Unreal engine 5 performance in VR

[gamma123152]

Let's say, today, the VR is a nice to have.

At the moment if you want to use VR in a simracing game then go for AMS2.
And also R3E, old game but the VR works pretty well.

Yes AMS2 is king in VR indeed.

But with OpenXR toolkit+OpenComposite VR works in rFactor 2 even better then R3E and iRacing/AC1 are great in VR too, all better then R3E in terms of performance with my setup.

 

[gamma123152]

My experience that ACC VR was just as serviceable as AC, and much more consistent in different conditions when in AC weather conditions and especially night could throw performance out of the window completely and would require separate settings altogether to still maintain fps target.
Plus we all know that AC enjoys higher player base because of the variety of content including some nice mods, but if you are serious about GT3/4 racing, the quality is just not there, ACC just walks over it.

"My experience that ACC VR was just as serviceable as AC, and much more consistent in different conditions when in AC weather conditions and especially night could throw performance out of the window completely and would require separate settings altogether to still maintain fps target."

Grasshoper

I know from experience that many VR players go for maximum sharpness/resolution and this isn't possible in ACC because the pixelation of ACC takes you fully out of the immersion. There is a sharpness/resolution/view distance treshhold for many VR players, with ACC and the current GPU's(even the 3090) you simply cannot achieve that minimum treshhold, it's simply too demanding. Many VR players tweak their settings to the max so that they can have 90fps fixed with the highest possible resolution for daytime racing, this since night/rain races are maybe ~10% only of all online races. In all other racesims you can achieve a nice result with this, but in ACC the result is always terrible, whether it's daytime, night or rain, it doesn't matter, the resolution is always to low.

"Plus we all know that AC enjoys higher player base because of the variety of content including some nice mods, but if you are serious about GT3/4 racing, the quality is just not there, ACC just walks over it."

Plus we all know that AC enjoys a higher player base because of proper VR support, this dispite the fact that ACC just walks over it.

Hmm not this isn't true too. But you're not right either. It's for sure a combination of both. So:

Plus we all know that AC enjoys a higher player base because of proper VR support and the variety of content including some nice mods, this dispite the fact that ACC just walks over it.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

Don't know, to me it looked nice and sharp without any pixelation on G2, in fact I preferred ACC VR presentation over AC due to higher level of photo almost realism. Can't say it didn't take some efforts and beefy system to get there but it was doable. I do not think deferred rendering was the main obstacle achieving good VR visuals with UE4, more like complexity of rendered assets, special effects, all that visual UE goodness, nor I think it will be a problem for UE5, if Rennsport decides to support VR after all. It's a business investment, and with not so clear future of VR these days, studio needs to think long and hard where to focus already thin stretched resources and if properly supporting VR must be a number one priority.

 

[gamma123152]

"Don't know, to me it looked nice and sharp without any pixelation on G2".

Then you have a very special opinion about this subject. For me it's impossible to get it as sharp as any of the other sims, not even close. ACC doesn't meet my "sharpness treshhold". I will play ACC again when I got the 4080/90. I run ~double resolution in AMS2 and rFactor 2 compared to ACC with equal performance, same for iRacing. And that's also on a Reverb G2 + 3080TI oced+12th gen i7 12700K+fast ram (last 2 points are important regarding ACC to mention). I cannot get it "nice and sharp without any pixelation". Yes in close distance in the car it's nice and sharp without any pixelation indeed, but not in far distance and that's what matters. Maybe you have an eye issue with far sight in general so that you don't see the difference in far distance in VR too?

I'm not a huge fan of AC's graphics either, all tracks(original and mods) and almost all mod cars look outdated to me too, so I agree with that part.

We keep having a different opinion about VR's future. IMO the future of VR is very clear, it's currently mostly limited by GPU power and software. Those subjects will be solved/better in the coming years, so let's talk again about this subject in 8-10 years and see where we stand then.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

Maybe you have an eye issue with far sight in general so that you don't see the difference in far distance in VR too?

Farsightness is when you can't see objects clearly close to you, not far, and it doesn't affect VR users as focal plane is usually a few meters away from the eyes.

