Vivoune

Damn it sounds like you tried a Vive pre! Great write Derek, thanks for sharing it with us, very informative and well exposed. I'm not surprised at the comfort comments, it really sounds like they're just still using prototype temporary gear... About SDE and screen quality compared to the DK2 I have to say I'm surprised you experienced them to be quite similar. It seems the poor job HTC did at making the HMD usable and comfy results in headset often being not placed correctly or set up correctly. So it could be the issue. Users report the Vive's designed to sit on the cheek bones and not on the nose like most would naturally put it on. If it's not though and you got the best out of the Vive, then yes it is indeed very concerning that a DK2 is more or less as good apart from a small drop in resolution. I would definitely not shell out that kind of money either. That said maybe the difference between the CV1/Vive and DK2 are more prominent in the sims we use, every bit of resolution helps to get the next apex, brake point or cockpit instruments, I recall Matt Wagner saying about VR concerns on the Polychop Q&A video that the CV1/Vive made reading cockpit MUCH better, yes, in capital letters. I look forward to your CV1 review and comparison. Now that I know you have a CV1 on the way and live in driving distance of a Vive demo, I might regularly remind you to do a comparison when you have the time after you got yourself well acquainted with the CV1. :D

Good to hear that Roie, loosing a whole session can be quite the bummer. I'd love to hear you talk a bit more about the actual sense of presence and immersion as well as cockpit usability, target searching etc. I know VR's been out for some time now since Dk1 but hearing how people are enjoying it never gets old! Good work regardless and thanks for sharing it with us.

I hear you! :) That's even more of a game changer in the sim community where VR is a perfect match.

I saw your vids Roie, they're cool, thanks and keep them coming ;) The OR definitely feels more like a refined final product than the "functional" look and comfort of the Vive no question here! I'm one of those who really find the Vive ugly. But I beg to differ on using the Vive as a seated experience, it's a growing misconception, the Vive can be used just as well in a tight spot or in a cockpit in a seated position. Reviewers are so focused on Room Scale that they tend to forget the Vive works just as well in a seated manner and some even think it can only be used standing with the furniture moved out of the way. I've found the Room Scale with its VR controllers in reviews are such a 'wow' factor that they completely forget to talk about the Vive's seated experience. Like HTC Vive engineer Shen Ye says "Thinking Vive can't do seated VR is like thinking colour TV can't do black and white." [ame] [/ame]

I reckon that's sarcasm. If the Rift truly as a better image quality and a wider sweet spot that's a game changer for simulation. So in that sense the Vive would offer a less optimal experience. But again, it's hard to see what's correct or not as there are many conflicting feedback and with different user setups (one user reporting a much less forgiving sweet spot in the Vive, then someone commenting it's because the writer is wearing prescription glasses and that he himself noticed a more forgiving sweet spot in the Vive than in the CV1... So it's quite difficult. There are many reports of people getting rid of any blurriness by wearing it properly. So I don't know what's what tbh.

