VR or TrackIr?

[dburne]

I paid about 50 bucks more than I paid for the CV1 in March of 2016 for my Reverb. But the improvements are a lot more than 50 bucks worth. From everything I have seen with it so far, I could probably even run it on a lesser rig than what I have now, and what I have now needed help from shader mods and lower MSAA settings to run the CV1 acceptably. No such needs with the Reverb. No shader mods, and I'm able to run 4X MSAA now, without a single hardware upgrade. Well, except for the HMD.

 

Now that is very interesting - and tempting.

[Art-J]

Expense is not a myth by any means, but still a real factor that needs to be considered.

 

What 4K and VR users like to forget is the fact that 8700K+ and 1080Ti/2080 owners are minority amongst players, especially outside of the West.

 

Headsets themselves might not all be expensive, with a good variety of products available nowadays, but adding hardware beefy enough to run unit-filled combat missions in VR with good eyecandy and performance does increase costs of this hobby multiple times.

 

If money is not and issue for OP, however, he should give VR a try.

[eaglecash867]

Now that is very interesting - and tempting.

 

Heh. Just get ready for the WMR transition. When you're used to the seamless interface of the Oculus stuff, it can be a bit frustrating at first. But, you quickly get things figured out and then you can run it just as easily. Just takes a little immersion, like learning another language. :)

[BigDuke6ixx]

Expense is not a myth by any means, but still a real factor that needs to be considered.

 

What 4K and VR users like to forget is the fact that 8700K+ and 1080Ti/2080 owners are minority amongst players, especially outside of the West.

 

Headsets themselves might not all be expensive, with a good variety of products available nowadays, but adding hardware beefy enough to run unit-filled combat missions in VR with good eyecandy and performance does increase costs of this hobby multiple times.

 

If money is not and issue for OP, however, he should give VR a try.

 

I’m getting excellent performance out of a 980Ti and a lesser CPU than the one you quote. Running high quality simulators on the PC is much cheaper now. In 1992 it cost me £600 in upgrades to run Falcon 3.0 and in 2000 I paid £500 for a 22” CRT monitor.

 

You can cry me a river over cost but you’ll get no sympathy.

[SharpeXB]

Along with the now completely disproven myth that higher resolution headsets require more horsepower to run. They actually require less, because you're not wasting a bunch of clock cycles by upconverting and downconverting every frame to make it look good.

Huh? In what world is more resolution easier to run? And who’s up-converting and down-converting?

More likely with VR you are CPU bound in this sim so the resolution isn’t the bottleneck. But generating more pixels by itself is always more demanding than generating less. That’s simple.

Unless what you’re talking about is that higher res panels require less supersampling. In that case sure. You’ll get better visuals and better performance using less SS

Edited October 19, 2019 by SharpeXB

[eaglecash867]

Huh? In what world is more resolution easier to run? And who’s up-converting and down-converting?

More likely with VR you are CPU bound in this sim so the resolution isn’t the bottleneck. But generating more pixels by itself is always more demanding than generating less. That’s simple.

Unless what you’re talking about is that higher res panels require less supersampling. In that case sure. You’ll get better visuals and better performance using less SS

 

LOL. Always amused by people who do nothing but speculate, when they have no actual experience themselves. Keep guessing though. :megalol:

[Wali763]

Hi.

 

I was the one, claiming above BFM is not good in VR.

 

Well I got my Reverb now, and tried to BFM. Yes, its possible, but from the tiny bit, Ive see up to now, its much harder than on a monitor.

 

First overall experience with the Reverb is not great, but I did not start to do any tweaking to get the full potential of the headset. But I already found a few things, I do not like....

 

I will of course do more testing but from my first impression, its kind of like my experience with the Rift S, that I gave back within a few days.

 

When I got the Rift S, I was afraid, it might ruin normal DCS for me, but it did not. With the Reverb Im not afraid anymore right now.

 

But Ill try to stay open minded, even our start today was rather poor.

 

Coming back to the opening question for me its cleary 2:0 for TrackIR... But thats not a final judgement.

