Right, only when you move Arthur. Which is basically something you do once or twice per playthrough am I right? Tapping/holding X is such a rare thing to do in RDR2, all those haters ignoring that.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
EA Motive's Dan Lowe compares the input response times of RDR2 with Uncharted, Assassin's Creed etc
- Thread starter Toriko
- Start date
That makes it better.
Should put it on the box.
"This game is the cheesy gordita crunch of western shooters"
Exactly. There's a delay and slower animation when moving the left stick by itself -- again, unlike other games this is essentially a walk button. When holding X and moving the left stick that delay disappears, or decreases greatly. What's shown in the video is not representative of the majority of Arthur's actions.
I'd love to see Dark1x and the guys over at DF test this.
I don't understand what you're saying.
I'm not saying it's rare, but for the most part of the game, you're moving, not starting to move. Aside from that, I'm saying that the input lag on "tilting the stick while holding x" is within normal bounds, which further lowers the amount of times you're confronted with this input delay.
Yeah. It does make it better. It actually makes some amount of sense, unlike if it were referring to "the act of aiming".
I mean I heard people gush over the "you only can put so many pelts on your horse!" thing and it's like.....cool......limited inventory.....awesome.
ITT: People who have no idea what input lag is.
You can still have weighty, "realistic" animations without input lag. The problem here is that you move the stick and there is an eternity where the game simply doesn't respond at all. A weighty way to convey movement without lag would be for the PC to have a wind up animation into movement to convey that the PC is starting to move. You can then preserve momentum through motion by giving the PC momentum and making it so you can just turn on a dime.
Those are legit artistic choices, but the input lag is just a flaw.
You can still have weighty, "realistic" animations without input lag. The problem here is that you move the stick and there is an eternity where the game simply doesn't respond at all. A weighty way to convey movement without lag would be for the PC to have a wind up animation into movement to convey that the PC is starting to move. You can then preserve momentum through motion by giving the PC momentum and making it so you can just turn on a dime.
Those are legit artistic choices, but the input lag is just a flaw.
I really don't want to count the mount of times the average player stops and starts to walk/run/ride/whatever again. Alright, 95% is hyperbole then.
But again, people arguing it's not that bad because there are other things in the game you can do without input lag or that the video is missrepresenting anything don't make much sense to me. The video isn't missrepresnting anything. Or would you disagree with that? Admittedly I didn't really pay attention to the differnce between starting to walk normally and starting to walk with X being hold.
And again, I'm not calling anyone who has a problem with the OP an apoligist, I'm calling the people who act like Rockstar did it on purpose that. And there's plenty of them, sadly.
Wouldn't you call the fact that all those other games are of them in a jogging animation, while only RDR2 is in a walking animation, misleading?
People said Arthur feels like a tank before this "Input lag" video was online.
So just wait till the Online mode drops. So u can enjoy getting melted in an immersive way.
So just wait till the Online mode drops. So u can enjoy getting melted in an immersive way.
As long those other game's input lag doesn't suddenly get worse in a jogging animation then no. This post sums it up quite well:
I wouldn't risk it if I was them. If the game is found to be full of input lag the rage from fans could end up shutting down their whole site.
People saying holding X while moving lessens the input lag, well....
That's some bullshit.
There's still input lag. The only difference is the animation to move is much faster.
That's some bullshit.
There's still input lag. The only difference is the animation to move is much faster.
Play Uncharted 4 and run around with Drake then come back and play this game. Arthur controls so badly compared to Drake.
I see,RDR 2 force defensive arrived,denial is strong indeed
It's hilarious.
User warned: antagonizing other members
So you're suggesting they just stumbled upon some technical hurdle only for movement, where as the rest of the game is seemingly free from such technical limitation?
So you genuinely believe that despite all evidence to the contrary, that Rockstar just couldn't figure out how to make walking more responsive? Because from all the information presently available, it seems very clear that this was an intentionally design decision. That's not even excusing the choice, or taking a side either way, it's just an objective observation.
You seem rather invested in getting into people's shit and arguing for the sake of it because you either want to be right, or you're just bored sitting in front of whatever connected device you're using. I'm not tone policing, so much as just calling you out for being an outright asshole to people...because you can?
You must be a blast at parties. "NO SHARON, THIS SONG ISN'T GOOD, I DON'T CARE IF THEY USED DISTORTION INTENTIONALLY, IT SOUNDS LIKE SHIT WHY CAN'T YOU SEE THAT, YOU STUPID APOLOGIST!"
