Is support for VR dwindling?

[StrongHarm]

I think that's my point, are we expected to keep upgrading our systems to keep performance where we got it to so the gameplay is enjoyable? Is ED's focus ever on improving the games FPS performance to improve everyone's gameplay and even allow a lower cost entry point, or just how nice the trees look etc. It seems whenever we spend hours tweaking and spend money to get the smooth game play right there's an update waiting round the corner to knock it back again where we were before.

 

This has always been so. Back in the twilight home of computing, the best technicians out there were people who flew sims. If you think this is challenging, try spending 30 minutes tweaking your system and loading drivers into high mem or chasing down hardware IRQs and DMAs, every single time you start your sim. In consideration of today's recreational computing there are two things that stretch any hardware; 1. VR 2. Sims. We're talking about compounding two variables which, even when individually factored, are a strain on current hardware. The fact that we can do it at all is *amazing*, but to do it well it takes time and it takes money. There's no way around it. I've spent both on getting DCS to run well in VR and I couldn't be happier (except for minor things like map lights). If you want my VR performance analysis and specs I've done a full writeup on it: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=201647 . Take note that in my analysis I found that the benefits of turning AA up in VR wasn't worth the performance hit. Since that writeup there have been a few patches and I'm now running AA at 16x with no performance hit. This is an example of the steady improvements we're seeing in VR in DCS. tldr; PD 1.2, MSAA 2x.

 

ED has done a magnificent job of integrating VR even though they were under no pressure or obligation to do so. They've also steadily improved support and provided tools to tweak VR, even though they were busy building a *world* with uber accurate physics and airframes (F/A-18!). It's my belief that their motive is simple... they're simmers too.

 

[Charlie-1]

This has always been so. Back in the twilight home of computing, the best technicians out there were people who flew sims. If you think this is challenging, try spending 30 minutes tweaking your system and loading drivers into high mem or chasing down hardware IRQs and DMAs, every single time you start your sim. In consideration of today's recreational computing there are two things that stretch any hardware; 1. VR 2. Sims. We're talking about compounding two variables which, even when individually factored, are a strain on current hardware. The fact that we can do it at all is *amazing*, but to do it well it takes time and it takes money. There's no way around it. I've spent both on getting DCS to run well in VR and I couldn't be happier (except for minor things like map lights). If you want my VR performance analysis and specs I've done a full writeup on it: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=201647 . Take note that in my analysis I found that the benefits of turning AA up in VR wasn't worth the performance hit. Since that writeup there have been a few patches and I'm now running AA at 16x with no performance hit. This is an example of the steady improvements we're seeing in VR in DCS. tldr; PD 1.2, MSAA 2x.

 

ED has done a magnificent job of integrating VR even though they were under no pressure or obligation to do so. They've also steadily improved support and provided tools to tweak VR, even though they were busy building a *world* with uber accurate physics and airframes (F/A-18!). It's my belief that their motive is simple... they're simmers too.

 

 

I am not disagreeing ED have done an amazing job with DCS and yes it does support VR.. my point was the latest change seems to have been executed without regard for the VR player base who's performance is already pushed to the limit. There are other sims that also manage to move forward with amazing things and maintain performance without penalty.

[BigDuke6ixx]

99% of computer hardware consumers will not be overclocking anything. It is up to the software vendors to ensure that their products are playable with out-of-the-box hardware.

 

I think we need to take it in stride,Since January of this year with the introduction of the long awaited and promised DCS World 2.5 we've seen a Massive update to the core game.

 

The DCS Team is not limitless with time and resources.We just received an update to help solve some memory game issues with 2.5.1. I believe once they get the core game issues resolved they'll revisit optimizing VR.

 

As a side note,a 1080ti with a mild memory overclock can do wonders in smoothing out some VR rough spots.

 

What are you doing then, that lesser mortals are not if you don't mind me asking? Would be glad to compare notes!

 

Let’s do it. Are you having any A10 deployment issues in VR?

[BigDuke6ixx]

Hmmm,How shall I put this??? ;)

I remember when FSX came out....some 11 yrs ago?? The graphics and options were so advanced that no PC or stock GPU/CPU at that time could run it at MAX settings....tweaking became a normal/acceptable way of getting the best bang for your hardware's buck!! And if you had a Beefy CPU?Say,2.5 GHz or over? You found a way to over clock that thing and keep it cool.

