How, why, and when VR will fail

[saunder]

My wonder about VR is how the player is supposed to manage to the various button presses that are necessary to operate interface and plane when vision is blocked by a VR set. (That is I assume it is fully blocked - I have not tried VR myself).

 

I can see that the basic flight controls of stick, rudder and throttle are done by feel alone, but there are various keyboard commands or button presses that are needed in a flight as well - how does a player in VR manage these?

 

The majority of commands can be programmed into a joystick\throttle and those that can't be programmed can be operated with the mouse which is much easier to use with VR and if using the Oculus CV1 there is the leapmotion and I am sure most simulators will have the drivers and software implemented so that you can use your hands in the cockpit and operate clickable cockpits with your hands It's excellent when used with P3D\FSX if using FlyInside and it also as a see through function so you can see outside the headset. 

[unreasonable]

From what I've gathered the Vive has a see-through function using a camera, while the Rift has a gap on the bottom that you can peek through.

 

 

OK I can see how that could work - maybe, but still likely to break the seamless immersion that is the point of VR, I would think.

 

@WingitWingit - As for programming all the keystrokes into HOTAS and using them blind I am unconvinced - pressing the wrong button can have terminal consequences. Using a mouse when flying is also a no-no for me: I am not taking my RH off the stick to fiddle about with a mouse.

 

Personally I am sceptical that I will personally wish to use VR - but then I am sitting five feet away from a 70inch HDTV, so my immersion is already fairly good! But I have an open mind. I do worry that the game play element is in danger of being left behind by another round of graphics gee-whizzery. I am sure a friend who does my IT for me will be experimenting with VR, so I will at least have an opportunity to have a look at how it works for free!

Edited April 25, 2016 by unreasonable

[saunder]

I can honestly say that I do see why those who have not experienced it are scepticle but I have been using it for 18 months and would not fly without it. I think BOS is one of the best combat simulators out there but I don't even have it installed and will not install it unless VR is implemented. The total immersion that is achieved with VR overrides any down sides to VR I have no problem with frame rates and I have not got the latest hardware. The first time I put the headset on I was totally taken back by what I saw it is a completely different world the first thing I wanted to do was reach in and touch the controls.

 

You would be surprised on how much easier it is to use a clickable cockpit with VR much easier than using a monitor and once again using leap motion is getting better and better in P3D to reach into the cockpit and flick a switch is as good as it gets.

 

It does come down to the individual on what they find acceptable and yes what they can afford, but for me no VR no flight simulator and I have been using flight simulators since they began.  I hope you do get to try VR it would be interesting to see what you think and another thing wearing an Oculus Rift for 5 mins and making a decision is a waste of time it takes the brain a while to adjust and once it does you put the headset on and its fantastic from the second you put it on. 

[unreasonable]

I think my hesitation is due to the fact that I prefer SP for various reasons so when I fly in BoS or elsewhere it is because I want the feeling that I am a military pilot carrying out a mission and trying to survive. This means that the game has to convince me to care about my RP alter ego, find the tactical situation believable and so on. That means a context in which to set the mission, and AI and mission plans that are plausible. Once in the mission, AI behaviour - friendly, enemy, AAA all has to be broadly credible: by which I mean you are not constantly stopping to look at something happening and thinking :"Oh that is just ridiculous". 

 

If I am reminded every few minutes of the limits of the programming it is only possible to play in a sort of ironic mode - how I play RoF most of the time.

 

No amount of VR graphics is going to hold my attention for long, any more than looking out of an actual plane window, if the mission itself is not satisfying. On the other hand, as sometimes happens when the AI "gets it right", the current level of graphics we have is already enough to leave me sweating and weak kneed at the end of a particularly gruelling fight. 

 

The difficulty is that these other factors are lagging in CFS development: they are hard to program (or so the developers say), and various user groups have different requirements.

 

People have mentioned the porn application of VR - but as a parallel to my point here, if the girls are ugly why would you want to see them in more detail?

[SharpeXB]

I have read a lot of the replies to the review that this thread is based on and I get the feeling that most of the negative comments are from people who have never even tried VR and the comment regarding pixels anything like that soon becomes unnoticeable as your brain makes the adjustments, the tracking is almost faultless far better than trackir and going back to the pixels being noticeable I would rather have that and looking into a detailed cockpit than a picture on a square box with a wall behind it there is no contest there. I also think that it is the fact that a lot of flightsim enthusiasts have some very nice setups that they are in danger of them being obsolete I have some very nice gear (see attached pics) the tornado throttle module is for flying anything not just a tornado and its not finished yet but back to the subject I will still use them with VR and if that changed I would not hesitate to let them go rather than not use VR and they have taken me 3 years to assemble... Flying WW2 combat in DCS with VR is an absolutely amazing experience.

