If Oculus results on a success, a lot of your lateral controls will still be useful but you won't see all those nice panel instruments anymore.

Whatcha gonna do?

castAR might be a better fit for someone with an instrumented pit.

They got a nice shot in the financial arm recently...
http://venturebeat.com/2015/08/19/castar...gaming-glasses/

Likely pass through cameras that allow a form of AR won't be far off. At that point I predict greenscreen HUD, MFD's, canopies and mirrors and instrument faces etc, similar to how one would implement CastAR with retroreflective material.

Kick ass physical cockpits will remain relevant and still be the envy of other simmers, but I suspect most will be bare bones. I also suspect there will be a huge surge in people using cockpits of sorts, and that demand may bring some interesting new products to the market as large swaths of people are bitten by the immersion bug.

My idea:

A physical cockpit that contains no instruments, switches etc. but which closely matches the dimensions of the virtual cockpit in the sim. You wear hand tracking gloves so that when you reach out and touch a switch in the sim you see your hand move to the switch and at the point where it touches the surface of physical cockpit you're sitting in it also touches the virtual cockpit of the sim.

I don't think Oculus will be such a big hit for flight simmers. First-person shooters will be all over Oculus though. The need to reference charts, mission cards, etc. means flight simmers cannot have the entire view blocked out, so CastAR seems like a better choice for flight simmers... or until the hand-tracking glove is developed.

My entire reason for wanting Oculus (or HTC Vive, haven't decided yet) is for flight sims. "reference charts, mission cards, etc." are usually presented in game anyway.

I guess that would depend on what sim you are playing.

The Oculus and Vive will be perfect for most flight simmers "IF" the resolution is good enough. Instead of looking a monitor in your game room, you'll be in the cockpit of your favorite aircraft looking down thru the clouds and saying "Holy Shyte I'm a long way up."

I still have hope that the Oculus's resolution might be good enough. According to Palmer, the custom displays being built for the CV1 Rift by Samsung, are better than the ones in the latest Rift headsets shown at the latest tech shows. Even if the resolution isn't higher, any improvement to the ppi or smaller spaces between the pixels will certainly help.

I would imagine once Vive announces their final specs and release date, Oculus will announce their final specs, and open up the Rift to preorders. I won't make up my mind until I see the final specs, and content available. Palmer has just stated the Rift will be more than 350 dollars and why..http://www.roadtovr.com/...but it still should be much cheaper than the Vive as flight simmers will be able to buy a Rift without the cost of the inputs that we won't require.

Think I'm going to hold off for a few years. This tech will only get better but I feel the first few versions of these new VR headsets will have great "wow" factor when using them but little actual benefit to gameplay due to lack of resolution.

I'll give them a few versions and they will nail it and it will be amazing.

I think it�s already amazing. Keep in mind the below was 2 years ago on DK2:

I think the immersion more than makes up for any loss in resolution.

With this idea, the user could paste stickers with various icons/codes on the surfaces of the blank cockpit and these codes are then interprited by the AR camera which presents whatever visual entity tied to that code.

This way the user can create its own cockpit by pasting these stickers (representing various panels, screens, instruments etc) at free will.
I also suspect a system like this would ease the development some. Maybe?

You guys need to check out FlyInside FSX (and P3D). It's an awesome add-on that gives GREAT Rift support to both FSX and P3D. The kicker is that it ALSO supports the leap motion controller. This will allow you to manipulate virtual cockpit controls with your hands. At some point I hope to see it evolve enough that you can use a "dark" cockpit as F4UDash4 had suggested.

Check it out: https://flyinside-fsx.com/

g.

Here's a great vid a guy did explaining Flyinside FSX then comparing it with a real flight over the same terrain in the same plane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30pSJ0wOB6U

Resolution is 1080 X 1200 on each eye. Most monitors works at those resolutions.

I don't think the stickers would be necessary. Well, maybe one just to sync the physical cockpit to the virtual cockpit at startup. The glove would be tracked by the VR HMD positional tracking system and would determine when your virtual fingertip was interacting with a virtual switch. The physical cockpit idea is simply to give tactile feedback to the player, instead of reaching into empty space and flipping a switch your fingertip would actually touch a hard surface.

Of course it would be ridiculous to have multiple physical cockpits to match each different virtual cockpit in a sim like DCS, so a generic cockpit would need to be used to represent all.

