to those who complain about stutters at this stage

[LHookins 3,102]

37 minutes ago, threegreen said:

the resolution and field of view at this time are not enough for me

Add in frame rate and you have the same arguments made 20 years ago.  I knew resolution has improved lately.

Eventually, VR will be in a pair of glasses.  

When we heard about Asobo I checked their site and found they had an interesting augmented reality system already available.  I'm halfway expecting a Microsoft VR system based on it.

Hook

[Superdelphinus 718]

@LHookinsis that not a Hololens thing they were doing?

[LHookins 3,102]

3 hours ago, Superdelphinus said:

@LHookinsis that not a Hololens thing they were doing?

Dunno, I didn't study it.  Just noticed they had the augmented reality system and the visor appeared to have an open bottom.  Not everyone likes having their entire vision obscured by a VR headset.

Hook

[vortex681 806]

6 hours ago, LHookins said:

VR isn't exactly mainstream anywhere, is it?  Hopefully it becomes more popular as the tech improves.

I've no doubt it will become much more popular, but in my opinion there are 4 things that I think will prevent VR completely taking over from monitors for gaming in the foreseeable future:

1 - resolution/field of view. Even if the VR hardware could do it, the PC hardware isn't around at the moment which could run true 4k VR headsets at a decent framerates with a significant improvement over the FOV of existing units. People say that the immersion makes up for the lack of resolution but that's not the case in my view.

2 - the cost. For the average gamer, the cost of even the cheapest VR headset is probably outside of their budget and is unlikely to reduce much as new headsets hit the market (at least not for the next few years).

3 - lack of easy interaction with external hardware like keyboards, switch boxes, external touchscreens etc.

4 - motion sickness! Probably the main factor which would prevent a VR takeover. There's a significant number of gamers who could afford VR headsets but for whom motion sickness would prevent from them buying one.

The first 3 points can probably be overcome, given enough time and money but I think the last point is what will really prevent gaming monitor manufacturers going out of business.

[LHookins 3,102]

1 hour ago, vortex681 said:

4 - motion sickness! Probably the main factor which would prevent a VR takeover. There's a significant number of gamers who could afford VR headsets but for whom motion sickness would prevent from them buying one.

The first 3 points can probably be overcome, given enough time and money but I think the last point is what will really prevent gaming monitor manufacturers going out of business.

Believe it or not, that motion sickness is easy to combat.

I had that problem when I first got TrackIR.  It wasn't bad, but it was there.  I quickly learned to move my eyes in the direction I was about to move my head and it went totally away.

My understanding is that the motion sickness is caused by what you see not matching what you feel.  Moving your eyes as you move your head gets rid of this difference as far as the brain is concerned.

Hook 

 

[nickhod 425]

15 hours ago, vortex681 said:

4 - motion sickness! Probably the main factor which would prevent a VR takeover. There's a significant number of gamers who could afford VR headsets but for whom motion sickness would prevent from them buying one.

Motion sickness tends not to be a problem in VR if:

• Your frame rate is matched to your headset (i.e. 90 fps)
• You're in a virtual vehicle and have cockpit, dashboard or helmet (depending on the game) that your brain can use as frame of reference for how you're moving through the virtual world without your body physically moving.

As VR improves, people's susceptibility to motion sickness should be exactly the same as if they were in a real vehicle. 

It's more of an issue (for some) when you're moving through a virtual world without a virtual vehicle. Your brain can't reconcile why you're physically stationary but seem to be moving and you feel sick.

I can imagine that plenty of people try VR with X-Plane or P3D, having it running at 20 fps, and have a terrible experience that puts them off. It's a shame. I hope MSFS has first class VR support out of the box.

[vortex681 806]

4 hours ago, nickhod said:

Motion sickness tends not to be a problem in VR if:

• Your frame rate is matched to your headset (i.e. 90 fps)
• You're in a virtual vehicle and have cockpit, dashboard or helmet (depending on the game) that your brain can use as frame of reference for how you're moving through the virtual world without your body physically moving.

As VR improves, people's susceptibility to motion sickness should be exactly the same as if they were in a real vehicle. 

It's more of an issue (for some) when you're moving through a virtual world without a virtual vehicle. Your brain can't reconcile why you're physically stationary but seem to be moving and you feel sick.

You're correct, but it's not the whole story. It's not just the motion but also the perceived angular changes affecting the vestibular system which cause a sensory mismatch between the visual and the inner ear. As you said, our inner ear tells our brain that we are not moving, but our eyes tell us that we are. If you're prone to motion sickness, having a full virtual cockpit doesn't really help as you still get the same mismatch between inner ear and vision - I've tried it and, sadly, still feel sick in VR when moving whether I'm inside a cockpit or outside. I can't see how any improvement in the technology is going to solve this problem. The world will still look as if it's moving whilst your inner ear tells you it's not. Some people can cope with this and others can't.