Flight sims won't decide the sucess or failure of VR. Flying games of all types only account for less than 1% of PC game sales and only .1% of games overall. Home cockpit builders are an even smaller subset of flying game players.

 

What's probably more a concern for developers is that 4 of the top 10 selling games last year were 1st-person shooters which by most accounts don't adapt to VR very well.

 

And when you look at the reasons why 3D gaming failed, all these reasons still apply to VR. Except the quality of the 3D experience which is better. Although the "immersion" of 3D was actually a negative in some ways too. Is VR better enough to counter all these other reasons?

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/04/10-reasons-why-3d-gaming-failed/

 

You could even add to the list above another trait that VR has, at least currently.

It's a handicap to the player. Unlike head tracking or better resolution or higher graphics and frame rates which bestow an advantage to the user. Unlike all of the other hardware PC gamers equip themselves with, VR is a detriment.

Low resolution, inability to use the zoom view, lower graphic settings, inability to see outside controls, 1:1 head tracking which is actually more physically difficult than just moving a mouse or a hat switch. Potential motion sickness. All those combine to put the VR player at increased difficulty. Whether it's being competitive at multiplayer or playing at challenging SP missions, VR (as it is now at least) is a hinderance.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SharpeXB

[Lusekofte]

 this is cool VR usage

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/126073580757532/1157150947649785/?notif_t=like&notif_id=1461597699255559

[saunder]

Flight sims won't decide the sucess or failure of VR. Flying games of all types only account for less than 1% of PC game sales and only .1% of games overall. Home cockpit builders are an even smaller subset of flying game players.

 

What's probably more a concern for developers is that 4 of the top 10 selling games last year were 1st-person shooters which by most accounts don't adapt to VR very well.

 

And when you look at the reasons why 3D gaming failed, all these reasons still apply to VR. Except the quality of the 3D experience which is better. Although the "immersion" of 3D was actually a negative in some ways too. Is VR better enough to counter all these other reasons?

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/04/10-reasons-why-3d-gaming-failed/

 

You could even add to the list above another trait that VR has, at least currently.

It's a handicap to the player. Unlike head tracking or better resolution or higher graphics and frame rates which bestow an advantage to the user. Unlike all of the other hardware PC gamers equip themselves with, VR is a detriment.

Low resolution, inability to use the zoom view, lower graphic settings, inability to see outside controls, 1:1 head tracking which is actually more physically difficult than just moving a mouse or a hat switch. Potential motion sickness. All those combine to put the VR player at increased difficulty. Whether it's being competitive at multiplayer or playing at challenging SP missions, VR (as it is now at least) is a hinderance.

 

 

I see your point but the link means nothing its about 3D gaming this is VR 3D is just a small portion of it.. Only time will tell but I am putting my money on VR..

[taildraggernut]

SharpeXB really doesn't want VR to be a thing, too bad it's going to be.

[1PL-Banzai-1Esk]

VR is going to fail , geee , I better cancel my Rift pre-order .

 

On a serious note , even if it does fail as a mass market device it will still be here and it's already amazing. Even if somehow Oculus folded and never developed CV2 , I would still use CV1 to play DCS and Cliffs of Dover (when we get support in TF 5.0 patch).

 

I think that somehow misconception is that Rift should completely replace your monitor. I believe it to be more of an addition to my gaming rig, I will still play BoS and RoF on my monitor when I want to compete.

 

 

When I want to be inside a game I feel comfortable in , I will use Rift , DCS , Elite : Dangerous are both amazing experiences. I am sure there will be more to follow.

 

Yes it is pricey , yes you need most powerful rig you can get , it can make you puke , but it's the most amazing development in gaming industry since 3D graphics.

 

I am sure that there will be more occasions for people to try out Rift or Vive at Airshows and other events , and once you try it , you will be amazed.

[coconut]

SharpeXB really doesn't want VR to be a thing, too bad it's going to be.

 

I think all his points are fair criticism, then it's a matter of personal experience whether the negatives outweigh the positive. Hard to tell today which way it's going to go. I think the author of the article is exagerating a bit, media likes to do that.

 

I would be very surprised if it failed. The Vive is at least as good as the wii and the kinect, which took some time to fail (a year or so?). I bet one year from now VR will have had interesting developments in terms of accessibility and features. If it doesn't, then I can see it failing, but even then, only temporarily.

