5 ms·

This is also clear on rhythm games like Stepmania. Here's a random video from a keyboard user: https://youtu.be/TWiMnENdcyY?t=56 https://youtu.be/TWiMnENdcyY?t

This is also clear on rhythm games like Stepmania. Here's a random video from a keyboard user: https://youtu.be/TWiMnENdcyY?t=56 https://youtu.be/TWiMnENdcyY?t=56 At this speed the player is reacting (and hitting with correct timing) about ten notes (arrows) per second. This is possible by memorizing and reacting to group patterns instead of individual notes, but more importantly, reacting unconsciously. A player can play at this level without conscious attention, even while holding a conversation, or while focusing at different parts of the screen, or spaced out. It feels like the fingers play by themselves. This is so automatic that the player may have little feedback on how well they are doing. They may think they are making blunders and about to lose, while "the fingers" have correctly hit every note so far. Definitely feels like a faster neural path was built.

LaikaF 9y ago
When I used to play Stepmania and DDR a bunch that was entirely what ended up happening. You started processing chunks of the arrows, and mapping them to various foot/finger movements. At a certain point though people just straight up memorize the whole song though.
madez 9y ago
I still remember vividly the learning process when playing a game like Stepmania (maybe it actually was Stepmania, I don't remember the name). The first season was played very conciously and slow. After each season, I recognized that certain patterns just came out perfectly without difficulty. Sometimes I was even surprised by myself. However, what I wanted to say is, it was enjoyable just letting the brain do its job of processing patterns and reacting to them. It was relaxing.
organsnyder 9y ago
I used to play Stepmania a fair amount, and one of my controllers had a noticeable amount of latency. Despite this, I was about to be about as effective as with the lesser-delay controllers. I think part of the reason is from my experience as an organist: some instruments have a noticeable delay from the time that the key is pressed to when the sound reaches my ears, whether due to delays built into the control mechanism itself, as well as sound delay (the console is sometimes located on the opposite side of the hall from the pipes). I think this has caused my brain to be wired to accommodate these sorts of situations.
- katastic 9y ago
  Also, there's weapons in some games (both melee and long range) that have considerable "wind up". You click, and they don't actually attack for awhile. Chivalry, for example. Part of the fun is learning to control the wind up correctly so that you are in the exact place (you being a moving, rotating person AND then being a moving rotating person) somewhere in the future as opposed to "close in until within range/in-scope, then immediately triggering the left-mouse button." You have to continue guiding the attack as the attack is winding up. Another interesting one is long range sniping in simulator and quasi-simulator FPS games like say, PUBG. There's bullet drop, and people can move toward, away, and side-ways. You've got to place the shot ahead of the target, for a given targets speed (walking vs running, vs in a vehicle), and lead the appropriate amount. The amount also changes with distance (obviously) as well as different guns have different bullet velocities (less velocity = more lead), as well as different scopes (2x/4x/8x/15x) which offer drastically different required mouse movements to get the appropriate crosshair movement (even if the "lead" corrected for magnification is the same). God, I love our brains. I would love to read a textbook on EXACTLY that kind of learning. Subconscious, neural learning. Oh, and that's one great thing about PUBG. The combination of low-level muscle memory for maximum speed target acquisition and firing, with the constant high-level mental strain of planning 2, 3, and 20 steps ahead. Solving for "this situation right now" (shot this guy on my screen AND how do I outflank this guy walking nearby but out of sight that is also trying to kill me), solving for "what happens next" (if I fire, will it attract another, full health, group of people that will kill me?) and solving for "how do I keep getting closer to the blue zone to reach the end game without dying." All of those circuits are absolutely required to "win" in a game with 100 players and only one winner. For the fun of it, I really should write down my other mental processes that go on. Getting further in the game (closer to 100) is all about learning to train your brain into juggling many problems at the same time as well as specifically targeting areas where you are lacking. Like if you're not good at close combat, you can get near the end by sneaking but you will eventually die. And combat at short range, medium range, and long-range combat all have different strategies and tradeoffs. Combat with groups is different that combat with 1 enemy, or a pair.
cakebrewery 9y ago
It's hard to explain, but with these sort of games your brain "feels" if something is off (a little bit of latency, etc). I get a similar feeling playing instruments. It's quick to adapt to these changes, but the feeling of something being "different" still lingers for a bit. Used to play (still could if I got back to it) at that difficulty with my keyboard. Got to the point where I could have conversations while playing. I also play guitar so I stopped playing Stepmania to avoid extra strain.
