Head in the Game-It's Coming!!

[DigitalEngine]

Getting our heads in the game, it's coming!!

Two recent things have happened,

 

Steams OpenVR SDK Now Available & Sign UP for the HTC Vive DK is available

 

And, Oculus just posted "The Rift Q1, 2016"!!

 

Who will it be? Let the VR wars begin!!

 

Flight sims will never be the same...

Edited May 6, 2015 by BlueMatrix

[SharpeXB]

Don't get so excited yet. You haven't seen the GPU hardware it will take to drive high res stereoscopic 3D at high frame rates.

[71st_AH_Hooves]

ITs cool that the HTC vive is free of charge to developers. Im sure that 1CGS qulaify. ;P I hope this renews the excitement that the team once had for Oculus. Even though Oculus wnt support dx9, maybe HTC vive will?

[SR-F_Winger]

YES. I was very excited to read that anouncement as well.

Sad only that IL2 is not on the train. This is really bad for the IL2 series.

On the other hand there are so many gamebreakers right now that the ONE with missing VR support is only one of many.

So I am looking forward to flying in VR. Sadly no more IL2.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

 No VR support for BoS has been already announced??

[71st_AH_Hooves]

No Oculus support at this time due to dx9. But other Vr products will support dx9 so who knows?

[APIKalimba]

All developpers will have to  upgrade, before too long,  their technical compatibilty to DX12 and Oculus if they wish to stay up to date.

If competitors like WarThunder  offer  Dx12 and full 3D immertion, they will render those who don't quite obsolete. 

We're about to live what happend to recorded music when it went from mono to stereo....and then to surround. Who wants to go back there ?

Even if the music was better....

[SCG_Neun]

This is the future for sure....but I'm personally going to hold off on any purchases until the cost goes down and the technology has time to evolve a bit more.   

[avlSteve]

It sounds great, the full immersion, but I still don't understand how those devices will work with flight simulators.  In all my sims, I have many events mapped to the keyboard.  Will I still be able to see the keyboard using rift, and if not, then what's the deal?

Edited May 7, 2015 by avlSteve

[-=PHX=-Satch]

It sounds great, the full immersion, but I still don't understand how those devices will work with flight simulators.  In all my sims, I have many events mapped to the keyboard.  Will I still be able to see the keyboard using rift, and if not, then what's the deal?

 

Voiceattack

[BlackDevil]

It sounds great, the full immersion, but I still don't understand how those devices will work with flight simulators. In all my sims, I have many events mapped to the keyboard. Will I still be able to see the keyboard using rift, and if not, then what's the deal?

And this is only one point of many. Flightsims are a niche market. No VR company will care about them.

Checking six every 10 secs won't work anyhow. The enthusiasm will calm down. Maybe in a few years the hardware will be good enough.

Edited May 7, 2015 by BlackDevil

[SharpeXB]

All the feedback I see about OR in flight sims says. First. It's cool. But second. It's too blurry. 1080p stretched across your whole field of view isn't sharp enough for being able to see instruments and other planes etc.

sending a stereoscopic 1440p+ 3D high FPS signal to a headset and maintaining the graphic sophistication players expect today is going to cost $$$

We're talking SLI Titans. Be careful what you ask for...

Edited May 7, 2015 by SharpeXB

[DigitalEngine]

When the higher res consumer VR headsets are released, I'll get one (maybe, two, CV1 & Vive).

 

DK1 is too low of a resolution (although, almost there), but once you try one, one thing is for certain, there's no going back, monitors are (or will be soon) a thing of the past!!

And there is still a big issue with my monitor (42 inch), its not big enough. and no matter what I do, it just doesn't put me head in the game, even with the TrackIR and a CH HOTAS....

 

BTW, I don't use the keyboard for flights, use a full CH HOTAS, and VAC (for the AI Bot control), keyboards are just too archaic for flight sims (for me anyway). A well mapped HOTAS is much more functionally and ergonomically intuitive.

