Jump to content

VR in sims.. OR and beyond


Recommended Posts

Some folks wanted to discuss this product. At the moment 1CGS is not implementing it into this series.. based on posts made by those above my pay grade.. and given the talent on this development team, once Oculus sorts it's stuff out and gets on the market for a bit who knows what may happen.. but for now and until someone says different it is not supported. Feel free to discuss OR.. and what you would like to see etc etc.. but the minute this thread turns into anything remotely resembling slagging the team for choosing to follow their business plan (don't forget.. BoS was in development before OR was announced..) instead of diverting resources to work in OR, support this thread will be edited or locked if it persists.

 

If discussion is your goal then discuss the products, the technology.. Who knows .. contrary to what some say this team is more open than many think and if enough information is out there and the sim progresses far enough.. who knows what may happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really my feeling that the release of Bos and the current development pace of VR like OR are sadly staggered in a way that will not make its possible to have VR until the next generation of flight sims.

 

This is obviously no ones fault. Just the way the market has evolved.

 

Basically we want Bos to be like old il-2 and have a steady stream of additions for maybe the next 10 years. VR may be a reality in the next 2-5 years. So that effectivly will mean that a new engine for bos will need to be created in 5 years time making the previous work/additions to current Bos semi redundant.

 

Basically its bad timeing due to the way the market has evolved. I really hope either the vr devs can make it back compatible to lower dxs or the Bo's team can some how port it up. Bottom line we need one ore the other

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to call attention to the fact that the OR is not the only game in town. In fact I believe HTC vive will beat the OR to market. At 1200x1080 per eye, it should be a decent picture. Though I will say 1080 is still not enough fidelity for far off spotting of enemy AC.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Hooves.. and I cannot help but think that someone will come up with a technology that will be able to take any 360 degree 3D environment that can be used on a PC or gaming console and implement it into VR.. even older ones, just as you can take an older sim now and run it on any modern PC with a WS monitor as long as the OS will run it. The promise of VR is great.. but it isn't quite ready... but I think it will be and what I mentioned above will be doable in 5 years or less.. I am speculating here.. but I think OR has cracked open the VR market and there will be others that we may not even know about yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Quite a number of people are worried about being able to see their inputs.  Personally I don't set that as being a problem.  I also have everything mapped to my Joystick, Throttle, Pedals, and VAC software should work very well for tower communication, and any other command that we don't have room for on our Hotas.   I rarely had to look at my Hotas, and think it should be very easy to learn where everything is by feel.

 

  Currently both the Vive and Rift are using the same resolution display per eye.  It remains to be seen how well they've optimized the lenses, and software to enhance the displays resolution etc .   Early VR is well suited to sitting race, and flight sims, but it also remains to be seen if the res will be good enough.  Although atleast 90% if simmers probably use icons.

 

  HTC Vive is still scheduled to be released this year, but with very limited numbers.  I doubt the general public will see many until the majority are available in the New Year.   Not to mention its highly unlikely there will be any flight sims ready for the Vive.  DCS is still working on Rift support, and has just started looking at the Vive headset implementation as well.   Early reports are good, but its highly unlikely they will have Vive support before the end of this year.  Gaijen has suggested they will have Vive support to go along with their Rift and Morpheus support, but sometime later in the future.

 

  Currently it "appears" the headset quality for both is quite close.   We should know more on final specs when these units are offered for preorders.  You can almost guarantee the Oculus will offer their headset for preorder the moment  Vive does.

 

  Current Tracking solutions offer about the same amount of movement, with no noticeable amount of latency from either solution.   Oculus suggests they went with the camera solution for better body, and facial tracking. 

 

  IMHO the current Rift Touch inputs offer more dexterity and overall uses than the Vive wands, but we haven't seen the final specs of either.

 

  Oculus has been funding, and developing software for a couples years longer than the Vive.  BUT that won't matter, if someone has developed a killer app for the Vive. 

