I find that I play my favorite game Rocket League at my best at 120 Hz....Is there math that might show why?
Posted: 30 Aug 2021, 15:43
Long story short, I’ve played the game for thousands of hours and throughout that time I’ve been obsessed with settings. I know that changing settings a lot with prolong ranking up or whatever but I’m a big stickler in perception perfection.
When I watch people stream the game, I can see that they’re “feeling” things I’m not feeling. So across my thousands of hours I’ve tried so many monitor settings and recently blew my own mind when I stumbled upon 120hz instead of anything higher.
My monitor will do 280 (ASUS VG Blah blah blah) and I got that about 4-5 months ago. It’s really nice but I always felt bad on it. Talked myself out of it and just said “I need to get used to it” or something.
Well out of frustration and curiosity 3 weeks ago I decided to experiment and limit my frames beginning at 60 for a few days and then go up in increments of 20 or sometimes 30 until I hit 280. I would stay at each Hz for a couple days at a time.
I tracked my W/L and also how well I was hitting the ball with power and accuracy etc. I did best around the 120hz mark. Going above that I would progressively play worse. Up in the 200’s+ it was basically RNG if I was going to hit the ball with any power. I could hit it, but it would be weak and in accurate.
I much better with the monitor set to 280 with gsync on, but using the nvidia frame limiter set at 120. That shows my monitor with an 8ish millisecond response time on the steam HUD.
I use a DS5 controller overclocked to 1200-1300 Hz.
I’m dumb and probably just barking up the wrong tree but is there some mathematical/measurable coincidence between 8ms screen and 1200 Hz controller?
Obviously in the end it mostly just comes down to human perception I suppose. I never thought I would want to play at 120fps but I REALLY like it. My recent wins and ranking up, and my recent in game performances of small micro movements are proof that I’m doing well like this.
Long story not so short I guess. Sorry.
When I watch people stream the game, I can see that they’re “feeling” things I’m not feeling. So across my thousands of hours I’ve tried so many monitor settings and recently blew my own mind when I stumbled upon 120hz instead of anything higher.
My monitor will do 280 (ASUS VG Blah blah blah) and I got that about 4-5 months ago. It’s really nice but I always felt bad on it. Talked myself out of it and just said “I need to get used to it” or something.
Well out of frustration and curiosity 3 weeks ago I decided to experiment and limit my frames beginning at 60 for a few days and then go up in increments of 20 or sometimes 30 until I hit 280. I would stay at each Hz for a couple days at a time.
I tracked my W/L and also how well I was hitting the ball with power and accuracy etc. I did best around the 120hz mark. Going above that I would progressively play worse. Up in the 200’s+ it was basically RNG if I was going to hit the ball with any power. I could hit it, but it would be weak and in accurate.
I much better with the monitor set to 280 with gsync on, but using the nvidia frame limiter set at 120. That shows my monitor with an 8ish millisecond response time on the steam HUD.
I use a DS5 controller overclocked to 1200-1300 Hz.
I’m dumb and probably just barking up the wrong tree but is there some mathematical/measurable coincidence between 8ms screen and 1200 Hz controller?
Obviously in the end it mostly just comes down to human perception I suppose. I never thought I would want to play at 120fps but I REALLY like it. My recent wins and ranking up, and my recent in game performances of small micro movements are proof that I’m doing well like this.
Long story not so short I guess. Sorry.