 

**2018** Not much has changed.....Tech has advanced and so must we....VR is cutting edge stuff,If you want to keep up kids, You are going to have to learn to tweek, over clock and adjust your hardware and settings to give you the best experience you can get.

This is Flight Simulation 101 Its been this way since The Commador 64 days.

 

** My Apologies for getting O.T My comments are meant to help those struggling with bottleneck hardware issues**.

 

But now we have the snowflake generation. Do I need to say anymore?

[cichlidfan]

Rubbish. Here is what he said:

 

 

 

 

That’s the post you commented on.

 

I guess you don't know what OP means.

[eaglecash867]

 

**2018** Not much has changed.....Tech has advanced and so must we....VR is cutting edge stuff,If you want to keep up kids, You are going to have to learn to tweek, over clock and adjust your hardware and settings to give you the best experience you can get.

This is Flight Simulation 101 Its been this way since The Commador 64 days.

 

You were overclocking your Commodore 64?!! I never felt a need to push mine...that whopping almost 1MHz clock speed was enough for me. Just kidding. Just being a smart-a** and trying to add a little levity to a thread that looks like its getting pretty intense.

 

In the old days of MSFS on PCs, you still had the option of keeping your current settings if the new bells and whistles taxed your rig too much and you weren't in a position to upgrade yet. I think that's all some of the guys were wanting. :D

[StrongHarm]

NAKE350: Right. I was trying to convey that I received the benefits of the latest version without a performance penalty in VR, so it is possible. See my analysis/specs and tell me if I can help: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=201647

[Thick8]

NAKE350: Right. I was trying to convey that I received the benefits of the latest version without a performance penalty in VR, so it is possible. See my analysis/specs and tell me if I can help: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=201647

 

I noticed you have preload radius at its lowest setting. I need to try that because I can’t start a multi-player game with DS on. With 2xAA, 16xAF, 1.3 SS, and DS on DCS will use up all 11Gb of video ram and kick back to the menu.

[aaron886]

But now we have the snowflake generation. Do I need to say anymore?

 

You haven't needed say more this entire thread.

[Phantom88]

You were overclocking your Commodore 64?!! I never felt a need to push mine...that whopping almost 1MHz clock speed was enough for me. Just kidding. Just being a smart-a** and trying to add a little levity to a thread that looks like its getting pretty intense.

 

In the old days of MSFS on PCs, you still had the option of keeping your current settings if the new bells and whistles taxed your rig too much and you weren't in a position to upgrade yet. I think that's all some of the guys were wanting. :D

 

;) Haha!! Got me!! :thumbup: Yea....Some Levity....I'm down with that brother :thumbup: Cheers and keep Rock'in in The Free World.

[BigDuke6ixx]

What are you doing then, that lesser mortals are not if you don't mind me asking? Would be glad to compare notes!

 

Very simple things. I suppose the most simple was to map the zoom function to my Warthog. You don’t need to be a genius to fly DCS in VR yet I read so many posts in here from people who say it’s impossible. There are people who haven’t even worked out how best to use the head mouse and regard the current implementation as a show stopper because they can’t even raise the gear.

 

How I operate the gear: I scavenged a lever and mounted it in the correct place. I’ve mapped gear to a voice command on VoiceAttack. Of course you don’t need a physical lever at all, but I ts nice. I operate the gear lever while saying ‘gear up’ as part of my after takeoff chx. See, simple workarounds for easily solvable problems.

[eaglecash867]

Thanks eaglecash867, I think £400 is approximately the price difference to from 1070 to 1080Ti, although I won't be rushing out to buy one, when I can just use DCS V2.5 or spend money in other Sims that run just fine with what I have. Besides, I think Deferred Shading has some way to go to enhance the quality of DCS graphics in VR from where it was.

 

Hey NAKE350, I tried turning off the MSAA and enabling deferred shading per some input from other users on these forums, and its pretty disappointing. Having the MSAA completely off makes everything outside about a 100 foot real-world radius look like somebody smeared vaseline on the lens. The colors look nowhere near realistic. You're right, they look oversaturated. They look "cartoony" or like you're underneath the path of a total solar eclipse. Not even close to what it looks like in real life. Without it turned on, things look much more like the real thing

 

I'm installing the Beta now to see if I notice any improvements, or decreases in performance over the stable version. I'm probably not going to take any quantitative measurements though. I figure if its not enough to bother my eyes or be noticed, then its negligible. If they've taken away the option for turning it on or off in the Beta, I guess I won't be using the Beta or downloading subsequent updates for the release version until they get it right. Flight sims, this one in particular, have finally evolved to the point where it no longer feels like you're sitting among a collection of highly detailed drawings. I hate to think they may have taken a step backward. We'll see how it goes on my rig, and I'll let you know.

