Goodbye VR... for now at least.

[msalama]

I'm not here to press buttons.

 

Huh? And I kind of thought everyone were. Because for the otherwise inclined, there're various "preflight checklist: press I" flying games available.

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

Never tried track Ir to be honest. Got into this bc of vr and just staying with it. My last video system was Mrs Pacman so i find it amazing!!

[BigDuke6ixx]

Never tried track Ir to be honest. Got into this bc of vr and just staying with it. My last video system was Mrs Pacman so i find it amazing!!

 

I got Track iR back in 1999 and it was a revelation but that was ever so such a long time ago. :)

[GunSlingerAUS]

Lol, exactly. "I don't like VR. Let me make a post about it in the VR forum and then spend the next 2 months arguing about it rather than just moving on."

 

If someone is going to call me a prima Donna for having my say, while a few others fill this thread with utterly inaccurate technical claims which will confuse more people who have visited this extremely popular thread, I'm going to set the record straight.

 

DCS VR is objectively not "super smooth". But a core group of VR flyers are happy with low fps.

DCS VR is objectively buggy

DCS VR objectively causes visibility issues

DCS VR is subjectively amazingly immersive

DCS VR is subjectively good for casual flying and/or some slowmovers

DCS VR is not suitable for competitive or complex missions - I'd say that's objective given that the key influencers in the DCS community have nearly all ditched VR after trying it.

DCS VR will not be magically saved by porting to Vulkan, if every other previous, real game example is accurate.

DCS VR has the potential to be absolutely astonishing, but it will likely take many years for the hardware to be fast enough.

 

And finally, most of the tweaks suggested by some DCS users to get VR working well are objectively not correct - it's impossible to get DCS VR to run at the same standard as every other true VR game on the market.

 

I can factually prove every point I've just made, and have done so many times. Hopefully this will help those interested in VR who are reading this thread have a more accurate idea of what to expect. Ditto with those who are disappointed by the VR experience, but are wasting time chasing a performance level that does not yet exist.

Edited February 1, 2020 by GunSlingerAUS

[Gman109]

And think of how much more superior our air forces would be if they could just turn their heads 20 degrees and see behind them? “serious sim”or game?

All jokes aside different strokes for different folks! I love the Sa in an airquake style server but on a server with a more “global” style conflict, I never even see who shoots me. Picking out aircraft at a distance without tags is an absolute sticking point. That said, if I want to watch wings on a monitor, ill boot up youtube! Agree to disagree and move forward.

Cheers

 

 

Like I said, VR can't simulate peripheral vision, which is critical to pilots' ability to see in the rear quarter/6. You only need to get your head/neck to about 4 or 8 oclock position, your peripheral vision will take care of the next clock positions (you can see this in your aforementioned Youtube videos in any video of a fighter pilot doing BFM and tracking visual range threat aircraft that are behind him).

 

 

 

So far as dot/spotting distance, agree absolutely, I have 3 different monitors that all give differing results/advantage depending on what settings and resolutions I run them at (native or otherwise), from 27" to 34", 1080p up to 4k, etc. And like you said, it depends on what type of online flying one is doing, air quake/dueling or a more realistic type of PvP like say Blue Flag, where VR isn't nearly as much of a disadvantage as on a dueling/dogfight server.

 

 

I'm sure not giving up VR, and will continue to use it for the majority of my DCS flying.

[Panthera_Tigris]

DCS VR is not suitable for competitive or complex missions - I'd say that's objective given that the key influencers in the DCS community have nearly all ditched VR after trying it.

 

 

We have "key influenceres"?? I just thought that was just something kids do to sell skin cream on Instagram or make a few bucks streaming video games. So who are your "key influencers"?

 

Yea man, VR is not perfect. Thank you making this "Goodbye VR" thread to get that point across. We need more of these. Everyone who doesn't like something should make a thread about it IMO. Lets make a better world for you and I (and the infleuncers).

Edited February 1, 2020 by Panthera_Tigris

[eaglecash867]

We have "key influenceres"?? I just thought that was just something kids do to sell skin cream on Instagram or make a few bucks streaming video games. So who are your "key influencers"?

