Viewspeed v2

[CaptaPraelium]

1 hour ago, potato psoas said:

Well if you want the same cm/360 for different FOVs

No, same cm/360, at the same FOV, regardless of angle of the turn. If horizontal sensitivity is 2x vertical, then the same cm vertically and horizontally would be a 360 vertically and a 720 horizontally, which would certainly destroy any muscle memory for aiming

[potato psoas]

15 hours ago, CaptaPraelium said:

Thinking this through, I feel like in the past we're usually focussed on the changing FOV as though the rendered world on our screen is changing. This is evident by pretty much every diagram on these forums where the FOV is represented by a circle, and we have different sized circles for different FOV. Which seems to make sense. But let's remember this image:

Yes FOVs can share the same circle like in both the above and below images:

(one is just top down and the other is the front perspective)

7 hours ago, potato psoas said:

But it only works for one particular set of FOV. Each time you change FOV ingame you have to convert the cm/360 because they still both use the same monitor distance.

Edited December 11, 2017 by potato psoas

[CaptaPraelium]

Again, I'm not suggesting same cm/360 at different FOVs. I think I need to draw this so it's more apparent what I'm getting at.
It's 1am here and I know it will take me a long time without some kind of geometry drawing app so I should do it tomorrow or I'll be up all night
I'll try and find us a good tool to draw this stuff so you don't have to make mspaint do magic like that.... Wish me luck.

[potato psoas]

3 minutes ago, CaptaPraelium said:

Again, I'm not suggesting same cm/360 at different FOVs. I think I need to draw this so it's more apparent what I'm getting at.
It's 1am here and I know it will take me a long time without some kind of geometry drawing app so I should do it tomorrow or I'll be up all night
I'll try and find us a good tool to draw this stuff so you don't have to make mspaint do magic like that.... Wish me luck.

Ok yeah well I didn't really understand what you meant by this post:

6 hours ago, CaptaPraelium said:

No, same cm/360, at the same FOV, regardless of angle of the turn. If horizontal sensitivity is 2x vertical, then the same cm vertically and horizontally would be a 360 vertically and a 720 horizontally, which would certainly destroy any muscle memory for aiming

 

[CaptaPraelium]

Not your fault mate, I'm trying to draw this geometry in your mind with my retarded words and I'm rushing it to boot. I'll make pretty pictures tomorrow.
Probably with this: https://www.geogebra.org/geometry

[potato psoas]

19 hours ago, Drimzi said:

The FOV scaling using the diagonal FOV is superb. Feels absolutely incredible really. As for the desktop conversion, it requires a bit more work. The best 2D to 3D conversion I ever did was with an earlier formula, where the desktop length, 1080, resulted in about 1338. I didn't really understand that number or why it worked so well, but I just figured out what that number is. It is the arc length of the FOV 127, which is the diagonal FOV for 90 degrees.

 

Using the simplified Viewspeed v2 formula that I posted in reply to Potato Psaos:

Desktop Length = 1080 = Felt Way Too Fast

90 Arc Length = 1199 = Felt A Bit Fast

127 (Diagonal 90) Arc Length = 1338 = Feels Perfect

Desktop Diagonal = 1527 = Felt Too Slow

180 Arc Length = 1696 = Felt Way Too Slow

 

The 90 Arc Length above is the same result as using the standard 180 Arc Length in the original formula. Using the Viewspeed v2 formula from the front page, the 127 Arc Length (using the diagonal desktop length, 1527, not 1080) results in the same thing as the 127 (diagonal 90) above.

 

This formula for me will result in a CSGO 360 distance of:

90 Arc Length = 15.9016 inches

127 Arc Length = 17.757 inches.

Original Viewspeed v2 = 18.85 inches, which is what I felt to be a little bit slow, causing me to revisit this formula.

 

For Shoot the Beat! at 100 vertical FOV:

90 Arc Length = 13.3091 inches

127 Arc Length = 14.8536 inches

Original Viewspeed v2 = 14.7638 inches

The 100% vertical monitor match formula I used in my osu/shoot the beat video = 12.96 inches

 

 

I haven't tested extensively, I will leave these formulas here anyway if you want to test:

 

90 Arc Length

Horizontal Deg. | 4:3 Base

Horizontal Deg. | Res Base

Vertical Degrees

 

Diagonal 90 Arc Length <- Feels 1:1 for me in CSGO

Horizontal Deg. | 4:3 Base

Horizontal Deg. | Res Base

Vertical Degrees

All Viewspeed methods are too fast. With all your methods so far the lower the FOV the faster it feels compared to the desktop. And you also need to account for the HFOV and VFOV not sharing the same cm/360 by utilising m_yaw (m_yaw affects the horizontal sensitivity so you'd have to use the VFOV sensitivity in the calculator to get correct results).

