|
Post by Pyroth309 on Jul 3, 2022 13:32:41 GMT
VR mode is limited to cockpit I've read. Which is fine to me, I only ever play driving games in the cockpit. It's unnatural to be up in the chase drone 3rd person view to me. Project Cars 1-3 have the chase/exterior view option - gives me better overview. I'm not much into sims, but love arcade ravers - also like good ol' Virtua Racing or Daytona So I almost never use the cockpit unless forced to do so. I don't mind it much in DiRT 1-2, but would like having the option to change views. Those were the days... That game is from 1992, even today this game feels like the old king - or some reference that cannot be beat. In 1992, Virtua Racing was so far ahead of any homePC or gaming console that it looked like some dream never being within reach. I guess I'm getting old, sigh... Old loves never die... If I can get some of that racing feeling back from F1 22, I'm in - but did work the first time at all It even say "real simulation" on the chassis - how awesome is that, lol. Given the choice of getting back into the original Sega experience as shown in the image, or getting back to F1 22 VR, I'd be in Sega's seat in seconds - but maybe that's just me :-) Yea I get it. I just personally always found that view kind of ridiculous. I don't drive cars in real life sitting on top of the rear spoiler or levitating above the back of them so not interested in doing it in games either lol. Just a pet peeve of mine. I get annoyed when I don't have a cockpit view. But I get it.
|
|
|
Post by dburne on Jul 3, 2022 16:05:43 GMT
Yeah I am with you there, only the cockpit view for my purposes. I have been that way since my Papyrus racing days. One thing I will not be crazy about is I understand VR is not working when navigating the menus, have to do that in 2D. I hope they address this going forward. Heck look at MSFS 2020, they added VR only after the initial release, and they made working with menus easy, Can also assign a button to switch between 2d and VR all whilst still in the game. VR even has a separate settings section, so you can have one set of settings for VR and another for 2D should you wish. Very nice feature.
I would like to check this out next week, Lord knows my wheel and pedals need to finally get some use on them, still practically brand new sitting in the corner, however I am still tempted to wait until the first patch based on some of the initial reactions to the sim in VR. But then who knows if they will even address VR in the first patch. Hopefully EA will get some of the initial roughness in their VR implementation worked out sooner rather than later.
I am primarily a flight sim enthusiast by heart, and I have more in those to keep me very busy for a long time. At one time I was primarily a race sim fan, did nothing but multiplayer several evenings a week and on weekends. Kind of burned myself out on that though. I do not ever want to get back into that habit again. I love my single player action in my flight sims. Single Player Campaigns in both DCS and IL-2, I get great joy from that. And the occasional relaxing flights in MSFS 2020. Really just these three keep me very busy every week.
Oh and the occasionally successive plays of Alyx, which I have one going now with auto-res disabled and running high res in the Aero. Dayum it is gorgeous.
|
|
|
Post by Rune on Jul 6, 2022 11:01:50 GMT
Still waiting for the DBurne review :-)
And 45 fps are not acceptable for a racing sim! ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Rune on Jul 6, 2022 18:45:09 GMT
Btw, I tried Project Cars today and was very impressed. There aren't many settings, but enabling all lens flares etc the sunlight was amazing.
I could get solid 90 fps using Index res 200% (must be set using SteamVR res slider, the in-game res slider does not work). Res 250% was too much, got a few reprojections.
Maxing out Project Cars 2 was a different story - even res 175% was too much, and jaggies started appearing. Will need a RTX 4090 just to get that game looking great in 90 fps with the Index, lol.
Project Cars 1 is much less demanding than the sequel, and I had a really great time in Project Cars 1 - felt much like F1 22, but perfirmance was much better and there was no blurry image quality.
I paid 5 bucks or so for Project Cars, it's on sale until tomorrow.
