Jump to content

mrsparks

Members
  • Posts

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS, IL2-BOS/BOM, IL2 CLOD
  • Location
    San Francisco
  1. +1 to this. As an Oculus user, I bought the Pimax 4k to see if it was better. It's not. Bad distortion of the projection (turning left/right had a fisheye effect), very bad color gamut, very bad focus everywhere except exact center. I immediately posted it for sale, but wasn't able to sell it b/c the left eye stopped working. This was after about an hour of use. I'm VERY excited for the future of VR, but not willing to place a bet on Pimax.
  2. I also have experience with both Pimax and the Oculus CV1 and can confirm both the difficulty in focusing and the fish-bowl effect. Another thing I noticed is that the screen, while sharp, is much duller and has less vibrant colors.
  3. +1 I've felt this way since before 2.1, and had hoped it would come up since lighting has become a discussion topic. So thanks, Basco1. Specifically, I feel the cockpit should be much darker near the rudder pedals. As it is, it's as if there's a light there. Or, at least the cockpit doesn't appear to shadow itself. If the airframe casts a sharp shadow on the instrument panel, I'd expect the instrument panel to cast a more diffused shadow on the recessed area beneath it. Currently, this diffuse shadow isn't present (or isn't intense enough) to feel realistic. Overall, I admit it's a minor point - and I'm thrilled with 2.1 in general. But since we're talking about it ... :-)
  4. Can confirm. I've noticed it's only present on "Default" terrain shading, though. Hope it's helpful. Very enthusiastic about progress with 2.1 in general :)
  5. A very sane choice. :) I'm sharing simply to add a real-world data point to the increase "will more RAM help?"-style questions.
  6. Against all the good advice on these forums, I upgraded my system. Yes, mainly it was for 2.1 as it is now, but more broadly in anticipation of the future. Previous system: i5 @ 3.5mhz 8gb DDR3 RAM GTX 1070 1TB SSD Current system: i7 7770K 64gb DDR4 RAM GTX 1080ti 512mb m.2 NVME storage Results were *very* encouraging, indicating there isn't an unbreakable ceiling to performance in 2.1, but rather a relative (expected) decrease in performance vs the partially optimized 1.5. On the previous system, Normandy was borderline unplayable. I mean, I played it - don't get me wrong :lol: but it was a struggle. It was more likely testing the map than playing. Looking at the wing, the trees chugged along at was seemed like 5 fps. On the current system, Normandy is totally playable. There's a normal* level of ghosting in the terrain when looking at the wing, but everything else is very smooth. I was able to increase pixel density from 1.7 to 2.1 without a problem (2.5 was playable, but the tradeoff wasn't worth it). *normal = same as IL2 BOS (and most other games) even at medium settings. Ghosting in this scenario seems impossible to alleviate without resorting to ASW in most games. *Settings*, unchanged between configs: All the dropdowns on "high" except heat blur and lens effects. Yes, even shadows. AA and Anisotropic off. All sliders set to the middle. Terrain shadows on flat. Global cockpit lighting on. Based on this, I wouldn't hesitate to update your system if you were planning to anyway. You'll likely notice positive improvement right away, and it will only get better as optimizations are shipped.
  7. I modified RiftFlyer's plugin, but I think it could have just as easily been modified from the official plugin. I plan to clean up (remove RiftFlyer's sophisticated bank/yaw acceleration functions) the export.lua file later. Also, major props to RiftFlyer. I'm very new to this, and I'm sure his approach is superior in many applications. In my situation, I find the "come back to center at full inversion" approach feels better.
  8. Sorry for the delay in the in-depth review / pix ... it's taking significantly more tweaking than I anticipated, but honestly, it's all part of the fun. The biggest challenge so far has been overcoming the "Roll bug" present in current DCS plugins for X-Sim and SimTools. SimTools Thread: https://www.xsimulator.net/community/threads/digital-combat-simulator-%E2%80%93-dcs-plugin.4762/ X-Sim Thread: http://www.x-sim.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=309 I read through all the replies. Some of them seem to show progress / solutions, but I could find any that produced the desired result in a 2DOF motion platform. Sorry to make this post simply links to other threads, but I covered the solution I came up with here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2912408#post2912408 If anyone else has a seat-mover and is experiencing this issue - - the fix in the thread above works. Happy to help you integrate it in your export.lua - just ping me.
