Looking back in CV1

[WelshZeCorgi]

Is there some way to accelerate?/accentuate?/intensify?/multiply? head movement with the Oculus rift CV1 so that you can look behind you? Seems with the 1 to 1 headtracking you can't check your six unless you dislocate your spine.

 

Even if you manage to turn your head most of the way, because objects in the CV1 only come into focus when they are in the center of your headset, you can't use the corners of the headset FOV to see behind you.

[Gaff]

I don’t think this is possible. If you tried to increase the rate of the tracking, this would induce nausea, and you would get sick in no time.

 

I think using a swivel chair would be a better solution.

[metzger]

I haven't tried but a snap views might also help.

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[dburne]

No.

Why in the world would you want to?

VR is 1:1 in all aspects.

[WelshZeCorgi]

No.

Why in the world would you want to?

VR is 1:1 in all aspects.

 

I thought I made it clear in the first post but it's because I want to see behind me. For some reason my neck can't turn my head 180 degrees.

[MegOhm_SD]

Lean out and around or get a swivel chair. What you want is arcade, so why not a swivel chair. Works wonders and saves your neck.

[lobo]

Sounds like you need to downgrade to a trackIr. ;)

[dburne]

It just amazes me when I see these posts ( this one certainly not the first).

I mean we go all these years getting better and better tech and hope to get as close as we can to actually simulating flying and fighting in the aircraft.

Track IR was a big leap when it came out as it got us away from pressing buttons to look around, we could move our head and watch the view move - how cool.

 

Then along comes VR, which is about as real as it gets. Actual 1:1 head movements. Actual impression on being in a full size cockpit with all the world around you wherever you look. The actual combat pilots did not have a button they could push to get a snap view of behind their airplane. And they could not swivel their neck around like an owl.

 

Granted VR currently has a limited field of view, but that can also be helped with the aforementioned use of a swivel chair to expand it a little when needed.

 

Anyway to each their own, I personally love the tracking. Increased the pucker factor a little lol. But it helps in the way one flies to keep an eye out and using mirrors where appropriate. Also SA is way better in VR.

[DerekSpeare]

no

[eaglecash867]

I thought I made it clear in the first post but it's because I want to see behind me. For some reason my neck can't turn my head 180 degrees.

 

You have to learn to twist and contort your body like real fighter pilots do when they're trying to see behind them. :smilewink:

[VampireNZ]

This is one of the things I like best about VR - having to cope with real limitations and requirements to maintain tally in a 1:1 scale. Thank goodness there is no G included!

 

I was surprised how much more limited you were in the F-16 compared to an aircraft with stick mounted in the center!

Can't turn as far to the right as your right hand is holding the stick limiting shoulder rotation, and can't turn as far left as the stick is on the far RH side of you.

With ctr mount at least you can swap hands and then turn a long way around to your right while leveraging off the side of the seat with your right hand. Also allows more rotation to your left as well. Dogfighting left-handed whilst twisted sideways peering over your right shoulder is a thing lol.

Using a simrig with adjustable backrest, I did find the reclined position actually helped a little seeing up and behind a bit more obviously.

Edited October 14, 2019 by VampireNZ

[Driskill]

I understand what WelshZeCorgi intends to do. Being with a CV1 or any 110 degree VR-Headset you have a hard time to look over your shoulder, what in reality is no problem. When i got the Index i was able to look over my shoulder and it felt naturally. I don´t think, that there should be a function like turnrate times 1.5 or something like that. A more natural FOV should do it. But since i have the reverb i go with it because of the better clarity and so i am able to read every display and gauge in the f-18 for the first time.

[Greyman]

Whilst i agree that VR should mimic RL as much as possible and that a virtual pilot should not be able to do anything that a RL pilot would not be able to do, it might not be a bad idea to remember that not everyone will have the same level of physical ability and very few will have the flexibility of a RL figher pilot, especially when they get to my age. :)

 

A major benefit of VR is that it allows people to experience things that they cannot do in real life and i don't see the issue with providing something that might help. If it's an option, it won't stop people choosing not to use it and as long as it isn't abused in MP, then there shouldn't be an issue.

[zhousaifu]

VR flying requires ACTUAL positional and situational awareness flying technique.