This probably warranted a more detailed analisys to state my point. But I'll keep it simple to start.
If you take 1920x1200 monitor and run on it the kind of Vertical FoV (I mention Vertical fov because most of the 2x1080 horizontal resolution on the rift is overlaping so not directly comparable) the rift is running I would not be able to see see or hit #%&*$#, in say DCS to mention just one. Sure it's great for flying around but when you need to make out those fine details (ground targets), you won't.

Sapper, that may be true for the DK2 (960x1080 per eye - one screen), but I doubt that's the case with the CV1. It's my understanding that the CV1 uses two panels, so you're not losing half your horizontal resolution. (The panels are AFAIK, 1920x1200 or better, each.)

Being able to see and hit targets is actually pretty easy, even in the DK2. Warthunder is a fun proving ground for working on your VR air combat skills.

g.

Gene,

Do You have the DK2? How is Cliffs with them?

Gene, the CV1 has been confirmed to be 1080x1200 with the displays in portait configuration.

That doesn't make it a 1080x1200 display. It's a 1200x1080 display rotated.

Audillo, I've got a DK2, yes. I haven't tried Cliffs of Dover with it - I suspect I won't get around to it until after the CV1 is out.
Flying through the mountains in DCS is a scream though.

g.

I know how they work Gene. But refresh direction asside, I don't see a problem with calling them 1080x1200 since that is how they are mounted on the device.
But the point was that they are not 1920x1080. Also that warthunder is nice and fun very diferent from trying to see tanks or even infantry in DCS.
No matter the experience you had personaly in WT, I stand by my point take a similar (1080x1200) array of pixels on any display set it to show the same FoV as occulus and see what detail is actualy rendered at certain distances. Now it can be argued that the engine can be tweeked to adjust for this and it's true, by forcing the rendering of things that are smaller than single a pixel at a given distance, but that should be visible in reality. Still Visual accuety will be defective, it's already defective in present day monitors, going down in resolution and then increassing the mil per pixel is not going to improve it.

Ahh, yes. My personal experience backed by 25 years of experience in visual systems for flight simulators needs to be discounted. It's obviously incorrect.

How many hours have you spent flying in a DK2? Do you own one?

g.

Obviously. Since you feelt the need to bring up the "speacialist" card, instead of making any valid argument other than your anedoctal experience. Wich is not something I would discount, but it's not an argument eighter.

Those that can, do. Those that can't, argue about specs.

Put another way, if you don't have a DK2 or at least a LOT of time using it with the applications in question, then you lack the qualifications required to complain about it.

g.

OK

The resolution is already similar to a normal monitor. If I understand SAPPER correctly the problem is that the OR uses a Field of View of 110 degrees. The "far back" default field of view for CloD is 90 degreess, so objects will be smaller (Although using a virtual larger screen).

What is the problem of using Zoom?

I think its a different FOV.if you use a 110 fov the cockpit will look all warped and far away from you.I think the rift will have a life like fov and the amount of view is 110 deg.I think.....I did say that twice.

Gene I really don't care if you think I am or not qualified or not to argue about the rift. Actually you have no Idea if I have or not. Aparently you think yourself exclusevely able to aford one.
Quite frankly your degression towards ad-hominem stlyle arguments, is speaking loads of your character and making me lose the respect I had of you of knowing your work for a few good years now.

Specs like the details make the picture, if you insist on discussing the "experience" without the discussing the specs, you become alike the cult member who knows his end of the world cult is true because he had an "experience". Take this as you will I don't care if you think it qualifies me or not, but I don't need to put on a DK2 or a RV1 to have a 1200x1080 viewport renderend on my screen set my sim FoV in dcs to 110 degrees and realize that it's insuficient for my needs. Maybe some people are visualy impaired and can't tell the diference of having roughly 29 pixles per degree versus having less than 10, fortunately and even though I use glases, I can.
Of course I would be a fool not to at least listen to people who have tried the DK2, after all there are mimicks than can be used to improve on resolution limitations, such as interpolation when rendering, but a lot are reporting my fears/findinds, that it's hard to read the intruments in DCS cockpits let alone to see ground targets.

Aullido - Objects will not technically be smaller since wou will see them in life like size with the oculus, but they will be drawn with fewer pixels, since fewer are avaiable, this is speacially problematic in distant objects since they will sonner become imperceptible and in some cases the engine may even just decide they are too small (in the scene) to be drawn at all.

