vicx

That isn't what screenshots taken in DCS 1.5.1 using Rift runtime 0.8.0.0 should look like. The screen shot is the wrong shape.

Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Nvidia Driver 358.78 Directx Runtime 11 Oculus Runtime 0.8.0.0

LOD system ... continued Refueling Aircraft ... they work differently in DCS right now. It is important to be able to find your NATO tanker. This guy has infinite view distance. But for the other side ... it is different. First he turns into small box and then he disappears at 50km. /

LOD system ... continued NEW Igla terrorist VS OLD Igla terrorist New Igla has a regular size long distance LOD and he disappears at 1km range. This guy hides in cover. Old Igla has a big box for a long distance LOD and there is no limit on visibility. This is not how models work in newer versions of DCS. This guy might be from BS1.

LOD system ... continued The big bombers: B-52 and Tu-95 These are old models and don't share exactly the same approach. From a very old version of DCS judging by the shells :) Tu-95 stops being visible at 17.3km but has a non-visible collision shell that persists till 50km. *Note* Images on far right or opposite what they should be. The black lines show the collision shell of the Tu-95. B-52 stops being visible at 50km

Can you show a new screenshot from DCS 1.5.xx and using a newer Rift runtime?

LuSi, I doubt it's cap. It could be that you have adaptive VSYNC on but again I doubt that is what is going on. The framerate shown in DCS now goes up in steps. 37,50,62,75. In the first release it went up in steps from 75 to 150. In the first release, DCS was showing you the combined framerate for both eyes. If it was showing you 75 in the first release then it means you were only getting 37 which is quite bad. You would have been seeing a lot of judder which is a poor VR experience. You need a constant 75fps for each eye to get a good VR experience in DCS. === So how to get a constant 75fps per eye? First you must be realistic. You can have settings that give you a good result but then you might load a mission or a certain module that ruins your framerate. Some parts of the map are hard for VR and some cockpits are hard for VR too. All you can do is turn down your settings until you get 75fps most of the time ... sometimes it will still drop to 50 even with a Titan. At least I found out via testing which are the important settings First there are two settings that you should set high no matter what. TEXTURES: HIGH (need high to be able to read gauges) MSAA: 2x (need to use AA to improve experience, 2x is the best setting IMO) It is not worth setting these low unless you have a really low powered video card. Next are settings that affect fps (ranked in order of importance). SHADOWS: OFF (makes a huge difference) VISIB RANGE: LOW (makes a huge difference ... more detail in future post) WATER: LOW (makes a difference) TERRAIN TEXTURES: LOW (can make a difference) TREES: 0 (set this in in options.lua. Trees are their own topic in VR) CIV TRAFFIC: OFF (if you must have traffic set to LOW) Settings that affect fps but only in external view DOF: BOKEH (do you need fps when taking external screenshots?) Settings that don't really affect fps HDR: ON/OFF (doesn't affect fps) LENS FX: (doesn't affect fps) Note: setting VISIB RANGE doesn't just change the distance things pop up ... it actually loads different sets of scenery. LOW setting doesn't load Forests. Forests are the worst thing for framerate in VR. If you want to have a longer viewing distance WITHOUT forests you need to edit LUA files. I am working on a mod that does this ... more details later. Hope this can help. These setting give me 75fps most of the time. === Right now I am working on custom settings VR mod to let me have higher view distance for buildings, roads and rivers. The mod will also gets rid of forests because forests totally KILL the framerate. This VR mod mixes some the scenery from VISIB RANGE:LOW with some of the scenery from VISIB RANGE:HIGH so that there will be a smaller amount of buildings and trees but they will render out to slightly longer distances. It also tweaks the blending so that it looks good on VR and reduces popping. I had a setting that I really liked but it turns out that some parts of the map are just REALLY tough in VR. Maybe it is just better set everything very LOW and enjoy the consistent smoothness. Will keep testing and post mod details in a future post so other people can work on their own approach.

The WW2 aircraft have a very consistent LOD system. The models are very well optimised for performance/ All models are visible with zooming aids out to 50km for each model. With the Korean aircraft LODS a lack of consistency :huh: The F-86 uses the old large box system. With the spotting system he might be visible longer. The Mig-15 is not nearly as optimised for performance as the WW2 models.

