Any High level players in the game "Overwatch" use 60Hz monitors ?

[alucasa]

Dude..., do you realize what you are saying?
You are talkin' about skills and wits.... That'z like .... shit talk for pro-wannabes. Those don't have those which is why they are looking for other advantages.

 

[Fif23]

Alucass, if you want to point up a psychological synopsis due to self frustration you can do it in a more humble way.

Keep the discussion mature please, this is the second time you flame against the discussion in this post

I know you like Humor, but when 100% of your humor boosts your own ego then it is not humor anymore but a mechanism.

Nobody gives a rats ass if you play good or not. This is a curious question about the science of tech, with gaming used as a visualization and discussion tool.

Sensitivity beats Skill in a game, take a tip from an older man

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Dude..., do you realize what you are saying?
You are talkin' about skills and wits.... That'z like .... shit talk for pro-wannabes. Those don't have those which is why they are looking for other advantages.

To be honest, I quit PvP because I put myself in my target's shoes: I would be pissed off at me. I only play games where headshots are rewarded and I use a weapon that reliably one shots in the head. Not much in the way of warning or fairness. I'd hate to play against me, so I quit. I have no problem slaughtering AI but generally refuse to slaughter humans.

With single shot weapons, I average 60% accuracy and 75% of my kills are headshots (pixel scan games, 60 Hz monitor). I kind of suck with burst and full auto weapons.

 

[alucasa]

To be honest, I quit PvP because I put myself in my target's shoes: I would be pissed off at me. I only play games where headshots are rewarded and I use a weapon that reliably one shots in the head. Not much in the way of warning or fairness. I'd hate to play against me, so I quit. I have no problem slaughtering AI but generally refuse to slaughter humans.

With single shot weapons, I average 60% accuracy and 75% of my kills are headshots. I kind of suck with burst and full auto weapons.

In my experience, PvP was nice & fun until it started to get really personal.
I mean, even though it was a game, you are virtually killing others and acrtually enjoy it. It's okay at first, but when it crossed my mind that I really did want to kill the other dude, I quit it because it was going too far.

Virtual or not, it was crossing my moral values.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

See, you get it! Tempers are going to flare because of what you're doing. Makes sense to just stop.

 

[alucasa]

Alucass, if you want to point up a psychological synopsis due to self frustration you can do it in a more humble way.

Keep the discussion mature please, this is the second time you flame against the discussion in this post

I know you like Humor, but when 100% of your humor boosts your own ego then it is not humor anymore but a mechanism.

Nobody gives a rats ass if you play good or not. This is a curious question about the science of tech, with gaming used as a visualization and discussion tool.

Sensitivity beats Skill in a game, take a tip from an older man

You know, it's anything but science of tech. In the end, it's skills and luck in addition of the magic of ping. This thread could never be mature; you should know that.

 

[Vayra86]

My question to you is simple.

Is a shitty TN 144Hz monitor, to overwatch, as useful as cleats for a football player ?

Is it a matter of ALL professional-wannabes using 144hz screens, like all footballers have cleats ?

60Hz = You are 40%+ more likely lose the game.

Correct ?

I am looking for a scientific answer either in thre form of research done or statistics showing high level players winning with 60hz vs 144gz counterparts

No, just no.

High refresh rate has advantages, but they're not that big.

Scientific evidence is almost impossible to get because play sessions are influenced by a huge number of other factors including network latency and the aforementioned tick rate of the server, which is ultimately the limiting factor in any case. Many of these factors are extremely abstract, such as the degree of focus you have, familiarity with game, physical condition, etc etc.

Network latency > PC performance (steady framerate @ 60 +) & input lag > refresh rate. That would be my order of business when looking at the conditions you play under and improving them.

The biggest advantage from a quality panel is not directly refresh rate, but 'motion resolution'. Fortunately most gaming panels combine the two because a higher refresh combined with a backlight strobe to reduce blur is probably the ultimate combination when it comes to how a monitor can improve your play.

