However, I have one concern: the documentation for the core.wait command says:
In an attempt to achieve this, I've been resetting the clock at the start of the audio stimuli, then hogging the CPU for for 2secs, as follows: event.clearEvents(eventType='keyboard')
PSYCHOPY PYGLET VS PYGAME TIMING UPDATE
In particular, I'd like very accurate reaction times, so the program would ideally hog the CPU from the onset of each stimulus until a fixed point afterwards, and record keypresses of "w" and "e" during this time. Speed-wise, Pyglet is definitely faster than pygame out-of-the-box, and speed is always a concern when developing with pygame (you have to update the smallest parts of screen, and remembering what has changed can be tedious). As the map was huge and full of power ups, it wasnt really that difficult as long as I could maintain full alertness for 10-15 minutes - but if I was tired or. The challenge was to get 50 frags without dying.
I've set up an experiment in the Builder to obtain rapid reaction times to audio stimuli, and I've subsequently been playing with the code to get the experiment to do exactly what I want. The most reliable test I found, and by accident, was fighting bots on a certain Quake 3 map - me vs 10 or so highest difficulty bots.
0 kommentar(er)
