Off topic: Oculus

I still don't understand how this will work in trainz with older content. Not all cabs have interactive controls such as "Togog" NG models, all of his cabs have non interactive controls so how will this work when you need interactive controls in every cab with a VR system with content that was made way before it was put in. I would like to see how they can overcome that obstacle if this VR thing was added to Trainz.
 
Hello Everyone,

Guyz, you can't over think this -- :wave:

I prefer driving -- easy on the eyes -- You can pause the game and take a break -- or save a session for a later time to rest your eyes!

But for surveyor, could be an issue due that your eyes do need a rest --- I guess you have to go on how you feel ,and take breaks if you do use VR for surveyor.

About the older contents, don't see an issues as you are just building as usual, except you are using a VR and a control or your keyboard and mouse to place items!

Kind Regards
Ish
 
Bringing the thread back form the dead...

I have had the rift for over 2 years now, closer to three I think. So the hardware has improved a bit and so has the software. There are a lot more solid titles that really utilise VR in a good way.

Sims have been my bread and butter in VR, flight sims and racing sims but since I got the hand controllers it has also opened up a whole new world of other types of games.

When you look at google earth VR and go to a hi resolution city in 3d and see things on the scale that you do in trains it's easy to imagine how great it would be to control the trains. I guess we all use this software a bit differently. I tried a demo called 'derail' and it puts you inside the train. That is pretty cool and with the current state of the touch controllers you can use all the train controls with your hands and it is natural and easy but the reason I hope trainz goes VR is I like the other mode.

I like looking down on the world and operating things more like a model railway. Google earth shows you how you can work with vast landscape but I would be just as happy walking around my 5x4 meter space in VR with a nice model railway layout and being able to change layouts on demand from a library of them.

Here are how some other games do similar things. Tabletop gaming seems to be making a comeback in VR because it works really well. It is nice having other people in your virtual world and being able to talk to them with your built in microphone and headphones. You see their virtual avatar, where they are looking, what their hands are doing. I can easily imagine a multiplayer scenario working on a model railroad where there is more than one person there. Just like a club night virtually.

If you have never used VR then it's hard to tell you what it is like but someone will do this, it's only a matter of time but with a good library I can see how trainz can get in on this market. Stand back and someone else will.
 
I just picked up the Samsung Odyssey WMR headset and have been having a bunch of fun with it. After playing with some of those games, I'm ready to try Trainz (especially surveyor) in 3D :)

Curtis
 
I've got a Rift, an impulse purchase! Elite Dangerous is fantastic as you're seated. But games where you move around without teleport can get you nauseous at first, you just get used to it by stopping when you feel ill. If you continue your brain associates VR with being sick and it'll only get worse. If you stop, eventually you build up a tolerance and your brain gets used to it.

I couldn't believe how immersive VR was, I wasn't expecting it to be so good, especially with the Touch controllers!

There is a basic Train Sim type game available called 'Derail Valley' but i've not tried that yet.

I'm in no rush to ruin my eyesight ... If I want to immerse myself in Trainz, I'll get a 52" TV

Sorry to quote such an old comment but this is a common misconception. The screens may physically be close to your eyes but to your eyes they are not due to the lenses, I can't explain it but it's no different to watching TV or reading a book.
The lenses in the rift make it as if the screen is as far away as a TV would be.. if that makes sense? Try googling it if i'm not making sense.
 
Every major PC flight sim features VR support. Over the years I've seen all kinds of silly statements from non-VR users about this or that not being possible in VR. I was once told that playing Half Life 2 in VR was not possible because everyone gets sick in VR. I was told that VR is only good for driving and flying. Absolute nonsense of course. I've been using VR since 2006. Now in 2018 the majority of VR games launch with full locomotion (train pun?). Another cliche is that "games have to be built from the ground up for VR"... This actually makes no sense from a coding perspective. So many non-VR games are brought to VR successfully. SteamVR developers have worked very hard to reduce the stringent 90FPS requirement for game developers. Dynamic Super-Sampling was created with the goal of easing that burden... allowing game developers to bring to VR without needing to push the FPS to 90. Oculus ASW 2 does a similar (albeit more sophisticated) job of reducing hardware burden.

