Jump to content

The VR Paradox


witwas

Recommended Posts

I’ve been in VR since the rift CV1, the vive pro was its successor and then the reverb G1 together with the pimax 5k super (which i both still have now). I have a 9900k with a 3080 card and I struggle to get decent framerates with my Reverb G1, it goes super with the pimax but it feels like i had a drink too much because it’s blurry. I feel like I fell into the ‘FPS chase strap’ and I cant get out.

 

If you fly high in the sky its al fun and games but if you do helo flying low level it’s a stutter fest. Of course these are well known problems and are for now not solvable, i know they talk about vr optimization  in the future but the maps that are coming out are getting heavier and heavier, it seems like vr headsets and developers are doing a fabulous job, gorgeously looking maps and planes even a 1/1 world representation in FS2020 and my god those dcs clouds are gorgeous. On the other hand it seems impossible to buy decent hardware to run al that eye candy on.

 

Now here’s the paradox, I can’t get back to pancake mode but I can’t get VR to work properly.

 

Am I the only one?  

 

 


Edited by witwas
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there should be no reason on your hardware; that you cant get a decent consistent 45fps... it may not be simple but it is possible, certainly with the G1


Edited by speed-of-heat

SYSTEM SPECS: Hardware Intel Corei7-12700KF @ 5.1/5.3p & 3.8e GHz, 64Gb RAM, 4090 FE, Dell S2716DG, Virpil T50CM3 Throttle, WinWIng Orion 2 & F-16EX + MFG Crosswinds V2, Varjo Aero
SOFTWARE: Microsoft Windows 11, VoiceAttack & VAICOM PRO

1569924735_WildcardsBadgerFAASig.jpg.dbb8c2a337e37c2bfb12855f86d70fd5.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I'm kinda in the same boat. I've started out with the Vive Pro, dismissing the original Rifts and Vives, then sold it shortly after, because I wasn't happy with the state DCS VR was in. Late last year I transitioned to the G2 and a 3090, hoping things would improve (was running a 2080ti before the 3090). Seldom have I been able to achieve a consistent and trouble-free VR performance in DCS. I've since sold the G2 and bought the Pimax 8KX just for the FOV and while I do have some fun offline with it, I mostly fly online on a flat display. I've specifically upgraded my 49' Sony TV with a generic 120hz board so I would take advantage of the 3090 delivering 100+ FPS in flat mode. The same system struggles with VR, delivering roughly 60-68 FPS tops. I learned that you absolutely must have 75/90 FPS for smoothness and Pimax smoothing is pretty crap, tbh.

 

Anyways, I am finding myself leaning towards the flatscreen more, unfortunately. As much as I want VR to succeed, it just isn't there yet. I also find it ridiculous that modders constantly have to maintain shader mods and ED basically doesn't care to implement them in VR despite all the improvements they make. The shared parser seems to be abandoned too. I kinda lost hope about it. They probably gave up on it until they get Vulkan in, which will probably take ages. 

  • Like 4

My controls & seat

 

Main controls: , BRD-N v4 Flightstick (Kreml C5 controller), TM Warthog Throttle (Kreml F3 controller), BRD-F2 Restyling Bf-109 Pedals w. damper, TrackIR5, Gametrix KW-908 (integrated into RAV4 seat)

Stick grips:

Thrustmaster Warthog

Thrustmaster Cougar (x2)

Thrustmaster F-16 FLCS

BRD KG13

 

Standby controls:

BRD-M2 Mi-8 Pedals (Ruddermaster controller)

BRD-N v3 Flightstick w. exch. grip upgrade (Kreml C5 controller)

Thrustmaster Cougar Throttle

Pilot seat

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same boat here. Just have a RiftS for now and as weak it is compared to more modern VR sets I refuse to sink more money on a like it seems for now temporary dead horse like VR in DCS. Trying back just monitor flying with a headtracker doesn't give me this sensation and immersion from being inside a cockpit. So I am stuck and have rather lost any mood to start DCS in its actual VR state any longer. That's a real shame, because when and if DCS works it's just pure fun to fly. But most of the time I struggle keeping it smooth in one version until I have to start from the scratch again with the next release. Plus: none of the shader mods seem to work with restricted MP servers any longer.