[Wali763]

I could have just edited my above post, but I didnt, so someone interested could follow my line of thought. This also is a bit of a self-therapy, since Im quite frustrated now.

 

After that post, I tweaked quite a few settings according to Thud's VR4DCS-guide, but it did not make me anything like at home in VR.

 

After only testing it for one day, Ill send the Reverb back.

 

Playing DCS on a monitor is a game, but a nice looking and challanging game.

 

Playing it in VR to me is just painful.

 

To me its not becoming a sim by moving to VR as some mentioned.

 

Where is the immerson, when you look through diving googles?

Where is the immerson, when you still can see the pixels even in the max resolution-headset right now?

Where is the immerson, when its still hard to spot a Il76 2 miles out?

Where is the immerson, in moving around in the cockpit with a cursor, clicking things?

Where is the immerson, when many things shimmer unnaturally?

 

For a game on a monitor DCS looks really nice but for VR its just not nice enough for me to feel like the real thing.

 

Maybe im picky and maybe Ive not invested enough time both in the Rift S or the Reverb, but for me, this just aint enough.

 

Maybe, once we have headsets with 4K-displays per eye and 150degree FOV and a sharp image even if we look towards the edge of our natural FOV and general image quality has been notched up even more. But thats Im sure, still pretty far away...

 

Everybody has got his own expactations but right now VR isnt just doing it for me. Needless to say, that could be very different for someone else.

 

I tried to leave out the things I did not like about the Reverb (WMR and cromatic abberation), but as things stand right now VR is dead for me.

[dburne]

I tried gaming on the monitor again once after VR, and I just could not do it.

Not any game of any sort.

However VR it is not for everyone, most folks get that.

 

Hopefully the OP got his original question answered.

[Lorenzo.D]

my eyes get stressed a lot in vr ,i sell back my Oculus Rift s and returned ti use track ir.

 

Inviato dal mio ASUS_X01BDA utilizzando Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

LOL. Always amused by people who do nothing but speculate, when they have no actual experience themselves. Keep guessing though. :megalol:

If higher resolution headsets actually require less horsepower to run, why isn’t anyone making 16K 8640p VR headsets? :music_whistling:

Edited October 20, 2019 by SharpeXB

[TOYKILLA]

15 Years ago,we fly with TrackIR and dream about an HMD for LockOn. Today I would go for a Plug&Play Rift S or a Reverb HMD.

 

I have my TrackIR also here,but never used it since my first DK2 experience in my Simulator.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

Edited October 20, 2019 by TOYKILLA

[BigDuke6ixx]

I could have just edited my above post, but I didnt, so someone interested could follow my line of thought. This also is a bit of a self-therapy, since Im quite frustrated now.

 

After that post, I tweaked quite a few settings according to Thud's VR4DCS-guide, but it did not make me anything like at home in VR.

 

After only testing it for one day, Ill send the Reverb back.

 

Playing DCS on a monitor is a game, but a nice looking and challanging game.

 

Playing it in VR to me is just painful.

 

To me its not becoming a sim by moving to VR as some mentioned.

 

Where is the immerson, when you look through diving googles?

Where is the immerson, when you still can see the pixels even in the max resolution-headset right now?

Where is the immerson, when its still hard to spot a Il76 2 miles out?

Where is the immerson, in moving around in the cockpit with a cursor, clicking things?

Where is the immerson, when many things shimmer unnaturally?

 

For a game on a monitor DCS looks really nice but for VR its just not nice enough for me to feel like the real thing.

 

Maybe im picky and maybe Ive not invested enough time both in the Rift S or the Reverb, but for me, this just aint enough.

 

Maybe, once we have headsets with 4K-displays per eye and 150degree FOV and a sharp image even if we look towards the edge of our natural FOV and general image quality has been notched up even more. But thats Im sure, still pretty far away...

 

Everybody has got his own expactations but right now VR isnt just doing it for me. Needless to say, that could be very different for someone else.

 

I tried to leave out the things I did not like about the Reverb (WMR and cromatic abberation), but as things stand right now VR is dead for me.

 

I can see an Il76 at 2 miles in my CV1 so I’m not sure what your malfunction is. Did you update you graphics drivers to the latest versions?

