Jump to content
Mib2347

I have devised a way to demonstrate heavy aim

Recommended Posts

Tell me anything I said which isn't true.

 

 

 

I'm not even fucking defending 343, I'm saying the op doesn't actually prove anything.

 

actually it proves that there is clearly something wrong with the aiming, what exactly that is, we don't know. it also proves a lot of people right, as 343 said that people were likely head-casing, as did some members on this forum. 

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

oh i get that scientific rigour is a must, but i just find it so funny that of all the people to try and semi-deny or defend 343 it's MeanBean. :laughing:

Frankly, this is more indicative of Beyond's general bias against 343 than any bias I have for them.

 

The fact that you're railing against a critical analysis of the op's methods just shows your confirmation bias.

 

actually it proves that there is clearly something wrong with the aiming, what exactly that is, we don't know. it also proves a lot of people right, as 343 said that people were likely head-casing, as did some members on this forum.

No it doesn't. Again, you didn't actually read what I wrote did you? You just reflexively downvoted.

 

 

This method just as likely shows that H5 has varying rumble patterns as it does aiming issues.

 

Also heavy aim is likely caused by input lag, this is not a demonstration of input lag.

  • Upvote (+1) 3
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Frankly, this is more indicative of Beyond's general bias against 343 than any bias I have for them.

 

The fact that you're railing against a critical analysis of the op's methods just shows your confirmation bias.

 

the op goes on to state that more rigorous testing needs to be done, but what we have seen is clear inconsistencies with the reticule movement. 

 

confirmation bias? ok, i am biased toward 343, a result of being conditioned to expect the worst with anything they produce, something you can prove by looking at halo 4, MCC and halo 5. so yeah, i am biased. 

 

you are ignoring your own cognitive bias though, which tends to make you defend, applaud or play devils advocate with regards to 343. 

Share this post


Link to post

Ok so in that case we would do 

 

2/11.8*100 = 16.95% 

 

So the same input could make your cursor move up to 17% less from run to run.

 

making multiplayer aim 20% worse in ten seconds flat*

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

the op goes on to state that more rigorous testing needs to be done, but what we have seen is clear inconsistencies with the reticule movement.

 

confirmation bias? ok, i am biased toward 343, a result of being conditioned to expect the worse with anything they produce, something you can prove by looking at halo 4, MCC and halo 5. so yeah, i am biased.

 

you are ignoring your own cognitive bias though, your own bias tends to make you defend, applaud or play devils advocate with regards to 343.

My bias comes into play far less here than yours because I'm not actually defending 343. I'm not claiming heavy aim doesn't exist, I'm saying this is not a demonstration of it.

 

This discussion is pointless if you're not actually going to read what's being written. I'm done here.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

My bias doesn't come into play here because I'm not actually defending 343. I'm not claiming heavy doesn't exist, I'm saying this is not a demonstration of it.

 

This discussion is pointless if you're not actually going to read what's being written. I'm done here.

 

so you see a pattern in my behaviour, call it out, but refuse to see the patterns of your own? 

Share this post


Link to post

Am I crazy for hoping this actually does bring about some sort of change in the aiming system?

In the great words of Royal 2, "I just want to aim my gun in peace."

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

The only things we need to prove the validity of this are:

 

1) a little more evidence from other games that demonstrates that this method is consistent.  The H:CE example was a good start.  If we could also get one from Halo 4 (as a 343 game that people like the aiming in) and a game like Destiny as another xbox one game with good aiming.

2) Confirmation from 343 that the rumble signals sent to the controller for certain weapons are always consistent (cmon @@Unyshek )

3) demonstrate that this occurs with other weapons in H5 like the magnum and sniper, as single shot precision weapons.

  • Upvote (+1) 7

Share this post


Link to post

The only things we need to prove the validity of this are:

 

1) a little more evidence from other games that demonstrates that this method is consistent. The H:CE example was a good start. If we could also get one from Halo 4 (as a 343 game that people like the aiming in) and a game like Destiny as another xbox one game with good aiming.

2) Confirmation from 343 that the rumble signals sent to the controller for certain weapons are always consistent (cmon @@Unyshek )

3) demonstrate that this occurs with other weapons in H5 like the magnum and sniper, as single shot precision weapons.