I think everyone fully understands what input lag is. The problem with your assertion is that you ignore that the lag isn't present across all inputs, which means this isn't a technical limitation. Given that information, all signs point to this being an intentional choice. I can't argue if it's the right or wrong choice because I don't own the game and likely won't for quite some time (I'm not too terribly interested in it)...but that still doesn't change the fact that what we're seeing in RDR2 isn't traditional input lag caused on a technical level. Delay can absolutely be artificially implemented, and given the rest of the information present here...that's very likely what is going on here.
Last edited:
I love Red Dead Redemption 2, but this post absolutely nails it. The delay between issuing a command and the game even acknowledging that the command input was received is the issue. Slow animation isn't so bad if you can trust that the game actually received your instruction and is beginning to process it. But standing still for half a second while the game offers no signal that you've issued a command just makes you think, shit, better press it again. And this is magnified by the number of times the game simply doesn't respond to commands that you issue. The game is full of little contextual things where you press a button and Arthur repositions himself and then steadfastly refuses to actually do the thing you were prompted to do. Hold to loot drawer, wait why are you walking away, oh, you're just standing back a little and... you're not looting? I thought that's what we agreed on. Hold to pat dog, no, where are you going, oh the dog moved, ok, hold to pat again, no it still didn't work... It's not enough to impact my thinking this is possibly the best game I have ever played, but I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't mind some slightly snappier controls.
Uncharted doesnt even have a sprint button if i remember correctly ? Still feels better
Your contributions to this thread have been nothing but lamenting this fictional "defense force". Practice what you preach.
Odd that they lump one FPS in there with a bunch of third-person games. It's not exactly apples to apples, FPS better have damn near no input lag.
Thank you. It's like if someone in a game is holding a large weapon and the animation and movement speed is changed because the weapon is heavy. Thats supposed to feel weighty.
.
And yup @topic, that's it. And it is not in any way good, excusable or even deliberate.
While not ideal, I can even deal with the input lag with regards to the player character's movement. Sure, it is often a bit annoying but never critical.
HOWEVER: the (manual) AIMING is where this turd really starts to stink.
l'm one of those players who hate any kind of aim assists and it is always the first option I turn off when starting a new game. I had zero problems adjusting to it in RDR1; eventually I was shooting dudes on moving horses from a moving horse all while not using dead eye with relative ease. RDR2 on the other hand ... good luck consistently hitting moving targets with manual aiming! You are always slightly too late. Without dead eye and/or aim assist, this game would be virtually unplayable.
And yes, I did play around with the dead zone, acceleration and sensitivity settings, which alleviated the problem somewhat but definitely did not solve it.
Rockstar clearly messed up here.
Last edited:
I tried to test the input lag by aiming, running, riding, and it's still there. I don't think it's deliberate.
Honestly though the more I play the less it bothers me, like going into a 30 fps game after playing something in 60 fps. It makes sense that something gotta give when it looks that good with a world that large on this gen consoles.
Thank god for Dead Eye though.
Honestly though the more I play the less it bothers me, like going into a 30 fps game after playing something in 60 fps. It makes sense that something gotta give when it looks that good with a world that large on this gen consoles.
Thank god for Dead Eye though.
I think it's fair to show, just for comparison sake. That way you can see what a game looks like when it has effectively no input lag, like Destiny, two or three, like other third person games, or what appears to be about six plus for RDR2. All that is considering that the majority of input lag for most games is actually display lag, so there's nothing the game can do about it.
The very person you quoted in the same post as mine explains how it has nothing to do with giving a certain feel to anything. There are no signs pointing to anything, there is no basis to your theory other than "Rockstar are infallable gods who can't make any mistake ever, so it has to be intentional." If you want to call that objective go ahead. I call it apologism.
For someone trying to call other people out on getting in their shit you sure have some headcanon rolling regarding my personality and personal life. Nice way of discussing things, talk about tone lmao. I don't get why you have to get personal to get to your point. Still not sure where I'm being an asshole towards others. I sure as hell didn't pull the shit you did in your third and fourth paragraph directed at me. Think about that.
When the online drops a lot of gamers will realize how terrible gameplay, movements,aim and input is,one thing is you playing against a dumb AI,and another is against other player,and the cover system is shit tier, seriously -.-
There is a clear defense force here.Defending the indefensible, would love to see all this defense for an Ubisoft game.
It does feel extremely weird every time i'm in a firefight and he just casually strolls around. I always have to remember to hit A to make him act like he's getting shot at it. It's just so jarring. The game actually controls great in first person, but I really don't want to play it in first person. I wish I could just apply the same control scheme for first person to third person (and just always have Arthur facing forward).
I can't believe I just logged into RDR2 for a bit just to test the input lag. There's lag when you
- move
- move while holding x to run
- press square to jump
- move the R3 to aim
- pressing R2 to shoot
- pressing L2 to ready the gun
No noticeable input lag in the menus though.
