What FoV number do you get for your device? (number below fps counter)

[chiliwili69]

As you know, in the 4.007 it was introduced a new number which appear below the in-game fps counter (press Backspace).

 

According to the Game update this number is the "current Field Of View". Which normally is measured in degrees.

 

I assume that they refer to the horizontal FOV, but they were not specific about that. If they refer to horizontal, what about the vertical FOV?  @Han

I also assume that they refer to the FOV of just one eye.

 

The above are just assumptions (perhaps game devs could clarify this more).

 

But the two assumptions are aligned with the value I expect to see. In the case of the Index the value shown during the game is 105 (in the menu is 45, but I discard this value, it must be a bug).

Some time ago I kept a table of calculated FOVs (horizontal and vertical) of different VR headsets: (look at the rendered FOV tab):

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJmnz_nVxI6_dG_UYNCCpZVK2-f8NBy-y1gia77Hu_k

 

this is the table:

 

The horizontal FOV for the Index for one eye is 103.6º which is quite close to the value shown by IL-2 counter.

 

I would like to know what value is shown for you for every VR headset, so we can compare the FOV which is used for IL-2 VR.

Edited July 12, 2020 by chiliwili69

[SvAF/F16_Goblin]

Reverb G1 = 91 degrees reported in-game

Edited July 30, 2020 by MA_Goblin

[-332FG-Gordon200]

2 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

in the menu is 45, but I discard this value, it must be a bug.

The menu screen is much closer to the player than normal screen. I believe the 45 is correct for what we are seeing at the moment.

 

Reverb G1 = 92

[E69_Qpassa_VR]

Samsung Odyssey 97

[HunDread]

CV1 - 80

[[CPT]Crunch]

O+ - 98, maximum zoom 30, menu 45.

[JimmySolarium_VR]

CV1 - 80

[ziher]

5K+ small 104, normal 114, large 128

[OrLoK]

rift s = 90

[Charlo-VRde]

Oculus Quest - 95 (if you want to add the Quest into your spreadsheet)

[cellinsky]

HTC Cosmos ---> 94
Is it depend on IPD? In may case its 65.0

Edited July 13, 2020 by cellinsky

[RedeyeStorm]

Index a steady 105.

[Alonzo]

Pimax Artisan, normal FOV, 116.

 

Chili, it might be useful to couple the in-game displayed FOV with the value from Risa2000's hmdq tool. That queries SteamVR for the actual rendered FOV. On my Artisan, for example, SteamVR reports 131 degrees hFOV. Since this is the rendered FOV it is the absolute maximum viewable FOV assuming lenses are perfect and nothing is lost to the display panel usage or warping the image to fit the lenses.

 

This is a database of field of view values, as reported by the tool. Again, people might perceive worse actual FOV, but these are reasonable numbers for objectively comparing headsets. Plus of course, this doesn't take into account usable FOV -- if only the center of the image is sharp, you can have gigantic FOV but it won't do you much good!

 

https://risa2000.github.io/hmdgdb/

 

[Varibraun]

Reverb G1 = 92

[GOA_Karaya_VR]

CV1 - 80

[HR_Zunzun]

Lenovo explorer 102º

[Guest deleted@134347]

vivepro: 104

[Alonzo]

Correction to my Artisan number: I'm now seeing 109 FOV. Not sure where I got 116 from. It's a bit weird since the device itself advertises 131 to SteamVR.

[cellinsky]

15 hours ago, Didney_World said:

vivepro: 104

How comes? Since my Cosmos is actually a VivePro. Thats 10 degrees more?

 

Edited July 16, 2020 by cellinsky

[Guest deleted@134347]

5 hours ago, cellinsky said:

How comes? Since my Cosmos is actually a VivePro. Thats 10 degrees more?

 

 

I don't think Cosmos is a VivePro at all.  The screens in your Cosmos are 1700x1440 per eye whereas in my VivePro it's 1600x1440. 

