Why Virtual Reality for BMS would improve the experience by order of magnitudes.
-
It doesn’t work and without the distortion it is not good in 2D + the headtracking is an emulated TrackIR(opentrack) which is not the same as it goes “on rails”.
P.s.: But DCS got a nice VR update with supersampling so I got that goin’ for me which is nice
-
please post shoot!
-
Man I miss BMS. Wish this game could support VR so bad.
As to the resolution of DCS cockpits. The current state of DCS… I can read everything without any weird head movements. With the added pixel density support the cockpits are -almost- as clear as they were when I played on my 1080p TV.
The outside resolution is of course lower, but I can spot my targets 90% of the time. If I’m having a little trouble spotting something, I use VoiceAttack, just a quick labels on, then off again once I have it.
Air to air refueling is a joy now, not a hassle. The tanker and basket are HUGE! I’m on first try and stay on with no disconnects at all. I was -never- able to do that on a monitor. (yes I’m a crappy “pilot” :))
As OldGoat said earlier… The sense of immersion and the feeling of actual height and depth. Can’t be beat. I moved my 50" 4k upstairs and just recently sold my track IR. I’m never going back. Can’t. Feels like a video game after VR.
My virtual squadron has four RW pilots in it now. Two of them fly with the Rift and have stated that DCS (and I soooo wish BMS) in the Rift is the closest you can get to what flying in RW actually looks/feels like. So that’s good enough for me, I’ll take the resolution hit. My guess is two years and we’ll be in at least 1080p in VR and 4k in 5-ish. Then… just… wow. Can’t wait.
-
1080p is half what a cheap monitor has now for pixels per MOA.
-
IMO VR technology will 100% fit the flight simulation world in the next generation, probably within the next couple of years.
-
I just tried the pixel density slider in DCS. Up to 1.5 my PC can handle it with no significant FPS impact and that already improves cockpit readability a lot.
When I push it to 2.5 (max), everything yet quite a bit better and more clear. Readability really is a lot less (to none) of an issue then. But FPS drop is too big, unplayable for me.All in all my PC (I7_3770+GTX970) is a bit too weak for DCS in VR. I can barely get above 60 FPS (that is even with pixel density at 1.5) which makes it quite flyable but at the cost of ingame detail and still in a solo mission.
If I add medium in-game detail I am around 45 FPS….
…which is even more away from the recommended 90 FPS experience.90 FPS is quite a number to reach for a flightsim even more so in stereo 3D rendering.
So it is flyable and stunning to show of. I cant see cockpit readibility being much of an issue. You can tweak that away with ingame quality settings.
But realizing steady optimum FPS is not so easy.Greets
-
So one says readability in cockpit is an issue on low setting the other says details outside the pit are an issue and worst than 1080p…
And all are exited about it.
Hmmm makes one wonder.
-
So one says readability in cockpit is an issue on low setting the other says details outside the pit are an issue and worst than 1080p…
And all are exited about it.
Hmmm makes one wonder.
Well, not so difficult to explain. Albeit probably hard to understand without having tried it.
It is just some ups and downs. Some aspects are really really great. Dont ever compare to a monitor.
Other aspects are worse than on a monitor setup.Now a (very personal) question is if the goodies outweigh the bad things or vice versa.
As for the readiblity on low settings: Well, just use high settings!
(Edit: Pixel densitiy is the setting that matters most here. In DCS the max FPS i can get is 60+. I can still run PD x 1.5 on the GTX 970 and readability is acceptable. Due to the FPS requirement that comes at the expence of some other in-game details for me but those are not directly related to the cockpit readabilty.)
For people with PCs powerful enough for multiscreen setups that might be possible.
Of course 90FPS remains a difficult target for optimum experience but it is not that it wouldnt be flyable at 60FPS as well.
What I wanted to say is that cockpit readability is no limitation or problem of the current generation of VR hardware, but boils down to the PC being able to render the images in a high enough resolution while maintaining the neccessary FPS.
If one already would have a GTX 1080 at hand, before investing in 3 or more big-screen monitors for a flightsim like DCS it might be worth trying the Rift before.
-
I seem to recall hearing that the HUD at full res in BMS was not legible on the rift. That would strongly suggest angular pixel density is an issue.
-
They’re readily available on the market now. In the States at least there is a return policy. All I can say is try one if you can.
You guys on this forum that keep grumbling about VR… It’s not like the rest of us work for Oculus or HTC. I’m not sure what you all keep hinting at. It’s like you all think that those of us that have purchased a VR device and enjoyed the heck out of it are trying to trick you or something.
Maybe my terminology was off with the 1080p thing. I don’t know how that stuff works… What I meant was VR in two-ish years will be as clear as a “regular” monitor. 4k in under 5 is my hope. Until then. -shrug- It was worth the purchase for me. I was building a switch for switch 18C 'pit. VR killed that project. That said, I still use certain switches and having a physical 'pit around you while in VR really adds to it. The first thing I did when I got in VR was try to rest my elbow on the canopy frame, felt that real. Had my home cockpit frame matched that, my brain would have been fully convinced I was in a jet.
So not sure if those of you that are so vehemently anti-VR are home cockpit builders, but if you are, don’t worry, it will change the way you use your cockpit, but having it AND VR is icing on the cake.
