Cockpit readability in VR? Planned improvements?

I haven't flown the Harrier much since I got VR, so I decided to revisit it.

And holy hell I'm blind as a bat. Even during daytime the cockpit is pitch-black (and my gamma setting is 1.7 IIRC). Even with console lights or flood lights, switch labels are illegible. Even when zoomed. I have to smash my face against the "screen" to read the VREST or ENG pages. The only three things I can read are the HUD, MC lights, and the analog ENG panel.

Are there any plans to improve cockpit readability? Or any user-mods similar to the one for the Tomcat?

What VR headset you got? What version of game, Release or OB ?

Odyssey Plus. Open Beta, one version prior to the current.

I also use the Odyssey+, warning lights are not really readable and also the letters on the MFD's are barely readable.

The whole cockpit is, as the Mirage, far away from VR-optimized.

For me, readability is much worse then vanilla Tomcat and miles away from Hornet.

Hopefully, Razbam will improve that over time.

Just to throw my hat in the ring - I use a Rift S (PD 1.3 and Gamma 1.8) and have no issues with the Harrier. It's one of the better VR cockpits in my opinion.

I think MFD-wise, things will be better when (if?) we get brightness, contrasts and symbology controls.

That makes me ask what cockpits you find worse in VR?

In my opinion:

M2k and Mig21 are on the same "bad" level.

F-5, A10 and Huhey are a little bit better.

Tomcat, Viggen, FW190 are much better.

Hornet is by far the best in readability in VR.

That makes me ask what cockpits you find worse in VR?

 

In my opinion:

M2k and Mig21 are on the same "bad" level.

F-5, A10 and Huhey are a little bit better.

Tomcat, Viggen, FW190 are much better.

Hornet is by far the best in readability in VR.

i do not agree for the A10C : MFD are smaller so less legible, the HUD can not be seen totally unless you are 5 cm behind it and its font are also smaller. And the quality/details of the A10C cockpit is really outdated, that is obvious in VR. I found the A10C cockpit to be the worse in VR, far behind the AV8B (I do not have the M2K and do not use the Mig21).

I haven't flown the Harrier much since I got VR, so I decided to revisit it.

 

 

 

And holy hell I'm blind as a bat. Even during daytime the cockpit is pitch-black (and my gamma setting is 1.7 IIRC). Even with console lights or flood lights, switch labels are illegible. Even when zoomed. I have to smash my face against the "screen" to read the VREST or ENG pages. The only three things I can read are the HUD, MC lights, and the analog ENG panel.

 

 

 

Are there any plans to improve cockpit readability? Or any user-mods similar to the one for the Tomcat?

For the poor readibilty, I scarcely fly in the AV8B. Panel are peach black, caution panel light and labels are impossible to make out even with your face pressed against the panel.

Interestingly, I am using Odyssey plus and open beta too.

I believe something with amiss as the AV8B cockpit was one of the prettiest when I did my first VR look in there.

That makes me ask what cockpits you find worse in VR?

 

In my opinion:

M2k and Mig21 are on the same "bad" level.

F-5, A10 and Huhey are a little bit better.

Tomcat, Viggen, FW190 are much better.

Hornet is by far the best in readability in VR.

M2000-C is the worst, the radar is fine but switch labels are impossible. I can't even find them, let along make them out.

F/A-18C cockpit readability is very high but the green writing on the MFDs, especially with the HSI on the AMPCD is awful without VR zoom.

SA342 analogue dials are not too bad but labels are difficult and the interior lighting is useless so it's not much fun.

It'll differ from headset to headset (the switch from OLED in the Rift to LED in the Rift S made a huge difference in cockpit readability) and from eyeball to eyeball but I'm happy with the Harrier in VR with the exception of the warning panel, that's pretty tough to read, even with the brightness cranked.

Anyway, sorry to hijack. I don't think VR readability is top of the list with this stuff, rightly or wrongly I think the priority is to make a faithful creation of the pit. To make it accessible to EVERYONE in VR we might meed something that looks like those mobile phones for people with eyesight problems - super high contrast with 8,500 font size.

Your best bet is a texture mod and if you're a multiplayer guy, those are generally IC friendly.

Using Rift S with few problems with most of the stuff I need to read in the Harrier. Some smaller analogue gauges are a bit tricky. Probably the same in real life to be fair as they are quite small. Some pages on MFDs are harder than others...as someone else has said maybe some brightness and contrast controls on MFDs will help. Of course the other thing that might help is that if you might need corrective lenses in your headset....especially if you happen to need glasses IRL.

It's going to depend on your pixel density mainly. I notice a lot of people using 1.something. at 2.3 I don't really have an issue, i do need to turn the caution lights down though.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I have a reverb. No problems here.

It's going to depend on your pixel density mainly. I notice a lot of people using 1.something. at 2.3 I don't really have an issue, i do need to turn the caution lights down though.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I can't run higher than 1.2 without losing frames. 2.3 would be a slideshow.

