Oh well, I should find comfort in padding the bell curve in everyone else's favour.
And we appreciate it :cute:
I refuse to participate in a reaction speed test on the grounds that I don't want a conscious dampener applied to something that should remain subconsciously directed.
If you don't think you're fast enough, you'll miss the falling glass/bowl. You'll fail to hit that scoring single. You'll hit the brakes a trifle slower.
O-k-a-y... you believe if you're slow you can
think about being slow
before reacting? :glasses-nerdy:
But seriously, if you are slower than the norm it might be good to know (to drive accordingly for example). And it's not fixed, it can be improved.
freakinacage said:
really dropped my av with the long waits
Yeah, they're a killer!
Fastest, 112. Median of 143. Not too bad by the slow old overweight guy, even if I DO say so myself.
Waay ahead of the pack. Does this translate to good FPS performance out of curiosity?
My fastest click was 78 ms, but because it was less than 100, it didn't count towards the leader board...how unfair is that =/ My average (out of 5 clicks) was: 154.8 ms
Well try again! I don't see any time for you on the leadboard for the last week, if you're routinely this fast you can of course post a similar time again.
The cutoff was already lowered to 100ms from 130 because of consistent performance better than was previously expected. Clicks faster than this aren't counted because they're considered to be more about anticipation than reaction time - luck - so the improvement to the average of a few tries is rightly discounted on that basis. This ultra-fast click shouldn't have been counted because I can't honestly say if I reacted or just jumped the gun and got lucky here:
Einion
