Why Virtual Reality for BMS would improve the experience by order of magnitudes.
-
I see a problem when you flying for an hour or two. Its going to be a big strain on the eyes. Also it’ll be harder for you to reach for the coffee, beer, wine, and sandwich thats you in front of you. Some missions are pretty long you can do some other things in between.
Didyou use it for a few hours? Your ipd setting was not calibrated, if you used an earlier prototype, those did not have ipd calibration. Your eyes will focus on objects as you do real life.
-
http://www.destructoid.com/review-htc-vive-352103.phtml
The Vive also features a decent resolution camera on the front, which can be used at any time to provide a camera feed of the real world within the virtual environment. That’s a really nice touch, particularly if attempting to do tasks like typing while wearing the headset.
The ability to see your keyboard and mouse via camera feed without taking my headset off, as well as the absence of Oculus weird nose gap, for me made the Vive a considerably better VR platform of choice for seated play.
The headset itself was lightweight and comfortable enough to wear for long periods of time, and I did not feature any greater eye strain than I already experience working at a monitor all day.
-
The nose gap was nice for me to find the mouse to click on switches in the cockpit. But i’m moving to a trackball placed behind the throttle.
-
Getting a Vive. Flight sims and racing were the main reasons.
I also do not use the keyboard with my BMS setup, just HOTAS and Trackball.
-
The nose gap was nice for me to find the mouse to click on switches in the cockpit. But i’m moving to a trackball placed behind the throttle.
Yep, that’s what I’m talking about with the gap and using it to your advantage like you would looking under NVGs.
If you look close on my X65 you’ll see my trackball velcroed to it, but it isn’t used that much due to my other input devices.
-
Huds and small text is pretty readable.
-
I’ve not only tried it; I’ve owned and used a 6DOF VR headset for almost a decade. It’s a great solution for immersion. Fantastic for getting the feel of “being there”. In WWI aircraft it provides an immense feeling of presence, and really lifts the experience something wonderful. But when it comes to handling avionics in a modern multirole fighter aircraft, it just doesn’t cut it. There are a lot of switches and buttons around the cockpit which are required to operate anything beyond basic flight controls. And they often have to be used in a hurry, while staying focused on other things - like that bandit trying to get on my six.
Sure, I can gimp myself and only use the HOTAS for flying, but then there is a lot I can not do. I can not use emergency systems. I can not manipulate MFD’s fully. I can’t even flick the master arm switch, drop external loads or manipulate the ICP/DED. Heck, I can’t even raise or lower the landing gear.
The mouse is not an option for me. Never has been, really. It’s awful. And it gets much worse in VR, because I can’t see where it is, but have to grope for it for every little thing I want to do. Outside of VR I use a 24" touch scren for input, and that is passable. Not great, but good enough that it almost feels like sitting in a cockpit when I have to actually do things.
If all I want to do is fly around and admire the scenery, then VR is fantastic. But I have higher demands on BMS than that.
Jesper
-
I’ve not only tried it; I’ve owned and used a 6DOF VR headset for almost a decade. It’s a great solution for immersion. Fantastic for getting the feel of “being there”. In WWI aircraft it provides an immense feeling of presence, and really lifts the experience something wonderful. But when it comes to handling avionics in a modern multirole fighter aircraft, it just doesn’t cut it. There are a lot of switches and buttons around the cockpit which are required to operate anything beyond basic flight controls. And they often have to be used in a hurry, while staying focused on other things - like that bandit trying to get on my six.
Sure, I can gimp myself and only use the HOTAS for flying, but then there is a lot I can not do. I can not use emergency systems. I can not manipulate MFD’s fully. I can’t even flick the master arm switch, drop external loads or manipulate the ICP/DED. Heck, I can’t even raise or lower the landing gear.
The mouse is not an option for me. Never has been, really. It’s awful. And it gets much worse in VR, because I can’t see where it is, but have to grope for it for every little thing I want to do. Outside of VR I use a 24" touch scren for input, and that is passable. Not great, but good enough that it almost feels like sitting in a cockpit when I have to actually do things.
