potato psoas

Here is a forum post which DPI Wizard explains his scripts:

I know DPI Wizard has his scripts that allow him to find it out precisely. But if you want to find the FOV with your mouse what you do is move your mouse so that the point at one edge of the monitor ends up at the point on the other edge. Then you keep doing this until you do a 360. Then you count how many times you moved (the last time is usually a fraction so you have to guesstimate it). And then with the number you get, you divide 360 by it and that is your FOV. Things can be made easier if you have a pro mouse which you can change the y value sensitivity for. You just decrease it and you can perform a very straight line and get a very accurate FOV result.

Oh ok I know what you mean now. Usually when that happens I just have same profiles on my mouse which increase my DPI when I ADS. And then I have some buttons which cycle through different profiles.

What do you mean by ratio matching system?

okie dokie thanks

well there's an ADS option in the calculator so I wasn't sure if it was possible to set an ads sensitivity or not But I guess it wouldn't hurt, just have a DPI adjustment on my mouse. Not sure which gun though. Maybe the Assault Rifle.

It just dawned on me but my method is exactly the same as the Gear Ratio method. (I think I was using the vertical monitor distance as if it were the horizontal monitor distance) LOL So mathematically I came to the same conclusion but a more complicated process than gear ratios. Now if this is so, then why don't people like using Gear Ratios? Personally I think, because the arc is greater than the chord length, the 2D sensitivity feels faster than the 3D sensitivity. The higher the FOV the slower it feels.

bump

All the methods, 0% and 100% MM, Viewspeeds v1 and v2 and this method all share similar consistency as you can see in this graph: Because the curves are so similar the 3D to 3D conversions actually feel quite accurate (within a certain FOV range). But the problem is that they artificially increase your 3D sensitivity. A lot of people are used to playing 0%, so compared to this it will feel quite slow. If you usually play on a 30cm/360 @ 90FOV in 0% games or 35cm/360 with Viewspeed it will turn into a 42cm/360 with this method. If that feels too slow then you should increase your DPI so that you get similar results as Viewspeed or 100% MM. But of course that's if you even want to match your desktop to your in-game. Best bet is to test it for yourself - I made sure to make the layout really nice.

So because I no longer think VFOV and HFOV have different cm/360, here is another Excel document that you should download: https://1drv.ms/x/s!AgoMjDNmWWpe6BNOggV8D4ynasKz Quoting my instructions: Edit: I have also made a Google Sheets Doc as I was asked to make one: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WVC-ON76awAaqHqJoCP44JNQi6pTJ2jdFvdVGFGC5lM/edit?usp=sharing

Here is an edited version of my previous diagram: So yeah, it was hard to wrap my head around but it's not the cm/360 that determines the sensitivity but the angle you turn around... and that has to do with CPI doesn't it? So this diagram has nothing to do with calculating sensitivity, just explaining how different axes can share a 1:1 projection with some cropping and adding of FOV... like, if you imagined 180 FOV the circle would be infinitely big and that's just ridiculous - can't have a cm/360 that is that big! So then I think the solution to the FOV to FOV conversion is that your cm/360 will be based on both the HFOV and VFOV.

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

Ah I see it, thanks heaps

But now the in-game option is disabled... can we have both?

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.

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.

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

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) 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.

Well if you want the same cm/360 for different FOVs then you need something like this: And if either FOV axis shares the same circumference then they must share the same radius. So you can pick either to do the calculation. cm/360 = 2*pi()*radius radius = (0.5*monitor distance)/(0.5*FOV) However when I looked at CS:GO it was more like this: If the converted Vertical FOV was lower then they could share the same cm/360 but it is not. As an example, at 90 config FOV the horizontal FOV is 100.39 and the vertical FOV is 73.74 but really if you want to use the same cm/360 the vertical FOV should be 57.39. The correct way to convert is using this formula: VFOV = 2*DEGREES(ASIN((0.5*vertical monitor distance)/horizontal radius))

I'm not so sure I can wrap my head around the z-axis... But since CS:GO was converted in Green we need to have a different vertical sensitivity because it isn't supposed to share the same cm/360 value as the horizontal part. I don't think it really matters which method was used though as long as there is a way to adjust the vertical sensitivity the way we like in the settings. I'm thinking I may have to use the m_yaw value in CS:GO now (changing DPI can only be so accurate).

Yeah I've spent hours making diagrams these past two weeks. (Lucky I don't need to go to work)

Yeah I can see this in CS:GO by using the command mat_setvideomode 1000 1000 1 (Use 1000 x 1000 as the bottom gets cut off by your taskbar). Placed my ruler along the vanishing line and yeah it was 45 degrees. Just throwing them together in Paint, but I make sure the dimensions are correct and all the points connect fairly accurately - helps heaps cause usually I guess with hand drawings. Have to write down formulas and use my calculator to do it.

So I was thinking about it and I don't think it makes any sense trying to change a game's sensitivity when the vertical FOV scales with the horizontal FOV anyway. What you need to do is have a separate sensitivity for the vertical and the horizontal. That or you play a game in 1:1 aspect ratio. I've only tested it in CS:GO so far, but I don't think in any game developers actually convert the Vertical aspect properly. They do in fact just add and crop FOV depending on your aspect ratio. When I tested CS:GO, the vertical and horizontal both had the same cm/360 but they have different FOVs. So they would feel different. Have a look at this: (This is just an update on my previous diagram) Orange is how it should be if you only have one sensitivity setting. If you are going to go the Green way then you need a different sensitivity for vertical and horizontal. I tried using 1600 DPI for both x and y on the desktop but used 2000 DPI for y in CS:GO and it felt exactly the same. Then you go back and you realise how flat the vertical sensitivity feels.

So I looked at Minecraft and PUBG and came up with this: The monitor is the camera and it is behind a point of rotation (usually the player model) with radius as the distance between camera and point. The camera rotates around the point as the tangent to the circle. Two things can happen: the player model turns around with the camera or the camera just moves around the player model. Sometimes the radius between the point and the camera decreases when you bump into a wall like in Minecraft. Depending on the game the radius might affect the FOV or cm/360. DPI Wizard would have to take that into account for each game. I'm not sure how you convert as a sensitivity, but this is what is going on between the camera and player model.

Here is another picture: (Example: 16:10, 10.668cm/monitor width, 90 FOV in 4:3 Base) I realise that it's exactly like the one DNAMTE made. Though I never understood what it meant... I'm so out of the loop. I guess we at least came to the same conclusion.