Is there a clear difference between 60 and 120-144 HZ when you're playing Osu? Is it noticeable? Pointless? A must have if you want to be good?
forum
What does HZ mean for Osu?
posted
Total Posts
32
Topic Starter
ZenithPhantasm
smoother approach circles and cursor
ZenithPhantasm
It's not a must have for anyone but yes chances are it will improve your overall experience, and not only in osu!. Other games and general use will also feel smoother (though films and videos don't count - I've never seen 144Hz video, for instance)
Is there a clear difference between 60 and 120-144 HZ when you're playing Osu? Is it noticeable?As soon as I got used to 160 Hz, I noticed a difference in osu. I didn't noticed it in osu before, while I could see a huge difference playing quake though.
Pointless?Depending on your needs and budget.
A must have if you want to be good?There are enough players proving a 60 Hz monitor is enough for competitive gameplay. Its impact on your performance wont be crucial.
People sight-read AR10.3 on 60hz screens. So don't worry too much about refresh rates if you want to improve at the game.
However, I prefer the more fluent cursor and approach circles. Somebody who still has not a good feeling for his tablet area or mouse sens but aims with rather fast motions will appreciate that he has double the information on the screen. After getting my 144hz screen I have gotten rid of my cursor trail and still could follow my cursor nicely despite my habbits of having abrupt and sudden cursor movement.
I couldn't play Taiko and Mania on 60hz though. It gave me headache after just some minutes.
However, I prefer the more fluent cursor and approach circles. Somebody who still has not a good feeling for his tablet area or mouse sens but aims with rather fast motions will appreciate that he has double the information on the screen. After getting my 144hz screen I have gotten rid of my cursor trail and still could follow my cursor nicely despite my habbits of having abrupt and sudden cursor movement.
I couldn't play Taiko and Mania on 60hz though. It gave me headache after just some minutes.
Sightreading ar10.33 is, mathematically speaking, borderline impossibleInfevo wrote:
People sight-read AR10.3 on 60hz screens. So don't worry too much about refresh rates if you want to improve at the game.
However, I prefer the more fluent cursor and approach circles. Somebody who still has not a good feeling for his tablet area or mouse sens but aims with rather fast motions will appreciate that he has double the information on the screen. After getting my 144hz screen I have gotten rid of my cursor trail and still could follow my cursor nicely despite my habbits of having abrupt and sudden cursor movement.
I couldn't play Taiko and Mania on 60hz though. It gave me headache after just some minutes.
Infevo wrote:
http://ask.fm/AzerFrost/answer/125994372770
Not everything a good player says instantly becomes truebigfeh wrote:
borderline
I'm pretty sure that's how it went, but I might have mistaken the ARs there. Pretty sure sightreading some of the higher ones is mathematically impossible (or nearly), just not too sure that's the case for 10.33 (though when I have the time I'll post with thoughts and conclusions).
I mean that there's a breaking point at which the circles appear too fast for someone to react. There's a biological/physical limit to a person's reaction timeInfevo wrote:
i'm not even sure what you mean by "mathematically"
I agree. But as long as some people manage to consistently play certain insanes at AR11 based on reaction and achieve high accuracies I still find it only plausible that a wiide variety of others are capable of actually sight-reading a lot harder maps @ AR10.3.bigfeh wrote:
I mean that there's a breaking point at which the circles appear too fast for someone to react. There's a biological/physical limit to a person's reaction timeInfevo wrote:
i'm not even sure what you mean by "mathematically"
I'd really like to trust Azer on this one. He is not the kind of person to talk about things he doesn't know a lot about.
Reactiontime+Movement for an expected action is around 250s for someone who is actually fast and used to it(I assume osu! players ARE used to it).
Approachtime for AR11 is 300ms, while it is 400ms for AR10.3.
So AR11 is borderlinemagic while AR 10.3 (as AR10) should be completely possible for anyone.
60 Hz compared to a 144 Hz monitor will steal you only 10ms of reaction time which is obviously quite the difference for AR11 - however if you include a manual offset that is negative you could play AR11 somewhat like hidden and extend your reaction time like that.
Approachtime for AR11 is 300ms, while it is 400ms for AR10.3.
So AR11 is borderlinemagic while AR 10.3 (as AR10) should be completely possible for anyone.
