2D tools not really any good in a 3D environment

[Globusdiablo]

Tinkering with the gfx settings for my wife (oh sorry, meant to say Vive), I've noticed it's like rumbling through my dads toolbox. Plenty of tools, but few actually work for the job at hand.

It seems that VR is still so new, that developers are using 2D tools to solve 3D problems.

It's well known to most that dialing up "quality" settings usually add noise/artifacts, thus creating more problems than they solve.

I found that anti aliasing does absolutely no good in VR. Merely adds artifacts. Ended up turning that off completely.

The same can be said for another classic 2D tool, the super sampling. It does wonders to a 2D monitor, but adds interference in a 3D environment. Ended up scaling that down to 0.65, thus working in unison with the one tool on the list that actually seems to be built for the 3D environment. The HMD quality setting.

With low to medium settings throughout, draw distance at max, SS at 0.65 and HMD quality at 2.0 I get solid fps in the green, and more artifact free visuals.

I guess what I want to say is, I can't wait till the tools catch up with the hardware.

 

[CMDR MAIN SEQUENCE]

I think this must be Vive specific. In the Rift both AA and SS certainly improve things (specifically SMAA makes text sharper, the other types are useless IMO). I've seen several Vive users say the 0.65/2.0 thing is the best option and yet this makes things look worse in the Rift. I guess it shows how different the two ecosystems are (including the ED implementation).

 

[shadragon]

E: D was designed for 3D from day one. The settings I use may not work for you because we have different PC hardware, Internet latency and other hardware differences like routers / modems, etc.

Find what works best for you. It takes time, but it is worth it.

 

[Globusdiablo]

E: D was designed for 3D from day one...

Probably. But neither Oculus nor Vive were around when FD started building this game.

Bottom line is that this is 1. generation tech with 1. generation tools. Things will improve rapidly from here on in. I hope.

 

[Globusdiablo]

... I guess it shows how different the two ecosystems are (including the ED implementation).

Indeed. A rocky road ahead for VR if manufacturers and developers can't agree to a common platform.

 

[shreddog]

It's well known to most that dialing up "quality" settings usually add noise/artifacts, thus creating more problems than they solve.

I found that anti aliasing does absolutely no good in VR. Merely adds artifacts. Ended up turning that off completely.

The same can be said for another classic 2D tool, the super sampling. It does wonders to a 2D monitor, but adds interference in a 3D environment. Ended up scaling that down to 0.65, thus working in unison with the one tool on the list that actually seems to be built for the 3D environment. The HMD quality setting.

With low to medium settings throughout, draw distance at max, SS at 0.65 and HMD quality at 2.0 I get solid fps in the green, and more artifact free visuals.

Interesting. I will try this out on my next VR session and compare it to my own settings. Lately I've beem running VR medium with some beefed up settings(SMAA,ultra shadows, high textures and environment). After Guardians dropped I've had extremely good performance on my oc 970 using these settings, even on planet surfaces. And it looks great. Before Guardians I had to use VR low settings. So Frontier must have done an amazing job with optimization.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Probably. But neither Oculus nor Vive were around when FD started building this game.

Bottom line is that this is 1. generation tech with 1. generation tools. Things will improve rapidly from here on in. I hope.

But the concept of VR (aka rendering what each eye sees separately) has been around for ages, and each eye sees a 2D image. The reason for the wonky AA is not because VR is in 3D, but because the relative pixel density is low at the moment. We can SEE the individual pixels, whereas on a 4K monitor we can't see the individual pixels unless we get a magnifying glass.

Once eye tracking tech gets added to VR headsets, the pixel density can be increased without having to have the graphics card render each eye at 4K resolution. Then the visuals should improve.

 

[Globusdiablo]

...After Guardians dropped I've had extremely good performance on my oc 970 using these settings, even on planet surfaces. And it looks great. Before Guardians I had to use VR low settings. So Frontier must have done an amazing job with optimization.

