Why Virtual Reality for BMS would improve the experience by order of magnitudes.
-
You would assert that things look nice in VR? Interesting…. my biggest issue with it is the reportedly low resolution. Is this a nonfactor?
Could you elaborate a little more on why you think a VR set makes things unrealistic?
-
You would assert that things look nice in VR? Interesting…. my biggest issue with it is the reportedly low resolution. Is this a nonfactor?
For looks, definitely a non-issue. When you’re looking around you won’t notice the resolution much. Even my decade old 800x600 headset makes most non-complex games look astonishing. A modern Occulus set is even better.
Where the resolution causes problems is in the complex parts. Looking at gauges, and MFD’s. Reading maps. Things like that is where VR falls down today. And that is immersion breaking.
Could you elaborate a little more on why you think a VR set makes things unrealistic?
Operation of avionics in procedures approaching realistic becomes immersion breaking.
Again, as stated from the very start, my comments apply to flying BMS as a war bird simulator, in procedures attempting to be close to real procedures. If all you want to do is gun dogfights, or flying around, or whatever else people do with the sim where a HOTAS is the limit of input required, VR is an excellent choice. And there is nothing wrong with using the sim for this either. Do whatever is fun.
What I reacted to was the specific stance that VR, as it stands today, will be a game changer for a complex military flight sim like BMS. It won’t be. It will be a game changer for simple, non-complex kinds of flying, and it has been for about a decade. WWI air combat in Flying Corps with a VR headset was an astonishing feeling.
-
:munch:
-
Thank you for keeping on-topic Goat. It will be great to have programmable knee boards in-game since, as has been made excruciatingly clear throughout this thread, it will be hard to refer to outside materials when in VR. I’m hopeful that with enough coaxing Vireo 4 will be able to successfully inject 3D. I’ll fiddle around with it as well. Keep us posted!
Here is a post that details the 3D descriptor in each cockpit for drawing the HUD. It shows that the HUD is actually drawn a long distance away from the cockpit. Thankfully, it looks pretty straightforward to edit this file. Even better, there’s also a HMS (helmet-mounted sight?) line that appears to define where the HMS symbology is drawn in 3D space. We could edit this to have it drawn very far away (20000 units, like the HUD) and easily change the scaling to make it still appear the correct size. I think this will solve the HMCS location/ collimation issue. This solves another major roadblock in successfully implementing VR for BMS.
-Rabbit
Great, that is a relief to know. I can more seriously start looking at the d3d proxy without worrying about that now. Still waiting for cv1 to be delivered to me though.
Operation of avionics in procedures approaching realistic becomes immersion breaking.
Again, as stated from the very start, my comments apply to flying BMS as a war bird simulator, in procedures attempting to be close to real procedures. If all you want to do is gun dogfights, or flying around, or whatever else people do with the sim where a HOTAS is the limit of input required, VR is an excellent choice. And there is nothing wrong with using the sim for this either. Do whatever is fun.
I think this is giving off the impression to readers that VR is arcade mode only, but hotas isn’t the limit of input. I don’t want people to be discouraged if they do ‘procedures approaching realistic.’ The average poster doesn’t do them and is not part of any wing I’ve come to notice. But I try to go to the extreme in ‘real’ with no compromise as the military pilots i fly with hand me down.
There are no limits to input and whatever map reading, I will make whatever solution I need for my sake, but now that supposedly the hud and hmcs problem is solvable by us it doesn’t matter anymore to try to mold bms dev and community perceptions about vr.
-
But Rabbit and Goat check my post just after that one, I did try that back in the day and it didn’t work for me with stereoscopic glasses and he does not have glasses to confirm that it does work…
-
I think this is giving off the impression to readers that VR is arcade mode only, but hotas isn’t the limit of input. I don’t want people to be discouraged if they do ‘procedures approaching realistic.’ The average poster doesn’t do them and is not part of any wing I’ve come to notice.
No, that’s not the point… well, not the only point. What about having to access other physical input devices? What about having to reference data cards and the like?
If all you want to do is sightsee and maybe the occasional mission or dogfight, VR will rock. If you want to dig a little deeper into the immersion, fly MP, coordinate with other flights, etc., then VR will get in the way. There may be workarounds for now, but they’re exactly that. Workarounds.
-
No, that’s not the point… well, not the only point. What about having to access other physical input devices? What about having to reference data cards and the like?
If all you want to do is sightsee and maybe the occasional mission or dogfight, VR will rock. If you want to dig a little deeper into the immersion, fly MP, coordinate with other flights, etc., then VR will get in the way. There may be workarounds for now, but they’re exactly that. Workarounds.
Oh for… physical input devices are not the issue. Physical output devices are the issue.
-
Oh for… physical input devices are not the issue. Physical output devices are the issue.
-
Your HOTAS works fine without being able to see it. Your switch panels do not cease to exist when unobserved. Your ICP can be operated despite being blindfolded.
