NoSafety

It would be interesting to know how much difference it makes with the tracking calibration software on Logitech mice but good video OP

I think you misunderstood their question. They're asking if they want to increase their sensitivity equally across all games, can they just increase their DPI.
In which case, @lewloopz, you can just change the DPI as long as you leave all in-game sensitivities the same. Otherwise you'd need to use the calculator to redo all the games

The save function is completely overhauled, and now works like this:
Settings are saved on the server, and will be available to you when you log in, regardless of browser, device and location. The Add button adds a new entry to the input list, and saves all entered data to this entry. The entry name can be 30 characters long, and you can add up to 100 entries. Entries will be sorted alphabetically. The "Default" checkbox is to select this entry as the one that loads when you log in. The Edit button allows you to edit the entry name, and change the "Default" selection. The Delete button deletes the entry, and reverts all fields to either your default selection, the first alphabetical selection, or clears all fields if you have no entries left. The Save button saves all entered data into the selected entry. The Load button loads the selected entry. Entries will auto-load when you select them. Report any feedback here!

Lawbreakers use FOV based on your resolution, CSGO use FOV based on 4:3 resolution.
It's important the the Actual FOV (in the output) of the games are identical if you want to match them, so Lawbreakers need to be set to 106.26 to match CSGO.

By popular request I've made a theme with light colors, scroll to the bottom to change to it.
It still needs a few tweaks, but notify me if you see anything that looks wrong!

Added with hipfire and ADS sensitivity!

The new Viewspeed is live!
Thanks a lot to everyone contributing to this!
Unfortunately I can't plug the formulas directly into the code, I need to work them a bit so it takes some time. And I also need to find the formulas for reverse conversion. But it helps a lot with the way you organized the first post @Drimzi!

It's all done now, please test it and report any weird stuff or if it works as expected.

Vertical matching is the way to go, I agree. when your going from 4:3 to 16:9 for example the only difference is peripheral, not turning mechanics, vertical FOV eliminates some of the problems that this presented.
When I previously posted the formula of Chord Ratio / Circle Ratio (which equals extremely close to 100% monitor match) it seemed that something was not correct, I expected different results, put it on the back seat and looked for another solution.
Using Vertical FOV in the formula gives the results I was looking for, in a similar way that original view speed does. I'm testing this method currently with Drimzi and so far I really like it.
 
 

Overwatch and CSGO have such close for 103 to 106 I assume the conversion would be almost 1:1 no matter what method you used?
 
I think this viewspeed is ready for the calculator tho. 
 
 

Yes, for the closed beta. It takes anywhere between a few hours and several days depending on the complexity of the game.

Are we gonna get destiny 2 ?

Preloaded and ready to go!

Okay, I think you may be onto something... my average accuracy and reaction time on aim hero is 96% and 0.37 and that's on a sensitivity i'm used to playing on, I have been trying different sensitivities all week looking for the same thing as this thread and my average reaction on those was anything between 39-46 and accuracy about 90% obviously being slower because I was trying to get used to the sensitivity. However even though I had a few misclicks  after trying playing with it on aim hero and only having like what an hours practice with it... I scored 93% and 0.38. I also tried different online aim practice games and felt exactly the same as playing aim hero. all the games felt the same , I just honestly don't think I can tell whether it's matched to my desktop or not. I don't feel slowed down on my desktop when I come out of game or sped up so I guess that means it's the same... but I really don't know lol

Oh boy, let the "which multiplier value should I use" argument begin. What should I use Drimzi LUL

This first video is a bit long to show all the tests in full.
 

Added by popular request!
I'll be all over this game as soon as I can

I'm curious. may sound like a stupid question but is vertical cursor speed ever put into the equation? both 360 distance and monitor distance match are calculated for horizontals right? and actually come to think of it, isn't view speed too? is it even possible to do?

Edit:another thought... If I convert from 103 hfov to a 106.26 hfov shouldn't the 360 degree distance be longer on the wider fov? I understand why it's not using the current formula but I don't know... in my head that kind of makes sense... having a hard time getting the whole concept of it , I just want my aim to be exactly the same game to game like everyone else lol

Edit: this is the picture i've got in my head , is this what viewspeed does? (Green line would be your cross hair)

When I first joined this website, before we had a choice to change the percentage monitor match... I assumed it was perfect, therefore it felt perfect. In fact as soon as DPI wiz made the suggestion that the value match was up to user discretion (0 - 100%) it opened a can of worms for me.
Point being, placebo and the old sugar pills can do miraculous things. View speed was a big hit and the majority of players seem satisfied with it, aided by the fact that it sits within a general range that has been chosen by large game developers such as CSGO and Battlefield 1, add to its credibility. I personally use it and find it matches FOV quite nicely, various snap testing and dot games all tell me that it works, good enough.
Its every time you miss that flick shot and look for something to blame, new sensitivity, better FOV... It must be something OTHER then my aim skill.... An endless hunt that I have fallen victim to personally, searching for the perfect match. Maybe there is no perfect match, perhaps its the fact that perfect is by ones own definition, that is, whatever you use, will, over time become your norm, natural and BEST.
I've been testing out various formulas and correlations with Drimzi and often what he thinks matches up, doesn't for me. But I've been playing with viewspeed for so long now, anything other then that feels unnatural.
I have a several correlative formulas that land within the ballpark for our current sensitivity matching, but, none truly make logical sense to me as of yet. Just because a formula gives an acceptable answer does not mean its logical or correct.
I think we have to realise that 180' FOV and 20' FOV will never feel the same. CSGO pros don't get their god like flick shots because of 75% MM, they get them because they practice that FOV with that sensitivity on the daily.
 
I would like to see a correlative explanation that makes logical sense in the matching of FOV sensitivity for any formula. The reality is any match that falls within a certain percentage will feel ok, it's truly hard to notice a difference when the FOV varies so greatly. Larger the FOV the greater the difference in perceived speed due to distortion.
 
PS: Sometimes actual or theoretical does not line up with how we interpret or perceive something. I say this because when I played COD (at or close to 0% monitor match) I found it a terrible system, in fact I used Iron sight or ELO sight ALWAYS, unifying the different weapons for me. Perhaps 0% does match the movement under the crosshair, however, given the fact that we have a mix of radial AND zoom ratios that do not correlate (3d projection, 2d plane). A one sided approach is nor logical or perceptually accurate IMO.
 
 
 

In your opinion.

In the equation in the first post, replace d with the result of (resolution/mouse dpi), and replace theta with your game's actual fov. The formula'll give you the cm/360 or inch/360 you should be using at that fov, if this equation is to be trusted in doing what it's supposed to do. Go into the calculator and put in that result to get the sensitivity you should be using, in that game.
I just tested it out, and I think it feels better, but I don't know if that's just placebo. To be honest, we need a way to measure and quantify that perception of speed, to really put this to rest. If that even makes any sense.