Is there any benefit to match desktop into games

[espe89]

Hello,

I keep matching my desktop sensitivity with my main game (CSGO). Do you think there is any benefit doing this or it's 100% useless/placebo ?

I do this because I think it is kinda training my muscle memory when not gaming ... I'm probably doing this for nothing but I'm curious to see if anyone is doing this too or maybe a better way.

 

[Insight_BF]

No benefits at all imo, I never believed in aim trainers either (2d/3d). The only way to really train is to play the game in my opinion.

Playing the game for years made me good, I never felt the need to train in any other way.

Edited August 13, 2018 by Insight_BF

[potato psoas]

The difference between 2D and 3D is that one has a cursor and the other has a crosshair. If we are talking about converting the sensitivities, the only time they will be matched is at the center of the monitor and only if you use 0%MM. This is because the distance from the monitor is not the same for all points on the monitor. Therefore we can conclude that you will actually perceive slower sensitivities as your cursor approaches the edge of the monitor. This is unlike the 3D world where the camera position is dependent on mouse movement.

Personally, I do match desktop and game by converting from a chosen DPI. It doesn't exactly translate, as I mentioned above, but you can maintain enough muscle memory for it to feel very similar. It's not like a change in FOV doesn't force you to use different muscle memory either. But keep in mind, this works best with 0%MM. Higher monitor matches will complicate the translation even more.

[Drimzi]

2D conversions scale from 0 FOV. All methods will have roughly the same results for very low FOV, but the scaling of a method becomes more apparent the further away from 0 you get.

The eccentricity of the image, and your mouse movements, scales with FOV and pitch, so pure distances and trajectories will not directly translate. If you are distance matching from desktop (or between different FOVs in general), it will only work for pure vertical (or horizontal with neutral pitch) movement. Diagonals will not match. In 2D, you could move perfectly diagonal to one corner, but in 3D, you will have to curve your trajectory to reach a corner. I would recommend converting 0% or 56.25% (distance match vertically, since vertical movement is always straight) for any conversion in general.

 

Edited August 14, 2018 by Drimzi

[espe89]

vertical or horizontal match at  only 1 point, exact  ? 

56.25% matching point is at the extrem bottom or up edge of your screen 

100% for the lateral edges of your screen, right ?

 

0% mm is to minimize the distorsion, no matching on the edge except on the center of your crosshair ? 

[MuntyYy]

23 minutes ago, espe89 said:

vertical or horizontal match at  only 1 point, exact  ? 

56.25% matching point is at the extrem bottom or up edge of your screen 

100% for the lateral edges of your screen, right ?

 

0% mm is to minimize the distorsion, no matching on the edge except on the center of your crosshair ? 

Nothing can minimize the distortion. 00% is matched at the crosshair and represent the gear ratio for the focal length, whilst 100% matches at the edge ( 16:9 A.R ) and represent the gear ratio for the horizontal angle. 56.25% mm is again the gear ratio for your vertical angle.

[Drimzi]

You can match any point, it is just that you can only match 1 exact point since the curvature changes with the fov. The curvature of your mouse movement depends on fov and pitch, so horizontal movement is not always going to reach a point on the screen even if you matched to it. Change to an extreme pitch, like looking straight up, horizontal movement will be so curved that you will just spin like a ballerina instead of turning to the point designated on the screen. The vertical movement always follows the geodesic, doesnt matter how curved the image is. 56.25% would be the max point thats even on the monitor/screen, the max point that you can reach with identical mouse movement in 2D and 3D, at all times. What you should be taking away from this is that matching a distance is kind of pointless, just base your "distance match" based on the resulting feel rather than picking a distance based on theory.

[MuntyYy]

Every match has its own strengths and weaknesses. Like Drimzi said, pick one that feels natural to you and practice till you master it.

[espe89]

Oh okay I understood something here with the 56.25 vs 100. I never thought if I'm ingame looking up and trying to go to the edge with my cursor I will spin, but it's logical now.

So the 0% is probably the most "logical" right now

[MuntyYy]

I don't think you get it. Distortion will still be present regardless of your monitor match percentage. However choosing 00% may be the most logical cuz you ain't matching to a "random" point on your screen. If you go up or down in the game  world you will still spin instead of going left or right due to how the matrix is designed.

[espe89]

Yes I understood I the world will still spin, but I was using the 100% MM, I was matching my cursor at the lateral edge, it was ok, but it works only if I'm looking straight forward, if I'm looking up or down and trying to reach this matching point it will not work because of the way it is designed. The 0% minimize this because its centered at crosshair, this is what I understand

[MuntyYy]

Correct. 