 

[gamma123152]

Farsightness is when you can't see objects clearly close to you, not far, and it doesn't affect VR users as focal plane is usually a few meters away from the eyes.

Farsight(ED)ness? I wrote "eye issue with far sight" so that is the opposite of farsightedness.

I don't have an eye condition so I didn't study this subject regarding VR at all. I'm just surprised that ACC looked nice and sharp without any pixelation on G2 for you because compared to all other sims it's not sharp without any pixelation at all. My conclusion is if you don't see any pixelation at all going on with the Reverb G2 and that even in ACC that you must have an serious eye condition.

In close distance it is sharp enough, but in far distance it simply isn't with the current GPU power. Because you're not able to get close to native G2 resolution at 90fps/hz with the 3080TI/3090. Or did try it at 60hz or 45fps with reprojection? In that case you can get it sharp enough, but the experience is then terrible imo/not worth it and there is still always pixelation visible, no matter how high the setting is.

But yes, then it's possible to get ACC sharp without that much pixelation. But without ANY pixelation as you stated is never possible with the G2, not even with AMS2+foveated rendering tweaked to the max.. There is always shimmering/pixelation going on simply because of the PPD that's roughly ~23. So I still don't understand how you can say that... and that especially with ACC ! (which always has more pixelation then the other sims from what I see). There is always pixelation to some degree with the G2, even with above native res. with optimal VR optimized race sims.

 

[StefanoCasillo]

I do not think deferred rendering was the main obstacle achieving good VR visuals with UE4, more like complexity of rendered assets, special effects, all that visual UE goodness, nor I think it will be a problem for UE5, if Rennsport decides to support VR after all. It's a business investment, and with not so clear future of VR these days, studio needs to think long and hard where to focus already thin stretched resources and if properly supporting VR must be a number one priority.

Exactly.. there's no way around it.

You want a game that will perform "properly" at the insane resolutions required by VR at over 90fps? You'll have to aim the entire asset creation team to that goal and sacrify the final quality of the product for the "single screen 60fps crowd" with the final result to have your game looking "older" than whatever the next new shiny thing will be... not an easy path to choose.. it has been done before with the "graphics is not important physics is all that matters" mantra and didn't really go well.
Graphics sell games.. and selling games make money to pay the devs' rents... it's a no brainer really.

 

[Luciano Falkowski]

it has been done before with the "graphics is not important physics is all that matters" mantra and didn't really go well.

I mean... Didn't it? iRacing is not the best looking sim out there, but it is the best when it comes to event hosting (cameras for the production side, etc) and also it is, by far, the best VR performing sim in the market. It also is the most played sim out there.

 

[gamma123152]

Exactly.. there's no way around it.

You want a game that will perform "properly" at the insane resolutions required by VR at over 90fps? You'll have to aim the entire asset creation team to that goal and sacrify the final quality of the product for the "single screen 60fps crowd" with the final result to have your game looking "older" than whatever the next new shiny thing will be... not an easy path to choose.. it has been done before with the "graphics is not important physics is all that matters" mantra and didn't really go well.
Graphics sell games.. and selling games make money to pay the devs' rents... it's a no brainer really.

AMS2 is the best looking sim at this moment in my eyes. ACC second, to me but only with pancake. Some may say ACC first and AMS2 second. AMS2 is the best performing sim in VR by far but also on pancake and older pc's. I wouldn't say that Reiza sacrificed anything regarding visuals to make good VR possible.

You two are thinking in "tunnel vision", it's not that there is only one way or the other way only. It's not that there is no nice looking and performing sim possible without UE and deferred rendering.

There are enough examples that prove you two wrong, not only sims, AMS2 is a good example, but you can also take other VR games like HalfLife Alyx as an example. Looks awesome state of the art and performs perfect in VR too.

rFactor 2 with it's PBR shaded content looks great too, and with OpenXR toolkit + foveated rendering it runs flawless with everything on high too in extreme resolution(native G2) with 8xMSAA. And that, the opposite of AMS2: Also WITH rain AND night.

So everything is possible now, you ONLY don't need to choose for deferred rendering and make smart design choices like AMS2 with their crowd and trees for example. That gives so many headroom and it reduces LoD pop-in for 100% which is very distracting during racing too(big irritation with ACC, constant trees/LoD/shadows because of this).

