Jump to content

To you MP competitive pilots, how is VR vs TrackIR


falcon_120
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello again guys,

 

Short question:

For you competitve pilots that play MP on 104th servers or similar and play A2A. How is your combat efectivenes compared to your previous Track Ir5. Which percentage would you say you have improved or got worse?

And how about you mud movers, how is AG

 

 

Long question:

So i happen to came across the other day to a VR store, where you can play VR games with the oculus some minutes. And it turns out that they have DCS world 1.5 installed there. So i couldn't hold myself back and i payed for 10 minutes to see how it was like.

 

Needless to say that i was completely impressed and amazed with the feeling you get the first time you put a VR headset inside a DCS plane cockpit. It was amazing, i could not imagined how the 3D experience was accomplished, that sense of depth where you find yourself trying to hold the virtual stick. The difference in size between an F15c and the P51.

 

So i was charmed by this, and 1 week later i0m here waiting for my Oculus VR to arrive home. I know that i want to play missions thinking that i'm actually in the plane.

 

Once said that, i have to say that i'm a combat guy, that love playing A2A and A2g combat missions and using weapons in the most effective way possible, i'm not there for just flying, (although if i need i will). So this question comes to my mind: will i be much worse with the rift comapred to my Trackir5.

 

I don't mind being a bit worse but i'm curious if i will find going sometimes back to my trackir5 if i need to be really effective lets say forr example in MP.

 

What is your impression guys?

 

As always, Thanks for all the responses guys,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TIR beats VR (at least Rift CV1) 100-0 in combat effectiveness IMHO.

 

I never played with Rift that much that i would have got used to it and biggest reason why i didn't was the poor resolution of it which brings pretty huge disadvantage in PvP. But i belong to the minority who aren't impressed with current VR tech anyway so others might have different opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not competitive in MP, but have 2 years with VR (Rift CV1) now, flying all sorts of stuff.

 

A2A

As long as you have IFF, then I think VR is best, especially in the merge. The natural 1:1 head tracking, always knowing exactly where you are looking compared to the planes nose, and knowing / sensing the planes attitude. TIR doesnt come close in that regard. Im totally lost with TIR now.

Spotting is about equal (so many factors play in. Pixel Density, MSAA (less of both is better), and the lighting conditions for example). Some times its better in VR, some times it better in TIR. But I really think its equal. Visual ID though, TIR hands down. BVR, equally good.

I also find that VR has the upper edge on quickly glancing at your instruments, displays or HUD.

Checking your six, like dead six, thats really hard in VR. Im - depends on your chair/seat and how flexible you are - able to check me 4 (im worse over my right shoulder, cause my right hand is on the stick) and 7'ish, on a 'snap', while swinging to my six takes a lot of effort, and isnt something I do frequently.

 

Regarding the spotting. In VR I often got annoyed cause I couldnt see the foe. But then when flying TIR for a while, it wasnt any different really. Just as often I loose track, or dont even spot'em.

 

For me the biggest VR plus in A2A, is the merge, like in the phone booth as they say.

But its a lot of work, a merge in VR. Im throwing myself around my seat, and I sweat after a good fight. TIR is very relaxed compared. Goes for any kind of flying. VR is more energy draining.

 

A2G

Depends on the targets really. Again, if you have to visual ID the stuff down there, then VR is quite poor. Picking out the dots, maybe a 60/40 in TIR's favor. CCIP bombs, rockets, gun. Visual is better in TIR, Im a little more accurate. But judging distance, planes attitude, dive angle, speed, VR has the upper hand, and just aligning for the run, again VR.

 

 

In any regard, for me, the most important factor is immersion, and VR wins it on all counts.

 

Edit: Should add, PC performance. Its shite in VR compared to a 1080p monitor. But thats not really a DCS only thing. X-Plane, iRacing, Assetto Corsa, Raceroom Racing. They all struggle compared to a single screen, and all the bling you can run. Id say about similar to a 3x monitor, run in 3 separate viewport mode. Struggle in the sense that you have to, well want to maintain 90 fps. In flight 45 works, but you dont want that when racing.


Edited by Knock-Knock

- Jack of many DCS modules, master of none.

- Personal wishlist: F-15A, F-4S Phantom II, JAS 39A Gripen, SAAB 35 Draken, F-104 Starfighter, Panavia Tornado IDS.

 

| MSI Z87-G45 Gaming | i5-4670K @ 4.3Ghz | 32Gb DDR3 1600 | Asus GTX 1070 Strix OC | Samsung 850 Evo 250 & 500Gb | 40" Sony FullHD | Oculus Rift CV1 | Thrustmaster Warthog Stick (19.5cm extension) & Throttle | MFG Crosswind | Windows 10 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concur with knock-knock. I play mostly WW2 in multiplayer, A10 and Huey in single.

 

Spotting and identification is harder in VR. However, once you have them, maintaining situational awareness is miles ahead in VR, both for ground and air targets. The 1:1 tracking is the reason for this, you look naturally where you would expect them to be and there they are. I think the balance tips in favour of VR.

 

The other thing is depth perception. Air to air refuelling, form flying and hovering in helicopters is light years ahead in VR, as that depth perception and 1:1 tracking gives a far better “feel” for what the aircraft is doing.

 

I can’t go back to trackir, I’ve even abandoned other sims I loved (and that still have essential features not replicated in DCS) because they have no VR support.