  • Like 3

Primary for DCS and other flightsims: i9 12900K@default OC on MSI Z790 Tomahawk (MS-7D91) | 64 GB DDR5-5600 | Asus TUF RTX3090 Gaming OC | 1x 38"@3840x1600 | 1x 27"@2560x1440 | Windows10Pro64

Spoiler

Secondary: i7 11700k@5.1GHz on MSI Z590 Gaming Force MB| 64 GB DDR4-3200 | PowerColor RX6900XTU Red Devil | 1x 32"@2560*1440 + 1x24"@1980*1200 | Windows10Pro64

Backup: i7 6700K@4.8GHz | 64 GB DDR4-2400 | PowerColor RX5700XT Red Devil | SSD-500/1000GB | 1x49" 32:9 Asus X49VQ 3840x1080 | Windows10Pro64

Flightsim Input Devices: VPC: ACE2 Rudder / WarBRD Base / T-50CM2 Base with 50mm ext. / Alpha-R, Mongoos T-50CM, WarBRD and VFX Grip / T-50CM3 Throttle | VPC Sharka-50 + #2 Controle Panel | TM Cougar MFD-Frames| Rift S - Secondary: TM HOTAS WARTHOG/Cougar Throttle+Stick, F-18-Grip | TM TPR Rudder | DelanClip/PS3-CAM IR-Tracker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have decent performance from my 1070M and Rift S.  Sure, the detail is dialed down a bit, and the PD could be higher, but it is certainly playable and smooth.  The only times I really struggle is with large unit count missions.  I'm surprised you aren't happy with the performance of a 3080, perhaps you just need to manage your expectations?

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I myself could never go back to pancake gaming.

It is VR or nothing for me - no games are on my drive unless they have VR support. It has been that way for me way back even in the Rift CV1 days. I began this journey back in Jan 2017.

 

I have my Vive Pro 2 dialed in nicely for DCS. Allows me to run a consistent 45 fps and the image quality is very good imho.

No of course not as sharp all around like a monitor displays, but it is certainly good enough for me. As long as I can maintain that 45 fps it is pretty much stutter free for the most part. Currently I am mainly flying the Hornet in campaigns on the Black Sea and Persian Gulf. Even on the Super Carrier I have it maintaining 45 fps finally.

 

And I will tell you I spend several hours on most days flying DCS in VR. One of the beauties of retirement. If fact I am quite addicted to VR as I also enjoy other made for VR games with the controllers.

 

VR has come a long way in the past four and a half years - not as far as I would like to have seen but am very excited about what lies ahead for VR. Valve is working on a new Index headset and I am betting they will knock it out of the park when they get it done.


Edited by dburne
  • Like 7

Don B

EVGA Z390 Dark MB | i9 9900k CPU @ 5.1 GHz | Gigabyte 4090 OC | 64 GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 MHz CL16 | Corsair H150i Pro Cooler |Virpil CM3 Stick w/ Alpha Prime Grip 200mm ext| Virpil CM3 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Base w/ Alpha-L Grip| Point Control V2|Varjo Aero|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dburne said:

I have my Vive Pro 2 dialed in nicely for DCS. Allows me to run a consistent 45 fps and the image quality is very good imho.

No of course not as sharp all around like a monitor displays, but it is certainly good enough for me

Maybe you get the point: even with an almost top notch system like you have, one has to tune a good amount to get half of the optimum FPS. And not much people can afford such high-end graphics that are needed to get this slightly well. 

Plus I am making the experience that it gets worse with every new update in the last month and I have to tune more and more to get a not as good experience in VR. At the moment I have not much hope that DCS gets better in this area in the near future and I have to decide to either dump VR with DCS or dump DCS itself, because I won't spend thousands of Euros on high-end graphics hardware and a new VR kit to just get a just slightly better experience with more hours of tuning and fiddling around.