Wolftriked - FoV is FoV, the reason 110 degrees will not looked warped in ocullus as oposed to you screen it's because it will be wraped around you like it should as if the scene was real and that is one of the great things about VR.

*rolls eyes*

You've essentially admitted you don't have a DK2, nor have you (apparently) used one, yet you think you're qualified to discuss the merits/usability of the DK2 as well as the CV1? Awesome.

Look, I'm sorry if you're all twisted up about me pointing this out. However, I get tired of people prattling on about crap they know little or nothing about. It's just flat /irritating/ and my responses reflect that irritation.

When you've had the opportunity to spend an hour or two using a DK2 then we'll continue this discussion. If you find you have the opportunity to attend an event that would allow you to try the CV1, do so! I've heard it's very good and I look forward to getting my hands on the hardware once it arrives. I _suspect_ that the increased resolution in combination with the pixel size reduction will go a long way towards eliminating the avionics readability issues.

The visual experience in DCS isn't very good in the DK2 due to the resolution of the DK2 and how DCS is displayed in it. I would recommend that you try FSX or Prepar3D with the FlyInside! FSX (or P3D) plugin. The visual experience in the DK2 is excellent and the performance is also very good due to Dan's use of "time warp". Turn up the land traffic and start counting cars. Let me know how high you get when you can't pick out individual cars.

Look at this from my perspective. Which would you take seriously - a person that's performed a task or someone that's only read about it? You wouldn't take your car to a guy that's only read about fixing cars, would you? This is why I can't take you seriously.

g.

A few days ago I downloaded the "Google Cardboard" app for my phone, an old Galaxy S4. Once I found it would run ok on my phone I ordered this Google Cardboard Kit to make the experience complete.


Now this is by NO MEANS representative of Oculus Rift, but if it was just a bit more comfortable to wear and the screen just a little wider / clearer I would be trying to figure out how to fly a sim with this setup! It is that good.

That being the case, I can't wait for OR to be released, flight simming will take on an entirely new life.

And why do you think I need you to take me serious? You're stuck up feeling superior and I care very little for the likes of you. I made my point and you so far you have not presented a single compeling argument do caombat mine. All you can say is "I tryed it and I like how it looks". Well good for you, but I don't have to try it to know that with those specs it's not good enough". I can never be good enough with those resolutions. And after the initial "god this is great" dies out for people there will be a lot of disapointed sim fellows out there when they realize they can't fly a proper mission with the occulus on. I can imagine that the experience is better in FSX, P3D or XPLane and the likes. First you don't need to find targets all you need to see are runways wich are big ass things and as for instrument readability that can be better or worst depending on the plane beeing simulated, some planes you sit closer to the dashboard, others further away, the size of the instruments may vary. But at 1200x1080 I'll pass, looking forward for greater resolutions when they come out though.

My "compelling argument" is that you appear to possess neither the knowledge or the experience to discuss the topic at hand.

Excuse me whilst I go find myself a High Horse to ride off into the sunset on.

*plonk*



g.

F4Dash4, the situational awareness gained by the DK2 is simply AMAZING. If you can, find someone local to you that has one. You'll love it. Being able to retain visual on the bad guy by just looking around is fantastic. With the higher resolution screens in the CV1 & Vive, it'll just be better.

g.

I'll second that, I had a DK2 at launch and whilst it wasn't perfect by any stretch it showed me all I needed to know about what a game changer it is...and I agree it really has to be experienced to demonstrate the difference it makes. It really isn't something that can be discussed in great detail without having some first hand experience regarding the immersion it provides. I'm not saying people can't or shouldnt try and discuss the pros and cons - just that I struggle to see how people can lend a valid opinion without really seeing how much of a difference it seriously makes. It's literally on a different planet. I'm certainly intrigued into the possibilities regarding VR use outside of gaming - I'm hoping it can bring live sports events into the home so to speak. ....it's definitely possible.

I'm not silly enough to either commit to a particular brand or write a particular manufacturer off - I'll certainly try and weigh up all the options but I know it's going to be difficult to resist buying the first VR headset that hits the market. The biggest drawback of the DK2 was definitely the screen door effect due to the resolution but since that has been increased it only makes me even more interested.

Hi Paradaz,

Do You play CloD? How do You describe the experience? Any limitations?

I am very interested on the Rift, but first I need to know how many sims are supported.

Thanks.

