So, what does the future look like for high Res VR?

[Voyager]

Got a big head, so been using the VP2 for a while now, and it looks like with the new CPUs and GPUs coming out, we've finally got enough horse power to drive those kind of displays at pretty good refresh rates. 

 

So I'm wondering, what sort of things come next on the headset side of things? 

 

Are we finally reaching a point on the hardware where we're hitting diminished returns? Or is there still more that needs to be done there? 

 

I sort of am not really feeling the need for that much more resolution myself. But I'm wondering what really is out there. 

[dburne]

Vive Pro 2 is a very nice headset, good resolution with a decent FOV.

 I currently run an Aero, came from a Vive Pro 2. Aero is an amazing and gorgeous headset, and if you have the Vive Pro 2 then you already have the tracking system you would need for the Aero.

 

However it is a very high cost- and whether it will be worth it will be very much dependent on the individual. I have been running mine since Jan and love it.

Edited November 6, 2022 by dburne

[firdimigdi]

49 minutes ago, Voyager said:

Or is there still more that needs to be done there? 

 

For the current type of strap-a-screen-to-your-face HMDs I imagine at some point there'll be new lens/optics tech or a cheaper way to produce a known desirable type of lens with a less demanding distortion correction profile thus shifting the expenditure of rendered pixels from the latter to increased FOV. The recent offerings with pancake and aspheric lenses seems to hint to that direction at least.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

The future will be some sort of small, wireless glasses with pancake lenses featuring eyetracking, foveated rendering, 180 degree+ FOV, and maybe even peripheral vision. No, we are not there, but we're making progress.

[simfan2015]

Maybe there is ... none for gaming yet.

Meta and PICO are going to further push/advance standalone VR (consumers).

HP probably leaving VR may be a sign of what is happening.

SteamVR ... where are the AAA titles (besides Alyx) ???

IL-2, DCS, hard-core racing games are a niche ... none of these titles mean anything (market share) in this regard.

Few people have a '13900K - RTX 4090' ...

Still a "chicken and the egg" problem ... not more PC VR content, less PC VR hardware.

Companies follow the money, not money-pits.

So High-Res VR ... sorry, I have my doubts.

Edited November 9, 2022 by simfan2015

[SCG_motoadve]

I run the Varjo Aero with a i9 10900K and a 4090. at 3600x plus resolution and looks 4 K monitor quality and smooth, really amazing.

Normandy map gets some slow downs, also going from high to Ultra preset, slows it down, could be the processor?

[dburne]

1 hour ago, SCG_motoadve said:

I run the Varjo Aero with a i9 10900K and a 4090. at 3600x plus resolution and looks 4 K monitor quality and smooth, really amazing.

Normandy map gets some slow downs, also going from high to Ultra preset, slows it down, could be the processor?

 

I would not stick with a preset but go in and adjust each individual graphics setting for optimum performance on your rig. Probably the two biggest frame-time killers are MSAA and Clouds.  You could possibly lower that resolution some to help as well - like maybe 3300-3400 - should still look really good.

 

 

[SCG_motoadve]

3 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

I would not stick with a preset but go in and adjust each individual graphics setting for optimum performance on your rig. Probably the two biggest frame-time killers are MSAA and Clouds.  You could possibly lower that resolution some to help as well - like maybe 3300-3400 - should still look really good.

 

 

Clouds are on high, the reason for the high resolution is that then there is no need for MSAA, I tried 3200 resolution and 2x MSAA and 3600 res with no MSAA, 3600 looks much better , you can see so much more detail, and has better performance.

Ultra preset you see more detailed terrain for more distance, has better lightning, as far as I know, what are other differences between Ultra and High? Is there info somewhere we can find about this?

[dburne]

5 minutes ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Clouds are on high, the reason for the high resolution is that then there is no need for MSAA, I tried 3200 resolution and 2x MSAA and 3600 res with no MSAA, 3600 looks much better , you can see so much more detail, and has better performance.

Ultra preset you see more detailed terrain for more distance, has better lightning, as far as I know, what are other differences between Ultra and High? Is there info somewhere we can find about this?

 

Ok thanks - I myself have not experimented enough to say with any certainly so I will have to have a look with it next time I fire it up.

[firdimigdi]

2 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Ultra preset you see more detailed terrain for more distance, has better lightning, as far as I know, what are other differences between Ultra and High? Is there info somewhere we can find about this?

 

It's all in the gpresets.ini file, not near my computer now but IIRC the landscape mesh is more detailed, cloud samples are higher, the forests draw at a larger distance, shadows as well and they are even higher res close-up and there are more effects for moving water, etc. It's a pity we don't have more control over these with mods off mode.

[chiliwili69]

On 11/9/2022 at 9:31 AM, simfan2015 said:

IL-2, DCS, hard-core racing games are a niche

 

If we sum all the Space sims (ED, StartCitizen, etc), racing sims (Asseto, iRacing, etc ) and flight sims (IL-2, DCS, MSFS, etc) and any other PC SIM VR (truck, etc) are they still a niche?  How many we are?  only IL-2 could be around 2 million copies sold in 2014 , MSFS is 2 million, and ED is 3.5 million, Assetto 1.4 million,...

If we sum all this could be about 15-20 million copies?  many users will be the same (I bought 4 of them).

So maybe about 5 million people in the world play sims. And perhaps a small fraction (20%?) will play in VR, about 1 million?

 

This is still a niche comparing with the mobile gamers:

 

 

Young generations like playing with a mobile phone, this is something I really can not do, but I am 53. My soon with 15 plays also mobile but he always prefer the PC with a 4K 28" monitor.

 

So I think future Vr devices will try to combine the portability with the PC games. Something similar to what Pimax recently annouced.  Pico4 and Quest2 allowed also to play PCVR, even if the games are not bought in the stores. Definetely what valve will do with the Deckard will reveal a lot of what the VR is going to be for the next 5 years.

 

The money is not in the hardware, but in the software sold.

 

 

[simfan2015]

Wow chiliwilly69... That graph is really an eye opener! 

[[CPT]Crunch]

Yet Panasonic with their new Shitfall chose the PC route with cable over their original plans of free standing.  Kind of have my eye on that one, a nice improvement on everything the 5K Arpara vaporware was suppose to be bringing to the table a year ago, but didn't.

[simfan2015]

A matter of games / software but of course also a matter of cost. Why still get a 3000 USD PC if kids can now play their favorite games in VR on a 300 usd quest. Development studios follow that money.