Hi res, hi FPS VR focus in year 2021

[Leaderface]

I would like to talk here about limits:

Let´s supuose you buy a new Reverb G2 headset at the fall of 2020 and want the best experience out of DCS, so you´ll want 90 FPS stutter free

gameplay. (imposible by now).....

So: you want to buy the best Pc on earth at that moment. And that will include a Ryzen3 CPU and a new Nvidia Ampere card.

Let´s say that improves your FPS a decent 30% from what we have now, so you still are in ED hands to improve the sim another 60-70%....

Sounds feasible for anyone?

 

Now: you end up in fall 2021 with a Reverb G3 with 4K panels and a Ryzen 4 and a new Nvidia 5 nm card with (let´s say) a 50-60% more horsepower than actual top gaming PCs....

There is no way to fly at 90 FPS with 4K panels headset (not to say at 120 FPS) at that timeframe with the slow improvements that we actually have in DCS.

And those 4K panels are coming and you will want to enjoy them.

So: we need a 12-18 month focus on improving the VR capabilities on DCS to achieve that goal. So we can fly at 120 FPS on a dual 4K display headset.

That will be an aproximately 10x improvement from what we have right now.

Anyone thinks that will be posible?

Because we don´t have foveated rendering in DCS at the moment, no?. And I don´t want to use DCS without VR. Maybe that is my fault, but I think that´s the way to go for any newcomer to DCS since now. I think VR is now the way DCS it´s meant to be played.

So, there are lots of work to be done to improve VR smoothness untill that level. And I, frankly, can´t see the end of the tunnel in that departament because you can´t simply throw so much more horsepower at it. You´ll need very big improvements on the game engine to fully utilize our top gaming PCs.... come on!, the next gen consoles will have 8 CPU cores and great GPU capabilities and we are strugling to run DCS on VR with a 2.000 $ PC..... That´s not fair.

Anyway: if anyone with an HP Reverb (let´s put an actual Reverb as a basis) can report his FPS with DCS on the free Caucasus map and with

the free jet or with the mustang too, It will be great to check those FPS numbers with the time and see the improvements. Because, unfortunately, there is no good information about this on the internet.

If we can put only those FPS numbers monthly or with any new beta, that could be a very good effort to bring some light on this very unfortunate VR problem.

Can anyone help me with that?

(I don´t want to buy a new Pc because I want to wait for those improvements to come, but I´m in the need to measure the VR improvements with the time. And think those VR FPS numbers could help a lot of people with the same problem).....

Let´s see how we can try that in the more accurate way: (same mission, weather, daytime, etc.... and last beta on use) A quick an easy one and use it as a basis. (If anyone can make a specific mission and link it, it will be better yet).

Show here your VR FPS numbers, please, and let´s see how it goes.

Thanks!

Edited June 21, 2020 by Leaderface

[Motomouse]

Just play the game and enjoy it.

[Steel Jaw]

who can afford vr...meh.

[sirrah]

Welcome to the forum Leaderface

 

I suggest you do a forum search. There are already more then plenty of VR FPS threads out there. Most of them not making any sense though, as there's just too many factors into play. System specs, dcs settings, test situation (aircraft, location, mission complexity, etc etc.)

 

If you truely want to test and see progress over the years to come, ask ED for a proper build in benchmark over at the wish list sub-forum... oh wait, that has also been asked for numerous times already :smilewink:

[Svsmokey]

Just play the game and enjoy it.

 

Good advice here....

[Leaderface]

Sirrah: Yes, I´ve read all that stuff (or at least, as much as I can) with the same answers: VR is great, but just a nightmare in DCS.

And sorry, guys, I just want to enjoy it in VR and wait till it gets resolved.

And a proper benchmark tool will be great. (In fact it will be used in hardware forums to test stuff and it will give DCS much more visibilty). It will be a great move.

Edited June 21, 2020 by Leaderface

[Leaderface]

 

If you truly want to test and see progress over the years to come, ask ED for a proper build in benchmark over at the wish list sub-forum... oh wait, that has also been asked for numerous times already :smilewink:

Wish list eh..... I´ll try that too, thanks.

