Could someone please help me with finding rob's guide to vr settings for 4.1. I tried to find it but no luck. I have major stutters with my rift and do not know what to do. Thanks so much.

Start by turning all your sliders down. You want at least 45 frames per second. No matter what rig you have, you'll need to make sacrifices to achieve that.

once you're stable at 45 fps, experiment with increasing sliders.

start with a default plane at a default airport (without VR, I can get 600 frames,per second - that's a good start!).

Withh VR, I can fly the ngx, but I've got autogen, traffic and shadows off, and I still don't quite hit 45 fps (I can if i turn on simple clouds).

there's no magic settings as such, it's all just compromises in terms of visual quality plus plane plus airport/scenery. In addition, you'll want the best hardware you can find.

oh, and take care with your antialiasing - MSAA Is the one you want.

Despite the limitations, VR is totally worth it in 2017, I've done nearly 100% of my flying this year with the DK2 or the CV1.

 

37 minutes ago, bjablonka8120 said:

inding rob's guide to vr settings for 4.1

Sorry, I don't do much VR and haven't updated my guide for P3D V4.1.

I'm not anti-VR as I do have the Oculus, it's just that the resolution is too low for me and I can't do more than about 30-60 mins with the headset on until I start to get headaches.

I'm waiting for GPU hardware and VR devices to improve, maybe the next generation I'll get more involved in VR.  Sorry! 

Robert's advice above is good, however, I'd try to aim for 60 FPS (personal preference), that's doable with good hardware and provided you don't over do it with add-ons and don't max out sliders.  Always start with a Base default configuration (no Add-Ons) and then move the graphics settings/options to a point where you don't have stutters.  Once you find that "Default" base graphics configuration, then start adding add-ons one at a time and check your performance after each add-on.

I used my VR primarily for GA flying in more remote locations as that was much easier to sustain 60 FPS.  Big cities and airports (i.e. EGLL) will be harder to obtain smooth VR flying.

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Thank you so much! What helped was to use the GA aircraft and standard airports and not at Frankfurt v2 or orbx scal airports for example. Now the rift is pretty smooth at least not getting sick:) Now the only problem I have is when I fly in vr the Bonanza the inside view is toward the back of the plane. Does not happen with any other planes.

 

Again, thank you so much for your help.

1 hour ago, OzWhitey said:

Start by turning all your sliders down. You want at least 45 frames per second. No matter what rig you have, you'll need to make sacrifices to achieve that.

once you're stable at 45 fps, experiment with increasing sliders.

start with a default plane at a default airport (without VR, I can get 600 frames,per second - that's a good start!).

Withh VR, I can fly the ngx, but I've got autogen, traffic and shadows off, and I still don't quite hit 45 fps (I can if i turn on simple clouds).

there's no magic settings as such, it's all just compromises in terms of visual quality plus plane plus airport/scenery. In addition, you'll want the best hardware you can find.

oh, and take care with your antialiasing - MSAA Is the one you want.

Despite the limitations, VR is totally worth it in 2017, I've done nearly 100% of my flying this year with the DK2 or the CV1.

 

I do wonder what’s the fun of VR if you have to turn so much things off... The idea of VR is that you actually are there but how can you get that idea if you are flying over an empty world? But maybe you hardly look outside and just admire the VC in 3D? 

For the OP: if you really want a smooth VR experience, consider getting Aerofly FS 2. Performance (and lighting) is soooo much better in AFS2! It’s in a league of its own. I myself do a short VR flight in Aerofly whenever I feel like it but just as Rob I think the resolution is way too low to actually enjoy it. For regular simming I use P3D in 2D.

1 hour ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Robert's advice above is good, however, I'd try to aim for 60 FPS (personal preference

Hi Rob, on the Oculus CV1 the refresh rate is 90 FPS, but it can cope with half this. So it's got to be 45 or 90 for smooth VR. You want the sim generating over 45 FPS, and the Oculus will then lock this to 45 FPS using the ASW function.

smooth frames are essential to minimising the motion sickness and related effects,

. Once you get used to VR, you can turn up the sliders a bit and just cope with some stutters - I drop to 20 FPS at times in thick clouds with the NGX, it's ok, I can still fly 3 hours with no problems. If I'd tried that when starting vr, it would have given me majjor motion sickness. The brain adapts (the visual cortex and associated higher centres also seem to get better at interpolation, but that's another story) 

6 minutes ago, J van E said:

I do wonder what’s the fun of VR if you have to turn so much things off... The idea of VR is that you actually are there but how can you get that idea if you are flying over an empty world? But maybe you hardly look outside and just admire the VC in 3D? 

It's the most fun I've ever had in flight sim, by far. It's all about presence, the feeling of being there. 

Empty world? Hardly. Read me other post on a typical 4.1 flight. I fly in hilly terrain, with fs global ultimate mesh at 5m, and large scale photoscenery at 25cm per pixel. Add envshade and ASCA/ASP4 to that, and it looks truly beautiful. In cruise, I just stare out the window with a smile on my face.

I've also built a network of airports that are framerate friendly, but which have plenty of trees and objects, because photoscenery is rubbish by itself when you're on the round.

the trick is to compromise on the things you can live without. I want shadows, sim traffic and complex airports, but I can't manage that yet. So I go without, or adapt and overcome (like using real traffic rather than mytraffic/ut live). I prioritise my clouds and shaders over these things.

as for low res, as I mentioned above, you adapt. You also must use supersampling at 1.5. I can happily program the CDU in VR mode now. It probably takes 50 hours to get your 'vr legs', but when you do it's worth it. I just could not go back to flying looking at a computer monitor, no thanks!

