Finally got my DK2, and jumped straight into LFS. Butter smooth both with and without v-sync. World feels solid, but the CA is very bad. But it was as bad in the desk demo, so I guess that needs to be fixed in the SDK.

It's a whole new ballgame compared to the DK1, but it could still use some more resolution. I guess it'll look better once they nail the CA down.

We still love you, Scawen! :-)

Got my shipping confirmation, this time next week I'm Riftin' and Driftin'! :-D

Latest SDK 0.4.2 is out, and it has CA fixes, apparently. Thoughts on implementing that?

I agree on the braking. In most circumstances you don't go as heavy on the brakes as we do in the game. The car has huge brakes on huge wheels. I guess braking hard in that feels like going into a wall.

Look at the 8 and 9 minute mark, under hard braking the car is really shimmying about...
http://www.topgear.com/uk/vide ... dster-series-18-episode-2

Check your linearity settings, and check that all the factors are correct. But maybe take it in another thread? My T500RS set to 1080 is perfectly 1:1 to the onscreen wheel.

Their forum down for everybody else too?

Ah, that changes stuff!

Quote from Scawen :

Well just one example for Rift + LFS + motion chair.

Let's say you are driving up a 20 degree slope at constant speed. Your chair, and steering wheel, should lean back 20 degrees.

Now, if you look "forward" with your head relative to the car body (as if you were a stiff crash test dummy) your head will be looking UP 20 degrees relative to the real world. So the Rift camera, regardless of whether it is mounted on the seat on on a nearby tripod, will think you are looking UP 20 degrees. So now, the way LFS + Rift works at the moment, your view will be pitched up 20 degrees relative to the car. And that will be UP 40 degrees relative to the in-game world, which is wrong. So although your head doesn't move relative to the steering wheel, you would now have to look down 20 degrees (i.e. move your head to be level relative to the real world) to see it as it is supposed to be.

My highlight, and is that sentence really correct?

If the camera is mounted on the chair, it will also be tilted 20 degrees and see you as looking straight ahead. If it is mounted on a tripod it will see you as tilted 20 degrees.

It's a matter of references, really. with the camera on a tripod the real gravity will match ingame gravity in your case, and simulating forces by tilting would be very difficult. With the camera on the chair you could ONLY simulate accelerations, as camera "down" direction would alway be the virtual world "down" direction.

This stuff is hard to explain by typing.... :-P

I've made an app that shows you what your FFB is doing and suggest a gain setting to avoid most of the clipping. The SLS is a little special, since it can generate huge forces, but there's not much detail. I think they have some sort of "powersteering" filter built in, so the cars with power steering are pretty dull.

I'll release the app later today, got some more refinements to do on it.

Finally a proper version of my car in a game! :-)

I would think it a fair assumption that everyone will be on the latest SDK at any given time, though. That's how I would develop, anyway.

They don't just drive "like" they have polygonal wheels, they DO HAVE polygonal wheels, even the physics mesh is used for calculations. There is no way that can work. It's hidden for the most part when going off road (which feels really good), but for any hard surface it just doesn't even begin to act like a car.

Headsup on CA correction:

https://developer.oculusvr.com ... 1190&start=80#p168339

Devs are still arrogant A-holes, no amount of steam is gonna change that. They actually seem to believe their car handling physics is realistic. I tried to tell them on several occations that cars don't have polygonal wheels, but they went on about how their physics engine is physically accurate and blah blah. And when I tried to tell them that while that might be true, real cars still have round wheels and don't bounce around, they gave me a lecture on physics which, while true,were completely irrelevant for the issue, non-round wheels..... So... cool crashing-sim, and I enjoy rock-climbing, but that's pretty much all it's good for.

Noticed in the DK1 that when you breathe through your noce some of the expelled air goes into the rift, making my face alot more sweaty than it ought to be. My face is pretty normal proportioned so I shouldn't create any unheard of aerodynamics in the DK1. Don't know if the DK2 is similar in that respect, but I suspect is it. I might need to sit with my mouth open to discourage some of that heat and moisture....

It's a little funny... The MX5 is characterized as a little unpredictable... How many times have you read that about the real MX5, street or race versions? It would be the LAST word I would think of to describe the MX5. Yet, it's hailed at an accurate sim... Not impressed, and to think I resubbed for a year due to Rift support....

Quote from Krane :

Love the '86! Had it a while?

Excellent! Glad to help! :-)

When I drive LFS, I use the Rift. There's no going back to the flat world of 2D now. I mainly drive alone, for fun, though.

Indeed. I input slightly different IPD in the two profiles and it is using the 0.2.5c IPD in LFS.

Quote from Scawen :

That is the value reported by the SDK. Nothing changed around that in LFS recent versions.

LFS uses the 0.2.5 SDK and maybe that version doesn't report any value other than 64mm?

I just downloaded SDK 0.2.5c and made a profile, and the IPD is now correctly reported.

Yes, that's where I got the 66.9mm IPD setting from. My utility is slightly different though, I guess since I am using SDK 0.3.2.

Ok, I'll ask the OR gurus. :-)

Edit:
I've only downloaded the most recent SDK, 0.3.2. Could that be the issue?

Last edited by atledreier, Tue, 8 Jul 2014 08:23.

Quote from Scawen :

The IPD seen in LFS comes straight from the Rift. It's not set by LFS. I guess there is a problem in the Rift SDK and they are not reporting the IPD correctly.

Maybe something changed in the last versions? Any way I can check what is being reported by the SDK?

In 0.6F the IPD is listed as the default 64mm regardless of profile selected. Is there any way to set the proper Rift IPD in LFS?