I would give you a Wolfram Alpha link but I'm having trouble getting it to do what I want, so try my Excel link with all my formulas instead:

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AgoMjDNmWWpe6BCTf_ZpphcPVzyw

Just download the file and you can edit the settings then use the calculator to find your sensitivity and m_yaw values from the data calculated from the spreadsheet.

 

I've been using this method for ages now and it actually feels perfect. If it is slower than you expected then you need to increase your DPI/2D sensitivity. I bet you'd get similar kind of sensitivities as Viewspeed if you used a higher DPI.

Edited December 11, 2017 by potato psoas

[KandiVan]

Also think the 2D->3D conversion is a tad off but the fov scaling from hipfire to ADS is wonderful. 67->61.84 vFOV. (Thats for Diagonal 90 arc length)

Edited December 11, 2017 by KandiVan

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Bryjoe]

7 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

This gives me the same results as Viewspeed v2, since you say to use the vertical 360, with the exception of having different 360s for horizontal and vertical. It is an interesting concept, maybe it is the missing link.

Is it just me that doesn't really understand the point of matching desktop sensitivity to anything? At a reasonable DPI (800+) matching it to a first-person game would be unreasonably fast and vice versa. I don't think I want my CSGO sensitivity when I'm navigating my desktop as it is slow at 41.6CM/360. It is slow because precision is important in shooters but not when I'm navigating my browser. Now, for a game like WoW, or perhaps movement in a 3rd person game, RTS I can see why some parity between desktop and in-game is warranted, in the other cases I'm not sure why.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Bryjoe

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Bryjoe]

3 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

You don't have to if you don't want to, but a lot of people want a single, universal sensitivity. If you want to try diagonal fov scaling, you can just put in a fake DPI until it matches your reference game's 360, then you can generate 360s for other fovs based off your reference game.

Yeah, I can understand that, but wouldn't something like 1200 DPI on desktop be almost "twitchy" in a game like CSGO? I suppose at 400 DPI it would be low enough to match and fit any game though, maybe even as high as 800. I found it very hard to navigate a 1440p screen at 400dpi, however.

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[KandiVan]

Yea i use 200 dpi on 16x9. (400 dpi 4/11). Its quite easy to navigate with the mousepad space. Sensitivity is universal

[Cocyx Skeleton]

I use 250 DPI 6/11 personally. Feels great to me!

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Cocyx Skeleton]

39 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

This feels the best to me in terms of 2D to 3D.

Horizontal Deg. | 4:3 Base

Horizontal Deg. | Res Base

Vertical Degrees

Feels like the midpoint between the Diagonal Arc formula and the Viewspeed v2 calculator conversion of Windows / Desktop. Feels pretty nice, what changed?

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[potato psoas]

7 hours ago, Bryjoe said:

Is it just me that doesn't really understand the point of matching desktop sensitivity to anything? At a reasonable DPI (800+) matching it to a first-person game would be unreasonably fast and vice versa. I don't think I want my CSGO sensitivity when I'm navigating my desktop as it is slow at 41.6CM/360. It is slow because precision is important in shooters but not when I'm navigating my browser. Now, for a game like WoW, or perhaps movement in a 3rd person game, RTS I can see why some parity between desktop and in-game is warranted, in the other cases I'm not sure why.

Well if you want your desktop sensitivity to be different from your gaming sensitivity then you still need to use the correct conversion method to convert between FOVs. You can work in reverse to find your gaming monitor distance but still use a different monitor distance for your desktop.

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[KandiVan]

The last two iterations feel amazing, even in third person. If you havent found the perfect formula I'd say you are incredibly close. Will do more stringent testing in the coming days to verify my feelings. Great job guys!

[Bryjoe]

3 hours ago, KandiVan said:

The last two iterations feel amazing, even in third person. If you havent found the perfect formula I'd say you are incredibly close. Will do more stringent testing in the coming days to verify my feelings. Great job guys!

So, how does it feel different than the existing viewspeed? Faster or slower?

[mcdoncod]

I'd also love to try out these formulas - I plan to play for a couple of hours later today, but am not sure how to be implementing them.

If I plan to play OW @ 1920x1080 would I use the 16:9 formula? 

[potato psoas]

On 12/12/2017 at 12:22 AM, CaptaPraelium said:

Not your fault mate, I'm trying to draw this geometry in your mind with my retarded words and I'm rushing it to boot. I'll make pretty pictures tomorrow.
Probably with this: https://www.geogebra.org/geometry

Is this the pretty picture you were trying to think of: