Thank you for helping me to reach 800,000 subscribers. Here at the Klik Empire, we are
always trying to do things in new ways, so for the first time ever I proudly present
to you: GREY squares, on an orange background. 800,000 of them. See if you can find yours
here! Remember, you have to be SUBSCRIBED to stand a chance!
And for my next party trick, I will attempt to lose as many subscribers as I can. So HIT
THAT SUBSCRIBE BUTTON.
And follow me on Twitter.
And if that didn’t work, what better way to lose subscribers than to talk about CS:GO’s
tickrate? Again.
As could be expected, Kinsi’s test of 64 VS 128 tick has been critically assessed and
dissected by the community. Which is GOOD! But I hope it’s being done for the right
reasons… and not just because people want to continue believing that 128 tick’s better.
His test was to see if people could feel the difference that 128 tick makes. They’d play
a round of deathmatch, then would decide whether or not the server had been 128 tick at the
end of the round. From this, you can already see that this isn’t
trying to see if there’s a difference between 64 and 128 tick; it’s trying to work out
if people can FEEL a difference. An important distinction to make. To actually know and
quantify the difference is a lot more difficult and I suspect will be the topic of hot debate
for a long time to come. Because it is hard to prove it one way or another when there
are so many variables at play. But see Kinsi’s test for what it is. It’s
a great chance for people to test their belief that they can feel the difference.
From the data he initially collected, I didn’t find evidence that people could tell which
of the servers were 128 tick, but I made it clear the limitations of the test and how
it wasn’t a definitive ‘answer’ to the question.
Unfortunately, it seems like many people have seen this as reason to ignore the whole test
and to continue believing that they can feel the difference.
In fact, it’s the people who can 100% feel the difference who refuse to do the test!
It’s infuriating. Like, these are the people that we need to do the test! We could finally
get proof that there’s a difference if they did, since they can feel the difference- 100%!
But for whatever reason, they choose not to do it.
As I have told many people since: if you think you can feel the difference, then test it
yourself. This is your chance! If you genuinely care enough to have a strong opinion about
this, do it! The server is up, and it would be great to get more results. Please don’t
refuse just because you know there’s a difference and don’t need to prove it because you know
already. Because that isn’t proof, despite it being commonly accepted as such within
the Counter-Strike community. But perhaps more infuriating than people who
ignore the test are those who go out of their way to discredit it completely. These can
be intelligent people who know a good deal about what they’re talking about- and if
they only put half as much effort into testing it for themselves, we might actually have
reached a conclusion by now. As I’ve said, I have been open about the
limitations of the test and have been cautious when talking about my findings. Sadly, this
honesty and prudence has been mistaken as admitting that my findings are useless. They
are not useless. I consider the test, and the conclusions I drew from it, to be a valuable
first step towards answering the question once and for all.
I even deleted a number of responses I typed to people. This will be seen as me admitting
I was wrong, but actually I realised the people I was discussing it with weren’t interested
in getting results, they had already made their mind up and I was achieving nothing
by discussing it with them. And I do question the motives of people who
are discrediting the test. Do these people genuinely believe the test to be entirely
useless, or does it just suit them to say this because they think 128 tick feels better?
I’ll now address some of the comments my previous video received.
Tickrate has been covered too much so I shouldn’t have made a video on it.
No u. It’s hard to tell sometimes, but I’m sure a lot of the comments are memes and jokes.
But as this is a proper topic that I am trying to cover, I’ll treat the rest of the comments
I show as though they’re serious. …starting AFTER this comment.
This is a more valid point. Some people think the test was ruined by the people who can’t
tell the difference. I’ve seen this same logic being used to a number of arguments.
Some think higher refresh screens would show the difference, higher framerates would show
it, some think higher skill levels would… the general argument is that these results
are cancelled out by the people who can’t tell, for whatever reason. But just think
about it. If everybody couldn’t tell the difference, the results would have been right
50% of the time... Which is what happened. Even if most couldn’t, it would only take
SOME people who could tell to push this average up to above 50%. Which we didn’t see.
Although what I just said also applies to monitor refresh rate, there’s another reason
for why it won’t make a difference. A lot of comments have asked this out of genuine
curiosity, so hopefully what I’m about to say will explain it! I guess the idea is that
a 64 tick server is enough for one tick per monitor refresh if using a basic 60 hz screen,
but because 144 hz is higher than 64, people think that using faster screens would benefit
from 128 tick instead. This sounds reasonable, doesn’t it.
The truth is, all frames you see, regardless of the monitor you use, are equally affected
by interpolation. What you see on screen is rarely lined up to a tick. It normally falls
somewhere between them. As an example, if your screen shows something
exactly half way between ticks, the game places everything exactly half way between the two
ticks it’s between. A higher refresh rate screen will simply display more frames between
the same 2 ticks of data. It can do this because the game already knows
where things are for a few ticks before it shows you- that’s right! What you see on
your screen is always delayed by a few ticks! This acts as a buffer against packet loss
and the other problems that delays over the internet can bring about. I did briefly talk
about this last video, but it’s a valid question that I think warranted an answer.
This one raises a good point! Some people believe that if the test involved bunnyhopping,
surfing or throwing pre-learned grenade throws, they’d be able to tell if the server was
128 tick. And you know what, I wouldn’t be surprised if they could. Maybe a future
test could focus on testing these particular activities… because it would be good to
know. I guess it should have been made more obvious, but Kinsi’s test was to see if
people could tell the difference that 128 tick would bring to shooting and hitreg. Because
even if you could tell a 64 tick server from a 128 for grenade throwing… it makes them
different, but doesn’t exactly make one better than the other. Which is generally
the reason people want 128 tick servers. If you want 128 tick because you’ve learned
grenade throws on it then… yeah, sure. I understand that and nothing learned from Kinsi’s
test can be used to prove or to discredit that.
A common way that people discredited the test was to say it didn’t give people enough
time to feel the difference. But what IS enough time? Is it a game? Is it 10 hours? There
is no right answer for this. Obviously, more is better. But the longer a test like this
requires people to play for, the less likely they are to do it and the fewer results it
would get. So one of the perks of having it test a 1 round minimum is that it leads to
more results than a longer test would. Which you’d hope would make up for it to some
extent. But this whole idea that it’s not long enough
is a frustrating one because there’s no ‘right’ amount of time to test it for.
It’s a valid disclaimer to add, but isn’t reason to dismiss the test.
There’s a difference between not finding evidence of something in particular, and not
finding any evidence at all. The truth is that the data was too inconclusive for me
to say that people could feel the difference between 64 and 128 tick. I did the right thing
by saying that the evidence suggested that they couldn’t. And even this boring, unpopular-sounding
conclusion is something. I think this might be what this comment’s
trying to say as well. Evidence was found- It’s just that it suggested that different
tickrates CAN’T be felt by the players on the server.
WHAT IF, instead of complaining about 64 tick, I spent some time learning how to play better?
Hmm.
Let’s go… back in time. Once when I was at school, I did a speech
on why I didn’t like fox hunting. I was in front of a crowd, sucked at public speaking
and was nervous. I was asked the question ‘If I had to kill a fox or a human, which
would I choose’. And it destroyed my argument. I had no answer to it and it made me look
like a fool! Afterwards, away from the pressure, I realised the question had absolutely nothing
to do with the topic. And this is how I feel about comments like this. Intentional or not,
it has misunderstood the point of the test, and attempts to derail it by attacking my
ability as a player and by assuming it’s about skill level in the first place. It’s
moot. It’s a moot point. Next. …Actually, that’s it for the Youtube comments.
The last, and perhaps most important criticism, was heavily discussed on Reddit. And it was
regarding Kinsi’s choice to include 47 tick. People did the test, thinking it would either
be 64 or 128 tick, and were asked if they thought it was 128 tick at the end of each
test. People weren’t told that 47 tick would be
an option, and because of this the test has been criticised for being misleading. I grouped
47 and 64 tick results together, which lessened the impact, but there were still ways it could
have changed the results. Imagine you play on a 47 tick match, and think
‘this isn’t very good’, so vote at the end of the round that you don’t think it’s
128 tick. Now imagine you play another round, but this time the server is running on 64
tick. This time, you feel that it’s better, so vote that you think it’s a 128 tick server!
In a way, you’re not wrong. You felt an improved tickrate, so voted for a higher option.
You still thought a 64 tick server was 128. But at the same time, you can understand how
they had been unfairly misled. Luckily, from Kinsi’s original data, anybody
who wanted to could analyse whether 47 tick had impacted the results!
And some did. Thank you to Ieatcarrotss, whose research
and findings were fascinating! He saw if people could feel and rate the jump from 47 to 64,
or 64 to 128… or the other way. And of the 190 people who did the test 2 or more times,
51 correctly felt a change in tickrate. And 139 chose incorrectly. In other words, if
the tickrate changes… you’re MORE likely to think it’s gone the opposite way.
And mangobae did his own testing by removing invalid and 47 tick results… and concluded
that the results didn’t change at all. I am very thankful to these people for taking
the time to do further testing. I urge other people to do the same, should you think there
was something wrong with how I or Kinsi originally reached our conclusions. We need people like
this in the community if we’re to get to the bottom of this. Be like them! And not
like… this. Like I said, I don’t think Kinsi’s test,
or my conclusions from it are perfect. But they can’t just be dismissed for the reasons
covered in this video. 128 tick may bring about a number of advantages, but a change
in the feel of the game isn’t one of them (Online, based on this test). Thank you to
everybody who took part, to the people who genuinely asked questions because you wanted
to know more… and to the people who did further testing themselves.
And thank you to the 800,000 of you who follow me.
And thank you for this suggestion that we should up the tickrate to Planck time.