Yes, it's gonna cost, it'll be like the monitor wars all over again, trying to stay with the latest, biggest, highest resolutions, etc....
you know, the money, money, money thing....

But come on, other wise we'd still be flying on 15" CRT's!!

Still remember when people would say 1080p was impossible, the hardware to drive it would never be affordable even if it was possible, But I'm not sticking with a 15" CRT (it's actually is still sitting here on my desk, and still works) just because some peoples didn't think 1080p was practical.

Edited May 8, 2015 by BlueMatrix

[chiliwili69]

Devs,  Are you going to request the SDK of HTC Vive? You lost the train of Oculus but Vive could work with DX9

 

I am very sure that in 3-4 years time almost all simmers of this forum will fly with VR.

My problem now is that after flying in DCS with DK2, I don´t like to play BOS/ROF with my 28" monitor. It is weird.

 

Regarding hardware to support VR, the most likely resolution of Oculus CV1 will be 2K (it will be known next week). 

I have made my own table about top three VR devices:

 

 

If my PC with a single GTX970 can run BOS at 2K at 50-80 Hz I think that Oculus will need SLI with gtx970/980 to run it well at 90Hz.

 

Can someone with 980SLI confirm if 90 fps are reached and mantained at BOS with 2K resolution? (SharpeXB, you had 980SLI?)

Edited May 8, 2015 by chiliwili69

[SharpeXB]

Can someone with 980SLI confirm if 90 fps are reached and mantained at BOS with 2K resolution? (SharpeXB, you had 980SLI?)

I did have that setup but no longer. I put some test results on the EA forum but that's gone now. I don't think my average FPS was ever as high as 90 due to the CPU and BoS is really dependant on that for the scenarios with large numbers.

I can post results with the Titan X

That will average 50fps in Ultra/UHD which is about equal to the 2x 980s

IMO 2k is too soft for VR

Edited May 8, 2015 by SharpeXB

[BlackDevil]

...and when they reach the necessary resolution and fps, they still have to solve the motion sickness problem. It is not that pronounced, when moving the head slowly and little with other games, but throwing the head around in a dogfight won´t be fun for everyone.

[Guest deleted@1562]

It would be a good idea for the VR-Sets to provide the possibility to move the view 180° when the head moves 20°. This really shouldn't be difficult - if Natural has no patent on this.

[Freycinet]

All the feedback I see about OR in flight sims says. First. It's cool. But second. It's too blurry. 1080p stretched across your whole field of view isn't sharp enough for being able to see instruments and other planes etc.

sending a stereoscopic 1440p+ 3D high FPS signal to a headset and maintaining the graphic sophistication players expect today is going to cost $$$

 

The resolution will be higher in the center of the field of view due to the optics, I believe.

 

Looking at this thread, why the high level of aggravation from so many? - Some people need to take a chill pill... - But, hey, if it is about making the forum a disagreable place to be then you're succeeding in your mission.

[Blitzen]

Is CloD in basically the same situations as BoS & I assume BoM will be?That is to say none of thesedevices will ever be useable?

[SharpeXB]

The resolution will be higher in the center of the field of view due to the optics, I believe.

Now that would be a really good idea. Have the "fovea" of the screen at higher res than the peripheral vision. Just like reality. It would save on video processing with no perceivable loss for the user.

Hmm well maybe not since you can just rotate your eyes within the headset... I guess it wouldn't work.

[AvengerSeawolf]

All the feedback I see about OR in flight sims says. First. It's cool. But second. It's too blurry. 1080p stretched across your whole field of view isn't sharp enough for being able to see instruments and other planes etc.

sending a stereoscopic 1440p+ 3D high FPS signal to a headset and maintaining the graphic sophistication players expect today is going to cost $$$

We're talking SLI Titans. Be careful what you ask for...

 Sooner or latter it will happen and will be affordable for the general public.