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

You guys need the GearVR LensMod. Picture quality beats the Index this way. Just saying..

[Alonzo]

It's very interesting to compare numbers to the hmdq database, which lists physical render geometry as advertised to the SteamVR subsystem:

• Valve Index. SteamVR hFOV 108/109 (depending on PP on/off). In-game 105.
• Rift CV1. SteamVR hFOV 88. In-game 80.
• Reverb. SteamVR hFOV 95.7. In-game 92.
• Pimax Artisan. SteamVR hFOV 131. In-game 109.

My suspicion is that the in-game VR implementation isn't quite doing the right things when it comes to VR viewport/eyes. And it's worse with canted displays.

[cellinsky]

58 minutes ago, Didney_World said:

 

I don't think Cosmos is a VivePro at all.  The screens in your Cosmos are 1700x1440 per eye whereas in my VivePro it's 1600x1440. 

Not a VivePro, but basically the same tech. I have better resolution but less FOV? Thats what I am curious about...
I have also the LensMod, and while its more clear and the sweetspot is bigger, it makes the FOV even more narrow than with the original Cosmos Lenses. 

[Guest deleted@134347]

56 minutes ago, cellinsky said:

Not a VivePro, but basically the same tech. I have better resolution but less FOV? Thats what I am curious about...
I have also the LensMod, and while its more clear and the sweetspot is bigger, it makes the FOV even more narrow than with the original Cosmos Lenses. 

 

like Alonso is saying this may have something to do with the VR implementation in game itself. Remember two patches ago when the devs were introducing the VR zoom they messed up the FoV for Pimax, Rift, and HTC. My FoV at that time became very high, may be ~130 (I suspect) and it was unflyable. This makes me believe the FoV is controlled in the IL2 software based on the detected hardware....  this is all a speculation though.

[Alonzo]

1 hour ago, Didney_World said:

 

like Alonso is saying this may have something to do with the VR implementation in game itself. Remember two patches ago when the devs were introducing the VR zoom they messed up the FoV for Pimax, Rift, and HTC. My FoV at that time became very high, may be ~130 (I suspect) and it was unflyable. This makes me believe the FoV is controlled in the IL2 software based on the detected hardware....  this is all a speculation though.

 

I use the VREM mod to fix the zoom convergence ("double vision" problem). But the VREM setting that I use works in most planes, except the He-111. In that giant bomber, for some reason the in-game convergence is different and needs a different 'fix' from VREM.

 

This is what leads me to think that something in the VR code in IL2 needs an overhaul -- it should "just work". My (maybe naive) expectation is that the SteamVR API accounts for the different types of headset and view modes if you're using it correctly, and each game would then support all headsets that are SteamVR compatible. I'm sure the reality is a bit more complex than that, but still, I thought that was the point of coding to SteamVR -- you automatically get support for a wide range of headsets.

[dburne]

2 hours ago, Didney_World said:

 

like Alonso is saying this may have something to do with the VR implementation in game itself. Remember two patches ago when the devs were introducing the VR zoom they messed up the FoV for Pimax, Rift, and HTC. My FoV at that time became very high, may be ~130 (I suspect) and it was unflyable. This makes me believe the FoV is controlled in the IL2 software based on the detected hardware....  this is all a speculation though.

 

Not only that but I would think how one centers himself in the cockpit could affect the FOV number.

Further forward would reduce whilst further backward would increase. 

[Guest deleted@134347]

6 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

Not only that but I would think how one centers himself in the cockpit could affect the FOV number.

Further forward would reduce whilst further backward would increase. 

 

dburne, I think that's an illusion. You're not 'zooming in' when moving your pilot. Just because you can't see the wings in your periphery doesn't mean your FOV got reduced somehow.

[dburne]

1 minute ago, Didney_World said:

 

dburne, I think that's an illusion. You're not 'zooming in' when moving your pilot. Just because you can't see the wings in your periphery doesn't mean your FOV got reduced somehow.