 

 

This is why it is laughable watching guys that use Track-Ir with the "insta-180 rear view" controlling the aircraft while going back and forth from left to right rearward views in 1/100th of a second (ahem,. Growling Sidewinder :-P ) and other guys using Track-IR.

 

Track IR WAS a stop-gap means to add some level of immersion to the simulation experience but it is COMPLETE ARCADE / GAME MODE when compared to having the need to actually move your body in the cockpit to maintain visual ID on a target that is not directly in your front quarter view.

 

 

 

On a related note and with understanding that not everyone has access to VR due to computer limitations / budget etc, the online community should clearly address the simulation differences between those with VR versus Track-IR setups.

 

 

 

I would go as far as to say that there should be VR only Servers for simulation using VR hardware;

 

AND

 

 

 

Track-IR / Hat-switch viewing only servers for ARCADE types using Track-IR / Hat-switch viewing.

 

 

 

 

This is not an "Elitist" viewpoint, this is simply a factual "simulation" versus "arcade / game-mode" issue when it comes to visual tracking fidelity when compared to the real-world and the closest way to recreate the experience in the simulator.

[Lensman]

If the OP really wants to check his six without enjoying the reality of VR there is an easy fudge. Map the 're centre view' to a HOTAS button.

To check six more easily, turn head to look out the side of the canopy, hit re centre view, return head to forward position. It's easy to look directly backwards now. Just hit re centre while looking forward to get back to normal view.

I feel queasy just thinking about it :)

[VampireNZ]

VR flying requires ACTUAL positional and situational awareness flying technique.

 

 

This is why it is laughable watching guys that use Track-Ir with the "insta-180 rear view" controlling the aircraft while going back and forth from left to right rearward views in 1/100th of a second (ahem,. Growling Sidewinder :-P ) and other guys using Track-IR.

 

Track IR WAS a stop-gap means to add some level of immersion to the simulation experience but it is COMPLETE ARCADE / GAME MODE when compared to having the need to actually move your body in the cockpit to maintain visual ID on a target that is not directly in your front quarter view.

 

On a related note and with understanding that not everyone has access to VR due to computer limitations / budget etc, the online community should clearly address the simulation differences between those with VR versus Track-IR setups.

 

I would go as far as to say that there should be VR only Servers for simulation using VR hardware;

 

AND

 

Track-IR / Hat-switch viewing only servers for ARCADE types using Track-IR / Hat-switch viewing.

 

This is not an "Elitist" viewpoint, this is simply a factual "simulation" versus "arcade / game-mode" issue when it comes to visual tracking fidelity when compared to the real-world and the closest way to recreate the experience in the simulator.

 

Also, one thing TrackIR people won't understand, is that along with having to move your whole body around to keep tally etc - as it happens your arms that are holding the controls are attached to your body!

So this introduces an interesting aspect to controlling the aircraft precisely - while at the same time contorting to all sorts of shapes and positions, all while not disrupting your control inputs at all.

Is fun lol. :thumbup:

[zhousaifu]

Also, one thing TrackIR people won't understand, is that along with having to move your whole body around to keep tally etc - as it happens your arms that are holding the controls are attached to your body!

So this introduces an interesting aspect to controlling the aircraft precisely - while at the same time contorting to all sorts of shapes and positions, all while not disrupting your control inputs at all.

Is fun lol. :thumbup:

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's realistic! :smartass::thumbup:

[WelshZeCorgi]

Sounds like you need to downgrade to a trackIr. ;)

 

Guess that speaks volumes for the shortcomings VR has.;)

[WelshZeCorgi]

VR flying requires ACTUAL positional and situational awareness flying technique.

 

 

This is why it is laughable watching guys that use Track-Ir with the "insta-180 rear view" controlling the aircraft while going back and forth from left to right rearward views in 1/100th of a second (ahem,. Growling Sidewinder :-P ) and other guys using Track-IR.

 

Track IR WAS a stop-gap means to add some level of immersion to the simulation experience but it is COMPLETE ARCADE / GAME MODE when compared to having the need to actually move your body in the cockpit to maintain visual ID on a target that is not directly in your front quarter view.