[Leaderface]

who can afford vr...meh.

 

Mower: VR is not that costly (only the most advanced and experimental is): you can play Half Life Alyx (a very well optimized game, and probably the best game of 2020) with a medium Pc with almost the same quality as on a top end Gaming Pc. You don´t need to spend that much money to enjoy the VR thing.

The problem is that once you try it, you don´t want to play on a flat screen anymore.

And that´s my problem, because, first of all, I´m a VR tech fan, and that´s the way I´ve found DCS (as one of the best VR experiences, when they fix it).

And all I want is to life that experience in the best posible way and perfect that (even with a 6 DOF platform): https://dofreality.com/

And I know that in ED are on the same spirit: they want the best posible experience. And I´m pretty sure they will get there someday.

I just wanna know how the advances are because I can wait playing other VR games. No problem with that.

[David OC]

When they fix it?

You mean make it more optimized where possible.

DCS was never designed around vr like the small vr games in the vr store, no or little ai, missile logic, weapon logic, ballistic logic etc.

Even the other sim with vr have little going on compared to dcs.

It will always be a bit of a balance for vr, ED will do there best and the vr tech needs to improve also to allow fo very large dynamic worlds.

Dcs is by far the largest most dynamic and straining vr game out there, so it will most likely use and eat up the best tech you can throw at it, now and over the coming years as vr displays improve even more. Hopefully the hardware can take some of the load off in the future and not just rely on dev's constantly chasing there tail. Things like sli would make sense for vr etc. Run two 2080ti's one per eye. That sounds expensive lol.

Edited June 21, 2020 by David OC

[Leaderface]

Yes, but SLI doesn´t work in most of the games, nor does in VR so that´s not a solution (SLI never worked in VR no mather how logic the thing may seems).

And I see many people don´t want to play the game in VR. So they conform with half the experiene the game can offer: good for them.

But I want. And many people wants.

So you have a Rift: Tell us your experience and average FPS (and divide it in half for a Reverb user). Is something acceptable?

 

 

And, in the same way ED starts with an early acces product and don´t let it untill finished, I think VR is an early acces product that need to be finished as well. (You don´t cooperate with Varjo, for example, with the intention to letting them hanging on).

Edited June 22, 2020 by Leaderface

[Vertigo72]

The simple fact is DCS graphics engine is currently poorly optimized. Throwing money at hardware doesnt really solve the software issue. You can spend fortunes to buy yourself maybe 20% more performance, but its hard to imagine a rewritten game core couldnt boost framerates by many 100s of percent.

 

Those who say you shouldnt compare performance with more popular games because of AI or physics or ballistics; ignoring the fact those should be able to run those on our 6+ idle cores, I might buy that argument if I got a bazillion FPS flying around solo on an empty map with no other units, so no AI, no ballistics. But I dont. Just flying over a desert with zero other units, you may struggle to get 120 FPS. And less if any buildings or trees show up.

 

Even flying over water with nothing else in sight, even when disabling the cockpit so even that doesnt need to be rendered, just plain water and a cloudless blue sky, not another polygon or texture to be seen, I got 150FPS. I get more than that in some AAA titles rendering hugely complex scenes.

 

Lets hope a Vulkan implementation provides a fix.

[Leaderface]

The simple fact is DCS graphics engine is currently poorly optimized. Throwing money at hardware doesnt really solve the software issue. You can spend fortunes to buy yourself maybe 20% more performance, but its hard to imagine a rewritten game core couldnt boost framerates by many 100s of percent.

 

Those who say you shouldnt compare performance with more popular games because of AI or physics or ballistics; ignoring the fact those should be able to run those on our 6+ idle cores, I might buy that argument if I got a bazillion FPS flying around solo on an empty map with no other units, so no AI, no ballistics. But I dont. Just flying over a desert with zero other units, you may struggle to get 120 FPS. And less if any buildings or trees show up.

 

Even flying over water with nothing else in sight, even when disabling the cockpit so even that doesnt need to be rendered, just plain water and a cloudless blue sky, not another polygon or texture to be seen, I got 150FPS. I get more than that in some AAA titles rendering hugely complex scenes.

