VRSS works in IL2

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Exactly @Alonzo, that's the easiest way to find out whether it works in a game. Then swivel head around, due to the big delta in render target and the border of the VRSS sphere, you will be able to see the border and can make out where it is located. 

 

And indeed, in-game MSAA will be replaced by real SuperSampling - but unfortunately the sphere does not fit the center. I don't know what the sphere's center is tied to. I assume either the vanishing point, or by default the center of the rendering mask(s)? 

 

If anyone has enough time at hand to find out, that could help tremendously.

[skpcarey1]

I dont really see what youre referring to in my VR version of IL2( i Have an Index )but since activating this but, I have my visuals cranked all the way up and im averaging 45fps

(I would like to make it 60fps)which is smooth for me but I will keep experimenting as I am retired with considerable free time to help.

[YoYo]

As I remember, when this driver was released I tested this settings (reddit manual) in IL-2 and it doesnt work. Topic about this is present,

it was only placebo effect and this function turn off MSAA in the sim.

 

Jason confirmed also no support:

 

 

Edited February 12, 2020 by YoYo

[FTC_ChilliBalls]

 

@YoYo Jason only confirmed that no effort was going to be coming from their corner to implement VRSS since they´ll be switching to deferred rendering in the future. Makes sense.

If I have understood it correctly, VRSS uses the sample grid of MSAA to selectively apply Supersampling in the middle of the screen.

 

As for IL2 and functionality, I haven´t tried it out myself, but Fenris seems to have discovered sth.

On 2/10/2020 at 9:58 PM, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

I tested it, and found the functionality working - but not correctly.

Now the result is this:

VRSS does work, but incorrectly. Its center is not located in the center of the vision, but it is there. A picture says more than a thousand words.

 

As NVidia has stated, the games need to be updated individually and cleared. It the center of the VRSS sphere must get adapted. If it's tied to the vanishing point, I do not know.

 

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Exactly, it does work, but the center is not in the center of your vision.

 

Headsets with normal Field of View like Index or Rift S probably don't even get to see the VRSS sphere. The fact that I can even see it, is probably because of my large FOV Pimax headset.

 

To draw the comparison with my awesome paint skillz:

 

The black circles is Pimax FOV, the brown is Index FOV, the red Rhombi are the sweet spots. It's merely an approximation to demonstrate where the VRSS sphere is located.

[coconut]

It's worth noting I'm not experiencing @SCG_Fenris_Wolf's problem. The VRSS circle appears to be pretty well centered on the direction of my gaze. Not sure what's the reason. Maybe a different version of SteamVR, of PiTool, quality setting in PiTool or the use of shader-modifying mods?

[=SFG=capt_nasties]

On 2/10/2020 at 7:38 PM, Alonzo said:

OK. So this is a different process than I previously tried, and I'm using OpenComposite to bypass SteamVR, so I guess all bets are off for how it might work. What I'm hearing though, is:

• Enable VRSS using the Profile Inspector
• Set in-game AA to 4x (multisample=2 in config file)
• Set game render target to less than 100% -- is this achieved by pixel density < 1.0 in Oculus Tray Tool?
• Observe VRSS renders outside of frame at lower resolution than inside, which will be at up to 4x multisample depending on headroom?

Also @capt_nasties I suspect with the Reverb you're in such a better position with the native pixels that you're going to see less improvement in quality, but if you can convince the VRSS system to do less work around the edges, you'll get better FPS overall. The centre won't get much better (Reverb center at 2x AA is probably pretty awesome already, great device) but the performance might.

 

Yes I first am going to test if actually reducing the SS value to less than 100% actually saves resources.  If that is a "thing" then it seems a VRSS test is warranted.  more to come on this.  Given IL2 is so CPU bound I am still a bit skeptical, but its definitely an interesting topic.  

[Privet]

On OG Vive I have something similar to Fenris_Wolf - a thin vertical band where the VRSS is visible.

[JG1_Labroisse]

I tried it on the Reverb.  Set SS to 100% Anti-aliasing in game to 4 and enabled VRSS through Nvidia Inspector.  It didn't seem to change performance one way or the other, and the image quality was about the same or perhaps slightly worse than running 120% SS without VRSS and AA @ 4 in-game..

 

Running 2080Ti, intel 5820K CPU oc to 4.0 GHz.

[=SFG=capt_nasties]

just got done doing some bench marking with my HP Reverb and noticed an average of 3 FPS increase in going from a super sampling value of 106% in steam VR to 56% in steam VR. (this was in scripted campaign)  I checked in the headset and it definitely was down sampling the image.  Given the lack luster gain in performance from this I am not inclined to even try VRSS applied to a lower super sampling value to try and obtain better performance.  