Is this really worse than F1 22?
|
|
|
Post by dburne on Jul 7, 2022 11:02:34 GMT
Still waiting for the DBurne review :-) And 45 fps are not acceptable for a racing sim! ;-) I have been down since Sunday evening, waiting for my Aero repair kit which is arriving today via Fed Ex. Basically new link box and cable. May be a few days before I get around to trying F1 2022 out though. I have no problem at all with 45 fps for my flight sims.
|
|
|
Post by Rune on Jul 7, 2022 14:24:11 GMT
Btw, would be interesting how Project Cars performs with the Aero. I'm getting solid 90 fps with maxed in-game settings and Index res 200% (remember to activate crowds - in VR, crowds are deactivated by default, and empty seats don't look nice - I've activated all crowds). Index res 200% is 2,848 x 3,168 per eye - so I'm using a res higher than Aero's 2,880 x 2,720 per eye.
If the Aero is performing way worse than Index when using same res, as shown in the OpenVR Benchmark, you should not be able to get 90 fps using a res corresponding to 2 x 9 mill pixels in Project Cars - but would be interesting if you could!
Unfortunately Project Cars needs 50% more res to get rid of jaggies - Index res 400% would really be awesome, but can't do that with an RTX 3090, and probably not with the RTX 4090 too...
Still a major breakthrough that Project Cars became enjoyable and finally playable thanks to the RTX 3090 - I consider res 200% the lowest acceptabel res before jaggies become too prominent.
|
|
|
Post by Rune on Jul 7, 2022 15:17:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dburne on Jul 7, 2022 20:50:22 GMT
Automobilista 2 is also a very nice racing sim.
|
|
|
Post by dburne on Jul 7, 2022 20:58:39 GMT
Btw, would be interesting how Project Cars performs with the Aero. I'm getting solid 90 fps with maxed in-game settings and Index res 200% (remember to activate crowds - in VR, crowds are deactivated by default, and empty seats don't look nice - I've activated all crowds). Index res 200% is 2,848 x 3,168 per eye - so I'm using a res higher than Aero's 2,880 x 2,720 per eye. If the Aero is performing way worse than Index when using same res, as shown in the OpenVR Benchmark, you should not be able to get 90 fps using a res corresponding to 2 x 9 mill pixels in Project Cars - but would be interesting if you could! Unfortunately Project Cars needs 50% more res to get rid of jaggies - Index res 400% would really be awesome, but can't do that with an RTX 3090, and probably not with the RTX 4090 too... Still a major breakthrough that Project Cars became enjoyable and finally playable thanks to the RTX 3090 - I consider res 200% the lowest acceptabel res before jaggies become too prominent. Rune with all due respect, there is a big difference in a higher resolution that is native to the headset, versus super sampling a lower resolution headset up to the same. Also Aero does not necessarily need to be able to run at full 90 fps all the time, it handles some lower frame rates quite nicely. In fact in DCS as it is such a demanding sim I run my Aero with Vsync on and frames locked to 45 fps. Gives me a very nice experience with incredible image clarity - across practically the entire view. Of all the headsets I have owned, none has come close to what I see in this one. But on the other hand, it is one hell of a price to have to pay to get it. Edit: Would love to reply to your claim over on the Index thread on Oculus forum of 50% performance increase for Index over Aero at same res , but I refuse to do any posting any longer on any of their forums. I have the Index, and I have the Aero. Two totally different ballparks. It is not all just hard resolution numbers. Index, Reverb G2, Vive Pro 2, Aero. There is a huge difference in Aero over the other three. I have used all of these extensively.
