|
|
|
|
|
|
by Strilanc
505 days ago
|
|
|
It doesn't need to be perceptible to cause a difference in a game. Suppose two players notice each other at the same time (e.g. as would naturally happen when walking around a corner in a shooter), first to shoot wins, and their total latencies are identical Gaussians with a standard deviation of 100ms. Then a 6.5ms reduction in latency is worth an additional 2.5% chance of winning the trade. Maybe you won't notice this on a moment by moment basis, but take statistics and its impact should be measurable. In ELO terms a 2.5% gain in win rate is around a 10 point increase (simplifying by assuming that single Gaussian is the entire game). That's small, but if you were a hardcore player and all it took to raise your ELO by 10 points was using a better monitor/mouse/OS... why not? Doing that is cheap compared to the time investment required to improve your ELO another 10 points with practice (unless you're just starting). Also, I think you'd be surprised what people can perceive in a context where they are practiced. Speed runners hit frame perfect tricks in 60FPS games. That's not reaction time but it does intimately involve consistent control latency between practice and execution. |
|
|
> Suppose two players notice each other at the same time (e.g. as would naturally happen when walking around a corner in a shooter)
This is not true for third person games. Depending on a left sided or right sided peek and your angle or approach, players see asymmetrically.
For example, Fortnite is a right side peek game. Peeking right is safer than peeking left as less of your body is exposed before your camera turns the corner.
I believe distance also plays a part in the angles.