Yeah, FD is definitely optimising the code constantly. Optimising visual settings for Elite: Dangerous feels very similar to when you buy a new TV. You have to turn off all the artificial "enhancement" features creating that KAPOW effect on the sales floor, but is completely over the top when you see it in your living room. Although I do know that many people actually watch TV using the factory presets and never give any thought to the pink faces and contours.

 

[dogbite]

Given that we all perceive visually at different frequencies and our brains adapt and adjust to what details we see (the more we use VR, the more we adjust to the lower detail as an example) things like AA and SS are likely quite subjective. Also, in these early days of VR how AA and SS are being developed will vary from game to game and in perception, from person to person. I find AA works better in say DCS and Assetto Corsa than say ED, although the implementations are on going in VR. That other may register this differently does not surprise me. I wouldn't relegate these tools to the useless category, it is just that they are under developed at the moment. That being said, at current HMD resolution and cranking PD, AA and SS will only have minor impact for most, I would think.

 

[Globusdiablo]

...The reason for the wonky AA is not because VR is in 3D, but because the relative pixel density is low at the moment. We can SEE the individual pixels, whereas on a 4K monitor we can't see the individual pixels unless we get a magnifying glass...

I don't agree. I don't mind the pixelation, I mind the colour bleeding, making some text unreadable. I think FD should revisit the colour scheme for HMDs. Having a monitor an inch from your face with a fresnel lense in between creates issues.

An example. If you raise yourself a bit from your seat when activating FSD, you can allign that prompt with the reticule prompt for your destination. Move a bit forward and they even have the same size. And approximate colour. Yet the FSD prompt is clear, and the reticule prompt is blurry/bleeding. So it's a question of applying a different colouring "approach" to VR than 2D screens. I think.

 

[CMDR MAIN SEQUENCE]

The reason for the wonky AA is not because VR is in 3D, but because the relative pixel density is low at the moment. We can SEE the individual pixels, whereas on a 4K monitor we can't see the individual pixels unless we get a magnifying glass

This is true but it's also because the AA in this game is poor at the moment. Even SMAA. It seemed to take a nose dive with 2.0 (most noticeably with the text on the cockpit UI but with other aspects as well). On a 3440x1440 monitor at Ultra I can still see some shimmering (a milder version of what I see in VR) and a small amount of aliasing (sitting in the hanger is probably the best test). I must play around with different levels of SS when time allows. In fairness there are lots of brightly coloured lines against a darker background which will increase shimmering and are lots of straight lines in this game - then again there are in other games and they don't seem to have this problem. In VR the pixelation just makes the issue more obvious.

 

[Darkfyre99]

I don't agree. I don't mind the pixelation, I mind the colour bleeding, making some text unreadable. I think FD should revisit the colour scheme for HMDs. Having a monitor an inch from your face with a fresnel lense in between creates issues.

An example. If you raise yourself a bit from your seat when activating FSD, you can allign that prompt with the reticule prompt for your destination. Move a bit forward and they even have the same size. And approximate colour. Yet the FSD prompt is clear, and the reticule prompt is blurry/bleeding. So it's a question of applying a different colouring "approach" to VR than 2D screens. I think.

I absolutely agree that FD's choice of orange for its primary HUD color is atrocious. Not only is it ascetically unappealing, but the "bleeding" you're complaining about is due to the HMD's apparent pixel size verses the apparent pixel size of a 4k screen two feet away from you. In VR, pixel size is large enough that the individual color elements (the red, green, and blue sub-pixels) becomes important. You can see how much clearer text made up of only those three colors is compared to the default orange text.

It's also why FD's decision not to allow for a customizable HUD (as opposed to the modding the config file to alter the HUD, which also affects other graphical elements in the user interface) is nearly unforgivable. I like having my reds red, my greens green, and the portraits portraity. If I want the text in game to be legible without leaning towards it, I have to sacrifice a lot of elements equally important. Thankfully, VR does allow me to lean towards any text I can't quite make out.