-
Search Results
-
In reply to: UE5 support for ROUTINE
There is an Unreal Engine 5 profile. Just create a new one based on it, and add the .exe file (or the process if you can’t access it, and it will add the executable permanently anyway).
I used this method on Nightingale and it worked well :
https://www.vorpx.com/forums/topic/nightingale-2/Adjust the resolution (game), FOV (game), zoom (VorpX) and headtracking speed (in this order) until it’s perfect.
Topic: Nightingale
Nightingale works very well for me in full VR but the game is very demanding and unusually, I had to configure the game and VorpX very precisely.
I would love an ingame option or a special key binding to disable headtracking while using edgepeek or a key binding to disable/enable headtracking. There are a lot of menus and inventory management in this game.
I can’t resize HUD (or I don’t know how). It’s not really a problem because I usually don’t, but maybe there is a solution working with every Unreal Engine 5 games.
On my Reverb G2, with an RTX4090, I use (with VorpX V24.1) :
– 5120×3840 resolution (just choose this resolution in Virtual Monitor, and the game follow). I wasn’t able to force fullscreen sadly (it may be more optimized).
– 120 FOV (ingame slider is limited to 110 but you can edit FieldOfView in GameUserSettings.ini file in “Appdata\Local\NWX\Saved\config\WindowsClient” folder)
– Judder Protect (it seems to be recquired with this game).
– (And cap framerate at 33% but it’s just because I don’t want to burn my computer).
– Headtracking speed at 5.0/max (I don’t know why I need that much, but It didn’t work otherwise. I have no problem now but I had to ensure the game is perfectly smooth, which is unusual).
– Z3D strenght 3.0/max – Works very well but once again, the game must be smooth. I play with max graphics but I had to use FSR with max quality/sharpness.
– ClarityFX & Sharpness at max. Gamma between 0.9-1.0There may be better settings, but it works well (considering there is no official profile). It seems a bit sharper&clearer than UEVR (even with lower resolution). It has been more reliable for me (no glitches / crashes).
Topic: Nightingale
Nightingale works very well for me in full VR but the game is very demanding and unusually, I had to configure the game and VorpX very precisely.
I would love an ingame option or a special key binding to disable headtracking while using edgepeek or a key binding to disable/enable headtracking. There are a lot of menus and inventory management in this game.
I can’t resize HUD (or I don’t know how). It’s not really a problem because I usually don’t, but maybe there is a solution working with every Unreal Engine 5 games.
On my Reverb G2, with an RTX4090, I use (with VorpX V24.1) :
– 5120×3840 resolution (just choose this resolution in Virtual Monitor, and the game follow). I wasn’t able to force fullscreen sadly (it may be more optimized).
– 120 FOV (ingame slider is limited to 110 but you can edit FieldOfView in GameUserSettings.ini file in “Appdata\Local\NWX\Saved\config\WindowsClient” folder)
– Judder Protect (it seems to be recquired with this game).
– (And cap framerate at 33% but it’s just because I don’t want to burn my computer).
– Headtracking speed at 5.0/max (I don’t know why I need that much, but It didn’t work otherwise. I have no problem now but I had to ensure the game is perfectly smooth, which is unusual).
– Z3D strenght 3.0/max – Works very well but once again, the game must be smooth. I play with max graphics but I had to use FSR with max quality/sharpness.
– ClarityFX & Sharpness at max. Gamma between 0.9-1.0There may be better settings, but it works well (considering there is no official profile). It seems a bit sharper&clearer than UEVR (even with lower resolution). It has been more reliable for me (no glitches / crashes).
All the games I tried on UEVR had no issues with raytracing or graphical settings tbh… I haven’t tried a lot of them though. I definitely have had more issues with VorpX, but I’ve been using VorpX for like almost a decade, so its only logical lol
UEVR doesn’t handle raytracing with Unreal Engine 4. There are a lot of other visual glitches in most beautiful games. Anyway it’s nearly impossible to have max settings with most AAA games from the reviews. A lot of people, including me, have constant crashes depending on the game.