pdkl95 9y ago
A big difference between Hexagon and most other rhythm games like Stepmania, Beatmanias IIDX, Guitar Hero, etc, is that pattern is the same. Just like musicians memorize complex music that they later perform[1] with precise timing, the same is possible for these step/note patterns. I've personally seen someone perform one of the insane speed/note-density DDR songs blindfolded. Humans have surprisingly good internal timing and mechanical ability, iff you can memorize/practice it before hand. Super Hexagon doesn't allow any of that. The game is randomly generated each time, making memorization impossible. It's 100% reaction against the incoming wall pattern, with no pauses. Except you don't actually have time to "react". I recommend this[2] essay that does a much better (and more poetic) job of explaining how uniquely Supper Hexagon interacts with human perception. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRUwpUqSFbI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRUwpUqSFbI [2] https://problemmachine.wordpress.com/2015/04/11/hexagon/ https://problemmachine.wordpress.com/2015/04/11/hexagon/
- katastic 9y ago
  You are missing his point though. It's not just memorizing the whole song. If it was, when you play a _new_ song, you'd be as rusty as when you first started to learn to play. But new versions come out, with new sets of songs, and people play songs of the same approximate difficulty as well. If it was simply memorization, they wouldn't be able to play same or near difficulty songs. They'd have to "ramp up" as they memorized the new song. Obviously, people's brains are reacting to similar patterns (each song has a "style" and many songs are of the same "style" with things like jumps, diagonals, triplets and so on), as well as other subconscious neural reactions. When you're playing 9-step (out of 10) step songs, you're not watching individual arrows at all. It'd be impossible. You unfocus your eyes and play through your peripheral vision. Your body reacts. You don't need to think at all. (So nobody is arguing that the Hexagon game isn't "more random" . They're arguing that it's more than just randomness at play.) It's really no different that carrying on a conversation while playing a game of casual pong with a friend. Everyone just calls it "muscle memory." The pattern is never the same with a ball bouncing off a table. It's not rocket science.
- lifthrasiir 9y ago
  Music video games can easily thwart the pre-memorization with the randomized chart (often considered essential to master the game). Players typically learn the timing, but possibly not the entire patterns. It is still remarkable that top-ranked players can do much, much better on a new song at the first glance---probably because the music is much more predictable than the pattern itself, so one can guide the pattern recognization with the music.
lb1lf 9y ago
Also, morse code. I can comfortably send morse code at ~25wpm, approx. 125 characters/minute. ('Comfortably' meaning others can comfortably figure out what I am trying to send) That equals ~375 hand movements/minute, or 6.25/second. (Granted, I cheat - I use a single lever paddle and a microcontroller to get the timing exactly right.) I've heard people going twice as fast, though that's very rare. However, people more skilled than I can use a straight key at up to ~35wpm or so - that's ~9 taps a second, while also getting the timing just right without the aid of a microcontroller. That, in my book, is very impressive.
wvh 9y ago
As a guitar player, a lot of playing is muscle memory, combined with an overarching understanding of what you are trying to convey. In fact, the challenge is often to break free from the muscle memory so as not to fall into the same patterns (like minor pentatonic scale) over and over. Part of practice is learning how to use muscle memory to handle the fast stuff – faster than you can process at full speed – freeing up your mind to think about the broader strokes. It's interesting to think that activities such as playing music, drawing, painting or practising sports are really a combination or interaction of fast muscle memory, slower rational/strategic thinking, and guiding emotion/intuition.
tomxor 9y ago
>At this speed the player is reacting (and hitting with correct timing) about ten notes (arrows) per second. This is possible by memorizing and reacting to group patterns instead of individual notes, but more importantly, reacting unconsciously. You've just described how people play music in general :P the patterns trigger memory and other internal processes (whether it's recalling verbatim or dynamically based on a new pattern from some combination of scales), this escapes the limitation of input output response time because it's all internal with some arbitrary output delay which we account for by "leading" whatever the physical action is (for an exaggeration think about percussion instruments). If you are at all musical it's fun to do a bit of introspection here... with anything slightly complicated where you do not have time to think about the position of each note (a pretty unnatural way to perform) you will realise that your fingers (or toes in some strange cases), react to a sort of stream of signals internally... it's probably not even a stream but more of a parallel matching against the pattern from which you pick a stream of notes internally because this is right brain stuff. Disclaimer: i'm not a neuroscientists or musicologists, I just like thinking about the brain and am slightly musical.

