LMS for VR is this something ED could implement?

[StandingCow]

 

Article: http://www.roadtovr.com/nvidia-explains-pascal-simultaneous-multi-projection-lens-matched-shading-for-vr/

 

Basically it boils down to, a lot of pixels (close to half) are wasted currently in VR. Without LMS your GPU has to render 2.54 Mpixels per eye, this technology would cut it down to 1.57, and it actually improves the quality of the image.

 

Pretty cool stuff. I wonder if this is something ED could or has already looked into... or if it is even possible. The game has to support Nvidia VRworks: https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks. It says supported in DX12 but I am not sure if it is supported in earlier versions of DirectX, still trying to find out.

 

Edit: looks like it supports DX11 as well - https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/multiresshading

Although only two engines support it: Compatible with the following APIs: DX11, DX12, OpenGL. Integrated with Unreal Engine and Unity

[url=https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/multiresshading][/url]

Edited March 31, 2017 by StandingCow

[Gladman]

Given prior statements on this forum it would appear ED has decided to not go with Nvidia specific tech.

 

 

To me it seems foolish given the lions share of GPU's sold historically and more than likely in the future will be Nvidia, but I digress.

 

 

I could see them making a stance if this was Call of Duty or any other top contending video game but its not, its a niche market that could easily capitalize on leading tech but they do not. It is what it is and although I completely disagree with that path, I can either deal with it or play something else. These days, I play something else.

[dburne]

Well for what we do - combat flight simming - VR is still very much a small niche within a niche...

Perhaps as the technology grows and it becomes more mainstream developers such as ED will take a stronger look at something like this.

[StandingCow]

Well for what we do - combat flight simming - VR is still very much a small niche within a niche...

Perhaps as the technology grows and it becomes more mainstream developers such as ED will take a stronger look at something like this.

 

I think the only big improvement we will see in VR is eye tracking... and that may be a bit far off.

[Gladman]

This is a good read based on announcements and etc. Good things are coming but it'll be a bit as we all expect.

 

 

https://www.vrdiscussion.com/blog/article/26-oculus-rift-2-what-when-to-expect/

[Lensman]

I think the only big improvement we will see in VR is eye tracking... and that may be a bit far off.

 

Have you seen this?

 

https://www.getfove.com/?gclid=CjwKEAjw_PfGBRDW_sutqMbQsmMSJAAMpUapBaXIK62w9mXZzmGBfkCCF926Nvg25uX6WfR0G087sBoC8urw_wcB

[dburne]

I think the only big improvement we will see in VR is eye tracking... and that may be a bit far off.

 

Oculus is working on eye tracking for the Rift CV2.

[cichlidfan]

Oculus is working on eye tracking for the Rift CV2.

 

Which might be out in two years.

[Snacko]

That looks very interesting. I had 3D glasses almost 15 years ago and loved them. Unfortunately that company went out of business. I've been putting off getting into VR even though I really, really want to. It's just not there yet for me. The glasses that I had were polarized and the software duplicated the image on my CRT for each eye. It worked pretty good with almost any game.

 

I have a friend who lives 2 hours away who is into DCS and has the Oculus Rift. I went down to try them out about 2 weeks ago and while the immersion into realism was fantastic, there were several problems that I would like to be solved before I take the plunge.

 

1. Screen Door effect has to be fixed. This post looks promissing to fix that. I am pretty sure that will be fixed soon.
   
2. I want to be able to interact with just my hands, or non-invasive gloves/controllers.
   
3. And see my Hotas and keyboard.
   
4. Wireless
   
5. Needs head tracking acceleration like TrackIR.
   

 

Obviously this is geared toward the simulation gamer. But I am looking foward to the Screen Door effect and controller/hands solutions before I seriously think about buying in.

[Brewnix]

Wonder what kind of price it would be if ED were to get a license to use Nvidia's proprietary rendering products?

Maybe if the goal is not to high the community could help! Just a thought.

[cichlidfan]

Wonder what kind of price it would be if ED were to get a license to use Nvidia's proprietary rendering products?

Maybe if the goal is not to high the community could help! Just a thought.

 

If ED doesn't want to do it, in the first place, what difference does it make?

 

Besides, with the income from military contracts as well as ED's cut from all of the 3rd party items, along with the DCS revenue stream, I should hope they don't need help with their finances.

[Brewnix]

That looks very interesting. I had 3D glasses almost 15 years ago and loved them. Unfortunately that company went out of business. I've been putting off getting into VR even though I really, really want to. It's just not there yet for me. The glasses that I had were polarized and the software duplicated the image on my CRT for each eye. It worked pretty good with almost any game.

 

I have a friend who lives 2 hours away who is into DCS and has the Oculus Rift. I went down to try them out about 2 weeks ago and while the immersion into realism was fantastic, there were several problems that I would like to be solved before I take the plunge.