 

[gamma123152]

Will there be VR support?​

Yes, the current plan is to add support for virtual reality from RENNSPORT’s launch.

“No real sim racing game can exist without VR. We are in heavy development,” explained Szczech.

“We also have a lot of ideas like how to improve spectating in VR, more than just the driving, which we are working on too,” expanded Hebecker.

All sounds very promising. But nothing is clear regarding forward rendering or deferred rendering. Until then it's unclear how good the VR support will really be.

 

[Wakkaman]

I totally agree with TurboT. Of course, VR will only go uphill not downhill which doesn't make sense.

I just tried the Varjo Aero for a couple of days and really we are so close to almost perfect VR. Iracing and AMS 2 are on another level with the Varjo, it's like a 2k screen and really easy for the eyes with a fan to keep you cool. And Pimax just announced this week they will come with the Crystal headset which is a direct competitor to the Varjo with up to 42pp which is like 3K or higher.

The biggest problem is performance, but if the 4090 is as fast as they promise these glasses will shine! Without a doubt most people will eventually race in VR, it's way closer to real life and that much more immersive. Look at Boosted Media he was also really impressed with the Varjo (before the distortion updates) and he has the best triple setup arguably on youtube.

Also Iracing and AMS 2 are way better in VR than ACC. I know all the tweaks and openxr and what not, but with the Varjo the difference is even more noticeable. There you really see how poorly optimized ACC is, Boosted Media also noticed this in his review.

My dad does a pretty poor job racing on a monitor, mostly because it's harder to predict and see the corners. Yet he was extremely comfortable with the Varjo Aero. He did lap after lap not fast but without mistakes like you would in real life and was totally blown away! And he already tried other headsets, but the Varjo is such a big jump it makes all the difference. He also didn't have nausea, no sweat nothing.

Any Racesim developer not focusing on VR for the future is making a big big mistake! The Varjo made that absolutely clear to me, it's like the first next-level headset and of course more companies will follow.

 

[BrunoBæ]

I just tried the Varjo Aero for a couple of days and really we are so close to almost perfect VR. Iracing and AMS 2 are on another level with the Varjo, it's like a 2k screen and really easy for the eyes with a fan to keep you cool. And Pimax just announced this week they will come with the Crystal headset which is a direct competitor to the Varjo with up to 42pp which is like 3K or higher.

Thank you for your description of you and fathers experience with the Varjo
Hehe but when I reached your description of the Pimax then I admit that I just thought: Wait a min. Can this guy be believed at all

 

[Wakkaman]

Thank you for your description of you and fathers experience with the Varjo
Hehe but when I reached your description of the Pimax then I admit that I just thought: Wait a min. Can this guy be believed at all

Hahahah I never owned a Pimax, but I heard they are controversial

 

[BrunoBæ]

@Wakkaman OK But seriously was the reason you returned the Varjo the price - or was it something else?
Just curious

 

[Wakkaman]

@Wakkaman OK But seriously was the reason you returned the Varjo the price - or was it something else?
Just curious

It was the shape of the lens and the fact ACC and rFactor 2 are not really playable . Rfactor 2 is extremely beautiful if you do hot laps, but once you turn on AI or race multiplayer it's unoptimized even for the Varjo which is pretty efficient.

It's hard to explain but the edges have a round shape and you see the transition, especially in first person shooters or rpg's like Half Life Alyx, for me it kills the immersion a little bit. In racesims you don't really notice it, because you are more surrounded and mostly look forward.

So basically only AC, AMS 2 and Iracing you can really enjoy the Varjo for simracing. And AMS 2 and AC I hardly play so I would buy it only for Iracing. I think that's overkill at this stage, considering the g2 is still doing a good enough job in Iracing. One's the 4090 is out I will consider buying a headset like this again and I wish they solve the roundness of the lens. For that kind of money, it should work in all games. But we are really close to almost perfect VR.

 

[gamma123152]

It was the shape of the lens and the fact ACC and rFactor 2 are not really playable . Rfactor 2 is extremely beautiful if you do hot laps, but once you turn on AI or race multiplayer it's unoptimized even for the Varjo which is pretty efficient.