 

Yea man, VR is not perfect. Thank you making this "Goodbye VR" thread to get that point across. We need more of these. Everyone who doesn't like something should make a thread about it IMO. Lets make a better world for you and I (and the infleuncers).

 

+1 :D

 

"Goodbye VR" sounds a lot like "I don't wanna play anymore! I'm taking my football and going home!"

Edited February 1, 2020 by eaglecash867

[TOYKILLA]

+1

 

Its a never ending Story here.

 

I love flying DCS in VR, with the HP Reverb, on my daily Glowing Sidewinders Multiplayer Sessions.

 

No problems here for me with VR. It's not perfect, but the Experience is out of this World

 

@ micsmotionsimulator

[Fri13]

I'm going to set the record straight.

 

DCS VR is objectively not "super smooth". But a core group of VR flyers are happy with low fps. [/Quote]

 

Mostly false, but partially right.

 

DCS VR is objectively buggy[/Quote]

 

Not anymore than desktop certain, so false.

 

DCS VR objectively causes visibility issues[/Quote]

 

False, as VR is more realistic than desktop when it comes to spotting and identifying etc by range and accuracy.

 

DCS VR is subjectively amazingly immersive[/Quote]

 

Correct.

 

DCS VR is subjectively good for casual flying and/or some slowmovers[/Quote]

 

False. It is as great for Tomcat as for Yak.... As great for competitive dogfight than for sight seeing.

 

DCS VR is not suitable for competitive or complex missions - I'd say that's objective given that the key influencers in the DCS community have nearly all ditched VR after trying it.[/Quote]

 

False. There are some who thinks that they are suppose to be able spot a vehicle on ground from 20km (in reality it is closer to 800-1500 meters when not camouflaged but correctly positioned) or spot a fighter in any weather by visibility allowing from 20-30km range (in reality it is closer to 3-5km and when optimal scenario happens) so they will do anything to maintain their believes that anything lower is inferior.

 

DCS VR will not be magically saved by porting to Vulkan, if every other previous, real game example is accurate. [/Quote]

 

It actually had very good changes it will get major performance boost, but not by Vulcan alone but graphics and game engine rewrite that is going on. Vulcan is just a part of the update.

 

DCS VR has the potential to be absolutely astonishing, but it will likely take many years for the hardware to be fast enough. [/Quote]

 

That already happened year ago when Rift S came out. Affordable and high quality visuals for affordable PC. And if ready to invest own hobby, it is actually cheap as < 4000€ PC does it already.

 

And finally, most of the tweaks suggested by some DCS users to get VR working well are objectively not correct - it's impossible to get DCS VR to run at the same standard as every other true VR game on the market. [/Quote]

 

Again false. Completely.

 

I can factually prove every point I've just made, and have done so many times.[/Quote]

 

You believe so...

 

Hopefully this will help those interested in VR who are reading this thread have a more accurate idea of what to expect. Ditto with those who are disappointed by the VR experience, but are wasting time chasing a performance level that does not yet exist.

 

Those who believe they can take ie, FX 8350 with 8GB RAM and 750Ti 2GB card and get DCS run acceptably, do not expect to run it on VR or in 4K. Upgrade to 1060 6GB and you can do 4K even (but sub 40 fps), but yet VR starts to be accessible at lower qualities.

 

Upgrade to 6-th gen i5 or equal, 16-32GB RAM, 1070 or better and VR becomes very possible well balanced experience. And that is already like 5 years old specs wise.

 

It can not be denied that DCS is limited by the architecture for single core, but that is changing. And it ain't such a problem at all for VR as you try to paint it to be.

 

2-3 years ago I would have agreed with visuals if only based to Rift CV1 quality. But that is history. If smart, one will upgrade to Rift S. And if someone can afford, get the 4500€ HMD and you have experience that is higher than even your cynical expectations can be at best.

 

VR is not anymore anything like Rift CV1 was.... And I hold that Rift S is already excellent, even when lowest of the current offerings at high end.... Considering that best and worst price difference is 10x, there ain't reason to even consider Rift CV1 anymore and anyone should upgrade to at least Rift S.

