PiedDroit

Hopefully they will revamp some of the bindings in their 2.0 update (many controls can't be bound to controller at all, or lack a "X or else Y" binding option). For what it's worth, mouse cockpit mode is not only double click on the mouse center button, on keyboard it is LAlt+LShift+C by default, and can also be bound to a controller button.

Haha thanks, this one wooshed over my head. Good to know there's some updates planned, still one of if not my favorite module en the roster.

I'm picking up the MiG-21 after a long time not flying it and I was curious about this announced new version, but could not find any info, is SMT actually confirmed? I did a quick read on the variants, and what I could find is that the SMT was extremely unpopular due do the worsened handling caused by the additional fuel tank on the "spine", most were rebuilt with a smaller tank and redesignated MiG-21ST, visually identical to the bis. So, I hope we'd be getting the SMT, but the ST, which is the same as the SMT (as far as I understand) system-wise, but flies better and less ugly.

Did anyone notice these screenshots from the Home > Downloads > Screenshots > In Development section? Not sure if I should get hyped right away note the file names, e.g. In_Dev_03.12.2021.6.jpg

Yep exactly. I'm DCS non-Steam user. What I did to make it run: - Configured the Windows Mixed Reality environment as instructed when plugging the headset. - From Steam, installed "Windows Mixed Reality for Steam" (had to search manually for it in the store) - When I play, I first start "Windows Mixed Reality for Steam" (which also starts the WMR envirnment), I wait for the headset to hook up and then I start DCS, works like a charm.

Hi folks, I finally got the chance to get the Odyssey, I'm posting here to give detailed feedback about wearign it with glasses, as it was very difficult for me to get info on that. They fit much better than in the Oculus Rift, putting it on and removing it is a breeze too thanks to the "crown" design. The Odyssey's space is 140 mm at the widest point without compressing the foam. The width of my glasses' frame is 135 mm, height 35 mm. I think they are wider than average and yet they fit well. The lenses didn't touch each other either (they were with the Oculus Rift), but I guess this might depend on each person's morphology. Funny detail, in the manual they explicitely tell to not wear the HMD while wearing glasses, as doing so "may cause facial injuries". Covering all the bases I guess :D Hope this is useful. Cheers,

On the higher FOV picture, there will be more objects to display, so at equal resolution, I assume the performance should be worse with the higher FOV.

Also, make sure the LEDs on the camera are OFF by selecting "Track clip" on the TIR software (if you see four red dots on the camera itself, it means it's emitting IR light, you don't want that when using the track clip). It's still possible to have parasitic reflections though, from the sun, as the other said, the best way to diagnose the problem is to have the camera view selected and look for any masking / parasites (red).

Despite all the other ways of perceiving depth, I think binocular vision is the major contributor, not focal length. Chaning world scale with camera separation works, it has been done in other sims.

It has to be provided by the graphics engine, I assume that doing such transformation after rendering is quite costly in terms of processing power. Or maybe it's not that costly, but it still has to be applied after rendering. Which means new software development. The day graphics API (DirectX) and 3D game engines will be able to render pictures directly with barrel transform applied then it will be possible to add this even for monitors quite easily. Good thing is that VR is pushing us right in that direction :thumbup:

Interesting topic indeed. I've been researching this a while ago, I found this good read on the subject: Reducing stretch in high-FOV games using barrel distortion Right now the 3D engine we have does not (I think) offer such camera type / transform but maybe in the future... WebGL sample from the same article Pictures from the article:

I was assuming 3) FOV is tied only to the headset and not to the user. If in the real world my vision is already distorted by glasses I thought it would not matter too much in the headset as I'm used to this distortion (I'm already seeing the world smaller than it actually is because of the glasses), but maybe it has more impact. I think 2) and 5) are the same thing, the ratio between them is the actual parameter. I'm more curious about 4), isn't that an optical thing? How would that affect the rendered picture?

But the link he posted shows an "IPD" setting in DCS, that would be the camera spacing! - or world scale, or viewport separation, or rendering IPD, whatever. The IPD term is used for too many things :D It's not available yet, it's for 2.5.

Hi, that's exactly this. There is a confusion of terms I think, I see this kind of questioning coming back every now and then because there are actually two settings related to the distance between eyes, not just one. The IPD is more the optics side, having proper IPD on the headset means your eyes are well aligned with the lenses and the screen, which is better for comfort, but this will not drastically affect the sense of scale because the images on the screens will be not be modified by this. World scale, on the other hand, is on the rendering side, it is the distance between the two rendering viewports. If the distance between the two viewports is too large, the world will appear very tiny (think of looking at a toy plane), and vice-versa. The size of the world itself has nothing to do with it, it's the relation ship between the world "size" and the distance between the two rendering viewports that matters. This setting should be unique to each person, currently I understand it is fixed in DCS, that's why some people complain about the world scale and some other not.

Sitting in a trainer aircraft does not magically train you, the instructor does. The problem in that case is unused and/or insufficient training missions, not the lack of training aircraft - DCS is virtual, so, many platforms can be trainers, from basic training to advanced training, there is no cost issue, safety issue nor dual-seater limitation. With the curent status of DCS (counting the Hornet), between more aircraft and more content, I favor the latter personally.