Oculus Rift and DCS World Discussion

[mhe]

Of course the first implementation of VR will not be all that the technology can be in the future. But good for us that ED is on the forefront of optimizing DCS for VR so we can have the best virtual flight experience possible at all times. They won't stop improving after the first implementation, especially not when they see a very likely large spike in sales once they have VR working and the first consumer Rifts are in the stores.

 

And no, 4K is not the answer. 8K would be it - at that resolution you become limited by the eye and not by the display panel. But we are some time away from building an affordable 8K panel in such a small form factor, let alone transfer content to the device at decent framerates or even having an affordable PC that can render pretty content at desirable framerates at these resolutions.

 

I expect the first Rift to be 1440p or 1600p and the second iteration to come in 4k (once HDMI 2.0 and DisplayPort are as common as DVI and HDMI 1.4 are now). The only question is when.

[Python]

Yep, we'll also need graphics cards and processors to catch up, I doubt many of us would be running DCS at 4k yet, never mind 8k. One day though....

[Cobra847]

Full HD resolution from 5-7" display is way too low for device held at couple of inches or so from the eyes. Even the newest mobile devices, with similarly sized display, have much larger resolution than Full HD. And they're handheld - viewing distance is much larger than Oculus.

 

We need 4K+ display to have ideal resolution (pixels/degree) in VR glasses / helmets. And yes, it will happen sometime in, probably not too distant future. Oculus (and mass market VR) is in it's infancy. It will mature, for sure. Early adopters will have their exclusivity (as always), but for the rest of us it makes much more sense to wait for the technology to mature.

 

And, don't forget, competition will be stiff, very soon.

 

Oculus (VR in general) is the future. It will become necessity for gaming and flight simulation software like head tracking is now. It will just not happen overnight. Looking forward to it.

 

You are completely wrong about the resolution. Sure, it's not massive for what is NEEDED, but it is sufficient. ALL Reports have confirmed this.

[danilop]

Well, 1080p 5-6" display @ 2 inches has way less pixels/degree than average desktop monitor (1080p 24" display @ 20" distance) . That's a mathematical fact.

 

But hey, to each his own. :)

Edited January 19, 2014 by danilop

[Bushmanni]

From the gameplay perspective what counts is the amount of visible pixels, not the pixel density. I have a 46" FullHD screen and compared to 24" 1920x1200 screen I previously used the 46" is vastly superior in both functionality and immersion. You will see exactly the same stuff with same clarity regardless of the picture size as long as the whole picture fits in your field of view but you will find the few pixels wide distant enemy dots much quicker from the big screen. We will have to change FOV constantly with FullHD screens and we will need to do that with Rift also and all it means that it's on par with current monitors in that regard.

[average_pilot]

From the gameplay perspective what counts is the amount of visible pixels, not the pixel density. I have a 46" FullHD screen and compared to 24" 1920x1200 screen I previously used the 46" is vastly superior in both functionality and immersion. You will see exactly the same stuff with same clarity regardless of the picture size as long as the whole picture fits in your field of view but you will find the few pixels wide distant enemy dots much quicker from the big screen. We will have to change FOV constantly with FullHD screens and we will need to do that with Rift also and all it means that it's on par with current monitors in that regard.

The problem is that when you are using a HMD for VR the FOV of the game must match the FOV of the HMD to achieve a correctly scaled stereoscopic view.

 

Here is a nice article of Michael Abrash (Valve) about the issue of resolution in wide FOV HMD's

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/when-it-comes-to-resolution-its-all-relative/

 

We will have a problem of pixel density when playing DCS in the upcoming CK Rift. The requirement to read small text and gauges makes flight simulation a special case in this first round of affordable VR. I don't know what kind of solutions ED will find to make DCS a great experience nevertheless.

[danilop]

Yep, Michael Abrash article is exactly what we are talking about here. ;) First Gen VR will have resolution issue.

 

Hopefully, it will be sorted out in the near future ...

[cichlidfan]

DCS is going to be a lot more accessible with the Rift, simple for the fact that people will be buying the Rift for other games. I think one of the things that makes DCS initially hard to get into is that you almost need a headtracker, but if you don't know whether you will even like DCS then you won't go buying a $200 headtracker.

 

You also need a joystick and pedals to make DCS accessible so, in that regard, the Rift is no more useful than a monitor, which everyone already has.

[Bushmanni]

The problem is that when you are using a HMD for VR the FOV of the game must match the FOV of the HMD to achieve a correctly scaled stereoscopic view.

