Originally Posted by hisXLNC
They were both for the finalmouse. I distrust anyone who cant form an objective opinion on their own.
I tried both for the finalmouse. the hyperglides were the ms3 as there were none for the finalmouse at the time. the corepadz were specifically for the final mouse. the corepadz were cut too thin and were almost see through and not opaque from how thin they were. They barely came over the ridge for the mouse feet. Id say poor research and quality are definitely something id rate a company on. Corepadz failed. The glide was noticeably worse. The size and cut were bad. The rounded edges were worse.
I use 1600 dpi and lower sensitivity in game. Using low dpi was great in small resolution screens, and it should be a thing of the past but sadly here we are in 2020 with 4K and idiots still using 400dpi
An objective opinion on your own? Which is the definition of subjective?
Regardless of that, did you even read my first comment explaining the technical reasons why a product is superior to the other, other than giving examples with my first hand experience?
What poor research? Do you have problems understanding English or is that just a clumsy attempt at being petty?
I'm talking about hands-on experience and measurements, on top of how a sensor works from a technical standpoint.
Your comment and assumptions are almost as ridiculous as finalmouse's marketing strategy.
On top of that, your opinion is exactly a failure to develop an objective conclusion from your experience.
You think a company is bad because it made feet perfectly in spec with finalmouse's wrong data, like explained in Klopfer's comment (data I presumed to be wrong in the first place as FM is a joke company).
FM's specs were wrong from the start, and what your caveman like reasoning was able to conclude was: "mouse scrapes! corepad bad!"
Really appropriate how you opened up your comment
Do yourself a favor and start listening to people that understand things better than you.
And btw who is talking about cpi now? Why? (It's cpi, we are on a mouse tech forum, please).
Do you realize that there is no direct relation between screen pixels and cpi in a 3d matrix environment like an fps or tps?
The camera moves in degrees not pixels, so there is absolutely no difference in aiming granularity between 800*600 or 4k at any given cpi.
If you're pointing at x and you move the mouse by 1 count at 1 sens you are now pointing at x+1. (actually by x+0.022 in quake/source engine but let's keep things simple)
That will always be the same spot in the game, no matter how simplified or detailed the image is on your screen.
You have direct cpi to pixel relationship in 2d environments like desktop, rts, moba and what not.
That is totally different from moving a camera.
Pretty ironic how you came out of nowhere with such a clueless statement showing how little you understand about the things you post about.
But most of all, what the hell does that have to do with the discussion? Who the hell asked you at what cpi do you game at?
Is that your confused response to me saying that higher feet lower cpi? If so I'm not even gonna try to explain to you why that is beyond ridiculous.
Btw take a look at this::
Looks like hyperglide failed yet another design and on a good mouse, not FM junk.
Anyway my compliments for exposing yourself as one of those guys that think higher resolution screens need more cpi in a 3d environment.
I could understand right away that your were totally clueless about what you were talking about.
Now you basically put up a neon sign for any newbie that might have the doubt anything you say might be relevant.
Use this forum to learn, not to post about things you don't understand.