LaikaF 9y ago

When I used to play Stepmania and DDR a bunch that was entirely what ended up happening. You started processing chunks of the arrows, and mapping them to various foot/finger movements. At a certain point though people just straight up memorize the whole song though.

madez 9y ago

I still remember vividly the learning process when playing a game like Stepmania (maybe it actually was Stepmania, I don't remember the name). The first season was played very conciously and slow. After each season, I recognized that certain patterns just came out perfectly without difficulty. Sometimes I was even surprised by myself. However, what I wanted to say is, it was enjoyable just letting the brain do its job of processing patterns and reacting to them. It was relaxing.

organsnyder 9y ago

I used to play Stepmania a fair amount, and one of my controllers had a noticeable amount of latency. Despite this, I was about to be about as effective as with the lesser-delay controllers. I think part of the reason is from my experience as an organist: some instruments have a noticeable delay from the time that the key is pressed to when the sound reaches my ears, whether due to delays built into the control mechanism itself, as well as sound delay (the console is sometimes located on the opposite side of the hall from the pipes). I think this has caused my brain to be wired to accommodate these sorts of situations.

katastic 9y ago
Also, there's weapons in some games (both melee and long range) that have considerable "wind up". You click, and they don't actually attack for awhile. Chivalry, for example. Part of the fun is learning to control the wind up correctly so that you are in the exact place (you being a moving, rotating person AND then being a moving rotating person) somewhere in the future as opposed to "close in until within range/in-scope, then immediately triggering the left-mouse button." You have to continue guiding the attack as the attack is winding up. Another interesting one is long range sniping in simulator and quasi-simulator FPS games like say, PUBG. There's bullet drop, and people can move toward, away, and side-ways. You've got to place the shot ahead of the target, for a given targets speed (walking vs running, vs in a vehicle), and lead the appropriate amount. The amount also changes with distance (obviously) as well as different guns have different bullet velocities (less velocity = more lead), as well as different scopes (2x/4x/8x/15x) which offer drastically different required mouse movements to get the appropriate crosshair movement (even if the "lead" corrected for magnification is the same). God, I love our brains. I would love to read a textbook on EXACTLY that kind of learning. Subconscious, neural learning. Oh, and that's one great thing about PUBG. The combination of low-level muscle memory for maximum speed target acquisition and firing, with the constant high-level mental strain of planning 2, 3, and 20 steps ahead. Solving for "this situation right now" (shot this guy on my screen AND how do I outflank this guy walking nearby but out of sight that is also trying to kill me), solving for "what happens next" (if I fire, will it attract another, full health, group of people that will kill me?) and solving for "how do I keep getting closer to the blue zone to reach the end game without dying." All of those circuits are absolutely required to "win" in a game with 100 players and only one winner. For the fun of it, I really should write down my other mental processes that go on. Getting further in the game (closer to 100) is all about learning to train your brain into juggling many problems at the same time as well as specifically targeting areas where you are lacking. Like if you're not good at close combat, you can get near the end by sneaking but you will eventually die. And combat at short range, medium range, and long-range combat all have different strategies and tradeoffs. Combat with groups is different that combat with 1 enemy, or a pair.

cakebrewery 9y ago

It's hard to explain, but with these sort of games your brain "feels" if something is off (a little bit of latency, etc). I get a similar feeling playing instruments. It's quick to adapt to these changes, but the feeling of something being "different" still lingers for a bit. Used to play (still could if I got back to it) at that difficulty with my keyboard. Got to the point where I could have conversations while playing. I also play guitar so I stopped playing Stepmania to avoid extra strain.

