Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0 @ 500-1000hz

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0
Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical
Logitech MX 300
Logitech G1

i don't recommend any razer mice. the ergos were designed for alien hands except for the deathadder.

the g9 probably has a nice shape, but it's a laser mouse...

mx 518 is really comfortable but intellimouse 3.0 explorer seems to respond faster and is lighter

Out of all mice I've tried (basically all of them =P), I can only recommend:

Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical (1.1a)
Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0
Logitech MX500
Logitech MX518
Logitech MX300
Razer Deathadder (Only on light surfaces and high sens)

In that particular order.

better not sum the MX300 and MX500, since they are end of life a long time ago

I find mx518 very comfortable..there are better mice out there but the comfort is unmatched

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0 @ 500-1000hz

i like the way you think. :D

I just ordered a WMO1.1.. :<

Once I get my first paycheck I'm gonna spend in on some hardware to test.

I like the WMO 1.1a :>

I wish the IME3.0 could be that light weight. But I just prefer the 3.0's ergonomics. I like the wmo's shape more than some right handed mouse shapes like the mx5xx.

Question, I ordered a WMO and on the site, it said it is the 1.1 edition, sadly I was not sure if it is a 1.1a version or not, but as I was determined to just get one, I just ordered it.

It's not in yet but how could I check wether the WMO is 1.1 or 1.1a?

"how could I check wether the WMO is 1.1 or 1.1a?"

Ah heh, that simple, some of the posts on this forum board got me confused:D

Thnx mate.

link doesn't work anymore

Fixed, sorry ;)

Razer Krait/Salmosa

the Salmosa is awesome.

The Chinese version is - apparently the US/UK versions will be larger. =/

I've used both, the chinese version is rediculously small. The standard sized version which will be available in NA/EU this fall is IMO, perfect shape and size.

You've tried the US/UK version? About how much bigger is it? Krait-sized?

yea, comparable to the krait and very much so to the mx300.

shapewise?

is the salmosa even out yet? i go to razer and you cannot actually purchase it you can only really look at the pictures. Salmosa is 3g technology but is it optical 3g or laser 3g. beause teh 3g in the deathadder is way better than the 3d in the lachesis.

infrared.

infrared 3g(DA), and the mouse should be out in september.

Did they completely removed the Hz switch? If so whats the default rate, 125 Hz?

no, the dpi and hz switch are both on there. DPI you can switch from 800 to 1800, and the Hz from 125 - 500 - 1000 hz.

Great to hear! Because I already found this pic from a early review. My guess is this is the Chinese version?

correct, hence the chinese characters on the mouse =)

1.Razer Diamondback
2.Razer deathadder / MS Intellimouse Explorer 3.0


3.Logitech G9 (I like the shape but it feels heavy to me...)
3.Fatal1ty 2020 (never tested it but i like little mice)



?.Roccat will finaly launch their mouse soon...will it be good ? :)

My personal choice is: http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/mouseandkey...px?pid=004 @500hz. I've tried the diamondback, ms wheel mouse optical, and explorer 3.0 aswell, and I think the intellimouse optical is best out of them all, cos its got the lightness/size of the WMO and the 2 side buttons from the 3.0. The diamondback is good too but its side buttons are a bit crap. The 3.0 is nicer for ergnomics I suppose, but it was the biggest and heaviest one. Tbh all of those mice have "the best" kind of sensors, so it really comes down to which one you like best.

I've been using one of those (Intelimouse 1.1) for nearly 5 years now I think, I there was a special edition silver one I picked up from somewhere once, absolutely fantastic. never noticed it lose its tracking (unless fluff got over the sensor) and I flick about very quickly.

I'm intrigued as to how the DeathAdder and the Salmosa stack up, I hope Sujoy updates his mega review on http://www.esreality.com/?a=longpost&id=1265679&page=1 soon with all 3 though i'd expect the intelimouse optical 1.1 to be identical to the WMO and IE3 of course.

Are you serious?

Of course its the 518!

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0
or
Logitech mx300

MX300 or some bulk piece-of-shit 400dpi mouse I've never heard of.

