DerekSpeare

хиитрец молодец ! Cheers, Flagrum!

So if I understand this properly we can have the following: DCS 2 Open Alpha DCS 1.5 DCS 1.5 Open Beta I have DCS World 1.5 and 2 on this PC. The latest version of the 1.5 installation is 1.5.3.50487 - Pls confirm if there are update for this. DCS Open Beta 1.5 will update to 1.5.3.51171 - Does the 51171 update not apply to the non beta version? Does the non beta version receive its own updates?

I'm confused. I have v 1.5.3.50487 and it won't update. Am I reading correctly that now I must install a second version of 1.5.3 to get it to 1.5.3.51171?

BoxxMann's thoughts on the Leap Here's my report: The Leap was easy to setup and get going. I installed the Orion package. All was straightforward. Anyone who has basic knowledge of Windows software installation procedures and UI configuration menus will not have any trouble. First was the calibration, and it went easily. Leap has a preview mode where you can see your hands as it sees them. It uses an IR camera to do the magic. After a few minutes of fiddling I went straight away into FlyInside for FSX (the latest version we have) Dan's implementation of Leap is really great. I was wondering what I needed to do once it fired up, but there were my hands. I didn't need to do anything other than have the Leap connected for FI to use the Leap. Dan has already included an IR camera passthrough as well, so mashing a button brings up an IR view of your particular world. That's really cool and was unexpected. And no Vive required! Humans have been relying on texture and relative proximity of objects when interacting with the world around them since we've been humans. The very physical nature of everything is something we never consider but controls every aspect of our existence. We've been interacting with computers no differently, really. Our impulses to create inputs into our computers gives us very real physical feedback. Typing this is one example! When we're driving, flying or anything, we rely on physical cues controlling our behaviour at any point in time. We interact with so many objects in life without seeing them, but touch is what our brains expect to sense when we do. When we go to start our car we put in the key and turn the ignition, know what it feels like to perform the act, and take off for our excursion, never really conscious of of the feel of the many physical things we touched. We rarely - if ever - need to see it to do so. But what if we didn't receive any tactile cues? What if there was "nothing" really there and you went through the motions, trusting that your hand was in the right place and your conditioned car starting muscle memory acted properly? And say the car started. You'd have to take it on faith that all is "normal", in a relative sense at least. We'd have to make conscious decisions to accept matters, and a conscious "awareness" of interaction is something our brains are not often prone to expect to be required to do. This is what it's like using the Leap. You can see your virtual hand and you can see the interaction, but the lack of tactile feedback makes it quite unrealistic to use and believe - FOR ME. That we often don't look at objects with which we interact makes it doubly hard to consider the Leap to be anything more than a novelty at this point in time. Surely I agree that there are relevant uses of it right now with many aspects of computing, but those who are into gaming and want instant tactile feedback when interacting with their virtual world should look at keeping what they have now. My personal example of simply reaching down to throw the landing gear lever was telling enough for me. In a real plane you just do it. I didn't have that success and confidence in my pretend plane when I tried to do the same. While Dan's implementation is fantastic, and the Leap may have other value, for cockpit games it's got a long way to go. Maybe one day an electrical field of some sort will be invented so that it creates a pseudo-real environment of "electrical texture" that gives physical sensations of virtual objects in the open spaces of our physical worlds. Maybe one day! Details to purchase: The Leap Orion Software is here if anyone else has interest: https://developer.leapmotion.com/get-started The Leap VR Developer Mount is from Leap here: http://store-us.leapmotion.com/products ... oper-mount I purchased the Leap from a HK seller on ebay here (arrived in just about 14 days): http://www.ebay.com/itm/271221480224?_t ... EBIDX%3AIT

I'm very much in favor of the split screen setup where all of the menu interfacing takes place on the main screen and the flying take place on the HMD. I currently turn off the oculus and do my planning/setup on the main screen. Then I exit out, turn on the Oculus and fly. VR folks should have this option available to them to use if they wish. This is, in fact, what it was like when ED rolled out VR for DCS very early on. I know things have changed a lot...but...

I'd really like to see ED get proper Oculus support...they've been pretty damn quiet about Oculus integration >0800 at iRacing, too...hmmmm...