 

  The Rift headset/Tracking/Input hardware should be cheaper than the Vive hardware "IF" Oculus still plans to sell their hardware near cost, while trying to recoup costs with software sales.    Not to mention that Oculus will sell an even cheaper package, that only includes one Tracking unit, and a Microsoft game pad, that by far most the VR software is currently being developed for.  Most early VR users will be quite happy with just that.

 

  All those factors suggest to me that Oculus still has the upper hand.  IMHO opinion Vive will have come up with an attention grabbing Hardware Spec, Content, or Price to gain a high market share, even if their product does reach consumer status before the Rift.   I'm leaning toward the Rift because of the current flight sim support, but my final decision won't be made until I see the final specs/content at preorder time.   Even then I will probably preorder both, if I can cancel one, if shipping dates, or specs change.   Release dates usually always change. and not for the better, especially with the  troubles HTC is currently experiencing.  ;)

Edited by JG27_Chivas
Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the VR product with a much wider field of view?

 

one of the limiting factors of this new tech is the looking through blinkers view, I get it that at the right resolution the 'presence' and immersion will be better than any flat screen, and am looking forward to mainstream release.

 

There are a few racing sims with good OR support but I have read many comments about the issue of having to move your whole head to look at the mirror for instance rather than glancing with your eyes, something that TrackiR and triple screen setups don't suffer for as much, and while the immersion is greater this effect has led them to return to other options

 

might get tiring having to swivel your head around in the aircraft cockpit more than IRL

 

Quite a while ago SLR cameras had eye tracking/sensing  that adjusted focus depending on which part of the view your eye was looking at, I wonder what happened to that tech?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was interesting that the list showed the Oculus DK1, and DK2, but left out the latest Oculus Crescent Bay / CV1.  I would image it will be between 100 and 110, around the same as the Vive headset.    It will be interesting to see if what the final FOV specs of the Vive and Rift will state when preorders open.  I wouldn't doubt that Vive and Oculus still have a trick or two up their sleeve, that they haven't divulged.

 

All else being equal a wide FOV is definitely something I will look for in whatever VR unit I purchase, but its a balancing act between price, FOV, display, lenses, available content, etc etc. with Specs, and Content being on the top of my list.   We should see future, VR headsets, GPU's, CPU's, VR software/drivers scale rather quickly in the next few years.   The business sector is now suggesting the market will be worth 20 billion by 2020.

 

Its interesting I've also seen a study where the eyes focus with detail that's actually there at the centre of their vision, while the periphery details are sketched in by the brain to whatever it thinks should be there.   The basic scene will be there but the details arbitrary, and sometime quite different than what's actually there.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that every increase of resolution will be better for flight sims.   The DK2's resolution certainly wasn't good enough, and it will be very interesting to see if the Vive/CV1 consumer versions display resolutions and resolution enhancements are "good enough" to be entertaining  until later versions of VR headset come online.

 

Personally I won't need to see distance dots to find flying in VR entertaining as long as the distant graphics are still relatively clear.  DCS is making a good accommodation for see distant dots, by adding an option to increase the size of the distant dots.   I had trouble seeing distant dots on a good monitor, and just flew with people who could.  Not to mention that 90 plus percent of flight simmers fly with icons on anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Icons are a no go for me. BoS has such excellent detail rendering. DCS needs help and will certainly get it with EDGE. I'm not sure if I'm willing to give up 2160p res in 2D. Future editions of these VR devices probably won't require that compromise anyways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't usually use icons either, but do like the option to add or remove them during offline play.   I was just suggesting that most people fly with icons so spotting dots with VR headsets should be far less of an issue. 