Note that the thread isn't called "Oculus CV1 vs HTC Vive" for a reason, I think both are great and will do just fine, there's no wrong choice. I think that's a question that a lot of us are asking ourselves. I know I am. I'm not particularly biased towards one or the other. This is talking about the consumer version of both HMDs, not the DK2 nor the Vive pre. I find it very hard to find comparison between the two consumer headsets. There are a few on various forums or reddit but they're mostly conflicting and all over the place. I mostly leave the Room Scale out of the equation, even if it's a great thing that one day could allow us to get out and have a look at our aircraft for before-flight verification or after flight damage reports (that sounds really cool) we're only really using it seated. This is what I could gather from people that tried both on the same apps and at the same time : Comfort The CV1 is more lightweight (by 85 grams) and has better head straps, so is all in all more comfortable than the Vive. That's something I don't mind much as you can read everywhere people being perfectly happy spending hours on end in both units, I think it's a matter of having it correctly set-up, and worse-case scenario, can be rather easily corrected by 3rd party straps and face pads. I won't cover cable management as we're mostly seated. Screen Although they have the same resolution the Vive has a bigger vertical FOV than the CV1 so it feels less like looking at a world through a scuba diving mask resulting in a better sense of immersion. That translates to a lower pixel density in the Vive thus a supposedly less "crisp" image. Most people that tried both in conjunction agrees that both screens, despite these differences, are very similar and most flaws are being easily overlooked once immersed into the world. I can't comment on the screen door effect since feedback are absolutely all over the place and conflicting... I only know that the CV1 has more of a diagonal pixel arrangement while the vive has more of a checkered/tri-force pixel arrangement. Both SDE mostly feels like looking at printed paper rather than the good old SDE of the DK1 & 2 and you have to be looking at it to notice it. There are also numerous reports of the CV1 having a much better wider "sweet spot" than the Vive, to a point where some think their Vive has hardware issues. Meaning the CV1 has most of their screen being crisp quality where the Vive gets blurry quite fast when not looking straight ahead. A lot of conflicting feedback on this too as some say it gets more blurry as you approach the borders, other say it's clear with only the near border zone being blurry, other say there's a tiny sweet spot at the center being the only readable area while other says they had their Vive set up all wrong for days and once used correctly also reach a crisp screen with a wide sweet spot. There are conflicting infos all over the internet with people wearing prescription glasses with different eye problems, setting the Vive up incorrectly etc. That's quite an important factor for flight simmers like us as the smaller the sweet spot the less usable cockpit we have so it's a bit disturbing that HTC failed at providing an easy and consistent way to set up the unit correctly, obviously the CV1 is a much more refined product in that regard. In terms of contrast, brightness and colors, the Vive seems to have a brighter screen with a better contrast, deeper blacks and more vibrant colors. Some people prefer the CV1 dimmer screen that is found more natural and less "digital" than the Vive's. It seem to be a matter of taste much like when buying a TV though, some prefer the CV1 some prefer the Vive. The CV1 seem to struggle with blacks that are often rather grey, recent software updates seem to have improved the situation. Lenses Sadly both headsets suffer from the now infamous god-ray effect when high contrast images are being shown (a clear hud in space or at night for exemple) resulting in light bleeding into the user's eye through the lenses and breaking immersion. Everyone seem to agree it's worse on the CV1 than on the Vive. Although that's an issue I don't think it should be that big of a deciding factor, I'd be surprised if there wouldn't be different set of lenses official or 3rd party to correct that so the CV1 issue should be easily fixable. Tracking Most agree that the tracking system of the Vive, being laser based and using two tracking sources, is near perfect and more precise and stable than the CV1. The CV1 still offer an absolutely solid experience, but is more comparable to a trackIR being infrared based. And yes, despite the fact that most reviewers omit to speak about it due to the 'wow' factor of room scale, the Vive works just as well seated behind a joystick as it does standing in the middle of a room. *** I dont cover audio as I think most of us will use our own audio solution anyway and the CV1 audio can be easily taken out. I'm not covering software, setting and general support either because I find everything will evolve a lot in the coming months. I don't take price in consideration either as I feel they're rather similarly priced once the controllers are taken into consideration. Any of you guys have both headsets and have done proper first hand comparison? That'd be great to hear from you guys. Currently I have a Vive on order, but I'm not completely set, it mostly depends on if the reports of the CV1 having a more crisp image and a much wider sweet spot is true and independent of the hardware setup correctly for the specific user (glasses, IPD etc) or not.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rVmwQvLklQ[/ame]

And a very successful campaign ended with about 2.7 millions dollars out of the $100 000 target. #36 in most funded projects ever on Kickstarter with 27 times the funds they asked.

