Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/03/2018 in all areas

  1. First, some background: We set our sensitivity such that a certain amount of mouse movement will result in a certain amount of soldier movement. In it's simplest form, we have our hipfire at some cm/360. If this were real life, when we use a magnified optic, that means that our movement is magnified accordingly. This is why shooters take such measures as controlling their breathing and heart rate. In game, where magnification amounts to a reduced FOV, this is very unwieldly. Having the same cm/360 at all levels of zoom, just doesn't work. As we zoom in, the sensitivity becomes impractically high - it feels too fast. Muh feels. So, we can use some formula, to reduce our sensitivity in proportion with reduced FOV. The math is fairly straightforward in this case, it is what we here refer to as "0% monitor matching". So, we try this.... and it doesn't feel right either. Muh feels. So, we can try to make our 3D game respond as though it were a 2D space like our desktop. This is obviously never going to work because the 3D game world is NOT in 2D no matter how hard we try to treat it as though it is. So, sometimes, it feels right, and other times, not so much. Muh feels. Now, 'muh feels' is a term which often carries negative connotation. The implication of saying 'muh feels' is that the person is ignoring 'muh reals' - ignoring reality in favour of their subjective sensation. I want to state very early on here, that such an attitude is not the point of this thread. On the contrary, it is clear to me that there is a strong reasoning for the way that sensitivity changes across FOV changes are perceived - and this is the golden word here - Perception. These 'muh feels' are not coming from nowhere. Yes, there will be some psychological effects like placebo and memory and many many others, but I don't think that any of us could put all of our observations down to just these effects. What we do know, is that the human brain performs a great deal of work on the image captured by our eyes, to determine relevant data such as distance, angle, size of objects in the game. It should be clear to us all by now, that this image processing performed by our brains, is having an effect on the way our movement feels in-game - otherwise, 0%MM would just work. In other threads, a great deal of work has been done to find a formula which 'feels' right. Just as much of that work has validated previous formulae, I hope that this thread will do the same. However, the intention of this thread is to take a different approach to finding that 'right' formula. Rather than a process of elimination - in other words, trying a formula, and adjusting it according to 'muh feels', until it 'feels' 'right', I want to take a look at WHY it doesn't 'feel' 'right'. I believe that a more scientific approach will be beneficial as a counterpart to the scatter-gun approaches which we have used in these other threads. I also want to be clear that I am by no means an expert on this subject. Human visual perception is kinda rocket science and I warmly welcome any input on this. However, the intention here is not to simply say "it feels too slow", or "it feels too fast", but to figure out WHY. The first step in solving any problem, is to define that problem clearly (Every properly defined question contains it's own answer), and to the best of my knowledge, this has not yet been done. I've collected a fair few documents and videos as a basis for this, and (largely because I have too many tabs open in my browser) I think it's about time I posted these links here for future reference. I hope you might take the time to look these over and give it some thought, and perhaps you might even have some information you could add to the discussion - I need all the help I can get The next post in this thread will be a 'library' of links that we can reference, which I will update over time as more information becomes available, and the following post will be a brief overview of what I've been able to derive from that information, which appears to be related to our perception of the 3D games projected on our 2D displays.
    1 point
  2. I have created a python script to create the files for the cs fov testing @Drimzi made with his lua script here : https://github.com/Skidushe/sens-fov-scalar It should allow us to test the different monitor distance ratios efficiently rather than copy pasting. You should be able to put the python file inside the cfg folder and then run from there if you want to do it that way too.
    1 point
  3. Drimzi

    Perceived sensitivity

    Since this calculator uses a percentage of the users horizontal resolution, for 16:9: 1:1 = 56.25% 4:3 = 75% 16:9 = 100% Viewspeed V2 handles 3d to 3d as well, as it doesn't return the same 360 distance for all fovs. edit: To find percentage values: 1:1 = 1080 / 1920 * 100 = 56.25% 4:3 = (1080 * 4/3) / 1920 * 100 = 75% 1:1 Diagonal = (1080 * sqrt(2)) / 1920 * 100 = 79.55% 16:9 = (1080 * 16/9) / 1920 * 100 = 100% 21:9 = (1080 * 64/27) / 1920 * 100 = 133.33%
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...