POLL: Should Egosoft make X4 VR compatible?

[vvvvvvvv]

In Pico 4, in VD, turn off all environments (just the Empty Void). If you point above the screen (I think - could also be below, can't remember right now), you will find all options (like SBS etc).

In OpenTrack, you need to choose SteamVR as Input and UDP Over Network as output, and set 127.0.0.1 as the target address. When starting the tracking, you may be asked to allow the connection. Then in X4, you need to enable the OpenTrack connection under Controls.

https://i.imgur.com/IQfdG9k.png

EDIT:

Here are the options for SBS and Head Lock in Pico 4 Virtual Desktop: https://imgur.com/a/1Lfnc28

While I got it to work, it is still nowhere close even the most basic experience, and it still "isn't it".

It took a hour to setup. I was nice of virtual desktop devs to hide the menu and make sure i only appears if you click on empty space without indication anywhere in the program that it exists. Same goes for opentrack hiden options where configuration does not work the way it is described in steam guide and where x4 doesn't tell where it is waiting for a connection.

The result?

Floating window with inertia, lagging rotation (which is a major VR sickness trigger) and I still can't look to the side like I could in rebirth VR.

So, that's a no. That's not what I'm looking for. There was also absolutely no gain from doing this through virtual desktop instead of desktop+, except greatly reduced performance. Because by the time you need open track, you launch steam VR, Steam VR tries to show the game in the theater, the option to disable theater disappeared few versions ago, and so you get 10 fps in main menu though the situation improves when you are in the ship.

All things considered at this point it'll be faster to make your own x4 clone with VR support.

Anyway, that brings us to previous question.

I wonder... why are you voting for native VR implementation in X4 so fiercely?

This is why.

[MarStrMind]

In Pico 4, in VD, turn off all environments (just the Empty Void). If you point above the screen (I think - could also be below, can't remember right now), you will find all options (like SBS etc).

In OpenTrack, you need to choose SteamVR as Input and UDP Over Network as output, and set 127.0.0.1 as the target address. When starting the tracking, you may be asked to allow the connection. Then in X4, you need to enable the OpenTrack connection under Controls.

https://i.imgur.com/IQfdG9k.png

EDIT:

Here are the options for SBS and Head Lock in Pico 4 Virtual Desktop: https://imgur.com/a/1Lfnc28

While I got it to work, it is still nowhere close even the most basic experience, and it still "isn't it".

It took a hour to setup. I was nice of virtual desktop devs to hide the menu and make sure i only appears if you click on empty space without indication anywhere in the program that it exists. Same goes for opentrack hiden options where configuration does not work the way it is described in steam guide and where x4 doesn't tell where it is waiting for a connection.

The result?

Floating window with inertia, lagging rotation (which is a major VR sickness trigger) and I still can't look to the side like I could in rebirth VR.

So, that's a no. That's not what I'm looking for. There was also absolutely no gain from doing this through virtual desktop instead of desktop+, except greatly reduced performance. Because by the time you need open track, you launch steam VR, Steam VR tries to show the game in the theater, the option to disable theater disappeared few versions ago, and so you get 10 fps in main menu though the situation improves when you are in the ship.

All things considered at this point it'll be faster to make your own x4 clone with VR support.

Anyway, that brings us to previous question.

I wonder... why are you voting for native VR implementation in X4 so fiercely?

This is why.

I believe I DID mention to disable the rotation delay in Virtual Desktop, and I DID mention this will cause dizzyness.

I have given enough advise on how to make it work. It needs to be set up properly (including the movement profiles in OpenTrack), and it is an enjoyable experience. But each to his own. No use in providing additional advise I suppose, you made up your mind.

PS: The OpenTrack option was not present when I wrote the guide on Steam some time earlier. This seems to be a new addition and change.

[vvvvvvvv]

you made up your mind.

Yep, I did. I need more than just this. At least Elite dangerous level. This is my third attempt to make this work, and given amount of time spent tinkering with it, it isn't paying off. To each their own, I guess.

[MarStrMind]

you made up your mind.