 

Yeah you are probably right, sometimes I type before I think too much...

[Guest deleted@134347]

42 minutes ago, Alonzo said:

 

I use the VREM mod to fix the zoom convergence ("double vision" problem). But the VREM setting that I use works in most planes, except the He-111. In that giant bomber, for some reason the in-game convergence is different and needs a different 'fix' from VREM.

 

This is what leads me to think that something in the VR code in IL2 needs an overhaul -- it should "just work". My (maybe naive) expectation is that the SteamVR API accounts for the different types of headset and view modes if you're using it correctly, and each game would then support all headsets that are SteamVR compatible. I'm sure the reality is a bit more complex than that, but still, I thought that was the point of coding to SteamVR -- you automatically get support for a wide range of headsets.

 

i haven't tried VREM... I don't feel the need for it.  The incident with VR zoom mishap 2 updates ago didn't just affect my FoV when 'zoomed in'. The FoV was screwed up in non-zoomed view, that's why it was so impactful, I simply couldn't fly until they released the patch. I felt like my eyes should've been a foot apart to get the proper convergence feel, you know, like a hammerhead shark.. ?    Hmm.. now, a hammerhead shark trying on a VR .. that'd be something, won't it..

 

Edited July 16, 2020 by Didney_World

[Alonzo]

1 hour ago, Didney_World said:

i haven't tried VREM... I don't feel the need for it.

 

Yeah I think with a Vive Pro it has 'flat' (parallel) screens for each eye, so VREM is not needed for that headset.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

The thing is, most headsets aren't 100% with parallel viewports. Many have slight deviations in the mounting, especially vertically, which they notice and transfer with the projection matrices. So one viewport might be 0.50° upwards, while the other is -0.80° downwards. The software should correct for that. 

 

If it is assumed by any developers that both viewports always look forward - you get anomalies. If they drop parameters of the matrices because they have been empty with RiftCV1 and HTC Vive 1 - in a false attempt to optimize performance - you get anomalies. Often people don't notice, but since risa2000 and others have started gathering info on that it's become clear that this is the case and most headsets of today include these parameters as well. Some carry native corrections for that, like the Index, which also has PP turnt on by default which cannot get turned off. Others dont. 

[coconut]

On 7/16/2020 at 3:53 PM, Alonzo said:

My suspicion is that the in-game VR implementation isn't quite doing the right things when it comes to VR viewport/eyes. And it's worse with canted displays.

From HMD gdb:

Quote

FOV hor.: Total (stereo) horizontal FOV, i.e. the visible angular range at least by one eye in a horizontal plane at the eye level.

My understanding is that they measure the combined FOV of both eyes, whereas the game reports a single eye.

 

On 7/16/2020 at 3:53 PM, Alonzo said:

My suspicion is that the in-game VR implementation isn't quite doing the right things when it comes to VR viewport/eyes. And it's worse with canted displays.

The zoom implementation is wrong when PP is off. I think that when they narrow the view cone, they keep it centered on the normal vector to the screen's plane. They should instead center it on the forward vector. DCS used to do it wrong, similarly to IL2 now, but at some point they fixed it.

Edited July 17, 2020 by coconut

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

As I said guys, the tool doesn't show the proper values.

 

I took the effort to find the post by its creator risa2000 again. Here is the link

 

Would you please consider that and stop posting wrong values (like 160° for Pimax headsets). You need to test it within the actual testroom in SteamVR, while you're in there in the headset. That's proper data, and only that. I didn't get the values while using the headsets that are shown by the tool either.

 

 

Just imagine what this could cause please: For example, the Devs lowering frustrum culling for these headsets, and as a result Pimax users might get pop-ups in the periphery again. Thanks, and best regards ?

Edited July 29, 2020 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[dburne]

I could well be wrong, but I wonder maybe if the tool is also supplying the data to the developers already?