  • Like 1

Primary for DCS and other flightsims: i9 12900K@default OC on MSI Z790 Tomahawk (MS-7D91) | 64 GB DDR5-5600 | Asus TUF RTX3090 Gaming OC | 1x 38"@3840x1600 | 1x 27"@2560x1440 | Windows10Pro64

Spoiler

Secondary: i7 11700k@5.1GHz on MSI Z590 Gaming Force MB| 64 GB DDR4-3200 | PowerColor RX6900XTU Red Devil | 1x 32"@2560*1440 + 1x24"@1980*1200 | Windows10Pro64

Backup: i7 6700K@4.8GHz | 64 GB DDR4-2400 | PowerColor RX5700XT Red Devil | SSD-500/1000GB | 1x49" 32:9 Asus X49VQ 3840x1080 | Windows10Pro64

Flightsim Input Devices: VPC: ACE2 Rudder / WarBRD Base / T-50CM2 Base with 50mm ext. / Alpha-R, Mongoos T-50CM, WarBRD and VFX Grip / T-50CM3 Throttle | VPC Sharka-50 + #2 Controle Panel | TM Cougar MFD-Frames| Rift S - Secondary: TM HOTAS WARTHOG/Cougar Throttle+Stick, F-18-Grip | TM TPR Rudder | DelanClip/PS3-CAM IR-Tracker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, schmiefel said:

Maybe you get the point: even with an almost top notch system like you have, one has to tune a good amount to get half of the optimum FPS. And not much people can afford such high-end graphics that are needed to get this slightly well. 

Plus I am making the experience that it gets worse with every new update in the last month and I have to tune more and more to get a not as good experience in VR. At the moment I have not much hope that DCS gets better in this area in the near future and I have to decide to either dump VR with DCS or dump DCS itself, because I won't spend thousands of Euros on high-end graphics hardware and a new VR kit to just get a just slightly better experience with more hours of tuning and fiddling around.

 

I have the same sentiment about DCS. The amount of tweaking that one needs to do to have this game 'barely' playable in VR is insane.

 

However, not all players in DCS are created equal.

 

- The VR jet players don't complain because their playtime is mostly at high altitude where the performance is great.

- Heli and WWII - we suffer the most since we are very close to the ground, objectives, and the high amount of SFX.

 

Having a 5900x CPU I recently acquired a 3090 secretly hoping it would offer a vast improvement over the 2080ti I had. The actual improvement? Maybe 10%, or 15% at max at low altitude, i.e. WWII and Heli altitude. Suffice to say I'm disillusioned and I have stopped playing DCS completely because of it. I refuse to play it at potato 1k quality where the performance is more or less ok on 3090.

 

Couple of weeks ago there was a dev post about how they're looking in to VR improvements. If they achieve 20% improvement it'd already be game changer, pun intended. Until then - it's IL2 VR for me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a jet player that flies down in the weeds in the A-10C, faster than helicopters or WWII planes, and I'm getting good performance with a G2 and a 2080ti.  The eye candy I had to turn off isn't even missed because I found that I never really spent much time looking at those things anyway.  Don't miss shadows at all because all of my attention is focused on keeping the pointy end out of the dirt, killing the target, and not getting smacked by a MANPAD or gun in the process.  I've still got the good clouds though.  

  • Like 3

EVGA Z690 Classified, Intel i9 12900KS Alder Lake processor, MSI MAG Core Liquid 360R V2 AIO Liquid CPU Cooler, G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 64GB DDR5 6400 memory, EVGA RTX3090 FTW3 Ultra 24GB video card, Samsung 980PRO 1TB M2.2280 SSD for Windows 10 64-bit OS, Samsung 980PRO 2TB M2.2280 SSD for program files, LG WH14NS40 Blu-Ray burner. HOTAS Warthog, Saitek Pedals, HP Reverb G2. Partridge and pear tree pending. :pilotfly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I run VR on a 1080; I7-7800HK at 4.3Ghz; 32Gb ram; 170% SS; Odyssey HMD; and get kind of okay performance in the weeds. I have spent hours upon hours tweeking to get it. DCS is strange though because I don't always get the same performance for the same settings in the same replay.... and often get better performance setting some things HIGHER *shrugs*. Here's some hunting in the weeds on GS with about 50 players with FPSVR overlayed so you can see the performance. It's not great but not terrible either. I have shadows on LOW and clouds on standard, steam per app at 170%, tree's 100%, steam reprojection enabled, shared parser = true, yada yada yada. This is a replay but the performace is the same... probably better live because I'm not recording. You can see a few stutters but not that many. 

 

I've also noticed some modules are a little easier on my GPU/CPU than others (Viper being one of the easier ones imo... and why I'm in it!).