It's hard to explain but the edges have a round shape and you see the transition, especially in first person shooters or rpg's like Half Life Alyx, for me it kills the immersion a little bit. In racesims you don't really notice it, because you are more surrounded and mostly look forward.

So basically only AC, AMS 2 and Iracing you can really enjoy the Varjo for simracing. And AMS 2 and AC I hardly play so I would buy it only for Iracing. I think that's overkill at this stage, considering the g2 is still doing a good enough job in Iracing. One's the 4090 is out I will consider buying a headset like this again and I wish they solve the roundness of the lens. For that kind of money, it should work in all games. But we are really close to almost perfect VR.

I've also bought the Varjo Aero, but I also returned my Varjo Aero, this for the following reasons:
- Impossible to use with multiple people, you have to adjust all 4 headstrap adjustments very precisely every single time you switch from person to person. This plus the manual IPD adjustment in the software because the auto-IPD gives way higher(unusable amount of) chromatic aberration. So in fact also returned it for the same reason: "shape of the lens".
- (Motion) blur when moving the head, Varjo is still investigating what the cause is( for months already), they still have no idea what's causing it so they also don't know how to fix it.
- Edge distortion, still not good enough with the so called experimental profile. A lot of "warping" in the sides of the lenses.
- Major Chromatic aberration + red shift, very visible in automobilista 2
- The stereo overlap was extremely bad, I could see a black spot between my eyes, so the glasses looked like "2 tunnels". With the G2, I have a perfect stereo overlap and I don't have a black spot in the middle visible. A friend of me didn't have this problem, I have a high IPD, he a low.
- Lower FoV both horizontally and vertical then the G2, to low for me.
- My Aero had a dead pixel in the right panel, I spotted this within a few minutes, so bad quality control at Varjo.
- Headstrap was way less comfortable then my G2+comfort mod.
- Mura, which was visible in the skies.
- Worse black levels then the G2.

For me it was not a next level device but it was a beta device. In fact: Now with OpenXR toolkit+Opencomposite for sims as rFactor 2 and Dirt Rally 2 and the VR perf kit 0.3 with Foveated rendering+CAS for Automobilista 2 gives me overall a way better experience with my Reverb G2+FoV mod+comfort mod then I had with the Aero. The issues were huge for me, very distracting.

I saw that the lenses were very clear in terms of light passthrough and the higher resolution and the fan were all nice. Also the better software(performance for same resolution was better than with my G2). But for the rest it was really unexpectedly bad.

I still have good hopes for an Aero 2, I believe in the philosophy of Varjo(more than Pimax), so maybe they will surprise us in the future. All issues are solvable, with: 1. A better lens design 2. OLED panels 3. Software improvements 4. Better quality control. But until they make an better device with these improvements I think that the Aero is simply overhyped and even if the prices were the same: I would still have chosen the G2, because of all the issues that I mentioned.

 

[Wakkaman]

I've also bought the Varjo Aero, but I also returned my Varjo Aero, this for the following reasons:
- Impossible to use with multiple people, you have to adjust all 4 headstrap adjustments very precisely every single time you switch from person to person. This plus the manual IPD adjustment in the software because the auto-IPD gives way higher(unusable amount of) chromatic aberration. So in fact also returned it for the same reason: "shape of the lens".
- (Motion) blur when moving the head, Varjo is still investigating what the cause is( for months already), they still have no idea what's causing it so they also don't know how to fix it.
- Edge distortion, still not good enough with the so called experimental profile. A lot of "warping" in the sides of the lenses.
- Major Chromatic aberration + red shift, very visible in automobilista 2
- The stereo overlap was extremely bad, I could see a black spot between my eyes, so the glasses looked like "2 tunnels". With the G2, I have a perfect stereo overlap and I don't have a black spot in the middle visible. A friend of me didn't have this problem, I have a high IPD, he a low.
- Lower FoV both horizontally and vertical then the G2, to low for me.
- My Aero had a dead pixel in the right panel, I spotted this within a few minutes, so bad quality control at Varjo.
- Headstrap was way less comfortable then my G2+comfort mod.
- Mura, which was visible in the skies.
- Worse black levels then the G2.

For me it was not a next level device but it was a beta device. In fact: Now with OpenXR toolkit+Opencomposite for sims as rFactor 2 and Dirt Rally 2 and the VR perf kit 0.3 with Foveated rendering+CAS for Automobilista 2 gives me overall a way better experience with my Reverb G2+FoV mod+comfort mod then I had with the Aero. The issues were huge for me, very distracting.

I saw that the lenses were very clear in terms of light passthrough and the higher resolution and the fan were all nice. Also the better software(performance for same resolution was better than with my G2). But for the rest it was really unexpectedly bad.

I still have good hopes for an Aero 2, I believe in the philosophy of Varjo(more than Pimax), so maybe they will surprise us in the future. All issues are solvable, with: 1. A better lens design 2. OLED panels 3. Software improvements 4. Better quality control. But until they make an better device with these improvements I think that the Aero is simply overhyped and even if the prices were the same: I would still have chosen the G2, because of all the issues that I mentioned.

I hear ya especially the warping I didn't like, but how many months ago you got the Varjo? Because distortion flickering kind of thing they fixed with software, it's basically unnoticeable.

But yeah I agree, there are still too many small issues for the money. But I was really really impressed with the clarity. For me, that truly felt next level!

 

[gamma123152]

I hear ya especially the warping I didn't like, but how many months ago you got the Varjo? Because distortion flickering kind of thing they fixed with software, it's basically unnoticeable.

But yeah I agree, there are still too many small issues for the money. But I was really really impressed with the clarity. For me, that truly felt next level!

I tested it with the most recent distortion profile a few weeks ago. The warping and distortion are the same thing. But that wasn't the main reason for my return, the other mentioned issues were more distracting/irritating to me. I need to be able to use the headset easilly/fast with multiple people because I don't always race alone, and the bad stereo overlap+chromatic aberration + red shift+motion blur were all really bad for me, those were the 4 main reasons that I returned it. I could have lived with the warping/distortion on the edges and the other mentioned issues.

The clarity/150 nits of the Varjo felt also for me next level/close to what you expect in real life indeed, so the future is bright for VR. Once an Aero 2/3/4/5 is released(or competition with a similair approach) with an even higher PPD+all issues that I mentioned solved+bright OLED+higher true to life FoV+wireless; then we have a perfect headset and one day that will be achieved for sure.

Knowing this, it's quite akward to think that people would then still prefer 2d screens. So I really don't get the anti-vr movement at all.

 

[Wakkaman]

I tested it with the most recent distortion profile a few weeks ago. The warping and distortion are the same thing. But that wasn't the main reason for my return, the other mentioned issues were more distracting/irritating to me. I need to be able to use the headset easilly/fast with multiple people because I don't always race alone, and the bad stereo overlap+chromatic aberration + red shift+motion blur were all really bad for me, those were the 4 main reasons that I returned it. I could have lived with the warping/distortion on the edges and the other mentioned issues.

The clarity/150 nits of the Varjo felt also for me next level/close to what you expect in real life indeed, so the future is bright for VR. Once an Aero 2/3/4/5 is released(or competition with a similair approach) with an even higher PPD+all issues that I mentioned solved+bright OLED+higher true to life FoV+wireless; then we have a perfect headset and one day that will be achieved for sure.

Knowing this, it's quite akward to think that people would then still prefer 2d screens. So I really don't get the anti-vr movement at all.

Exactly TurbotT I totally agree. How people and especially developers don't see the potential, just baffles me really. Of course, I understand developers that it's a compromise and there are many technical hurdles. So yeah I understand that you focus on the biggest market, but as you said from all types of games I think VR is actually most used respectively in flight and racesims. It went from 5% to like 25-40% pretty quickly.

I didn't expect from my first oculus that the development would go this fast. I was immediately like oke this is the future, but it's really blurry and you need a killer pc, so which monster computer is able to give us 4k resolution?

But the foveated rendering will make all the difference. One's developers really start to develop also specifically with foveated rendering and other VR developments in mind, VR will truly shine. The technology is here now we need the software to back it up.

 

[javo5]

Works in VR with UEVR injector.
Tested with Quest3