 

I agree it wouldn't initially be easy to go from a high resolution monitor to the much lower actual and perceived res of a VR headset.  BUT for most people there should be a huge difference in immersion from looking at a display on their desktop to being transported from their room into the virtual cockpit of an aircraft.  You actual feel like your at 2000ft, and the depth perception especially during landings is far superior.  BUT is still remains to be seen if the first consumer versions are good enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The feature we have that makes low resolutions usable is the zoom view. I'm not sure how that works in VR. If the player is "limited" to only seeing everything at "life size" then resolution becomes even more important. A UHD screen isn't even a high enough res to eliminate the need for the zoom view. Apparently the zoom still functions in VR but I can't imagine what that looks or more importantly "feels" like. It's possible that good VR in a flight sim would need higher than 4K per eye.

Edited by SharpeXB
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that the need for resolutions higher than 4K is already in the works. From that link above.

 

"With HBM2, NVIDIA gets access to more denser chips that will result in cards with 16 GB and up to 32 GB of HBM memory across a massive 4096bit memory interface which will dominate the next high-resolution 4K and 8K gaming panels"

Link to post
Share on other sites

DCS is adding an option to increase the size of distant aircraft.  Apparently it works fairly well, with testers using monitors.   They aren't saying much about their Rift implementation, but have said they also have a Vive prototype and are currently looking at the possibility of adding support for it aswell.   It would be interesting to find out if oversized dot option was added primarily due to their experience implementing the Rift in DCS World 2 and EDGE.

Edited by JG27_Chivas
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can understand from watching the live streams, the "model visibility" setting doesn't really increase the size of the objects, it's not "smart scaling" like some older sims use. It just adds a form of icon to prevent the distant planes and ground targets from disappearing when they become smaller than a pixel. So based upon that description it sounds like it would be beneficial in VR and of course on normal screens as well. Be interesting to see how it works out. I assume it's a much more subtle effect than an actual icon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I figure the "model visibility" feature is different than an icon because:

 

It disappears when the object is close enough to be rendered.

 

It has no identifying text or color.

 

It's not visible through your own plane.

 

Basically it's in the category of a "graphic setting" as opposed to "game aid" so it's not a server controlled or difficulty setting. Therefore as such it would work with VR better than on-screen text, I think.

 

That's how I imagine it working. We will likely know for real in a week or two :-D

Edited by SharpeXB
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

So firstly after having had a chance to play with the DK2 at a demo I'm super excited about the possibilities for using Oculus Rift (or similar) in a flight simulator. As such I'm obviously disappointed to hear that BoS won't have OR support in the foreseeable future. Which is not to bash the developers at all, I work in software development and I know how this stuff goes. Still I'm hopefully it will make it into BoS one day.

 

From my understanding of the model visibility feature in DCS it's similar to smart scaling, a review I was reading seemed to suggest it made it easier to identify aircraft as well which obviously wouldn't be the case if it were just a 2 pixel icon.

 

I'm actually a big fan of ideas such as smart scaling. Flying on a computer is already bit like flying in real life with really poor eyesight. The human eye can resolve much finer detail than screens can currently provide. In some flying games this can lead to very unrealistic tactics simply because people can't see well enough to make more realistic tactics work. For me accurately simulating flying in WWII can mean making allowances for the limitations of computer technology, but I know not everyone agrees :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 From my understanding of the model visibility feature in DCS it's similar to smart scaling, a review I was reading seemed to suggest it made it easier to identify aircraft as well which obviously wouldn't be the case if it were just a 2 pixel icon.

Actually the new model visibility feature in DCS is not smart scaling.

From Matt Wagner's explanation Model Visibility just adds a form of icon to prevent the models from disappearing when they're less than a pixel. But literally scaling up the distant models is not what it does. I haven't tried it but the beta of DCSW 1.5 is released now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The VR is always just around the corner, at least since Wolfenstein 3d which used to be hyped as "VR game" when it debuted. Head mounted displays are still far from VR (full body immersion) and when they become mainstream term VR will move to something newer (which still own't be VR...) .  