|
|
|
Post by Rune on Jul 9, 2022 9:26:41 GMT
Btw, would be interesting how Project Cars performs with the Aero. I'm getting solid 90 fps with maxed in-game settings and Index res 200% (remember to activate crowds - in VR, crowds are deactivated by default, and empty seats don't look nice - I've activated all crowds). Index res 200% is 2,848 x 3,168 per eye - so I'm using a res higher than Aero's 2,880 x 2,720 per eye. If the Aero is performing way worse than Index when using same res, as shown in the OpenVR Benchmark, you should not be able to get 90 fps using a res corresponding to 2 x 9 mill pixels in Project Cars - but would be interesting if you could! Unfortunately Project Cars needs 50% more res to get rid of jaggies - Index res 400% would really be awesome, but can't do that with an RTX 3090, and probably not with the RTX 4090 too... Still a major breakthrough that Project Cars became enjoyable and finally playable thanks to the RTX 3090 - I consider res 200% the lowest acceptabel res before jaggies become too prominent. Rune with all due respect, there is a big difference in a higher resolution that is native to the headset, versus super sampling a lower resolution headset up to the same. Also Aero does not necessarily need to be able to run at full 90 fps all the time, it handles some lower frame rates quite nicely. In fact in DCS as it is such a demanding sim I run my Aero with Vsync on and frames locked to 45 fps. Gives me a very nice experience with incredible image clarity - across practically the entire view. Of all the headsets I have owned, none has come close to what I see in this one. But on the other hand, it is one hell of a price to have to pay to get it. Edit: Would love to reply to your claim over on the Index thread on Oculus forum of 50% performance increase for Index over Aero at same res , but I refuse to do any posting any longer on any of their forums. I have the Index, and I have the Aero. Two totally different ballparks. It is not all just hard resolution numbers. Index, Reverb G2, Vive Pro 2, Aero. There is a huge difference in Aero over the other three. I have used all of these extensively. Yes, would be interesting to see if Varjo has made much better drivers the last months - these were earlier results with RTX 3090 - so my claim is just referring objective measurements: Varjo Aero 90 Hz - res 4148 x 3556 = 14,750,000 pixels per eyeThat's extremely bad performance - but it's also a very high res. So I tested my Index using similar res: Valve Index 90 Hz - res 3648 x 4056 = 14,800,000 pixels per eye
Using similar res, my performance was 52% better - and 52% better is a really big difference. My 1% Low was even 61% higher. Varjo needs to provide same performance as the Index when using same res, before they've convinced me that they're able to make acceptable drivers - right now seems like their drivers are horribly bad for performance. I don't do 45 fps with the RTX 3090 - really happy being able to do at least 80 fps in Lone Echo 2 and Green Hell VR :-) Note that Vive Pro scores the same as the Index - but Vive Pro also uses native SteamVR drivers - Varjo cannot do that, but adds another layer of drivers on top of the SteamVR drivers causing the massive performance reductions (HP G2, Quest 2, Pimax have the same severe performance problems running SteamVR - might be reduced with OpenXR, but we're not there yet, many Steam games still require native SteamVR drivers). You could try Green Hell VR with SteamVR res 100% and max out all in-game settings, including ambient occlusion and see how that goes with the Aero - that would be interesting. You can see your fps clearly using the app FpsVR: store.steampowered.com/app/908520/fpsVR/ (but you may already have that app) Btw, I'm not against the Aero - love what Varjo has been doing - but I need same performance as the Index or better when using similar res - and I'm not into 45 fps. Hope Varjo can get foveated rendering working in every game and app. 2c.
|
|
|
Post by Rune on Jul 9, 2022 9:45:14 GMT
Automobilista 2 is also a very nice racing sim. I've never tried that one - some also talk about iRacing, but that game seems to need a subscription plan - and I don't play racing games often. Might give Automobilista 2 a try later, thanks - there's a playable demo: store.steampowered.com/app/1066890/Automobilista_2/But somewhat funny that it takes a RTX 3090 to get Project Cars from year 2015 running in 90 fps with just Index res 200% - which I consider the lowest threshold for acceptable performance and image quality due to the jaggies. So F1 22 will be great when I get that RTX 5090 Ti, lol... (ok, performance was not that bad with F1 22, it was just either blurry (TAA) or with jaggies - so might need some serious super sampling for great image quality - and then I do somehing better than RTX 3090. Seems most agree that VR was badly implemented/optimized in F1 22).