 

 

Screen_210806_200100.png

NvidiaSettings1.JPG

NvidiaSettings2.JPG

NvidiaSettings3.JPG

ASUS ROG G701VI-XS72K 17.3" - i7 7820HK - GTX 1080 8GB - 32 GB 2666mhz - 512 GB SSD - Win10 Pro 64-Bit - T̶r̶a̶c̶k̶I̶R̶5̶ - Samsung Odyssey HMD!! (Amazing!!) - X56 Rhino HOTAS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the same feeling and I am waiting to upgrade my stuff because I am not sure that VR will stay viable.

 

Concerning VR there are really 3 scenarii as soon you have good enough and coherent setup:

- modern jet : easy to have stable 40/45 FPS, acceptable visual sugar even with High-end HMD

- WWII, jets as F86 : 80Hz/90Hz native frequency becomes mandatory. HMD with ability to play at different native frequencies is really the feature to focus on (i.e. 60Hz). 4K pixels per eyes becomes near impossible to handle at these frequencies. For sure, you have to put your graphical settings very low. I tend to think that it make no sense to have a more recent HMD than the Rift S if it is your DCS use case because it is probably the only HMD that is possible to handle at its full potential with 3090 and 11900k

- Helo : It is even worse than for the WWII because in this situation, the Rift S picture is so bad that it becomes difficult to be acceptable (from my point of view)

 

So, for sure, VR needs more love from ED but it is even more true that the HMD evolves in a direction (more pixels, higher native frequencies) that becomes incompatible with DCS, and so do the players expectations.

 

My advice is to always ask yourself your DCS use case. Most users happy with their High-End HMD flies probably modern jets and the trade-off between lower graphical settings and better experience because VR is at their advantage. They even profit good graphical settings because they can play with AWS/reprojection or other frame interpolation I am not aware off.

 

In other scenarii, the trade-off tends to become a paradox. Will it be possible to continue to play in VR at native frequencies without ghost planes in gun dogfight ? Not so sure, keep your Rift S for the time being and look for new HMDs with support for several native frequencies.


Edited by Chapa
  • Like 1

i7 12700k, RTX 3080ti, 64GB RAM, M.2 512Go, Quest 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fly the ka50, the spitfire, and the fa-18 of a super carrier… I can say that I have a good experience across all off them, you don’t need 90 across all of them but you certainly need 45 at low level. It’s why when I test I test at low level … 

 

yes you need to trade off, some graphics but for me it’s a reasonable trade, and also was when I was doing the same with a 1080.

 

Yes it would be nicer if the game had better support for performance available internally, it is out there in mod land though. 
 

but you will likely have to fiddle with stuff to get an optimal experience… and it will be less than you could have had with a 2d monitor … 

 

to each their own… enjoy what you can.

  • Like 1

SYSTEM SPECS: Hardware Intel Corei7-12700KF @ 5.1/5.3p & 3.8e GHz, 64Gb RAM, 4090 FE, Dell S2716DG, Virpil T50CM3 Throttle, WinWIng Orion 2 & F-16EX + MFG Crosswinds V2, Varjo Aero
SOFTWARE: Microsoft Windows 11, VoiceAttack & VAICOM PRO

1569924735_WildcardsBadgerFAASig.jpg.dbb8c2a337e37c2bfb12855f86d70fd5.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m going to try hard not to repeat what others have said, but I’ve just woken up so this may become a rambling mess.

 

So many points here that echo my own thoughts on VR and DCS, pretty much since I started playing in 2016 with the CV1. But what is and isn’t acceptable is  such a subjective/personal thing when it comes to VR it makes it a tricky subject of conversation.


For reference, I play SP in Liberation campaigns with a G2, I have a 3090 and a 5900x and 32gb of RAM.


It can certainly feel like the hardware is always one generation behind the headsets, and I don’t know about you guys but for me it can be hard to know that the game could look so much better with what one has, but one has to dial it back in order to get decent performance. Take the brilliant mods that most of us use and the great guides that are made (thanks Speed of Heat and others 👍). Without those things would be considerably worse but they still in one way or another make things look a little bit not as good. (Sorry still trying to wake my brain up) And as one needs to use quite a few of them now the effects are cumulative.

 

I think another factor that I for one find myself battling against is that of; I’ve spent thousands of pounds on hardware, surely it should look better than this! If the top end hardware can’t do it then what can!? This is know ones fault but my own of course but it can feel like you’ve bought a Ferrari that’s had the engine limited to 50mph.

 

Has anyone tried msfs since there performance improvements? Has it got better? can we even say that here?