Model visibility features are workable crutches, but what a VR would need to work with sims (and what separates full body immersion from putting monitor on your face) is ability to follow eye pupils, both their movement and focus. If you look at altimeter and focus your eyes on it (without moving your neck), your VR set tells your game engine to move PoV onto altimeter and focus on it, most likely by zooming in. Otherwise it's monitor on your head with manual zoom axis. Unfortunately, this feature is rather useless in shooters/beat'm up/ racing games / RPGs or whatever kids play these days, so it likely own't happen soon. 

Then there is mattter of seeing your cockpit controls (no full body imersion; you don't see your hands in the game). The obvious answer is, most games are played with gamepad, steering wheel and pair of pedals or mouse and WSAD keys, which can be used eyes-off, so what's the problem? Flight sims, which can't be controlled eyes-off (fairy tales on fitting everything into one HOTAS aside), are small enough margin of the gaming market to be ignorable (see Jason's history of cooperation with OR to see how ignorable).  

In short, I am afraid that head mounted displays are build with comfort of gamepad wrestlers in mind, and will come with limitations that will make them awesome but inpractical for flight sims. As flight sims are overly complex games with small market, overcoming these limitations will be cost-prohibitive (or outright pointless) for HMD manufacturers, and (again from Jasons recollections) they seem more interested in developers making new games designed for HMDs (as in, gamepad-controlled), rather than adapting their product to accomodate sims.

Edited by Trupobaw
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Trupobaw: So who can really know how it'll turn out, we'll have to see at launch. But my opinion is different to yours :-) When I had a go on the DK2 I got an amazing sense of presence, even with the poor resolution and all the rest. That sense of presence, at least for me, really felt like it could be a game changer. The game I tried wasn't a flight sim, but I think flight sims are one of the most natural fits for OR because you are seated in game, and seated in real life.

 

To be honest I already fly largely hands off keyboard in DCS ... the combination of HOTAS and clickable cockpit works just fine for me. I have no trouble navigating between my mouse and joystick without looking, so handling the controls "blind" seems totally doable. Full body immersion would be fun, but not necessary I think. People who've tried other WWII flight sims in DK2 say the gauges are already legible, and the CV1 will have substantially better resolution.

 

Personally I think VR is going to be very practical for flight sims, and I think a lot of people will try it and never look back. Much as people have with TrackIR, the greatest feature of TIR for me is not better view control (although that's awesome) but the improvement in immersion and I think VR could really be the next level up. Ultimately it seems the biggest problem for BoS adopting OR support is simply that OR have dropped support for DX9. I don't see the same fundamental incompatibilities between flight sims and VR that you see. But I'll guess we'll find out who's right :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is still hope the resolution may be good enough for most people.  Palmer has stated that the custom displays currently being built by Samsung for the Rift, are better than the displays in the Rifts being demoed at the latest tech events.  I doubt they will be of higher resolution, but even if they have higher PPI, and/or smaller spaces between the pixels should certainly help.   This along with DCS enhancement of distant aircraft is a step in the right direction.   VR is the future of flight sims, we just don't know yet if the first consumer version is good enough.   The prototypes were certainly not good enough, but it showed me that the immersion of VR can make many people prefer to fly with VR even if the resolution isn't perfect.   Not being able to see our HOTA's is a non issue, as most people will find they will be able to use their hotas systems with no problem with minimal practice.

 

No word yet what exact enhancements have been made, but that info will probably be released as soon as Vive states their final specs and release dates.  

 

The first Rifts are currently rolling off the assembly lines, on schedule, with still some tweaks to be done to the production process before full production starts.   It looks like the partnership with Facebook, and Samsung is paying off with hundreds of custom parts, and custom displays/lenses that weren't likely to happen without their support.  The people who suggested that Facebook was going to dumb down the Rift were obviously wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the new model visibility feature in DCS is not smart scaling.

From Matt Wagner's explanation Model Visibility just adds a form of icon to prevent the models from disappearing when they're less than a pixel. But literally scaling up the distant models is not what it does. I haven't tried it but the beta of DCSW 1.5 is released now.