There is an increasing phenomenon of VR users only buying VR supporting games (I'm in that camp). My view is that I've played games and sims since the early 80's on 2d displays. Began using VR in 2006 and knew it was where I needed to be. Why stare at a tiny 2d rectangular image when I can be completely immersed?

I'm not a trainz owner. Nearly bought it a number of times but the lack of VR stops me from doing so. I purchased Train Sim some years ago and haven't used it for some years due to lack of VR support. Eventually some developer (a forward thinking developer) will be first to market with a serious train sim supporting VR.

""Quote Originally Posted by cascaderailroad View PostI'm in no rush to ruin my eyesight ... If I want to immerse myself in Trainz, I'll get a 52" TV"

One of the common anti-VR cliche circulating. VR currently uses Fresnel lenses. The Fresnel extends the focal plane to a far point (far beyond the surface of the screens). This means your eyes aren't focused at short range.
 
Last edited:
But your eyes are still being bombarded by UV, IR light rays, from a non-dimable bright LED screen, that is less than 1 inch away from the cornea ... This is not proven to be safe for the eye !

Ask any eye surgeon, and they will tell you the damages that new technology devices does to the eye
 
Last edited:
There is an increasing phenomenon of VR users only buying VR supporting games (I'm in that camp). My view is that I've played games and sims since the early 80's on 2d displays. Began using VR in 2006 and knew it was where I needed to be. Why stare at a tiny 2d rectangular image when I can be completely immersed?

Completely agree. Can't say that I think the hardware is quite up to where it needs to be yet, but it's tangible. As somebody who's been looking forward to this for a very long time, I must confess that I haven't used my Oculus in about a year simply because it's just not quite good enough (for what I want/expect, I'll be the first to agree that everybody has different requirements).


One of the common anti-VR cliche circulating. VR currently uses Fresnel lenses. The Fresnel extends the focal plane to a far point (far beyond the surface of the screens). This means your eyes aren't focused at short range.

To be fair, there are many things wrong with the images presented by VR goggles, and we have limited research on whether or how badly that will affect your eyes. Most literature that I've read on the topic can be broadly summarised as "don't play for too long in one stretch" and "don't give this to young children". That said, the same advice can be used for any screen, to a greater or lesser degree.


I would very, very much like an excuse to release a Trainz VR product for desktop VR headsets. So far we're not seeing a big call for it from the community.

chris
 
Hi Chris (N3V), and fellow VR users!

A very long time ago I set my phone to trainz youtube videos, and had it play in my VR goggles, and I was amazed -- I felt like I was in the cab, etc ... However, for surveyor I don't see the community will ever jump for that like I said on this thread previously, but for driving purposes, it's so cool --- Now, since I have constructed a Marz route, with flying vehicles, etc, VR is awesome for that! Of course, I have eye issues so I don't spend much time on it, because the technology haven't figure out to fix that part, correct me if I'm wrong, of course -- But for now long time VR for eyes now really good right now due to headaches and dizziness!

However, i think, and I said this before on this thread, start small, baby-steps, just like trainz 1.2, and look where we are now with Trainz --- And also, I think the ocmmunity will not jump on this until it's out there, where folks can use with it either with cheap or expenisve VR equipment!

Ish
 
But your eyes are still being bombarded by UV, IR light rays, from a non-dimable bright LED screen, that is less than 1 inch away from the cornea ... This is not proven to be safe for the eye !

Ask any eye surgeon, and they will tell you the damages that new technology devices does to the eye

This is outright paranoia and scaremongering. VR displays emit no dangerous UV radiation or IR. Any potential HEV is filtered-out. You should be more worried about the significant global rise in background radiation due to Chernobyl and ****ushima. As well the radiation you should also be concerned with cell-phone energy if you use your phone frequently to make calls. Air pollution? VR is safer than countless things you're exposed to every day. Deodorant? Shampoo? All contain potentially dangerous chemicals.

And no.. asking any eye surgeon won't return the one scaremongering answer you want to push.
 
Completely agree. Can't say that I think the hardware is quite up to where it needs to be yet, but it's tangible. As somebody who's been looking forward to this for a very long time, I must confess that I haven't used my Oculus in about a year simply because it's just not quite good enough (for what I want/expect, I'll be the first to agree that everybody has different requirements).

To be fair, there are many things wrong with the images presented by VR goggles, and we have limited research on whether or how badly that will affect your eyes. Most literature that I've read on the topic can be broadly summarised as "don't play for too long in one stretch" and "don't give this to young children". That said, the same advice can be used for any screen, to a greater or lesser degree.