 

Lets hope a Vulkan implementation provides a fix.

I´m with you here: In ED there are priorities, and parking all the projects and rewrite a new multicore engine is not one of them. And I understand them.

But there are points of inflection were waiting for the brute force to come and fix my problems, simply won´t work.

And I think that point of inflection will arrive with VR and dual 4K panels. (Because, next thing will happen are wide FOV and dual 8K panels, so....)

And they need to work in advance to offer a solution before it happens.

But that´s only my opinion, of course.

Edited June 22, 2020 by Leaderface

[David OC]

Compare dcs to anyother game thats comparable?

 

View distance speeds etc. I cannot think of one. Your still limited by the gpu really. The sli was a hardware reference and rift api ability. It would be cood IF it could use it etc. Not that it will.

What happens when we hit 4k? Still ed or also the vr dev hardware problem also?

What aaa title and what scenes?

 

So in my opinion it's not just ed. If the hardware hits 4k plus. They also need to 1 build a 5080ti or do some hardware trickery, foveated rendering etc. So only the eye point, like in real life is high res etc. Not the full screens.

 

And I'm not saying ed cannot get more out of dcs tho, still they can only do so much with a large sim.

 

And by the way nvida does allow for vr sli type of thing. The vr manufactures do not

https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/vrsli

Works with Vulkan also if implemented.

Edited June 22, 2020 by David OC

[Baldrick33]

Sirrah: Yes, I´ve read all that stuff (or at least, as much as I can) with the same answers: VR is great, but just a nightmare in DCS.

And sorry, guys, I just want to enjoy it in VR and wait till it gets resolved.

And a proper benchmark tool will be great. (In fact it will be used in hardware forums to test stuff and it will give DCS much more visibilty). It will be a great move.

Reverb user here, with an 8500K & 4.8GHz and 2080Ti and thoroughly enjoying DCS right now.

 

Sure you have to pick and choose a bit what you play and I only play SP.

 

If ED can improve the experience that would be great but for me at least right now it is a fabulous experience. Of course I would love even greater resolution and not require reprojection but given a solid 45fps apart from passing closely other planes head on I find it perfectly smooth.

[Leaderface]

Reverb user here, with an 8500K & 4.8GHz and 2080Ti and thoroughly enjoying DCS right now.

 

Sure you have to pick and choose a bit what you play and I only play SP.

 

If ED can improve the experience that would be great but for me at least right now it is a fabulous experience. Of course I would love even greater resolution and not require reprojection but given a solid 45fps apart from passing closely other planes head on I find it perfectly smooth.

Great, Baldrick: 45 FPS are what other people are reporting with a beef enought system like yours.

And I´m curious: Do yo feel 45 FPS is enought in VR? , Don´t you feel that flying near the ground doesn´t give you enought speed feeling?

(It´s common knowledge that you need near 90 FPS to feel comfortable in VR for long periods of time). In any speed game you can take notice of any FPS increase, let´s say, between 60 and 120 FPS and between 120 and 240 too... You can note that and improve your skills too.

You really feel 45 FPS are enought? (maybe I´m wrong if so)

Anyone else are fine with 45 FPS?

[BeastyBaiter]

There are two things at work against VR users in DCS: the engine using a single CPU core (ignoring sound) and the graphical quality of the game choking even a 2080 Ti. The single threaded nature of the game results in frequent CPU bottlenecks. Yes, the game engine could be better optimized to use that one thread more efficiently but those gains would likely be very small compared to splitting it across multiple cores. This is a very difficult process for a legacy game engine though. It's doable, but time consuming. The switch to Vulkan will multi-thread the graphics engine's CPU portion, but it won't necessarily do the same for AI and other things. I expect that shift will give a major performance uplift though, since flight models and AI are generally somewhat trivial for CPU's to handle. It's draw calls going to the GPU that slow things down.