If all I want to do is fly around and admire the scenery, then VR is fantastic. But I have higher demands on BMS than that.
Jesper
Sounds like a HOTAS with a mouse on it would solve literally every complaint you have except doing things “in a hurry.”
-
Sounds like a HOTAS with a mouse on it would solve literally every complaint you have except doing things “in a hurry.”
It wouldn’t solve actually reaching out and pushing buttons, which is my main complaint.
Jesper
-
I’m an old goat that has been waiting probably 25 years for real VR to become a reality. I can’t tell you how much I’m looking forward to trying it out but I still have to be patient till the $$$$$ are ready …
-
-
It wouldn’t solve actually reaching out and pushing buttons, which is my main complaint.
Jesper
If you have more than just a HOTAS setup, you’re in the minority. You’ve created your own complaints about VR by investing in products unsuitable for its use.
For the majority of users who own just a HOTAS setup, VR would be a fantastic addition.
-
If you have more than just a HOTAS setup, you’re in the minority.
Many serious Falcon simmers have Cougar MFD’s, tablet MFD’s or a similar setup. It is also common with custom ICP keyboards, touch screens and other types of input devices, all of which do much more to add realism to make it feel like actually using an F-16 than a VR set does.
You’ve created your own complaints about VR by investing in products unsuitable for its use.
Indeed. And I stand by them, as those products improve immersion and realism much more than VR can in its present state.
For the majority of users who own just a HOTAS setup, VR would be a fantastic addition.
If your aims are that low, sure.
Jesper
-
But again, maybe not this generation, but at least next generation VR will most likely have the ability to use those things.
This generation might be able to already if you can program the front camera view to something other than the Vive’s controller button. Also a lot of Oculus Rift reviewers are talking about using the nose gap for the keyboard and other things.
EDIT to add:
Also there is the possibility of custom face seals that will not cover up the bottom. Most gamers are trying to stop that reality from leaking in, for us the cockpit is part of the sim reality. If I could get BMS to run in stereoscopic with my AMD card, my money would be where my mouth is with a pre-order of one of these. As it is I did finally impulse buy a RC FPV headset to maybe use as a basis as a HMD to proof of concept the whole look under and possibly front facing camera (which is common on FPV) .
-
Many serious Falcon simmers have Cougar MFD’s, tablet MFD’s or a similar setup. It is also common with custom ICP keyboards, touch screens and other types of input devices, all of which do much more to add realism to make it feel like actually using an F-16 than a VR set does.
Indeed. And I stand by them, as those products improve immersion and realism much more than VR can in its present state.
If your aims are that low, sure.
Jesper
So you own a Vive or Oculus Rift and have spent time flying sims with them? Of course you don’t. Your entire opinion is based on a VR headset you’ve owned for “…almost a decade.” In other words, nearly irrelevant. Particularly the part where you speak about VR in its “present state” which you clearly haven’t actually used.
Yes, many “serious” Falcon simmers (myself included) have MFDs or something else. However the term “many” doesn’t translate into “common” which seems to be the fulcrum of your current argument.
So what’s the actual takeaway from someone who doesn’t own or use a Vive or Rift, and who seems to think having more than a HOTAS setup is “common?” Please explain how your argument is anything more than a misinformed opinion based on outdated technology and a limited, if not optimistic, understanding of the demographics of flight sims?
I’d give up my MFDs in a heartbeat for VR. If you weren’t using nearly ten-year old technology to form your opinions, perhaps you’d join me.
-
I wouldn’t give up anything for VR in it’s state now. Have I tried Vive or Rift? No. I also don’t own a Ferrari but I know that the fuel economy on those cars will kill my budget.