I would very, very much like an excuse to release a Trainz VR product for desktop VR headsets. So far we're not seeing a big call for it from the community.

chris

Agree. I got my first VR HMD around 2006. Awful quality and it cost more than a vive pro back then. So I am more than ok with the current image quality especially knowing it will continue to improve. Supersampling helps quite a bit. I use my VR on a daily basis for exercise, entertainment and design (sculpt in VR, export to cinema 4d).

I guess trainz are less popular than planez and of course the VR market is a small slice of the PC gaming market. It really comes down to time/cost projection. There are lone devs who develop VR games, there are established non-VR devs not massive in budget but they still manage to adapt their tiny 2d rectangle games to VR. But trainz are more niche than VR. There are a few light train sims for VR... one has ambitions to become a full sim (Derail). Those VR train things are from new VR startup devs with far smaller budgets. Have you done a cost assessment to determine how much VR would cost to add?
 
This is outright paranoia and scaremongering. VR displays emit no dangerous UV radiation or IR. Any potential HEV is filtered-out. You should be more worried about the significant global rise in background radiation due to Chernobyl and ****ushima. As well the radiation you should also be concerned with cell-phone energy if you use your phone frequently to make calls. Air pollution? VR is safer than countless things you're exposed to every day. Deodorant? Shampoo? All contain potentially dangerous chemicals.

And no.. asking any eye surgeon won't return the one scaremongering answer you want to push.
Are you an eye surgeon ? Or is this your best guess ? I suggest you talk with actual eye doctors about the safety of VR, instead of voicing your novice opinion
 
Have you done a cost assessment to determine how much VR would cost to add?

The problem is less about cost, and more about opportunity cost. If we spend time to develop a fully-fledge VR driving mode, how many sales will that get us? If we spend the same amount of time on some other feature X, how many sales? Being a small company, we can't simply say "why not both?"

There's also a notable difference between building a simple product from the ground up for VR, and retrofitting an established game. If we were to step into the VR market with Trainz, it's likely that there would be some substantial prior expectations about what we should deliver, which could substantially increase our costs, or equally, decrease our ability to innovate and make a good "VR game".

Sidestepping this by making a spin-off game might be one approach, but heads more squarely into the "opportunity cost" territory. Another option would simply be to dabble - ie. release a partially formed experience to hard-core VR users to experiment with, rather than actually trying to develop a marketable product from the get-go. This would assumedly only work if there were such users within our existing community.

chris
 
Are you an eye surgeon ? Or is this your best guess ? I suggest you talk with actual eye doctors about the safety of VR, instead of voicing your novice opinion

This doesn't even merit a reply really. Do you tell smokers smoking is bad for their health? I've been using VR since 2006. I can still read your scaremongering posts. Go figure. Are you an eye surgeon? If so then please link to medical journal reports where eye damage is confirmed. After all... VR is now used by space, medical, the military, dentists, SWAT and many other pro sectors. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say you have absolutely zero professionally sourced statistics for eye damage. Your posting is cliche anti-VR rhetoric. Link me to the data please... Your scaremongering and personal dislike of VR is at odds with all those doctors and surgeons using VR and AR.

Looking back through this thread it looks like you've been pushing your VR causes blindness view quite a lot. You're calling me and anyone else who disagrees; "a novice" and you provide no medical journal reports on confirmed cases of eye damage from VR. You're basically trolling.
 
Last edited:
The problem is less about cost, and more about opportunity cost. If we spend time to develop a fully-fledge VR driving mode, how many sales will that get us? If we spend the same amount of time on some other feature X, how many sales? Being a small company, we can't simply say "why not both?"

There's also a notable difference between building a simple product from the ground up for VR, and retrofitting an established game. If we were to step into the VR market with Trainz, it's likely that there would be some substantial prior expectations about what we should deliver, which could substantially increase our costs, or equally, decrease our ability to innovate and make a good "VR game".