[eaglecash867]

Just tried the Beta, where you no longer have the option of turning off deferred shading, and I can say with all certainty...ignore my advice about spending your money to upgrade to a 1080ti. Its back to cartoon land, even on one of those. Actually, with the VERY noticeable drop in framerate, its more like a comic book. Not very well "animated".

 

The good new is, it appears that my fears of burning another activation to install it in parallel with the release version were unfounded. I didn't have to activate the A-10C module again.

 

My conclusion: It still needs work There's my feedback. We'll see what happens with the next update, but its definitely not your hardware that is the problem in this case. This thing runs great on the non-updated release version...not so much on the Beta. But, I guess that's what the Beta is for. I'm really glad they're doing the R&D on that before implementing changes in the other. That's an excellent approach.

Edited April 29, 2018 by eaglecash867

[Charlie-1]

Just tried the Beta, where you no longer have the option of turning off deferred shading, and I can say with all certainty...ignore my advice about spending your money to upgrade to a 1080ti. Its back to cartoon land, even on one of those. Actually, with the VERY noticeable drop in framerate, its more like a comic book. Not very well "animated".

 

The good new is, it appears that my fears of burning another activation to install it in parallel with the release version were unfounded. I didn't have to activate the A-10C module again.

 

My conclusion: It still needs work There's my feedback. We'll see what happens with the next update, but its definitely not your hardware that is the problem in this case. This thing runs great on the non-updated release version...not so much on the Beta. But, I guess that's what the Beta is for. I'm really glad they're doing the R&D on that before implementing changes in the other. That's an excellent approach.

 

Phew.. Thanks for trying it out and for the advice on the hardware performance.:thumbup:

 

I do find it odd others on here defending VR as if its some sacred cutting edge technology that only the privileged can master, well it may have been in the 80's when the commodore 64 or even the VIC 20 ware around, but not any more. The fact is there are other games/ sims out there delivering much better graphics on lower spec machines than DCS is right now. This is not cutting edge stuff, its all been done already.

[BigDuke6ixx]

Phew.. Thanks for trying it out and for the advice on the hardware performance.:thumbup:

 

I do find it odd others on here defending VR as if its some sacred cutting edge technology that only the privileged can master, well it may have been in the 80's when the commodore 64 or even the VIC 20 ware around, but not any more. The fact is there are other games/ sims out there delivering much better graphics on lower spec machines than DCS is right now. This is not cutting edge stuff, its all been done already.

 

Name a VR flight sim with better performance and quality than the stable 2.5 version of DCS.

 

Having problems with the beta? It’s a beta.

[Charlie-1]

Name a VR flight sim with better performance and quality than the stable 2.5 version of DCS.

 

Having problems with the beta? It’s a beta.

 

Am I allowed to name other games/ sims within the forum rules? See picture below, which looks pretty much the same in VR apart from the usual screen door effect.

 

The purpose of a beta is for people like us to test and give our feedback isn't it?

Edited April 29, 2018 by NAKE350

[BigDuke6ixx]

Am I allowed to name other games/ sims within the forum rules?

 

The purpose of a beta is for people like us to test and give our feedback isn't it?

 

Yes you can name other examples.

 

Your feedback seems to be along the lines that ED have failed to procduce an optimized VR build. Is that about right?

Edited April 29, 2018 by BigDuke6ixx

[eaglecash867]

Phew.. Thanks for trying it out and for the advice on the hardware performance.:thumbup:

 

I do find it odd others on here defending VR as if its some sacred cutting edge technology that only the privileged can master, well it may have been in the 80's when the commodore 64 or even the VIC 20 ware around, but not any more. The fact is there are other games/ sims out there delivering much better graphics on lower spec machines than DCS is right now. This is not cutting edge stuff, its all been done already.