AMD is developing to this

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/games/features/amd-plans-to-do-for-vr-what-it-did-for-pc-game-development-679513

[Toxin1]

ITs cool that the HTC vive is free of charge to developers. Im sure that 1CGS qulaify. ;P I hope this renews the excitement that the team once had for Oculus. Even though Oculus wnt support dx9, maybe HTC vive will?

 

No to beat a dead horse, but this is what we were told back in 2013 by Adam Smith:

 

"I didn’t believe in the Oculus Rift. Not in the way that I don’t believe in Derek Acorah, the phantom of credibility, but in the way that I don’t believe in matter transporters or eating only one biscuit. The Rift had seemed like an impossible dream, a product of improbable technology and the overly forgiving impressions of excited humans. Now I believe and all it took was a flight over Stalingrad in a Sturmovik." http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/09/06/best-of-gamescom-il-2-sturmovik-and-oculus-rift/

 

Why can't we experience this now?  How did it go from Nirvana to Neverland so to speak?

 

High hopes for VR support next year.

 

S~

[No601_Swallow]

Now that would be a really good idea. Have the "fovea" of the screen at higher res than the peripheral vision. Just like reality. It would save on video processing with no perceivable loss for the user.

Hmm well maybe not since you can just rotate your eyes within the headset... I guess it wouldn't work.

 

My completely inadequate understanding is that the "Magic Leap" device (assuming it actually works) may do this, because it projects images directly onto your retina with scanning laser. (What could possibly go wrong?...)

 

In addition, since the Magic Leap thing is supposed to be "augmented reality", it would seem to be possible to design the display so that your keyboard/desktop might still be visible (or visible at the flick of a virtual switch?)...

 

[by the way, I think I read on Wikipedia or somewhere that the high-res fovea is about the area of a thumbnail held at arm's length. That's all the high-res we can do. The rest of your visual field is - I'm given to understand - basically a constantly updated construction of reality by your brain. Shtunning.]

[SAG]

is there now way in which we could "trick"  the Rift into thinking that BoS is compatible?

maybe by using some 3rd party app?

 

correct me if im wrong but havent some games that werent natively supported by the Rift (DK1/2) become useable with the HMD via 3rd party apps?

 

Hope is that last thing ill lose.

 

the only type of game i would use VR for would be sims, and Combat Flight Sims (to me) are the most enjoyable of them all by a longshot. if VR becomes all about "Social" interaction (which im inclined to think because... facebook) then im never actually buying into it. i want to feel inside the world im playing in, not have a Stereoscopic 3D "SkypeCall".

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I wonder if those devices displays near 1 to 1 sizes objects as in real life? Or like our monitors when objects are 1 to 1 size  we see that they fill whole window or need to use zoom.

Edited May 10, 2015 by tomcatqw

[71st_AH_Hooves]

I wonder if those devices displays near 1 to 1 sizes objects as in real life? Or like our monitors when objects are 1 to 1 size  we see that they fill whole window or need to use zoom.

The objects are as large as they are in real life. WHen sitting in the P-51 in DCS Iwas astouded at just how large the propeller actually is. its an incredible sensation.

[M4rgaux]

I wonder if those devices displays near 1 to 1 sizes objects as in real life? Or like our monitors when objects are 1 to 1 size  we see that they fill whole window or need to use zoom.

 

This is only a matter of fov, for realism and to avoid simulation sickness a fov as close to real life is a must. Now, or computer screen are FAR from us, which kinda make us see the world through a very small window. VR headset, by putting the screen right in front of us, and aided by motion tracking should theoretically be able to take care of that.

[SharpeXB]

I wonder if those devices displays near 1 to 1 sizes objects as in real life? Or like our monitors when objects are 1 to 1 size we see that they fill whole window or need to use zoom.

I've seen accounts of people using "zoom" in OR to be able to see instrument panels, etc. Don't know how disorienting that might be in VR or what that would look like to the player. I'm sure the norm for VR is that it's not used.

