VR support 'not at launch' for Odyssey

A minimum viable implementation is not hard to do, and won't delay Odyssey for another 1-2 years, as some people are trying to suggest.

3D rendering can be implemented quickly (won't say a few days but most likely it is that - it is rendering the same scene 2x from a slightly different angle)
allow the HMD axis as your mouse/controller input (they had that during the FSS beta but unfortunately removed it) - done. Unless their new engine does away with 3D representation of things and uses mostly 2D sprites.

It won't be the best FPS implementation that exists, but it is more or less along the lines of what we have in space (with HMD axis as headlook). And what most VR players would be happy with.

Throw in a few optional comfort modes (vignette, blackout in certain situations, like what they have for the SRV) for those that want them and you can say it has solid VR support.

It won't be Halflife Alyx or a pure VR game, but it would allow people that play Elite in VR to continue to enjoy the newest incarnation of their game and the long awaited new content, that many of us have already paid for.

Would I like to have more support? Of course, I'd love to be able to interact with the cockpit, use roomscale (as an option) in FPS. I prefer to stay realistic though.
Its not just the 3D rendering which is nothing different from normal play, its just two different view points beamed to your eyes. I don't believe that is the issue at all. There would likely have to be some serious UI changes to make it work. None of those were needed in the ship piloting part as the UI worked perfectly fine for VR from the beginning (apart from maybe the colour).

I think we need to see what they have in mind for this update first to make a proper judgement on how easy it is.

I really want VR Odyssey, but i'm not going to say it's easy to implement in a satisfactory way as I have not seen any of gameplay and UI designs so far.
 
I've seen something else in this thread saying about how you have to design your assets for VR, so it would need a complete rewrite etc...

No...

VR integration consists of is interfacing with the VR API, whether it be SteamVR aka OpenVR, or Oculus VR, this API tells the game where the viewpoint is, as in what X Y Z position the head is, and its Yaw Pitch and Roll angles, and the distance between the cameras (for cameras read eyes) and asks the game for two pictures, one from XYZ+YPR & the other from the location of the other eye at its XYZ+YPR, the game renders these frames, and sends the two frames to the VR API and the VR runtimes (which host the API) deal with syncing those images with the headset. The VR API asks for its next frame to be two new viewpoints from the latest XYZ+YPR's and the process continues.

A rather simplified description of the workflow.. But I'm left wondering if they assumed it would be that simple, based on previous experience with Elite and discovered along the way that integrating VR FPS to the existing codebase wasn't quite as simple. Based on my, admittedly limited, previous experiences, I can see how such a problem could occur.. Or maybe the VR FPS portion doesn't perform well enough on a wide enough range of hardware. There's a bunch of possible, valid reasons for a delay.
 
You seem to have typo'd. Fixed it for you.

Do you have a source?

Here is mine:
1593178379735.png

 
Do you have a source?

Here is mine:
View attachment 178929

He's trolling this thread. I think we've had some Steam global-HMD ownership stats as "proof" previously... but you never know, he might change the attack angle for his amusement and onanism... ;)
 
Last edited:
I think we need to see what they have in mind for this update first to make a proper judgement on how easy it is.

I really want VR Odyssey, but i'm not going to say it's easy to implement in a satisfactory way as I have not seen any of gameplay and UI designs so far.

I'd be inclined to agree with you, but:
  • If we don't make noise we will be forgotten about and VR will be less likely to happen
    • There are plenty of 2D players trolling us with "bye now and good ridence you entitled box head whiners"
  • Granted we don't have all the details, but many of our opponents are telling us to naff off as adding VR to Odessy would:
    • "take years"
    • seriously delay the game
    • force a rewrite
    • force the developers to divert significant amounts of resources and thus cause gameplay and content to be sacrificed
    • force the minimum requirements for the game to go through the roof
      • VR does need high performance but it being in a game doesn't affect 2d requirements
So, to prevent the pancake trolls winning the argument with their repeated fallacious misinformation, I think our best approach is to keep reiterating evidenced and reasonable presumptions that dispel the pancake trolls myths. And currently, I think that means donning the roll of "Armchair Dev", and my case, that entails using my project management experience to theory craft reasons, based on past evidence, that VR in Odessy is viable, so that's what I'm doing.