My worry (for a long time now) is that DCS is heading in the opposite direction. It’s just getting more and more demanding on hardware. I haven’t even tried the Marianas map as I think I’ll find it pretty much unplayable, which is a shame. On the one hand the dynamic campaign is likely to be incredible but on the other I doubt I’ll be able to play it.


I feel more communication from ED on VR in particular would be so very much appreciated. As at the very least it may help us manage our expectations or, if the planets aligned and the right sacrifices were made to the correct gods, offer us hope for the future. A little bit of hope goes a long way! For example, what percentage of the player base are us VR users, and therefore how high a priority is VR in DCS? Are there things that can be done? etc.

 

Just from a VR players perspective I for one feel like ED are building a magnificent palace but sadly on swampy ground. That being said, I find it hard to believe that such clever people would be doing this if they didn’t know that they had ways to make it work. Here’s looking at you Vulkan! 

 

It would be fantastic to hear from ED more often on VR matters, please? 🙂
 

Ramble end.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just find it staggering to believe you guys with the 30x0 cards are struggling - I am running a 1070 Mobile in my laptop and it is perfectly playable on a Rift S.  Are you running thousand bomber raids?  Running all settings at MAX and expecting 360fps?  One of us is doing this wrong, I'm just not sure which of us.

 

See the source image

See the source image

 

Perhaps it's because I grew up on this, I am more willing to sacrifice visual quality for performance.  Maybe those more used to fancy graphics are expecting too much from VR?

 

You have immersion, quality and performance.  Pick any two.

  • Like 4

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I would try is this. Save your current graphic options profile for jets and SP.
Create from scratch a new profile with most options turned down a bit(or lot) for helis, heavy maps (syria, marianas) and MP with heavy servers(players, objects, scripts...)

I know creating a profile from zero is a hard task, but doing the opposite means you are no longer enjoying DCS.

Think if you tune both settings, choosing one or another is a mere click away.

i5 8400 | 32 Gb RAM | RTX 2080Ti | Virpil Mongoose T-50 base w/ Warthog & Hornet sticks | Warthog throttle | Cougar throttle USB | DIY Collective | Virpil desk mount | VKB T-Rudder Mk IV | Oculus Rift S | Buddy-Fox A-10 UFC | 3x TM MFDs | 2x bass shakers pedal plate| SIMple SIMpit chair | WinWing TakeOff panel | PointCTRL v2 | Andre JetSeat | Winwing Hornet UFC | Winwing Viper ICP

FC3 - Warthog - F-5E - Harrier - NTTR - Hornet - Tomcat - Huey - Viper - C-101 - PG - Hip - SuperCarrier - Syria - Warthog II - Hind - South Atlantic - Sinai - Strike Eagle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Digitalvole said:

It can certainly feel like the hardware is always one generation behind the headsets, and I don’t know about you guys but for me it can be hard to know that the game could look so much better with what one has, but one has to dial it back in order to get decent performance.

 

That can also be said about 2D. With my current setup i can't run full max at a (for me) acceptable framerate which is 60 FPS (locked).

It was only possible briefly when i changed my original GTX780 with a GTX1080ti and at that moment i had... YES, i'm there.

But then ED released a big update and down it went again, running behind reality.

For me every sim has been that like that, never been able to run it full max like it is intended to be. And my target is 60FPS sustained, not a single FPS more.

I always wonder how developers deal with this, i guess they never see their work (flightsims that is) run supersmooth at full detail levels.

We run at least one hardware generation behind, they run software that is even further ahead then what costumers buy.

 

For VR: With my Rift-S, i want a sustained 40FPS, if i can't get that, details go down.

Win11 Pro 64-bit, Ryzen 5800X3D, Corsair H115i, Gigabyte X570S UD, EVGA 3080Ti XC3 Ultra 12GB, 64 GB DDR4 G.Skill 3600. Monitors: LG 27GL850-B27 2560x1440 + Samsung SyncMaster 2443 1920x1200, HOTAS: Warthog with Virpil WarBRD base, MFG Crosswind combat pedals, TrackIR4, Rift-S.

Personal Wish List: A6 Intruder, Vietnam theater, decent ATC module, better VR performance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, with Rift S, using AWS (so interpolation at 40Hz) is perfectly smooth for sure but inaceptable to chase WWII planes (in MP servers) that appears as ghost because AWS.

 

So, I prefer low graphical settings and 80Hz, no ghost and better immersion.

