Jump to content

haltux

Members
  • Content Count

    111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About haltux

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

491 profile views
  1. haltux

    900m Headshot (Pe-2)

    I don't believe any second that this is an inability. This is a choice. If the gunner were sometimes making impossible shots and sometimes missing easy shots then yes, maybe, it would be an implementation issue. But the gunners being super-human all the time has to be a choice. It would be entirely straightforward to globally reduce the precision of their shots. I guess it is all about not wanting to make the "game" too easy. Everywhere you can read that Stuka were sitting ducks when attacked by allied fighters without escort. But for some reasons the IL2 team does not want shooting Stuka (or Pe2) to be too easy. It is a bit paradoxal, because when it is about plane capability, everyone agrees on the fact that this "simulation" should be realist and that there is no way a given plane should be made better or worst for gameplay purposes. But when it comes to AI gunner capabilities, they have no problem in making them non-human on purpose.
  2. OK, you mean you move the head at the right position. I believed you were talking about moving the crosshair in the cockpit, physically (so to speak). On the Spad 13 the crosshair (and the Aldis lens) are on the right of the cockpit, if you move your default head position in such a way that your left eye will be aligned with it, your head will be way too much on the right, it will feel compeltely wrong. It leaves you the choice between using the right eye or moving your head when you aim. None of the solutions are satisfying. I never used a rifle, but being right handed and having the left eye being the dominant, I would not have a satisfying solution either, with a rifle, in real life. I never though about that before but after a quick google search, I found I am not the first one to think about that, there are actually articles specifically adressing this issue: https://www.at3tactical.com/blogs/news/cross-eye-dominant-shooting
  3. Sorry, what? You can do that? For all planes? For Aldis scope as well? It is something about my favorite plane, the SPAD XIII, the cross hair is on the right, but my domianting eye is the left one. I cannot decide wether I should aim with my non-dominating eye or wether I should put my head further on the right 😞
  4. Better VR headset with higher resolution will not load the CPU more than current ones, unless of course you want higher framerates (but honestly 90 Hz is great). No it does not work that way. Only the rendering has to be done twice, to some extent, so the FPS is not divided by two when playing on a VR headset. Reaching 80/90 FPS 95% of the time if doable on current VR headset with a top notch overclocked CPU and a good GPU. With a higher resolution, the same CPU and a high-end GPU will do the job. About the rest of your message, polls show that the large majority of players disagree with you about how crappy VR currently is, so you won't find many people to tell you that Pimax 8kx won't be good enough. The VR support in IL2 is very good, there is not much to criticize. The only two problems are the resolution which is still not great on available headsets (but there is not much that 1C can do about it), and the fact that you need an expensive PC to run it.
  5. Actually I think pilots are way too resistant to wounds. I don't think that pilots, humans or or AI, should be able to continue fighting when they got hit by a bullet, whatever the bullet is, wherever they got shot (scratches being ignored). Practically I don't think anyone can continue flying high G manoeuvres when shot, and if they do they should pass out. When shot, controls should loose most of their responsiveness, things should get worst with time, and the only goal of the pilot should be to come back home and land alive. So my opinion is the exact opposite of yours. Wounds most probably happen at a realistic rate, but their effects are undermodelized. Where I agree with you is that AI gunner are far too accurate, sometimes this is really ridiculous, they make impossible shots. Not physically impossible of course, but their accuracy is based on a targetting algorithm that a human brain cannot possibly run. In single player mode attacking an "average" Stuka is way more risky than attacking an "ace" Bf109. I don't think that it is historically accurate. This is a known issue and dev apparently do not want to change that, and anyway I am sure many die hard IL2 players disagree with me, so I just accepted it.
  6. You really need to give an idea of what your budget is. "Low-budget" would be an Oculus Rift S, a PC with a i5-9600k and an NVidia RTX 2070 or similar midrange GPU. That will cost you somewhere around 1500€. And that will be great. If you want something significantly better, you need to spend much more in the VR headset AND in the GPU. So most probably at least 2500€.
