Jump to content

VR from competitive stand point


Skyracer

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Voyager said:

Given 4k can already meet human vision limits,

A 4K monitor at the normal viewing distance you refer to does not equal real life visual acuity. That should be apparent if you’ve ever actually seen one. In DCS even using 4x AA it’s still possible to perceive jaggies meaning you can still see pixels. 

  • 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

So if we go back to the original question, to summarize the relevant issues, and to include comments from other threads

  1.  Ability to check six.  Easier to do that with track-ir.  Although I'll shout out to Monstertech for their chair mounts.  Every modern fighter jet should have a swivel seat for this precise reason.  There's some technology available for the VR folks (VRNeckSafer) but it's still a work in progress and makes some people puke.   Don't get me wrong, I love my VR but this is a real disadvantage.  Scuba mask isn't good for checking six, in the air or the water.
  2. Resolution, recognizing that sometimes less is more.  A competitive player using track-ir might find an advantage in using a 1080 monitor, as opposed to 4K to make spotting easier.  I imagine same principle might apply to VR.
  3. Easier to "padlock" using VR?  Maybe?
  4. SA?  Both track-ir and VR are good SA tools, is VR any better?  Definitely for stuff like formation flying. Question is, how good is track-IR at building a world model?  So you split, bandit decides to chase you.  You break left and dive and tell your wingman to go get him.  Question: after you level off, can you point to your wingman?  Where is bullseye?  Can you point to that?  Is it any easier to do in VR than track-IR?   
  5. Fiddliness and reliability?  Maybe?  Murphy's law is no joke
  6. How does cost factor in?  Even if you think VR is superior (which is not at all clear to me) is it worth the expense?  For competition?  

So many of us are really good at one or the other, helpful to talk to people who are familiar with all three (track-ir, VR, and IRL) for example.

Not every comment is relevant to competition, although Tactical makes a good point about pets.  Dogs are bad enough; cats walk on the keyboard and can figure out how to turn your computer off.  And then there's "the claw."  

So, my conclusion is, it depends.  Do you have a cat, or not?  

Ryzen 5600X (stock), GBX570, 32Gb RAM, AMD 6900XT (reference), G2, WInwing Orion HOTAS, T-flight rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DeltaMike said:

Resolution, recognizing that sometimes less is more.  A competitive player using track-ir might find an advantage in using a 1080 monitor, as opposed to 4K to make spotting easier.  I imagine same principle might apply to VR.
 

Lets not forget the sweet spot of most VR headsets (G2) is fairly small. Which means for spotting you need to turn your head a lot more than with a flatscreen monitor.

  • Like 2

DCS Web Editor - New 3D Mission Editor for DCS that runs in your browser

DCS Web Viewer free browser based mission planner / viewer

dcs web editor new(2).png
4090 RTX, 13700KF, water cooled

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, winghunter said:

Lets not forget the sweet spot of most VR headsets (G2) is fairly small. Which means for spotting you need to turn your head a lot more than with a flatscreen monitor.

You have to turn your head a lot more in VR regardless as it is 1:1 mapping. Turn that much and you can’t see the monitor! The limited FOV and sweet spot just increases the difference in movement.

AMD 5800X3D · MSI 4080 · Asus ROG Strix B550 Gaming  · HP Reverb Pro · 1Tb M.2 NVMe, 32Gb Corsair Vengence 3600MHz DDR4 · Windows 11 · Thrustmaster TPR Pedals · VIRPIL T-50CM3 Base, Alpha Prime R. VIRPIL VPC Rotor TCS Base. JetSeat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the OP:

It depends a lot on what you’re going to be competing in, I suppose. Helicopters, warbirds, IMHO the closer distances of engagement and the feel of 3D (depth perception and SA) vs 2D absolutely give an edge to VR. Less so with modern jets and BVR engagement. 
 

There’s nothing like being padlocked onto a Bf109 in a turn fight, and checking your speed gauge to judge if you can cut it *just a little tighter*, then whipping your head right back to your target, not having to search around again to find his position, attitude, distance. The 1:1 relationship of your RL head movement to your in-game view is under appreciated, in my opinion. 
Or doing a nose-on orbit around a target in a Huey becomes much more intuitive, understanding where the trees are in relationship to you (particularly their distance) really ups the realism. 
 

The other question that begs asking is do you want to fly a simulator or play a game? Sure, checking your six with track IR is easy; not at all with VR, where you have to physically twist your upper body to achieve this. That’s simulating real air combat, not seeking a competitive advantage outside of real life. 
 

G2 most definitely gets the job done if you have the hardware to drive it. You can get as much cockpit detail and smoothness as you like if you’re willing to sacrifice the eye candy like pretty clouds, water, and shadows. Make it look more like a game (like native VR apps) and less like a simulator and you can have a very competitive experience. Most of my play is below 2500 ft in helicopters, so all the beautiful work on the new cloud system is less of a draw for me, so I can dial that down to low and bump up my trees and terrain detail and still get a great experience. 

