Jump to content

DigitalMe

Member
  • Content count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DigitalMe

  • Rank
    Fireteam Leader
  1. 144Hz/1ms response time

    Of course - and they are even smoother and more natural above 60fps. You said that the human eye cannot see above 100hz, it most certainly can. Way above it. I can overclock my monitor to 180hz and it is noticeably smoother again compared to 144hz.
  2. 144Hz/1ms response time

    They are fundamentally the same, the Hz of a monitor means how many times it updates it's image per second. Most movies are recorded at 24fps, so it is unlikely you will get much benefit from displaying the movie at 60fps. To meet the requirements of 60fps you would be interpolating frames or speeding up the movie (x2.5).
  3. 144Hz/1ms response time

    Vision is not that simple, but it has been proven with tests that people are capable of perceiving an image flashed for only 1/250th of a second. I can see a difference between 144 and 120 fps easily. Scientists are pretty confident that people could detect motion differences up to and possibly beyond 500 fps. Each person is different and each eye is different. Importantly, eyes can be trained and even more importantly, there is a vast difference between detecting motion and creating an image in the brain from light or detecting variations in light intensity etc.
  4. Competetive Gaming – How to make it

    Aye, no matchmaking tends to introduce a huge chasm of variety in player skill that leads to scores like that. It's one of the reasons I enjoy Overwatch, any time of the day I can queue up and have a chance of a pretty balanced game. Although I don't play Overwatch much, just with friends typically; I think I'd be much happier if more players were interested in shooters with a little more concordance with reality (like Squad). Sadly, realistic shooter games tend to have a very small following in comparison to the moderates (CoD, CS and BF) and the silly (Overwatch).
  5. Competetive Gaming – How to make it

    I think it was in another thread I saw him post a better score... here you go:
  6. Competetive Gaming – How to make it

    Tell that to Blizzard and Overwatch, they seem comfortable with some of the lowest tick rates possible lol You're marrying two separate considerations, one is the equal opportunity the game affords you and the other is what you yourself can afford regarding hardware. I play Overwatch at 144fps, always. I play the game on high and do this no problem, I have no advantage over those on low doing the same but have an advantage over anyone using 60 hz or anything less than 144 fps. That isn't something the game is providing me, it's my hardware, which is capable of displaying 144 fps.
  7. What's the day-to-day number of how many people play SQUAD?

    Yeah and a lot of us play infrequently, dipping in and out as it is EA.
  8. Why the medic aversion?

    I think the biggest problem is - if there is a medic near by, players will be gung ho. This leads the medic to performing one duty - bandaging. Personally I find this to be the least engaging aspect of the game. I have no problems with logi running (which is often designated to riflemen) and so I will generally take rifleman where I can (unless a medic is needed). I think there needs to be more critical injuries that can't be saved and a revive limit (1 or 2). This way the medic is a rifleman who, given the right circumstances, can turn a firefight around. But who isn't there to continually pick up the mess of bodies that throw themselves at an enemy because of the red cross.
  9. Please no shovel melee

    Considering that it doesn't tell you how you died nor where you were killed from it's pretty much as close as you can get to a stealth kill in MP games other than there being an actual stealth mechanic. I think my preferred method will be hiding in a doorway waiting to bash someone's face in.
  10. Please no shovel melee

    I'm going to agree with others, this is a non-issue. The thought that servers trying to populate can find a way to make the game fun while they wait for other players I'm all behind. This is, sadly, one of those games that sucks with any less than 30 players considering the size of the maps.
  11. Squad sale on summer sales

    I played a lot of BC2, it was quite an enjoyable game. I think the destructible environments are the best thing Dice have introduced to the series, BF3 was okay for it too although I never picked up anything after BF3. Their hardcore mode is lip service to the true potential of the game were it to offer a "realistic" game mode. Their rating system wasn't too bad, perhaps I didn't play it at the right time though because I would always feel like there was a few of us lightly seasoning the top of every game with rather ridiculous contributions on the scoreboard. Perhaps that's owed in part to the map design and my favouring the Rush gametype (much like I prefer AAS to the 'Conquest' style gametype). Those are definitely the type of players to look for. No belly-aching, no pretending to be Delta Force or Imaginary Battalion 443, just decent players, playing the game as intended without a fuss. I feel like it's a rare breed today, but perhaps I'm wearing my rose tinted goggles and it was as rare before as it is now and I tried harder to find them in the past. I definitely think some system should be introduced, but I doubt it will be the developers introducing it. I do think modders will do it and with that, some of the best players will inevitably move to unlicensed servers which will probably resolve most of the complaints.
  12. Squad sale on summer sales

