appreciate good solid data like that. I think Sujoy's experiment is only useful for determining which mice are good for very low-cursor-speed gamers, however (and also finding defects in DPI reporting). The maximum physical speed that the mouse can be moved at is only a concern if you have a very low cursor speed and are using a very wide range of motion on a large pad. This is a very useful experiment for gamers who like that, but I'm more of a high-speed (in RTS, of course) and medium-speed (in FPS and most other games). I noticed that about 1/5th of posters on average are very knowledgeable, even about extremely specific setups and mice differences. The rest are... well. Frightening. I have found a few good threads using the search function, but it is a huge PITA. I have seen a guide written for CS:S referenced about a dozen times which has information that is relevant to DPI + Speed sliders in Windows. How do you like the Salmosa? That was an option I had considered when getting a new mouse, but I figured it was just too extreme a change for me. @Jibba: The reason the WMO bothers me so much is because I try to use it with fingertips as opposed to palming. When you're just moving it around with your fingers, there is less surface in contact and it just makes the sliminess of the surface that much worse imo. To each their own, honestly - I'll be the last person to fault someone for their personal preference in a mouse, but I have to try extra hard to imagine functioning with a WMO. | ||
| ||
