Status of VRSLI implementation?

To clarify, I do NOT mean using SLI with VR, I mean VRSLI, which uses each gpu to render each eye.

Has anyone heard any rumblings with regard to the implementation of VRSLI in DCS or is this another "single core permanent limitation" kinda deal?

The PiMax 5k+/8K is pretty darn impressive with regard to FOV, Screen door affect, and clarify; and rending each eye with a dedicated 2080TI would be pretty darn awesome!

IMHO, if it cannot be supported, a rewrite of the engine would be highly preferable. I in no ware assert that this would be an "easy" or "quick" task but that does not mean it isn't necessary. The majority of simulations will be done using VR in the near future and continuing to build upon a platform that does not support it (along with multi-core processing) would be costly for ED in the long run because another company will provide the support.

Mass VR adoption is only a matter of time, and that time is fast approaching...

 

Mass VR adoption is only a matter of time, and that time is fast approaching...

and ED was one of the first to 64bit and VR....They know....It's also good for their commercial training side.

The rest of your post is a bit.....Well it's all not that easy, vulkan api and multi core is being worked on now. A rewrite to what? Combat sim's/ flight sim's in general would possibly be the hardest to code and ALL needs to sync real time. The LARGE player main base (possibly 4 cores? ) ED will implement VR SLI based on the direction it's all going to go? It's a big call today when looking into a crystal ball to where exactly to focus resources.

Its not an ED issue, its a hardware issue. VR does not support SLI in any way shape or form. As far as VR being adopted, you should have a look at this video first.

Mass VR adoption is only a matter of time, and that time is fast approaching...

What have you seen that would lead you to that conclusion?

Everything I see about VR gaming indicates that it is failing.

I was aware of Vulcan but I thought that was an ATI(AMD) product and even if it is open, the top selling, best performing company has no rational basis for abonding it's costly R&D of proprietary API's (nVidia). Love them or hate them, nVidia provides the fastest and best performing graphics acceleration products on the market. This is not a question of cost per Fps% because VR requires the best.

Being the first time market with Feature 'X' does not guranteed a company will remain in the lead, this is only acheived through continuous innovation. My slight nod to single core processing is less important to my point than VR itself. I meant it such as, if they are already going to rewrite the engine, might as well add multi-core processing to the to-do list. Once again, I do not assert this is an easy task, merely a necessary one.

Reviews of VR HMD use in games are mixed and not representative of the simulation market space because of their implentation standard differences and usage scenarios. An FPS game, to be immersive, requires far different hardware than a flying/driving simulation even though less components might be necessary. An example of best case immersive scenario: replica cockpit with VR vs a walking/running platform that allows you to also jump & crawl with lifelike autonomy and the "guns" to pair with the VR platform as well. It is the addition of complex movement hardware and expectations of the VR platform as a whole that creates the disparity in VR expectations.

As a VR user I can tell you, I am always chasing after the immersion factor and everyone who has used my setup, most never having used VR before, understand the alure to VR with regard to flight simulation.

VR is growing in popularity because the hardware is getting better. Many have used the Oculus/Vive but the PiMax 5k+ is a tremendous leap forward. It still isn't perfect but I can read the gauges just fine now and the screen door affect is substantially less detracting from the experience overall.

If there is a reasonable valid reason why ED chooses not to use Nvidias API's so be it but I hope it is a carefully made decision and not done for proprietary reasons because as I said, nVidia is the best, that is just a fact and that has been so for quite a while. This is why SLIVR under the SLIWorks software provided by nVidia would benefit most VR users.

SLI is dead, we all achnowledge that, but VRSLI is new and just starting to get adopted. There really is no valid argument that I can muster why everyone here would not be onboard with support for the APIs, regardless of if ED would actually go for it. They are a company and they make $ and decisions based on Demand. If we demand it, they might do it, business wise that's a pretty straight forward statement, wouldn't you all agree?

Here is where my ignorance prevails though. Can ED implement both APIs for Vulcan and Nvidias VRSLI? This way you can use whichever companie's hardware/software you want?

I would assume we all want a more immersive experience, isn't that the point of a "simulation"? VR is the way to go. If you disagree, I strongly urge you to give VR a try on a PiMax 5k+/8K with a 1080TI / 2080TI if you are able. I would wager you change your mind pretty darn fast...

If I am wrong in my initial assertion that this is an ED problem and can be mitigated through the use of Vulcan I would be ecstatic. I will be doing further research in the meantime.