Seriously, the MX300 is basically a fancy looking OEM generic mouse that luckily has a good USB microcontroller. There are probably hundreds of diamond-in-the-rough mice just as good as it.

IE3.0 @ 500hz hands down.

I have bought a Deathadder last week and I must say that it's the greatest mouse I've ever had so far. Using it with 1000 hz/ 1800 even increased my aim. And no, it's not conceitedness since quake has /stats.

Chris

lol!

I thought that for a while until focus posted about slow button response, try a reaction time program with the Death Adder and something else, the buttons on the DA will be anything up to 20ms slower.

I heard the drivers add some kind of delay. Can you try without drivers?

Those times were without the drivers, both Setpoint and the Razer drivers feel messed up.

Everybody is saying IE Explorer to get plusses :D

Joking aside, its a very good mouse idd. Along with mx300 and regular 1.1a

I didn't know that was going to happen, I was honestly trying to help with that first post. Kinda funny though.

Same as before AFAIK. IE3.0, MX518 etc..

I have got both Intelli 3.0 and DeathAdder plugged in toghether for a month now, it's really hard for me to decide between the too, i mean IE3.0 is lighter, more "mobile" and overall i think the control over it is better then the DA by a little.

but you just cant ignore the technical advantage the DA has, the mouse is just super smooth and accurate, if it could only be a little lighter it would be perfect.

it's suprised me that none of the top quake players use this mouse, they choose to stick with the old microsoft mice and automatically disqualifying other mices, too bad.

No, I know of at least a couple that have tried it and gone back.

can you name some for me? it's really weird. i found this mouse defenitly the best after the old microsoft's and no pro player uses it :P

I had absolutely no trouble hitting with it with about the same precentages as i have with the Intelli, both with tracking weapons and instant hit. altough it did took me a while untill getting fully used to it. i think people should give it a second chance in Quake community.

well, I'm no pro, but I've had the Death Adder for almost a year. I went back to IE3.0 about 2 months ago. There's an entire timeline of it for me on this site; from considering trying it out, loving it, troubleshooting it, and finally going back to the 3.0
I'm bringing both to Quakecon this year, since both my rigs are coming with me, and my gf likes to play with the DA.

I win a lot more games than I did with my DA too, just due to comfort I'd assume. ...and speaking of accuracies, I liked the DA better for LG but the 3.0 better for railing. sounds silly, I know, but I can't tell you how many times I switched back and forth, trying really, REALLY hard to just stick to the DA, but in the end I just couldn't.
I replaced the shitty stock feet with hyperglides, thinking that was it, but there's so much more. If you look back into my comments far enough you'll see what I'm talking about. The 'prediction' on the DA, the grip, lots of reasons it's inferior to the 3.0. I also preferred to use it at 450dpi, and I game at 1680x1050 in all my games.

Well i think its inferior to the IE3.0 as well but comeon people prefer the MX310 or MX518 over it its ridicolous.

I completely agree with you about that DA is better for tracking and IE for instant hit, its extactly the same for me altough im playing UT2K4 so replace lg with linkgun and rail with .. lg =)

altough the differences aren't that big, overall i think the IE3.0 is much more manueverable and thats his biggest advantage over the DA and every other mouse in the market except the WMO.

I'm just saying that the DA is 2nd in my book :)

microsoft wheel mouse optical 1.1a black :)

deathadder. no need to chang ethe frequency.

mine

Sujoys test showed mx518 afaik?

mx500@1000hz, tho deathadder outperforms it, it was added to the mousescore afaik.. but I just can't find the deathadder page on there.

it's got it's own thread. and it did score the highest concerning tracking capability.

In actual usage the MX500 is less finicky about surface and skips less often than the IR DA does. Never had an in game skipping problem having used an MX510 for years until I upgraded to a DA. The results are right, both mice are hard to make skip, unfortunately the DA's more sporadic and less predictable about it and I'd not feel good using it to play a lower sensitivity.

Just for your information, the mx500 and mx510 use a different optical sensor.

mx300/500 use a 400dpi sensor
mx510 uses a 800dpi sensor

It's still a great sensor though, shame Sujoy didn't have one to run in his test.

mx510 is 400cpi, mx500 is 400cpi, install the setpoint crap for either they become 800cpi monsters of clipping at any USB hz.