  • Thanks 1

i9 11900K :: 32GB G.Skill Trident DDR4-3200 :: Corsair water loop ::  Samsung 2TB 980pro nvme :: Gigabyte Aorus 3090 Waterblock :: Gigabyte Aorus Z590 Xtreme MoBo :: HP Reverb G2 VR

VKB Gunfighter flightstick and collective :: TM Warthog throttle & MFDs :: MFG Crosswind pedals :: 5 Dayton Audio bass shakers on 5.1 home theater amp

Win10 Pro x64 :: DCS 2.7 (Huey & P-51, mainly; have all the other rotors, but haven't explored their depths as yet)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am 4.4.2022 um 20:10 schrieb Voyager:

The HP Reverb is 20ppd and known because the screen has a relatively fixed distance from your face. 

A 4K display, at a distance equal to its diagonal, has a 60ppd resolution. That was their design viewing distance, as the human eye peaks around 60ppd.

Basically that means a 27" 4k monitor will have a 60ppd at the typical 27" ( little bit longer than arms length) placement. Closer it will have less effective pixel angle density, further, more. 

Also, individual peak resolvable resolution changes from person to person, depending on your eyes and vision correction. 

Using that conversion, a G2 is more the equivalent of a 1280x720p monitor. Certainly not as good as a 4k monitor, but definitely better than a 640x480.

That said, once headsets hit 30ppd, we'll be at around 1080p performance, which should be about the point where they become equally capable. 

Given 4k can already meet human vision limits, I don't expect 8k to provide any meaningful advantage. Sim developers may even have to start implementing stuff like airy disk emulation and atmospheric attenuation at that point. 

A 27 4k monitor has round about 105 ppd. The ppd of a G2 is between a 1280x720p and 640x480 resolution. Also a 30 ppd is far away from 1080p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hopped onto the VR train with the Rift CV1 and have used the Rift S, Samsung Odyssey and currently use the Reverb G2. The resolution with the G2 is fine, it's the first one where I feel it's comparable to a modern screen. Resolution is still a little lower compared to 1440p but not by much. Overall I find spotting to be about the same or slightly easier but identification requires use of the VR zoom function. Situational awareness in VR is superb, TIR can't compare and that was the case for me within minutes of trying VR after years with TIR. It has other benefits too, like depth perception. Formation flying, gunnery, low level flying and hovering with a chopper are all vastly easier in VR. Overall I consider VR to be a competitive advantage if you're going for that. The downside is you need a monster system to use it. My system isn't really adequate for the G2 but is ok with the Rift S. Now would be a bad time to do a complete system replacement. GPU's are well above MSRP still despite a new generation coming later this year from both team red and green. The rumor mill suggests it will be a major technological leap so that even entry level cards this winter will be faster than anything on the market currently. No way of telling what pricing will be, though I expect prices will continue to fall.

System specs: i5-10600k (4.9 GHz), RX 6950XT, 32GB DDR4 3200, NVMe SSD, Reverb G2, WinWing Super Libra/Taurus, CH Pro Pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BeastyBaiter said:

I hopped onto the VR train with the Rift CV1 and have used the Rift S, Samsung Odyssey and currently use the Reverb G2. The resolution with the G2 is fine, it's the first one where I feel it's comparable to a modern screen. Resolution is still a little lower compared to 1440p but not by much. Overall I find spotting to be about the same or slightly easier but identification requires use of the VR zoom function. Situational awareness in VR is superb, TIR can't compare and that was the case for me within minutes of trying VR after years with TIR. It has other benefits too, like depth perception. Formation flying, gunnery, low level flying and hovering with a chopper are all vastly easier in VR. Overall I consider VR to be a competitive advantage if you're going for that. The downside is you need a monster system to use it. My system isn't really adequate for the G2 but is ok with the Rift S. Now would be a bad time to do a complete system replacement. GPU's are well above MSRP still despite a new generation coming later this year from both team red and green. The rumor mill suggests it will be a major technological leap so that even entry level cards this winter will be faster than anything on the market currently. No way of telling what pricing will be, though I expect prices will continue to fall.

I sincerely hope you are right on that one. Prices have become ridiculous, especially on GPU's. The mining craze has certainly not helped that any either. There are folks still today can't get their hands on the 30x series of GPU they want. And the 40x series is right around the corner. I got lucky with my 3090 FTW3 Ultra, I had already signed up for notification on it on the EVGA site when they introduced the Que system, so I was automatically rolled over into the Que and my turn to order came around fairly quickly. So I have been rocking a 3090 for a while now thankfully.

It would be so nice to not have to play that game again when the 40x series comes out. I am not biting on the new 3090 Ti, just not enough of a jump over my 3090 that I can tell. This dang VR has cost me a crap load of money since getting into it. There was a time I never needed or wanted a top end GPU.