Reading the MFDs in full resolution blindfolded is a bit harder. And with VRs resolution being less than fantastic, losing the ability to see ones own physical MFD screens is a hardh blow.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
No, that’s not the point… well, not the only point. What about having to access other physical input devices? What about having to reference data cards and the like?
If all you want to do is sightsee and maybe the occasional mission or dogfight, VR will rock. If you want to dig a little deeper into the immersion, fly MP, coordinate with other flights, etc., then VR will get in the way. There may be workarounds for now, but they’re exactly that. Workarounds.
Inject reference data cards either on the kneeboard texture, xfire proxy technique when you look down to have them appear and have a button to cycle through them, and plain use the nose gap to look at your real knees.
-
Also, I would like to see the source of your info regarding people who fly with just a HOTAS. How do you know that the people who are flying with just a HOTAS are doing so because “it’s all they need”? Maybe they just can’t afford other game aids?
-
I fly with “just a HOTAS”. It’s all I need. The only time I use the keyboard is to talk on IVC ( <f1 &=“” f2=“”>and Teamspeak (<scrolllock>) in 2D world.
-
I can certainly “afford other game aids”. That was almost condescending, but I don’t think you meant it that way when you typed it.
:)</scrolllock></f1>
-
-
Flying “with just a HOTAS” here as well. I positively do not want e.g. those light, flimsy MFD things. Why pay for some buttons when I might just as well press them with the mouse in game? It’s not like they’re of vital importance during actual shooting/bomb dropping, unless you’re doing something bizarrely wrong.
-
Light, sure. Flimsy, not so much. Ill concede that the buttons could be more tactile, with an accurate depression force per the real ones, but they arent flimsy.
In fairness the same argument can be made of the comms switch, or the trigger button, or the ICP, or the DED, or most of the cockpit.
During weapons release, its not a big deal. In the wheel it is though. On the ground before takeoff it is though. Just because its unimportant at one specific stage of a mission, doesnt mean its not a useful aid to your sim.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
Inject reference data cards either on the kneeboard texture, xfire proxy technique when you look down to have them appear and have a button to cycle through them, and plain use the nose gap to look at your real knees.
Much too low resolution for that to be practical on modern VR systems. And the nose gap is a true immersion blower. I never have one, as it completely shatters the illusion I am trying to build.
-
Operation of avionics in procedures approaching realistic becomes immersion breaking.
So you said, but I was hoping you could expand on that rather than restating it. Perhaps provide examples? Explaining the view instead of (or as well as) sharing it?
Again, as stated from the very start, my comments apply to flying BMS as a war bird simulator, in procedures attempting to be close to real procedures.
Great! Glad we share this perspective.
-
Inject reference data cards either on the kneeboard texture, xfire proxy technique when you look down to have them appear and have a button to cycle through them,
Are these working now? Can you show me a video of these things in action? If they are available and working now, then I may have to re-assess my view on VR with regards to these items.
and plain use the nose gap to look at your real knees.
This is a workaround.
-
I fly with “just a HOTAS”. It’s all I need. The only time I use the keyboard is to talk on IVC ( <f1 &=“” f2=“”>and Teamspeak (<scrolllock>) in 2D world.
-
I can certainly “afford other game aids”. That was almost condescending, but I don’t think you meant it that way when you typed it.
:)</scrolllock></f1>
Flying “with just a HOTAS” here as well. I positively do not want e.g. those light, flimsy MFD things. Why pay for some buttons when I might just as well press them with the mouse in game? It’s not like they’re of vital importance during actual shooting/bomb dropping, unless you’re doing something bizarrely wrong.
Good for you that you can afford game aids, but I wasn’t “saying,” I was asking… or presenting other reasons. Either way, that was a totally different discussion.
Also, we have agreed that just for flying, indeed, the HOTAS is all you need. When dogfighting or dropping iron, having to use the mouse/keyboard/touchscreen/mfd/ICP means you’ve messed up your setup… which you should’ve done before stepping into the phone booth or going down the pipe. We are in agreement in that regards. Having everything set up properly in terms of switches or modes and just “being there” and fighting or dropping bombs, in other words, being in a situation where all you need is in your HOTAS, then VR rocks. We also agree in that regards.
But what about during those times when what you need is NOT on the HOTAS? Ramp starts. Setting up your jet. Fencing IN/OUT? Having to turn on Mavericks or switching bomb delivery profiles? What about those times when you’ve been ambushed by enemy fighters and have to change modes/settings real quick? As Blu3wolf says:
During weapons release, its not a big deal. In the wheel it is though. On the ground before takeoff it is though. Just because its unimportant at one specific stage of a mission, doesnt mean its not a useful aid to your sim.
I am simply saying that these game aids make cockpit work much easier. Can you still do it with a mouse? Sure! Is it easier with a mouse? Nope.
Another more important point is that it makes cockpit work much easier ALL THE TIME. Clicking on a button with a mouse while the jet is on the ground is fine. Try doing that as you are padlocked on a target or keeping your head on a swivel. Much more difficult. With a physical Cougar MFD or a touchscreen, it will also be difficult due to task saturation but it will still be easier than “hitting a target with the mouse cursor.”