I have both the only difference with the sensor is the MX500 tracks to a slightly higher top speed.

So since the 510 looks better and has grippier gloss plastic I put the 510's shell around my MX500 to take the best of each.

I thought the whole point of the 510 when it came out was that it had a proper 800cpi sensor? :(

It had 12-bit data path and shiny unique styling and supposedly some other things but in actual performance it's an MX500 largely.

MX510 press release:
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/172/1741&cl=ca,en

http://www.virtual-hideout.net/reviews/logitech_mx500_mouse/

The only technical improvements are more Mpxl/s, the 12-bit data bus and a higher stated maximum acceleration. Again in actual performance this makes absolutely no difference, just like the new ie3.0 with 9k fps versus the old.

Razer Diamondback!

im thinking about buying SS Ikari Optical. I have used IE3.0 about 5 years now and i would like to know how Ikari fits on IE3.0 users? im a palm-style player, although i dont play much nowadays but good mouse is still one of the key components.. Also i have been thinkin' of DA but the cheap prize on Ikari Optical is tempting.

I read about that the lift-off distance is quite high on Ikari, true? if so.. ill just buy new IE3.0 or DA.

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0

mine is exactly 5 years old now.

What mouse has the best button response times?

lol?

lol..?


Have a nice cockmeat sandwich..


Hope you like extra mayo.

pls dn be big bob

lol..?


Have a nice cockmeat sandwich..


Hope you like extra mayo.

Mayo makes you fat.

Then again, you're american, it makes sense your sperm has been replaced with such a fat sauce by now.

I was just wondering what sort of a question that was.

Since it seemed like something razer is gunning at with their "HyperResponse buttons".

In terms of how fast your clicks are detected my the OS USB rate is the most important thing. In terms of feel:

Razer have soft to press buttons
MS have medium touch buttons
Logitech often has firm buttons

Just refering it mouse 1 & 2 side buttons vary widely.

Depending on how you hold a mouse the best pressure varies. Stiff is bad for high sensitivity players as you're more likely to move the mouse when firing. Super soft can be bad if your fingers are heavy and you pick up and you recenter the mouse often.

logitech mx300.0

mx518 is a top mouse.

The ONLY complaint I have about this mouse is that I can't place my pinky in a nice position, but that might just be because of my fat sausage fingers :DDD

ahah typical euro fatty.

Typical stupid american.

Fat fingers doesnt necesarily mean fat person.

so ? Obesity doesn't imply fatness. LOL

just keep eating those sausages fatty.

Maybe if you ate some veges you'd be able to fit your fat hand on a mouse LOL!

nah it jus means you snort alot of cocaine.

thanks Nicky, seems fixed now \o/

I found it interesting that so many players are using the basic 3button WMO now. To name a few: Toxic, Fox, Cooller, Jibo, Cypher just switched to it from the ie3.0, Zero4 has started using this mouse as well and is no longer on his old ms ball mouse. This seems to be the mouse of choice for many top pros.

write us a novel about it.

toxic, fox, cooller have been using the wmo since 05, maybe even before.

what's walter using?

drugs

Walter Artificial-Aiming 3.0

G5 iirc

Cause if you like medium sized symetric mice it is the perhaps the best shape you can get. Symetric mice kill my wrist so don't use them anymore, haven't had any wrist problems since I switched to DA since it's shape sits quite naturally in my hand. Would probably aim slightly better with a small mouse but for me comfort and health is more important than being a little bit better at a computer game.

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0

wmo 1.1 £7

why spend more on shit

wmo was 12 euros, and wmo 1.1 18 euros here o0

best mouse ever.

Because it'll skip pixels @ 1680x1050 with my preferred sensitivity (22.5cm/360). I need 800dpi for that and call me crazy, but my G3 works perfectly fine for that.

That aside, if I wasn't using that monitor, I'd be using the wmo.

You still get the same precision relative to the gameworld regardless of which resolution you're running...

So basically, based on what you just said, that even if my cursor is...lets say 3 pixels to the left of my intended target that I will still hit said target because I'm not losing any precision?