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

17 hours ago, dburne said:

I sincerely hope you are right on that one. Prices have become ridiculous, especially on GPU's. The mining craze has certainly not helped that any either. There are folks still today can't get their hands on the 30x series of GPU they want. And the 40x series is right around the corner. I got lucky with my 3090 FTW3 Ultra, I had already signed up for notification on it on the EVGA site when they introduced the Que system, so I was automatically rolled over into the Que and my turn to order came around fairly quickly. So I have been rocking a 3090 for a while now thankfully.

It would be so nice to not have to play that game again when the 40x series comes out. I am not biting on the new 3090 Ti, just not enough of a jump over my 3090 that I can tell. This dang VR has cost me a crap load of money since getting into it. There was a time I never needed or wanted a top end GPU.

If you haven't, go check out Moore's Law is Dead on YouTube. He has some deep breakdowns on what is coming. 

 

Basically, AMD figured out how to do GPU chiplets and vertical stacking, so they can dice up the top end GPUs into small, high yield parts, and use multiple nodes to build the core GPU. They're going to be using both the 5nm and 6nm nodes for the RDNA3 parts.

Further, TSMC's 5nm node is having exceptional yields, so we're going to get a double whammy of a higher yield design being built on higher yield nodes.

And, because these are chiplettes, they're able to both shift production ratios after fabrication, and build out much larger GPUs than they could with monolithic designs. 

nVidia is about a generation out from solving the chiplette problem, so they are responding by pricing very agressively, and by pushing their GPU performance to the absolute limit. It sounds like they're also paying extra to get space on TSMCs 4nm production line, so they won't be pulling from the same wafers as AMD. Even if our niche doesn't play nice with RDNA3, nVidia will be bringing some heavy hitting hardware in. 

Finally, with Intel getting into the game, they are going to be buying market share with Alchemist. Basically pricing at cost so they can get their foot in the door. The drivers are a big area of concern, but their cards should help the current low end demand. The numbers aren't huge, but it should help alleviate the demand for RX 480 replacements. 

Q4 this year, provided TSMC is still standing, is going to be wild in the GPU market. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is assuming we can get the cards. I'm sitting on my 2080S for now and plan to upgrade to the big card from the next generation, probably AMD from the looks of it. But it might be a struggle. For a laugh, I checked ebay to see what the ancient RX 480 is going for, it's basically MSRP despite being a card from 6 years ago. But as said, things are getting better. Some cards are starting to get listed around MSRP but most are still well above. If things continue as they are, it should be fine in 6 months but my concern is there are a lot of people like me who would have upgraded but didn't. That backlog of gamer upgrades may hit the next gen cards pretty hard. Hopefully AMD and Nvidia have accounted for that with production. I don't think Intel is going to be a major player. They are releasing a mid level card for this generation, and this generation is on the edge of going away. The only way they will sell is if they sell for well below cost in the hope of gaining market share. The new intel cards are looking an awful lot like the old AMD FX series of CPU's. It didn't have to be that way, but they've had so many delays in getting them out that they will be obsolete before the first one hits the shelf.

System specs: i5-10600k (4.9 GHz), RX 6950XT, 32GB DDR4 3200, NVMe SSD, Reverb G2, WinWing Super Libra/Taurus, CH Pro Pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TBH, once SteamVR bottleneck has been taken care of (thanks, OpenComposite!), my Reverb G2 performs OK at 100% resolution with a 1080Ti. I'm holding off on any hardware changes until multicore and Vulkan are out (with luck, it'd involve better OpenXR support), since it appears DCS is hobbled not by our rig performance, but by crappy old code and by bugs in SteamVR. I'm planning a CPU refresh at some point in the future, complete with a custom water loop for overclocking, but hopefully the GPU will last me until a headset upgrade, which will have to be a serious improvement over Reverb (say, 8K wide FOV, or something like that). 

BTW, I wonder how long it'll take for VR technology to reach full capabilities (both FOV and PD) of the human eye, and how the "ultimate gaming rig" that would support that would look like. I feel like barring another global catastrophe, it might appear in this decade. Talk about interesting times. 🙂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TBH, once SteamVR bottleneck has been taken care of (thanks, OpenComposite!), my Reverb G2 performs OK at 100% resolution with a 1080Ti. I'm holding off on any hardware changes until multicore and Vulkan are out (with luck, it'd involve better OpenXR support), since it appears DCS is hobbled not by our rig performance, but by crappy old code and by bugs in SteamVR. I'm planning a CPU refresh at some point in the future, complete with a custom water loop for overclocking, but hopefully the GPU will last me until a headset upgrade, which will have to be a serious improvement over Reverb (say, 8K wide FOV, or something like that). 
BTW, I wonder how long it'll take for VR technology to reach full capabilities (both FOV and PD) of the human eye, and how the "ultimate gaming rig" that would support that would look like. I feel like barring another global catastrophe, it might appear in this decade. Talk about interesting times.  
Any guide or link to open composite?
I find flying on my 1080ti and g2 at 100% not so great so I need to tune it down a bit. Thanks!

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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