But as I already said, it’s really good if the game isn’t too ambitious, and I understand why you like it with third person game (I personnaly prefer to not have a true full VR view in TPS because I feel less immersed in the character I play).
But I enjoy UEVR with some minor games.
I definitely have had more issues with VorpX, but I’ve been using VorpX for like almost a decade, so its only logical lol
At worse, if G3D isn’t perfect, Z3D never really disable anything important, as far as I know.
??? what do you mean? It isn’t broken, automated or unused…?
It works pretty well and its nicely integrated into UE.It’s unused because the developper of the games didn’t use this to create a clean VR game. They didn’t care or relied on UEVR.
It’s broken because of a lot of reasons (raytracing doesn’t always work, 3D can be strange, it’s blurry at medium/long distance), but most of all, there is camera clipping, animation problems, HUD issues, cutscenes issues, etc.
Most of the time it feels like beeing the developer of an unfinished game when you play a first person shooter. You didn’t experience it because you mostly play third person games.
It’s automated because unless you use a profile, it is.
Without a profile, the gameplay isn’t adapted to VR. And even the camera doesn’t work well in a lot of cases.
Even with a profile, when it doesn’t crash, it’s usually far from perfect and you can feel the game wasn’t designed to be played in VR.VorpX may be less close to exclusive native games, but it relies more on the base game gameplay and animations, so it’s a much cleaner experience from a flat gamer perspective (especially with first person games and if you play seated).
I’m a gameplay programmer, and my role is to ensure games aren’t like UEVR conversions…
Also, didn’t UEVR build its own stereo views by intercepting DirectX drawcalls instead than using the two camera tricks, and thus becoming more “native”? That would be waaaay more performant, don’t quote me on it tho.
I just mean both programs do two renders. I have no way to know how and it doesn’t really matters. VorpX probably use several ways depending on the game.
So why people go to the cinema ? It’s easier to notice details on a giant screen.
Ah! I see what you mean now. I thought you were talking about just higher resolutions. You are talking about screen size!
Yeah, that is correct. In fact, that’s why 8K only is worth it when you start going over 70 inches, because unless you are literally at breathing distance from it, your eye won’t be able to resolve all the detail lolAnd as my G2 is afocal,
The hell does that mean? I can only find you saying “afocal” when I google the word together with g2!! hahahah
It should be a (little) waste of performence (because you still have headtracking). But in fact, in my experience with AAA games, UEVR’s performences and image quality are so much worse that VorpX is still better, whatever display mode you use (full VR or immersive screen).
Pretty weird like I said. Its very unlikely that VorpX runs better than UEVR in UE to be honest, or if it does is because it might be dropping some stuff (like g3d shadows being only processed once in one eye). In any case, it doesn’t matter, since VorpX works with literally everything else unlike UEVR (for obvious reasons).
And it’s not a waste of performance, because it’s very useful
Nonono, you are misunderstanding me. Its a waste in the sense that, the PC is processing data that it doesn’t have to.
(and accurate/immersive in first person games because UEVR can break easily when something is close to your head).
It does? It doesn’t for me in all games I tried… All of them are 3rd person though, I don’t play barely any FPS to be honest.
t’s true 3D stereo in hundred of games
Yeah, good stuff all around!
(it probably adds an additional camera and move the original one, exactly as UEVR does, except with VorpX it’s not a broken/automated/unused feature from Unreal Engine
??? what do you mean? It isn’t broken, automated or unused…?
It works pretty well and its nicely integrated into UE.
Also, didn’t UEVR build its own stereo views by intercepting DirectX drawcalls instead than using the two camera tricks, and thus becoming more “native”? That would be waaaay more performant, don’t quote me on it tho.All the games I tried on UEVR had no issues with raytracing or graphical settings tbh… I haven’t tried a lot of them though. I definitely have had more issues with VorpX, but I’ve been using VorpX for like almost a decade, so its only logical lol
In any case, going back to our post here. I still can’t reduce aliasing on high resolutions, sadly :(
I have to partially disagree.
