VR Support?

[KeyCat 131]

Wonder how many Rift's they sold during this campaign so far? Looks like the delivery time is up to a month compared to 3 days when I bought it.

 

Anyway, I played around with the Rift for a couple of nights. Not in A3 but in DCS flight sim with native VR support (Rift as well as Vive) and just want to make a comment about the "90 fps is a must for VR".

 

Maybe I'm a weird bread but I can fly without any issues with fps as low as 40-45 fps when flying the Huey/Gazelle helis down in the weeds. No nausiness, vertigo, head ace etc. For me the limit seems to be <35 fps then it start to be to "laggy" but 40-45+ fps is fine. This is with graphics set to high in DCS playing SP.

 

In A3 I easly get 50-60 fps on Altis with max graphics and high VD (~4500 m) in SP so VR in A3 would work just fine - at least for me.

 

We are all different so YMMW but just wanted to debunk that "90 fps is a must" comments. Of course higher fps is better and I get 70-90 fps when flying jets above ~5000 feet in DCS.

 

Regarding the concern with many keys used for A3 as well as DCS there is a small gap between your nose and Rift so it is quite easy to just peak there to find the keys again if you somehow lost them.

 

As I said I rather give my money to BIS for a "VR DLC" that gives native VR support instead of buying VorpX for  ~40 USD since I mostly play A3 and DCS. I'm sure BIS already recognize that VR is the future and will implement VR support sooner or later - hopefully sooner

 

Below are my spec...

 

Windows 7 Ultimate SP1

i7 6700K OC to 4.5 GHz

16 GB RAM @ 3000 MHz

nVidia GTX 9800

 

PS: I use the Rift with my prescription glasses and it work fine. It is a bit harder to put the headset on but when on no issues.

 

 

[kremator 1064]

Please remember that Rift is superior to Vive as it has asynchronous space warp AND asynchronous time warp. That is why Rift is so good and can handle lower FPS. 

[NeoArmageddon 957]

52 minutes ago, kremator said:

Please remember that Rift is superior to Vive as it has asynchronous space warp AND asynchronous time warp. That is why Rift is so good and can handle lower FPS. 

 

Vive has the same stuff, it is just branded differently.

 

Also DCS and Arma are two completly different things. DCS has mostly a cockpit so you don't need to rely your vision on far away objects when moving your head. 

@KeyCat You also need to take into account that Arma needs to be rendered twice for VR. So you should halve your 50-60 FPS in Arma vor VR.

Also A3 has a big problem with ever changing framerates depending on what you are looking at. This can cause severe nausea.

[kremator 1064]

34 minutes ago, NeoArmageddon said:

Vive has the same stuff, it is just branded differently.

 

Nope, sorry it doesn't.  Sure it has a differently branded ATW, but have never had ASW.  There are rumours on reddit that it is being worked on, but not having ASW is the reason why a lot of games run like shit on Vive and are smooth as butter on Rift.

 

Have owned both headsets, and sold Vive due to it. 

[KeyCat 131]

Valid comments!

 

Agree it's a different thing when playing as infantry but when flying helis/planes in A3 it's not a different thing

 

Just like A3, DCS suffer from fps drops depending where you look, looking towards a village/city makes the fps plummet and it's been that way since LOMAC days.

 

I'm not sure it's that simple that you take the fps/2 when using VR since my fps is not half in DCS. It is lower but not -50%. Of course this may be totally different in A3, we don't know. I haven't tested what max fps I can get on Altis if I turn down VD to ~1500 m and the rest of the graphics from max to medium but I'm sure it will be higher. Will test when I get back home.

 

 

[KeyCat 131]

Here is the result of a quick test in SP with graphics set to standard VD 1550 m, OD 1050 m, MSAA x4 and OTAC fully on @ 2560x1440 resolution. Tested on Altis with a couple of AI infantry squads.

 

Looking over the fields                               ~122 fps

Looking into trees/bushes                          ~105 fps

Looking in scope over the fields                 ~90-125 fps

Looking around in Kavala                           ~96-116 fps

Kavala in small hut/building                        ~113 fps

Kavala in a chapel                                      ~102 fps

Kavala in building                                       ~114 fps

Kavala at hospital on ground                      ~102 fps

Kavala at hospital heli plate on roof            ~103-130 fps

MH-9 at airbase on landing strip                 ~113 fps

MH-9 flying @ 20 m                                     ~100-130 fps

MH-9 flying @ 100 m                                   ~125-140 fps

MH-9 flying @ 300 m                                   ~140-160 fps

 

So even if VR means fps/2 the average would be ~55+ fps on my rig. Again this was a quick test so take it with a grain of salt

 

 

 

 

 

[KeyCat 131]

Heard rumors that BIS mentioned they are "working on" VR support for A3.

 

Is this bogus and just wish full thinking or has it been mentioned by BIS somewhere like Reddit/Facebook/Twitter/etc. which I don't follow?

 

My gut says bogus since we never seen any information on this forum even if people asked several times.

 

 

[heavygunner 179]

Bogus

[kremator 1064]

I don't think that it would be too difficult to make a VR addon,  as all of the heavy lifting has been done. In the same way that FlyInside was an addon that allowed people to use VR in Xplane 11.

 

I'd be happy to test something like this. In fact I'd be willing to PAY to test it! 

[NeoArmageddon 957]

3 hours ago, kremator said:

I don't think that it would be too difficult to make a VR addon,  as all of the heavy lifting has been done.

 

Believe me, it is. Atleast with modding and without official support by BI.

 

FSX, Prepar3D and XPlane has other engine features that makes this easier (like multiple render windows).

 

Quote from Wikipedia: 

Quote

Fans and hobbyists have also modded support for the Rift into several popular titles which allow for extensive low-level modding, including Minecraft and Flight Simulator X

 

RV engine doesn't have this low-level support (it has an advanced high-level modding support).

[zilfondel 11]

I bought a new computer for my Rift and am very interested in playing Arma 3 with it.  I know of the resolution issue, but then Arma has this neat feature where you can zoom in using optics.  I'd love to be able to pilot aircraft, helicopters and vehicles and be able to look around instead of using the clunky mouselook.

 

Newer gaming PCs can run Arma 3 at ultra high settings at extremely high framerates.  Even in our larger firefights I rarely drop below 60.

[FirstPanic 39]

Well... I'm Rift owner and I think that the Sandbox Engine (or hopefully the new engine) would be a GREAT push for VR.

Actually I think there is no other engine which would be better to create VR specific content (which will be different from a standard mission... you cannot walk arround for hours in VR). The vehicles and maps combined with the scripting engine would give us the chance to develop great things in VR.

 

Of course Arma need to have native support for VR... which is not possible today.

 

So let's keep fingers crossed that BIS understands that they have the GREAT chance to create a Sanbox for VR (... which does not exist today).

 

FirstPanic