It's my understanding that the new Oculus will have 360 degree head tracking. The DK2 starts to loose tracking at about 100 degrees l/r from front view (camera placing, etc. affect tracking)

This is why I don't want a camera. Leap integration is more in line with what sim folks are wanting - IMHO, of course.

=> dot - I'll be the first guy to say that MUCH more is needed from developers in the area of optimization and integration for VR. MUCH MORE! => Chivas - that's pretty intriguing!

There are many modern games which give stellar eye candy and wonderful frame rates when run on a single screen and high end computers... However, things start to break down considerably when VR is used, especially with flight and racing sims. It's my personal opinion that hardware lags about 5 years behind software, so this means that 5 years hence hardware then *should* blow the doors off what games we're playing today...give or take. And an aside: I realized from the video that the pills in the Matrix were the same...there is no color...like there is no spoon *<|:0)

This is worth watching: [ame] [/ame]

2016 will be a turning point for gaming. This is the year when gamers will receive their first generation of VR hardware. That groundswell will produce the demand for games that run more efficiently in VR. That demand will put pressure on developers to optimize their titles for use with VR hardware. Heretofore, hardware has been very capable, and gamers have had the luxury of being able to enjoy gaming experiences with high frame rates, high quality and high detail. VR arrived and suddenly everything slowed down. Game developers really must pay close attention to ensuring their work runs on VR platforms without trouble. It will be the deciding factor of who stays and who doesn't in the years and decades to come.

The Orion update allows the Leap to work in VR. Leap makes a VR kit which allows you to attach the Leap sensor to the front of the Oculus. https://developer.leapmotion.com/orion http://store-us.leapmotion.com/products/vr-developer-mount [ame] [/ame]

I have it on very good word from someone who has a CV1 that it's a marked improvement...better tracking...better "gauge readability".

I updated the nvidia drivers to 362.00 from 361.91 and have possibly received what looks to be a bit of a boost in frame rates. I'm also expecting asynchronous time warp to help frame rates as well when it comes out. My tests were with DCS 1.5.

BoxxMann's settings for maximum frame rates of 75+ using the DK2 I did a few tests comparing frame rates with the DK2 running and off in DCS. I was using the Hawk. Below are my graphical configs for keeping the frame rates nice and high at nearly all times (during my tests). My target rate is 75fps to match the DK2 refresh rate. As you can see from the screen of my config that the settings are basically bare bones, high speed-low drag. As a consequence of making these side-by-side tests, it appears to me that making a number of these settings to enhance the visual quality does little to improve the visuals, but does A LOT to wreck the frames. Visibility Range, for example, doesn't really change things (for me) but from low to the max the frame rates get slaughtered. Using Flat Shadows is recommended, but LOW will periodically drop the frames. Note that I didn't have any other plane in the sky and it was just me and my Hawk. I tested with DCS 1.5, latest updates (v2.x eats frames like mad). Anyhow, I'm planning to test some more and see what I can see. Some may not believe it, but running everything in DCS to the max will literally cripple this PC with the Oculus. TEST System - i7-5930(4.2ghz)/GTX980ti - ~14000 CPU passmarks, ~11400 GPU passmarks. Errata: I think non VR users are spoiled by being able to run their details up a lot while still enjoying great frame rates. As a consequence of high frame rates, it's appearing to me that there are graphical optimizations that require attention, but are masked at times when frames dip here or there when using screens. It's easy to overlook large swings with a screen, even when the frames may go lower. That said, I'm betting that there are elements in DCS that the developers should optimize to ensure fast rendering fidelity (IIRC, it was VicX who raised a similar point).

The promo videos make it look appealing, but in some ways it seems a bit arcadish to me. :thumbup::thumbup:

My first recommendation - after making sure the hardware is in order - is to run all of the graphics options all the way down and gradually bring them up where performance allows. There are two forces working in our favor. The first is the intimation that ED will implement Asynchronous Time Warp and the second, speculative, would be any improvements the Oculus 1.0.0.0 runtimes bring to the party. In that regard, we'll have to wait and see. I personally think that timewarp should come out as soon as possible and any graphical optimizations that can be made should be made as well.

