Can we incorporate Monitor Size into conversion calculations?

[DNAMTE]

I understand your train of thought, at one stage i started making a formula that would specifically change the variable based on ACTUAL viewspace, derived from your distance from the monitor.

Heres some screens from the calcs i was working with. In the end i decided to not follow that path as it becomes too theoretical.

[MuntyYy]

I strongly incline to what you stated above. Let your brain accommodate and account for changes, in order to be consistent across multiple games/ settings versatility is the key. If I can do it, everyone can as well. Playing only with one type of FOV and projection will hinder you in the "long run". And I'm not even talking about monitor sizes. In a 3d environment 9 cm of movement result in the same distance across all sizes of LCD's ( assuming they have the same ar )

Edited July 20, 2018 by MuntyYy

[potato psoas]

So I think I know what sitting distance is actually doing...

Sitting distance does affect the converted sensitivity, but only when monitor matching at anything higher than 0%.

If you are going to use a higher match percentage then you need to take sitting distance into account. This is because we are matching the perceived visual angle, not a distance along the screen. If you move your head back and forth, you are changing the visual angle that you are supposed to be matching to.

 

But... the interesting thing I realized is that 0% is always the center of the screen no matter how far away from your monitor you are. You can move your head back and forth and still maintain a perfect match at 0%. All that is happening is the FOV is zooming in and out. It would feel exactly the same as if you ADS'ed in the game, except it would just be like you were cropping the viewing window.

I've been testing this out in Quake Live with Zoom Scaling turned on and moving my head back and forth (like an idiot) to match the perceived size of the image as I zoom in and out. Like a dolly zoom, as Drimzi mentioned.

[MuntyYy]

Well.. I always thought that how far/close you stay doesn't affect the perceived sensitivity it will give you however, a more acute sense of reaction ( if you stay closer ). I still use 100% mm  probably cuz I've always "wished" to have the same point at the edge matched no matter the FOV.

[potato psoas]

21 hours ago, MuntyYy said:

Well.. I always thought that how far/close you stay doesn't affect the perceived sensitivity it will give you however, a more acute sense of reaction ( if you stay closer ). I still use 100% mm  probably cuz I've always "wished" to have the same point at the edge matched no matter the FOV.

I prefer to stay as far back from the monitor for the sake of my eyesight, but it also has the benefit of minimizing the degree to which your visual angle changes when you move your head back and forth. If you are close to the monitor (say, 20-30cm) and drift 10cm, it will be a difference of about 20FOV, but if you are further from the monitor (say, 60-70cm) and also drift 10cm, it will only be a difference of about 5 FOV. It makes a huge difference in consistency. Obviously you don't want to be too far back or you won't be able to see the monitor with much detail. For this reason I built myself a custom desk that has about 1m of depth. You could also have the monitor on its own desk/platform and move your main desk back, if you have the room.