    I would love for a system like this to be in place however, it doesn't really work. ELO Rating seems to be the most frequently used system and top to bottom you get the infantile jerks who would prefer to spoil your fun, than play the game. You get those, shouty, whiny, naturally good nerds who don't really understand why they're good, they just are and love to spend their time telling people down the microphone with an obsessive, high pitched wailing. (e.g. "DID YOU SEE THAT SHOT?"). Then you have the others that are depressed or angry with life and feel the need to blame people, angrily, instead of putting the game down and addressing the issues they're having in the real world. (e.g. "<long chain of expletives regarding your mother or other female relative>"). And of course the regular anti-social stuff you expect to get online; the "must make everyone listen to the music I enjoy" guy, the "need to bore everyone describing the lack of attention I get from the opposite sex" guy and conversely the "need to describe, in detail, every sexual encounter I have" guy. You get the "behaves like I'm high for the first time despite being high everyday '420 blaze it'" guy and the "hasn't learned how to set mic PTT so let's you listen to him and his wife arguing" guy and occasionally the "recognised that desperate men will fawn over just the voice of a female" girl. As always, I digress... The older I have gotten the more I have realised just how few people I can suffer and make suffer with contact; I give everyone respect and play the game but will rarely even speak lest my engagement encourage them to make me want to shutdown my computer for good. The best thing as always, is to join a community with like minded individuals. Private games will offer the best experience of any game 9/10. There's just no possible rating system for the different expectations regarding social constructs/etiquette.
  13. Best Squad KD ever....

    It's relevant to the post I quoted and in the video presented. You're absolutely right that he was confused over the semantics, which is what I described when I said that he formalised his misinterpretation. What is right in strategy is that which, when means tested, produces the desired effect most often. What is good, is what produces the desired effect, which can only be identified when that which is desired has occurred. He attempts to diminish good plays by suggesting that they occur less frequently when the chosen method is practised, but good plays are good plays because of their success. Some would say that when choosing the wrong method and succeeding it is a great play because the method was against the grain and yet met with success. Attributing its success to the player.
  14. Best Squad KD ever....

    This guy is so triggered. Good and bad plays are defined by their success, right and wrong plays are considered on abstraction and analysis. i.e. Choice A is right and Choice B is wrong, but both A and B can be good or bad. A good play is the one that is successful whether it involved your cat running across the keyboard or your understanding and exploitation of the current meta. A bad play is the one that is unsuccessful, for whatever reason, even if it was the right play to make strategically. A play can be good and wrong and a play can be right and bad, which is why scouting/information is always, in every competitive game, the most important asset at your disposal. A good player will always use the right way and inevitably make bad plays, a great player will take risks, play wrong and make good plays. That's one of the defining differences between a 90th percentile and a 99th percentile player, one of them is following the meta while the other is driving it. That the guy is using CS as a way of formalising his misinterpreting of good and bad is quite ironic, considering the limited strategy that is actually permissible in the game. To the OP, I hope I see more Joe's, I'm confident he was as much fun to play against as he was to play with.
  15. Squad sale on summer sales

    What price do you think will keep low IQ players and kids away from the game? I absolutely love the chip on the shoulder, bad players == kids isn't exactly true though, sadly. What's more, kids have an excuse for being uneducated, lazy and poorly behaved so I'd rather them than their adult equivalents. Provided I can find squad's whose sense of humour doesn't revolve around the latest meme I'm happy. Bad or good, couldn't care less. I think it's a good example of the ever present Dunning-Kruger effect in gaming though. The expectation that, somehow, players with no experience with guns in real life, military in real life or milsim games at all can somehow instinctively or intuitively pickup the game and get to a level you're happy with. I'll welcome anyone who has bought the game in a sale, the same as I would welcome anyone else. With ambivalence unless they directly ask me a question.
×