 

In F-18, AWS with nice graphical settings and stable 40Hz is perfectly smooth.

 

So at the end, the truth for one will never be your truth.
 

The only fact is that you will fight to find your acceptable settings if any given your HMD and setup and with DCS and HMD evolving it becomes more and more challenging 


Edited by Chapa

i7 12700k, RTX 3080ti, 64GB RAM, M.2 512Go, Quest 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lace said:

I just find it staggering to believe you guys with the 30x0 cards are struggling - I am running a 1070 Mobile in my laptop and it is perfectly playable on a Rift S.  Are you running thousand bomber raids?  Running all settings at MAX and expecting 360fps?  One of us is doing this wrong, I'm just not sure which of us.

 

See the source image

See the source image

 

Perhaps it's because I grew up on this, I am more willing to sacrifice visual quality for performance.  Maybe those more used to fancy graphics are expecting too much from VR?

 

You have immersion, quality and performance.  Pick any two.


I think most of us with 30 series cards have higher res headsets, my 1080ti did ok with my Rift S. Perhaps you have hit the sweet spot for your needs and that’s great. 
 

Just speaking for myself, the concern is where DCS is heading. The recent Marianas map is a good example, can you run that ok? (honest question, I’m very aware that the internet makes it easy to sound rude.) Or how about a mission with quite a lot going on such as a Liberation mission? Again it comes back to the individual and what they are doing in the sim, but it sure would be frustrating if they release an incredible dynamic campaign that none of us can run. 

 

I used to play games in the early 90s too, but things have moved on and as a result we expect more. If you went to buy new car today but they said I’m afraid you’re only able to buy the cars from the early 90s you’d be bit fed up, right?

 

Finally, immersion, quality, performance pick two. I know that’s how it is now and to a greater or lesser extent always will be and we need to be realistic in our expectations. But if we don’t strive for better then we might as well have stuck with Falcon 3.0 and called it a day. And frankly DCS has been heading in a slightly worrying direction when it comes to performance since 2.0 brought us deferred rendering (is that what it’s called?) but I like to believe they have something up there sleeves. 

 

I think threads like this are more of a “hey guys, *waves* don’t forget about us” kind of deal, not a “this just isn’t good enough!” Kinda thing. That’s how I see it anyhoo.


 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Digitalvole said:


I think most of us with 30 series cards have higher res headsets, my 1080ti did ok with my Rift S. Perhaps you have hit the sweet spot for your needs and that’s great. 
 

Just speaking for myself, the concern is where DCS is heading. The recent Marianas map is a good example, can you run that ok? (honest question, I’m very aware that the internet makes it easy to sound rude.) Or how about a mission with quite a lot going on such as a Liberation mission? Again it comes back to the individual and what they are doing in the sim, but it sure would be frustrating if they release an incredible dynamic campaign that none of us can run. 

 

I used to play games in the early 90s too, but things have moved on and as a result we expect more. If you went to buy new car today but they said I’m afraid you’re only able to buy the cars from the early 90s you’d be bit fed up, right?

 

Finally, immersion, quality, performance pick two. I know that’s how it is now and to a greater or lesser extent always will be and we need to be realistic in our expectations. But if we don’t strive for better then we might as well have stuck with Falcon 3.0 and called it a day. And frankly DCS has been heading in a slightly worrying direction when it comes to performance since 2.0 brought us deferred rendering (is that what it’s called?) but I like to believe they have something up there sleeves. 

 

I think threads like this are more of a “hey guys, *waves* don’t forget about us” kind of deal, not a “this just isn’t good enough!” Kinda thing. That’s how I see it anyhoo.


 

 

Nope, Marianas was a non starter for me.  Maybe after a bit of optimisation it will improve (I found the same with Syria though, and even the SoH back in the day).  

 

I'm well aware of the compromises I am making with my hardware (I even started a thread about a new laptop earlier this week).

 

Of course we expect more, and games have moved on immeasurably from the early 90's, not quite sure the point you are making here, I'm not comparing DCS to Falcon 3.0, other that in the same sense, it requires (required) the very best hardware to run it.  Cars now are much better than cars in the 90s, but there are still people out there who think we would be flying around in autonomous pods by now.  Expectations should be managed accordingly.