Edited February 14, 2020 by capt_nasties

[21.Gr.CT.Ludovisi]

I found opencomposite a real improvment of VR performance of this game. At the same time, the injection of VRSS in games like pCars2 is quite effective.

 

Anyone know if this method works with OC or just with steamVR?

 

Thanks

[DD_Arthur]

2 hours ago, I./SG1.Luvisi said:

Anyone know if this method works with OC or just with steamVR?

 

It works with OpenComposite

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 2/13/2020 at 8:54 PM, coconut said:

It's worth noting I'm not experiencing @SCG_Fenris_Wolf's problem. The VRSS circle appears to be pretty well centered on the direction of my gaze. Not sure what's the reason. Maybe a different version of SteamVR, of PiTool, quality setting in PiTool or the use of shader-modifying mods?

Hey, 

do you mind telling us your settings so I can check that out too?

Everything you can think of, SteamVR settings, PiTool settings, versions, mod use, etc.

[coconut]

SteamVR: 1.9.16

PiTool: 1.0.1.245, Firmware 2.1.255.255, Referesh rate 72Hz, IPD Offset +2, vertical offset 0, no FFR, Smarth Sth active, render quality 1

NVidia driver 442.19

No mods (in particular, no migoto)

[Privet]

Migoto mod is not a factor, VRSS area is the same with the mod turned on or off.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 2/16/2020 at 9:20 PM, coconut said:

SteamVR: 1.9.16

PiTool: 1.0.1.245, Firmware 2.1.255.255, Referesh rate 72Hz, IPD Offset +2, vertical offset 0, no FFR, Smarth Sth active, render quality 1

NVidia driver 442.19

No mods (in particular, no migoto)

 

Check, thanks mate. 

[FTC_ChilliBalls]

@SCG_Fenris_Wolf since you highlighted the SPD offset in coconuts Post you quoted, did playing with it have any results?

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

I didn't have time to play yet. Saturday is tomorrow.??

Edited November 5, 2020 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[E69_Qpassa_VR]

Anything has changed with recent updates?

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

2 hours ago, E69_Qpassa_VR said:

Anything has changed with recent updates?

Unfortunately no, and never will be.

 

Requires forward rendering.

[Boundless_I]

Hi everyone, just wondering if there are any news on adding a VRSS to this game anytime soon? As having a top rig doesn't help too much in VR in this game. Thought once I get my hands on 3090, I finally could put graphics on high and 90 fps on my Odyssey+, no chance

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Hmm I refer to my previous post, 8 months ago.

 

To elaborate, IL-2 would need an engine upgrade first.

[Boundless_I]

2 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Hmm I refer to my previous post, 8 months ago.

 

To elaborate, IL-2 would need an engine upgrade first.

 

Hi Fenris, thanks for your response. Just took some time to read the whole thing. IL2 developers have to offer you a job at their company as you did and keep doing so much stuff for the community. It is sad though, that with such good rigs we still can't be competitive (picture quality) to non VR users.  

 

Also, just ordered myself a Reverb G2 Omnicept Edition, still waiting for the delivery though (this is why got myself into this topic), any chances I could use eye tracking in this game? Asking you as you are like VR Guru here  Thanks

[Drum]

The Tobii eye tracker 5 is compatible with IL-2, and I believe the Omnicept has Tobii eye tracking gear so should work I would think.  Keep us posted on how good that is if it does, please Boundless_!

[Boundless_I]

No worries, but I have no idea if I need anything to turn on in game or somewhere in controls. Definitely will post once I figure out how to use it properly as I am coming from Odyssey+ and can't imagine what the difference will be there.

[Drum]

From what I've heard, VRSS requires zero coding from IL-2 to work, they just have to send Nvidia their app, who will then check it out to see if it's recognizing VRSS properly before Nvidia adds the game to the "list" of games cleared for activation with the Tobii eye tracker.  If it's not on the "list", it gets no love from the eye tracking unit, which is the same situation the new Tobii eye tracker 5 unit has.  We have to use an older eye tracking driver 1.6.4 instead of the newest 2.4.1 driver because it's not cleared for the newer driver "list".  It would be nice if they'd get onto that driver listing...