 

I'm an architect and it will be interesting to see how VR gets adopted by design and construction. You'll be able to give clients a virtual tour of their proposed building. I'll get my office to buy us some ;-)

 

Architectural design firms I've been with used the game engines like Frostbite or whatever to do walk through so since they run graphics so fast and well. It was hilarious to see the guys in the visualization lab load one of our hotel projects into Call of Duty and play shooter games in the building. And yeah they were getting paid for that... :-D

Edited May 10, 2015 by SharpeXB

[Guest deleted@30725]

The objects are as large as they are in real life. WHen sitting in the P-51 in DCS Iwas astouded at just how large the propeller actually is. its an incredible sensation.

 

This is what I hate about the current situation in gaming. You have no real sensation of scale. More akin to flying a rc version rather than the real thing unless you have a huge screen and the horespower to drive it.

 

They've got an F-15 in a hangar in duxford and I did not think it was that big till I was at duxford staring up at it taking up a large part of the hangar.

 

I think scale is going to be a neat factor in the VR universe as games like IL2 and DCS are partly educational and should help the quest for the people that want to feel like the virtual plane they are flying is ever more akin to the real version that they may never get to fly. I expect spotting should be easier as the view becomes closer to 1:1 and designers can more accurately represent how things should look in virtual space.

 

I expect we're still a few generations away from holo decks, but "one step for man, one giant leap for mankind" and all.

[Toxin1]

 

 

I'm an architect and it will be interesting to see how VR gets adopted by design and construction. You'll be able to give clients a virtual tour of their proposed building. I'll get my office to buy us some ;-)

 

There are VR demos of exactly this type of commercial use for the DK2. http://www.theriftarcade.com/vroom-aerie-sees-a-luxury-apartment-come-to-life-in-spectacular-ways/ 

The scale and immersion is very good even on the 1080 screen. 

 

As far as Zoom, with 6DOF you can just move your head closer to make images clearer.  Works very well and after a little bit of time your brain starts to fill in the image where it may be blurry similar to folks who gradually become near-sighted and still drive without glasses.

[VR-DriftaholiC]

Looks like the Rift will be 2160x1200 @ 90hz over two screens. Same specs as the Vive from Valve although there are reports of the Vive getting a resolution bump still unlikely to be beyond 2560x1440.
 

https://www.oculus.com/blog/powering-the-rift/

[SharpeXB]

This is telling

"This means that by raw rendering costs alone, a VR game will require approximately 3x the GPU power of 1080p rendering."

 

And the min system specs still seem low

 

"NVIDIA GTX 970 / AMD 290 equivalent or greater"

 

Seeing as it probably requires something like a single GTX 970 to run many games and BoS on Ultra. Will 3x that requirement mean 3x 970s?

 

I like seeing that the resolution spec is higher than 1080p but I suspect the GPU requirement to be more severe.

We're talking about 2160×1200 at 90Hz x2 displays. That's almost equal to running 4K/60hz and doing that for BoS on Ultra requires 2x Titan X GPUs

[VR-DriftaholiC]

it's not 2160x1200 x 2 its more like 1080x1200 x2. The trick with VR is because both screens are rendering a different perspective it's more taxing then a standard double wide resolution because the mesh and lighting and everything need to be calculated twice, once for each eye. Also running the game at "ultra" is sort of ambiguous as there are some details that would be lost even at 2160x1200. 

[SharpeXB]

Nevertheless the minimum GPU listed for it is nearly the most powerful one available today.

If according to them it's going to be 3x as demanding as running a 1080p game, and that sounds reasonable. Take whatever graphics hardware you're running now and triple it.

 

Hey it's gonna be cool but it's not gonna be cheap. It's going to mean graphics cards equal in cost to your PC. Just like 4K :-(

 

For example it took me a GTX 980 to run DCS on all High settings and get an even 60 FPS

So triple that probably means 3x 980s if you want to run that sim. Sure there are people running the DK2 now but it's lower spec. I think there's a bit of sticker shock coming when OR launches. And not for the headset itself.