Yep, I did. I need more than just this. At least Elite dangerous level. This is my third attempt to make this work, and given amount of time spent tinkering with it, it isn't paying off. To each their own, I guess.

I can honestly, and quite confidently tell you that if you want exact 100% Elite: Dangerous VR experience, you can stop right now. No workaround will ever be able to achieve that in X4. The primary reason for that is mostly that the image will be stretched. No matter what you do - SBS or top/bottom - there will always be loss of graphical fidelity (although exactly 50% less when using top/bottom). There is nothing you can do about that, no matter which screen resolution you have. Although I can imagine at full 4K resolution, the effect may be less noticeable.

On foot is also not working in Elite: Dangerous in VR, same as in X4 with this workaround - so we achieved 50% of the experience right off the bat

[vvvvvvvv]

The primary reason for that is mostly that the image will be stretched. No matter what you do - SBS or top/bottom - there will always be loss of graphical fidelity

I believe you should be able to install a virtual display driver. That will allow you to create a virtual display for which you can set a custom resolution. Set its resolution close to combined helmet resolution, set it as target display in x4 settings, and that will eliminate SBS stretching. I think this is used by people who want an extra display visible in Virtual Desktop or its alternatives which does not correspond to actual device.

For Pico 4 you'll be looking at 4320x2160. Basically 4k.

[MarStrMind]

The primary reason for that is mostly that the image will be stretched. No matter what you do - SBS or top/bottom - there will always be loss of graphical fidelity

I believe you should be able to install a virtual display driver. That will allow you to create a virtual display for which you can set a custom resolution. Set its resolution close to combined helmet resolution, set it as target display in x4 settings, and that will eliminate SBS stretching. I think this is used by people who want an extra display visible in Virtual Desktop or its alternatives which does not correspond to actual device.

For Pico 4 you'll be looking at 4320x2160. Basically 4k.

I found a driver, and configured it. I will try and report.

Do not get me wrong please - for me it is enjoyable, so am still thinking it is a configuration issue.

[vvvvvvvv]

Do not get me wrong please - for me it is enjoyable, so am still thinking it is a configuration issue.

Yeah, I perfectly understand that. If it works for you, great, doesn't seem to work well for me. No offense taken and so on.

[MarStrMind]

OK so... I installed a virtual display driver and tuned it to 2880x1440. Enabled ReShade SuperDepth, Half-SBS view in Virtual Desktop. Provided you set the IPD correctly, it does work fairly well. At these resolutions, you can get close to Elite: Dangerous Cockpit VR experience. I haven't done this in a long time, I know that there were a few extra settings in ReShade that needed adjustment in order to achieve proper depth.

A 2:1 screen ratio is definitely helping the experience.

One could also try to use one of the upscalers like DLSS or FSR in order to improve the performance at these large display resolutions.

I will continue to fiddle with the settings, and eventually update my now dated guide.

[NightIntruder]

I wonder... why are you voting for native VR implementation in X4 so fiercely?

This is why.

Yeah, good luck mate I play X4 with SWI mod. It's late game performance is even worse than vanilla one, solid 20fps and less The late game performance degradation stays there, it's not like occasional drops. I'm not gonna buy a new VR headset hoping it's gonna compensate for lacking 70% of recommended FPSs. In contrary to what you say, I believe no magic VR headset exists in the market that can give you a pleasure of playing a game at 20fps where stable 90 is recommended for enjoyable experience. Even if native VR implementation arrives, it would be insane expecting it to be great at 10-20 fps using Meta or Pico, surely not with Rift S.
So, it's pass for me

[vvvvvvvv]

In contrary to what you say, I believe

Well, dude, people believe a lot of things, many of which aren't true, and in this case my personal experience takes priority over your beliefs.

As discussed before, high FPS was important on Rift and I explained why --> Because it didn't keep high fps rotational tracking like modern headsets do.

At the end of the day, you have to experience it. If you don't want to, no point in discussing it further. Not to mention there's absolutely nothing magic about it.