It's unrealistic to expect that users in general will tolerate on an extended basis lower-than-refresh-rate frame rates. Oculus has stated the need for adequate hardware uite emphatically in order to achieve positive use experiences. Additionally, the difference between expected low(er) frame rates when encountered on a monitor verses a VR device are extraordinarily significant. It's a HUGE difference between 65 and 75 FPS on the Oculus...it's trivial at best on a screen. If you haven't seen it, you don't want to. I'd not expect anyone to tolerate it over the long term with VR. I'm really curious to know if those who are understating frame rate importance have any real VR use history or if the remarks can be considered speculative at best. Personally, I want those who use VR to have a good time with it. It's irresponsible to speculate on matters many with experience can prove to be otherwise true. Having low performance hardware with unrealistically optimistic expectations is a setup for a letdown. It's to everyone's collective benefit for the long term success of VR that folks do nothing but enjoy their VR gaming. I want to see everyone have only the best time as that means better hardware sooner! "None of us will know..."...no, plenty of folks posting here have bona fide, long term use experience with their DK2, AND the DK2 has a lower refresh rate than the CV1; c.f. 75 with 90hz. Some may know little about VR experiences, but we have plenty of folks here who do.

There's some terminology confusions going on. Since Oculus implemented direct-to-rift mode in 0700+ runtimes, judder was eliminated. However, what WAS judder in Extended mode BECAME a type of ghosting or smearing of the image when the frame rates went below the device refresh rate. It's impossible to record as fraps won't see it, and it's tough to describe without experiencing it in person. Both judder (pre 0700) and ghosting (0700+) are very prominent and not unnoticeable in my opinion. While ghosting may not be as disorientating as judder, both are undesirable to many and a symptom of insufficient hardware capabilities. Oculus has been very forthcoming with efforts to stress the importance of capable hardware to achieve the use experience with the Rift. My personal recommendations are the same as theirs, but I am more aggressive in my hardware recommendations. It's my personal hope that folks making the migration from screen to VR be as rewarding as I know it can be. Having a capable system on which to run their VR hardware ensures that all of the extraneous factors that potentially cause trouble have been removed from the equation. @hannibal - yes, many planes. And yes, the CV1 will have IPD adjustment. The Vive allows the user to adjust the lens-to-eye distance. NB - some of the reports I have read from reviewers who have tried both the Vive and the Rift indicate the Rift's visual quality is better. All other features aside, it is visual quality that is 80% of the matter when it comes to good experience.

Flyinside uses timewarp. It's like voodoo magic. flyinside-fsx.com

VR is here to stay. It's an eventuality when it becomes perfect for simming. I'm not going to wait and see, however. If it takes a couple of iterations to get it right, that's ok. I'll enjoy the ride with my Oculus every step of the way. I've been waiting 20 years for VR to finally happen. Oculus was the watershed event to make it a reality.

The significant demands VR places on overall system performance cannot be understated. It also demands that the graphical elements making up the world be created as efficiently as possible to not to waste precious computing time. I believe it was VicX who posted some examples of objects the bogged down frame rates unnecessarily due to poor construction. While the user can throw all of the best hardware available at the problem, that gets frustrating and costly. This has been my own solution over 25+ past years of simming :/ Perhaps what's responsible is that developers, ED in this case, take ownership of things and work to optimize their work more to improve it with VR and begin by cleaning up areas that need it. As VR improves, adoption rates will rise. That will place a greater need on performance developers won't be able to over look. For 2d monitor users, a drop in frames from 75 to 65 isn't really anything to notice. However, a drop in frames from 75 to 65 is VERY significant to VR users.

I'm curious why a 980ti SLI would get anything less than 75fps in any case.

There are many experienced VR users who post to this thread. Many have been using VR since the DK1, and I have been using the DK2 for 18 months. It's unrealistic to expect a positive experience with sustained frame rates lower than the device refresh rate. That's only being setup to fail - or get sick. Timewarp is not the end all cure. It smooths out the things in some ways, but if the underlying frame rates of the system go too low, the timewarp cannot sustain FPS equal to the device refresh rate, or DRR. An excellent implementation of Asynchronous Timewarp is found in Flyinside. I have been using that one since the pre-alpha days, sometime back in October of 2014. If guys are cool with low frame rates, great...if that's ok for them, excellent. I'd not want it, and I am sure experienced VR users here agree that you must have good frame rates to ensure a positive experience with VR.