Slashdot Mirror
Lag Analysis For the PlayStation Move
The $64,000 question about Sony's upcoming motion control system, the PlayStation Move, is how responsive it will be compared to traditional console controllers and its counterparts from Nintendo and Microsoft. Eurogamer slowed down videos of Sony's tech demo software to establish a rough baseline latency that developers will have to work with. Quoting:
"While exact latency measurements aren't possible in these conditions, a ballpark idea of the level of response isn't a problem at all. The methodology is remarkably straightforward. Keep your hand as steady as possible, then make fast motions with the controller. Count the frames between your hand moving, and the motion being carried out on-screen. Equally illuminating is to stop your movement suddenly, then count the frames necessary for your on-screen counterpart to catch up. While not 100 per cent accurate, repeat the process enough times and the frame difference becomes fairly evident. Bearing all of that in mind, and recognizing that we don't know how much latency the display itself is adding, I'd say that a ballpark figure of around 133ms of controller lag (give or take a frame) seems reasonable, certainly not the ultra-fast crispness of response we see from games like Burnout Paradise or Modern Warfare, but fine for most of the applications you would want from such a controller."
Since I suppose that 133ms + delay from your screen is quite noticeable. Too bad if you're sword fighting with a friend, 133 ms can make the difference between living or having your head roll on the floor!
It'll be like playing Quake on dialup again, oh the nostalgia!
Wii-style controllers are for fun. Not for accuracy. Not for performance. Not for precision. They are meant to be a fun tool to play a game. It is by far the most inaccurate way to put input into your machine. It's like typing on a "virtual keyboard" on a touchscreen, or a projected one. Yes, it's insanely cool to use a keyboard projected onto your desk instead of an ordinary one. But you neither get the tactile feedback, touch-typing is pretty much impossible and so on. You will not write as fast on any projected/displayed keyboard as you do on a standard keyboard.
The same applies to these motion controllers. Yes, they're a freaky cool toy. They sure offer a new aspect of "fun" to games. Especially in company when you can watch others gyrate, bounce and stretch (funny or sexy, depending on gender, body type and personal preference). But be honest: Ever tried to play DDR on a keyboard instead of the dance mat? Dunno about you, but I'm HEAPS better using a keyboard.
In short, if you want performance and precision, stay with the old style controllers. Motion controllers are cool if the way is your goal, i.e. when playing the game is where the fun is at. If reaching the goal is paramount, i.e. beating some boss or making the next achivement, they are rather unsuitable.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I guess we can compare these results to when the product is actually released for more than piddling around.
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Having gone through a series of monitors with different input lags and tested my own tolerance, I can't deal with a total of more than 50 ms input lag + rendering before I'm bothered and 75 ms before I lose my mind and spend my time on slashdot instead.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Also, just because the camera is pointing at the user doesn't mean it's capturing their movements at 60fps. I imagine the sample rate is tunable depending on the kind of game being played. Some games may only "sync" with the ball every 10th of a second, others more, others less and some won't even use the camera at all. Without the positional tracking of the camera, the controller is likely to be as fast as a regular controller.
I guess all these things are tweakable and it's up to games to make the right trade off between accuracy and responsiveness depending on what kind of game they are.
But the improvement to Resident Evil 5 will be immense. I guess it depends how you use it.
Twinstiq, game news
Generally by the time developers get their hands on something, it's set. You're not going to see any improvements in that response time in this gen of tech. What's worse is the 133 is going to be on top of any network latency, meaning this is going to be well-nigh impossible to use for any multiplayer game that isn't split-screen. Most twitch-based shooters are balanced at 60-100 latency since that's the average connection. 200 and you start to notice shit. This will be *starting you out* at 200, the 60 from your network, and the 133 from the controller. And your experience will rapidly deteriorate from there.
Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
I spent $700 on an IPS panel monitor a few years ago and am an avid gamer. Anantech, after constant complaints about input lag from many readers, began testing it in their monitor reviews. My monitor scored around a 50ms input lag.
That 50ms forced me to buy another monitor. My clicks lost accuracy in RTS games, my aim was off in FPS games, and I could see the delay when watching movies (lip movement didn't match voices). I bought a TN panel monitor of the same size and have them next to each other now, and only use the IPS panel for surfing and image editing. You can drag a window from the TN panel to the IPS panel and see it rubber band due to the delay.
I suspect that 133ms will make a majority of games that require fine accuracy unplayable from my experience with the above.