 

Here is a nice article of Michael Abrash (Valve) about the issue of resolution in wide FOV HMD's

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/when-it-comes-to-resolution-its-all-relative/

 

We will have a problem of pixel density when playing DCS in the upcoming CK Rift. The requirement to read small text and gauges makes flight simulation a special case in this first round of affordable VR. I don't know what kind of solutions ED will find to make DCS a great experience nevertheless.

 

I have used 3D on my 46" screen and zooming in and out doesn't create any real problems. While it does look like you are looking through binoculars while zoomed in, it doesn't cause any gameplay problems. I don't have first hand experience with VR headset about this but if people with experience say it isn't an issue I have no reason not to believe them.

[Burner_Tbird2]

At 1080p the consumer rift will not be the last rift you buy- down the road 4k will get it done at the current FOV.

 

But gauge reading will not be a show stopper for BVR combat. With low latency 6DOF and a virtual cockpit that is around 18"-24" from your head, you wont have to lean much to get a bigger picture. This can already be done with DK1+Hydra and higher res means even less lean-in is required.

 

Now tallying small ground vehicles or bandits visually, that's going to be a handicap compared to screen users with the initial consumer rift. Fidelity of FLIR screens also will likely be compromised.

 

VR is about the cool the aviation. Rolling downwind, base, to final and turning around in your seat to pickup the runway. Or looking straight up as you pull down off the top of a split-s. Keeping lead aircraft in your peripheral while you scan the instruments. And getting speed rushes watching your own shadow bounce off near mountain terrain passing alongside at 500knts. If that kind of stuff doesn't blow your skirt up stick with an HD screen, it will give a better picture in a numbers, best way to be a stone-cold-sim-killer, sense.

[danilop]

Resolution is not a show stopper, but something to be aware off. Every new technology has it's shortcomings and technological hurdles in the beginning. Oculus is not an exception.

 

We will probably not notice lack of resolution in most of the other games and pure flying in DCS, however for something like IFR flying or spotting targets and fighting in A-10C, it could and will be an issue. Simply, it's hard not to notice it because we are getting used to high resolution displays being everywhere. I mean, nowadays I get sharper text on my cell phone than what's standard on many printed documents ... :D

 

It will get better with time. :thumbup:

Edited January 20, 2014 by danilop

[average_pilot]

I have used 3D on my 46" screen and zooming in and out doesn't create any real problems. While it does look like you are looking through binoculars while zoomed in, it doesn't cause any gameplay problems. I don't have first hand experience with VR headset about this but if people with experience say it isn't an issue I have no reason not to believe them.

I have been gaming in stereo-3D for quite some time and I understand the effect you are explaining and certainly in doesn't affect gameplay. I do it all the time. But I understand that with VR you are trying to trick your brain to believe it's somewhere else and changing the game FOV would break the feeling. But, certainly, this is a new media and we still have to find out what works and what doesn't. Even more, we have to find out if it is going to work at all... I hope it will.

 

With low latency 6DOF and a virtual cockpit that is around 18"-24" from your head, you wont have to lean much to get a bigger picture.

Biggest issue is the HUD. As it is collimated it will remain the same size no matter how close you get to the HUD glass. Probably we will need bigger that normal HUD's.

 

But yes, it's going to be so cool that it will be worth all the troubles.

Edited January 20, 2014 by average_pilot

[Cedaway]

If I'm well with trigo, considering the human eye has a resolution overture of 0.017°, considering that the screen would be placed at 5cm of the eye, the 'ideal' resolution would be 3175x1786 on a screen that would be 5.08 cm large (2inches) by 2.8576 cm of height.

 

So, 4K (3840 x 2160) would be largely enough for our eyes at 5cm distance.

 

... ... ... Again, if I'm well with math... ... ...

[average_pilot]

I use to think of it in pixels per degree.

 

The current Rift has 640 pixels of horizontal resolution per eye, and pixels are spread 90º. That makes 7.1 pixels per degree.

 

Typical nowadays 1920x1080 monitor at typical viewing distance covers about 50º to 55º of your view on the horizontal dimension. Let's use 55º. That makes 35 pixels per degree. So, to have the pixel density of a monitor you need x5 the horizontal resolution of the Rift, or 3200 pixels.

 

Pretty much the same number you come up. The problem is that this is the resolution per eye! You need two screens of this resolution or a single one with a horizontal resolution of 6400 pixels. I suspect this would take several years to happen. And if the FOV of the HMD increase, which is desirable, the need for resolution would increase as well.

[chaos]

 

... ... ... Again, if I'm well with math... ... ...

