1. osu! forums
  2. osu!
  3. Gameplay & Rankings
show more
posted

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

Its the other way around the weight of a mouse gives stability and the size gives more area to grasp which allows for more control
So if I give you a chopsticks of 1km circumference, you'd be able to have more control over your food? Obviously not.
So if I give you a pentelpen and ask you to write your name of approximate 12mm standard font size, you'd be able to provide a satisfactory, hassle free result? Obviously not. Pentel pens are structured to discard control of where its ink will go with its increased ballpoint size compared to regular pens (ballpens, fountain pens etc.). Its purpose is just to mark which benefits more in size than precision that's why it's called a marker

I'll give you another clearer example just in case these already clear examples still isn't enough for you to stop with this false statement.

Write your name with a tablet pen in MSPaint.
Write your name with a mouse in MSPaint.

Just ignore the matter of speed for now, which among these two peripherals offered more control and ease? Which has better legibility?
posted

Kunino Sagiri wrote:

Write your name with a tablet pen in MSPaint.
Write your name with a mouse in MSPaint.

Just ignore the matter of speed for now, which among these two peripherals offered more control and ease? Which has better legibility?
That's an interesting test. Tablet was harder because there's very little friction between my tablet and the pen nib. There's less consistency between the mouse drawn glyphs but I've spent years writing with a pen.
posted

Kunino Sagiri wrote:

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

Its the other way around the weight of a mouse gives stability and the size gives more area to grasp which allows for more control
So if I give you a chopsticks of 1km circumference, you'd be able to have more control over your food? Obviously not.
So if I give you a pentelpen and ask you to write your name of approximate 12mm standard font size, you'd be able to provide a satisfactory, hassle free result? Obviously not. Pentel pens are structured to discard control of where its ink will go with its increased ballpoint size compared to regular pens (ballpens, fountain pens etc.). Its purpose is just to mark which benefits more in size than precision that's why it's called a marker

I'll give you another clearer example just in case these already clear examples still isn't enough for you to stop with this false statement.

Write your name with a tablet pen in MSPaint.
Write your name with a mouse in MSPaint.

Just ignore the matter of speed for now, which among these two peripherals offered more control and ease? Which has better legibility?
Chopsticks with a circumference of 1km doesn't give more control because of the limiting factor which is the size of the human hand. A mouse is a better size than a pen for the hand.

With the pentel pen example it is a different situation where its comparing apple to oranges because motion is not scaled. If a pentel pen shaped object is used as a pointing device it would be perfectly fine for producing a 12mm font sized name if a converter was used that scaled down the produced name.

And for the final point the reason why its easier to write names with a pen rather than a mouse is not because pen has better control its because people have had way more practice using a pen to write letters. Its like asking a person to play a first person shooter with a tablet.
posted

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

...
I don't think you get my point. These examples were only used to strengthen my first post where total size, volume, weight objectively influence control and the general usage of the said object. We're supposed to completely ignore the skill or mastery of the peripheral by the user but rather the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.

It doesn't matter if it fits your hand, it has a good shape, you prefer it or whatever simply because they're irrelevant. Use a ruler, compute for their respective total surface area, volume but I think you don't even need to use those tedious measurements to see which has more/less total.
posted

Kunino Sagiri wrote:

the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.

It doesn't matter if it fits your hand, it has a good shape, you prefer it or whatever simply because they're irrelevant.
Control as a metric does not exist without the context of anatomy and physiology. More precisely the control that a pointing device grants an individual is a function of both the physical properties of the device and the anatomical and physiological properties of the individual.

While I believe your argument that the physical properties of a tablet leads to greater control is true for the majority of human beings, I also think that the difference between mouse and tablet is minor enough that a smaller portion of people would have greater control with a mouse due to some anatomical or physiological oddity.

Thus it would be more reasonable to say that tablet is more likely to give a greater level of control.
posted

Kunino Sagiri wrote:

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

...
I don't think you get my point. These examples were only used to strengthen my first post where total size, volume, weight objectively influence control and the general usage of the said object. We're supposed to completely ignore the skill or mastery of the peripheral by the user but rather the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.

It doesn't matter if it fits your hand, it has a good shape, you prefer it or whatever simply because they're irrelevant. Use a ruler, compute for their respective total surface area, volume but I think you don't even need to use those tedious measurements to see which has more/less total.
Your point was that a tablet pen is superior because it gives a higher amount of control. The reasons you gave were that a lower weight and size is better for control which is partially true as less force is needed to move the pen. I disagreed since a higher surface area of the hand in contact with the peripheral gives more power to move that weight and a higher weight adds stability so less force is needed to grasp the peripheral to keep it on its path. One example you gave was writing which isn't a good example of equal mastery so its invalid and the other two examples are to do with the size of the object. Larger objects allow for larger movements but my point was if these movements are scaled then the control is similar.