[dburne]

We have "key influenceres"?? I just thought that was just something kids do to sell skin cream on Instagram or make a few bucks streaming video games. So who are your "key influencers"?

 

Oh my, all these years I have been spending here on the forums and I never realized this...

 

:smartass:

 

Edit: Due to the extreme popularity of the VR forums overall I would have to assume that most folks are quite happy with VR and enjoying the heck out of it.

:pilotfly:

Edited February 1, 2020 by dburne

[FragBum]

...

 

Edit: Due to the extreme popularity of the VR forums overall I would have to assume that most folks are quite happy with VR and enjoying the heck out of it.

:pilotfly:

 

Yep we do,.. :thumbup:

[Fri13]

Like I said, VR can't simulate peripheral vision, which is critical to pilots' ability to see in the rear quarter/6. You only need to get your head/neck to about 4 or 8 oclock position, your peripheral vision will take care of the next clock positions (you can see this in your aforementioned Youtube videos in any video of a fighter pilot doing BFM and tracking visual range threat aircraft that are behind him).[/Quote]

 

 

Sorry but no...

 

Pilots so not have superior eye sight that non-pilots do not have.

 

It is visually same thing that do you reverse your car, tractor, motorbike or do you fly aircraft and need to look at rear.

 

The difference is that pilots are experiencing G-forces as well. And typical turning fight happens where your opponent is 2-3km distance at opposite side of the turning circle etc.

 

You are not looking at your 6'clock, but at your 8 or 4 clock positions typically, and sometimes to your 5 and 7 clock position.

 

If the enemy is at your 6'clock, you are dead.

 

And you are not good to spot fighter size enemies flying straight at you in your peripheral vision, you can't even do that from the front but you need to use your fovea (about 1.5-2° area in your vision, extend your arm straight forward and raise thumb up, your thumbnail is about 2.5° cone).

 

What you are detection, is the enemy movement in peripheral vision, and that needs to have enough contrasts and motion to get detected. This is huge problem why example people get in car accidents because car, train, truck is coming towards them in a crossroads or street crossing even from 10 and 2 clock positions and they do not spot it as from their perspective the threat doesn't move. Yes it is part that victims minds are usually somewhere else, but it is not easy task at all to sense visually those threats. We can go to example martial arts and even there masters has problems to notice a incoming strike from peripheral vision.

 

The fighter pilots can't see easily to their rear, you can try that by looking first straight ahead, and then without turning head look at so much far left/right as you can and check when you can't anymore see well. We are often seeing that vision to actually see well to sides is very very limited, like accuracy to read something. Why people turn their heads toward the subject naturally.

 

 

And this is the VR HMD real limitation, human vision incapability to see 3D outside frontal arch, and seriously limited definition outside in peripheral vision.

 

This is why you can't take your eyes off from a threat, as you need to see them as couple seconds looking elsewhere means you likely have lost the fighter at 2-4km distance visually and you can't find it anymore in few seconds. And why you need to have a mental picture on your mind off your flight maneuver and enemy maneuver, as when you pull G's, that you will find threat then in the area of estimated once maneuver is completed, as you can't use peripheral vision as you do not have colors nor definition to see well when pulling higher G's.

 

If you look at the videos, the pilots are turning their bodies to see rear and sides, but they don't really see 6'clock position at all a TrackIR allows virtual pilots to see. Why TrackIR is completely unrealistic, and completely opposite is true that VR is far more closer to reality than TrackIR or any other.

 

And taking about VR and peripheral vision... Not everyone use Oculus, HP, Valve or similar VR systems. As some had invested to best there is:

 

uTstUcZd-as .

 

And when you do with example Rift CV1 the same thing that F-16 pilots does, resting head on right side of head support when looking at the left, you get to see at your 7 and 5 clock, almost directly, and twisting body more, you can see at your six, but challenging even without G forces. So try that at 9'Gs that so many believe is done.... Remember, your head alone feels like 50kg weight at that moment...

[Gman109]

False. It is as great for Tomcat as for Yak.... As great for competitive dogfight than for sight seeing.