 

are talking about something like RoF's distant plane icon (when icons are turned on)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

this certainly has me interested, but im a little uncertain. i will certainly be interested in a demo when it is accessible.

.

but. i have some q's that may just have to wait to be answered..

how is this so different than a monitor with head tracking? how does the head tracking work (gyro or TIR)? will the view curves will be easier to create, and getting the lock as your sensors go out of range wont be an issue (right?), but will that be a great impact?

.

i have friends that race RC FPV quads/multirotors. i was able to demo a set of those new headplay HD headsets (looks like VR headset) and sit in the driver's seat (someone else was driving/flying). i honestly want to like this, but this is what i thought... i had to remove the headset because i was getting motion sickness - very quickly. and im not prone to such thing. i still cant believe it. must try again - maybe just a weird fluke? obviously doesnt happen to everyone. the resolution, not being hd (racing camera live transmit latency limit) just dissappointed me visually. i dont like seeing blurry things. it seems the racers adjust because they have to in order to play. but i think the lower resolutions are a real thorn in the side.not sure what the VR/OR looks like, but it better be good. one of the racers insists on using a monitor (no goggles) - i can watch this without getting sick. some FPVers prefer monitors even with goggles available, for various reasons.

.

anyways, the if the OR comes in at $400usd, this is gonna put it higher than a half decent 1080 60fps monitor. thing is, the monitor can be used for everything. i doubt folks will be able to use the OR for web surfing or spreadsheets. the monitor is more practical and will be necessary for the pc (you will need to see your keyboard for some apps), so the 1st money goes to the monitor. now that you have the monitor, do you have enough extra to get the OR? some will, some wont. but, if the graphics are not VERY GOOD on the OR, even more wont.

Edited by Gump
Link to post
Share on other sites

are talking about something like RoF's distant plane icon (when icons are turned on)?

The Model Visibility feature isn't an icon. What it does is that it overlays a 2D "sprite" over the 3D model. The overlay starts at 24 pixels in size and then shrinks with the model as it gets farther away until it reaches a certain size, 3 pixels or 5 depending on your choice of Normal or Enlarged after which it doesn't shrink. It does fade out with distance just like any other object. Its shape changes and matches the aspect of the object.

Of course somebody already figured out how to cheat and edit the size larger, but it's s good illustration of what's going on.

post-1189-0-97756300-1444177992_thumb.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
but. i have some q's that may just have to wait to be answered..

 

 

I'll try my best to answer, but I'm not exactly an expert :-)

 

how is this so different than a monitor with head tracking? how does the head tracking work (gyro or TIR)? will the view curves will be easier to create, and getting the lock as your sensors go out of range wont be an issue (right?), but will that be a great impact?

 

 

So this is somewhat detailed on the Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oculus_Rift#Constellation

 

From what we know it works similar to Track IR, but provides 360 degree coverage by mounting IR LEDs on the whole headset. You need good head tracking to provide a good sense of presence: 360 coverage, sub-millimeter positional tracking and sub 1/4 of a degree angular tracking. Oculus seem to have put a lot into getting this right. Unlike Track IR I'm fairly certain there will be no "curves", the mapping will be 1:1 at all times to provide maximum presence. You brain can tell when your real head movements don't match up to your vision. If you want to check six you'll need to spin your head round like you would in a real plane.

 

i have friends that race RC FPV quads/multirotors. i was able to demo a set of those new headplay HD headsets (looks like VR headset) and sit in the driver's seat (someone else was driving/flying). i honestly want to like this, but this is what i thought... i had to remove the headset because i was getting motion sickness - very quickly. and im not prone to such thing. i still cant believe it. must try again - maybe just a weird fluke? obviously doesnt happen to everyone. the resolution, not being hd (racing camera live transmit latency limit) just dissappointed me visually. i dont like seeing blurry things. it seems the racers adjust because they have to in order to play. but i think the lower resolutions are a real thorn in the side.not sure what the VR/OR looks like, but it better be good. one of the racers insists on using a monitor (no goggles) - i can watch this without getting sick. some FPVers prefer monitors even with goggles available, for various reasons.