Impressive work. It really changes the map and improve immersion and realism, something we're all suckers for. ^^ Personally I think I'll pass though, I totally think Stairway deserves to get paid for his awesome work, but supporting paid texture packs in DCS feels like opening the door to the same type of market that FSX has where clouds, rain, weather, ATC, tree, everything is being sold as DLCs. That's not something I want to ever see in DCS. Some people are all for it, I understand and respect that, I'm not one of them. I might get it once it gets on sale though if that happens, to support Starway. I'd still be interested to know how that texture pack and the revised version of the Caucasus map will interact/coexist. Kudos to Eagle Dynamics for not locking other map textures or mods (although that'd have been suicidal) to keep it fully optional.

thanks for the feedback hannibal. Was it the final Vive or the Vive pre? They're quite different. People report that "The optics are way better on the Vive/CV1. It's the most jarring thing when going back to the GearVR [on Galaxy/edge s7]."

SkateZilla is spot on. Game engines will keep on getting optimized but there'll be new tech that'll be developed for VR to allow it to work properly at the FPS we need. There's no way around it really. ED can only do so much. Right now VR is mostly treated as screens, it needs to get its own tech and be treated as VR.

About Stereo, simulated surround sound has been a thing for a long time, so they'll use that with their own algorithm. But all current surround headsets (5.1 or 7.1) have a resolution of 30° at best with weaker spots on the top, bottom and rear. The better the source the better the headset will work though, so it's not made to shine with simple stereo. In a nutshell the point of it is to have several speakers in each ear angled differently so that their algorithm can beam sound the way it needs to, to create true specialized sound for your specific anatomy that it measured previously (thanks to in-house algorithms and on-board measuring tools). That should offer unlimited surround with great sound quality. At least that's the promesse. Games would have to not compress their sound output to 5.1 or 7.1 though, but according to Ossic it's not hard to do at all since 3D engines are already set up to have unlimited sound sources coming from the right sources. If itreally works like they say it does, it'll be to stereo headphones what VR is to 2D screens.

I haven't tried any true specialized audio headphones personally but from what I understand they're really weak on the top, bottom and rear aspect. Not to mention everything is still quite "close" to the head, not the kind of presence you'd expect to meet VR headsets. That Ossic should correct that. They claim life-like quality audio with a few degrees precision anywhere, so unlimited 3D. I'm still skeptical, but I'm also optimistic considering the various 3d party previews so far that are as excited and impressed by it as they were with the OR when it first was demoed. It would be so immersive to be seated in the cockpit and correctly hear (i.e feel) the engines running on your back, the pump on the bottom, oxygen ventilation on the side, alarms from the front, the rain atop us hitting the canopy etc. It would really bring a cockpit alive, closing your eyes and believe you're really there. Then for the lucky few, opening them and actually being there in VR. :D It would be so incredibly immersive.

I'm considering placing an order on the HTC Vive, despite it's strength over the OR residing in its room scale experience I'll mostly use it seated for simming, and most of it being DCS. Is it as good in DCS as the OR? Despite the same resolution I read the OR offered a tad better experience at reading text, thus better at reading HUDs and instruments. I know the resolution is far from enough yet for a perfect experience but is it useable to a point where you can spot targets, do missions effectively?

Hi guys, Here's a cool product that's about to close a very successful kickstarter campaign [ame] [/ame] Their marketing seems to be so overselling in its pitch yet so generic in its execution that I think it actually does them a disservice so here are a few feedbacks for the skepticals (I know I was): http://wccftech.com/future-audio-ossic/ http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/ossic-x-is-the-3d-headset-the-htc-vive-needs [ame] [/ame] Here's to ED supporting that product, the immersion would be epic. :) Cheers!

Texture painting is very subjective and everyone will have its own opinion on which modder is the "best" thus I don't see much point in debating it. I'm not sure I'm ready to pay for textures packs for such old maps in DCS. And it kinda opens the door to paid mods which is a whole other matter. No matter how good the textures it's still a map created 10 years ago, it shows, I think the best approach about Georgia would simply be to redo the map (maybe even expand it if possible) to reach the new coming map standards and have it paid DLC like Nevada is right now if finances are an issue. I know we can read a lot of people that are sick of the current map but a lot of us are still very much enjoying the dark grim temperate terrain that Georgia offers.