 

 

This the only point I take issue with. Care to duel 1v1 using your Reverb, and I'll use TrackIr some rounds, and my Reverb/Rift S/Index in some other rounds, so I can point out where TiR has a massive advantage in A2A dogfighting?

[Gman109]

You are not looking at your 6'clock, but at your 8 or 4 clock positions typically, and sometimes to your 5 and 7 clock position.

That was exactly my point about peripheral vision. I didn't just come up with that on my own, a good friend of mine I went through school with went a different route of service, and just retired as a 3500 hour Hornet pilot, and has flown the Gripen, SuperHornet, F16, F15, and has done the F35 training as well (he was Canada's CO of the test pilot program prior to recently retiring, and now flies fighters with a private company doing RedAir contracting with various NATO airforces). That was the first thing out of his mouth when using the Pimax5k I had at the time he tried VR on my system.

 

 

If the enemy is at your 6'clock, you are dead.

That's incorrect, and frankly ridiculous, if every time a threat aircraft got on your 6 you were ruled dead, there would BE no exercises such as Red Flag/etc.

 

 

 

 

What you are detection, is the enemy movement in peripheral vision, and that needs to have enough contrasts and motion to get detected.

 

 

 

 

The human eye is first attracted to motion, anyone who has any training at all in low light fighting (or any light condition combat for that matter) knows this.

 

 

 

 

If you look at the videos, the pilots are turning their bodies to see rear and sides, but they don't really see 6'clock position at all a TrackIR allows virtual pilots to see. Why TrackIR is completely unrealistic, and completely opposite is true that VR is far more closer to reality than TrackIR or any other.

This is and has been exactly my point - is English not your first language? If not then I can understand, as I thought I made this pretty clear...and again, the REASON why when dogfighting in visual range online TiR has such an advantage over VR.

 

 

 

 

 

And taking about VR and peripheral vision... Not everyone use Oculus, HP, Valve or similar VR systems. As some had invested to best there is:

Try and find 3 people here on these forums with the XTAL. I know of 2, and one was likely just lying to get attention, as he never posted a single picture of it being in his possession before he "sent it back".

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

This the only point I take issue with. Care to duel 1v1 using your Reverb, and I'll use TrackIr some rounds, and my Reverb/Rift S/Index in some other rounds, so I can point out where TiR has a massive advantage in A2A dogfighting?

 

I beat pilots all day long in my F14 and Index.

And I also loose all day long in the same setup.

Finally, sometimes when I’m feeling froggy I use an outside view and fly while watching the whole fight at a distance arcade style .

Your statement only proves you prefer Track Ir over VR.

Congratulations. That’s why we all have the freedom to choose our own preferences. You do you, let us do us...

Edited February 1, 2020 by Mr. Big.”Biggs”

[dburne]

Goodness gracious...

:doh:

[GunSlingerAUS]

Finally, sometimes when I’m feeling froggy I use an outside view and fly while watching the whole fight at a distance arcade style

 

Thank you for making my point about the type of flyer who uses VR almost exclusively.

 

And to those who think 45fps is smooth, I guess Valve, HTC, Google and Oculus are all incorrect in stating that asynchronous reprojection should only be used on rare occasions, and that the minimum desirable fps is 72, with 90+ being best practice. Which is impossible to maintain in the likes of the Reverb.

[Fri13]

That was the first thing out of his mouth when using the Pimax5k I had at the time he tried VR on my system.

 

The peripheral vision is well documented by the medical science that it is not at all so big as people even consider it to be. How far you can look sharply to side, is nothing amazingly at all, you can even check that scale I linked. Because your eye muscles can't turn your eye around in your eye socket so you can see clearly past that 120 total degree field of view because your fovea just does not move in your eyeball.

 

And outside of the sharper area capability to even detect an aircraft shape (attitude), color (attitude) and many other things becomes just nearly impossible.

There ain't VR HMD that has exactly bordless vision, if that is something that someone is whole through of their life learn to use for seeing. As anyone can point out that even best VR HMD has somekind vision limitations, just like any helmet, visor, cockpit etc has vision limitations. That doesn't mean that one can't use peripheral vision in VR very realistic manner.