 

The 'pick two' analogy works for so many aspects of our lives.  I am willing to sacrifice quality for VR immersion, some are happier with a 4k monitor and TrackIR.  I would love to turn it up to 11, hence the search for some better hardware, but the latest software has always and will always be one step ahead of the latest hardware, it's what ensures longevity in the software, and drives demand for new hardware.  If DCS maxed out ran at 90fps on a 2080, nobody (ok the miners would) would need new GPUs, which would be bad news for hardware manufacturers, and there would be a thread right here on how ED is being too conservative and the graphics would be so much better if they were willing to push the limits of the new hardware.  Everything is a compromise.

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, Lace said:

 

Nope, Marianas was a non starter for me.  Maybe after a bit of optimisation it will improve (I found the same with Syria though, and even the SoH back in the day).  

 

I'm well aware of the compromises I am making with my hardware (I even started a thread about a new laptop earlier this week).

 

Of course we expect more, and games have moved on immeasurably from the early 90's, not quite sure the point you are making here, I'm not comparing DCS to Falcon 3.0, other that in the same sense, it requires (required) the very best hardware to run it.  Cars now are much better than cars in the 90s, but there are still people out there who think we would be flying around in autonomous pods by now.  Expectations should be managed accordingly.

 

The 'pick two' analogy works for so many aspects of our lives.  I am willing to sacrifice quality for VR immersion, some are happier with a 4k monitor and TrackIR.  I would love to turn it up to 11, hence the search for some better hardware, but the latest software has always and will always be one step ahead of the latest hardware, it's what ensures longevity in the software, and drives demand for new hardware.  If DCS maxed out ran at 90fps on a 2080, nobody (ok the miners would) would need new GPUs, which would be bad news for hardware manufacturers, and there would be a thread right here on how ED is being too conservative and the graphics would be so much better if they were willing to push the limits of the new hardware.  Everything is a compromise.

 

I’m sorry, I got the wrong end of the stick there. My apologies.

 

Im married with two kids, I am all to familiar with compromise hehe 😉

But we all have a line in the sand where we aren’t willing to compromise any further. I’m in no way at that point with DCS right now but I do worry for the future. Something that was said about the new maps performance by one of the moderators had me concerned for how things may be in a year or twos time.

 

To your point about the latest software pushing past the limits of hardware, I don’t feel this is too often the case with games. Crysis and MSFS 2020 spring to mind but in general I’ve found if you have the best hardware you can usually stick it on ultra and forget about it, though perhaps the advent of 4K has changed all that, VR certainly seems to have! 😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best solution for DCS would be to have a VR-specific version of the sim. There is no good way to make a game perform equally in 2D and 3D. You’d be hampering one version or overwhelming the other. And it doesn’t seem feasible to have such a wide range of graphics options to accommodate both. 

  • Like 1

i9-13900K @ 6.2GHz oc | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | 24GB GeForce RTX 4090 | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

The best solution for DCS would be to have a VR-specific version of the sim. There is no good way to make a game perform equally in 2D and 3D. You’d be hampering one version or overwhelming the other. And it doesn’t seem feasible to have such a wide range of graphics options to accommodate both. 

 

You cant expect the same performance from 2D to 3D if you double or triple the pixels on screen going VR.

DCS doesnt need separate sims, DCS needs to adapt to the current hardware and technologies (multicore/threading, DX12/Vulkan, DLSS/VRSS/FSR, etc), using the current hardware like it was from 15 years ago ballast the general performance

  • Like 2

NZXT H9 Flow Black | Intel Core i5 13600KF OCed P5.6 E4.4 | Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX | G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo DDR5-6000 32GB C30 OCed 6600 C32 | nVidia GeForce RTX 4090 Founders Edition |  Western Digital SN770 2TB | Gigabyte GP-UD1000GM PG5 ATX 3.0 1000W | SteelSeries Apex 7 | Razer Viper Mini | SteelSeries Artics Nova 7 | LG OLED42C2 | Xiaomi P1 55"

Virpil T-50 CM2 Base + Thrustmaster Warthog Stick | WinWing Orion 2 F16EX Viper Throttle  | WinWing ICP | 3 x Thrustmaster MFD | Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals | Oculus Quest 2

DCS World | Persian Gulf | Syria | Flaming Cliff 3 | P-51D Mustang | Spitfire LF Mk. IX | Fw-109 A-8 | A-10C II Tank Killer | F/A-18C Hornet | F-14B Tomcat | F-16C Viper | F-15E Strike Eagle | M2000C | Ka-50 BlackShark III | Mi-24P Hind | AH-64D Apache | SuperCarrier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

The best solution for DCS would be to have a VR-specific version of the sim. There is no good way to make a game perform equally in 2D and 3D. You’d be hampering one version or overwhelming the other. And it doesn’t seem feasible to have such a wide range of graphics options to accommodate both. 