I can't run higher than 1.2 without losing frames. 2.3 would be a slideshow.

For me, turning down the caution lights so they don't wash out really helps, using VR Zoom. And in the harrier I move the eye position forward a bit (usually level with the two panels of the hud glass and forward to cut off about half the top line of the engine instruments). Of course your milage may vary.

But. This thread has help me understand why people complain about visibility in VR running at those PDs.

I sacrifice a few frames in congested areas. But I can live with it against the benefit of crisper view in VR, which to me, can't be beat.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

A PD of 2.3 is not normal and I can't imagine that this would help anything, especially with an Rift. Are you sure that you have not meant 1.3?

You will be just blocked with the resolution of the HMD.

I use a O+ with SteamSS 150% and PD 1.0.

This is perfectly fine and all the HMD can do.

I can read (not guess) the speed gauge on the Tomcat without leaning forward. Perfectly sharp.

I can read all labels in the Hornet without zooming. I can read nearly all labels in the Tomcat without zooming.

I fly the ball from one mile.

But, no matter what I do, i barely can read the warning lights on the harrier on ther lower right side (at your right knee, not the warning lights on the UFC).

Of course, I'm not moving my initial seat position, moving the head down is blocked very soon and also VR Zoom does not help anything.

Also the font on the MFDs are a real pain.

So maybe a Reverb is that over the top headset which makes that possible, but I can remember that they have been already hard to read on the normal screen.

2.3?!... I might as well go back to monitor and TIR :(

I have a reverb. No problems here.

I'm using a PD of 1.2 on the HP and it's fine, as well. 1.0 makes the mirrors unusable.

A PD of 2.3 is not normal and I can't imagine that this would help anything, especially with an Rift. Are you sure that you have not meant 1.3?

Yeah.... That's why I said it.

I'm still confused by the DCS PD and SteamVR resolution interaction.

PD 1.0 and SteamVR 150% = total PD of 1.5?

What should I be aiming for? I've been running PD 1.2 and SteamVR 130% and am unable to read the cockpit in....just about everything without mods. The Hornet is the only pit I can read.

PD and SteamSS do the same.

Don't use both of them, just one.

I'm running with SteamSS on 150% (make sure that you set that as general, or DCS specific) and PD 1.0.

Looks better for me, and performs better then SteamSS 100% and PD 1.5.

Pd 1.5 and SteamSS 150% should be the same.

PD and SteamSS do the same.

Don't use both of them, just one.

 

I'm running with SteamSS on 150% (make sure that you set that as general, or DCS specific) and PD 1.0.

Looks better for me, and performs better then SteamSS 100% and PD 1.5.

 

Pd 1.5 and SteamSS 150% should be the same.

I believe the in-game setting and SteamVR setting operate in different ways. As I understand it, the Steam setting is set to change the total number of pixels: i.e. 2.3 is 2.3 total pixels displayed, whereas the in-game setting changes the pixels per distance: 1.3 is 1.3^2 = 1.69 times the total pixel count.

I'm still confused by the DCS PD and SteamVR resolution interaction.

 

PD 1.0 and SteamVR 150% = total PD of 1.5?

 

What should I be aiming for? I've been running PD 1.2 and SteamVR 130% and am unable to read the cockpit in....just about everything without mods. The Hornet is the only pit I can read.

I would use one or the other. I think using both really kills performance.

When I was running my Rift, I used 1.8PD and obviously no steam anything since it was occulus.

With the Reverb I'm using DCS PD 1.0 and SteamVR 160% IIRC.

Also consider changing various NVIDA texture settings over to quality instead of perfromance.

I found the best pit in the rift to be Either the Harrier or F18 FWIW. Also, VR zoom to read things sometimes is essential.

Hmm....I was at PD 1.2 and Steam 130% and things looked okay. Tried PD 1.0 and Steam 150% and things looked awful.

Hmm....I was at PD 1.2 and Steam 130% and things looked okay. Tried PD 1.0 and Steam 150% and things looked awful.

Try a Steam PD of 190%, or an ED PD of 1.35 and see how that looks. I think that should be the same density boost you had from the two stacking (1.2^2*1.3=1.872, 1.872^0.5=1.368)

Hmm....I was at PD 1.2 and Steam 130% and things looked okay. Tried PD 1.0 and Steam 150% and things looked awful.

Steam PD is lower than the corresponding DCS PD. Basically steam is just adding 30% more pixels at 130%. While DCS is multiplying the image in 2 axes.

So SteamPD 130% for a 1024x1024 image = (1024*1024)*1.3= 1363148.8

DCS does this for PD 1.3 = (1024*1.3*1024*1.3) = 1772093.44

To get an equal for the DCS PD of 1.3, you'd have to use 170% for steam.