Chivas, I could bind every switch to my HOTAS using modifiers but I don't really want to do that with my full flavour DCS modules. Part of what makes DCS unique is the extra detail of having clickable switchgear in modules like Mi-8 (my favourite module right now). Using the mouse for switchgear with the DK2 is a bit annoying BUT not for the reason you might think. The main irritating thing with the mouse is that the screen the mouse operates in is windowed and you can travel outside the windows and lose the cursor. Making the window fullscreen doesn't seem to trap the mouse the way it does normally. When you actually have the mouse in your window it is easy enough to use. I should probably report that instead of putting up with it. As for using a wand. I think I would easily adapt to using a wand. I think it would be easier to sue than a mouse and and also more enjoyable. There are some very cool mechanisms already available in DCS that will make using a wand easier. The 3D hint boxes used for tutorials could be adapted to show a moving translucent 3D pointer when the wand is active. In VR those helper regions look really cool. Not on topic but relevant. I generally like the pilot body but sometimes I wonder if it would be nice to have the option of having it partially translucent - kind of a shadow showing where the body is than an actual photoreal body. In the KA-50 some of those switches on the right are just annoying to access with the player body in the way. Icarus ... as cool as those gloves are they are (VERY COOL) very much overkill for DCS because all you need in DCS is a pointer. In DCS you don't really pick things up and manipulate them which is the application these gloves are aimed at and why they cost so much. I think a very simple pointer token or coin tiny want that sits in holder in your cockpit space would be sufficient. Like a wand but much more basic and much smaller.

A lot of people don't know that DCS has legacy model enlargement and visibility system that has been around for a LONG time. I am wondering if the new improved spotting feature plays well with the old LOD system. It might be that because some LODS have a big box for their long distance LOD it means they "might" stay visible longer than is expected. So the other thing that affects how far away you can see models is what distance the last LOD is set to persist. In the example I posted above ... the Zu-23 gun emplacement is set to persist up 20km and then disappear. This is not a uniform value for all models ... this value is different across the range of models. Most of the modern updated models are 20km for ground units. But why is this Sborka Radar unit set to 50km? and is a dark color so he is easy to see? I do not think that there is any deliberate effort to make things different ... it is just that the models debuted in different older versions of DCS and have different levels of quality. This is the story with the models in DCS. They are a bit Frankenstein and were always a bit funny but you did not notice. Now it is easier to notice in so many ways. If you fly a new module without a radar, TGP or Shkval you a so reliant on visual that you notice that some models are VERY hard to spot and some just disappear when they should be seen. If you zoom with a 4K monitor some models show up that maybe should not be seen. If you use the new spotting feature you notice ground models persisit longer than is proper. In this way we start to notice the visibility is not consistent across all models. It is a good start to fixing these things. :)

I still haven't had it light up vs AI tanks.

I'm using an existing mod for this and it does the job really well.We could tweak it for VR and of course we could make it it green. You are right that green has twice the pixel resolution in the DK2 but I think to get sharper text in this way would have to be directly supported by DCS. Great ideas and easy to do although they are module specific. You obviously love the Huey. Great idea. Should we just give up on names? All my tests so far have been for the outside world. I haven't had a problem with the MFD because I just move my head closer. An MFD mod could be done but I would turn to it last. Thanks for the feedback Salsam, I'll make a post in MODS soon with a test version for people to try. Out of interest what video card to you have?

Call up your Congress Critter. Your ISP is being a Fascist and you live in a country that should not put up with that s_. If you don't get this sorted out you won't be able to install NTTR and that is Un-American. Posted from a free country ... Australia. Ooops I posted too soon, pretty sure my BT installs in DCS are pretty heavily throttled :/

You would be crazy not to buy FC3. You would be crazy not to buy FC3. It is the gift that keeps on giving. I bought it when there not many 6DOF cockpits ... and now they are all 6DOF and two have advanced flight model - and probably more will be added. IMO Su-33 has the most beautiful model and cockpit in DCS. Wish I knew who the 3d artist/texture guy/s were for it. I would subscribe to their work. Just get FC3. If you like aircraft in general (and have a soul :smilewink:) you will fly and enjoy them all ... at least once.

I'm wondering if anyone want to collaborate on a combined texture and visibility MOD Thanks Simon. Maybe you can participate in a new project. I'm wondering if anyone want to collaborate on a combined texture and visibility MOD that is specially for VR use. Playing with VR is hard on the system so there are lot of things we could detune to get some performance headroom back. At the same time, in VR some visual effects look great in VR and some look bad. In a MOD we could boost up good effects and reduce the bad looking effects. Example: Distant textures do not render in VR at all (Wide FOV and No zoom) ... it would be best to have very distinct and flatter textures at a distance and only use detail textures up close. Same goes for rendering of objects. You want the geometrical objects to show up futher away but the textures for those objects are not as important. Stuff like the ugly town surface textures can be removed and other textures that stop shapes from standing out. Need more ideas for this list :) Has anyone already down some work in this area. Does anyone have some feedback on testing they have done. Is there any particular texture pack MOD that makes things look better in VR?

