Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › An Overview of Mouse Technology
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

An Overview of Mouse Technology - Page 8

post #71 of 110
If "pixel skipping" is only a matter of relevance for extreme examples like the one you pointed out, this brings me back to my initial question. What difference does it make if you use an in-game sensitivity of 1 @ 800cpi or 2 @ 400cpi? According to the article, there was something to them that called for preference. As I pointed out, the same mouse movement produces the same rotaton behaviour and if the "degrees rotated per count" fpr both settings are low enough for no "pixel skipping" to occur, I can't quite understand what it is that makes you prefer one over the other. May it be the smoothness of the rotation behaviour? As in, with high CPI and low sensitivty, your FOV is rotated by a lesser degree, but more often per distance travelled, making the rotation seem more smooth than having your FOV being rotated by larger degrees, but less times for the same distance? Sorry to bother you, maybe I just didn't quite get something that was already pointed out on the article. I will try and read it again.
post #72 of 110
Thread Starter 
At 1 sens and 800cpi your radial value is half that of the second example which means that they will feel different. You are right that they both have the same rotational distance per 360°, but the radial values per count aren't the same for these two settings (how much you will rotate per count of movement).
post #73 of 110
Smoother is a good analogy.
post #74 of 110
I find it rather strange that 90% of competitive FPS players (both Quake and CS) tend to use 400cpi then. 400cpi today most likely isn't the sensor's native resolution, you are seemingly more likely to experience "pixel skipping" with low sensor resolutions (well, at least in CS most players use an in-game sensitivity of 1-3, so I guess this isn't a problem) and the rotation behaviour feels less smooth.
You could argue it is due to the fact that back in the days 400cpi was standard for popular gaming mice like the Microsoft Intelli Mouse, but generations of players keep doing it. Anything above 450cpi is practically regarded a FPS faux-pas in competitive circles.
I wonder why that is... Shouldn't there have been a change in how this is regarded long ago? I mean, especially since sponsors of professional players should take interest in suggesting them to use more than 400cpi with their modern xk CPI gaming mice, because then the fan communities wouldn't just go and keep buying 10 year old mice, but would actually have to buy more modern mice if they want to use their "idol's" settings. Seeing as how there are actual advantages of using higher CPI, or at least no disadvantages, sponsors suggesting their players to use higher resolutions wouldn't even be a mere promotional act. Supplying them with technical knowledge would also help to deconstruct the general assumption of gaming product consumers that offering higher CPI in mice is useless. Because considering that there is a difference between regulating your sensitivity via in-game settings or the hardware itself and that thus there can potentially be found something preferable in using high CPI, one can say that the more CPI customization a mouse offers, the more freedom it allows the consumer to set up his sensitivity according to his preference.
post #75 of 110
Generally, it would do with having sense of control over cursor speed. Mouse resolution counts are independent from any specific distance calculations. IE. "Oh, It takes 2 inches to move my cursor across the screen"

That and polling rate being a variable that works around how fast you actually move your mouse. Some gamers may feel more consistent with lower CPI as higher polling (ex 1000hz) will constantly peg max value, unlike a high CPI high hz combination which "can" be bad. Can because this may be situational to microcontroller clock timers and what not. I have a specific mouse that works sick @ 800 CPI 1000hz, would likely lower to 500hz for 1600 CPI though.

General cursor speed vs polled value. Highly recommend 125hz if you must have 3200 CPI+ ^^

The less smooth feeling may also give a sense of control. If you take notice, you could probably feel that you're generally able to move a mouse with the same radial perception at any CPI value. Raise, that and it feels a bit slower, but you're also not skipping if you desire to setup in such a way. It isn't going to matter that much in all honesty.. As long as your sensitivity multiplier isn't stupid high.

There are actually many current mice using native 400+ CPI registries, just depends in general implementation or whats offered for a specific model.

The 400 cpi "pixel skiping" will mainly occur with use of higher desktop resolution, but even then, it isn't as bad as a lower resolution skipping as there is more general pixel coverage within a specific area on screen, at least in my view of things. If I'm wrong, Gymbol can correct me biggrin.gif

tl;dr Use what feels comfortable to you, the actual player.
Edited by Skylit - 6/5/13 at 11:47am
post #76 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAGGARD View Post

Seeing as how there are actual advantages of using higher CPI, or at least no disadvantages
400cpi wouldn't probably affect pixel skipping (or view changes overall) in the slightest with any of the usual in-game sensitivities + screen resolutions the pros use. So techincally there's no upside for using higher cpi either, why not use 400? Native cpi is still better ofc
post #77 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAGGARD View Post

Anything above 450cpi is practically regarded a FPS faux-pas in competitive circles.
I wonder why that is... Shouldn't there have been a change in how this is regarded long ago? I mean, especially since sponsors of professional players should take interest in suggesting them to use more than 400cpi with their modern xk CPI gaming mice, because then the fan communities wouldn't just go and keep buying 10 year old mice, but would actually have to buy more modern mice if they want to use their "idol's" settings.