Concerning details in VR vs monitor : if used normally, most people don’t really see pixels and details on a 4k/8k monitor.
This is objectively false.
So why people go to the cinema ? It’s easier to notice details on a giant screen.
Ok you can be very close to your 4k monitor, but I really don’t like that, and it’s not curved properly (vertically and horizontally) so it’s not as immersive as VorpX.
If I don’t use VorpX, I prefer video projector because comfort matters and 1080p is enough for me in this case, as long as the display is 2m60 large and not too close I’m happier than with a monitor.But I always play FPS/TPS with VorpX. It’s so good to be in the game, and it’s so much more detailed and beautiful ! And as my G2 is afocal, it’s like looking at a very long distance.
If you play in immersive screen, the displayed game can be larger than your FOV so it can be more detailed than a monitor with the same resolution than your VR headset.
It’s the difference between an hemispherical Imax theater (with headtracking and 3D in this case) and a monitor.Yeah, we agree there, it is also an absolute crazy waste of performance unless you have a way to cull the polygons you aren’t looking at directly though, which is why UEVR is so neat, it is able to use the native software built-in UE to show the game not as AER, but its full proper VR version, with all the software boosts that that means.
It should be a (little) waste of performence (because you still have headtracking). But in fact, in my experience with AAA games, UEVR’s performences and image quality are so much worse that VorpX is still better, whatever display mode you use (full VR or immersive screen).
And it’s not a waste of performance, because it’s very useful (for example if a first person camera is partially locked because for example your character is seated in the original game, it avoids clipping and broken animations you would have in UEVR, and it also avoids to rotate the entire world around you).
It also allow you to clearly see the HUD and to switch instantly between display mode with edgepeek.
It’s a great way to play ! Even if I usually prefer full VR, some games (or some part of them) would be too altered.
It’s the best compromise, and you can only do that with VorpX.Anyway, VorpX always do that, even in full VR (if you don’t want to see borders…)
The game is rendered at high resolution with high FOV and you look at a part of this render (most of it of course if properly configured).VorpX does so too in its VR form I believe, but don’t really know much about how @Ralf does his black magic on it. The fact it works in so many different engines is flatout baffling.
I guess there are several methods. It’s not AER (except Cyberpunk), It’s true 3D stereo in hundred of games (it probably adds an additional camera and move the original one, exactly as UEVR does, except with VorpX it’s not a broken/automated/unused feature from Unreal Engine and it actually performs better in some games, especially DX9 ones).
It’s great to be able to configure 3D settings and it’s more comfortable in a lot of cases (and accurate/immersive in first person games because UEVR can break easily when something is close to your head).But in my opinion, when G3D can’t be perfect, a good Z3D is better than a bad G3D, at least in large outdoors environments, so VorpX’s Z3D options can be the best choices sometimes (even better than UEVR’s G3D in some games because it avoids a lot of glitches and incompatibilties with raytracing, etc.)
And anyway with the most beautiful games if you want good graphics settings, you have no choice. G3D can be too demanding, even when it doesn’t break effects.In reply to: Higher resolutions?
Mmmm…
Both images look terrible in your pictures.
It’s always possible to get a lot better image than that, at least in VorpX (UEVR isn’t even close in most games I tried).
It can be a profile or configuration problem (maybe the wrong type of 3D, etc.)
Or maybe it’s the game ?
When I use VorpX in a game like Bioshock 2, Metro Exodus or Frontier Of Pandora (or Hogwarts Legacy / Atomic Heart if you want UE4), the image quality is far better than any real 8k video I could record myself.
This is worse.
This is ugly even in 1080p. You shouldn’t be able to notice it on a 1080p monitor (impossible).
If the image quality is so bad, I guess it’s because you weren’t able to record correctly the output ? In this case I don’t see how we could compare.