pdkl95 9y ago

A big difference between Hexagon and most other rhythm games like Stepmania, Beatmanias IIDX, Guitar Hero, etc, is that pattern is the same. Just like musicians memorize complex music that they later perform[1] with precise timing, the same is possible for these step/note patterns. I've personally seen someone perform one of the insane speed/note-density DDR songs blindfolded. Humans have surprisingly good internal timing and mechanical ability, iff you can memorize/practice it before hand. Super Hexagon doesn't allow any of that. The game is randomly generated each time, making memorization impossible. It's 100% reaction against the incoming wall pattern, with no pauses. Except you don't actually have time to "react". I recommend this[2] essay that does a much better (and more poetic) job of explaining how uniquely Supper Hexagon interacts with human perception. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRUwpUqSFbI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRUwpUqSFbI [2] https://problemmachine.wordpress.com/2015/04/11/hexagon/ https://problemmachine.wordpress.com/2015/04/11/hexagon/

katastic 9y ago
You are missing his point though. It's not just memorizing the whole song. If it was, when you play a _new_ song, you'd be as rusty as when you first started to learn to play. But new versions come out, with new sets of songs, and people play songs of the same approximate difficulty as well. If it was simply memorization, they wouldn't be able to play same or near difficulty songs. They'd have to "ramp up" as they memorized the new song. Obviously, people's brains are reacting to similar patterns (each song has a "style" and many songs are of the same "style" with things like jumps, diagonals, triplets and so on), as well as other subconscious neural reactions. When you're playing 9-step (out of 10) step songs, you're not watching individual arrows at all. It'd be impossible. You unfocus your eyes and play through your peripheral vision. Your body reacts. You don't need to think at all. (So nobody is arguing that the Hexagon game isn't "more random" . They're arguing that it's more than just randomness at play.) It's really no different that carrying on a conversation while playing a game of casual pong with a friend. Everyone just calls it "muscle memory." The pattern is never the same with a ball bouncing off a table. It's not rocket science.
lifthrasiir 9y ago
Music video games can easily thwart the pre-memorization with the randomized chart (often considered essential to master the game). Players typically learn the timing, but possibly not the entire patterns. It is still remarkable that top-ranked players can do much, much better on a new song at the first glance---probably because the music is much more predictable than the pattern itself, so one can guide the pattern recognization with the music.

lb1lf 9y ago

Also, morse code. I can comfortably send morse code at ~25wpm, approx. 125 characters/minute. ('Comfortably' meaning others can comfortably figure out what I am trying to send) That equals ~375 hand movements/minute, or 6.25/second. (Granted, I cheat - I use a single lever paddle and a microcontroller to get the timing exactly right.) I've heard people going twice as fast, though that's very rare. However, people more skilled than I can use a straight key at up to ~35wpm or so - that's ~9 taps a second, while also getting the timing just right without the aid of a microcontroller. That, in my book, is very impressive.

wvh 9y ago

As a guitar player, a lot of playing is muscle memory, combined with an overarching understanding of what you are trying to convey. In fact, the challenge is often to break free from the muscle memory so as not to fall into the same patterns (like minor pentatonic scale) over and over. Part of practice is learning how to use muscle memory to handle the fast stuff – faster than you can process at full speed – freeing up your mind to think about the broader strokes. It's interesting to think that activities such as playing music, drawing, painting or practising sports are really a combination or interaction of fast muscle memory, slower rational/strategic thinking, and guiding emotion/intuition.

tomxor 9y ago

>At this speed the player is reacting (and hitting with correct timing) about ten notes (arrows) per second. This is possible by memorizing and reacting to group patterns instead of individual notes, but more importantly, reacting unconsciously. You've just described how people play music in general :P the patterns trigger memory and other internal processes (whether it's recalling verbatim or dynamically based on a new pattern from some combination of scales), this escapes the limitation of input output response time because it's all internal with some arbitrary output delay which we account for by "leading" whatever the physical action is (for an exaggeration think about percussion instruments). If you are at all musical it's fun to do a bit of introspection here... with anything slightly complicated where you do not have time to think about the position of each note (a pretty unnatural way to perform) you will realise that your fingers (or toes in some strange cases), react to a sort of stream of signals internally... it's probably not even a stream but more of a parallel matching against the pattern from which you pick a stream of notes internally because this is right brain stuff. Disclaimer: i'm not a neuroscientists or musicologists, I just like thinking about the brain and am slightly musical.