 

MSFS 2020 did it and seemed to do a pretty good job of it.

Totally separate graphics options for both.

 

1 hour ago, 5ephir0th said:

 

You cant expect the same performance from 2D to 3D if you double or triple the pixels on screen going VR.

DCS doesnt need separate sims, DCS needs to adapt to the current hardware and technologies (multicore/threading, DX12/Vulkan, DLSS/VRSS/FSR, etc), using the current hardware like it was from 15 years ago ballast the general performance

 

Fully agree with this.


Edited by dburne
  • Like 1

Don B

EVGA Z390 Dark MB | i9 9900k CPU @ 5.1 GHz | Gigabyte 4090 OC | 64 GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 MHz CL16 | Corsair H150i Pro Cooler |Virpil CM3 Stick w/ Alpha Prime Grip 200mm ext| Virpil CM3 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Base w/ Alpha-L Grip| Point Control V2|Varjo Aero|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 5ephir0th said:

DCS needs to adapt to the current hardware and technologies (multicore/threading, DX12/Vulkan, DLSS/VRSS/FSR, etc), using the current hardware like it was from 15 years ago ballast the general performance

That’s basically impossible. 3D is roughy 3x as demanding as 2D. So you’d be short changing 2D by 3x or overloading VR by 3x

Any performance benefit gained byVulkan etc will just go towards making the 2D game better but still more demanding. There’s no way for 3D to catch up to 2D unless the game just halted it’s development but that won’t happen. Games only ever evolve to be more and more demanding and that limit is defined as what will run at 2D since that’s the majority of users. I don’t know what “15 years ago…” means but I don’t think we want 15 year old graphics. 


Edited by SharpeXB
  • Like 1

i9-13900K @ 6.2GHz oc | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | 24GB GeForce RTX 4090 | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s basically impossible. 3D is roughy 3x as demanding as 2D. So you’d be short changing 2D by 3x or overloading VR by 3x

Any performance benefit gained byVulkan etc will just go towards making the 2D game better but still more demanding. There’s no way for 3D to catch up to 2D unless the game just halted it’s development but that won’t happen. Games only ever evolve to be more and more demanding and that limit is defined as what will run at 2D since that’s the majority of users. I don’t know what “15 years ago…” means but I don’t think we want 15 year old graphics. 

 

 

I think you misunderstood me, im not saying 3D must catch 2D performance, im saying just that it´s impossible cause on VR you are rendering double or triple the pixels.

And about "15 years ago" you misunderstood me again, i am telling you that DCS engine use hardware technologies like the time stopped 15 years ago, for example, the first multi core CPU for mass market was release 15 years ago and DCS engine still relying on one single core, we need that the engine adapts to actual hardware, that way we can have a better performance, 2D and 3D


Edited by 5ephir0th
  • Like 1

NZXT H9 Flow Black | Intel Core i5 13600KF OCed P5.6 E4.4 | Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX | G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo DDR5-6000 32GB C30 OCed 6600 C32 | nVidia GeForce RTX 4090 Founders Edition |  Western Digital SN770 2TB | Gigabyte GP-UD1000GM PG5 ATX 3.0 1000W | SteelSeries Apex 7 | Razer Viper Mini | SteelSeries Artics Nova 7 | LG OLED42C2 | Xiaomi P1 55"

Virpil T-50 CM2 Base + Thrustmaster Warthog Stick | WinWing Orion 2 F16EX Viper Throttle  | WinWing ICP | 3 x Thrustmaster MFD | Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals | Oculus Quest 2

DCS World | Persian Gulf | Syria | Flaming Cliff 3 | P-51D Mustang | Spitfire LF Mk. IX | Fw-109 A-8 | A-10C II Tank Killer | F/A-18C Hornet | F-14B Tomcat | F-16C Viper | F-15E Strike Eagle | M2000C | Ka-50 BlackShark III | Mi-24P Hind | AH-64D Apache | SuperCarrier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...