I also need to add a canopy arch with hand holds somehow. I never realized how much of an abs workout a dogfight can be when your on 1:1 head tracking. I’m constantly swatting the air trying to grab the (at the moment) virtual only handholds in the 18C to pull myself back around in my seat.
-
VR is on a good path, and it will eventually be awesome for flight sims,
Currently, the “price of VR” is just too high.
you have a huge performance penalty to pay, in current GEN VR HMD you need to have x1.5-x2.0 multisample on (called “pixel density” in the SDK). so you render close to 4K monitor resolution.
however, you need to hit almost 90 fps on half-target size all the time. (because you rended one eye at a time).even a 1080 cannot hold 90fps in this resolution in a flight sim (no problem to hold it in VR dedicated titles, even on a 970).
so you hold 45fps (which is about 24 fps per eye - which is reasonable unless you move your head too quickly, which you don’t because of the HMD inertia).
but if you drop below that, to 30 fps (15fps per-eye), it’s very disorienting, you get mismatch image on the eyes because they are rendered sepretly, in low altitude the same object will move between frames. but it’s still playable in most cases.but if you drop lower then that (24fps) it’s just plain headache.
holding a 4K screen at 60fps is hard enogh, but if you drop to 30 fps, nothing bad will happen. you can even go down to 20fps and it’s playable.
but in VR, it’s a no-go.nextgen VR HMD, supported by two generations from now GFX cards, will defiantly be what to aim for.
-
Thanx Uri_ba
nice clear crisp explanation.We don’t say you get money from OR or HTC we are just jealous. :lol:
Well it’s not that VR devices are expensive is that you in most cases need a serious upgrade on the pc if not a new one… That goes above the double of the VR price in the best scenario… which is ouch going above 1.400 - 1.500 USD or Euros.
And when we (that we don’t have the devices ) hear VR users complain for some factors that for that price we would expect perfection or at least those solved then what else you can do but blame them?
Sure is a phenomenal experience… It was back in 2000 when first ones came out with 640x480 or 800x600 resolution… and I tested them with plain games and not Flight sims… I imagine now its super wow… But there is a but as you see…
So don’t take it personal… we just wait performance to get better and prices to drop so keep buying guys… we are here.
-
Lol, Arty. Good stuff. :). I did upgrade to a 1080. I’m not rich by any stretch of the imagination but I’m lucky enough to be comfortable to throw a little money at my hobby I think what happens is that all the VR users always throw the resolution thing in there because it’s not 4K and we want to make sure we admit that up front. Butt if you’re running your settings right and you computer is powerful enough the feeling of being in a cockpit is just more than I can explain freaking awesome. Especially when a Sam is launched and you can really tell who is headed for and how far away it is just by feel.
To be honest. I have never once looked at my framerate. The rift does that computer magic where it fakes getting 90 frames per second somehow. So it never bothered with numbers just doesn’t feel right or not…
For me the VR issue is that for combat flight Sims now DCS is my only choice. God love the BMS guys for all that they’ve done but I would happily pay a company that updated this game / Sim so that I can fly it again. DCS is great but there are numerous ways BMS is better and I miss those.
Sent using voice to text while I should be concentrating on the road enjoy the typos
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
-
anyway don’t worry… BMS will get VR support…
Right after DX11, New terrain engine and cool sunglasses…
so… 2025ish? -
The first thing I did when I got in VR was try to rest my elbow on the canopy frame, felt that real.
This! Just this nails it. In DCS while on the ground I opened the canopy and leaned over the edge to watch the a/c from the outside. A simple WOW moment.
-
anyway don’t worry… BMS will get VR support…
Right after DX11, New terrain engine and cool sunglasses…
so… 2025ish?That soon? :lol:
Well the devs say they don’t own vr so they can’t code it - test it.
The lack here is an initiative to ask bms devs to whom to send a vr device. Then start a paypal account and gather the money for it. This should be done from someone with proven trust, a squadron close to bms team, or Falcon online… Just saying…
Else what Uri_ba said.Sent from TapaTalk
-
I seem to recall hearing that the HUD at full res in BMS was not legible on the rift. That would strongly suggest angular pixel density is an issue.
With the CV 1 the HUD should be easily legible. even the smaller text on the HUD on the A10C in DCS is legible. I expect you will have to lean in to the MFDs for identifying targets on the TGP or sorting out a complicated HSD. The fuel totalizer should be legible as well, but smaller gauges like engine RPM will require a lean-in. Right now I don’t think there’s a way to make it work. Fingers crossed OldGoat works some magic with the Virieo drivers.
-
It’s kind of hard to explain, but a wraparound 3-D and extremely accurate head tracking makeup for any shortcomings. The first time I used a Dev Kit it about took my breath away. I now have a CV1 and in DCS everything is very flyable and the situational awareness is so much better. Having your head view move true to life is not only natural. It is so much more revealing and accurate.
But, my first love Is Falcon 4.0 and I would love to fly it in virtual reality. People talk of the complexity of Falcon, but there are so many workarounds and also so many people that is spent a hell of a lot of money on building cockpits. My hope is that the two sides can merge.
-
Same here, cannot follow the hesitation. We’re living with imperfections from the beginning. VR + any kind of cockpit is a perfect match. Would have been such a great possibility to regain interest for new players. Even DX9 is no excuse, the guy from LFS found a great way to port his engine running dx9 still in backend, same as euro truck simulator.
-
hmm this looks very interesting:
http://www.pimaxvr.com/8k/