Anyway, if you play AA games with UEVR and no good VorpX profiles, UEVR has a lot of qualities, especially if you don’t really care about immersion and full VR, and just want 3D, and especially if you prefer G3D over image quality and if your computer is powerful and silent enough. Maybe you can use VRto3D in this case.
Why do you want to use VorpX instead ?
VorpX is great to play AAA games in full VR (or Immersive Screen) with the best graphics available. Especially First Person games (if you want a perfect native-like experience). You don’t really need it to play AA third person or strategy games based on Unreal Engine 4/5 (even if it should work a lot better than that).
I’m also a professionnal game developper (and I have advanced 3D modeling, animation and rendering skills too but it doesn’t really matter).
There is no way I can see blurry letters in VorpX.
But as we said, you may be right on a PPD limit. I wouldn’t be able to tell with my current VR headset, which is already better than most.
In reply to: Higher resolutions?
It’s definitely not better than VorpX. At best it’s different, but image quality can’t even compare because most beautiful settings don’t even work with UEVR.
I see! Maybe it varies a lot between games, because the games that have proper Native Stereo for me… look like the improved version of the monitor version. And I’m a graphics whore, after all, I’m a professional 3D videogame artist.
How do you configure UEVR to get a good image quality and see every details miles around like in VorpX ? Because every person who really tried both around me said me that VorpX has a lot better image quality.
I’m… not sure. I’ve been using VorpX since the early days, even going as far to using the shader authoring tool to create my custom profiles and… Even if its good, its never been flawless as UEVR seems to get to. (although I get way less control in UEVR without actually coding in LUA than with the authoring tool :S)
Well, let’s put an example. If I run Tales of Arise on VorpX, a UE4 game. 3D shadows are borked, due to the common issue with shaders on G3D. On top of that, like I said, it not only runs in a “window” since it isn’t fullVR compatible, but even when put both in that mode, VorpX only goes as high as under 3000p. On UEVR most shaders are flawless, except for the camera FOV that seems a bit weird at times (since it doesn’t zoom in like it would in a 2D screen)… and that’s it. I can run it if I can at 7000p, where pixels are literally so small I can’t tell them apart. A visual clarity that is so ridiculous I can see into the distance (at like… 10fps, of course lol). But even in UEVR “2D window” mode, I can easily put it at 5000p, get 90fps, and flawless image.
Maybe you don’t know how to configure VorpX, or as I said, you are very sensitive to something most people don’t even notice.
Maybe I’m missing something, but I mean, like I said, been using the thing since the early days, and I’m a user advanced enough to make their own profiles with the authoring tool… Tinkering with settings is totally my jam.
I just think not that many people are running HMDs with resolutions of 3550×3880 per eye yet. It would be ideal if Ralf could throw some light into this to be honest! And I mean, many people would notice if a program is rendering at like 2/3 or less resolution the HMD is capable of, I’m sure!Did you try the ClarityFX, Sharpness and Texture Enhancements settings ? (VorpX’s Ingame menu page 2) It’s very impressive on my VR headset if properly configured.
Yes, of course! I mean, it does make things better, but that doesn’t cut it, it really just needs way more resolution.
We probably don’t play the same games. I mostly play AAA games in VR (and anyway most of them aren’t made with Unreal Engine, except Atomic Heart which is an UE4 game and is better in VorpX).
I see! Surely we don’t play similar. To be honest, I like VorpX better as a “3D window” to the world better than full VR immersion. For that I feel UEVR is great, since it basically uses native UE VR rendering pipeline to show stuff.
As far as I know, you can always use max settings with VorpX in AAA games with a good enough resolution. It’s impossible with UEVR (either because it doesn’t even work, or because it works but it’s not optimized enough).
The problem is I straight out can’t. Like I said, is like VorpX just hits a ceiling of resolution the HMD won’t go over, even when I’m trying to force it (be it through the game engine rendering at higher resolutions, or the settings in SteamVR).