 

 

 

On a related note and with understanding that not everyone has access to VR due to computer limitations / budget etc, the online community should clearly address the simulation differences between those with VR versus Track-IR setups.

 

 

 

I would go as far as to say that there should be VR only Servers for simulation using VR hardware;

 

AND

 

 

 

Track-IR / Hat-switch viewing only servers for ARCADE types using Track-IR / Hat-switch viewing.

 

 

 

 

This is not an "Elitist" viewpoint, this is simply a factual "simulation" versus "arcade / game-mode" issue when it comes to visual tracking fidelity when compared to the real-world and the closest way to recreate the experience in the simulator.

 

Do you know what is also unrealistic? Having your FOV artificially narrowed to around 94 degrees.

 

Since everyone here is just banging the term, "real life," like their first hooker, let's try a real life experiment. Sit in a chair and look back. Look behind you. Simple right? It's easy! Unless you have serious back problems, you can easily see behind you by turning your head sideways, maybe add a little naughty twist in your shoulders and look out the corner of your eye if you need to, I didn't... voila! You have a clear, unimpeded view behind you. Now boot up DCS in VR, put on your CV1, flip on a quick mission and look behind you. And no, I'm not saying contort your body like a pole dancer, no need to imitate your mother (I'm joking, chances are extremely high I don't know you or your mother, and therefore have no way to give an insulting statement as fact, but what is the harm in humor in this already sarcastic post?)

 

But anyways, look behind you the same way you did without VR (with a CV1) and you'll probably see what I see. Half of your view is a blurry mess, the other half is just pure black because it's just the side of your headset.

 

And since having an enemy behind you is THE most dangerous situation to be in, it seems rather illogical to not give yourself a fair chance in seeing behind you to find him.

 

I am trying to solve that. I'm not trying to "cheat reality" by being able to talk to my headrest with a 1 degree turn. The CV1 artificially narrows your FOV and that, in and of itself, is not realistic last time I checked. Fighter pilots don't strap binoculars to their heads. I simply wanted to add a little "umph" to the VR camera when I turned my head and shoulders to their maximum deflection so that I would have a similar view of the space behind me, as I would in "real life" as demonstrated by looking behind you without the headset. This is in opposition to VR land, where you have to contort your body in an "unrealistic" way to get the same view in order to compensate for the "unrealistic" FOV hoisted upon you due to (understandable) technological limitations.

Edited October 18, 2019 by WelshZeCorgi

[WelshZeCorgi]

I understand what WelshZeCorgi intends to do. Being with a CV1 or any 110 degree VR-Headset you have a hard time to look over your shoulder, what in reality is no problem. When i got the Index i was able to look over my shoulder and it felt naturally. I don´t think, that there should be a function like turnrate times 1.5 or something like that. A more natural FOV should do it. But since i have the reverb i go with it because of the better clarity and so i am able to read every display and gauge in the f-18 for the first time.

 

Seems like one particular user has a well-working "headset" between his ears.

[majapahit]

Swivel chair,

bolted my hotas (and more) to the armrests with 2x2 wood,

USB cables extended 5m via ceiling and retractable dog leashes,

learn to dogfight sitting 90° from straight & watching the 6,

be able to hold level / speed / do ACM whilst looking at your enemy

if it's a F15 pro, tough luck

[WelshZeCorgi]

It just amazes me when I see these posts ( this one certainly not the first).

I mean we go all these years getting better and better tech and hope to get as close as we can to actually simulating flying and fighting in the aircraft.

Track IR was a big leap when it came out as it got us away from pressing buttons to look around, we could move our head and watch the view move - how cool.

 

Then along comes VR, which is about as real as it gets. Actual 1:1 head movements. Actual impression on being in a full size cockpit with all the world around you wherever you look. The actual combat pilots did not have a button they could push to get a snap view of behind their airplane. And they could not swivel their neck around like an owl.

 

Granted VR currently has a limited field of view, but that can also be helped with the aforementioned use of a swivel chair to expand it a little when needed.

 

Anyway to each their own, I personally love the tracking. Increased the pucker factor a little lol. But it helps in the way one flies to keep an eye out and using mirrors where appropriate. Also SA is way better in VR.