60 Hz compared to a 144 Hz monitor will steal you only 10ms of reaction time which is obviously quite the difference for AR11 - however if you include a manual offset that is negative you could play AR11 somewhat like hidden and extend your reaction time like that.
Im not sure if osu works that way (Im a noob and never went in-depth game mechanics), but shouldn't you add a little more time because of the time-tolerance given by the od?
Need to add that it is 10ms worst case. Only when gpu and screen are totally out of sync it is 10ms (10ms worse than 144hz). But you're right. I forgot to mention this. If you have a really good system with a g-sync screen this is off the table.Endaris wrote:
Reactiontime+Movement for an expected action is around 250s for someone who is actually fast and used to it(I assume osu! players ARE used to it).
Approachtime for AR11 is 300ms, while it is 400ms for AR10.3.
So AR11 is borderlinemagic while AR 10.3 (as AR10) should be completely possible for anyone.
60 Hz compared to a 144 Hz monitor will steal you only 10ms of reaction time which is obviously quite the difference for AR11 - however if you include a manual offset that is negative you could play AR11 somewhat like hidden and extend your reaction time like that.
By changing the offset you won't have any more or less time to react btw. It only helps syncing beatmap+hitsounds with the song in case your system has a significant delay or for whatever reason you might hit too early (then increase offset so everything is displayed later and you get in sync). You will however always have the same approach rate in ms.
I wouldnt recommend changing offset though as it can seriously mess with your acc in the long run. Only really experienced players who have to deal with OD10 and higher might feel the urge to change something individually for certain beatmaps with their local offsets if they notice something being off.
Is it noticeable? Yes, as clear as day and night
Pointless? Aesthetically speaking, no. Gameplay perspective, very subjective
A must have if you want to be good? No, you still have the exact same amount of time to react to a circle with 60hz. Though the smoother animations may be placebo to helping you play better
If it's well in your budget and game quite often then it is a well-invested purchase. If you're only playing casually and don't have money to throw away then I wouldn't invest in any QoL equipment
Pointless? Aesthetically speaking, no. Gameplay perspective, very subjective
A must have if you want to be good? No, you still have the exact same amount of time to react to a circle with 60hz. Though the smoother animations may be placebo to helping you play better
If it's well in your budget and game quite often then it is a well-invested purchase. If you're only playing casually and don't have money to throw away then I wouldn't invest in any QoL equipment
A higher refresh rate will always reduce the potentially maximal delay from desync, though. This can go up to 17ms @60frames per second. The more frequent a screen is able to refresh the better it will keep up with the output. (unless one has g-sync or any other reliable way of perfectly syncing devices).buny wrote:
Is it noticeable? Yes, as clear as day and night
Pointless? Aesthetically speaking, no. Gameplay perspective, very subjective
A must have if you want to be good? No, you still have the exact same amount of time to react to a circle with 60hz. Though the smoother animations may be placebo to helping you play better
If it's well in your budget and game quite often then it is a well-invested purchase. If you're only playing casually and don't have money to throw away then I wouldn't invest in any QoL equipment
A higher framerate reduces the amount of this particular delay, of course.
I wouldn't deny that having a higher refresh rate is better, but I wouldn't agree that it is something that would make you play better either
A 144Hz screen will give you a good extra 10ms, as its theoretical maximum delay is nearly 10ms under the mark for a 60Hz monitor. Again, not exactly a must have or a game breaker, but still definitely a big plus.buny wrote:
I wouldn't deny that having a higher refresh rate is better, but I wouldn't agree that it is something that would make you play better either
@edit
That's assuming you have a frame limiter in place e.g. vsync
Not mandatory. While it is better technically, it doesn't make you play better. It just feels better.
High refresh rate is very good for games where motion is involved in a reaction based environment, such as FPS games.
It is arguably better for games like Taiko and Mania, but once you develop a certain amount of skill at either of those games, you start to read stuff peripherally anyway, and it begins to matter less the better you get. Many players focus on a certain part of the screen depending on the scroll speed, which will cause the perception of motion blurr despite a high refresh rate, due to persistence of the eye - known as tracking speed. Personally this gives me a headache regardless.
High refresh rate is very good for games where motion is involved in a reaction based environment, such as FPS games.