 

One thing I wonder, today it may be hard to choose for some if they want to upgrade to 4K or VR. It seems to me both are very attractive. But what's after 4K? There's a point where there is little to gain from smaller pixels.

[Dakpilot]

4K VR

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[SharpeXB]

SharpeXB really doesn't want VR to be a thing, too bad it's going to be.

Oh I don't really want it to fail. I hope it turns out to be really amazing. But that remains to be seen.

For now I know I would be disappointed by it so I'll wait.

 

and once you try it , you will be amazed.

And that brings up a key point of concern here. Where are these devices at electronics stores where you could try them out in person? I don't see anyone (US) stocking them. They only have them to order online. Of course I'd like to try one. Every other prior amazing new tech product was there for you to try hands on. Game consoles, flat panel HDTV, iPhones, iPads, High Def Disc players. All of them were front and center at actual stores.

But retailers figure these won't sell or they would be there. That's not a good sign.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SharpeXB

[1PL-Banzai-1Esk]

Wait for the market to saturate. There is four months wait for Rift now. That's why there is no units to buy off the shelf.

 

People are paying crazy money on ebay to get their hands on Rift or Vive without the wait.

 

If there was Rift sold in a shop near where I live I would buy it tomorrow.

Edited April 25, 2016 by 307_Banzai

[SharpeXB]

Wait for the market to saturate. There is four months wait for Rift now. That's why there is no units to buy off the shelf.

 

People are paying crazy money on ebay to get their hands on Rift or Vive without the wait.

 

If there was Rift sold in a shop near where I live I would buy it tomorrow.

When the world was crazy for the iPhone, there was still one in the Apple Store you could see and touch.

In reality the Rift is not the kind of device that would sell easily in a retail store because only 1% of the customers will have a PC which can run one. You'd need to sell them whole package, PC plus headset. Indeed that what I see Best Buy (the only US consumer electronics store) selling, and online only. And it would be crazy to buy a $1,500 package from Best Buy because the way it works, in the US, you don't pay any sales tax shopping online (why there are no electronics stores left) so you'd just buy it direct from Oculus and save the tax.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SharpeXB

[Urra]

Pc sales fell 10% again this year, if anything vr should stabalize the fall of the pc for a year or two.

[SharpeXB]

Pc sales fell 10% again this year, if anything vr should stabalize the fall of the pc for a year or two.

Only 1% of PCs can handle VR so those headsets won't likely have an effect on sales.

"For many households, the recent trend for PCs has been power efficiency and reduction in size for greater mobility, meaning they may not have the power for the best VR experiences."

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35220974

[JG27_Chivas]

There is no doubt that the first version of VR headsets has issues.  By far the most important factor is do people still want it.  Its obvious to anyone that has tried the consumer versions is that they will.  The first question out of most first time users is....Where can I get one?  There is no doubt that a large part of the market cant afford the first consumer versions of VR and the hardware to run them, but they will still want one.  I can't afford a luxury car, but that didn't kill the luxury car market.  The good news is that consumer VR is much cheaper. 

[SOLIDKREATE]

Oh I plan on using one for Architecture. I can see that for certain.

 

The average PC gamer is 38 years old and has a median income of $69,000

What person in that demographic is going to buy a teddy bear game?

 

 

Not me, I'm in the same boat at you.

[Scarecrow]

I'm waiting until Gen 3 of VR. The pixel density isn't there yet

 

My thoughts exactly. I really hope this VR push makes it that far. IL2/DCS in decent VR would be worth paying alot of money for.

 

That article does make me worry though, Kinect and Wii failed because because they had no use to "gamers". VR might go the same way as it really isn't an advantage to console/FPS players who constitute the majority of gamers.

 

Only Tim will tell.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Scarecrow

[Dakpilot]

 

 

Only Tim will tell.

 

Who is this Tim you talk of, does he have inside information? 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[HunDread]

I can honestly say that I do see why those who have not experienced it are scepticle but I have been using it for 18 months and would not fly without it. I think BOS is one of the best combat simulators out there but I don't even have it installed and will not install it unless VR is implemented. The total immersion that is achieved with VR overrides any down sides to VR

 

I have a DK2 since august 2014 and I was like you saying I wouldn't play any sim on monitors after doing iRacing and E D in VR so BOS was not installed for several months.

Then I was bored in November and decided to give it a go and dug up my TrackIR from the bottom of a box of unused stuff and installed BOS.

 

It was a good decision. Since then I think I have spent around 4-500 hours in BOS and I'm happy I did not wait for VR implemented.

 

I agree that VR is great and I am waiting for implementation but there is a way from VR to monitors as well without any issues.