 

 

 

The second problem is the graphics quality. DCS has huge rendering distances. Games like Doom look fantastic and will hit 200 fps on a potato. But their view distance is maybe 200m rather than 200km. So even if just viewing water, there is more to render here. Switching to Vulkan may help a little, but we'll still need monster GPU's to run VR and have to compromise graphics settings compared to 1440p in order to keep the frame rates up. But that's an expected trade off. If the game suddenly performs way better, ED will want to make it prettier since the vast majority still view it in pancake mode. So we'll still have less eye candy, but that's fine. I just want a stable 80 fps in my Rift S or 90 fps in any other mainstream headset.

[Leaderface]

And by the way nvida does allow for vr sli type of thing. The vr manufactures do not

https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/vrsli

Works with Vulkan also if implemented.

Maybe in the profesional market, but in consumer market.... Too specific for wide adoption on that market. (Too much effort for so many people.... no. I don´t think it ever reach us), but good to know Nvidia works on that.

[Leaderface]

The second problem is the graphics quality. DCS has huge rendering distances. Games like Doom look fantastic and will hit 200 fps on a potato. But their view distance is maybe 200m rather than 200km. So even if just viewing water, there is more to render here. Switching to Vulkan may help a little, but we'll still need monster GPU's to run VR and have to compromise graphics settings compared to 1440p in order to keep the frame rates up. But that's an expected trade off. If the game suddenly performs way better, ED will want to make it prettier since the vast majority still view it in pancake mode. So we'll still have less eye candy, but that's fine. I just want a stable 80 fps in my Rift S or 90 fps in any other mainstream headset.

Another one that thinks 90 or more FPS are important in Vr, Great!.

Maybe the solution will be a real VR mode with sacrifices on the not so important things.

The real thing is that no one apart from ED know a thing about the posible diferences implementing Vulkan. (Maybe will be huge, maybe the CPU thing will keep stumbling the improvements).

Maybe we have too little information about how to improve our performance and that drives me crazy.

Is it so difficult to give us a glimpse of thought about the improvements we have to plan in the future appart from the basic and recomended settings on the website?

Anyone knows if a quad channel memory will help?, or an Optane SSD will make any difference?, DDR5?

 

We know how it works now, but we don´t know a thing with future implementations and how to confront those.

One thing is for sure: There are lots of things that ED are willing to add to bring more fidelity, but they simply can´t given the current operating status of the program.

So a multithread solution is a need for improving, that´s for sure.

Maybe Vulkan can change all of that, yes, but maybe not much. It will be great to know what to expect with that. Let´s see when ED will be ready to talk about that. They are working hard this 2020. I don´t expect any news in that front untill 2021.

I can wait playing Star Wars squadrons and Medal of honour in VR. No problem. :music_whistling:

Edited June 22, 2020 by Leaderface

[Vertigo72]

Compare dcs to anyother game thats comparable?

 

View distance speeds etc. I cannot think of one.

 

Just about any other flight sim ever? I only fly one other, which is a soaring simulator. To give you an idea:

 

 

another one with sea and trees:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb2m5BGwOt0

 

No, its not the greatest looking sim ever, its developed by one full time and one part time dev, and their focus is on flight modelling and atmospheric/thermal/slope wind/wave modelling more than eye candy, but it look ok, viewing distance is in the same ballpark as DCS and you can play it in VR at >90 FPS with a laptop with a gpu like a 1050.. Without VR you can play it on literally anything you could possibly buy the past 5 if not 10 years, including laptops with integrated graphics. I get like 300 FPS in VR on my system.

 

And btw, you can also play it online with 64 players on a server without crazy lag or warping.

Edited June 22, 2020 by Vertigo72

[reece146]

In fairness there isn't have the stuff going on in that sail plane sim that there is in DCS.

 

 

Looks like cool software - may have to get. The other day I was thinking a sail plane in DCS would be cool (I'd settle for a U2 - LOL)

[Vertigo72]

In fairness there isn't have the stuff going on in that sail plane sim that there is in DCS.

 

Sure. No radar, no sams, no AI etc. But even when you eliminate almost all of that in DCS, by flying all alone with no weapons, no radar, and no other units and even over sea, performance still pretty much sucks and there is not much to blame other than a poorly optimized graphics engine.