These are all things I would like to address.

 

My plan when I get home later is to use an old 360 with a copy of halo 2 for the vibration signal. That way I can use the same signal across multiple games and it will be consistent. My plan would be to first try it again in Halo 1 as I can quickly get setup and then test again in Halo 5 for a comparison if it all goes well. I will then check other games as it should quite simple if I'm getting the signal from an external source. If I do that it will also elimate the need to demonstrate different weapons as they won't be a factor any longer.

 

A user on reddit mentioned using a 555 timer which if I understand it correctly will output a signal for a precise time. That sounds like a good idea to me but I'm not sure how easily I could personally do it. I don't have a laptop/PC so if I had to program a small device then it would have to be simple.

 

I'll be home in about 3 hours and I'll have an hour or two to get some testing in.

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

These are all things I would like to address.

 

My plan when I get home later is to use an old 360 with a copy of halo 2 for the vibration signal. That way I can use the same signal across multiple games and it will be consistent. My plan would be to first try it again in Halo 1 as I can quickly get setup and then test again in Halo 5 for a comparison if it all goes well. I will then check other games as it should quite simple if I'm getting the signal from an external source. If I do that it will also elimate the need to demonstrate different weapons as they won't be a factor any longer.

 

A user on reddit mentioned using a 555 timer which if I understand it correctly will output a signal for a precise time. That sounds like a good idea to me but I'm not sure how easily I could personally do it. I don't have a laptop/PC so if I had to program a small device then it would have to be simple.

 

I'll be home in about 3 hours and I'll have an hour or two to get some testing in.

 

thanks for everything you've done man, this could probably go a long way to helping fix whatever issues are causing this.

Share this post


Link to post

Doesn't make sense that the vibration wave lengths are different from shot to shot. I don't think that the wave length or intensity of the vibration changes from shot to shot. I think that the test says something, maybe is true that only the carbine gives this results.

We need more testing but this is pretty promising.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

So, I've done quite a few writeups digging into H5 mechanic's in the past, and I'm also a total heavy aim nutcase, so your post came as a message from the heavens.

 

I also happen to be a developer, and I have to say I'm jealous of your ingenuity, good idea.

 

Also, I've ordered some arduino parts, a digital potentiometer, and I'm gonna buy a cheap Xbone controller at Gamestop today. I think I can rig something up over the weekend that will get us far more precise control over your test. Input deflection %, time, etc.

Yes! Please do.

 

I've been hoping that someone would come along and be able to really perfect the method. I don't know if you plan to buy a second hand controller but if that's the case then just be careful it doesn't have stick drift.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yes! Please do.

 

I've been hoping that someone would come along and be able to really perfect the method. I don't know if you plan to buy a second hand controller but if that's the case then just be careful it doesn't have stick drift.

Have you tried a different inner? Or specifically 343's default controller settings? I'd suggest trying both just for the heck of it to see what happens.

 

If you ran your same tests with those settings and the the number of unique terminal locations was reduced from 3 to 1, it would point to some sort of trimming happening. Dropped input due to mis-prioritized cpu processes. Perhaps the 0 inner is beyond the current capability of the xbox to handle consistently.

 

Does your method bypass the inner by any chance? Or do you think the game has a limitation in place for how quickly a person can pass that gap?

Edit: I just realized you can test to see if there is a limitation by keeping the same controller settings and just raising the inner. Coordinates would tell.

Share this post


Link to post

Have you tried a different inner? Or specifically 343's default controller settings? I'd suggest trying both just for the heck of it to see what happens.

 

If you ran your same tests with those settings and the the number of unique terminal locations was reduced from 3 to 1, it would point to some sort of trimming happening. Dropped input due to mis-prioritized cpu processes. Perhaps the 0 inner is beyond the current capability of the xbox to handle consistently.

 

Maybe.  More trials is always better but i would bet it doesn't make a difference.  These issues have been present since day 1 before the acceleration and deadzone options were available.

 

Hmmm... i would like to see the results from vertical movement too.  If vertical and horizontal are both jacked like this, trying to aim at an angle would be super jacked.