 

Anyway, once they're on the "list", your new Reverb G2 Omnicept will be fully funtional with IL-2.  The quest for a cheap Video card can end for most people because they can now just spend that money on a new VR headset with eye tracking, instead.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

Well, it's not *exactly* VRSS, but there's AMD's FidelityFX SuperResolution which is similar and definitely works in IL2 (although the high-res part is fixed to the center of the screen).

 

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 8/6/2021 at 12:35 AM, Drum said:

From what I've heard, VRSS requires zero coding from IL-2 to work[...]

I wish this was correct. Unfortunately IL-2 uses deferred rendering, which by pipeline design is incompatible to eye-tracking and will remain so. It would require a rollback to forward rendering, and/or preferably DX12. Also an OpenXR implementation (which OculusFB defaults to for new titles as well by now) because the game needs to dynamically access the geometric informations of the headsets as well.

 

Bet it is quite the rewrite. 

 

Point is... please do not recommend people to buy the very expensive Eye-Tracking systems for IL-2. They do not and will not work... don't get me wrong, I'd rather have the facts be different as well. 

On 8/4/2021 at 2:13 PM, Boundless_I said:

 

Hi Fenris, thanks for your response. Just took some time to read the whole thing. IL2 developers have to offer you a job at their company as you did and keep doing so much stuff for the community. It is sad though, that with such good rigs we still can't be competitive (picture quality) to non VR users.  

 

Also, just ordered myself a Reverb G2 Omnicept Edition, still waiting for the delivery though (this is why got myself into this topic), any chances I could use eye tracking in this game? Asking you as you are like VR Guru here  Thanks

Thank you? Although I'm afraid I'd be a bit too busy for that... also I nag so much about some things that I was breaking balls a lot!?

 

 

P.S. Source: This is the link to apply to VRSS(2) and get your title to enable FixFovR as well as DynFovR

Edited August 7, 2021 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[Drum]

I fooled myself into thinking my Tobii eye tracker was the same as rendering VRSS at the eye location, but it's not just tracking the eye locations...   I stand corrected, Wolfe.  ?

Edited August 9, 2021 by Drum

[Boundless_I]

On 8/7/2021 at 10:20 PM, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Well, it's not *exactly* VRSS, but there's AMD's FidelityFX SuperResolution which is similar and definitely works in IL2 (although the high-res part is fixed to the center of the screen).

 

Thanks, will give it a go, once got a chance

On 8/8/2021 at 6:52 AM, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

I wish this was correct. Unfortunately IL-2 uses deferred rendering, which by pipeline design is incompatible to eye-tracking and will remain so. It would require a rollback to forward rendering, and/or preferably DX12. Also an OpenXR implementation (which OculusFB defaults to for new titles as well by now) because the game needs to dynamically access the geometric informations of the headsets as well.

 

Bet it is quite the rewrite. 

 

Point is... please do not recommend people to buy the very expensive Eye-Tracking systems for IL-2. They do not and will not work... don't get me wrong, I'd rather have the facts be different as well. 

Thank you? Although I'm afraid I'd be a bit too busy for that... also I nag so much about some things that I was breaking balls a lot!?

 

 

P.S. Source: This is the link to apply to VRSS(2) and get your title to enable FixFovR as well as DynFovR

Thanks again, just got my beautiful headset today. Very uncomfy compared to my Odyssey+ with vr cover, but what an amazing picture those lenses could give... Had tested it only for few minutes so haven't played il2 yet, but definitely needs some modifications for the comfort.

 

On what you said about Vrss thing is just so disappointing, I can't even explain it. In such a game where your eyes are everything, you can't use them... I don't understand how the developers won't admit that vr is still the future for the games like this, where you can actually experience all the freedom of the beauty of flying. Getting these resolutions and eye tracking possibilities, how can you just close your eyes on this and skip the whole thing? This is too hard for me to understand. Hopefully, they will change the way they see things now ?

Edited August 10, 2021 by Boundless_I

[AEthelraedUnraed]

12 minutes ago, Boundless_I said:

On what you said about Vrss thing is just so disappointing, I can't even explain it.

Please try, because I can't quite understand what the major problem is, and in what way "the developers won't admit VR is the future"? VRSS isn't some kind of magic spell that, once activated, will somehow give you 144fps at max gfx settings. It renders some parts of the screen at a higher resolution, which is the same thing as techniques like FSR (which does work in IL2) do. Please tell me, what is the reason why not having VRSS is so important to you? What would you expect to happen if IL2 had VRSS, that isn't the case now?

