Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Panthera_Tigris

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

375 profile views
  1. Really looking forward to when they add VR support! Just want to add that many people seem to have experienced VR only with some old or entry level headset and they formed a permanent negative opinion of VR. Newer headsets like the Reverb, and to a lesser extent the Index, are on a whole another level when it comes to clarity. Its the equivalent of looking at a 720p monitor.
  2. I am not sure if its just me, but it seems MOST settings don't have much of a difference on the graphical quality in VR? I am running a Reverb at native resolution. For example, MSAA usually makes other games much better, but I see no graphical difference here between 0 and 4x (and yes I selected MSAA in dropdown). Same for the landscape quality - sharp vs blurred vs off all seem the same to me. 4K textures, SSAO and Sharpen on/ off are also indistinguishable. Shadows is the only one that seems to make the cockpit look significantly different. Resolution of your headset seems to be the only other relevant factor. Not sure about HDR, but it does seem it makes the colour pop more. Thoughts?
  3. As an owner of the original Reverb, I am just going to wait and see how much of an improvement G2 is before deciding. The resolution is the same so it's all up to the lenses.
  4. Some people have had some improvements by doing this with zip ties: That's a complicated discussion but essentially its because the gen 1 headsets require a lot of super sampling just to get to their native resolutions. So when you run the Reverb at its native 2160x2160 resolution, you aren't going much above other headsets. This might sound ridiculous but it's not and you can test it out for yourself. For example, I use 180% SteamVR SS for my Vive and that comes to 2028x2252 (so I am already pushing the same amount of pixels as I need to for the Reverb). And at 100% SteamVR SS you get 1512x1680. But that is NOT the native res of the Vive, which should be 1080x1200. Proof of all this is attached below. So why is the default resolution higher than the actual headset resolution in the Gen 1 headsets? It is to achieve something called barrel distortion which is a corrective technique to get rid of the pincushion distortion effect which is an inherent phenomenon in most VR headsets because of the shape of their lenses. The amount of correction required depends on the shape of the lens and other factors and it seems that you apparently don't need much of it for the Reverb. Here is some info on the theory by HTC: https://hub.vive.com/storage/app/doc/en-us/DistortionCorrectionTheory.html In conclusion, you are pushing the same amount of pixels, but Reverb has actual pixels and it look clearer, while in Gen 1 headsets all those super sampled pixels still need to be displayed on a physical display that is 1080x1200. All that super sampling does is change what colour each pixel should display so it can have a positive effect but can never match the benefits of actually having more physical pixels.
  5. @spitfirejoe Thanks for a great review! Yea, I have been hearing about the wire issue which is a bummer as the thick wire in my Vive is pretty annoying as well. Surprised to hear about the colour contrast as many others have said otherwise. I hope you don't mind if I link your post on the DCS forums.
  6. Don't know what the general consensus is, but I think we have a winner here if the reviews are anything to go by. The video review I linked earlier shows actual in-game FPS with fpsVR with different games and there has been another video by MRTV who also praised the clarity. But its a lot of pixel to push and if you see the video, the headset actually sub-samples a LOT by default. You need 188% SS in SteamVR just to get to the native resolution of 2160x2160. So you probably wont be able to push 90 FPS in demanding games at it's native resolution (which is what my original point was). But I personally think 60 FPS at 60 Hz should be playable as well (at least it was for the reviewer in that video). And even if it down-samples a bit, it will still be better than any other headset. And you still will have room to benefit from performance or GPU upgrades. Just my 2 cents. Its available on HP UK and I am thinking of ordering it from there via a freight forwarder (as HP UK is not doing intl. shipping). Or maybe just wait a few days to see if it pops up elsewhere.
  7. Thanks for the replies. I am guessing users might start making campaigns/ missions once the map is ready. BTW, do we have any indication when the map is likely to be released? I imagine the missions for WW1 will be quite different to what we have now I guess most missions during WW1 were just reconnaissance or artillery spotting? And maybe some smallish air-duels?
  8. Interesting video!! - Shows that you need 180% SS in SteamVR to play close to Reverb native resolution. Which means the headset subsamples a LOT if left alone. - I like the 60 HZ settings! Meaning I can play at 60 FPS without resorting to re-projection. Nice!! I would rather take 60 FPS without reprojection than 90 FPS half o which is interpolated, fake frames. Thoughts?
  9. Thanks for doing this! It is very helpful indeed but I think some users here do not realise that subjectivity is a part of predictive testing. This is a great initiative! By the way, did you take the following into consideration for Pimax testing:
  10. Every headset has some level of super sampling by default to account for things like edge distortion. I guess that is what you are calling "internal SS". I called it overhead a few posts back. Regarding the 25 million super sampled pixels, SteamVR caps the super sampling at 4096 pixels on the horizontal resolution. Can the testers confirmed they bypassed this manually?
  11. A bit hypocritical. Maybe you should have taken your own advice when you posted that spreadsheet. Don't you think? So "handled by the 2080ti" means 90 FPS stable? Just WOW! That's quite rich someone who claims to be so fixated on "hard numbers". Just have a look at the graph in that tab and its accompanying data. Its for a Pimax 5K which is 7.3 million pixels and at 100% SS it has average FPS of less than 45. No, its not. Vive is a SteamVR headset and the SS setting in SteamVR is not multiplicative. It just tells you the increase in overall pixels, not the increase in both x and y axes. Feel free to check this yourself. Even if he was using a different tool for SS than SteamVR, its still contradictory to the other test mentioned earlier. Either way, we are just wasting time here now. Time to move one. Let's wait for actual release before making tall claims. Reverb will have a 60 HZ setting as well so maybe that can at least be achieved with some tweaks. 90 FPS seems like a pipe dream on the Reverb with the 2080Ti unless you really go cheap on the graphic settings.
  12. Hmm.... that actually proves your claim was incorrect. Looks like you misread the data. Average FPS for Reverb equivalent resolutions is way below 90.
  13. Where exactly? I sure would like to see this "evidence". That's 9.3 million pixels and probably closer to 11 million after accounting for the in-built SS to counter edge distortion.
  14. I actually think 60 Hz is a good setting. I would take 60 stable frames on a native 60Hz display (WMR headsets apparently have variable refresh rates at 60 or 90 Hz) over 45 frames which re-project to 90 any day of the week. There is no way even a 2080TI can push 90 frames on a Reverb with its 9.3 million pixels + overhead anyway (In games like DCS or IL2). Only thing I'd do differently is probably reduce the SS.
  • Create New...