I've also tried it on a high end system where the framerate was locked to the headset frequency and still had the problem.

I know that you can reduce the effects of motion sickness with repeated exposure but, frankly, life's too short to spend a lot of money on something that makes you feel sick in the hope that, eventually, you may feel less sick!

Edited September 23, 2019 by vortex681

[LHookins 3,102]

Vortex:  Great explanation.

Next time you get a chance to try VR, try the trick I mentioned with your eyes.  Move your eyes as you are moving your head.  I'm interested in finding out if it works for VR.

Hook

[nickhod 425]

26 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

I know that you can reduce the effects of motion sickness with repeated exposure but, frankly, life's too short to spend a lot of money on something that makes you feel sick in the hope that, eventually, you may feel less sick!

Yeah, I can understand that. I feel lucky to never get motion sick.

You're right that angular changes in an aircraft are going to be much more pronounced than in a car. Motion platforms are the only thing that can help to eliminate that and then we're into a tiny niche of a niche.

Generally speaking, I'm surprised by the low VR adoption rate that you see on various stats and surveys. The first time I tried VR flight simming I gave up using a monitor.

Used Oculus Rifts go for sub £/$ 200 now, so cost isn't such a factor. I wonder how many simmers have tried VR and don't like it vs those who have never experienced it.

Edited September 23, 2019 by nickhod

[nickhod 425]

3 minutes ago, LHookins said:

Next time you get a chance to try VR, try the trick I mentioned with your eyes.  Move your eyes as you are moving your head.  I'm interested in finding out if it works for VR.

This is a good point. When I turn in a sim with VR, I tilt my head (and my body slightly) without really thinking about it. If I pull up on the yoke I lean back a bit etc.

Probably not a wonder cure for those who do suffer from motion sickness, but it can't hurt.

[pao 55]

Let's not assume about future performances...  way too early.

....  by the way, what affinity mask figures shall we input for MSFS 2020 ?

🤪

[vortex681 806]

2 hours ago, LHookins said:

Vortex:  Great explanation.

Next time you get a chance to try VR, try the trick I mentioned with your eyes.  Move your eyes as you are moving your head.  I'm interested in finding out if it works for VR.

Hook

Thanks for the advice but I've never had a problem with head tracking, even if i don't move my eyes as I move my head. I'm resigned to the fact that I'm just not compatible with VR.

[vortex681 806]

1 hour ago, pao said:

by the way, what affinity mask figures shall we input for MSFS 2020 ?

I spy a can of worms before me, just begging to be opened!

[Paraffin 2,197]

6 hours ago, nickhod said:

Yeah, I can understand that. I feel lucky to never get motion sick.

You're right that angular changes in an aircraft are going to be much more pronounced than in a car. Motion platforms are the only thing that can help to eliminate that and then we're into a tiny niche of a niche.

Generally speaking, I'm surprised by the low VR adoption rate that you see on various stats and surveys. The first time I tried VR flight simming I gave up using a monitor.

Used Oculus Rifts go for sub £/$ 200 now, so cost isn't such a factor. I wonder how many simmers have tried VR and don't like it vs those who have never experienced it.

It doesn't surprise me if we're just talking flight sims, although I am a little surprised it hasn't had a higher adoption rate for general gaming.

The resolution requirements are higher for flight sims, whether it's being able to read gauges and other panel displays from a sitting position in the cockpit, or being able to spot a grass runway among other vegetation in the outside world. We need higher resolution than most VR games, and without artifacts like the screen door effect. We're just barely getting to that point now.

The cost is also a major factor, not just for the head brick but for the graphics card to drive it. Cost is still a factor if a used Oculus Rift doesn't cut it for resolution. And every time a new, better system comes out, you're dropping major money for just an incremental improvement. 

Yet another factor with flight sims is the duration of many flights. If I'm on a 2 hour flight assignment in FSEconomy from takeoff to landing, do I want to wear the head brick for a solid two hours? I could wear it just for the takeoff and landing, taking it off during cruise, but what is it like to jump between simulated worlds like that? It's very different with TrackIR when I shut it off during the cruise phase, because my entire world doesn't change around me.

This is actually one of the things that's stopped me from trying out VR; not just the cost, but the idea that I might only end up using it a few times for zooming through the Grand Canyon in a helicopter, and it would spend most of its time not being used for the long flights I usually make.