As I said, you could not reach such resolutions with most beautiful games (especially with Unreal Engine 4/5 AAA games…)
I mean… I have a heavily overclocked 4090 with a 9950X3D, and tolerance for low FPS, so I can easily play a game at like… 40fps and not feel wrong about it. Even in VR I play with most maxed out always (when it makes sense ofc). I don’t play that many AAA games though, I’m more interested in AA and indie, with the nice AAA here an there.
So It depends on the game, and on your use. Anyway both programs have other pros and cons depending on your expectations.
Yeah! I just seem to choose UEVR for all the UE games.
Hopefully, I am doing something wrong, or there is a fix I didn’t think for this! It really is a shame not being able to use VorpX now that the MeganeX8K is giving me such ridiculously high PPD (it sits at around 46PPD, with mOLED quality, its insane!)
In reply to: Higher resolutions?
Also, to my knowledge… UEVR is best in UE games overall, by a lot. And I mean, its not surprising really, VorpX works on like a bizillion other engines, while that one is specific to UE4-5.
UEVR doesn’t even handle raytracing in UE4 games and it has a lot of visual issues (animations glitches, camera clipping, 3D and camera doesn’t feel right in first person games, etc.)
Stability can be bad (it often crashes) and it’s not reliable, at least on my VR headset.
It’s most of the time unusable if you want your PC to remain silent (even with a very expansive one).
It’s definitely not better than VorpX. At best it’s different, but image quality can’t even compare because most beautiful settings don’t even work with UEVR.
And VorpX is so much optimized than it’s a lot better with AAA games on current graphic cards.
I agree UEVR can be a lot better in some minor games with little environments when VorpX has no profile because you can get G3D and image quality is good at short distance.
How do you configure UEVR to get a good image quality and see every details miles around like in VorpX ? Because every person who really tried both around me said me that VorpX has a lot better image quality.
Maybe you don’t know how to configure VorpX, or as I said, you are very sensitive to something most people don’t even notice.
Or maybe there is a compatibility problem with your uncommon VR headset or as you said a limit to PPD somewhere, which doesn’t concern most people and has probably no real effect on most recent games.Did you try the ClarityFX, Sharpness and Texture Enhancements settings ? (VorpX’s Ingame menu page 2) It’s very impressive on my VR headset if properly configured.
Some people use OpenXR toolkit to improve image quality but I didn’t need it.Most people really don’t need this level of details anyway. I’m pretty sure there is no way to reach VorpX’s image quality with UEVR in an AAA game (or I don’t know how to do it, and no one arround me found out).
We probably don’t play the same games. I mostly play AAA games in VR (and anyway most of them aren’t made with Unreal Engine, except Atomic Heart which is an UE4 game and is better in VorpX).
As far as I know, you can always use max settings with VorpX in AAA games with a good enough resolution. It’s impossible with UEVR (either because it doesn’t even work, or because it works but it’s not optimized enough).
As I said, you could not reach such resolutions with most beautiful games (especially with Unreal Engine 4/5 AAA games…)
So It depends on the game, and on your use. Anyway both programs have other pros and cons depending on your expectations.
In reply to: Higher resolutions?
You probably have a good sight and are probably very sensitive to PPD (you bought a 8k VR headset so it’s not surprising ;) )
Maybe there was a limit in order to optimize ?
I wonder how you can use this kind of resolutions in VorpX. We probably don’t play the same games… (Frontier Of Pandora, Metro Exodus, Atomic Heart, etc.)
Or you have a lot better graphic card.How do you do ? Virtual Monitor is limited to 4860p as far as I know (I never tried above 3840p because I mainly play recent AAA games and even with an RTX4090 it would be hard to keep a decent framerate. I don’t know if it would be useful to me. In my opinion, 2880p is enough with a lot of old games because of textures limit, even if VorpX enhances them a lot).