[Boundless_I]

12 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Please try, because I can't quite understand what the major problem is, and in what way "the developers won't admit VR is the future"? VRSS isn't some kind of magic spell that, once activated, will somehow give you 144fps at max gfx settings. It renders some parts of the screen at a higher resolution, which is the same thing as techniques like FSR (which does work in IL2) do. Please tell me, what is the reason why not having VRSS is so important to you? What would you expect to happen if IL2 had VRSS, that isn't the case now?

The simple reason is that I have an eye tracking and as I understood VRSS could adapt where my eye is and always give me the best visuals with a great performance boost. I will definitely try FSR as it will boost the FPS at least a bit, as I couldn't jump over 74 fps on 70%SS with a custom high custom graphics preset with my 8700K 4.8 ghz and 3090 aorus waterforce extreme which is also a bit overclocked.

All this is a big sadness for me (my personal opinion!) as this game on Ultra settings with a system like this in 2d would run easily 144+FPS in 2K resolution  with an amazing graphics and joy of smoothness which you can't get even close to in vr no matter which system you have.

[RAAF492SQNOz_Steve]

1 hour ago, Boundless_I said:

The simple reason is that I have an eye tracking and as I understood VRSS could adapt where my eye is and always give me the best visuals with a great performance boost. I will definitely try FSR as it will boost the FPS at least a bit, as I couldn't jump over 74 fps on 70%SS with a custom high custom graphics preset with my 8700K 4.8 ghz and 3090 aorus waterforce extreme which is also a bit overclocked.

All this is a big sadness for me (my personal opinion!) as this game on Ultra settings with a system like this in 2d would run easily 144+FPS in 2K resolution  with an amazing graphics and joy of smoothness which you can't get even close to in vr no matter which system you have.

You should be able to get pretty good VR performance with a recent high end system.   I am not familiar with the 8700K CPU (or Odyssey+) so am writing somewhat generically, I get pretty good VR results with the HP Reverb G2.   I have a Ryzen 5800x and a MSI RTX Gaming Trio X and very seldom drop below 80 fps in complex scenario's. Run IL2 at Ultra setting with MSAA x2 and 100% SS but with shadow and cloud on medium with no reprojection. 

Edit: Referring to single player fps performance, have not graduated to multiplayer yet.

 

Can get 85 fps average in the Syn Vander VR2 benchmark as well.

 

I would expect that your GPU has much more overclocking ability than mine which is power restricted to 370W. My suspicion is that you are CPU bound and that your GPU is only running at 80% capacity or so.   

 

fpsVR should give you a good indication if your CPU is not able to supply enough data for your GPU to run at what it is capable of delivering.  

 

I got a 10 - 15% IPC (and corresponding IL2 fps) gain when I gave up on my 10th Gen Intel CPU and changed over to the Ryzen CPU.

 

Edit 2: just looked up the resolution of the Odyssey plus and noting that the Reverb G2 is much higher resolution would guess that your PC has some un-resolved configuration or software issue.

Edited August 11, 2021 by RAAF492SQNOz_Steve
Comment about single player and chart added

[AEthelraedUnraed]

2 hours ago, RAAF492SQNOz_Steve said:

You should be able to get pretty good VR performance with a recent high end system.   I am not familiar with the 8700K CPU (or Odyssey+) so am writing somewhat generically, I get pretty good VR results with the HP Reverb G2.

He uses a G2 as well, the Odyssey was his previous device 

 

3 hours ago, Boundless_I said:

All this is a big sadness for me (my personal opinion!) as this game on Ultra settings with a system like this in 2d would run easily 144+FPS in 2K resolution  with an amazing graphics and joy of smoothness which you can't get even close to in vr no matter which system you have.

You do know that the Reverb G2 Omnicept Edition has a refresh rate of 90Hz, right? Meaning that everything your GPU renders over that number is just a waste of power. You'll never get 144 FPS, not even with a supercomputer.

 

Given that @RAAF492SQNOz_Steve has a similar configuration and is able to run IL2 at ultra with an average framerate of 85, pretty close to the max of 90, I think there may be something wrong in your configuration. As RAAF492SQNOZ_Steve suspects, it might well be your CPU that's not up to the job.

[C6_lefuneste]

Hello, I did some quick testing also because I upgraded my rig with a 3080Ti.

I was a bit disapointed  by performance I had in some scripted campaign.

In my case, the CPU is clearly creating issue, as FPSVR showned. It's a 8700k with 6 cores, @4,8 Gz, so it should not be a real issue. But my fps went down even if the CPU is loaded at less than 60%, so it's really a lack of parallelism problem. It seems less critical if you are not using "Ultra" settings.