 

Oh man, the testing possibilities with this method and variations of the method are endless.  lets try not to overwork @@Mib2347 lol

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe.  More trials is always better but i would bet it doesn't make a difference.  These issues have been present since day 1 before the acceleration and deadzone options were available.

 

Hmmm... i would like to see the results from vertical movement too.  If vertical and horizontal are both jacked like this, trying to aim at an angle would be super jacked.

 

Oh man, the testing possibilities with this method and variations of the method are endless.  lets try not to overwork @@Mib2347 lol

I agree

Share this post


Link to post

Have you tried a different inner? Or specifically 343's default controller settings? I'd suggest trying both just for the heck of it to see what happens.

 

If you ran your same tests with those settings and the the number of unique terminal locations was reduced from 3 to 1, it would point to some sort of trimming happening. Dropped input due to mis-prioritized cpu processes. Perhaps the 0 inner is beyond the current capability of the xbox to handle consistently.

 

Does your method bypass the inner by any chance? Or do you think the game has a limitation in place for how quickly a person can pass that gap?

Edit: I just realized you can test to see if there is a limitation by keeping the same controller settings and just raising the inner. Coordinates would tell.

So if I'm following you correctly are you suggesting that the issue could be with the deadzones we set ourselves being ignored temporarily?

 

Either way I'd like to check things like that.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe. More trials is always better but i would bet it doesn't make a difference. These issues have been present since day 1 before the acceleration and deadzone options were available.

 

Hmmm... i would like to see the results from vertical movement too. If vertical and horizontal are both jacked like this, trying to aim at an angle would be super jacked.

 

Oh man, the testing possibilities with this method and variations of the method are endless. lets try not to overwork @@Mib2347 lol

I was planning on taking this week off work but last week I decided against it because I thought I might just sit around at home and waste it. Boy was I wrong.

 

It's easy for me to test vertical instead of horizontal so I can give that a try.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

So if I'm following you correctly are you suggesting that the issue could be with the deadzones we set ourselves being ignored temporarily?

 

Either way I'd like to check things like that.

I am suggesting it. But It's very unlikely to be the case since the problems have been present since day 1. I'm suggesting because it wouldn't take more than 2 minutes to land a couple shots and compare past points. And also because the game has changed.

 

There are two possible insights to be gained from the test:

 

  1. Whether or not inner has anything to do with heavy aim. If it did your points would be synonymous or close to it after changing the inner. It's very unlikely though as Apoll0 said.
  2. Whether or not the game has a built in limit for how fast the inner can be utilized. Your method is an immediate 100% in one direction. If you raised the inner and your new points matched your old points, we would know that your method bypasses the inner. If they were different, we would know that the game has a limit in place and that your method must utilize the innner.

Share this post


Link to post

I was planning on taking this week off work but last week I decided against it because I thought I might just sit around at home and waste it. Boy was I wrong.

 

It's easy for me to test vertical instead of horizontal so I can give that a try.

 

would moving at the same time as aiming make it worse? is there a way to test that, and if the movement inputs have any of the same issues?

Share this post


Link to post

would moving at the same time as aiming make it worse? is there a way to test that, and if the movement inputs have any of the same issues?

I wouldn't want to move at the same time as aiming but yeah I could test movement too I suppose.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

would moving at the same time as aiming make it worse? is there a way to test that, and if the movement inputs have any of the same issues?

When the aim is heavy It's like walking on banana peels on a floor that has dish soap on it.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

 

I am suggesting it. But It's very unlikely to be the case since the problems have been present since day 1. I'm suggesting because it wouldn't take more than 2 minutes to land a couple shots and compare past points. And also because the game has changed.

 

There are two possible insights to be gained from the test:

 

  • Whether or not inner has anything to do with heavy aim. If it did your points would be synonymous or close to it after changing the inner. It's very unlikely though as Apoll0 said.
  • Whether or not the game has a built in limit for how fast the inner can be utilized. Your method is an immediate 100% in one direction. If you raised the inner and your new points matched your old points, we would know that your method bypasses the inner. If they were different, we would know that the game has a limit in place and that your method must utilize the innner.

That's quite interesting. I will try that tonight hopefully as just like you've said it's not difficult.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.