The biggest advantage of having a physical ICP, touchscreen, or other physical device to interact with is the ability to use them while moving your head. Compare hitting an OSB using the cursor/mouse vs. hitting the same OSB on a physical MFD. If you have to interact with anything on the cockpit via in-game tools (such as the cursor), you need to keep your head steady so that the “target” stays in the same area and you can click it. Whether via cursor or some fancy new tech with VR, I would suspect that “the way it works” is the same –- hitting a switch or button is impossible if your head is moving. With a physical object to interact with, you can see in reality where the object is and manipulate it no matter what movement your head is doing. That’s why we can adjust the heating in the car or change the volume on the radio while still keeping our head on a swivel looking out for traffic.
For something like Elite Dangerous where there is minimal cockpit work required, or games like shooters where your hand is steady on the keyboard/mouse, I can see VR as very cool. For BMS, not so much due to the need to interact with the cockpit (which is easier with a physical touchscreen/ICP/MFDs), look at things like the data card, or reference checklists or other items.
-
I wouldn’t give up anything for VR in it’s state now. Have I tried Vive or Rift? No. I also don’t own a Ferrari but I know that the fuel economy on those cars will kill my budget.
Except that VR has nothing to do with ongoing cost, and everything to do with improving your immersion and enjoyment of the sim. Would a Ferrari be more fun to drive than your current car? I bet it would be. That’s the appropriate analogy - not gas prices and budget.
It is amazing that so many people are so downright negative about a product they have zero experience using. Not just “I don’t know if it would be cool,” but hostile. I can think of a myriad of solutions to the various complaints that have been raised (by people who haven’t even tried it), but why bother, when your minds are so clearly made up? Not only a predetermined opinion, but opinions formed on absolutely no experience with current VR hardware.
Might as well be asking for opinions on buying a new mega-yacht.
-
I wouldn’t give up anything for VR in it’s state now. Have I tried Vive or Rift? No. I also don’t own a Ferrari but I know that the fuel economy on those cars will kill my budget.
The biggest advantage of having a physical ICP, touchscreen, or other physical device to interact with is the ability to use them while moving your head. Compare hitting an OSB using the cursor/mouse vs. hitting the same OSB on a physical MFD. If you have to interact with anything on the cockpit via in-game tools (such as the cursor), you need to keep your head steady so that the “target” stays in the same area and you can click it. Whether via cursor or some fancy new tech with VR, I would suspect that “the way it works” is the same –- hitting a switch or button is impossible if your head is moving. With a physical object to interact with, you can see in reality where the object is and manipulate it no matter what movement your head is doing. That’s why we can adjust the heating in the car or change the volume on the radio while still keeping our head on a swivel looking out for traffic.
For something like Elite Dangerous where there is minimal cockpit work required, or games like shooters where your hand is steady on the keyboard/mouse, I can see VR as very cool. For BMS, not so much due to the need to interact with the cockpit (which is easier with a physical touchscreen/ICP/MFDs), look at things like the data card, or reference checklists or other items.
The f-16 hotas was designed to keep all critical functions in your hands. If in real life you are checking 3 or 6, you won’t be messing with the volume knobs and bingo page at the same time without looking i don’t think. That is why for me i am fine with it. If someone has a proper icp its easy to use.
Data cards can be set with the kneeboard mod. With injection drivers, I want to program my kneeboard app to display the screen from a phone, to the bottom of the screen, when you look down at the seat in the pit. You could use a laser pointer view to drag screens off quickly or click buttons that way. I think thats what I saw they added in DCS World. So you look at a switch and line it up with a crosshair and click a button and it will click. That is actually gold for a rampstart now that I think about it. The checklists would be injected into the bottom of the display, or if its eventually written in bms or in the kneeboard mod they could add it so you can flip pages in the model by clicking them.
Here is a video of someone walking up into the jet in DCS and flying. That is really cool.
-
Here is a video of someone walking up into the jet in DCS and flying. That is really cool.
And bim! the bed, paf!, the TV, outch!, the knee, … and couik!, the hamster.
LOL
-
Or ending like David Carradine hanging on your OR cable :mrgreen: