Is VR dead?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 197115
  • Start date
@HugoB and @RCHeliguy firstly, regardless of my chosen FOV when using the Pimax 5k+, I've never had to make any in-game adjustments relating to viewing angle apart from centering or adjusting seat position to my preference. The only in-game FOV adjustment I might play around with is the Real World View option in RaceRoom due to cockpit scaling issues, but that was the same with the Rift.

Secondly, for me personally, (it's all subjective after all) and for sim-racing specifically, clarity at the extremes of the FOV range, in terms of edge-to-edge sharpness where your surroundings are concerned, isn't the most important thing and I'm not including the clarity of dials, gauges and text in that statement because it hasn't been an issue when glancing outside of the sweet spot. It's the increased awareness and the early warning that the additional peripheral vision provides, without the need to consciously turn your head, that's been the biggest win for me since moving to the Pimax, even above the improved visuals. It just 'ups the ante' through both increased immersion and improved judgement, whether that's being visually aware of another car pulling alongside you that little bit earlier and reacting accordingly, (rather than CrewChief telling you and hoping he's right :)), or making a dive down the inside, with less risk to yourself and others, because you can see, or are aware of, a little more of what is to your left or right. I've even had a few 'three-abreast' moments of late, which I would have previously avoided completely or backed out of sharpish for fear of things ending in tears but I was able to hang in there because those few extra degrees of awareness gave me the confidence and 'margin of error' to do so.

Of interest as well is that the claimed Pimax FOV in Small, Normal & Large guises is also pretty questionable, at least when using this admittedly slightly fiddly and therefore questionably accurate, Steam Workshop app to measure it. :)

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1359389601

My quick and dirty results with the Pimax were as follows and I know others who reported similar.
  • Large: Claimed:170 - Measured:145
  • Normal: Claimed:150 - Measured: 125
  • Small - Untested
I also use a far less scientific, static test utilising the loading screen for rFactor2. This projects the rF2 logo and a line of white text underneath both in front and to the sides and the text in question extends slightly beyond the width of the logo. Looking straight ahead I can see the following in both eyes, in my peripheral vision:
  • Large FOV: the edge of the logo and a little of the text (unreadable) on both sides
  • Normal FOV: no logo and less text (unreadable) on both sides
  • Small FOV: I see nothing!
The good thing though is that these results, regardless of how they've been measured and assuming that manufacturer claims are somewhat on the over-stated side, are still significantly better in real-world use than I experienced when using a Rift and very briefly a Vive Pro. I'll therefore be really interested in measuring and comparing the Valve Index when it arrives soon because if it does provide a usable FOV in the region of 120-130 degrees along with an effective sweet spot and good, if not ground-breaking, visual clarity, all wrapped up in a comfortable and well-put-together package, then I am absolutely certain there are going to be a lot of extremely happy punters.

Time will tell.
 
Last edited:
  • Deleted member 197115

Vive Cosmos, 6 tracking cameras instead of original 4, $899 rumored price, shipping August.
More info next week, at that price it's better be 2k x 2k Reverb screens or 1440x1600 RGB OLED.

Who knows, could be an inside out tracking solution that could satisfy even people dancing room scale VR Ballet.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/uploadvr.com/vive-cosmos-6-cameras-faceplate/amp/

Price suggests that they aim at Index as main competitor, not Rift S.
Can only imagine follow up posts from you know who.:p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anything is possible. It looks like decent coverage except for games where you actually do things behind your back. Maybe they have accelerometers in the hand controllers.

FYI that is also an In Death reference. In that game you typically toss shards behind yourself as a means of short range teleportation. My shooting hand is sometimes behind my back as I'm tossing shards back and backing up before an oncoming enemy. There are still many games where reloading or changing weapons involves reaching behind your back.

I was reading comments asking why noone has put a camera on the back of the headset yet.

Their Rift like hand controllers look good. If they feel good that would be a big step forward for them.
 
Last edited:
  • Deleted member 197115

And here we go, the info everyone was so waiting for, Cosmos resolution 1440x1700 per eye, 100 more verical resolution than Vive Pro, Odyssey, and Index.
LCD RGB stripe. https://uploadvr.com/htc-vive-cosmos-tracking/

I like what I see so far, hope the optics is great too.
 
  • Deleted member 197115

They all are in the same ballpark FOV, except Pimax of course, don't expect anything drastically different there. RGB stripe with 100 pixels more vertical resolution should show some clarity improvement comparing to others, they also claim new lenses with 40% improvement, whatever that means.
Not as good as Reverb 2K though.
If price is right, could be a nice upgrade from WMR with its spotty support.
 
Never thought WMR support was spotty before but now with this 1903 issue. They got a fix and now decided not to bring it out before the next general Windows update just tells me that MS are not going to take the lead on the VR front.
Quite happy with my Lenovo which is a good thing as I am very fare from being impressed with the new ones coming out.
But might be asking too much
 
What many here appear to be missing is that higher frame rates = higher percieved resolution since your head is always slightly moving. Couple that with tracking accurate to 0.1mm and the "feel" should be very good.

I still think the quest for more pixels at slower framerates is a lopsided solution and not holistic in design.

Hopefully I'll find out soon enough.
 
  • Deleted member 197115

higher frame rates = higher percieved resolution
This is quite bizarre statement. :O_o:
But yeah, I am looking forward to end user reports of running any modern sims at 144 fps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Deleted member 197115

Never thought WMR support was spotty before but now with this 1903 issue. They got a fix and now decided not to bring it out before the next general Windows update just tells me that MS are not going to take the lead on the VR front.
Quite happy with my Lenovo which is a good thing as I am very fare from being impressed with the new ones coming out.
But might be asking too much
You forgot broken few months ago motion reprojection performance.
 
Its clumsy you have to change it here:

(x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\MixedRealityVRDriver\resources\settings\default.vrsettings

The text ive put in bold is the bit you will need to change.

// Motion reprojection doubles framerate through motion vector extrapolation

// motionvector = force application to always run at half framerate with motion vector reprojection

// auto = automatically use motion reprojection when the application can not maintain native framerate

"motionReprojectionMode" : "motionvector",
 
I totally forgot about that one. Thank god I managed to have acc running at 90fps most of the time and didn't need it.

Is it only broken on 1903? I'm back to a clone of the 1809 I had saved.
 
This is quite bizarre statement. :O_o:
But yeah, I am looking forward to end user reports of running any modern sims at 144 fps.

I have to agree here with @RCHeliguy , it's about 'perceived' resolution. With higher refresh rate comes less pixel blur when objects move, you move your head, or the world moves (racing games). Faster pixel respons times are needed to achieve 144Hz so this means Index's pixels are faster than 90Hz HMD's (Valve mentioned this too). The amount of 'clarity' this increased pixel speed brings can be noticeable or maybe not, but at least in theory this should be beneficial to us. I don't know if this advantage is also true if you are running the Index at 90Hz? And if you are using 60->120 ASW maybe the pixels are still faster than a HMD that does 90Hz only, so you can easily run the games with 60fps but still get the 120Hz clarity? Just guessing here though, maybe someone can chime in.
 
  • Deleted member 197115

60fps at 120hz with inserted synthetic frames will never be as good as native 90 frames due to dissoclusion artifacts.
But I'll be glad to get proven wrong, not 'in theory'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest News

How long have you been simracing

  • < 1 year

    Votes: 559 17.4%
  • < 2 years

    Votes: 379 11.8%
  • < 3 years

    Votes: 341 10.6%
  • < 4 years

    Votes: 243 7.6%
  • < 5 years

    Votes: 390 12.1%
  • < 10 years

    Votes: 367 11.4%
  • < 15 years

    Votes: 215 6.7%
  • < 20 years

    Votes: 168 5.2%
  • < 25 years

    Votes: 136 4.2%
  • Ok, I am a dinosaur

    Votes: 419 13.0%
Back
Top