But, I accept these optimistic projections are being forecast in the absence of specifics, but this is frontier, and we all know how forthcoming they are with details 😒, but I acknowledge that you can't build anything solid on tumbleweed... But once we get those specifics, if there is anything that stymies the sort of "just plug it into the API" implementation i've been proposing, I'll be changing my tune and saying "now I know STUFF, I understand THAT would be a problem, but would a possible workaround be THIS idea?" - As in trying to provide constructive suggestions on how to work around issues with Odessy that render it incompatible with or suboptimal for VR.

But with the very little information we have just now, I genuinely cannot see any reason for VR not to "work with" Odessy.
 
Last edited:
This poll was a great 10/10 as a noise making exercise, which is most likely what the author intended. It is a generous 1/10 with regards to contributing any kind of actual relevant facts for the discussion tho 🤷‍♂️ .
How? Over 6 thousand participants out to make it a valid source of data?
 
If you don't take 6400+ (as of today) opinions in a poll as being reasonably indicative of player composition and a more valid source of data than Zorvan arbitrarily reducing M Kozak's figure by an order of magnitude then I think you will need this:
1593183603730.png
 
I think we need to see what they have in mind for this update first to make a proper judgement on how easy it is.
Yes, we don't know what is in the update, so we don't know how complex VR integration would be. Significantly complex for 1st person I suspect, and more important combat involving multiple players using 2d and 3d in a single instance.

Complex does not mean impossible, just complex, so time consuming.


But with the very little information we have just now, I genuinely cannot see any reason for VR not to "work with" Odessy.
I'm sure it can. It will be up to fdev if they decide they want to take the time to do it.

The flight parts won't be the blocker for VR, if they can find a way to allow that I'd be delighted. They may well decide splitting it that way isn't acceptable, we will need to see.
 

Craith

Volunteer Moderator
Its not just the 3D rendering which is nothing different from normal play, its just two different view points beamed to your eyes. I don't believe that is the issue at all. There would likely have to be some serious UI changes to make it work. None of those were needed in the ship piloting part as the UI worked perfectly fine for VR from the beginning (apart from maybe the colour).

I think we need to see what they have in mind for this update first to make a proper judgement on how easy it is.

I really want VR Odyssey, but i'm not going to say it's easy to implement in a satisfactory way as I have not seen any of gameplay and UI designs so far.

I am fine with having to use hotkeys like people playing on a screen, and it not being officially supported. Fine may be to strong a word, but I oculd live with it. Removing VR from the future of Elite is not acceptable for me.
 
This poll was a great 10/10 as a noise making exercise, which is most likely what the author intended. It is a generous 1/10 with regards to contributing any kind of actual relevant facts for the discussion tho 🤷‍♂️ .

We will never have hard facts, so we extrapolate info from things available.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
We will never have hard facts, so we extrapolate info from things available.

Extrapolating from a wrong basis can lead to conclusions even more far away from the actual truth and make more harm than good. In other words it is not extrapolable, it is actually unreliable.
 
Last edited:
I am fine with having to use hotkeys like people playing on a screen, and it not being officially supported. Fine may be to strong a word, but I oculd live with it. Removing VR from the future of Elite is not acceptable for me.
I'm not talking about hot keys. Look at a VR versions of these the FPP games, the FPP UI has to change dramatically otherwise it's far too big and incongruous to look at. Make them for VR and they are far too small for screen purposes.
 
I think with regards to our expectations/demands for VR in Odessy, we need to define what is a must-have versus what would-be-nice. These would be weighted differently for different individuals, but the expectations can be defined into "levels" of VR implementation, and each subsequent level would inherit the previous level's functionality. As such each subsiquent level will satisfy more of the VR playerbase.

1st Level - Pilots Seat only VR in Odessy

This would be the bare minimum VR approach for Odessy, and would essentially leave us with the same VR functionality, but be able to fly or drive under those coloured skies, this would allow VR Horizons players to continue as is, but gain access to the skies, and some Odessy content. There will be things like "new engineers" and "Sphere of Combat" from the release that could be partaken of in a ship / SLF / SRV and thus done in 1st level VR.

