Tim Connor Adam Fiske Ryan Kennedy with Professor Mark Claypool
-
Upload
hayes-travis -
Category
Documents
-
view
31 -
download
4
description
Transcript of Tim Connor Adam Fiske Ryan Kennedy with Professor Mark Claypool
Effects of Display Settings onUser Performance inFirst-Person Shooters
Frame Rate and Resolution on Movement Related Tasks
Tim ConnorAdam Fiske
Ryan Kennedy
withProfessor Mark Claypool
Overview We tested the effects of frame-rate and resolution on
user performance in first-person shooters. Specifically, we tested the effects they have a on
players movability. Three basic movements:
Walking Running Jumping
Recognition
Related Works Several studies were done the effects of frame-rate and resolution on streaming
video. In this case, framerate can be very low and users can still percieve what is going on just fine, but higher resolutions make things much better. This is “passive” media, whereas our study deals with “active” media. McCarthy, John D, Sasse, Angela, and Miras, Dimitrios. “Sharp or Smooth? Comparing the Effects of Video
Quantization vs. Frame Rate for Streamed Video.” University College London, London, United Kingdon, 2004. Tripathi, Avanish, and Claypool, Mark. “Improving Multimedia Streaming with Content- Aware Video Scaling.”
IMMCN, Durham, North Carolina, 2002.
Other studies, specifically Reddy’s The Effects of Low Frame Rate on a Measure for User Performance in Virtual Environments, show that users performance at different movement tasks begin to greatly increase at 15 fps. Reddy, Martin. “The Effects of Low Frame Rate on a Measure for User Performance in Virtual Environments.”
University of Edinburg, Scotland, UK, 1997. Swartz, Merryanna, and Daniel Wallace. "Effects of Frame Rate and Resolution Reduction on Human Performance."
Silver Spring, Maryland, 1993
A previous study was done very similar to ours. Quake 3 Arena was used to study the effects frame-rate and resolution had on users’ ability to aim and shoot targets. Claypool, Mark, Claypool, Kajal, and Damaa, Feissal. “The Effects of Frame Rate and Resolution on Users Playing
First Person Shooter Games.” MMCN, San Jose, California, 2006.
Test Parameter and Map Development Frame-rates
15 fps 7 fps 3 fps
Resolutions 640 x 480 512 x 384 320 x 240
A test harness was developed in java to randomize the order of maps and run them.
Four Maps Walking Running Jumping Recognition
Walking / Running map
Jumping Map
Resolution Map
Test Setup Specs:
AMD Athlon64 3700+ 2 GB RAM 300 GB HHD nVidia GeForce 6800 17” Monitor
User space – Normal computer setup Second keyboard and monitor behind a divider away from user
This was necessary to monitor the user and to control the test harness
User Performance Rating After the testing we developed a user
performance rating For frame-rate maps it was based on two things:
Time taken to complete a map Amount of health lost during this map
(Time)*(Health Lost) = Performance Rating
For resolution maps Time taken
Walking: Frame Rate vs. Performance
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Frame Rate
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e r
ati
ng
Walking: Frame Rate vs. Performance95% Confidence Intervals for Mean
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Frame Rate
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e R
ati
ng
None of the confidence intervals overlap, indicating that, with 95% confidence, frame
rate makes a significant difference in performance rating for the frame rates tested.
Analysis of Performance on Walking Maps
As frame rate improves, worst performances improve and the spreads of data points become smaller, possibly indicating that frame-lag effects are having less of less impact on performance.
Analysis of Performance on Jumping Maps
Jumping: Frame Rate vs. Performance
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Frame Rate
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e
Jumping: Frame Rate vs. Performance 95% Confidence Intervals for Mean
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Frame Rate
Per
form
ance
The overlapping of the 7fps and 15fps confidence intervals indicates that performance at 3fps is significantly different from performance at 7fps and 15fps, but performance at 7fps is not significantly different from performance at 15fps.
As was the case in the walking maps, as frame rate increases, the
worst performances improve and the spread of data lessens.
Running: Frame Rate vs. Performance
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Frame Rate
Per
form
ance
Running: Frame Rate vs. Performance 95% Confidence Intervals for Mean
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Frame Rate
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e
Analysis of Performance on Running Maps
Similar to the results for the walking and jumping maps, as frame rate improves, worst performances do as well. Additionally, the spread of the data lessens.
Like the analysis of the jumping map, the confidence intervals for 7fps and
15fps overlap. This tells us that there is a significant difference between
performance at 3fps and performance at 7fps and 15fps, but not between 7fps
and 15fps.
Recognition: Resolution vs. Performance
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5
Resolution
Tim
e (
se
co
nd
s)
Note: 1 is 320x240, 3 is 512x384, 4 is 640x480
Recognition: Resolution vs. Performance95% Confidence Intervals for Mean
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 1 2 3 4 5
Resolution
Tim
e (s
eco
nd
s)
Note: 1 is 320x480, 3 is 512x384, 4 is 640x480
Analysis of Performance on Resolution Maps
On the lowest two resolutions, 320x240 and 512x384, respectively, participants
completed the maps with similar distributions of time. At the highest
resolution, however, 640x480, worst performance improved and the spread
of data lessened.
95% confidence intervals for 320x240 and 512x384 overlap with each other, but 640x480 does not overlap with either. This indicates a significant difference in time to completion for the resolution of 640x480.
Conclusions Frame rate impacts performance in walking,
jumping, and running. Performance in walking maps improves significantly with
each jump in frame rate tested. Performance in jumping and running maps improved
significantly from 3fps to 7fps, but not from 7fps to 15fps. Resolution impacts performance in recognition tasks.
Time taken did not significantly improve from 320x240 to 512x384. But, 640x480 is significantly better than both of the lower resolution.
Future Work Things that could be expanded upon in this
particular study Better demographic range to draw conclusions
between gender or age More recent first-person shooter to make it more
relevant to today. Effects of frame-rate and resolution on user
performance in other genres.
Questions?
The End