 

I can’t fly or drive on a monitor anymore as it just feels wrong. Track IR with its Linda Blair neck is just utter rubbish and is really just arcade gaming.

[Gnadentod]

Where is the immerson, when you look through diving googles?

Where is the immerson, when you still can see the pixels even in the max resolution-headset right now?

Where is the immerson, when its still hard to spot a Il76 2 miles out?

Where is the immerson, in moving around in the cockpit with a cursor, clicking things?

Where is the immerson, when many things shimmer unnaturally?

 

Where is the immersion when you look at a 2D screen, which in this case your argument isn't even working for but against you? When you look on a screen you also have stuff in your field of view which isn't even related to DCS. Pens, wall, people, animals, cans or whatever, not even to talk about when the picture gets distorted because of changing lightning conditions in your sim room through sun light for example. In VR atleast it's pitch black.

 

Where is the immersion when you can also see the pixels on a normal screen, which in this situation you are again also limited by your real field of view (e.g. you see other things around the screen) and doesn't create a 3D effect? Even when putting the screen as close as possible to you you still have edges on every side of the screen - exactly like in the HMD but without a 3D effect.

 

You can't spot a IL76 2 miles out? Failing to setup everything correctly is your fault or you are exaggerating to support your point aren't you?

 

Why no word about the possible future integration of gloves/controller use inside DCS so you can flip the switches with your virtual hands if controlling the mouse is so immersion breaking for you? Let it mature.

 

And DCS is not a game, the name itself has the word "Simulator" in it. Is there a difference between a game or simulator? Yes there is. I seriously cringe when people call it a game. Angry Birds is a game.

Edited October 20, 2019 by Der Hirte

[dburne]

If higher resolution headsets actually require less horsepower to run, why isn’t anyone making 16K 8640p VR headsets? :music_whistling:

 

I think your taking his comments a little out of context.

 

There have been a few folks report that running the Reverb they get as good or better performance as they previously got with prior HMD. Due to the amount of SS being applied in the lower resolution device versus being able to use the Reverb at it's native resolution and have better image clarity.

[eaglecash867]

If higher resolution headsets actually require less horsepower to run, why isn’t anyone making 16K 8640p VR headsets? :music_whistling:

 

Another silly question. Why isn't anyone making 16K monitors for that matter? Because the display technology isn't at that point yet. BTW, yes, I was referring to the supersampling required to make lower resolution headsets display a semi-acceptable picture. What did you think I was talking about with up-converting and down-converting? That process is what is happening with super-sampling. I've been talking about this in almost every post I have made recently about VR and the HP Reverb. On the same machine, I am getting FAR better performance with my HP Reverb than I ever did with my Rift CV1. I don't have to use shader mods anymore, and now I am running 4X MSAA instead of 2X. I get a MUCH clearer picture, and MUCH better performance with only rare ghosting. The reason? Because the need for super-sampling and/or higher than 1.0 DCS PD settings has been eliminated by the higher resolution. Being able to produce a higher resolution natively, and not having to fake it through super-sampling is much more efficient. This is actual experience, and not speculation. Now, feel free to get back to your usual business of showing up in every thread like this to tell us all about the myths again. Afterall, speculation and guessing is apparently superior to actual experience and data. :megalol:

[eaglecash867]

I think your taking his comments a little out of context.

 

There have been a few folks report that running the Reverb they get as good or better performance as they previously got with prior HMD. Due to the amount of SS being applied in the lower resolution device versus being able to use the Reverb at it's native resolution and have better image clarity.

 

Exactly right, Don. :D

 

Not only can we use the Reverb without super-sampling, but it appears that the VR portion of DCS isn't capable of producing anything higher than the native resolution of the Reverb. Not only is super-sampling no longer necessary, but it no longer has any benefit. :)

[eaglecash867]

Hi.

 

I was the one, claiming above BFM is not good in VR.

 

Well I got my Reverb now, and tried to BFM. Yes, its possible, but from the tiny bit, Ive see up to now, its much harder than on a monitor.