 

 

 

 

And thus, the Morlocks and the Eloi were born.... But which is which?! 

Also, not to the OP'squestion but to the guy that asked "what's the fun of VR", you can also give AF2 a try...

32 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

So it's got to be 45 or 90 for smooth VR

Oops, sorry ... aim for 90 FPS ... sorry has been a while since I've Oculus'd ... 45 just wasn't working well for me.

What are you operating at?

It's ATW that "I think" is the exclusive fallback when you disable ASW?  I seem to recall one of the options provided less of a motion sick sense which I think was attributed to lower latency?  But again, I make no claims of being a well informed with VR user.  However, on the FPS information stands as is ... I enjoy 30Hz operation with more visuals on a big monitor, but with that said, I'm certain future VR will eventually meet my visual objectives.

Cheers, Rob.

 

I found a good compromise with my VR settings, since the resolution is a common problem I'm using supersampling at 2 (Oculus Tray Tool), and ASW off, in this way I can distinguish more things in the world I'm flying. I use a photoreal scenery and few airports by aerosoft, I have just reduced the LOD and the autogen draw distance at "High", buildings and vegetation at normal and very dense respectively. ASP4 with ASCA are working without paying a special caution, with clouds at 4096 32bit, the cloud draw distance is at max and I don't have many problems in overcast weather as the main problem with fps is with the autogen (but I found a good compromise), and large paid airports. Usually in daylight I have a 4x SSAA for best visual, and 4x MSAA at night or when close to large airports and cities.

Regarding the problem of motion sickness, all is good for me now, I just needed a good training with my Me109 F4 in Battle of Stalingrad, and now in prepar3d I can fly normally, never had a headache. Anyway, resolution problem apart, for me is very tiring to stay in VR for more than 2 hours, so I alternate the normal view at the monitor and the VR, when I'm in longer flights.

My hardware: Oculus Rift, GTX 1080, I7 4790.

7 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Sorry, I don't do much VR and haven't updated my guide for P3D V4.1.

I'm not anti-VR as I do have the Oculus, it's just that the resolution is too low for me and I can't do more than about 30-60 mins with the headset on until I start to get headaches.

I'm waiting for GPU hardware and VR devices to improve, maybe the next generation I'll get more involved in VR.  Sorry! 

Robert's advice above is good, however, I'd try to aim for 60 FPS (personal preference), that's doable with good hardware and provided you don't over do it with add-ons and don't max out sliders.  Always start with a Base default configuration (no Add-Ons) and then move the graphics settings/options to a point where you don't have stutters.  Once you find that "Default" base graphics configuration, then start adding add-ons one at a time and check your performance after each add-on.

I used my VR primarily for GA flying in more remote locations as that was much easier to sustain 60 FPS.  Big cities and airports (i.e. EGLL) will be harder to obtain smooth VR flying.

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Have you used FlyInside? The dev came up with a really clever way of achieving smoothness with lower frames. 

https://flyinside-fsx.com/Features
 

• Asynchronous Timewarp: Flight simulators are notorious for their low FPS. FlyInside supports asynchronous timewarp so that you don't need to choose between good graphics and solid performance. With asynchronous timewarp your virtual reality view feels smooth even at lower frame-rates.

3 hours ago, dgraham1284 said:

Asynchronous Timewarp: Flight simulators are notorious for their low FPS. FlyInside supports asynchronous timewarp so that you don't need to choose between good graphics and solid performance. With asynchronous timewarp your virtual reality view feels smooth even at lower frame-rates.

 

9 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

It's ATW that "I think" is the exclusive fallback when you disable ASW?  I seem to recall one of the options provided less of a motion sick sense which I think was attributed to lower latency?  But again, I make no claims of being a well informed with VR user.  However, on the FPS information stands as is ... I enjoy 30Hz operation with more visuals on a big monitor, but with that said, I'm certain future VR will eventually meet my visual objectives.

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

10 hours ago, PepeBiondi said:

Also, not to the OP'squestion but to the guy that asked "what's the fun of VR", you can also give AF2 a try...

Did you actually read that guy's (me) post? 

In January there is going to be the release of 200 Degree FOV headset.  They add on their own technology to increase perceived framerates, which is basically alternating eyes every other frame.  I have a Pimax 4k (BE Model).  The 4k model uses a 4k screen to eliminate the screen door effect seen in other VR headsets, and inputs at 2560x1440.  The new model they are releasing is has 2560x1440 input per eye onto 2 UHD/4k screens, and increases the FOV from 100 to 200, as well as a vertical FOV that encompasses the entire vertical FOV.  I've made some posts in the thread I linked to below about it.  mostly video reviews by VR early adopters; they are very favorable.  I am fairly happy with my BE model; I can maintain a smooth 25-30 fps on crappy old hardware, mostly photoscenery over a nice mesh and AS16/ASCA ... beautiful.  

Pimax states that their aim is for the flight simulator community.  I cannot think of a more perfect person for them to get a production model to than Rob Ainscough, and I've written them an email stating so.  I doubt I have enough leverage with either party to brokerage that deal.  But I do believe that the Pimax 8k will be the frontrunner in VR in the next coming years.  And if it's going to be put to through its paces, configured, and be validated it for Prepar3d Rob would be a good choice.