 

Also, in fairness to condor, which again is a 2 dev project, its not FS2020, most of the compute resources are spent on the atmospheric modelling, ie thermals and slope wind etc. Something DCS doesnt even really do.

 

Looks like cool software - may have to get. The other day I was thinking a sail plane in DCS would be cool (I'd settle for a U2 - LOL)

 

LOL. wouldnt that be fun in DCS. Ive thought about a SR71 but maps may be a bit small :)

 

If you want to give condor it a try, its not a study sim, you wil be up and flying in no time, but mastering soaring takes decades. There is no trial, but there are worse ways to spend your money:

https://www.condorsoaring.com/

 

Maps are almost all free and made by the community spanning a good portion of the globe by now:

https://www.condor-club.eu/sceneriesmap/241/

 

Online community is very seasonal though, most are real world glider pilots who do it virtually in winter. This year was an exception with the pandemic and even national competitions have been done with condor.

[Baldrick33]

Great, Baldrick: 45 FPS are what other people are reporting with a beef enought system like yours.

And I´m curious: Do yo feel 45 FPS is enought in VR? , Don´t you feel that flying near the ground doesn´t give you enought speed feeling?

(It´s common knowledge that you need near 90 FPS to feel comfortable in VR for long periods of time). In any speed game you can take notice of any FPS increase, let´s say, between 60 and 120 FPS and between 120 and 240 too... You can note that and improve your skills too.

You really feel 45 FPS are enought? (maybe I´m wrong if so)

Anyone else are fine with 45 FPS?

I am a long time VR user since the DK2 and had CV1, OD+, Pimax 5k+ and briefly Index. I am super sensitive to reprojection in race sims and do whatever is necessary reducing settings to keep a solid 90 FPS. On monitors I used to run iRacing at a minimum of 150 FPS, anything less and I would notice. With DCS I really am generally happy with 45, only the ghosting of fast moving planes head on is an issue. The only other issue is if it drops below 45 otherwise it is fine. I have a similar experience with another WW2 sim :)

[Sprool]

@Vertigo72 Ive been a huge fan of Condor for many years, a real nice flight sim but well done, and I tried it in VR with a friends Oculus Rift this weekend for the first time - gobsmacked at the feel of immersion and height. Absolutely love it - this and DCS will fuel my purchase of a VR headset v soon. Condor users are less anal about the picture-perfect cockpits but flight dynamics are good and the fact there's so many great (mostly free) landscapes by loyal users is brilliant.

[Vertigo72]

Ive tried both sims in VR with a Rift-S. It just doesnt work for me. After the initial 5 minute cool factor, Id rather put it aside. Not sure if the "tunnel vision" or the obvious fake infinite focus 3d effect, or screendoor/resolution or the fresnel or a combination, but something prevents my mind from ever remotely believing I sit in a cockpit. I feel like Im where I actually am, just wearing silly heavy goggles looking at small and rather poor quality screens. I genuinely feel more immersed with a 2D screen and headtracking. And strangely, I did find some non flight sim games more immersive in VR, and could see the appeal there.

 

But hey, Im a minority, clearly most people seem to love it, so if it works for you, and your PC can handle it, go for it.

[Baldrick33]

Ive tried both sims in VR with a Rift-S. It just doesnt work for me. After the initial 5 minute cool factor, Id rather put it aside. Not sure if the "tunnel vision" or the obvious fake infinite focus 3d effect, or screendoor/resolution or the fresnel or a combination, but something prevents my mind from ever remotely believing I sit in a cockpit. I feel like Im where I actually am, just wearing silly heavy goggles looking at small and rather poor quality screens. I genuinely feel more immersed with a 2D screen and headtracking. And strangely, I did find some non flight sim games more immersive in VR, and could see the appeal there.

 

But hey, Im a minority, clearly most people seem to love it, so if it works for you, and your PC can handle it, go for it.

I don’t wish to belittle the Rift S but for a long time I found VR great for race sims but tried each new headset with flight sims but never got hooked until the Reverb where the extra clarity just made it work for me. I have been hooked on DCS ever since.