Where this gets clouded is what happens for on foot / Space Legs* content for VR level 1 players?
  • Is this Space Legs* content disabled, like the exit SRV menu button greyed out when in VR?
  • Is this Space Legs* content accessed by transitioning to flat screen, like click exit SRV brings up a black VR screen with a message "remove headset and press [BUTTON] to continue on foot"
  • Is this Space Legs* content accessed by a virtual 2d screen rendered inside the headset?
2nd Level - WASD/ Gamepad Walking VR in Odessy

This level would "inherit" the flying and driving in VR from the first level, but would add to it by allowing the player to take to their feet while still in VR and have VR headlook while on foot. The game remains a "seated VR experience" and as such does not include use of hand controllers to track the players hands, as such this would be a wasd / gamepad control scheme, with things like [PRESS E or BUTTON 2 to plant charges] prompts as opposed to the player physically placing the charges with own (tracked by hand controllers) hands.

Considerations / problems that I can foresee would be:
This list of considerations is in addition to the list from 1st Level and relates only to the VR On Foot aspect
  • Smooth Locomotion vs Teleporting?
    • Smooth locomotion may cause nausea in some
    • Teleportation is janky and could be used to cheat in FPS combat
      • pinned down? Simples... Teleport to a new safer location, this would be an exploited in PvE combat and an infuriating cheat in PvP FPS combat.
  • When running is there an element of headbob, which might cause nausea, so could this be smoothed for VR? Maybe via an option in graphics setting like "SRV Keep Horizon" setting?
  • What happens when the player leans their real body forward / back / left / right?
    • Would this be reflected by the "characters" and avatars?
    • Would reflecting this movement by the player need new animations for the "characters"?
      • Would the head be stuck to the neck and not movable at all?
      • or would the head only movable within certain limits?
      • Would hitting those limits induce nausea when the head motion stops changing the view?
        • as in you can move your head say ~150° (vertical to chin on chest), and more with slight shoulder / torso movement, but if the avatar/character is limited to say 110°, so movements from 110° to 150° of the players head would not be reflected on the view screen representing what their character's head is doing, the disconnect is a potential nausea trigger.
  • Similarly - care would need to be taken when entering or leaving the pilots seat, [Press X to enter/leave Pilot's seat] and an animation of your character getting up or sitting down disassociating the VR players view with their physical movements and or expected view changes arising from their control inputs into the game/simulation.
    • Maybe this might be best served as an optional fade to black during the transition?
    • Maybe cut to a third person view instead?
3rd Level - Seated VR with Hand-controllers in Odessy

Third level would "inherit" the flying and driving in VR from the first level, and continue to allow the player to take to their feet while still in VR and have VR headlook while on foot from 2nd level VR, but Add limited hand controls to the game, and remain a seated VR experience. In this sort of implementation the player would move their character using the thumbsticks on their hand controllers, and be able to perform tasks with them such as instead of the [PRESS "E" or BUTTON 2 to plant charges] from 2nd level VR, 3rd level VR would see the player move their hand to their hip, or press a button to "equip charges" to avoid punching their sears arms with their hand controller, take the charges from their hip pocket, move to the action point, move their actual hand towards the virtual action point and release the charges.