I think that whatever negatives that the mouse has in terms of control is made up for in positives which make the pen and mouse roughly equal. They have their advantages for different types of movements but for osu their control is generally the same in terms of overall performance.
posted

G3T wrote:

Kunino Sagiri wrote:

the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.

It doesn't matter if it fits your hand, it has a good shape, you prefer it or whatever simply because they're irrelevant.
Control as a metric does not exist without the context of anatomy and physiology. More precisely the control that a pointing device grants an individual is a function of both the physical properties of the device and the anatomical and physiological properties of the individual.

While I believe your argument that the physical properties of a tablet leads to greater control is true for the majority of human beings, I also think that the difference between mouse and tablet is minor enough that a smaller portion of people would have greater control with a mouse due to some anatomical or physiological oddity.

Thus it would be more reasonable to say that tablet is more likely to give a greater level of control.
That's a good point and is a good reason why people should pick based on preference. (though I still disagree that mouse has generally less control)

A possible reason for being anatomically suited to mouse is big hands, though I think mine are average.
posted

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

A possible reason for being anatomically suited to mouse is big hands, though I think mine are average.
That might be a factor. I have quite large hands and I swapped from tablet to mouse because I had trouble gripping the pen. However I also have a limited range of movement in my aim hand's thumb due to an injury I sustained a few years ago and that was likely a contributing factor.

The largest difference I've noticed about mouse vs tablet other than having to deal with mouse drift is the difference in input lag. The lower input lag on mouse means that while I have to concentrate more on the position of my cursor to account for drift I can concentrate far less on synchronising my taps with my aim as it comes more naturally.

I've tried switching back to tablet a few times and that difference in input lag is a greater annoyance to me than having to deal with mouse drift.
posted

G3T wrote:

I've tried switching back to tablet a few times and that difference in input lag is a greater annoyance to me than having to deal with mouse drift.
How much is the average input lag for tablets? I always thought that the input lag is no more than 2 or 3 ms greater than mouse at worst.
posted

Kunino Sagiri wrote:

How much is the average input lag for tablets? I always thought that the input lag is no more than 2 or 3 ms greater than mouse at worst.
It's hard to find good specs. The signal timing diagrams in Wacom's original patent from the mid 90's allows for a minimum input lag of 15 ms, excluding USB transfer times. The three factors in tablet input lag are the coil sampling frequency, the number of coils, and the DSP time.

As technology has become significantly better over the last two decades you'd expect a significant improvement in the above factors. I think, though I have no actual confirmation, that most of these improvements have been put into a larger resolution, more pressure sensitivity, and pen positioning data.

Using this analysis and my own experience of the difference between a good mouse and tablet I'd estimate that most Wacom tablets probably do about 5-10 ms of sampling/DSP and then there's about 6 ms of USB transfer time as they poll at 200 Hz. And then everything but the w5 driver for the 480 take multiple samples to smooth your input, further adding (5 ms * number of samples) to the input lag.

A good mouse at polling at 1000 Hz is going to have about 2 ms input lag to the PC to the eyes you have to take into account frametime, monitor DSP, monitor response time, and monitor refresh rate which is almost entirely usb transfer time as good optical sensors sample at about 6 kHz.
posted
I've played with tablet for a year now after switching from mouse and I haven't improved in any way but reading (which isn't due to the tablet, obviously). There are some things I've been able to do with one and not the other (both ways).

It's just a preference for the most part and there are a few maps that are more tailored for one or the other
posted
I used to play with a tablet for about 3 years, then I switched to a mouse and I'll probably stay on this one. It gives me much more control over the position of my cursor, my aim doesn't "shake", which is a common trouble for many tablet users and I feel much more confident on this one. Yes, a tablet has some crucial advantages, but mouse has its own as well.
posted

shit
posted
posted
posted
posted

LoliPantsu wrote:

i feel u
posted
posted
Only read the OP.

I agree with your points, but I think you're misrepping the "it's preference" argument a bit. Obviously they can't be completely equal, but they can be close enough that your choice makes no significant impact on your overall performance in the long run. And that's a much harder argument to refute, it depends on what you consider "significant".
posted
Another post where you write obvious stuff and then back it up with evidence so bad that it almost negates your point?

Nice.
show more
Please sign in to reply.