 

Assuming your math is correct... and it works the way you're r describing... there's one more issue that many seem to be forgetting. Performance.

 

You need a PC powerful enough to drive -2- displays at that resolution. We're not there yet. It will be a few years before we get VR resolution on par with today's monitors. Exciting times ahead... patience is a virtue. Maybe FA-18C will be here in time to pair it with Oculus Rift III. ;-D

 

 

SNIPED! :-)

[Flim]

4k might be pushing it, but when the rift comes out , it will be ready. I'm sure custom drivers are in the works to bypass performance issues. It's semi playable now...

 

Assuming your math is correct... and it works the way you're r describing... there's one more issue that many seem to be forgetting. Performance.

 

You need a PC powerful enough to drive -2- displays at that resolution. We're not there yet. It will be a few years before we get VR resolution on par with today's monitors. Exciting times ahead... patience is a virtue. Maybe FA-18C will be here in time to pair it with Oculus Rift III. ;-D

 

 

SNIPED! :-)

[average_pilot]

Talking about performance, there even one more issue. The low-persistence technique that they are using requires that the PC is outputting frames at the same rate of the screen refresh. And the same low-persistence technique also requires screens with very high refresh rates. Valve talks about at least 95Hz. So the PC will need to feed that 95Hz screen with 95 fps steadly.

 

If Oculus succeeds, everything from software to hardware will evolve to accomplish all the requirements specific to VR. But the beginning is going to be difficult and chaotic.

[hansangb]

Anyone watch Brain Games from NatGeo? It turns out that humans don't have much of a peripheral vision...it's all in your brain. So while we debate about true FOV etc., it's interesting that our brain fakes the HD view we perceive every minute of our lives. Interesting show...highly recommended.

[mhe]

Thanks for the recommendation, I'll pick it up when I can. I'm a documentary nut.

[average_pilot]

Anyone watch Brain Games from NatGeo? It turns out that humans don't have much of a peripheral vision...it's all in your brain. So while we debate about true FOV etc., it's interesting that our brain fakes the HD view we perceive every minute of our lives. Interesting show...highly recommended.

You may mean that the peripheral vision has very low resolution. Only the fovea, which is rather small, has high resolution, and we have to move the eyes toward lots of points of interest to build a high resolution image.

 

That doesn't mean that we don't use the peripheral vision. You can't use it to have a sharp image of your surroundings, but gives you a general sense of how they are and what objects/persons/animals are there, mostly in an unconscious level. That's why it's so important that VR HMD's have big FOV, to have something to feed the peripheral vision with and trigger those unconscious mechanisms of self-localization.

Edited January 21, 2014 by average_pilot

[-Hammer-]

I think they are already working on the "invisible" keyboard problem with the OR :thumbup:

 

 

ARLINGTON, Va. (Jan. 15, 2014) Jim Blesse, standing, from the Office of Naval Research (ONR), explains project BlueShark to Lt. Col. John Moore from the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory. Project BlueShark is an ONR effort to create a high-tech, futuristic environment to demonstrate what operational work environments might look like and what emerging innovative technologies might provide in the next decade. (U.S. Navy photo by John F. Williams/Released)

[hansangb]

You may mean that the peripheral vision has very low resolution. Only the fovea, which is rather small, has high resolution, and we have to move the eyes toward lots of points of interest to build a high resolution image.

 

That doesn't mean that we don't use the peripheral vision. You can't use it to have a sharp image of your surroundings, but gives you a general sense of how they are and what objects/persons/animals are there, mostly in an unconscious level. That's why it's so important that VR HMD's have big FOV, to have something to feed the peripheral vision with and trigger those unconscious mechanisms of self-localization.

 

 

Yes, I meant resolution/clarity. The other issue to think about is that even OR still requires you to move your entire head. It's not tracking your eyes to see where you're looking at. But I gotta say, OR is pretty damn cool toy to play around with.

[cichlidfan]

I think they are already working on the "invisible" keyboard problem with the OR :thumbup:

...

 

Nice find. :thumbup:

[average_pilot]

Yes, I meant resolution/clarity. The other issue to think about is that even OR still requires you to move your entire head. It's not tracking your eyes to see where you're looking at. But I gotta say, OR is pretty damn cool toy to play around with.

The Rift does not require you to move your entire head. Instead, it allows you to move your head as you do in real-life all the time

[wasyl00]

Wow. Please read the following article. it will give you goosebumps! It's from the guy who had a chance to experience Valve's VR prototype.

 

http://www.3delement.com/?p=332