  9. "Roll Bug" Fix Hi all, If you have a seat-mover (I don't think it's an issue with a G-Seat) or have browsed the DCS plugin threads on X-Sim or SimTools, then you might be familiar with the roll bug. The issue: At some point while rolling left, the motion platform will be pegged at full left deflection. Then just after crossing 180 while inverted, the motion platform will jerk to full right deflection to complete the roll to 0 degrees. Very distracting, not at all realistic. RiftFlyer has worked very hard and proposed an interesting solution that calculates bank acceleration (as far as I can tell). However, the Alternative DCS Plugin RiftFlyer authored resulted in the motion platform violently/randomly gyrating along its roll axis (I think it may have been related to not converting degrees back to radians before outputting to the socket. I had the same result / issue at first). Anyway, I wired up a fix tonight that I'm very pleased with. You can get a sense of the problem / solution approach in this JSBin: https://jsbin.com/qohelupovi/edit?js,console Here's basically what it does: Input 0 45 -45 90 -90 135 -135 180 Desired output 0 45 -45 90 -90 45 -45 0 I got it working in export.lua tonight: function rad(deg) return deg*(math.pi/180) end function deg(rad) return rad/(math.pi/180) end local synRoll = deg(bank) if synRoll < -90 then synRoll = rad(-(synRoll + 180)) elseif synRoll > 90 then synRoll = rad(90 - (synRoll - 90)) else synRoll = bank end I certainly hope this can help some folks with seat movers who are experiencing the roll bug. Happy to answer any questions related to this.
  10. The A3 arrived today. It's 2:30am PST, and I just got a quick landing in. LOTS of thoughts even with a completely un-tuned profile. But the main one is... ... head tracking is a non issue. The Oculus camera is zip tied to the platform, and has quite a bit of play (Atomic is sending a proper fastener soon). Still not an issue. I haven't understood why this thread is concerned with this if the positional tracking camera is stationary relative to the head (ie, moves with the platform). I'll leave with one other teaser: the TTI (tactile transducer) is a must. Not because it's awesome on it's own, but because the actuators generate their own vibration. Without a drone tone of piston knocking, shudders, wind, etc (I'm using SimShaker), the vibration caused by the motion actuators would be distracting. Okay, another teaser - I took unboxing pix. Excited to post more after I actually figure this out :-)
  11. Yes, it does. It uses SimTools + DCS plugin: https://www.xsimulator.net/community/marketplace/motion-simulation-software-simtools.63/ *EDIT* Discovered the plugin has an issue with the roll axis for 2DOF seat movers. Fix is here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2912408#post2912408
  12. @DBO I'm embarrassed to say. Let me soften this by saying I opted to get the motion platform instead of a pilot's license :-) About 8K. Eeek!
  13. @Brewnix - digging the Franken-Throttle! Looks really good. The Atomic A3 should be here on Sept 23. Excited to share how (or IF) it adds immersion.
  14. Hi all! I've been wanting to give back to the community for some time. I've enjoyed the genre for more than a decade (back to Chuck Yeager's Aces and European Air War), and it's time I help make something good for everyone. I have design and web programming skills. I wish I was more of a pure programmer so I could join a modding community, but the best I can do is build a community site. My goals for the site: Make it easy for newcomers to evaluate various titles and get up and running (hardware, mods, teamspeak, the whole gambit) Provide a more structured, easy to navigate survey of available flight sim options, with ratings and reviews and any other relevant info. Now, that could be cool. But it could also be much better. So I'm asking - what do you think is missing in the flight sim space? I don't want to rebuild ATAG. But I also sense there's a need for more. Just to get your juices flowing, consider mission planning, real-world meetups, training courses, online companion for historical campaigns, manual augmentation - there are so many possibilities! Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
×
×
  • Create New...