 

1. Screen Door effect has to be fixed. This post looks promissing to fix that. I am pretty sure that will be fixed soon.
   
2. I want to be able to interact with just my hands, or non-invasive gloves/controllers.
   
3. And see my Hotas and keyboard.
   
4. Wireless
   
5. Needs head tracking acceleration like TrackIR.
   

 

Obviously this is geared toward the simulation gamer. But I am looking foward to the Screen Door effect and controller/hands solutions before I seriously think about buying in.

Sorry for the double post in row! But has anyone seen this! This guy has figure out how to see his hands with the a green screen and a camera.

[Brewnix]

If ED doesn't want to do it, in the first place, what difference does it make?

 

Besides, with the income from military contracts as well as ED's cut from all of the 3rd party items, along with the DCS revenue stream, I should hope they don't need help with their finances.

 

Ah interesting, I thought it was a money thing the reason they wouldn't invest in to Nvidia's stuff.

[Jabbers_]

1. Needs head tracking acceleration like TrackIR.
   

 

If you find this, make sure you keep a trashcan next to your pit to puke into.

[Snacko]

You might need a trashcan. But I had no problems when testing my buddies Rift. I've never gotten sea sick, or any motion sickness. ;-)

[cichlidfan]

You might need a trashcan. But I had no problems when testing my buddies Rift. I've never gotten sea sick, or any motion sickness. ;-)

 

The Rift does not have head tracking acceleration, unlike TIR.

[dburne]

The Rift does not have head tracking acceleration, unlike TIR.

 

I can not imagine how weird that would feel.

[Snacko]

The Rift does not have head tracking acceleration, unlike TIR.

I didn't say it did. I said I would like to see that option. When I tested my buddies Rift I thought I needed to be able to turn my head further to see the cockpit and my six, that's all.. :thumbup:

[cichlidfan]

I can not imagine how weird that would feel.

 

Which is why you won't see a VR head set with acceleration. The goal with VR is to reduce the chance of motion sickness, not increase it.

 

@Snacko

You do need to turn your head further, along with your shoulders and waist.

[DayGlow]

I wonder if this even needs to be written into the engine or if it could be implemented in the drivers?

 

I mean the graphics engine sends the render info to the GPU and there driver discards the parts that wouldn't be needed and only render the pixels needed? Still would be more efficient than just rendering the full frame

[Delta99]

I didn't say it did. I said I would like to see that option. When I tested my buddies Rift I thought I needed to be able to turn my head further to see the cockpit and my six, that's all.. :thumbup:

 

This is an odd statement and strange that you would think you need some sort of acceleration. If you want to check six you look 180 degrees behind you.

 

Any sort of acceleration for VR does NOT make sense.

[Bushmanni]

Sorry for the double post in row! But has anyone seen this! This guy has figure out how to see his hands with the a green screen and a camera.

 

That is a video editing trick as said in the video description ie. he doesn't see his hands while playing.

[Astronut]

Accelerated head tracking is a necessity with Track-IR because you still have to be able to see the screen in front of you. With VR it is totally unnecessary. Also, the fact that looking behind you requires effort in VR is very realistic. It requires physical effort in a real airplane too.

 

You get used to the screen door effect, and to be honest, I barely notice it now unless I am looking for it.

 

I'm not wanting to be a jerk here, but it kind of amuses me that we all say we want a more realistic experience and yet, when we get something like VR, which brings with it some very realistic limitations, then some people declare that the tech is "not ready". More to the point is that those people either haven't tried it out properly, or they are themselves not ready to give up the various crutches we have become accustomed to (such as being able to check 6 instantly, see aircraft and ground vehicles from literally miles away etc etc) .

Edited April 2, 2017 by Astronut

[Snacko]

I think I would want the acceleration option because my neck only turns to 90° left/right. So that's all I could get out of VR. But my eyes turning adds an additional 15-20°, which I don't get. But TIR acceleration can help me there.

 

I don't have VR yet, so maybe I'll change my mind.

[Lensman]

Accelerated head tracking is a necessity with Track-IR because you still have to be able to see the screen in front of you. With VR it is totally unnecessary. Also, the fact that looking behind you requires effort in VR is very realistic. It requires physical effort in a real airplane too.

 

You get used to the screen door effect, and to be honest, I barely notice it now unless I am looking for it.

 

I'm not wanting to be a jerk here, but it kind of amuses me that we all say we want a more realistic experience and yet, when we get something like VR, which brings with it some very realistic limitations, then some people declare that the tech is "not ready". More to the point is that those people either haven't tried it out properly, or they are themselves not ready to give up the various crutches we have become accustomed to (such as being able to check 6 instantly, see aircraft and ground vehicles from literally miles away etc etc) .

 

I find it amusing too. I guess we are all looking for different experiences in flight simming. My enjoyment is getting as close to the real experience of flying an aeroplane as I can. I have a full size Spitfire cockpit and the Rift complements this beautifully. Others will have different priorities like becoming a combat ace and getting to the top of a leader board.