I don't know that CloD has native support for VR goggles of any brand - it may be usable with something like VorpX though. The only flight sims I know of with dedicated VR support is FSX, Prepar3D, Warthunder, and DCS. DCS support (the last time I tried it) was a bit wobbly - they hadn't gotten the clickable cockpits working yet. They're pushing hard for 2.0, so that may still be the case.

g.

I do own CLoD, however I didn't even try it out with the DK2. I actually sold the DK2 a couple of months back whilst I could still get a decent return on the hardware. I felt that what I had seen was enough to convince me to buy into VR at retail.

I did play DCS with it, and again the immersion is outstanding....the main limitation which others have already mentioned especially for flightsims is with regards the simpit. I've dabbled myself in all sorts of different things, button boxes, MFDs, side consoles etc. and the DK2 made all them unusable. I appreciate that this could change in the future if overlays can be used with additional cameras but in my opinion the feeling you get of being 'in' the aircraft and being able to look 360 degrees more than makes up for it, however some people have outstanding pits and it's a shame if nothing else that the functionality may be lost.

I put a fair bit of time into racing sims, and it's less of a problem here....as long as you have the wheel and pedals there isn't a lot else in terms of a pit that is missing. A physical shifter perhaps......Euro Truck Simulator 2 is another great example for the DK2....I remember nearly falling off my chair at one stage because I leaned on what I could see as the open window in order to look down the length of my truck as I reversed....obviously there was nothing there but the sensation of 'being there' is more realistic than any peripheral can provide in my opinion. As far as limitations go, as I've said before it is definitely the resolution with the DK2 - when the screen is so close to your eyes a true HD sized resolution was just nowhere near big enough and you could make out the pixels/screen door effect. I haven't seen/tried Crescent Bay and beyond so don't know how much of a difference the increased resolution has made.

I also ran a few demos past my dad with the DK2 - he's a complete techno biff - doesn't use a laptop, has never played with the internet....the remote control for the TV confuses him.....so it was so funny to see him with the DK2 on and he's waving his arms around and trying to 'touch' the objects that are suspended in front of his face. He was absolutely blown away by it which I thought was quite ironic and he just isn't normally impressed by anything that a PC can generate.

I would love to try one if it were available to me but even without first hand experience I am sold on the concept enough that I am planning on a "Oculus ready" PC build starting on Black Friday / Cyber Monday and I'll be buying an Oculus or Vive as soon as they're available and I can determine which is best suited for flight sims.

Is it possible that much of this could be overcome with a good HOTAS setup plus a pit with widely spaced, tactile switches? For some purposes (gear, flaps, tail hook, canopy etc.) a few simple 2 position toggle switches would suffice and if they were organized well could be operated "blind" while wearing a HMD.

I am planning a simpit build and that is my current thought process at least.

Since Cliffs is already playable on Nvidia's 3D Ready I was hoping it would not be difficult to convert Cliffs to VR. This technology is a godsend for both Nvidia and ATI since at least doubles the graphics hardware requirements, long ago restricted by consoles.

I was expecting for a driver to convert from 3D Ready to Oculus Rift, that will make tens of games ready for the Rift.

Looks this idea is already taking form:

New driver support.

A good HOTAS can definitely make things work well. I have a Warthog myself so you can cram a lot of functionality onto the stick/throttle . ....but that reminds me of another limitation of the DK2 . .....anything that requires you to take your hands of the flight stick, be it a keyboard keystroke/menu or button box switch brings you out of the immersion because more often than not you have to lift the goggles off your head. Related to that is the fact that the VR is so immersive that you expect to see your own body/hands when you look down and for a split-second it can often feel a little bit odd if you reach forward to trip a physical switch for example because until that point you feel as if you in the middle of the action........

I wouldn't right off the Rifts 2160�1200 at 90Hz split over dual displays just yet. Apparently Samsung has created a custom VR display for the Rift, that may or may not have a pixel/sub-pixel/lower space between pixel setup combined with custom lenses, and Optic Software that may or may not have the appearance of a higher resolution. Certainly nothing compared to a high resolution monitor, BUT far more immersive.

DCS has an option to increase the size of distant objects, like aircraft, which should help VR's lower resolution spot distant aircraft/objects.

Vive and Oculus should be showing their hardware at Gamespot/BestBuy, so that people can make a more informed decision, rather than relying on second hand info.