It is arguably better for games like Taiko and Mania, but once you develop a certain amount of skill at either of those games, you start to read stuff peripherally anyway, and it begins to matter less the better you get. Many players focus on a certain part of the screen depending on the scroll speed, which will cause the perception of motion blurr despite a high refresh rate, due to persistence of the eye - known as tracking speed. Personally this gives me a headache regardless.
ZenithPhantasm
Strobing/CRT problem solved.RaneFire wrote:
Not mandatory. While it is better technically, it doesn't make you play better. It just feels better.
High refresh rate is very good for games where motion is involved in a reaction based environment, such as FPS games.
It is arguably better for games like Taiko and Mania, but once you develop a certain amount of skill at either of those games, you start to read stuff peripherally anyway, and it begins to matter less the better you get. Many players focus on a certain part of the screen depending on the scroll speed, which will cause the perception of motion blurr despite high refresh rate, due to persistence of the eye - also known as eye tracking speed. Personally this gives me a headache regardless.
I have a strobing monitor. It doesn't stop perceived motion blurr of the notes in Taiko, resulting from focusing on a stationary point. Like I said, persistence of the human eye/tracking speed of the human eye.ZenithPhantasm wrote:
Strobing/CRT problem solved.
Suppose I didn't mention strobing, but anyone buying a high refresh rate monitor, better be taking advantage of strobing in some way, or else they're wasting their money (what I mean by that is it really isn't worth it unless you have all the money in the world).
Of course having your monitor refresh 144 times per second is better than 60. This in accordance with lightboost/benq blur reduction technology can make the game buttery smooth.
I personally use the Blur Busters Strobe Utility for the BenQ monitors and it's really nice.
But to be perfectly honest, the only difference I can feel with getting a 144hz monitor is that everything else <120hz looks like ass.
I personally use the Blur Busters Strobe Utility for the BenQ monitors and it's really nice.
But to be perfectly honest, the only difference I can feel with getting a 144hz monitor is that everything else <120hz looks like ass.
That's not how offset works.Endaris wrote:
however if you include a manual offset that is negative you could play AR11 somewhat like hidden and extend your reaction time like that.
120hz/144hz would only have practical uses at AR10.3 and higher. Having a high refresh rate just gives you a smoother and more detailed time lapse of the approach circle.
I can see AR10.3 approach circles just fine on 60hz, but on AR11, it can get really muddled in which case, having the higher refresh rate would help.
For me, I prefer 60hz because 120hz gave me a lot more eye strain.
For Taiko! especially and maybe CB, I can see having 120hz/144hz being more helpful.
I can see AR10.3 approach circles just fine on 60hz, but on AR11, it can get really muddled in which case, having the higher refresh rate would help.
For me, I prefer 60hz because 120hz gave me a lot more eye strain.
For Taiko! especially and maybe CB, I can see having 120hz/144hz being more helpful.
sadly ar11 still looks distorted on 144hzusa wrote:
120hz/144hz would only have practical uses at AR10.3 and higher. Having a high refresh rate just gives you a smoother and more detailed time lapse of the approach circle.
I can see AR10.3 approach circles just fine on 60hz, but on AR11, it can get really muddled in which case, having the higher refresh rate would help.
For me, I prefer 60hz because 120hz gave me a lot more eye strain.
For Taiko! especially and maybe CB, I can see having 120hz/144hz being more helpful.
ZenithPhantasm
I heard a certain 160hz CRT exists and I heard this guy has one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jK0IfJgx10bigfeh wrote:
Not everything a good player says instantly becomes true
I'm pretty sure that's how it went, but I might have mistaken the ARs there. Pretty sure sightreading some of the higher ones is mathematically impossible (or nearly), just not too sure that's the case for 10.33 (though when I have the time I'll post with thoughts and conclusions).
I can play 10.3 on my laptop 60hz I can even do 9.3 + DT good too. It might be easier on a 120 or 144 though. The higher ones (which most people don't play) probably are only slightly easier.
E m i
ar11 = 300ms[-Shuusei-] wrote:
Nothing.
According to my personal opinion the 144 Hz accommodates the view but it does not make the play easier
just a luxury fool
decrease in average refresh-related input lag going from 60 to 144hz: 4.8611111111111111ms (8.333333ms ---> 3.4722222ms)
308.3333333333ms (60hz) ---> 303.47222222222222ms (144hz)
you: ar11.023148148148 is not easier than ar11.055555555555555