Mouse movement modifies the players view angle in the game world, a variable that operates independent of screen resolution. This information is merely handed off to the renderer to be drawn onto a planar surface. Hit detection is a mathematical process which takes into acount the location of a hitbox, the player's position in the world, and his view angles. You can't think about aiming in terms of pixels--the game doesn't operate that way. You need to start thinking about it in terms of degrees. If your sensitivity is so coarse that you can't hit a target at 1600x1200, you won't be able to hit him at 640x480 either.

And do yourself a favor. Think long and hard about this before replying.

The view angle may be independent of screen resolution, but mouse resolution is not. I understand that you would have to have a fairly high resolution to skip so many pixels as to overshoot the angle to which you can hit your opponents hitbox. However, the situation still exists to make that a realistic possibility. I'm not saying that you have to have a dpi calculator and make sure that your sensitivity vs. resolution absolutely has to allow you to hit every possible pixel, but it would be the best case scenario that is readily available to just about everyone if they wanted it.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that yes I know you don't really have to have anything higher than a 400dpi mouse just so long as your tracking doesn't seriously suffer from it at higher resolutions paired with a rather high sensitivity. I use a relatively medium to medium high sens (22.5cm/360) and I like to use 800dpi @ 1680x1050. Could I use 400dpi, sure. But I like knowing that I'll never have the issue of missing my target due to a technical glitch that I have control of.

Perhaps later today I'll break out an older mouse and test out gaming at my settings on a 400dpi mouse just to see what its like. Its been a while.

Your logic is strange and probably incorrect. You know that the game only cares about the number of mouse counts the cursor is displaced from the center of the screen, and not by the percentage of the screen that the cursor is displaced?

In 95% of all situations using a setup that covers "almost all" of the pixels on screen you will not have any issues aiming. However that 5% is what I personally am concerned about. Its those situations on ctf maps where you're aiming from across the screen and the difference between a hit and a miss is 1 or 2 pixels (I guess I should be more friendly with zoom). Another situation would be attempting to aim through a narrow opening on say cpmctf2 from a distance (again probably a good time to use zoom).

I understand that when you break it down that is how the game operates with mouse input. I'm just saying that I don't necessarily have to suffice with using a 400dpi mouse with a sensitivity that doesn't allow me per-pixel accuracy at higher resolutions.

well just use 320x240 and the enemy hitboxes will magically enlarge.

You know, some day you will learn that you are wrong, and you may come back and read this and regret that you were wrong. So you should probably stop going on about it everywhere.

Everyone has told you over and over again, it's your sensitivity value in game that affects the coarseness in degrees of your aim and that only degrees turned in game matter not the mouse or screen resolution, and that therefore using an uber high tft screen res like a dolt is not a relevant reason to buy and use a high cpi mouse in and of itself. Besides I'm sure you'll miss a lot more shots from using a lagged screen than being "one or two pixels off to the side".

Learn to use zoom for these bizarre situations if it kills you that much.

Look dude, I can admit when I'm wrong, but you don't have to talk down to me like a 3 year old just because I don't take a couple people's word as gospel on mouse motion mechanics. Yes, I could probably stand to learn how to use zoom more effectively. If you don't like LCDs then that's fine, but I seriously doubt that I'm going to be missing any shots due to the fact that its an LCD. They just simply aren't as horrible as most people make them out to be. Sure it took me quite a while to adjust to one, but its still not horrendously terrible.

I seriously doubt that I'm going to be missing any shots due to the fact that its an LCD.

Tell that to noctis.

Does he regularly use an LCD?

He uses a CRT at home but feels he plays especially badly when forced to use an LCD.

Oh but believe me LCD's are bad enough to miss shots because of. Whats a 5,10, 20 ms delay going to do to you on everything? Wont always make you miss but it'll be enough to miss some shots of course versus lagless a CRT. Quite simply they increase your reaction time, the quicker you react the more effectively you can use instant hit weapons. What advantage does an auto aim or a trigger bot have over humans, nothing but a vastly faster reaction time.