Also, as tech savvy people we tend to forget that 'immersion' is a huge factor in good gameplay. The human body is extremely good at adapting to any kind of delay when it comes to hand-eye coordination. A good example of this is console gameplay versus the PC. The longer you play on a console with its 30 fps and generally 20-30ms input lag on an HDTV (or more, even), the better you'll get at anticipation and executing moves before the information on screen wants you to.

Want to know why other players are able to hit you before you hit them? They are better at anticipation. The only way to be first, is to be too early. Pro players take into account projectile speed and just 'know' when you will pop your head around that corner. When you are moving towards it, they're already pulling that trigger. A degree of intuition is required to be really good at gaming. Intuition can come with experience and lots and lots of practice.

Bottom line, if you get used to 60hz/fps gaming, it is highly likely you'll have to readjust when first gaming on a high refresh rate system, and actually do worse in games until you've readjusted. Do I win more with a high refresh panel? Yes, but mostly because of the strobing backlight and because I get better the more I play. The high refresh is more a quality of life thing than anything else.

I've been on each side of the fence, too. I used to game competitively (UT'99, UT2k4) on a shitty system that could barely pull 20 fps, and even then, I could actually be competitive, win, and also get on top of k/d ratios and total kills. If I would have to go back to 20 fps gaming today on my current rig, with a much better panel, keyboard and mouse, I would perform like crap and probably start throwing with things in frustration.

 

[uuuaaaaaa]

strobing backlight

Hell yes!

 

[phanbuey]

I've used both and playing at 144hz makes gigantic difference in most reaction based games; especially when the game is about hitting fast moving objects by clicking on them.

In reality we probably could use higher refresh rates than 144hz.

60 FPS is good for a casual stroll in a Bethesda game. Not so good for fps.

 

[redeye]

My question to you is simple.

Is a shitty TN 144Hz monitor, to overwatch, as useful as cleats for a football player ?

Is it a matter of ALL professional-wannabes using 144hz screens, like all footballers have cleats ?

60Hz = You are 40%+ more likely lose the game.

Correct ?

I am looking for a scientific answer either in thre form of research done or statistics showing high level players winning with 60hz vs 144gz counterparts

My thoughts on Overwatch...

Equipment does not matter, Overwatch is a team based shooter... a knowing when to use the right character is very important... maining a single character is fun to start, but often does not win matches. (One star player, 5 backup players)

Console players deal with a 20Hz server tick rate, and the slow (33ms or more) input lag... and there are plenty of excellent players (tend to be under 18 lol, (damn youth and naturally good aim, lol)

i do not believe that a frame rate above 60hz matters... (display lag, somewhat)

TEAM WORK, meaning changing characters when need to fit the situation, knowing when to use the advantages of characters (rienheart is a good shield, get behind it etc )

ULT management, Because the team that can clear out the point with a well place ULT/combo can will the game... )
Knowing when to stay on point...
situational awarness,
strategy,
and aim Count for more.


I use the console more (lvl 100 ) (lvl 18 on pc) and i think display input lag is more important...
(tv's on average seem to have 40-60ms display lag. good ones have 33ms or less... DOES NOT matter when you are watching tv/moviewhy it is high on tv's...

 

[FireFox]

Obviously, skills come first. If you suck, doesn't matter what kind of hardware you play on, you are still gonna suck.

It sounds like me first time playing Titanfall 2

 

[Halo3Addict]

I still have a 60Hz monitor that I am more than happy with, but I don't play shooters on PC. I decided to upgrade to 1440p instead

 

[phanbuey]

My thoughts on Overwatch...

Equipment does not matter, Overwatch is a team based shooter... a knowing when to use the right character is very important... maining a single character is fun to start, but often does not win matches. (One star player, 5 backup players)

Console players deal with a 20Hz server tick rate, and the slow (33ms or more) input lag... and there are plenty of excellent players (tend to be under 18 lol, (damn youth and naturally good aim, lol)

i do not believe that a frame rate above 60hz matters... (display lag, somewhat)

TEAM WORK, meaning changing characters when need to fit the situation, knowing when to use the advantages of characters (rienheart is a good shield, get behind it etc )

ULT management, Because the team that can clear out the point with a well place ULT/combo can will the game... )
Knowing when to stay on point...
situational awarness,
strategy,
and aim Count for more.