I'm using 60 Hz as frequency for my Reverb, and fps went down to 40 fps. I can also add that il2 GB seems to handle reprojection worser than other sims, with a lot of articacts ans jaggies, so I can barely play with it.

Of course, I can have easilly 90 fps in QMB with ultra settings, but my point of view is you need to define your config for the worst cases, not for the easiest situation. If you have a lot of lag doing ground attack or in a furball, it's worthless to have 90 fps when navigating.

Edited August 11, 2021 by c6_lefuneste

[SCG_motoadve]

3 hours ago, c6_lefuneste said:

Hello, I did some quick testing also because I upgraded my rig with a 3080Ti.

I was a bit disapointed  by performance I had in some scripted campaign.

In my case, the CPU is clearly creating issue, as FPSVR showned. It's a 8700k with 6 cores, @4,8 Gz, so it should not be a real issue. But my fps went down even if the CPU is loaded at less than 60%, so it's really a lack of parallelism problem. It seems less critical if you are not using "Ultra" settings.

I'm using 60 Hz as frequency for my Reverb, and fps went down to 40 fps. I can also add that il2 GB seems to handle reprojection worser than other sims, with a lot of articacts ans jaggies, so I can barely play with it.

Of course, I can have easilly 90 fps in QMB with ultra settings, but my point of view is you need to define your config for the worst cases, not for the easiest situation. If you have a lot of lag doing ground attack or in a furball, it's worthless to have 90 fps when navigating.

I upgraded to a new PC, 3090 with i9 10900 @ 5.3Gz.

Can barely run the scripted campaigns Vive Pro 2 headset @90Hz , and I have lowered lots of settings, no AA, medium shadows, normal reflections, , no mirrors, I am disappointed with Il2 performance.

Also quick mission with 16 planes and heavy clouds lots of ghosting, and if I turn ON motion smoothing looks horrible in IL2 its unusable, too many artifacts, where in other sims it works and allows you to run them very smooth.

[dburne]

4 minutes ago, SCG_motoadve said:

I upgraded to a new PC, 3090 with i9 10900 @ 5.3Gz.

Can barely run the scripted campaigns Vive Pro 2 headset @90Hz , and I have lowered lots of settings, no AA, medium shadows, normal reflections, , no mirrors, I am disappointed with Il2 performance.

Also quick mission with 16 planes and heavy clouds lots of ghosting, and if I turn ON motion smoothing looks horrible in IL2 its unusable, too many artifacts, where in other sims it works and allows you to run them very smooth.

 

Have you tried lowering resolution in Vive Pro 2?

Native is going to be too high for IL-2.

[SCG_motoadve]

1 hour ago, dburne said:

 

Have you tried lowering resolution in Vive Pro 2?

Native is going to be too high for IL-2.

What resolution are you using?

I am using 3300x3300 or something close to that.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

It's unfortunately still an issue, especially when many clouds and shadows appear and at Ultra. It's definitely a pipeline issue, and I hope IL-2 upgrades their engine one day, vulkan or DX12, OpenXR, forward rendering (very important!!), etc. 

 

There's not much we can do as players, you can have a 1000HP or 1500HP engine but if the drivetrain and aerodynamics are from a Golf 2 then there's not much we can do. Jump about and pull our own legs out, it won't help us that much as we're fighting diminishing returns here.. 

 

 

Thats said, some upgrades still help. A 5800 running at 4.8GHz is as quick as a new Intel at 5.3-5.4GHz. 

My 5900 on stock allowed me to play on Ultra at 90 until the GPU hit its limits. But the entire demand is somewhat.. well, unreasonable. 

 

Clouds make demand explode on higher resolutions. Shadows as well. Post processing effects are mushing the picture. If we had forward rendering, we'd receive access to all the new tech like VRSS/eye tracking and if the engine would push depth information to OpenVR/OpenXR we'd get a motion reprojection with much less artifacts. Lemme dream, ay? :))

30 minutes ago, SCG_motoadve said:

What resolution are you using?

I am using 3300x3300 or something close to that.

Yours is fine, at these resolutions we can't change much. Clouds and so on increase in performance demand progressively the higher the resolutions go. The increase isn't linear. So there's nothing we can do except keep the resolutions lower.

Edited August 11, 2021 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[dburne]

1 hour ago, SCG_motoadve said:

What resolution are you using?

I am using 3300x3300 or something close to that.

 

Yeah that is about where I am as well.

I do not use Vive's Motion Compensation, to me it looks better without it.