 

I hear ya NAKE350, I've noticed a lot of responses on these forums that are really intense and emotional. I don't get it either, but I've never been a big fan of drama. I'm coming from the standpoint of making my living for the last 25 years in a world that tends to be very unforgiving of cheerleading and being willing to overlook small details in the interest of getting things done quickly so you can appear to be super-tech. I'm CONSTANTLY on the phone with FSEs and software engineers about what works and what doesn't, and how a Service Bulletin or manual left out a critical step that compromises safety-of-flight. Nobody ever gets defensive, they just walk through things with me and start working on a solution. Like Gunny Highway says in Heartbreak Ridge, "I can't fix it if I don't know what's broken!"

[Charlie-1]

Yes you can name other examples.

 

You feedback seems to be that ED have failed to procure an optimized VR build. Is that about right?

 

I've added a picture from Aerofly FS2 in my post above. Its photo real in my opinion.

IL-2 Battle of Kuban is another example. see below.

 

I don't know how they've done it, but these game run like a dream even on my kit.

 

IMO DS isn't ready for VR in DCS yet and here's why.

 

1) There's a massive GPU performance hit causing FPS to halve.

2) Resolution looks lower so image quality reduced

3) Colours look over saturated and unreal.

4) Contrast is all over the place, seems one extreme or the other.

5) Night lighting is barely visible, no where near as good as it was in 1.5 and other sims.

 

Its a real shame DS has been forced upon us, but I suspect it's for the benefit of monitor users, and I suspect there's a lot more of them than us VR players.

Edited April 29, 2018 by NAKE350

[eaglecash867]

Very cool bug, NAKE350! I have a real-life photo somewhere that I took of that exact aircraft.

[Charlie-1]

Very cool bug, NAKE350! I have a real-life photo somewhere that I took of that exact aircraft.

 

Really!! where did you find that? :thumbup:

 

It fly's real nice too btw, although DCS' flight models seem more finely tuned and probably more realistic. Especially when it comes to slowing down on the runway.

[eaglecash867]

Really!! where did you find that? :thumbup:

 

It fly's real nice too btw, although DCS' flight models seem more finely tuned and probably more realistic. Especially when it comes to slowing down on the runway.

 

It just showed up on the ramp one day. That reminds me...I really need to work on getting all of my photos organized so I can find them. All kinds of cool stuff that I know I have, just can't remember where I put it.

 

Also took some good pics of a factory-fresh Growler that stayed in our hangar for a couple of nights on its way to a completion center. Didn't even have any markings on it yet. Nothing detailed or close-up though...didn't want the black helicopters showing up. :D

 

I'll have to check out that Aerofly FS2. I'm always on the hunt for jaw-dropping VR experiences during my little chunks of down-time here and there.

[Thick8]

I bought and returned Aerofly FS2. It is very pretty and runs wonderfully on my machine with all the eye candy cranked up. Unfortunately that’s all it has. Flight models are arcade like and there is no physics involved. Want to land on the static water. Go ahead. You can fly right through buildings and trees and such.

[BigDuke6ixx]

I bought and returned Aerofly FS2. It is very pretty and runs wonderfully on my machine with all the eye candy cranked up. Unfortunately that’s all it has. Flight models are arcade like and there is no physics involved. Want to land on the static water. Go ahead. You can fly right through buildings and trees and such.

 

I got a refund on it too.

[Charlie-1]

It just showed up on the ramp one day. That reminds me...I really need to work on getting all of my photos organized so I can find them. All kinds of cool stuff that I know I have, just can't remember where I put it.

 

Also took some good pics of a factory-fresh Growler that stayed in our hangar for a couple of nights on its way to a completion center. Didn't even have any markings on it yet. Nothing detailed or close-up though...didn't want the black helicopters showing up. :D

 

I'll have to check out that Aerofly FS2. I'm always on the hunt for jaw-dropping VR experiences during my little chunks of down-time here and there.

 

Sounds like you've got some awesome toys where you work.. I'm not jealous at all !:thumbup:

 

Have a look at FS2 on youtube.. loads of vids on there.. Just one example of how VR can be implemented with out the massive overhead. Not much game play though, but just nice for a relaxing flight with most emphasis over your side of the pond! :)

 

There are many games now with good native, and non-intrusive photo real VR support. Project cars 2 for instance, which looks equally awesome on the monitor or in VR. With this in mind..I'm not sure of the motive for ED going down the DS route, so any info would be useful?