I use the console more (lvl 100 ) (lvl 18 on pc) and i think display input lag is more important...
(tv's on average seem to have 40-60ms display lag. good ones have 33ms or less... DOES NOT matter when you are watching tv/moviewhy it is high on tv's...

So go back to his analogy of the cleats....

that's a great analogy... Do cleats matter to win the game? Well no - not if we're talking some random fat guy vs a pro soccer player - the soccer player can be using flip flops and would still dominate.

But everything being equal, the equipment really does start to matter... Not because it gives you this massive competitive edge, but because it sucks playing in flip flops.
Is it done? yes. Are there people that can play 100x better in flip flops than people with equipment? yes, absolutely. But if you go out to have fun and compete at something why handicap yourself?


To OPs original question:
http://www.espn.com/esports/story/_/id/15616253/importance-quality-esports-equipment

 

[MxPhenom 216]

I play csgo competitively and I went from 60Hz to 100Hz on my monitor and it was noticeable. I wont go back to 60Hz. Id Love to have a 144Hz screen, but I wont go back to TN either, so the only choice I have is Acer or ASUS ROG 27" IPS screens with G-sync but they are $700.

 

[eidairaman1]

running 16 yo monitor, supports 75Hz

 

[Vario]

MLG Pro thread

 

[Komshija]

60Hz = You are 40%+ more likely lose the game.

Correct ?

Nope. It doesn't matter whether you have a 22" 60 Hz 1080p monitor or 32" 144 Hz 4K monitor if your skills are low. Anyone who claims the opposite is either an idiot or doesn't know what he/she is talking about.

 

[lyndonguitar]

can your PC run the game without any Lag and stuttering whatsoever? by saying no lag, I mean a stable 60 fps even at the most demanding visuals(e.g. clashes on dota 2, smokes in CSGO) and stable acceptable ping (less than 100ms)

If Yes, then Skill is all you need in order to 'be pro'.
personal experience, I once reached a high rank in CSGO a few years ago playing with a cheap $5 A4tech Mouse
Also, a Philippine team in dota 2, TNC, beat the defending world champs 'OG' in The International by using the same cheap mouse.

If No, then you need to upgrade, because your specs/internet are bottlenecking your 'pro potential'

After that making sure you are not bottlenecking your pro potential anymore, you can upgrade for a better gear, mouse, keyboard, headset(important for FPS games), and monitor
It's a better experience with a VERY slight advantage that can be overcome by skill and sometimes luck, that is all.

Ping/Latency: It matters second only to skill(first if it's a 'bottleneck') when you are playing online, if playing Lan, it doesn't matter unless you have a considerably shittier LAN Cable than other players
Resolution and Size: more field of view, more advantage. you might see enemies you wouldn't otherwise see when playing on another size/resolution
Keyboard: Ergonomics and responsiveness. gaming keyboards are more comfortable and easier/faster to press, less mispresses. Less inputlag/response time
Mouse: Better Precision and Accuracy, also more comfortable, depending if you've picked the right one. Less inputlag/response time

144hz vs 60hz: in action games, you'll easily notice, track, and identify fast moving things when in 144hz, easier on the eyes, less blurring, also, input lag and response time.

also,
60 frames per second
1000ms/60frames = 1 frame is displayed every 16.67ms

144 frames per second
1000ms/144frames = 1 frame is displayed every 6.94ms

A 144hz player will notice the enemy and react quicker than the 60hz player, provided that they have the EXACT same biological reaction time., Internet ping, response time, input lag

 

[P4-630]

A little off topic but @lyndonguitar ...... :

1,666 , I would make another post quickly!

Oh and registered at April's fools day!! LOL!