 

 

So FPV RC aircraft are very cool, but due to the wireless nature of it (and the distances involved) it tends to be very laggy and poor resolution. Both of those things are liable to make people feel sick in a HMD. Most of them also don't provide head tracking, so moving your head in real life won't change the angle of the camera on the plane and that can make people feel sick also. Even FPVs that feature a moveable camera have considerable latency to spin up the camera motors.

 

Oculus doesn't have these inherent limitations, and people who've tried the Oculus CV1 prototype all seem to talk about how any kind of motion sickness with earlier prototypes is now gone. The resolution of OR is not going to be as good as a similar monitor at standard viewing distances, but on the flip side having tried some earlier prototypes I'm expecting the sense of presence you get will be more than enough to compensate this for most people.

 

anyways, the if the OR comes in at $400usd, this is gonna put it higher than a half decent 1080 60fps monitor. thing is, the monitor can be used for everything. i doubt folks will be able to use the OR for web surfing or spreadsheets. the monitor is more practical and will be necessary for the pc (you will need to see your keyboard for some apps), so the 1st money goes to the monitor. now that you have the monitor, do you have enough extra to get the OR? some will, some wont. but, if the graphics are not VERY GOOD on the OR, even more wont.

 

 

Yup, it will be an expensive monitor you can only use for gaming. I should try it in store when it comes out and see if you like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
but. i have some q's that may just have to wait to be answered..

 

 

I'll try my best to answer, but I'm not exactly an expert :-)

 

how is this so different than a monitor with head tracking? how does the head tracking work (gyro or TIR)? will the view curves will be easier to create, and getting the lock as your sensors go out of range wont be an issue (right?), but will that be a great impact?

 

 

So this is somewhat detailed on the Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oculus_Rift#Constellation

 

From what we know it works similar to Track IR, but provides 360 degree coverage by mounting IR LEDs on the whole headset. You need good head tracking to provide a good sense of presence: 360 coverage, sub-millimeter positional tracking and sub 1/4 of a degree angular tracking. Oculus seem to have put a lot into getting this right. Unlike Track IR I'm fairly certain there will be no "curves", the mapping will be 1:1 at all times to provide maximum presence. You brain can tell when your real head movements don't match up to your vision. If you want to check six you'll need to spin your head round like you would in a real plane.

 

i have friends that race RC FPV quads/multirotors. i was able to demo a set of those new headplay HD headsets (looks like VR headset) and sit in the driver's seat (someone else was driving/flying). i honestly want to like this, but this is what i thought... i had to remove the headset because i was getting motion sickness - very quickly. and im not prone to such thing. i still cant believe it. must try again - maybe just a weird fluke? obviously doesnt happen to everyone. the resolution, not being hd (racing camera live transmit latency limit) just dissappointed me visually. i dont like seeing blurry things. it seems the racers adjust because they have to in order to play. but i think the lower resolutions are a real thorn in the side.not sure what the VR/OR looks like, but it better be good. one of the racers insists on using a monitor (no goggles) - i can watch this without getting sick. some FPVers prefer monitors even with goggles available, for various reasons.

 

 

So FPV RC aircraft are very cool, but due to the wireless nature of it (and the distances involved) it tends to be very laggy and poor resolution. Both of those things are liable to make people feel sick in a HMD. Most of them also don't provide head tracking, so moving your head in real life won't change the angle of the camera on the plane and that can make people feel sick also. Even FPVs that feature a moveable camera have considerable latency to spin up the camera motors.

