Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
GUI Input Devices XBox (Games) Games

Measuring Input Latency In Console Games 160

The Digital Foundry blog has an article about measuring an important but often nebulous aspect of console gameplay: input lag. Using a video camera and a custom input monitor made by console modder Ben Heck, and after calibrating for display lag, they tested a variety of games to an accuracy of one video frame in order to determine the latency between pressing a button and seeing its effect on the screen. Quoting: "If a proven methodology can be put into place, games reviewers can better inform their readers, but more importantly developers can benefit in helping to eliminate unwanted lag from their code. ... It's fair to say that players today have become conditioned to what the truly hardcore PC gamers would consider to be almost unacceptably high levels of latency to the point where cloud gaming services such as OnLive and Gaikai rely heavily upon it. The average videogame runs at 30fps, and appears to have an average lag in the region of 133ms. On top of that is additional delay from the display itself, bringing the overall latency to around 166ms. Assuming that the most ultra-PC gaming set-up has a latency less than one third of that, this is good news for cloud gaming in that there's a good 80ms or so window for game video to be transmitted from client to server."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Measuring Input Latency In Console Games

Comments Filter:
  • by TheSambassador ( 1134253 ) on Sunday September 06, 2009 @01:50PM (#29332723)
    Only in the ports that the PC gets from the consoles (or even ones that happen to be released on both systems) do I notice the horrible latency. It's awful in Oblivion, Fallout 3, Bioshock, and plenty of others. Part of it has to do with V-Sync, but turning that off doesn't eliminate all of it. I can't believe that 133ms is the norm. I've grown up a PC gamer, and that's definitely one of the top reasons I *hate* console FPS games.
  • Reality check (Score:5, Interesting)

    by girlintraining ( 1395911 ) on Sunday September 06, 2009 @01:51PM (#29332731)

    ...average lag in the region of 133ms. On top of that is additional delay from the display itself, bringing the overall latency to around 166ms.

    Considering that until very recently all displays had an inherent lag of about 70ms -- and that new [LCD] technology has pushed that higher. But we're only considering half the equation: The average human response time for auditory or visual input is 160--220ms. This increases as we age. We are also part of this system and we're a helluva lot more lagged than our technology is.

    I want an upgrade.

  • DDR? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by koinu ( 472851 ) on Sunday September 06, 2009 @01:51PM (#29332735)

    Anyone can make a comment how the lags affect gameplay on DDR? I still hesitate to buy an LCD TV and stay with my CRT, because I am not sure about it. When playing DDR, I usually listen to the music and the rhythm, so I really don't know exactly what would happen with a LCD TV.

    I've seen people playing DDR with Samsung LCD TVs on Youtube. It seems it's working well.

  • by Kral_Blbec ( 1201285 ) on Sunday September 06, 2009 @01:55PM (#29332773)
    Side note about Oblivion and Fallout 3. I think it is delayed intentionally to make it feel like someone actually is moving and make it more RPG-like.They aren't supposed to be twitchfests. Many FPS have the char move so fast it isn't humanly possible, turning, running, switching weapons etc.
  • Re:Reality check (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Mprx ( 82435 ) on Sunday September 06, 2009 @02:14PM (#29332925)

    The only inherent display latency of a CRT is the time taken for the beam to arrive at any particular part of the screen. In the worst case this is one frame, which at a reasonable refresh rate (100Hz+) will be only 10ms or less. A good LCD (there's only one on the market, the ViewSonic VX2268wm) updates in the same line by line fashion as a CRT, and will add only a few more milliseconds switching time latency.

    Of course you still have the latency in the input/processing/rendering stages, but this doesn't have to be very high (increase input sampling rate, avoid any interpolation, disable graphics buffering, etc). The only reason most modern console games are unplayable is because reviewers all ignore latency, and low latency can be traded for higher graphics detail which the reviewers pay attention to.

    Perceived latency has nothing to do with reaction time.

  • by bezenek ( 958723 ) on Sunday September 06, 2009 @03:56PM (#29333839) Journal
    At the Hot Chips symposium last month, Rich Hilleman, Creative Director for Electronic Arts, commented on the 100ms delay inherent in the Wii remote (Wiimote). I assumed there was an issue in the delay involved in sensing the accelerometers, but this article shows 100ms is not any different from other consoles.

    I wonder what Rich Hilleman was really getting at? Maybe people are more sensitive to delays when they are a result of a full-body-type movements rather than a button-press.

    This is interesting stuff, and it would be a good thing if some graduate student did a thesis on it. (Free Ph.D. here--no thinking required!)

    -Todd

It appears that PL/I (and its dialects) is, or will be, the most widely used higher level language for systems programming. -- J. Sammet

Working...