 

What's surprising to me with the replies to my post is how so many are (subconsiously?) missing my point in order to find themselves a new deadhorse to beat.

 

I love the 1:1 tracking too. That's not the issue. The issue is the unrealistically narrow FOV that the CV1 provides. Looking behind you in a chair in real life is easy. Looking behind you in VR with only has 94 degrees or so is unrealistically difficult. Since I'm such a stickler for realism, I want to be able to look behind me in VR with the same ease as in real life. I don't want it to be easier, I don't want it to be harder, I want it to be similar if not the same.

 

I tried the swivel chair suggestion and found a few things.

1. It actually gave me motion sickness.

2. Using pedals caused the swivel chair to swivel around unintentionally, thus causing motion sickness.

3. As the board is wooden, it also caused the wheeled chair to move around out of place and required me to stop, center the swivel chair again and try playing. (Can't do that in MP.)

4. Even if the chair doesn't move, swiveling it around causes my knees to knock into the stick, which causes the plane to violently roll unintentionally, which again causes motion sickness.

5. In order to swivel the chair, I have to take my feet off the pedals in order to swivel the chair intentionally, while not inputting rudder unintentionally.

6. My center stick and 2 desk mounted controllers kept scratching and poking my legs as the chair moved. It's bad enough as it is but when you're in VR, its a weirdly extra shock.

7. And before a crowd of angry pitchfork holders demand evidence, here it is.

 

 

https://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q429/WelshZeCorgi/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20191018_155749062_HDR_zpslj3iejlt.jpg

 

Well, quality is not great but it's still evidence.

 

And to answer people probably crying, "well how would acceleration help then?! Wouldn't it cause motion sickness too?" Maybe, I don't know, but the only way to know for sure is to try it. All the things that caused motion sickness seemed to have come from unintentional motion, (swivel chair swiveling from rudder inputs, knees knocking into the stick,) controlled acceleration from intentional movements (and a profile with a subtle acceleration, like giving you an extra 5 degrees after turning your head 110 degrees not 180 from turning your head 2 degrees) would most likely not create much motion sickness, if at all, I predict. Not that I can test it as there's seemingly no way to adjust it.

Edited October 18, 2019 by WelshZeCorgi

[WelshZeCorgi]

Swivel chair,

bolted my hotas (and more) to the armrests with 2x2 wood,

USB cables extended 5m via ceiling and retractable dog leashes,

learn to dogfight sitting 90° from straight & watching the 6,

be able to hold level / speed / do ACM whilst looking at your enemy

if it's a F15 pro, tough luck

 

Weird how I'm getting shit for acceleration when those same people are suggesting using swivel chairs. Like it's somehow more realistic than acceleration. Wait, I must apologize, I never knew F16's and Mig21s used swivel chair technology in their seats.

 

Anyways, I'm not talking about you. Thanks for the suggestion, I've tried it, but I don't think it's for me.

[eaglecash867]

Weird how I'm getting shit for acceleration when those same people are suggesting using swivel chairs. Like it's somehow more realistic than acceleration. Wait, I must apologize, I never knew F16's and Mig21s used swivel chair technology in their seats.

 

Anyways, I'm not talking about you. Thanks for the suggestion, I've tried it, but I don't think it's for me.

 

If FOV is your issue, there are other VR headsets available now that have an FOV pretty close to what we have in real life. As far as accelerating head movement to compensate for a limited FOV, its not a question of if it will cause motion sickness, its a question of how severe it will be. If your eyes and internal "gyros" don't agree with each other, the upchuck factor goes way up. That being said, I'm not sure how useful visual information is in your peripheral vision for the purposes of knowing which way an enemy aircraft is pointing. You might be able to detect him with a wider FOV, but you still need to look pretty much right at him to know how to maneuver and defeat him.

[dburne]

What an interesting and long thread when the answer to the OP original question was a simple no.

 

We have had these threads before and will undoubtedly have them again.

Maybe try posting in the Wish List section... If enough folks show interest there maybe ED might give some thought.

 

In the meantime fly and have fun, enjoying VR for what it does give.

And undoubtedly probably in the not too distant future the fov for the headsets will get there. Something to look forward to.