So yes, all LCD's make people miss more. Even if they are good with respect to input lag. 75hz is not as smooth, drawing the information for the player at a slower rate than a 120hz CRT, that means at any given point even if the 75hz lcd had no response time or input lag (impossible) they're still viewing something slightly older than the CRT player assuming he's changed his refresh rate.

Well I use a 2ms Samsung LCD and yes, when I first started using it I did notice a huge difference. And if I went back to 120hz CRT I'd still notice a huge difference. Fact is though with as slow as my LCD is to my CRT after I got used to it I'm not really missing any shots that I normally would've been able to hit. Some of the more difficult shots are more difficult than they normally would be yes, but its not THAT much more difficult. I'm sure with an older or even crappier LCD I would be experiencing more issues and even more annoyance, but the fact is now that I've gotten used to it I game just as well as I used to and if I happen to start playing on a CRT again, so much the better for me.

Honestly if I were noctis, I would invest in a good LCD and learn to deal with it. There's always going to be organizers that are going to try and make players use LCDs so if he's already used to them, then he's not as quite as much disadvantage as everyone else who may not be used to them. If he plays in a tourney with CRTs, then he should game just as good if not better.

Thanks for sharing your experiences.

This is my experience trying to play wSw on an LCD and only time gaming on an LCD:
My friend bought a 2ms 19" widescreen panel. I was curious and tried wsw. The computer was getting over 500fps but it looked and felt like 60 (because it was) and the slow frames simply just faded/blurred into each other, sometimes even with a little bit of trailing making it very difficult to aim or know just where the gitter warsow bots were.

Then I read the manual and found out I didn't have it in "game mode" did this, the screen was already brighter than I'd like for at night time, screen's brightness got even higher, good bye blacks. Colors and high tones got way over saturated, like NV digital vibrance on steroids. The fading and trails went away though so I could see and aim better, probably not much worse than the best you could expect at 60hz/60fps.

The thing that sucked about game mode besides the non existent color accuracy, contrast and excessive sharpness and brightness, was instead of smearing things that were in motion they became sharp, the edges motion were at contrast so high there was even artifacting. Really distracting and not suitable for any serious gaming. People who've only used LCD's don't even know what normal gaming is supposed to look like.

To it's credit, when I calibrated the screen it's blacks got a bit better and it looked really nice outside of game mode. Not better than my 21" CRT but good image quality. Text as always is great on LCD's.

This was the panel. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824116095
BTW, it's amazing how CS players can believe these things are actually great for gaming, then again new egg reviews on mice are even more useless.

I had a 19" LCD briefly (Samsung 906BW) and I couldn't even use it because it would hurt my eyes pretty bad after an hour or so no matter what settings I tried =/

Yeah, I think they just use those extreme brightness settings to make the screens look nice and stand out against the others in a store. At the typical price point LCD's sell at they aren't gunning for graphics designers or anyone who might know a shit about monitors. Thus they can push some pretty unhealthy stuff on people's eyes like the brightness levels of today's panels.

Bright whites, can increase the contrast ratio and for some dumb as fuck reason the candelas of a screen is considered a marketable statistic. Pretty much every spec on LCD panels is next to useless.

At least on a CRT you could look at the max horizontal and vertical scan rate and know what refresh rates it could go.

Yea, that's a pretty shit panel actually. I've got a 22" widescreen Samsung model and it actually does pretty well for an LCD. Dare I say the best performing LCD as far as gaming, better than most Dell screens. I didn't want to get an LCD at first, but I eventually got one because it saved a ton of space on my desk, allowed me to push back my desk by about 8 or so inches, and its widescreen so its nice to watch movies on occaisionally and great for the productivity software that I use.

To your defense in regard to mouse motion I hooked up an MX310 and screwed around for about 10mins. I noticed that the tracking wasn't as horrible as I would've thought it was. I could make smaller trained motions for distance shots, but I think the biggest issues that I noticed were that I couldn't track as smoothly for extended periods of time and certain flick shots I was missing. Part of it I'm sure needs some getting used to, but over all not quite as bad as I would've thought.

Yeah I use ie3.0, it's 400 I can move the mouse in smaller movements than what it registers one but it doesn't matter in-game. At my sens I usually aim without needing to make the little movements. For me it's hard to be that precise while also being quick, especially with my shaky hands.