 

That's incorrect, and frankly ridiculous, if every time a threat aircraft got on your 6 you were ruled dead, there would BE no exercises such as Red Flag/etc.

 

So you say that because enemy that is flying 500-1000m from your six o clock is so stupid that it is going to sit there without shooting you down? If their purpose is to kill you, they will kill you.

If their purpose is just to mess you up, they will just mess you up.

If it is for a training purposes, you are not there as even trainer going to shoot trainees down because they would never learn anything if you are there to dominate them.

 

We are not talking about formation flying or anything stupid "but what if", but about enemy that directly goes for the kill in the split second they get you lined up for the guns. And if you are going to spend times to trying to look at them, instead maneuver away, you are dead.

 

The human eye is first attracted to motion, anyone who has any training at all in low light fighting (or any light condition combat for that matter) knows this.

 

Wrong. Human eye requires object to have contrast before it can detect its motion. You simply don't understand now that contrast doesn't mean literal black and white, it means that you have capability to detect something out of something. If you have black aircraft against pitch black ground in a moonless overcasted night, you will not spot it any manner at all no matter how the aircraft would move around you. But if there comes any kind contrast, be it a black shape top of the city lights, that creates contrast and will reveal the existence of the object and as well movement.

 

 

This is and has been exactly my point - is English not your first language? If not then I can understand, as I thought I made this pretty clear...and again, the REASON why when dogfighting in visual range online TiR has such an advantage over VR.

 

Yes, because it is unrealistic, why to what people are referring as "realistic that pilots can look straight at their six'o'clock and detect anything there as clearly as front of them". That is why VR is far superior and has advantage in the simulation flying because it actually makes it more realistic, and so on VR pilot has advantage to learn the correct flight maneuvers and tactics instead just cheating.

 

 

Try and find 3 people here on these forums with the XTAL. I know of 2, and one was likely just lying to get attention, as he never posted a single picture of it being in his possession before he "sent it back".

 

So, you just called someone as liar because he didn't provide you the evidence. So okay. And why should they be in these forums? ED forums do not present 100% of their customer base, not even 50% of it. Maybe closer to 5-20% is proper amount. What there are here, doesn't present what there are in actually flying and enjoying DCS.

 

Regardless all the fancy things that flight simulation fans can have, like HOTAS, Pedals, Flight chair, Centered Stick etc, are far less used by majority of the people out there who want to just fly. A basic joystick with integrated throttle and 8-way hat etc is one of the most commonly used gaming devices among simulation fans, and keyboard. And VR is far from the userbase that HOTAS is from. But none of that makes the VR as bad device to own for amazing experience.

 

There is possibly fewer people ready to invest over 450€ for other than a Rift S than there is now people to invest a second hand 150-200€ CV1 or Vive sets there are now in sales. So of course 4500€ costing HMD gets very niche target group, but that is where business is going. Not all people buy all fancy things for themselves, they buy it for their business and the company pays. I know one (who I have never met) who got one via their job. Didn't really use much because the project it was meant to and two units were bought for two 3D artists was postponed. Maybe I should now call him as liar now too by taking your attitude but who cares?

 

Point was, if you want something amazing, YOU NEED TO PAY! If you are not ready to invest more than 500€ for a whole setup to fly a DCS, prepare to be let down. You can do it. You can make it very easily really. But you will never get it to be such experience than example 10000€ setup will make it to be, even more, lets say 15000€ with all the 3DOF motion chairs etc.

 

But do not go to argue that DCS ain't VR ready because it is not like real life thing.... As nothing is by any means. But VR is far closer to that than any 2D desktop with TrackIR or so is. In fact the DCS is far closer to reality than almost any of the military grade simulators are. After using a real F/A-18C simulator from Boeing, you will cry with eyes wet whole week how terrible such simulator is by visuals compared to DCS, and it costs so much more than possible 15000€ you would invest to a top grade DCS home simulator (5000€ for HMD, 5000€ for PC, 5000€ for motion platform).