  7. You might want to try the "IPD modifier like" feature of c6_lefuneste's 3dmigoto mod.
  8. By the way I think you misinterpret the output of this tool. I can't use it because I am a rift user but from what I quickly read your interpretation is wrong, appolon01 has the right interpretation. The curve does not represent the history of a frame. The X axis does not represent what happens during a frame. It is a distribution of the frame time. When the blue curve is high, say 6% at 11 ms, it means that 6% of the frame took 11 ms. So the more blue you have after the 12 ms vertical the more you GPU bottlenecked. Same thing with CPU.
  9. I am not an expert but I am pretty sure it does not work that way. The CPU has a complete frame time (12 ms) to complete its computation, and then pass its output to the GPU which process it during the next frame, and has a complete frame time as well. They work in parallel, the CPU works on frame t while the gpu works on frame t-1. That involves a 1 frame latency, which is fine. Actually, you can even set more than 1 "pre-rendered frame" provided from the CPU to the GPU in order to smooth the process at the cost of a higher latency. If the GPU was waiting until the CPU has done his job to do his, first that would be a silly waste of ressources, the GPU would spend a lot of time idling, second their would be no clear notion of CPU or GPU bottleneck, because a better GPU would compensate a weaker CPU, which is clearly not the case in IL2.
  10. Sounds to me that you don't reach 40 FPS. Did you actually check that? Backspace key displays the FPS value. This is plain wrong as dburne said. The problem is that there is a threshold effect, under the threshold it's pretty bad, it looks like there is no way the game could run smoothly even on a significantly better machine, but over the threshold it's great. And the threshold is just slightly under the best machines available. I have just boosted the overclocking of my recently acquired i5-9600k from 4.6 to 5 Ghz, and the difference is massive. This is another level of satisfaction when playing in VR. This is a bit upsetting for those who do not have the cash to update their machine, but the good news is that their is little doubt that in a couple of years it will run flawlessly on average machines, even without major breakthrough in CPU performances.
  11. Until recently the prop was making awful artifacts when ASW was on on Oculus Rift. So you had the choice between prop and ASW (and living with artifacts). Now this is solved in the core game engine, so there is no need to remove the prop anymore as far as I know.
  12. Hello, for those who manage to make it run at 60 Hz, how is it? I am still hesitating between Rift S and Reverb, and the 60 Hz sounds to me like a strong argument in favor of Reverb. Dips at 40 Hz with the ghosting effect are still painful, so constant 60 Hz sounds like a good deal, but how does it feel? Is 60 Hz really good enough?
  13. IL2 is mostly single threaded and CPU bounded, so most of your hardware is idling while you play this game. There is no intrinsic reason why large parts of computation could not be offloaded to other cores or/and to the GPU. There is no doubt IL2 could run flawlessly at 90 FPS on modern hardware (and even more obviously on future hardware) if the engine were rewritten from scratch with this goal in mind. But this would be unreasonably time consuming and expensive so it won't happen anytime soon. And really, never? I am kind of pessimistic when it comes to the upcoming progress of technology, but stating that having a given game running smoothly in VR will never happen? Seriously?
  14. 40 FPS is 40 FPS. Double image does only depend on the relative speed of the object, and the screen, that's it. It does not depend on the game. Maybe it is more tolerable in DCS because the contrast is lower, something like that. Basically IL2 has been developed before the VR era and 30 FPS was just considered fine. Once the engine is complete and developed and optimized during years with this target in mind, it is very difficult, or even impossible, to double the performance even at some price in terms of graphic quality. It is too late. Note that most pre-VR era flight simulator have the same issue: DCS and flight simulator in particular. Bear also in mind that il2 is a niche product. A very advanced simulator with a limited number of buyers. Most probably, it is not very profitable. VR is a niche in the niche. You can't expect people to spend thousands of hours working on something for a couple of hundred users that pay just a little bit of cash each, and that would pay anyway even with no-so-good performance because there is no competition. It is not economically viable. With a recent CPU (overclocked i5-9600k, 200$), with a single enemy plane on sight, possibly two, you stay over 80 FPS.
×
×
  • Create New...