Besides, I think I prefer my G2 (2160p) over my Varjo Aero (2880p but maybe there is more pixel density at the center of the fresnel lenses), and the G2 ratio is probably closer to my field of view, the way I wear these VR headsets, so I can see more details in full VR with the G2.
Curiously, I can also see more clearly the pixels on the Aero (maybe because the G2 is afocal and my sight is almost but not completely 10/10). Sometimes it’s not so good to see too clearly (but anyway I don’t concentrate on pixels during playthrough).
So I don’t think I could really see the difference, especially in game, between a 4000p VR headset and my G2. Anyway it’s still way better than a Quest 3 at medium/long distance ;)
The most important thing is the displayed image in my opinion.
Even if my Reverb G2 is 2160p and even if my sight isn’t 10/10, I can clearly see :
– the difference between 2880p, 3200p and even 3840p game resolution (but only in very recent games because as I explained it doesn’t really matter in old ones). It seems most games arent really perfect at a given resolution. You have to render them in a higher one than the displayed one.
– the difference between VorpX and UEVR clarity and sharpness.UEVR’s sharpness & clarity isn’t even close to VorpX at medium/long distance in every AAA game with large outdoors environement I tried (even with 6000p resolution in UEVR, it’s still blurry at medium/long distance while VorpX is usually great even in 2880p). The fact I usually can use a wider FOV in VorpX may play a role but It doesn’t explain everything.
Of course VorpX handles more optimized game engines than UEVR, but even with Unreal Engine 4 VorpX is always a lot better in this case (didn’t really compare UE5 yet). I haven’t found a way to fix it yet, and I don’t think there is. I asked around me and everyone confirmed this phenomena, even on Pimax Crystal Light. It may depend on the technologies used by each game I suppose.
tldr; thank you vorpx
even tho i still have technical probs with vorpx, if it werent for vorpx i wouldnt even buy VR HMDs, i’d just play on flatscreen monitors.
all the best games are from 10+ years ago and there’s just no better way to play them in VR than vorpx.
metaverse is no reason to buy a $400+ hmd, but playing VR max payne or descent or unreal or medal of honor, that’s really awesome. there is nothing in the standalone stores or freeware VR injectors for recent engines that’s 1/1000th as good as playing 1990s-2010s games on vorpx.
having a pcvr HMD without vorpx is like buying a console or gaming PC and never playing anything except free to play games.
In reply to: Is Avowed a possibility?
Did you try the Unreal Engine 5 profile ?
Like Stalker 2 :
https://www.vorpx.com/forums/topic/stalker-2/
I don’t see why you could not use VorpX.
You may have a FOV limit (105) with Avowed but it should be Ok (depending on the VR headset). I played Frontier Of Pandora with 105 FOV on Reverb G2 and it was amazing (I would have prefered 110, I don’t know why FOV are limited in these games but it’s a shame).In reply to: STALKER 2
After hours of testing profiles, Luck found me with the Unreal Engine 5 base profile. But you must launch with TAA mode in Exclusive Fullscreen for Z3D to work. You can’t use DLSS or FrameGeneration or the screen becomes all garbled. Any changes to AA or resolution will require a relaunch.
I put my profile settings on the cloud, but only vorpX version 24.1.0+ will be able to find it:
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: HoC [dellrifter22]
dx12 Z3D
Settings I used:
-4:3 res 3360×2520 or 2880×2160
-Exclusive Fullscreen
-FOV 106
-TAA at 100 render scale
-No DLSS, No FrameGen
*cutscenes don’t work well in 3D, so best to watch them flat in EdgePeek.The 3D strength is passable, but could be better. Hopefully one day we’ll have a proper profile that works with DLSS for better performance.
In reply to: Outcast 2 – A New Beginning (Demo)
Don´t know how well vorpx would work with this, but since it uses Unreal engine 4, you can use that certain mod that was recently released…
(There are videos on youtube on outcast 2 vr)
Topic: Styx Shards of Darkness