- move
- move while holding x to run
- press square to jump
- move the R3 to aim
- pressing R2 to shoot
- pressing L2 to ready the gun
No noticeable input lag in the menus though.
I just made this.
Button press at Game Frame 2. Action at Game Frame 8
About 6 frames of input lag at 30FPS. Big difference from OP's video and puts more in line with other 30FPS games.
Button press at Game Frame 2. Action at Game Frame 8
About 6 frames of input lag at 30FPS. Big difference from OP's video and puts more in line with other 30FPS games.
Did you played the GOAT controls and feel MGS V?or the running up Horizon Zero Dawn?
There's also an input delay on the L3, trying spamming crouch on L3 and then do the same with X (you can change crouching to X)
Another thread that has people arguing versus actually having discussion. Era can be so much better guys.
That said I love this game. 60 plus hours and it's all I've played since release. Does it have problems. Yep. *submitted early*
So that said the controls being the way they are is a very valid reason not to play the game. I feel most impact lag can be tolerated unless it's a fighting game or platformer. Here it doesnt hurt as bad but still odd that there is such a thing in a game like this. Wonder if there is a very deliberate reason for doing this versus like their gameplay in Max Payne 3.
That said I love this game. 60 plus hours and it's all I've played since release. Does it have problems. Yep. *submitted early*
So that said the controls being the way they are is a very valid reason not to play the game. I feel most impact lag can be tolerated unless it's a fighting game or platformer. Here it doesnt hurt as bad but still odd that there is such a thing in a game like this. Wonder if there is a very deliberate reason for doing this versus like their gameplay in Max Payne 3.
They're all good but Watch Dogs was just so damn solid with every weapon. Still the best for me.
Title of the thread: EA Motive's Dan Lowe compares the input response times of RDR2 [...]
Shooting is an input.
Did I miss what? The results of the video posted in the OP? No, I didn't miss that. What's your point?
Did you miss this? It's in the second post of this thread.
God forbid that reviewers dock points for a game with shit controls. It's not a movie.
Yeah like WTF, of course when you press the trigger the gun goes boom immediately. It's impossible to have input lag on that.
Admittedly I do not own the game and haven't played it, but there are a number of users saying that aiming, "sprinting" (I guess holding X and moving?) & other inputs don't have the same input delay as the walk movement. I'm simply assuming this is the case, given the number of responses in this thread speaking to that. There is likely still a delay there, but the impressions I've gotten from most is that the difference between those delays and the walk delay is pretty significant.
This is why I think the test in the OP, while accurate, only illustrates a portion of the picture. If you were to look at this data, you could assume that there is a half second delay between pulling the trigger and actually shooting...which doesn't seem to be the case. Because of that, I think it's fair to call it "misleading", because it doesn't communicate if this problem is persistent across all inputs, or specifically just movement (though it's clear it's just movement, I believe).
You're explicitly calling people apologists (as in, suggesting they're worshiping a corporation) because they are saying "this test only reflects a portion of the picture". That is insulting, particularly when there are people who aren't even saying "this is okay". They're saying "this isn't the complete picture, and it is likely this lag is intentional to some degree". The term "apologist" is absolutely derogatory, and that's explicitly how you're using it. To insult people for being "so stupid and faithful to a developer". You're not using it in any other way, outside of labeling people as beneath you.
Many people have made the claim in the thread that walk movement is the primary offender here for input lag. Given that you haven't refuted that specific claim (but instead have mocked people for bring it up), then it is clear that the input lag isn't buried within the engine itself (if it were, the lag would be persistent across all inputs, like say, Tekken 7). Given that the input between aiming, walking, menus, etc, is NOT consistent, then it stands to reason that it was an intentional decision (and not some worship theory as you seem to think I have). In fact, I've made it explicitly clear many times that I don't enjoy Rockstar games, I haven't beaten one (literally ever) and do not own RDR2. I'm not a fan, and I'm not here to "defend" them. I'm literally just participating in a discussion about the incomplete nature of the data presented in the OP. I didn't even argue that the data was inaccurate, or say that Rockstar made the right choice. You've injected all of that into my posts, despite it very clearly being absent from all of them.
Further more, you're adding "think about that" to the end of all your posts, because you want me to step over the line, and I admittedly did. I'm bothered that only I got a warning for this encounter, as you're clearly trying to get these reactions (from more than just me), but that's life. I over stepped, and I've learned. You're going on the ignore list because it's clear your only purpose in this thread is to insult, bait, and then deflect responsibility for your words at any given opportunity. That's all I have to say on that subject.
My point is, if the video and the results reference movement 'lag', making a video about shooting 'lag' isn't really that relevant. Honestly I can tell you're obfuscating, for what purpose, I have no clue. But really, why bother?