You also have to think about the latency, and if I'm not mistaken they already want 60 FPS as the default, and I know Carmack wants 120 FPS eventually, because framerate is apparently a lot more important in that kind of virtual environment, because it's more obvious when you have dropped frames. So 120 FPS is probably "ideal", but not practical yet (the screens aren't there either).
Add to that 2x or 4x (4k) the resolution, and you're going to need really powerful hardware and very fast cables. HDMI 2.0 and Thunderbolt 2.0 barely support 4k @ 60 FPS, but I suppose that's getting pretty close. There are probably other bottlenecks, though.
120Hz monitors are already standard equipment for professional PC FPS players: apparently it makes aim significantly easier. It does seem to usually take some drastically lowered settings to get anything resembling 120Hz minimum from the video card, though. Of course there's also the problem of getting 120Hz panels at the sort of DPI that Oculus needs. (The 120Hz LCDs were apparently an unintended by-product of the LCD manufacturers' drive for 60Hz 3D.) This is one area in which LCDs are still playing catch-up to CRTs, by the way.
It reduces the perceived latency, thus making aim easier. If you want to make a habit of being rude to strangers in public, you should be very, very careful to have your facts exactly right before you do it.
reducing latency doesn't make aim easier, it makes prediction easier. aiming is pointing at the right pixel at a given moment. since i figure there can be confusion, i put quotes on "aim", too.
if you were playing FPS at a high level you'd also probably make the difference between prediction and aim itself, because they're 2 different skills that you train differently.
my words were actually too exact for your sake, ironically - and not actually rude but honest.
So, now that you have been, I'll just let you know that you, sir, are just a random asshole. (note: i still have my facts exactly right)
reducing latency doesn't make aim easier, it makes prediction easier. aiming is pointing at the right pixel at a given moment. since i figure there can be confusion, i put quotes on "aim", too.
if you were playing FPS at a high level you'd also probably make the difference between prediction and aim itself, because they're 2 different skills that you train differently.
I have repeatedly heard/read high-level TF2 players describe 120Hz as improving their 'aim' - their choice of words. This applies to hitscan as well as projectile aim, and most certainly includes flick hitscan aim, where any kind of prediction is at a minimum. While we're at it, here's a Q3 professional http://www.stermy.com/shoutbox.php :
Yes, 120hz LCD are WAY better than 75hz LCDs and will improve your aim/accuracy quite alot.
On the other side, I think I've yet to see an FPS pro refer to 120Hz as improving 'prediction' as such (though no doubt it does).
Comments
You also have to think about the latency, and if I'm not mistaken they already want 60 FPS as the default, and I know Carmack wants 120 FPS eventually, because framerate is apparently a lot more important in that kind of virtual environment, because it's more obvious when you have dropped frames. So 120 FPS is probably "ideal", but not practical yet (the screens aren't there either).
Add to that 2x or 4x (4k) the resolution, and you're going to need really powerful hardware and very fast cables. HDMI 2.0 and Thunderbolt 2.0 barely support 4k @ 60 FPS, but I suppose that's getting pretty close. There are probably other bottlenecks, though.
120Hz monitors are already standard equipment for professional PC FPS players: apparently it makes aim significantly easier. It does seem to usually take some drastically lowered settings to get anything resembling 120Hz minimum from the video card, though. Of course there's also the problem of getting 120Hz panels at the sort of DPI that Oculus needs. (The 120Hz LCDs were apparently an unintended by-product of the LCD manufacturers' drive for 60Hz 3D.) This is one area in which LCDs are still playing catch-up to CRTs, by the way.
it doesnt make "aim" easier. it reduces the perceived latency.
It reduces the perceived latency, thus making aim easier. If you want to make a habit of being rude to strangers in public, you should be very, very careful to have your facts exactly right before you do it.
woot, getting threats on the public HN!
reducing latency doesn't make aim easier, it makes prediction easier. aiming is pointing at the right pixel at a given moment. since i figure there can be confusion, i put quotes on "aim", too.
if you were playing FPS at a high level you'd also probably make the difference between prediction and aim itself, because they're 2 different skills that you train differently.
my words were actually too exact for your sake, ironically - and not actually rude but honest.
So, now that you have been, I'll just let you know that you, sir, are just a random asshole. (note: i still have my facts exactly right)
Excuse me? I didn't threaten you in the least.
I have repeatedly heard/read high-level TF2 players describe 120Hz as improving their 'aim' - their choice of words. This applies to hitscan as well as projectile aim, and most certainly includes flick hitscan aim, where any kind of prediction is at a minimum. While we're at it, here's a Q3 professional http://www.stermy.com/shoutbox.php :
On the other side, I think I've yet to see an FPS pro refer to 120Hz as improving 'prediction' as such (though no doubt it does).