Your HOTAS works fine without being able to see it. Your switch panels do not cease to exist when unobserved. Your ICP can be operated despite being blindfolded.
True on all points, and like I said, I can see VR and replica cockpits working together nicely. Heck, if I had a replica cockpit, I’d be so deep in the rabbit hole that VR is a no-brainer addition to it. The problem with a non-replica pit is that the MFD or ICP, while still fully operational, is no longer located in the place where you see it in VR. Therefore, you need to “locate” it in the real world in order to operate it. While you can operate a keyboard blindfolded by being familiar with the keys and locating the indents on the F and J keys, there are no such tactile cues on a touchscreen and even with physical switches, you’d still have to “orient” yourself via touch. Sure, this makes the process do-able (via touch) but it would be immesurably quicker and easier if you could see the “target” switch/button and interacting with it rather than feeling for it like a blind man.
So you said, but I was hoping you could expand on that rather than restating it. Perhaps provide examples? Explaining the view instead of (or as well as) sharing it?
Let me try…. Setup A is a 3x27" monitor with 1x24" touchscreen. Setup B is VR. I’m flying along and suddenly I’m hit by flak. I’m still flying but my HUD is down and I’ve got a few other yellow lights as well. Oh joy. Mission abort. I could just press “E” and be done with it but this is a campaign and I’d like to try to bring my jet back in one piece. I realize I’m leaking fuel as well and I don’t think I can make my home plate, but the alternate is nearby. I need to switch to that radio freq to tell them I’m coming in with an injured bird, but I don’t have the airbase freq committed to memory. I need to pull out a sheet.
Setup A would just have me look down, pull up my printout, locate the needed information, enter it on the ICP, double-check that I’ve entered the right numbers, then tuck the sheet back under my leg or wherever it’s from. Not much in terms of “breaking immersion” there because we all know pilots refer to checklists and other printed materials all the time.
Setup B would have me take off my VR, pull up my printout, locate the needed information, put the VR back on to work with the cockpit, enter it on the ICP, double-check that I’ve entered the right numbers (probably via the nosegap as taking the VR off again would be too troublesome), then tuck the sheet back under my leg or wherever it’s from.
Now this is a very simple example, just needing to retrieve info (airbase freq), entering it on the ICP, and going from there. What about having to work off an approach plate? Or departure procedures? Or landing on a unfamiliar airfield and needing to know which turns to take to get you to your parking spot? How about participating in big organized flights and you have to locate the info pertaining to your strike group, what ID they have, what Victor freq they are on? Or finding info about the alternate tanker TACAN/freq because the primary tanker is busy or has been shot down? You’ll have to decide which is more immersion-breaking — having to look through the nosegap all the time or having to take off the VR goggles.
Bottom line is if your “Falcon Experience” simply consists of single player (or small group MP) with runway or taxi starts, if you don’t have a problem with leaving an injured plane in the air over enemy territory as you just exit the sim, if you mostly do TEs or instant action dogfights, if you only do minimal cockpit work and think that you don’t need to do it in an emergency situation, then yeah, VR brings more to the table than it takes away.
-
-
We already agreed that for a touchscreen, VR prevents the use - as the touchscreen depends on sight. I dont look for my switches or buttons though. I know where they are, and I can access them as fast blindfolded.
I would argue that constant reference to checklists is not an avionics issue, but either way it definitely present an issue with VR. Hardly an insurmountable one, given the present ability within BMS to display kneeboards, but a significant one. I am a little surprised to hear that folks flying big MP events dont have the AB freqs for their alternate committed to memory, though.Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
We already agreed that for a touchscreen, VR prevents the use - as the touchscreen depends on sight. I dont look for my switches or buttons though. I know where they are, and I can access them as fast blindfolded.
I’m curious about your pit setup there, Blu. Got a pic? I’m guessing your statement is a vote for physical switches, which has been on my “to-do” list for a very long time…. I just need to find the time to do that and the guts to work with electronics.
I would argue that constant reference to checklists is not an avionics issue,
I don’t see where I made it to be an avionics (electrical systems in the aircraft) issue; the issue was getting access to the correct information to input into the avionics.
I am a little surprised to hear that folks flying big MP events dont have the AB freqs for their alternate committed to memory, though.
They might very well have it memorized, but I don’t! :wfish:
Still, that was only one of the examples cited. -
The avionics question was directed specifically at the poster I quoted; I suspect I disagree with their view but unless its clarified I cannot be sure.
As for touchscreens vs switches, I am sure touchscreens are great for some folks. Until I wish to simulate an F-35 cockpit though, I am not one of those folks.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
Still don’t see the issue. When I have to use the OSBs, I use the mouse. I have never had an issue with that. As for being jumped by enemy fighters, what should I use my mouse for? Emergency Jettison + Missile/Dogfight mode.