[Ergoswot]

So.... egosoft devs... this is now one of the biggest and most popiular threads on the forum. But sure... even implementing a BASIC VR cockpit/1st person mode (no motion controls needed) most definitely isn't worth your time and most definitely won't draw in lots of new PCVR customers...

Sigh. PCVR is only growing https://www.roadtovr.com/pc-vr-wont-die ... opulation/ and please don't let the fact that you made a mediocre native-VR game that didn't sell so well stop you from realizing that MANY people eat up PCVR space sims. I would be shocked if you do not make the return in investment in long-term sales just by implementing a basic VR cockpit and 1st person mode.

[Crimsonraziel]

Sigh. PCVR is only growing https://www.roadtovr.com/pc-vr-wont-die ... opulation/

While the Steam population doubled (+100%) the VR population grew only by 20%. In other words: A small group (less than 2% VR users) is growing way slower than the other 98%. This is a call to invest in the 98%.

[vvvvvvvv]

Sigh. PCVR is only growing https://www.roadtovr.com/pc-vr-wont-die ... opulation/

While the Steam population doubled (+100%) the VR population grew only by 20%. In other words: A small group (less than 2% VR users) is growing way slower than the other 98%. This is a call to invest in the 98%.

And that small group, which is less than 2% VR users, is 3 million headsets.

[MarStrMind]

I can see development work in implementing Motion Controllers.

However, I cannot imagine it to be difficult to position two extra cameras (left and right eye), locked to the position of the current first person camera position. They'd need to be rendered in sequence. You can ask the SteamVR API for the IPD, and set the eye camera offsets accordingly. Then, send the frames for left and right eye into SteamVR API.

6DOF data from the headset can also be queried via the SteamVR API...

I reckon it could be done by putting in a switch at exactly the point where the image pipeline begins rendering. Instead of one FBO you'd have two.

Maybe it's not that simple but that'd be the way I go - or at least how I would approach it.

The head tracking in cockpit is already implemented - OpenTrack already works without VR. First person on foot would have to be coupled with the same mechanism in cockpit. Cannot be too difficult either.

All in all there is development work involved, yes. But it is not reinventing X4 as a whole, it seems to me that only control and render mechanisms need adjustment, plus Motion Controller support.

[vvvvvvvv]

I can see development work in implementing Motion Controllers.

Note that by default people do not even request motion controllers. The minimum request is literally Stereo Camera + Head Tracking. This would be played with gamepad. Elite Dangerous style.

[MarStrMind]

I can see development work in implementing Motion Controllers.

Note that by default people do not even request motion controllers. The minimum request is literally Stereo Camera + Head Tracking. This would be played with gamepad. Elite Dangerous style.

You're right, I forgot about that.

[BitByte]

...into SteamVR API.

And that SteamVR API works in non-steam games (like in GOG version) how well?

[MarStrMind]

Technically speaking, it should work. As long as the game communicates with the API, it works. I tried this myself some time ago with a simple OpenGL engine written in C++, and was able to successfully connect to SteamVR although it was just a simple engine, not even a game in Steam.

[vvvvvvvv]

...into SteamVR API.

And that SteamVR API works in non-steam games (like in GOG version) how well?

Launching a non-steam VR game will bring up SteamVR. It may be because SteamVR registers itself as OpenXR provider, but I've not investigated. Actually the idea would be to actually target OpenXR. That's how Blender does it in VR scene preview. Targeting OpenXR would also allow user to use faster API from Virtual Desktop, bypassing some overhead. At the time of Rebirth VR OpenXR did not exist.

Note that X4 already interacts with Steam API. That's how it provides achievement tracking. I expect that the devs have implemented facade pattern for achievements. Effectively at a code side of things, VR functionality can be completely shutdown with one or two bools if it is not detected.

[Crimsonraziel]

And that small group, which is less than 2% VR users, is 3 million headsets.

Which makes the other group about 150 million.

Where to invest? In 3 million growing +20% OR 150 million growing +100% in the same time.
The only thing in favor of VR here is the reduced competition.