 

Since then I don't have E D installed.

[JG27_Chivas]

I have a DK2 since august 2014 and I was like you saying I wouldn't play any sim on monitors after doing iRacing and E D in VR so BOS was not installed for several months.

Then I was bored in November and decided to give it a go and dug up my TrackIR from the bottom of a box of unused stuff and installed BOS.

 

It was a good decision. Since then I think I have spent around 4-500 hours in BOS and I'm happy I did not wait for VR implemented.

 

I agree that VR is great and I am waiting for implementation but there is a way from VR to monitors as well without any issues.

 

Since then I don't have E D installed.

 

It definitely wouldn't be a problem going from the DK2 prototype back to a monitor, as the DK2 was no where near good enough to be a consumer product. I hardly used my DK2, mostly because it didn't have an IPD adjustment.  My CV1 is a huge improvement over the DK2, and good enough to be the first  consumer product.  The transition back to gaming on a monitor wouldn't be so easy.  That said the monitor is no where near dead yet, but its use as gaming hardware will diminish greatly as each new generation of VR appears.

Edited April 27, 2016 by JG27_Chivas

[1PL-Banzai-1Esk]

It definitely wouldn't be a problem going from the DK2 prototype back to a monitor, as the DK2 was no where near good enough to be a consumer product. I hardly used my DK2, mostly because it didn't have an IPD adjustment.  My CV1 is a huge improvement over the DK2, and good enough to be the first  consumer product.  The transition back to gaming on a monitor wouldn't be so easy.  That said the monitor is no where near dead yet, but its use as gaming hardware will diminish greatly as each new generation of VR appears.

 

Hi Chivas ,

 

Could you share your experiences with CV1 ? Do you play DCS , and how would you compare DK2 in DCS to CV1.

 

Thanks

[JG27_Chivas]

Hi Chivas ,

 

Could you share your experiences with CV1 ? Do you play DCS , and how would you compare DK2 in DCS to CV1.

 

Thanks

 

Unfortunately I have an issue with the Tracking camera not seeing the HMD so only the internal tracking is working.  I haven't been able to test, nor is there any point to doing so, BUT it was very easy to see the huge increase in perceived resolution from the DK2 to the CV1.   I'm in the RMA process right now, which could be a very lengthy process if some forum posts are to be believed.  Hopefully Oculus proves my apprehension unjustified, but I'm not holding my breath.

[HunDread]

It definitely wouldn't be a problem going from the DK2 prototype back to a monitor, as the DK2 was no where near good enough to be a consumer product. I hardly used my DK2, mostly because it didn't have an IPD adjustment.  My CV1 is a huge improvement over the DK2, and good enough to be the first  consumer product.  The transition back to gaming on a monitor wouldn't be so easy.  That said the monitor is no where near dead yet, but its use as gaming hardware will diminish greatly as each new generation of VR appears.

 

So far what I've heard CV1 may not be THAT MUCH of an improvement over DK2 (I don't have IPD issues). In fact the first few impressions I have read were all pretty moderate. The guys stated that ok it's good, good, but all of them prepared everyone to accept downsides in order not to get disappointed when theirs arrive.

 

I am mostly getting my info from the iRacing forums and sometimes oculus forums but the latter is a piece of crap full of adults acting like infantile idiots. I cannot bear that forum for more than 5 minutes. For me that is nauseous, not the Rift.

 

And I tend to skip those 'reviews' which starts with a big 'wow' or 'I'm totally blown away... blablabla'. I don't want to read those childish people publicly justifying their 6-1000 USD spending mainly for themselves alone. Those people would even be praising a 800 USD handful of s**t they'd have to slush on their face no matter what.

 

I read those in which grown up people talk about pros and cons.

 

And the reason is that back then when I was waiting for the DK2 I did read those people's reviews who were so 'blown away' and wowed all the time so when mine arrived I was totally disappointed. While if people had been able to write their impressions as grown up people, that would have saved me my disappointment.

 

In a few weeks I got used to the limitations and started to enjoy the DK2. I haven't fired up iRacing without it ever since and I am not planning to.

 

So my point is that by concentrating on cool-headed reviews, CV1 may not seem that much of an improvement over DK2 to justify 800+ USD spending when I already have a DK2.

Edited April 28, 2016 by Black_Sab

[1PL-Banzai-1Esk]

Check this out Sharpe, maybe you can get a demo :

 

https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/oculus-rift-retail-experience-kicks-off-at-best-buy-locations-may-7/

[SharpeXB]

Yeah that's good news. I may even be getting one of these at my office soon. :-D