Does anyone want to work on a combined texture and visibility MOD that is specially Does anyone want to collaborate on a combined texture and visibility MOD that is specially for VR use. Playing with VR is hard on the system so there are lot of things we could detune to get some performance headroom back. At the same time, in VR some visual effects look great in VR and some look bad. In a MOD we could boost up good effects and reduce the bad looking effects. Example: Distant textures do not render in VR at all (Wide FOV and No zoom) ... it would be best to have very distinct and flatter textures at a distance and only use detail textures up close. Same goes for rendering of objects. You want the geometrical objects to show up futher away but the textures for those objects are not as important. Stuff like the ugly town surface textures can be removed as can the Has anyone already down some work in this area. Does anyone have some feedback on testing they have done. Is there any particular texture pack MOD that makes things look better in VR?

Oh it's going to happen ... it's not an area a HMD maker wants to commit to but 3rd parties are going to go crazy with this. You will have lots to choose from. Feedback on the glove link. I have seen a proper force feedback gloves with servos that look pretty awesome and at the other end low commitment devices like finger tip thimbles and rings might also work. There won't just be gloves. There will be a full range of devices with varying capabilities and ways to interoperate with the HMD tracking systems.

I think Oculus will be the most affordable solution and I think it will be the most convenient and the easiest to use package. It's going to make most people happy. BUT I don't necessarily want the cheapest or most convenient or easiest to use HMD cause I want other things more. What I want is the most feature rich HMD that gives me the most options and lots of ways to customise the way I use it and has people hacking on it to make it do crazy s_. I just get the feeling that Vive is gonna be a little more geeky - at least I hope that ends up being the case. The guy who designed the Lighthouse tech gave a talk earlier this year and I thought ... this is even cooler than the HMD part. I'll make my own tracking parts when they release schematics or just wait a week and order chinese dongles on ebay. I'm going to find that side of things a lot of fun. If they were selling the Vive dev kit I'd probably already have one to go with my DK2. See that's the thing ... because I have a DK2 the thought of getting a CV1 Rift is not as exciting. I know I'd be getting something a lot more polished ... but I wouldn't be getting anything really new. YMMV ... but that's my take.

Thanks kilo ... I have used it a fair bit but I didn't know it HAD to be engaged for stabilising to work. It makes a big difference ... so it's worth using.

No way will you be able to max everything. No way is 40-60fps enough ... you have to stop the fps from ever dropping below 75 and then you gotta double it because each eye gets it's own frame. So when DCS shows you 75 it means your GTX970 is really doing 150 so yeah you need to reset your expectations the same way guys with Titans have had to. === Any drop in framerate is to be avoided at all costs in VR. When you get a smooth experience it will feel good so you will notice less the other compromises that have to be made. My experience is with a GTX780 in an i7-3820 3.6Ghz. Shadows affects framerate the most for me. I turn shadows OFF completely and I don't think it is as noticeable having no shadows in VR as it is in 2D. In 2D you need the shadows to help with the illusion of 3D. In VR everything is already in 3D so missing shadows ... not so bad. I turn down visibility to low because you can't make out detail far away anyway. If you aren't reaching the goal of smooth - use low terrain textures too. Lastly you do have to have some AA. Sacrifice whatever else you need so you can run with some AA. Turn OFF vsync. I have had to do that because sometimes it was showing 60 in DCS instead of 75. --- The other thing I tried a week ago was to edit my graphics.lua to get rid of the ugly town surface textures. The textures that show car parks and fences do not look any good in the rift. It is better to have flatter shading for stuff that is at a distance. I lost my changes when I repaired my install (trying to fix the crashing bug that just got fixed) I think a texture mod just for Rift users is an interesting idea. Anyone tried this yet? Or has anyone tried making a special graphics.lua mod for VR?

Using at least 2xAA helps. Other than that use "caveman" zoom, move head closer. There is no zoom in VR mode. Not sure if ED are just looking for a way to do it that doesn't turn into a juddery mess that makes people throw up ... or it is not possible.

It wasn't dead it was just sleeping. I recognise some of the posters so it can't have been i the ground that long. On the subject ... without knowing doing any research whatsoever I would expect that a missile in HOJ mode would be less effective than an active seeker. It knows where the target is but it doesn't know how far away it is. It should have no problems seeking but optimal guidance should suffer.

Just off the top of my head I was guessing EDID information ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Display_Identification_Data Bytes 21 and 22 But whatever I don't think it is neccssary to know the physical screen size. That is a red herring just the resolution would suffice for rendering purposes.

I'm not totally against a zoom feature but I don't think there should be 15 levels of zoom which is what we have now. It is too many levels and the maximum zoom is too strong. I think two levels of zoom would be enough. A default view which would be a wide view for "tracking" and then a narrow view could be an "identify" view. The rendering engine could use directx11 rendering tech to provide the most realistic representation of the object based on the resolution of your monitor, the range to the object, and the view you are currently in. I wouldn't totally get rid of the old way. If it was possible, I would keep it in DCS as a "retro" gameplay feature.

It does for me last time I tested this with SAM units, which as far as I know is a recent change within the last three months. Had multiple units in a group, only tested in a single player mission.