 

[Komshija]

A 144hz player will notice the enemy and react quicker than the 60hz player, provided that they have the EXACT same biological reaction time., Internet ping, response time, input lag

Nope. Average human reaction is not 10 milliseconds but 0,3 seconds (300 milliseconds). The "quickest" individuals can react twice as fast, meaning 0,15 seconds (150 milliseconds), so 144 Hz monitor will certainly not increase your skills. Even the very best players need 1-1,5 seconds to make a good aim, so a couple of milliseconds that you might get from the higher refresh rate will not make any difference. Besides, you must also count a luck factor (eg. noob's lucky headshot that ended your killing spree) and that has nothing to do with hardware or skills.

 

[lyndonguitar]

Nope. Average human reaction is not 10 milliseconds but 0,3 seconds (300 milliseconds). The "quickest" individuals can react twice as fast, meaning 0,15 seconds (150 milliseconds), so 144 Hz monitor will certainly not increase your skills. Even the very best players need 1-1,5 seconds to make a good aim, so a couple of milliseconds that you might get from the higher refresh rate will not make any difference. Besides, you must also count a luck factor (eg. noob's lucky headshot that ended your killing spree) and that has nothing to do with hardware or skills.

I said "provided that they have the EXACT same biological reaction time., Internet ping, response time, input lag"

lets say both players has the exact same reaction time of 300 milliseconds, with the same input lag and all that delay that goes into it.

That 10 milliseconds will matter if it comes to that, because the 144hz player will be able to react first because he will see the 60hz player 10ms earlier

but in the grand schemes of things it's negligible. It's the skill that matters the most. Did you even read my whole post?

 

[uuuaaaaaa]

Nope. Average human reaction is not 10 milliseconds but 0,3 seconds (300 milliseconds). The "quickest" individuals can react twice as fast, meaning 0,15 seconds (150 milliseconds), so 144 Hz monitor will certainly not increase your skills. Even the very best players need 1-1,5 seconds to make a good aim, so a couple of milliseconds that you might get from the higher refresh rate will not make any difference. Besides, you must also count a luck factor (eg. noob's lucky headshot that ended your killing spree) and that has nothing to do with hardware or skills.

if you could play vs you, 144hz you would win. With this said, my aim in quake improved dramatically since I switched to high refresh rate/low input lag monitor, thus allowing me to hit more "crazy shots" and win more games. You'd be surprised how much of a difference it made. 60fps/60Hz is considered unplayable in arena type shooters (quake1/2/3/4/live, unreal torunament) and there is a reason for that.

 

[Toothless]

Looks like OP ditched once they found out they're wrong and their down-talking to people isn't working. Typical pro-wannabe on a TF2 remake.

 

[Komshija]

@lyndonguitar: You misunderstood me. That would be next to impossible because there are many other variants than hardware and skill. Two players with the same reaction time under ideal circumstances might have different reaction time during gameplay, which again depends on a lot of other factors.
Don't confuse reaction time with time needed for proper aiming and eliminating the enemy.

 

[lyndonguitar]

@lyndonguitar: You misunderstood me. That would be next to impossible because there are many other variants than hardware and skill. Two players with the same reaction time under ideal circumstances might have different reaction time during gameplay, which again depends on a lot of other factors.
Don't confuse reaction time with time needed for proper aiming and eliminating the enemy.

hence I said negligible, no one has the same reaction time, and the same hardware, internet and the exact same circumstances in a 1v1 'aiming match'. it's just technical talk because the OP was looking for 'possible advantages' when using 144hz over 60hz. I just listed it.

Skills is what matter. not only reflexes and precision/accuracy, but also tactics, strategies, positioning, map knowledge, etc

Looks like OP ditched once they found out they're wrong and their down-talking to people isn't working. Typical pro-wannabe on a TF2 remake.

My guess is that he didn't have the budget or money to buy a 144hz so he needs to justify his serious competitive Overwatch gaming @ 60hz.

and my answer to OP is, Yes, you don't have to buy it to reach the highest levels. 144hz is a better experience though