Edited May 15, 2015 by SharpeXB

[JG27_Chivas]

Hopefully we will see some info from DCS World 2 after the Oculus NDA has lifted.  Apparently one of the Oculus developers is a DCS enthusiast and over the last year or so, has helped the DCS implement support for the Oculus during its EDGE development.  I would imagine the DCS developers have run their new EDGE graphic engine using the Crescent Bay prototype at around 2160x1200, and would have a good idea of the feasibility of VR with combat flight sims. 

 

Everything is a compromise until higher than average computers are powerful enough to run the displays required for the best VR experience.  No word yet if the CV1 has a custom display from Samsung with features best suited for VR.   The GearVR headset does have a higher1440 display but renders VR at a lower resolution for performance reasons.

 

According to Lucky Palmer...."CV1 displays are on the cutting edge of current display fabrication technology. Low persistence/high fill/90hz/global update is critical!"

 

The Oculus isn't that expensive, its still rumoured to sell for around the three hundred dollars, which is cheaper than a good monitor and Track IR, while providing more immersion.

 

Oculus isn't supporting DX9 sims, and no word yet if Vive supports DX9 for BOS.

COD is DX10, but no word yet if Team Fusion has the time or interest to add Oculus support.

[SharpeXB]

The trouble is sims are all CPU limited in terms of their frame rate. Unless that changes VR isn't going to perform very well. Even the

strongest CPUs today sometimes get only 30 fps on this and DCS. And whereas the occasional drop in fps on a 2D screen isn't that bothersome,

in VR it's probably nauseating.

Edited May 16, 2015 by SharpeXB

[JG27_Chivas]

_{There is no doubt that VR will struggle with sims that have a difficulty rendering high frame rates, although I never experienced any nausea running DCS with the DK2, but the resolution was definitely too low.  I have a relatively highend system with a now relatively low end GTX580 GPU.  I will definitely upgrade to atleast a 980 or higher when the consumer versions VR units are released.  I'm looking forward to DCS EDGE and the Oculus CV1.   The possible performance gains of DX12 with Windows 10 could help considerably for any future sims in VR.  Not sure why AMD is no longer recommending that developers work with Mantle.}

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

Nevertheless the minimum GPU listed for it is nearly the most powerful one available today.

If according to them it's going to be 3x as demanding as running a 1080p game, and that sounds reasonable. Take whatever graphics hardware you're running now and triple it.

 

Not being a computer guru (so take what I say with a grain of salt), the logical solution is to make a machine with twin graphic cards, one for each lens/screen/eye. Current systems essentially asks the GPU to run two games at once, which is well beyond the reach of most machines.

[71st_AH_Hooves]

No to beat a dead horse, but this is what we were told back in 2013 by Adam Smith:

 

"I didn’t believe in the Oculus Rift. Not in the way that I don’t believe in Derek Acorah, the phantom of credibility, but in the way that I don’t believe in matter transporters or eating only one biscuit. The Rift had seemed like an impossible dream, a product of improbable technology and the overly forgiving impressions of excited humans. Now I believe and all it took was a flight over Stalingrad in a Sturmovik." http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/09/06/best-of-gamescom-il-2-sturmovik-and-oculus-rift/

 

Why can't we experience this now?  How did it go from Nirvana to Neverland so to speak?

 

High hopes for VR support next year.

 

S~

I wish I had an answer for you. What I can tell you is that the team was having g some difficulty making the screen look right. There was an issue with getting The gun sight to show up culminated, and that the frame rate was slightly low. These are ALL issues that could be worked on and fixed

the real killer was most Likley oculus' decision to not support dx9 in their sdk. So developing anything further maybe seemed fruitless? It is a shame, it had SO MUCH potential. But choke it up to a litany of odd/questionable dev decisions.

[Warpig]

All this VR stuff is so over-rated. I'd rather be able to see my beer and other surrounding environment.

 

The hype is real!