Considering most of the sensitivities in the comp scene, there is no reason for most of them to use more than 400-800, most of them use what feels best or what they are used to(for Example Strenx with 800cpi and 51cm/360°), or which provides the best performance(cooller with 2300cpi and ~26cm/360°), not to mention that many mice tend to have lower malfunction speeds and/or worse cursor quality with high cpi, and its not like people buy specific hardware today because players are using it, or maybe i just havent seen someone that stupid yet.
post #78 of 110
@ Skylit: I'm not saying the higher the CPI the better, nor do I necessarily want to know what I should be using, I was pointing out exactly what you did; it actually doesn't really matter that much as long as your settings aren't "objectively" out of the norm. So, I was wondering, with using high CPI actually not being that bad as people make it out to be, but actually offering more options to make your sensitivity fit your preference, whatever that might be, why do sponsors not encourage a change of view in this field? How the polling rate affects the actual translation of the sensor's CPI to the desktop is interesting, but it doesn't really explain why 90% of the time, people will prefer low over high CPI...
The native CPI still being 400 on modern mice would be a sound reason of course. But is that actually true? What is the "average" native CPI of mice nowadays? I thought it was 800-1000 in most cases.

@ test user: I said that in most cases, this wouldn't be a problem. I just tied that statement to the fact that with lower CPI, most people are going to use higher in-game sensitivities. And higher in-game sensitivities can lead to "pixel skipping". And reasons for not "just using 400cpi" besides the "native CPI" argument you also mentioned, is that like I mentioned, higher CPI can feel different (more smooth maybe, however different it may feel, people potentially could prefer it) while not changing the real sensitivity.

@ woll3:

Like I said, old-school players might be used to 400cpi mice, but that doesn't explain why generations of players keep using the same.
Quote:
not to mention that many mice tend to have lower malfunction speeds and/or worse cursor quality with high cpi

That's something. Does this apply to a difference of 400 vs. 800 - 1600cpi though?
Quote:
and its not like people buy specific hardware today because players are using it, or maybe i just havent seen someone that stupid yet.

It's actually very common (in the CS community at least) for players to base their settings upon what the professionals use. Not necessarily the exact gear (but this isn't as uncommon as you might think aswell), but when someone of their "idols" wouldn't be using the standard 400cpi, the fan wouldn't just go ahead and get a non-customizeable 10 year old mouse, but would have to consider buying more recent models which support higher CPI and maybe also use the manufacturer's software/drivers.

Again, I'm not talking about what is best to use or what should be used or whatever. It's just that the vast majority of professionals (not only in gaming, even in GFX for instance) using low CPI made me think that there is something objectively superior to it. Now that I know that actually, there are no real disadvantages to the opposite and that some people might even prefer the "feel" of higher CPI while maintining the real sensitivity they are used to, I am rather buffled as to how there has never been a change to how this is viewed, especially with manufacturers pushing the resolutive barriers of their sensors and the sponsors assumably taking interest in making the adjustability of their mice's resolution an actual viable aspect of marketing their products (whereas the general opinion now seems to be: higher CPI are completely useless and sponsors are just alluring people who like big numbers into buying their products). As I said, if what this article suggest is true, that would mean: More possibilities of setting up your CPI = more ways of adjusting your sensitivity to fit your preference.
post #79 of 110
Hmm, I don't know if higher cpi even increases smoothness once you get to the estimated "useful cpi", which most pros should do with400. i "value. Yeah, you can more safely use higher cpi, and maybe slightly change the feel, but old habits die hard smile.gif
post #80 of 110
Thread Starter 
Regarding the cpi registries, yes. I don't think the difference between 400-800 today is as big, but at least historically speaking 400-1600 was pretty large at one point (like 1 or more m/s different in the most extreme cases) Skylit can probably answer this more thoroughly, but historically speaking the higher the cpi generally the lower the ips has been, which for low to ultra low sens fps players could be problematic in maintaining cursor consistency during very quick movements. I was rather impressed with this regarding the G100s in that the ips remained pretty consistent throughout all the registries, but for older mice this hasn't been quite the same.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mice
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › An Overview of Mouse Technology