 

First overall experience with the Reverb is not great, but I did not start to do any tweaking to get the full potential of the headset. But I already found a few things, I do not like....

 

I will of course do more testing but from my first impression, its kind of like my experience with the Rift S, that I gave back within a few days.

 

When I got the Rift S, I was afraid, it might ruin normal DCS for me, but it did not. With the Reverb Im not afraid anymore right now.

 

But Ill try to stay open minded, even our start today was rather poor.

 

Coming back to the opening question for me its cleary 2:0 for TrackIR... But thats not a final judgement.

 

Of course BFM is going to be easier if you barely have to turn your head to look behind you. But, what I found with TIR and a monitor is that spatial disorientation was a real problem in BFM and missile/AAA avoidance. VR is much more natural for both things, since you have depth perception and no longer have a disconnect between what your eyes are telling you and which way your head is pointed. Just an example I noticed is that, now, I can defeat at least short-range SAMs with maneuvering alone. No countermeasures required because knowing which way I have to turn, climb, or dive to defeat the shot...and being able to instinctively implement that plan is far easier in the VR world.

 

If you've re-trained your brain long enough to deal with the unnatural head movements of track IR, its only natural that VR will take some getting used to. :)

[Wali763]

Where is the immersion when you look at a 2D screen, which in this case your argument isn't even working for but against you?

 

I never claimed flying DCS on monitor is immersive, but many people here claim VR is immersive. Thats why I pointed out the things the break my "immersion"

 

 

You can't spot a IL76 2 miles out? Failing to setup everything correctly is your fault or you are exaggerating to support your point aren't you?

 

 

Since I feel this statement to be rather offensive I decline to answer it in a constructive way. Even though I were able to and could explain my point.

 

 

Reading quite a lot in this forum, I somehow had the feeling, that for some VR is like a religion, that cant be questioned.

 

Thats why, after the Rift S, I thought I have to be wrong if most people like it, so I got the Reverb, which didnt do it for me either.

 

 

Regarding BFM it is for sure correct, that Id needed much more time to adjust to it. But turning your upper body to check the 6 is rather intensive and makes it hard to maintain controlled inputs. Also (but thats a Reverb-specific situation and could be solved somehow) the stiff cable of the Reverb is limiting my movements. Nevertheless I still firmly believe, that spotting is easier on a monitor and thats essetial for me.

 

 

VR for me just has too many shortcomings to reach a level, I could enjoy it. Thats also why, I stopped testing the Reverb more. Even if thorough tweaking would have giving me better visual results, there still would be some shortcommings that I am not willing to accept.

 

 

Coming back to the topic, even if for 90 out of 100 people VR is superior, Im one of the 10 that prefer TrackIR.

Edited October 20, 2019 by Wali763

[Baldrick33]

Reading quite a lot in this forum, I somehow had the feeling, that for some VR is like a religion, that cant be questioned.

I think it is one of these things that when you get into it, the assumption is that someone who doesn't either hasn't tried it for long enough (it can take some time getting your "VR legs") or haven't got it setup right.

 

In reality it is no different to getting into flight sims and not understanding why it is a niche genre. One man's meat and all that.

 

It is useful to get opinions of those that have tried both and form a view of similar experiences to your own to establish what might work but there can never be a correct answer.

 

I am one of those who flip flopped between monitors and VR in the early days as the immersion of VR was such a wow factor but the graphics quality so relatively poor. I think it is there now with the latest headsets but that is just my own threshold of acceptability. There are other good reasons not to want to wear a headset which I can quite understand, it won't be for everyone.

[Thick8]

Since I feel this statement to be rather offensive I decline to answer it in a constructive way. Even though I were able to and could explain my point.

 

 

Reading quite a lot in this forum, I somehow had the feeling, that for some VR is like a religion, that cant be questioned.

 

 

VR for me just has too many shortcomings to reach a level, I could enjoy it. Thats also why, I stopped testing the Reverb more. Even if thorough tweaking would have giving me better visual results, there still would be some shortcommings that I am not willing to accept.

 

 

Coming back to the topic, even if for 90 out of 100 people VR is superior, Im one of the 10 that prefer TrackIR.

