[QUOTE=.N.E.R.D.;501026]http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sleep/sheep/reaction_version5.swf This is what I use cause it is much more fun ;)))
Regarding TTK I’`d say just drop body hit dmg 50% for 2 weeks or a month and let us try.[/QUOTE]
Awesome link NERD:
My best was 0,174, but I also had a couple above 0,2. My daugher’s(9yrs) best was 0,318.
Wooo! this is moar fun than the Pixel’s link 
My best so far is 0,117.
So that’s what nerds do most of the time. What’s yr best Frankie?
There’s a small trick that I found. If I keep quickly tapping slightly the mouse button but not yet pressing it, the reaction time can decrease, in my case it was ca. 30%. Obviously reduces time needed to contract the finger muscle.
Also looking at center of screen while detecting the motion with peripherial vision works better for me. Though the ovens are cheating by moving heads and chewing, which sometimes causes a false start for my finger 
Hm, I am too old for good results I guess I average at 180 and also got my total fails I always like those premature ejaculation 3 second penalties 
Also keep in mind that there should be a difference if you play it with sound or not. I read somewhere that if the stimulus is audio the brain is usually faster.
We had this discussion on TS the other day.
The speed of sound/light has nothing to do with how fast your brain can process these inputs.
The summary seemed to be that when the source is at a close distance then the greater influencing factor was processing speed, which apparently research says sound can be processed faster than light, whereas if the source is at a far distance then the time it takes to arrive at it’s destination is the greater factor, so light is going to be responded to faster.
There’s sound in that test? Hmm, might put my headphones on as well next time
Processed faster than light? Nice joke.
Haha, this time with the implied missing words, “sound can be processed faster than light (can be processed)”.
Although I neither believe not disbelieve the hypothesis/theory as I’ve never looked at any research material on the matter, but there could well be merit in the idea that it takes your eyes longer to create the relevant electrical signals that your brain requires for processing than your ears, or even that the types of signals it creates require more processing in order to produce a response.
But I could be be completely off base, I’m no brain surgeon (two jokes in one day, you like that Ashog? 
).
Yeah I guess it has something to do with the processing of both, what a shame. I thought it was some mambo jumbo about our ancestors being able to run away from a big hungry cat sneaking up on em and suddenly farting 2 meters out
From all multiplayer shooters I find UT3 and COD having the most immersive mobility. I don’t exactly know how they achieve it but they really make me feel like I’m there myself.
Immersive isn’t always practical though. ETQW isn’t as immersive but because there’s quite a lot of acrobatics involved in that game the sharp movement really helps keeping control.
I thought driving in gta4 was easy, just different from the past games. I haven’t played 5 since it is console only. Also, driving on the high way is easy, but pulling off stunts, like high speed turns, etc. that actually is hard.
[QUOTE=tokamak;501101]From all multiplayer shooters I find UT3 and COD having the most immersive mobility. I don’t exactly know how they achieve it but they really make me feel like I’m there myself.
Immersive isn’t always practical though. ETQW isn’t as immersive but because there’s quite a lot of acrobatics involved in that game the sharp movement really helps keeping control.[/QUOTE]
I think that’s^ exactly what I’m looking for in a fps game; immersive mobility. Not having to compensate for artificial stuff.
To put things into perspective, GTA’s driving isn’t actually hard , compared to other game’s driving, neither is moving around in DB, BUT there’s a lot of unnecessary sluggishness and artificial inertia, that I don’t need to be happy. It’s like an already beautiful woman, that puts fake eyelashes and a lot of make up in her face; she might still look good and all, but you just don’t get, why she would attach all this unnecessary stuff to her face, since she’d look so much nicer without it. I know it’s a bit of a shallow comparison and not a 100% on point, but I think you get what I mean
PS: As I’ve said, GTA’s driving is not particularly hard, BUT you have to bear in mind, how many accidents you make in this game, compared to reality. There’s no way I’d want to drive a real car mere 10km through a city with the DS3 pad and the GTA physics. If you look at it like this you’d have to admit, that driving in GTA is a lot harder than in reality; at least I’d dehydrate after the first kilometre, from all the cold sweat.
Well I don’t think anyone is actually asking for sluggish movement lol, movement is pretty meh in that game. BF3 + 4 movement is also very sluggish. **** that game.
I dislike the mobility and gunplay in every single BF game without exception. They just never get it right. BF never actually feels like playing an actual game. It’s more like a stapler-gun simulator or something.
What UT3 and COD do right is that they give you lots of little feedback cues based on what you’re doing. What you get is what you see.
(Stapler-simulator, WYGISWYS, man I should become a professional industry buzzword creator)