|
|
|
Post by dburne on Jul 9, 2022 14:33:36 GMT
Rune with all due respect, there is a big difference in a higher resolution that is native to the headset, versus super sampling a lower resolution headset up to the same. Also Aero does not necessarily need to be able to run at full 90 fps all the time, it handles some lower frame rates quite nicely. In fact in DCS as it is such a demanding sim I run my Aero with Vsync on and frames locked to 45 fps. Gives me a very nice experience with incredible image clarity - across practically the entire view. Of all the headsets I have owned, none has come close to what I see in this one. But on the other hand, it is one hell of a price to have to pay to get it. Edit: Would love to reply to your claim over on the Index thread on Oculus forum of 50% performance increase for Index over Aero at same res , but I refuse to do any posting any longer on any of their forums. I have the Index, and I have the Aero. Two totally different ballparks. It is not all just hard resolution numbers. Index, Reverb G2, Vive Pro 2, Aero. There is a huge difference in Aero over the other three. I have used all of these extensively. Yes, would be interesting to see if Varjo has made much better drivers the last months - these were earlier results with RTX 3090 - so my claim is just referring objective measurements: Varjo Aero 90 Hz - res 4148 x 3556 = 14,750,000 pixels per eyeThat's extremely bad performance - but it's also a very high res. So I tested my Index using similar res: Valve Index 90 Hz - res 3648 x 4056 = 14,800,000 pixels per eye
Using similar res, my performance was 52% better - and 52% better is a really big difference. My 1% Low was even 61% higher. Varjo needs to provide same performance as the Index when using same res, before they've convinced me that they're able to make acceptable drivers - right now seems like their drivers are horribly bad for performance. I don't do 45 fps with the RTX 3090 - really happy being able to do at least 80 fps in Lone Echo 2 and Green Hell VR :-) Note that Vive Pro scores the same as the Index - but Vive Pro also uses native SteamVR drivers - Varjo cannot do that, but adds another layer of drivers on top of the SteamVR drivers causing the massive performance reductions (HP G2, Quest 2, Pimax have the same severe performance problems running SteamVR - might be reduced with OpenXR, but we're not there yet, many Steam games still require native SteamVR drivers). You could try Green Hell VR with SteamVR res 100% and max out all in-game settings, including ambient occlusion and see how that goes with the Aero - that would be interesting. You can see your fps clearly using the app FpsVR: store.steampowered.com/app/908520/fpsVR/ (but you may already have that app) Btw, I'm not against the Aero - love what Varjo has been doing - but I need same performance as the Index or better when using similar res - and I'm not into 45 fps. Hope Varjo can get foveated rendering working in every game and app. 2c. Again though you are comparing apples to oranges. The Aero at native resolution would spank the Index at SS resolution to the same. One big reason is the lenses used. No sense in continuing this discussion though as you will never know unless you tried the Aero which you do not have a taste for, and that is ok. We will just agree to disagree... Btw it is not up to Varjo to get foveated rendering working - it already works along with eye tracking in Aero. It is up to the game devs to support it. It is working now in MSFS 2020, that was implemented by a MS employee in his spare time. But yes - in Varjo Aero eye tracking along with foveated rendering is already there and was there from the get go for the Aero. Nice thing about Aero is one can look forward to growing into it even more and more, with higher res with new hardware and the eye tracking/foveated rendering if other game devs would include support for it. So when you see folks praise Cambria for having this feature = if it does - realize Varjo has had it for quite some time. I loved my Index, still have it - but after Aero I could not go back to it - not even for the four days I was down.
|
|
|
Post by Pyroth309 on Sept 18, 2022 16:26:39 GMT
Ran across this that shows what it looks like in VR.
I'm still waiting for a big sale but does look cool. 4:32 to see what it looks like in VR.
|
|
|
Post by dburne on Sept 20, 2022 18:09:56 GMT
Hope to get some time in with this one before too much longer. Am home recovering from surgery at this time though and very limited for a while on how much I can move my neck, so no gaming currently.
|
|
|
Post by dburne on Sept 22, 2022 20:40:00 GMT
Geeze I did something totally unheard of for me today. I installed a desktop game. That is right, a game that can only be run on my desktop. Madden 23. I got it to pass some time by, this will allow me to at least game some with my way limited head and neck movement without fear of straining them too much. I will be so glad when I can get back to my beloved flight sims. Ugh.
|
|