https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I81Sy1mTzw8

 

lol - As usual, Austin comes across as a bit of an arse to me every time I hear him actually talk in interviews like this.

 

He is incredibly dismissive of the current experience and it honestly isn't a very consistent analysis vs what Flyinside & DCS users are saying.  I think they should have dug a little deeper on options (like Flyinside), and Oculus tweaks to rendering rez I've seen discussed on Reddit, before giving such a strong opinion on the current situation.

 

Whatevs...wanted to share the link anyhow.

Keep in mind he is making those comments from the a developer's point of view and so I agree with him.

 

I think it is still too impractical for a flight sim, but for a racing sim, I think it may work as you don't have to worry about dozens of buttons and switches like you would in a flight sim.

 

This technology is still in diapers, give it a few years and It will be something I would consider worth buying.

His take on the current generation of hardware sounds about right to me (disclaimer: I don't own either the Rift or Vive, just going on other reports I've read), 

 

The games where it's really taking off are those like Elite: Dangerous where the starfield background and 3D objects are easy to render. Even there, I've heard complaints about being able to read the text displays and instruments. And that's a game where I think the UI was intentionally kept fairly basic. Elite can be flown with just HOTAS switches too, and you need a lot more than that for some flight sim cockpits. Think about what you'd need to manually control every switch on the new PMDG DC-6 cockpit. There is a basic need for either haptic feedback or at least some kind of virtual visible hand inside the cockpit.

 

But I still think resolution is the first big hurdle to overcome. We can barely get 60 frames per second on one monitor with the kind of world detail we like to see in X-Plane. VR needs something like 70 fps in each eye, to avoid motion sickness? We don't have GPU's that can render X-Plane at 140 fps yet. How far are we willing to strip down the world detail we're used to, for VR? I do think it's coming, it's just a bit early yet. 

 

P.S. Austin's controlling a helicopter with a twist joystick for tail rotor? C'mon, he must have rudder pedals under that desk, right?  :smile:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I81Sy1mTzw8

 

lol - As usual, Austin comes across as a bit of an arse to me every time I hear him actually talk in interviews like this.

 

He is incredibly dismissive of the current experience and it honestly isn't a very consistent analysis vs what Flyinside & DCS users are saying.  I think they should have dug a little deeper on options (like Flyinside), and Oculus tweaks to rendering rez I've seen discussed on Reddit, before giving such a strong opinion on the current situation.

 

Whatevs...wanted to share the link anyhow.

 

 

I disagree, I think you're being way too harsh. Everything he said seemed reasonable and I agree with all his points. But as you admit this seems like a very rough first impressions video so I wouldn't take everything he said at face value.

I was expecting him to be worse honestly ha... also, he's at the video recorders computer, not his I gather, so that's why no rudder pedals I'd guess ;-)

 

Generation 2 or 3 of these HMDs should be great, but I too feel it's too early for serious sim usage.

 

 

But I still think resolution is the first big hurdle to overcome. We can barely get 60 frames per second on one monitor with the kind of world detail we like to see in X-Plane. VR needs something like 70 fps in each eye, to avoid motion sickness? We don't have GPU's that can render X-Plane at 140 fps yet. How far are we willing to strip down the world detail we're used to, for VR? I do think it's coming, it's just a bit early yet. 

 

Considering this technology is extremely new, simply waiting for the all of the other hardware components to catch up while VR improves is not a bad option.

 

I know Laminar Research had worked on Rift support about 2-3 years ago, so they were interested in it at some point. 

One of the problems I see in his review, is the depth of field. He has it set as if you were viewing the cockpit on a regular monitor. The idea, is to set it to what would be a more realistic position closer in and view the instruments by looking down. The limitation virtual glasses though, is you actually have have to look down, in the real world you may just have to adjust your view with your eyeballs. Now if Oculus could track eyeball movement,that would really be something.

Good comments all.

 

I just didn't get the impression that Austin was coming to the situation from a neutral view of VR.

 

Very much felt like he'd made up his mind a bit without too much desire to tinker and see how far you can push the experience right now.

 

Just seems odd. Austin is VERY much a tinkerer, builder and experimenter normally.

 

I'm mostly "out" on VR for now (in flight sim), but I know for a fact it's much better than this video portrays. I've played with both headsets using flyinside and the rift in DCS. It's a better experience than Austin is portraying in my view. (I'm a real world GA pilot with extensive experience IFR, land and Sea)

Good comments all.

 

I just didn't get the impression that Austin was coming to the situation from a neutral view of VR.

 

Very much felt like he'd made up his mind a bit without too much desire to tinker and see how far you can push the experience right now.

 

Just seems odd. Austin is VERY much a tinkerer, builder and experimenter normally.

 

I'm mostly "out" on VR for now (in flight sim), but I know for a fact it's much better than this video portrays. I've played with both headsets using flyinside and the rift in DCS. It's a better experience than Austin is portraying in my view. (I'm a real world GA pilot with extensive experience IFR, land and Sea)

 

Seems like this was a very quick and dirt demo. Would like to see his reaction using a good set up and proper simulator. I did enjoy his flying haha.

I'm a complete pass on VR at this point.  The main reason, ignoring the fact that I personally feel that the tech just isn't there yet for a truly immersive experience, is that I use a ton of hardware. I love having an actual dial or a switch for darn near anything that I can make work.  So much so, that I've built whole switch panels just for flying a certain piece of equipment, such as recreating the overhead on a B206, for example. VR is opposite to that experience.

 

I'm personally more excited about the possibility of AR (augmented reality) as shown by MS's HoloLens. Being able to be surrounded by a virtual cockpit, but actually have my yoke and switch panels showing, now THAT sounds exciting. But, I think the hardware is a few steps behind in that area as well.

Good comments all.

 

I just didn't get the impression that Austin was coming to the situation from a neutral view of VR.

 

Very much felt like he'd made up his mind a bit without too much desire to tinker and see how far you can push the experience right now.

 

Just seems odd. Austin is VERY much a tinkerer, builder and experimenter normally.

 

I'm mostly "out" on VR for now (in flight sim), but I know for a fact it's much better than this video portrays. I've played with both headsets using flyinside and the rift in DCS. It's a better experience than Austin is portraying in my view. (I'm a real world GA pilot with extensive experience IFR, land and Sea)

Don't forget he is not neutral to VR, Laminar spent lots of money and energy into getting VR working in X-Plane almost three times (each time occulus kicking them in the balls with completley changing the open gl driver and at last abbandoning it)  so they have their knowledge and probably multiple hours tinkering with it.  I guess you see here his condensed feeling over all those sessions in one quick video

My initial reaction to strapping an Oculus Rift DK2 to my face was "Really? This is what everyone's all hyped up about?" The resolution today is distractingly bad, the UI challenges are still being solved, sim-sickness is still a problem, and the hardware is clunky and uncomfortable. We've had as-good or better VR technology for decades; the only breakthrough here is the cost as we now have cheap phone displays that can be used.

 

There are ridiculous amounts of money being spent on solving all of those problems though, so in the long term, things may change. But we're not there yet.

As much as I like better graphics and immersion in a sim...I will just never wear such a thing .
I'm too afraid it might fry my soul right away. 

 

Flo

The Program/Sim needs to be created or adapted to be VR Friendly,DCS World has done this for Oculas Rify CV1

We he doesnt very consistent with his owm words. On this video, minute 5.50 he says its ######ing amazing. Come Austin just because you havent done it with Xplane you dont have to put others down.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pnYz9LpTTus