Yea, I kinda had a feeling that most of the people that I would be debating with would be using a sensitivity that low. Although mine's not horribly high (22.5cm/360) its not exactly the lowest either. I've found that I can use 400dpi at that resolution with my sensitivity, but its not optimal. Being able to do fine corrections and slight changes in tracking that require, for me, finer hand movements just makes it easier when I have a mouse that goes exactly where I want it to all the time. Like I said. If it weren't for my move to a larger LCD, then I'd still either be using a wmo 1.1a or an MX310. Especially now since you can set your polling rate higher with those mice.

yeah, 400cpi is not optimal for 20cm/360. I'm 36 in promode and come from games that require even lower settings.

"The view angle may be independent of screen resolution, but mouse resolution is not."

It is. If you persist in arguing I'll be happy to cut and paste the code.

If mouse resolution was independent of screen resolution, then why would Sujoy go on about how much dpi is needed for what resolution you use in the MouseScore 2007 article? I guess you can consider it arguing, but all I'm attempting to do is have a civilized discussion. I don't understand why three people have jumped on me now because I'm attempting to have a debate and understand how something works. I'm not even trolling for christ's sake.

void CL_MouseEvent( int dx, int dy, int time )
{
if ( cls.keyCatchers & KEYCATCH_UI ) {
VM_Call( uivm, UI_MOUSE_EVENT, dx, dy );
} else if (cls.keyCatchers & KEYCATCH_CGAME) {
VM_Call (cgvm, CG_MOUSE_EVENT, dx, dy);
} else {
cl.mouseDx[cl.mouseIndex] += dx;
cl.mouseDy[cl.mouseIndex] += dy;
}
}

static void CL_MouseMove( usercmd_t *cmd )
{
float mx, my;
float accelSensitivity;
float rate;

// allow mouse smoothing
if ( m_filter->integer ) {
mx = ( cl.mouseDx[0] + cl.mouseDx[1] ) * 0.5;
my = ( cl.mouseDy[0] + cl.mouseDy[1] ) * 0.5;
} else {
mx = cl.mouseDx[cl.mouseIndex];
my = cl.mouseDy[cl.mouseIndex];
}
cl.mouseIndex ^= 1;
cl.mouseDx[cl.mouseIndex] = 0;
cl.mouseDy[cl.mouseIndex] = 0;

rate = sqrt( mx * mx + my * my ) / (float)frame_msec;
accelSensitivity = m_sensitivity->value + rate * m_accel->value;

// scale by FOV
accelSensitivity *= cl.cgameSensitivity;

if ( rate && cl_showMouseRate->integer ) {
Com_Printf( "%f : %f\n", rate, accelSensitivity );
}

mx *= accelSensitivity;
my *= accelSensitivity;

if (!mx && !my) {
return;
}

// add mouse X/Y movement to cmd
if ( in_strafe.active ) {
cmd->rightmove = ClampChar( cmd->rightmove + m_side->value * mx );
} else {
cl.viewangles[YAW] -= m_yaw->value * mx;
// Com_Printf ("cl.viewangles[YAW]: %f m_yaw->value * mx: %f\n", cl.viewangles[YAW], (m_yaw->value * mx));
}

if ( (in_mlooking || cl_freelook->integer) && !in_strafe.active ) {
cl.viewangles[PITCH] += m_pitch->value * my;
} else {
cmd->forwardmove = ClampChar( cmd->forwardmove - m_forward->value * my );
}
}

I don't know what Sujoy said, cut and paste it if you want but screen resolution has nothing to do with mouse events. The mouse resolution depends on m_pitch, m_yaw, sensitivity and DPI.

Heh, interesting.

Here's the direct quote from page 2 on the Mousescore 2007 article that I'm referring to:

"New gaming mice tend to be released with high DPI counts, but how much DPI is really needed to play games? Higher DPI obviously seems better. Like the steering wheel in a car you want continuous and smooth control over turning. The difference is that game graphics is made up of pixels, rather than the real world which has much more detail. At some point, having more DPI becomes unnecessary because the actual bottleneck is the screen. But how much DPI is enough?