 

When I first got my Odyssey I put it back in the box to ship back probably 10 times over a 2 week period; for many of the same reasons you have addressed. But it grew on me to the point that I can no longer play any game on a monitor. Maybe it triggers some sort of addiction switch or something.

You're right about the religion thing. People seem to think the just because you disagree with them that you think they are wrong; and they take it as some kind of personal affront. This is one of the only forums I read and post on now because the membership has maintained a sense of civility. There is the occasional outlier though.

Hopefully VR will reach a level of acceptability for you on the next go around because feeling that immersion is a great experience.

[SharpeXB]

BTW, yes, I was referring to the supersampling required to make lower resolution headsets display a semi-acceptable picture.

I get your point about super sampling. It’s not a very good solution because you’re paying the performance cost for high resolution without much of the benefit.

[Wmacky]

I could have just edited my above post, but I didnt, so someone interested could follow my line of thought. This also is a bit of a self-therapy, since Im quite frustrated now.

 

After that post, I tweaked quite a few settings according to Thud's VR4DCS-guide, but it did not make me anything like at home in VR.

 

After only testing it for one day, Ill send the Reverb back.

 

Playing DCS on a monitor is a game, but a nice looking and challanging game.

 

Playing it in VR to me is just painful.

 

To me its not becoming a sim by moving to VR as some mentioned.

 

Where is the immerson, when you look through diving googles?

Where is the immerson, when you still can see the pixels even in the max resolution-headset right now?

Where is the immerson, when its still hard to spot a Il76 2 miles out?

Where is the immerson, in moving around in the cockpit with a cursor, clicking things?

Where is the immerson, when many things shimmer unnaturally?

 

For a game on a monitor DCS looks really nice but for VR its just not nice enough for me to feel like the real thing.

 

Maybe im picky and maybe Ive not invested enough time both in the Rift S or the Reverb, but for me, this just aint enough.

 

Maybe, once we have headsets with 4K-displays per eye and 150degree FOV and a sharp image even if we look towards the edge of our natural FOV and general image quality has been notched up even more. But thats Im sure, still pretty far away...

 

Everybody has got his own expactations but right now VR isnt just doing it for me. Needless to say, that could be very different for someone else.

 

I tried to leave out the things I did not like about the Reverb (WMR and cromatic abberation), but as things stand right now VR is dead for me.

 

 

I'm not a "gamer" and pretty much have no use for games. For me it's the difference between being "in" the aircraft getting flight time. ( though perhaps forgetting my eyeglasses at home), Or, playing a video game looking a pretty graphics on a screen. I have no time for games!

[Gnadentod]

I never claimed flying DCS on monitor is immersive, but many people here claim VR is immersive. Thats why I pointed out the things the break my "immersion"

I've never claimed that you've claimed this aswell but I displayed the flaw in your "argument" against VR.

 

Since I feel this statement to be rather offensive ...

Ah, you're feeling. I see, it's about your feelings.

 

Reading quite a lot in this forum, I somehow had the feeling, that for some VR is like a religion, that cant be questioned.

I'm neither a "VR fanatic" or a "2D fanatic" but you could also say the same thing for the "other side", so what.

[SharpeXB]

Where is the immerson, when you look through diving googles?

Where is the immerson, when you still can see the pixels even in the max resolution-headset right now?

Where is the immerson, when its still hard to spot a Il76 2 miles out?

Where is the immerson, in moving around in the cockpit with a cursor, clicking things?

Where is the immerson, when many things shimmer unnaturally?

I agree with you but I’ll state it in a different way. Yes VR is immersive absolutely. That part is pretty incredible. It’s just like being there. But you’re wearing a scuba mask and everything is pixelated and blurry.

The potential is there but it’s not good enough for me to bite. I would have the same reaction as you and end up returning it. It’s possible with top end hardware today to get totally good performance on a monitor. It’s not possible with VR, even the strongest rigs struggle with it in DCS and I don’t really have the patience for that.

Someday this will be $299.... I’ll wait.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/solrogers/2019/06/25/how-much-would-you-pay-for-2020-vision-in-vr/#5f8a0f0f6dde