They are redoing the grass/clutters, clouds and most effects (explosions being one of them). It hasn't been stated when nor to what extent.

The problem with typing and clicking is particularly problematic specifically because muscle memory is hardly involved. We're good at remembering exact force and pressure required, we're terrible at remembering distances and length. For exemple driving with a brake pedal that has only slight linear resistance would be very hard. About your issue, there are ink pens that also records what you write and instantly translate them into PDF through bluetooth, it's then just a matter of copying it into the kneeboard. There are other ink-less pencil that can "write" on any surface to modify or note anything on the document you want. There are all kind of different electronic pencil that offer some solution to that problem thought I'm not sure how exactly that would work for you.

Click bait indeed. Afaik the only official word there has beenabout the Vive pricing is from Ryan Hoopingarner, director of VR product marketing at HTC that said “We feel like [customers will] be happy with the investment they’ve made in the Vive.” when asked about the just announced USD600 price tag. It could mean anything of course, but that's all there is thus far. I think there's a rather huge and easy marketing move from HTC/Vive and that is to sell their VR system around the same price as the OR.

Afaik the advantage of simvibe is that is translates telemetry data from sims into the buttkicker(s) in order to have the right vibrations at the right time regardless of what's happening sound wise. Only a few sims output such telemetry, namely Iracing. It'd be great if DCS would but, afaik, that's not the case. Indeed that sound about right. I'm sure it's the best they could do too. But the hard truth is it's just not good enough for a lot of us. I hope screens will evolve quickly, Oculus Rift is now worryingly starting to only refer to long term plans in scales of 10+ years when asked about affordable market VR and wide adoption, taking smart phones as an exemple.

Indeed. Sadly it's all we'll hear for some time, whether it's the OR or the Vive, the tech just isn't there yet for a HD crisp VR experience, it'll feel like 480p and will be the norm for some time. Though that's enough for a lot of people, some prefer a crisp HD screen at home, other prefer the huge average quality screen of cinema theaters, it's all personal preferences. Personally I think I'll buy into VR once it allows DCS World (cockpits, ground target scanning etc) to be as readable as with an HD screen, I recon a year or two from now depending on how big of a leap the next GPU and CPU generation will take.

Yes, the front camera is nice and logical. Palmer Luckey already said they had plenty of accessories in the work so you can bet there'll be an OR front camera that can be clipped on the unit as well as the yet-to-be-priced VR controllers at the end of the year. I'm sure all of these accessories will also be a "bargain". A front cam also opens they way for hand gesture and hand/finger movement tracking. If done well it could mean at some point just reaching with our hands in the real world to flick a switch in VR.

I'm one of them (It doesn't cost $200 though), if we are to go down that road I also have a 400€ hotas, 350€ rudder pedals, a 700€ monitor and a 2000€ water cooled custom built PC. All of that to say that I like to think of myself as an enthusiast and PC sim/gaming a passion, just like many others in the DCS community. I still can't justify the OR at that price which is to me, beyond enthusiast. That said, it doesn't mean there's anything wrong with those who can justify it, there's no need to be sarcastic really. Oculus Rift was pitched, funded and developed on the basis that it'd be an affordable VR solution for the masses and is now being sold instead as a luxury high-end specialized product for the few. There had to be reactions.

Same here, I used to work with many screens. I need the work space it provides. Early last year I switched to an extra wide 34 inch IPS 1440p screen and it's been great. It cost about the same price as the Oculus Rift, it was a great investment and serves me really well in every department be it work or entertainment. The Oculus Rift though is a very very specialized screen that can only be used for the one thing it's been designed for. That's why I can't justify buying it at such a price, I want it, but I don't need it. Kudos to those who can justify it though, share your experience. I know someone who actually is at the working front of that tech and says that the tech is simply not ready yet, the screens are way too low rez for a good experience, we'll get there, but we're not there yet. For that kind of money I want a top notch product and experience. I only hope that such an agressive price point won't delay yet again the VR adoption a few years back should the price stay up high for too long.