Considerations / problems that I can foresee with hand controllers would be:
This list of considerations is in addition to the list from 2nd Level VR and relates only to the VR Hand Controllers functionality
  • There would be a lot of work associated with elbows, with a WASD/Joypad game, the developers have control over the movements of arms, hands and elbows, and can have predefined animations for them. With hand controllers they need to, on the fly, figure out the appropriate movement for upper arm, forearm and below to reflect the changes of positional data from the hand controllers.
  • There MAY be a lot of work to implement hand interaction with assets in game, for things like pressing the button to open a door.
  • There would be a need to draw a line somewhere on what can and cannot be picked up and interacted with using hand controllers.
    • it would be cool if everything a player sees could be grabbed and manipulated as this would allow for things like throwing a pipe or a rock behind an opponent to distract them,
  • When transitioning to / from the seat, player would need to put aside their hand controllers and grasp their HOTAS, or vice versa
    • not a biggie, the VR Player would do this during the transition (fade to black moment or animation)
  • If the player has made their bindings use hotas buttons and hand controller buttons in the same mode, like if the left hand-controller grip button is also used for shield cell bank, working with the two types of controllers concurrently would be cumbersome.
    • not a biggie, the player simply needs to map more sensible control schemes and doing so is their problem not Frontier's
      • maybe put in checks in bindings to prevent ship / SRV functions being bound to a hand controller' buttons / axis' ?
    • Frontier would, however, need to ensure they don't create potential conflicts, by, for example making the open airlock button from the pilots seat one that needs "physically pressed" by using the hand controllers
  • Clipping! If a player stands with their CMDR's toes against a wall and raises their arm 90 out in front of them could their arm "clip" through the wall, potentially allowing them to cheat by shooting through a wall if they raise a hand holding a gun. Or would their CMDR be bushed back from the wall? It's not insurmountable, but it will need addressing.
4th Level - "Room scale" VR in Odessy
4th level would "inherit" the flying and driving in VR from the first level, and continue to allow the player to take to their feet while still in VR and have VR headlook while on foot, and the hand controls from third level VR, but now becomes a "room scale" VR experience. In this sort of implementation the player would move their character using either the thumbsticks on their hand controllers, or by walking (within the confines of their room) they could also control stance by physically crouching etc. There may still be a reliance on some VR Hand Controller inputs for walking as the player only has a room not a holodeck. Continued over from 3rd Level VR the room scale player would be able to perform tasks with their hands through the hand controllers. As such instead of the [PRESS "E" or BUTTON 2 to plant charges] from 2nd level VR, Like 3rd level VR, a roomscale player would move their hand to their hip, take the charges from their hip pocket, move to the action point, move their actual hand towards the virtual action point and release the charges.

Considerations / problems that I can foresee with hand controllers would be:
This list of considerations is in addition to the list from 3rd Level and relates only to the "room scale" functionality
  • Again, potentially a limit on the "physics" available to interact with, room scale players might see an apple sized rock that would be ideal to throw to distract a guard, and the could crouch down to pick it up, but would the game necessarily enable them to do that?
    • Finding out what is and isn't interactive could distract the player from core gameplay.
    • Adding more and more "physics" means an exponential growth in developer workload for diminishing returns in added gameplay
  • Room scale is good, but its not infinite. The boundaries could be a problem, if they hit a boundary of their play zone and have to turn 180° IRL and counter that with a thumbstick input to retain their original heading to continue walking down their corridor, in a 300m long ship, that's going to get a bit tedious.
  • Tracking of posture, stand up right, ducking slightly, fully ducking, crouch, kneel, prone all need to be tracked and calculated from head and hands alone.
  • Out of sync return to seats. A player gets out of gaming chair IRL, walks within their playzone to where their virtual SRV hangar is located, boards SRV, but they are now 3m away from their seat...
    • Do they walk back to their IRL seat and recenter avatar?
      • How do they do that without clipping through bulkheads?
  • First Person Combat, granted Room Scale would be good for enabling the player to go through stand / crouch / kneel, but how does that work with going prone? Or Cossack Crawling?
  • Clipping (again) if a player centres VR on current location when they have a couple of metres in front of them IRL, but only a couple of centimetres in game from a wall, could they simply step forwards 2m IRL and walk through the wall that way?
  • "Periscoping" - in a combat situation it might be possible for the player to crouch, reset VR, stand up, and have their view point from 3ft above their characters head somewhat akin to the way some players abuse third person in games like ARMA.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7zoVIsIT2A
 
Last edited:
I hadn't seen your reply before I submitted an edit:

[EDIT:] I see where you are going with this now, so this means I can cite this article to dismiss people citing Steam stats as, polls and statistics are now evidently worthless even with thousands or millions of datapoints or participants - cheers for that :cool:

but the point stands the evidence from ~6400 users is more valid evidentially speaking than the whimsical opinion of one participant in the debate who "corrected" another participants post by downwards revision of their quoted figure by an order of magnitude 20% --> 2%
 
Back
Top Bottom