 

Oculus doesn't have these inherent limitations, and people who've tried the Oculus CV1 prototype all seem to talk about how any kind of motion sickness with earlier prototypes is now gone. The resolution of OR is not going to be as good as a similar monitor at standard viewing distances, but on the flip side having tried some earlier prototypes I'm expecting the sense of presence you get will be more than enough to compensate this for most people.

 

anyways, the if the OR comes in at $400usd, this is gonna put it higher than a half decent 1080 60fps monitor. thing is, the monitor can be used for everything. i doubt folks will be able to use the OR for web surfing or spreadsheets. the monitor is more practical and will be necessary for the pc (you will need to see your keyboard for some apps), so the 1st money goes to the monitor. now that you have the monitor, do you have enough extra to get the OR? some will, some wont. but, if the graphics are not VERY GOOD on the OR, even more wont.

 

 

Yup, it will be an expensive monitor you can only use for gaming. I should try it in store when it comes out and see if you like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

this certainly has me interested, but im a little uncertain. i will certainly be interested in a demo when it is accessible.

.

but. i have some q's that may just have to wait to be answered..

how is this so different than a monitor with head tracking? how does the head tracking work (gyro or TIR)? will the view curves will be easier to create, and getting the lock as your sensors go out of range wont be an issue (right?), but will that be a great impact?

.

i have friends that race RC FPV quads/multirotors. i was able to demo a set of those new headplay HD headsets (looks like VR headset) and sit in the driver's seat (someone else was driving/flying). i honestly want to like this, but this is what i thought... i had to remove the headset because i was getting motion sickness - very quickly. and im not prone to such thing. i still cant believe it. must try again - maybe just a weird fluke? obviously doesnt happen to everyone. the resolution, not being hd (racing camera live transmit latency limit) just dissappointed me visually. i dont like seeing blurry things. it seems the racers adjust because they have to in order to play. but i think the lower resolutions are a real thorn in the side.not sure what the VR/OR looks like, but it better be good. one of the racers insists on using a monitor (no goggles) - i can watch this without getting sick. some FPVers prefer monitors even with goggles available, for various reasons.

.

anyways, the if the OR comes in at $400usd, this is gonna put it higher than a half decent 1080 60fps monitor. thing is, the monitor can be used for everything. i doubt folks will be able to use the OR for web surfing or spreadsheets. the monitor is more practical and will be necessary for the pc (you will need to see your keyboard for some apps), so the 1st money goes to the monitor. now that you have the monitor, do you have enough extra to get the OR? some will, some wont. but, if the graphics are not VERY GOOD on the OR, even more wont.

 

 

Yes you should be concerned about the perceived resolution with the first VR headsets.  Nobody is sure yet if it will be good enough for flight sims.  Many found it OK with early prototypes, but my experience with the DK2  certainly wasn't good enough.  That said I think there is good chance the consumer version might be atleast OK.  People are suggesting the latest VR versions will have no problem reading gauges, not sure how the distant terrain will look.   That said, I'm not too concerned about the resolution being perfect, as my current eyes have problems spotting aircraft now, so I just wing up with people who can, and that has worked very well in the past.

 

As far as immersion goes there is no comparison.   I very much enjoyed simming on a good monitor with Track IR, but have little interest in flying with a monitor now that I've tried VR.   With a monitor your looking at a cockpit and terrain in a box.  With VR your in the cockpit of aircraft looking down thru the clouds and thinking "holly grap I'm along way up".  There is a "huge" difference in immersion.

 

As far as price goes, if you already have a VR ready computer the Rift will be much cheaper than a good monitor and TrackIR.   Especially if you prefer a multi monitor setup.  You can use any old monitor for surfing the net.  I know any gaming I do will be with VR, it is the future.   You won't lose tracking when checking your six, and there probably won't be any curves to adjust as the movement will be 1:1.   This could be a problem for older folks with less flexibility when checking their six.  I plan to build a partial swivel in my chair to make it alittle easier. :)

 

For most people I would suggest waiting to try out the various VR solutions at local Best Buys, and Gamespots when they are released.   Personally I will be preordering a Vive or Rift or both depending on final specs and content the moment its possible.   So far I'm leaning toward the Rift, but that could change when I have more info.