I was thinking of buying the Vive, but I doubt there be many Vive's available this year, and even if there are some, its doubtful there will be any flight sim software ready to run on it. Maybe by the time the Rift comes out early next year there will be some flight sim supporting the Vive and Rift. With DCS and WT being the most likely candidates. If your just into flight sims the Rift should be much cheaper, as we will have the option of buying the Rift without inputs, and only one tracker. If the VR is good enough we can buy the Touch inputs, and extra tracker later, with a total price still cheaper than the Vive if infact Oculus still plans to sell their hardware near cost.

My best price guess, is $399 for the Rift.
$500 for the Rift/Touch
$599+ for the Vive/Wands

Cost factors that favor the Rift.
Option to buy less hardware.
Vive Laser tracking more expensive to produce than the Rift Constellation tracking
Samsung partnership will allow for a custom display at a lower price point.
Oculus selling their hardware near cost

No word from HTC Vive on pricing other than saying their hardware won't be cheap.

That should not be the case if you have a sim pit with all your needed switches laid out such that you can find them without looking. My plan is to have a CH stick (modded as a center stick), throttle, pedals and as many functions as I can moved to toggle / rotary switches positioned aft of the throttle in well defined rows well separated so they're easy to find "blind".

Also toying with the idea of having a gaming key pad:



on my right console where I can lay my hand on it "blind" and have numerous functions at my fingertips there as well.









Yep, motion tracking gloves would be great. Then you could interact with the virtual cockpit directly. And I have always wished flight sims at least had the options of showing your virtual arms/legs when you looked around inside the cockpit.

I've been hoping they would. I hope they have a flight sim available to demo too.

I'm not disagreeing with you and it's a good idea.......I would suggest that it may not be quite as intuitive as you might think though. Even though you know exactly where any keyboard or buttons/switches are you (or I certainly did anyway) end up 'feeling' for where the keyboard is before you extend for a button. Because the headset is so immersive it's easy to get disorientated with the real-life peripherals even though one of your hands is permanently on the stick. On top of that, if you're right handed you're probably going to be reaching for keyboard controls with your left hand.......and 'in the dark' it adds extra difficulty.

To try and explain what I mean.... close your eyes when youre flying a normal flight sim even just for a couple of minutes but continue to move your head up,down,left, right and then try to hit the spacebar of your keyboard with your left hand! You may be OK but if you're anything like me just a few cm/inches away from from where you think you are means you end up searching for the device as if you're walking around in the dark. I honestly think that I'd struggle to guarantee I was hitting the right switch even if they were 6 inches apart.

Whilst I say all this I also think it emphasises just how immersive the VR experience can be to take you out of your real surroundings!

I don't know if anyone else has thoughts on this? Perhaps it's just me but as far as my DK2 experience went I wouldn't entertain my sim pit if the VR experience at retail was the same. Ultimately I found that it took away some of the immersion rather than adding to it but others may disagree.

This is mostly theory on my part as I've not tried this yet but the theory I am working on is to maintain a point of contact between your hand/arm and the simpit at all times and to place switches / key pad such that you can locate them with a very short hand movement. I specifically prefer a gamepad, or a multi-switch gaming mouse/trackball, as opposed to an actual keyboard as a keyboard is not as conducive to laying your hand on and immediately / instinctively knowing which keys are under your fingers.

Example, additional toggle / rotary switches located aft of (or even on) your throttle that you can easily find with your left hand.

For your right hand you would need to take it off the stick and do the same with a side mount stick or in my case, as I plan on a center stick, move your elbow back into contact with your seat cushion at your side, then move outboard to where your switches are located. If you've laid everything out right, and with a little practice, your hand should fall right onto your switches, mouse or gamepad. And of course you would only want things that are not needed in maneuvering flight located on the right side since they require you to take your hand off the stick.

I've even thought of putting a large, easy to locate switch on the front of my pit seat, between my legs, to act as an ejection handle

I currently don't need to use the keyboard, but then again I only fly WW2 aircraft. I have a center mounted joystick in my right hand, a throttle in my left, and a very easy to find three lever peripheral above the throttle, all three peripherals have more than enough buttons, rotaries etc. I also use a VAC system to communicate with the Tower etc, or even any other action. VAC could also be used to select and show highly used phrases in the Chat box. The main point is VR with be so immersive for most people, that they will find ways to use their keyboard or avoid it all together. Personally I can find and type without having to see my keyboard, but much prefer not using it at all.

FlyInside has support for the Leap Motion controller so you can manipulate virtual cockpit controls with your hands. At some point I'd like to see it be able to map virtual locations to physical ones in order to help out those building cockpits.

g.