Ryzen 9 3900X / Asus Crosshair VI Hero X370 / Corsair H110i / Sapphire Nitro+ 6800XT / 32Gb G.Skill TridentZ 3200 / Samsung 960 Evo M.2 / Virpil Warbrd base + VFX and TM grips / Saitek X56 Throttle / Saitek Pro Combat pedals / Rift S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With TiR/2D you get a lot of 'cheat level' advantages that you do not have in VR. 180deg view rotation, freakin 'The Bionic Man' level of zoom. VR has it's perks too, but they are just tied to the reality it brings with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TIR beats VR (at least Rift CV1) 100-0 in combat effectiveness IMHO.

 

I never played with Rift that much that i would have got used to it and biggest reason why i didn't was the poor resolution of it which brings pretty huge disadvantage in PvP. But i belong to the minority who aren't impressed with current VR tech anyway so others might have different opinions.

 

Yeah, TIR cheater, sorry, users can twist their heads all the way to 6 O'clock. As for the low resolution argument: VR zoom blows that right out of the water.

 

Monitors are just so sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, TIR cheater, sorry, users can twist their heads all the way to 6 O'clock. As for the low resolution argument: VR zoom blows that right out of the water.

 

Monitors are just so sad.

 

Confused by what you mean ref the VR zoom. Clearly it's nothing like as good as that available for a monitor user.

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS imposter system related to FOV settings. You see closer not only because the hardware. It was the DCS engine. The hardware only contributes partial.

Even more ironic, the imposter shader wont increase the size if you use larger resolution with same FOV, it is a fixed numbers of pixel. The higher physics pixel density, the smaller they are.

With 90FOV, you wont able to see same target in your regular monitor. It was simply not rendered , and even worse imposter rendered target @4Kres way too smaller than rendered in HDres.

It has WVR disadvantage. But i doubt someone able to beat me 100-0 in WVR.

TIR depends muscle memory. VR is more natural.


Edited by Insonia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried something that significantly evens up VR with TrackIR: use VR with Pixel Density set to 1.0.

 

Turning up pixel density helps cockpit instruments look sharper, but can render dots on the horizon too small to see. With PD set to 1, I can see aircraft on the horizon about as well as I could on a 1080 monitor. It's a massive improvement over running it at 1.4, like I did before.

 

I honestly have no desire to go back to TrackIR, honestly. For me, VR in DCS is extremely close to the time I was able to sit inside a fighter cockpit in a museum- except now I can do that while I'm flying the plane. It's that good for me. I can't ever go back. As a caveat, I'm lucky in that I don't get motion sickness at all, even after several continuous hours in DCS in VR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PD must be set to 1.0 to get something about spotting ranges. Then you can spot against clear sky a F/A-18 from over 10km distance and fairly easily from 5-7km between clouds etc.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TIR offers better identification of both air and ground targets. VR is better for spotting and tracking in the first place. VR also gives depth perception, so gunnery, formation flying, landings and air refueling are vastly easier.

System specs: i5-10600k (4.9 GHz), RTX 2080 Super, 32GB DDR4 3200, NVMe SSD, Reverb G2, WinWing Super Libra/Taurus, CH Pro Pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VR Pros: Drastically increased SA in the WVR environment (e.g., BFM, Formation Flight, AAR, and general aircraft maneuvering)

 

VR Cons: Unable to spot fighter sized aircraft >~5nm, can literally see the aircraft appear disappear at a certain range. This is a massive disadvantage compared to the unrealistic amount of zoom when using a monitor (Its practically like having a small telescope in your cockpit)

 

All IMO of course :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fly in VR only now since getting the Rift and stream every now and then, and am absolutely competitive with it in MP. I can see most bandits just fine at range against the sky, its hard against the terrain but that was always the case with a monitor as well. F-5s and Mirages tend to be really hard to see, but get killed all the same. Top of the scorebaord at the time in the video after 6+ hours of flight, with basically 1 death per hour.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm mostly with Blkspade on this one...

 

There is certainly some spotting weirdness about 3-5K but closer and further than that is pretty fine. Aircraft identification is hard sometimes so IFF like your life depends on it... but actual spotting is ok.

Win-10 x64

 

Nvidia RTX2080 (HP Reverb)

Asus Prime X570P

AMD 3800x

32GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

 

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals

Using VJoy and UCR to remap Throttle and Clutch into Rudder axis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can manage air-to-air combat in VR if I have to, but 2D screen resolution doesn't just look better, it also allows you to see and judge the enemy's attitude and type. Flying combat in VR is like playing a combat game on an Atari 2600... all you see is a dot or a blob until you get way too close. It is hard to give of 1:1 tracking and the immersive feeling of being inside the cockpit, but TrackIR/conventional display simply looks amazing in comparison, never mind the high and smooth frame rates. I fly VR for fun/immersion, I fly TrackIR/display for combat.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks blkspade really nice video. Could please share your setting? I'm trying to set everything up now and maybe i can use yours as a starting point.

 

Thanks in advanced!

 

I occasionally move the settings around to test things, but in this video I think everything was on high except shadows on medium and terrain shadows on flat (or off) GI off Terrain low. Pixel density on 1.4 with 2x MSAA, 8x AF. 512 Every frame for cockpit displays, which basically means mirrors in the Eagle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I occasionally move the settings around to test things, but in this video I think everything was on high except shadows on medium and terrain shadows on flat (or off) GI off Terrain low. Pixel density on 1.4 with 2x MSAA, 8x AF. 512 Every frame for cockpit displays, which basically means mirrors in the Eagle.

 

Thanks! Any reason to pick 512 every frame over 1024?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...