Edited by JG27_Chivas
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Its really my feeling that the release of Bos and the current development pace of VR like OR are sadly staggered in a way that will not make its possible to have VR until the next generation of flight sims.

 

This is obviously no ones fault. Just the way the market has evolved.

 

Basically we want Bos to be like old il-2 and have a steady stream of additions for maybe the next 10 years. VR may be a reality in the next 2-5 years. So that effectivly will mean that a new engine for bos will need to be created in 5 years time making the previous work/additions to current Bos semi redundant.

 

Basically its bad timeing due to the way the market has evolved. I really hope either the vr devs can make it back compatible to lower dxs or the Bo's team can some how port it up. Bottom line we need one ore the other

 

FSX and Prepar3D have VR support via FlyInside. DCS and War Thunder have Rift support. Suggesting it is not possible "to have VR until the next generation of flight sims" is just objectively wrong. Nobody would ever call FSX a next gen flight sim, yet a single devloper can do a magnificent job of implementing VR for it. Nor would anyone consider the devlopment pace of DCS to be 'rapid', yet it has implemented VR support.

 

BOS not having VR is simply a developer decision and one that came after customers were repeatedly led to believe VR support would be added. Even as late as the 31st October 2014, several days after the official release of IL-2 Sturmovik Battle Of Stalingrad, developers still claimed that - "We'll announce it [VR support] pretty soon I think. There's some GUI works that needs to be done before we turn Oculus on for everyone."

 

If you look at the rapid advances made in VR over the last 2 years I think it very likely that all serious flight sims will be VR within 5 years or less. BOS devlopers will either have to step up to the plate or risk becoming irrelevant, and the VR train has clearly already left the antiquated DX9 station.

Edited by Riftnoorbeast
Link to post
Share on other sites

Played DCS with my DK2, 1.5 Beta and newest drivers/sdk and it was amazing in the 109k4. With their enlarged icons for visibility spotting was a dream. Reading gauges can be a pain but once you are familiar you don't need the fine print. I think with CV1 or Vive it will be the only way I play. I fear BOS will never catch up at this point. Especially since click-pits are nearly mandatory with VR. Can't wait to be able to reach out with a touch controller and flip the switches. 

Edited by driftaholic
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

IMO if VR makes for a compelling experience people will want to play it, spotting issues or not. In particular I think (and hope) flight sims might see a bit of a resurgence of interest due to VR. Lots of other genres will need to heavily adapt the gameplay to fit, not so for flight sims (or driving sims). Sitting in real life controlling a vehicle you would be sat it could provide one of the most natural and compelling VR experiences.

 

Sadly if there is a big surge in interest in flight sims due to VR, it looks like BoS won't be able to capitalise on it any time soon :-(

Edited by Tomsk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Since I did and do test Occulus i can tell you this is the future and we are talking about just a couple of months .. All IL2 cockpit are not in ratio which will make  VR a little bit out of sink . some adjustments need to be done.. Years ago we discussed to implement clickable cockpits into IL2 .. IL2BoB did it and in this matter it is more advance in engine management .. It is now the time that new controlers are coming like those gloves for VR 

https://www.gloveonevr.com/

 

Il2 is basically a new Sim/Game but it is already falling back and absolute it's missing all the goods for a complete VR experience unlike for example DCS which is far more advance .. After warnings years ago, Il2 will suffer from it. I have been flying under DCS for a while now  because of it's complexity of engine management and details and coming back to Il2 it really feel the Game state in my mind not a sim alas.

 

Now when many will use this VR and gloves in actual interactive cockpits for a full VR experience we will be stock again with an  absolute Il2.. some change need to be done asap. we are talking a matter of at list first Q1 or second Q2 of 2016 a blink for a Flight Sim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...