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Hmm why would it? It's a tool written by a random user (nothing against him, he is an incredibly nice guy), who admitted it has several bugs. Hence, I sure hope not.

 

They should call the FOVs via API's repro matrices and geometry, or by headset manufacturers: Pimax is 170° horizontal, which means you'll need >180° to avoid pop-ins.

Edited July 29, 2020 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 7/17/2020 at 6:09 PM, coconut said:

The zoom implementation is wrong when PP is off. I think that when they narrow the view cone, they keep it centered on the normal vector to the screen's plane. They should instead center it on the forward vector. DCS used to do it wrong, similarly to IL2 now, but at some point they fixed it.

+1

[dburne]

1 hour ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Hmm why would it? It's a tool written by a random user (nothing against him, he is an incredibly nice guy), who admitted it has several bugs. Hence, I sure hope not.

 

They should call the FOVs via API's repro matrices and geometry, or by headset manufacturers: Pimax is 170° horizontal, which means you'll need >180° to avoid pop-ins.

 

I stated that incorrectly I guess, I was thinking of the FOV number being reported by the game itself.

[Alonzo]

I'm confused because I thought the whole point of a VR API was to standardize what an application needs to do, so it can work with multiple headsets including future headsets yet to be invented. Code the VR app to the SteamVR API. Headset manufacturers provide drivers for their headset for SteamVR. Job done, VR app doesn't need to know about the 700 different types of headset, works with all of them.

 

Am I being hopelessly naive? All of this stuff -- correct field of view, correct zoom, object culling at the correct angle from center -- should be handled once, by coding to the SteamVR API. It shouldn't matter whether some random idiot (me) on a forum says something about headset FOV, it should Just Work.

 

Maybe it's too much to ask. Even Alyx, a flagship game designed for the Index which itself has canted displays, has all sorts wrong with it on a Pimax. Object pop-in, floating blood textures, all sorts. You'd have thought the Alyx development team would at least know how to code to the APIs. (Or maybe they do know and there's something funky about the Pimax SteamVR drivers...)

[SvAF/F16_Goblin]

@SCG_Fenris_Wolf What is the "testroom" in SteamVR? I've never used that.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

11 hours ago, Alonzo said:

I'm confused because I thought the whole point of a VR API was to standardize what an application needs to do, so it can work with multiple headsets including future headsets yet to be invented. Code the VR app to the SteamVR API. Headset manufacturers provide drivers for their headset for SteamVR. Job done, VR app doesn't need to know about the 700 different types of headset, works with all of them.

 

Am I being hopelessly naive? All of this stuff -- correct field of view, correct zoom, object culling at the correct angle from center -- should be handled once, by coding to the SteamVR API. It shouldn't matter whether some random idiot (me) on a forum says something about headset FOV, it should Just Work.

 

Maybe it's too much to ask. Even Alyx, a flagship game designed for the Index which itself has canted displays, has all sorts wrong with it on a Pimax. Object pop-in, floating blood textures, all sorts. You'd have thought the Alyx development team would at least know how to code to the APIs. (Or maybe they do know and there's something funky about the Pimax SteamVR drivers...)

I totally agree, that's true. Of course the SteamVR API (its name is OpenVR) handles all this natively. Given from the fact that HMDs in IL-2 show differenting world scale, and other things that are off, what you mentioned is a reasonable thought. I have no further comment on this though, except to just to express my hopes that this will be regarded.

 

You can use these to play Half Life Alyx or Boneworks without PP:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Pimax/comments/hwwh7p/how_to_get_rid_of_shadow_culling_in_half_life/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Pimax/comments/hznx4j/release_a_mod_that_fixes_culling_in_boneworks_and/

 

What most Simulation Devs didn't get for a long time was that VR users are indeed the niche that plays Simulations. So a much higher percentage in the Simulator Genre than the casual gamer globally. I am glad the IL-2 developers have recognized this, and the Flight Simulator Devs now as well (after quite a s#!%storm) ?