 

Nothing in VR beats the thing that you get to laid your hands on real cockpit, sit in real seat and look through a real HUD etc. But when graphics are just made for the training purposes etc. It is like returning to 1990 graphics.

 

And there are lot of serious people to ready put such prices for their hobby. It is laughable what a people with good income will do. Like friend who owns a car customization shop, that is specialized for arctic environment car modifications and builds customizations for militaries etc. A 50000€ for a simple customization to front-the-store truck is nothing. But quality costs and warranty. Like when Tesla revealed their new Cybertruck, its starting price of $40000 is super cheap. The top model with $70000 price tag is cheap as well, and then think that people would go and invest extra $50000-80000 for possible modifications to it (not just argument that what could be done and what would need to be done).

Or how about we would talk about how much it costs to own a sailing boat...

 

Considering that what one can go and buy for a flight hobby.... DCS becomes super cheap even with 15000€ price tag!

 

So if someone is ever just trying to make a case that DCS in VR is not a nice experience, should really step up their price range first before going to say that it is buggy, underperforming, unoptimized etc etc.

Edited February 1, 2020 by BIGNEWY
edited out 1.2 off topic

[Fri13]

And to those who think 45fps is smooth, I guess Valve, HTC, Google and Oculus are all incorrect in stating that asynchronous reprojection should only be used on rare occasions, and that the minimum desirable fps is 72, with 90+ being best practice. Which is impossible to maintain in the likes of the Reverb.

 

Yeah, lets next start to talk about how the DCS audio is not hiqh quality enough, as the hifist ears will bleed when they hear the highly compressed audio in DCS via their 50000€.

 

 

We can all start to act like snobs with specs....

[TOYKILLA]

Oh, I think we all know who would win. There's a reason most of the top pilots stopped using VR, but the rabid virtual fan boys are oblivious to facts.

You will find the biggest issue of VR in front of your Screen.

 

For people like you, DCS need a Playstation VR Port with nothing to Setup

 

@ micsmotionsimulator

[GunSlingerAUS]

@Fri13 I have posted numerous times about all of these points, as have dozens of others. Please use the forum search feature, thanks.

[BIGNEWY]

Closed for moderation

 

 

Re-opening thread,

 

I have deleted some posts that violate our 1.1 or 1.2 forum rules. I have not issued any warnings this is a friendly reminder to be nice to each other and respect our rules here, if you can not please refrain from posting.

 

Stay on topic if you have a problem with moderation please PM me, it is not for public discussion.

 

Thanks

Edited February 1, 2020 by BIGNEWY

[GunSlingerAUS]

You will find the biggest issue of VR in front of your Screen.

 

For people like you, DCS need a Playstation VR Port with nothing to Setup

 

@ micsmotionsimulator

 

@Toykilla, please discuss your viewpoint within the caveats of using accurate information. For example, you feel DCS is extremely smooth and perfect, but it is good to note that you feel 45fps delivers such an experience. In my view, which is also the view of the VR industry at large, 45fps is not at all smooth or perfect. There's countless resources documenting why 72fps at an absolute minimum is desired at all times for VR, with most VR developers now aiming for 90 or 120fps.

Edited February 1, 2020 by GunSlingerAUS

[GunSlingerAUS]

Yeah, lets next start to talk about how the DCS audio is not hiqh quality enough, as the hifist ears will bleed when they hear the highly compressed audio in DCS via their 50000€.

 

 

We can all start to act like snobs with specs....

 

Haha, they're a waste of money! Unlike my Vocal Clear headphones ;) you're right though, having headphones like mine are a waste for DCS. But they're amazing for first person shooters, and likewise with music and movies.

Edited February 1, 2020 by GunSlingerAUS

[GunSlingerAUS]

Btw guys, please don't think I hate DCS in VR. I do not, and in limited situations, I personally find it the best way to fly. When it works well, it's simply amazing. However, there are clear limitations currently when flying more complex scenarios, and I think it's only right that we should be open about this. Claiming that it is perfect does not help those whose viewpoint differs from yours. People with less hardware knowledge may think they've done something wrong with their PC, when in fact they haven't at all.

Edited February 1, 2020 by GunSlingerAUS