[MuntyYy]

25 minutes ago, espe89 said:

but it works only if I'm looking straight forward, if I'm looking up or down and trying to reach this matching point it will not work because of the way it is designed

Based on this logic, 00% won't work either if you use the same constant velocity.

Edited August 14, 2018 by MuntyYy

[MuntyYy]

People prefer 00% over 100% for different reasons.

[Drimzi]

0% is best because it scales with the projection. You arent trying to match a distance or point on the screen. The fovs should feel different, as they are different. 0 fov is completely flat and uniform, and curves more and more as you approach 180.

The issue with 0% is the zoom. The distance, size and speed of the thing changes with zoom, and you have to scale your input appropriately. If there was no zoom, so it was like a dolly counter zoom (vertigo effect) where the distance to the target also scales with the focal length to counteract the zoom, then I think most people will find 0% to be the best. I wish I could test this properly in real-time, but you can see that it works from a video that DPI wizard posted where the zoom was countered with distance, and 0% tracked the targets perfectly using scripted movement with different fov.

When people test the methods, it will likely be a direct zoom scenario like ADS/scope, where a distance match will feel more the same since your input distance is similar. Or they will test a different game, where they will more likely compare movement, like 180s, and feel like 0% is overly sluggish compared to other methods.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Drimzi

[MuntyYy]

43 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

If there was no zoom, so it was like a dolly counter zoom (vertigo effect) where the distance to the target also scales with the focal length to counteract the zoom, then I think most people will find 0% to be the best.

It would be the best for most people.. but it isn't. You don't decide if the enemy is exactly 2x further from you when you scope in with a 2x magnification. On top of that, try playing at 130+ FOV converted by 00% mm. Does it feel natural ? Or you need to re-learn how to track, flick and move ?

[espe89]

well after few days, I have concluded its not worth it to use desktop to games since I'm playing with a fucking low sens (80cm/360), its a pain in the ass to use this on windows with dual screens @ 2560x1440p. 

I will keep using the converter to convert csgo to any other games but not into windows. Not doable for me.

[potato psoas]

1 hour ago, espe89 said:

well after few days, I have concluded its not worth it to use desktop to games since I'm playing with a fucking low sens (80cm/360), its a pain in the ass to use this on windows with dual screens @ 2560x1440p. 

I will keep using the converter to convert csgo to any other games but not into windows. Not doable for me.

lol you complain about a low desktop sens yet you use 80cm/360 XD

[espe89]

Ofc in games I love to use this sens.

[Discorz]

These are the results I came up with after testing this subject (CSGO):

[espe89]

what did u tested dude ? mdh 0% and 100% ?

[randomguy7]

I prefer desktop match because mathmatically at 0% vertical monitor distance match the game will move exactly 1 pixel per degree, which I prefer, because it allows me to use the lowest needed dpi in order to minimize issues created by higher dpi settings. 

[randomguy7]

 this also allows you to have a better muscle memory because you will be using the same sens as your desktop, iirc

Edited January 21, 2020 by randomguy7

[Discorz]

On 1/20/2020 at 9:14 PM, espe89 said:

what did u tested dude ? mdh 0% and 100% ?

I did this test to see if I could practice my aim in 2D online game like AimBooster so I could just flick shot in 3D space. For that I had to match my in game and desktop sensitivity
....I tried to match horizontal distance mouse travels on fullscreen picture and in game, from point A to B (because of flick shot muscle memory).

As picture above shows there is no correct sens value that perfectly matches desktop and in game sensitivity. Results start to distort because moving around in 2D and 3D space are not the same.
BUT definite most accurate value would be exactly somewhere in between 2.5 - 3.5. Higher or lower than those start to get inaccurate.
3.5 would be for higher and 2.5 for lowersensitivity players.
3.5 is perfectly matching desktop sens only in radius of 250px from center of screen (500px diameter), but this sens feels faster than desktop.
With 2.5 you would be most accurate on edges of the screen and it kinda feels too slow.
Value that would make sense to use is 3.1 (average) and that one is most accurate in the 1st and 3rd quarter of the screen wich is in between center and edge of screen (yes 3.1, not 3.0 because of fov image stretching)

This type of sensitivity matching is connected and depends on FOV (field of view). Any other FOV does not apply to my results anymore, I think.

For test I used: win10 sens 6/11 (default), no accel | CSGO no accel, raw input on | fov_cs_debug 90 (default) | native 1080p/16:9 res | 24.5" monitor | Logitech G102 @200/300/400/800 dpi

[espe89]

It makes sense dude, to be honest I had ridiculous results with 100% back in the time, then I kept switching over and over, I dont even know If I could have the same results now in aim training

Edited January 22, 2020 by espe89