Sidestepping this by making a spin-off game might be one approach, but heads more squarely into the "opportunity cost" territory. Another option would simply be to dabble - ie. release a partially formed experience to hard-core VR users to experiment with, rather than actually trying to develop a marketable product from the get-go. This would assumedly only work if there were such users within our existing community.

chris

Important questions to consider, I agree. I think a partially formed experience for hard-core VR users to play with would be nice. Some games and sims began VR support in this way. I know there are VR users who really want a serious train sim... I've read their posts on steam. Problem is they don't know to come here and voice their opinion. Perhaps RoadtoVR and other VR sites could do a feature on a potential TrainZ VR? I say this because non-VR games sometimes feature because a developer expresses an interest in VR or plan to deliver at some point.
 
Eye damage:

https://www.news.com.au/technology/...s/news-story/a67849532e82d857be7a3524c91ef11e
I will be asking several experts, and researching more of this
OPTOMETRISTS have issued a warning that virtual reality could be damaging people’s eyes as a new study shows that Australians are on the cusp of a VR revolution.
Bupa Optical senior optometrist Karen Makin said there was early evidence linking VR headsets to eye problems but there needed to be more research into long-term use.
There’s not been a lot of research done in the field and that’s the concern because it is unknown,”
Lack of research, does not mean that VR is safe ... Only time will tell when millions of more cases of eye damage occurs in the coming years due to VR ... and we humans are the actual test ginuea pigs and lab rats

A chemical used to make Teflon somehow got into the bloodstream of everybody on earth. "It doesn't break down -- ever. It is the most persistent synthetic chemical known to man," The chemical is PFOA, sometimes called C-8. It's used to make Teflon - made by DuPont -- and many, many other products. But DuPont says PFOA is used only during the manufacturing process and that there's no PFOA in Teflon cookware or other Teflon products.

Just because DuPont claims PFOA C8 is safe ... Do you trust DuPont ?

This isn't the first time the EPA faced this kind of problem. A chemical very similar to PFOA, called PFOS, was used by 3M Corp. to make Scotchgard and other products. In May 2000, after negotiations with EPA, 3M phased out PFOS use.
 
Last edited:
I've tried a VR at a recent ComicCon and while the first person point of view is immersive, there is little to no world view. You see and usually notice things in front, sometimes near the edge of the viewport but often miss anything else. Perhaps OK for a single driver in cab but for the rest of the driving modes, probably of limited usefulness. And in Surveyor not sure what it would add. We can already zoom in and out, change the point of view at will, move around all while manipulating all the objects it takes to build a world. For those with larger HD monitors, the window into this world is already pretty big, wearing the equivalent on your face doesn't sound like a big advance.

Developing another driver POV using VR might be useful if it doesn't take away from the core work.
 
I know there are VR users who really want a serious train sim... I've read their posts on steam. Problem is they don't know to come here and voice their opinion.

Perhaps mention it to them as a possibility if you cross paths again? It's certainly more likely to happen if we have a pool of seriously interested people (even if that pool is tiny compare to our overall user base) than if nobody really cares.


martinvk said:
Perhaps OK for a single driver in cab..


Yep, that's definitely the driving style to go for in VR.


And in Surveyor not sure what it add.

Honestly, having played with it as a concept? Stop thinking "Trainz in VR" and start thinking "model train in my lounge room". It makes a lot more sense when you think about it that way.

chris
 
Important questions to consider, I agree. I think a partially formed experience for hard-core VR users to play with would be nice. Some games and sims began VR support in this way. I know there are VR users who really want a serious train sim... I've read their posts on steam. Problem is they don't know to come here and voice their opinion. Perhaps RoadtoVR and other VR sites could do a feature on a potential TrainZ VR? I say this because non-VR games sometimes feature because a developer expresses an interest in VR or plan to deliver at some point.

I totally agree here!

I've tried a VR at a recent ComicCon and while the first person point of view is immersive, there is little to no world view. You see and usually notice things in front, sometimes near the edge of the viewport but often miss anything else. Perhaps OK for a single driver in cab but for the rest of the driving modes, probably of limited usefulness. And in Surveyor not sure what it would add. We can already zoom in and out, change the point of view at will, move around all while manipulating all the objects it takes to build a world. For those with larger HD monitors, the window into this world is already pretty big, wearing the equivalent on your face doesn't sound like a big advance.

Developing another driver POV using VR might be useful if it doesn't take away from the core work.

And, with Martin, of course!

VR, in my 2 cents, will serve better for driving a trainz, or any vehicles in the trainz world, at least, for the beginning stages!

Ish
 
Back
Top