I will use the example of playing an FPS game. If you are playing on a screen resolution of 1024 by 768 pixels, then we can roughly work out the number of pixels in a full horizontal rotation of 360 degrees. We multiply the number of pixels across the screen by 4 (since each screen is about 90 degrees viewing angle).

Pixels in 360 degrees = 1024 * 4 = 4096

Now we need to work out how far we want to move the mouse for a full rotation of 360 degrees. This distance changes depending on the gamer, because changing the game sensitivity changes how far you need to move the mouse for the same effect. By dividing the total number of pixels by the total distance (in inches), we get a rough idea of how much DPI is useful.

High Sens: 360 degrees in 0.1 m (4"), roughly 1000 DPI needed

Medium Sens: 360 degrees in 0.25 m (10"), roughly 400 DPI needed

Low Sens: 360 degrees in 0.50 m (20"), roughly 200 DPI needed


While 3D games don't need you to turn a whole pixel before the screen changes, this is a sensible way to work out when more DPI resolution stops being useful. What we find is that standard 400 DPI mice are ok if you have a low sensitivity, but there are times when more DPI can improve the game. If you have a High Sens and a huge 2560 x 1600 panel to play on, our formula says that our ideal mouse resolution is a whopping 2500 DPI! "

He's just making up an arbitrary measure.

Just a rough formula to approximate at a given cm/360 and resolution what mouse cpi would be needed to turn in small enough segments to not notice jumps.

Sujoy failed to mention that it's simply a visual thing.

As you saw in the code ix pasted, the only things that affect the mouse and aiming are your in-game sens, pitch, yaw and accel settings.

Screen resolution and mouse resolution do not effect this. If can't aim because of too coarse an in-game sensitivity, your problem still will be the same at 640x480 vs. 2048x1536 or at 4000cpi vs 400cpi.

So even though you're seeing 10 times the information at 20x15 (and thus way more likely to see the "notchiness" of your mouse settings), your aiming and whether you hit or miss is the same as at 640x480.

Ok, I think I get what you guys are saying now. I'm sorry if this frustrated the three of you, but I guess I'm one of those people that needs to see the nitty gritty before something makes sense in my brain. Again I didn't really mean to be obtuse, thickheaded, or come off as abrasive I just needed to understand.

can anyone explain the diference between wmo (default is 1.0 i presume) wmo 1.1 and wmo 1.1a

a is oem

1.0 was originally released when the 3.0 was originally released years ago. It skipped like mad. 1.1 and 1.1a have the same sensors, the "a" version is just the OEM version.

Razer Lachesis. 4000dpi is the bestest, l33test and da most pro-est.

I LOL'D

lmao@terrorhead (one of the worst mice around)

Anyhow, sticking with my 3.0 probably until it breaks. WMO 1.1 or IE 3.0 are both solid picks.

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 3.0 @ 500-1000hz for sure

When i look at the pictures of WMO1.1a in the mousescore2007 thread, the product name at the bottom of the mouse says:

"Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical 1.1a"

with 1.1a in the name.

I recently purchased a "normal" WMO1.1 but at the bottom i dont find 1.1 in the name.
Do i have to expect that this is not a 1.1 then?
Is it maybe a 1.0 ? Or just a normal WMO ?

Could anyone please confirm that?

Your help will be appreciated.

wmo thread

If you can move it marginally fast without it skipping, you've got the right one!

I dont believe they've even made the bad ones for years now.

MX518

MS 3.0 has shit feet and i cba for mouse skates

MX518 has shit feet too except for some of the new ones that have 1800DPI

least they're teflon and not vinyl

nvm, read your post backwards.

I have one, they're ptfe/teflon.

mx518 is all you need brah

http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1334

Salmosa is looking hot otherwise the review is bullshit.

I need to get a new mouse, since the lasermouse I have now cuts out every now and then. I have thinking of getting a Fatal1ty gaming mouse. Or a mouse meant specifically for gaming. Are Fatal1ty mice any good?

they're top tier. go and buy one.

wörd

1) G9
.
.
.
2)G5
3)MX518

^ logitech plant