VRworks w/ support for Devs, current VR implementation, into an emerging market

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Good day,

 

I have come to some thoughts regarding the development of VR and its current implementation ingame. There are several issues and also possibilities on what could be done to improve IL-2's VR features:

 

 

1) Ingame AA blurs a lot in VR. Would MSGAA be implementable like in EVE Valkyrie?

 

2) Disconnect ground texture resolution from rendering range of ground objects please. VR users could use the new extended range for tree rendering that gets enabled with Ultra+4xTerrain - but do not need the very high bump-mapping/texture-resolutions that come with it.

 

3) The ability to set grass to 0.

 

4) Some HUD optimization if possible, please. Current HUD eats 20-30fps, people in VR fly without HUD, thus without chat.

 

5) The rendering propellers interfere strongly with Oculus' ASW technology. What fix could there be - maybe disabling prop rendering in VR at anything above 1000rpm?

 

6) Is a release of IL-2 BoX in the Oculus Home store if possible? It would be a great way to pierce into a new emerging market with direct exposure, and generate new income.

 

7) Nvidia VRworks new Lens Matched Shading technology would be great! Dx11 compatible, would that be possible? https://developer.nv...smatchedshading  Could you apply for VRworks, I heard Nvidia even hands out support for developers who want to integrate it?

 

 

Best regards!

 

Fenris

 

 

[chiliwili69]

Good to be constructive about the current VR implementation, but take into account that development resources a always quite busy, and although VR sub-community is growing (we are about 120 people, see the poll https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27278-about-vr-and-vr-devices-used/)we are still a small group inside the IL-2 community.

 

No need to say (but I say) that current VR implementations is outstanding, but small details like the ones above could be improved.

 

Regarding your points:

 

1) I use AAx2 only and with some SS (1.7 in steamVR) it gives a decent image. AA algorithms are going to introduce some blur in the image.

The MSGAA is a Nvidia propietary tech, I would not tie IL-2 to a propietary tech. 

But the real problem is the current resolution of VR devices, it is still low. When they will go to 4K per eye (or fov render with eye tracking) you will almost not need any kind of AA.

 

2) Agree, this could be de-coupled. High resolution textures eats a lot of fps. This would not require a high dev effort.

 

3) This can be set in startup.cfg, but it would be desirable to have it as option.

 

4) I only use HUD for reading the map in some moments. All the other things are in the cockpit. Regarding the chat for MP , there could be an option to have only HUD for chat.

 

5) I switch ASW off, and squeeze my CPU/RAM to get 90 fps most of the time.

 

6) Has been already posted in this forum. It has nothing to do with IL-2 VR experience.

 

7) This tech was explained when they introduced the Pascal cards. Again it is a propietary technology. For sure they will improve the fps since less device supersampling will be needed, but the current IL-2 VR bottleneck is more in the CPU/RAM rather than the GPU (a 1070 is enough for IL-2 VR).

 

 

I would also encourage you and any VR user to analyze their VR performance with the IL-2 VR benchmark you can follow at https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29322-measuring-rig-performance-common-baseline/

 

If your VR performance is below your CPU or GPU peers, something could be wrong is in your hardware/drivers/settings or some hardware upgrades will give you a fps boost.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

I disagree on the point regarding the number of VR players. I have never seen the poll before. I just asked in discord, there are 3 people I fly with who also use VR, they also haven't heard of the poll nor participated in it.

 

1) Do you believe that with the current implemented VR technologies in IL-2, you'll be able to take advantage of 4k goggles in 2018? Don't you think it was better to improve the experience already, instead of waiting a year?

 

2) Yes, very important. It could free a lot of overhead, and thus improve minimal fps, which is very important in VR.

 

3) Almost - it can be set to 1, so it is still loaded. I guess this is redundant.

 

4) Toggling the HUD on and off for the chat is a hassle in MP. You lose a lot of information, even when toggled on a coolie hat. It needs to be a constant without pancaking your performance.

 

5) I switch ASW off as well, but only because IL-2 lacks the proper environment to use it. Most other VR titles use it incredibly well, and it is a very big advantage to have ASW for translateral fluidity in movement, and fluid movement of planes passing by.

 

6) It does have everything to do with IL-2's VR experience. More exposure = more customers = more income = more funds available = more development on a better VR implementation. 

 

7) There is nothing bad with propietary technologies. They are functions in NVIDIA's package that you get by implementing the latter. You also get constant continuous development of the technologies in this package for a majority of your customer base.

 

I have seen your comparisons, but this is not about my system - is fresh, clean and powerful. Would a standstill in the implementation of emerging technologies such as VRworks be advisable if we want to use 4K goggles next year. Do you think with the current barebones VR implementation, lack of gfx customization, lack of available VR technologies, the performance in 4K goggles would be any better? Can you play fluently on Steam's SS 4.0 (equivalent MPD to 4K goggles) now?

Edited August 26, 2017 by 1CAG_Fenris_Wolf

[hotshotmike1001]

would love to be able to use the controllers in the vc  

[blitze]

Nothing wrong with proprietary  tech except when it comes from a corporation like Nvidia for example G-Sync as opposed to the open implementation equivalent FreeSync.  Just pony up that extra Nvidia Cash people for your G-Sync capable Monitor.  There are other alternatives to Nvidia VR-Works which will be available to everyone to implement.

 

I would be wary of 777 implementing technologies from corporations who have a history of cash cowing and restricting those technologies to the industry.

 

As for true 4k headsets in 2018 (4k rendered per eye), holding my breath on that one.  Still, I would be happy with 1440p upscaled to a 4k per eye screen just so to eliminate screen door effects.  Might be a bit more reasonable with regards to PC capabilities for the immediate term.  Not sure how Pimax will do it with their up coming 8k HMD and what PC equipment you require to drive it.