- This topic has 21 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated Mar 26, 2018 2:34pm by
.
-
Posts
-
What this guy did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LUEImQd-pU
seems to give the equivalent of z-buffer 3D for any of the supported games.
He recommends using Virtual Desktop instead of BigScreen – which adds £10 cost.
Ralf – how nicely would this play with the virtual cinema mode in VorpX?
In general – ignoring 3D entirely – is vorpX Virtual Cinema going to be smoother than BigScreen/VirtualDesktop/Steam Cinema?
Rather surprised to see no response to this. Does nobody else find it remotely interesting?
Or has anyone tried it and concluded it sucks?
Tested it and I´m using Virtual Desktop.
1) Looks really good in 3D and indeed works really fast. BUT is not GEOMETRY 3D. It is like watching a 3D movie in the cinema.
2) NO HEADTRACKING
3) Even if you zoom a lot it is still noted that I´m looking at a screenSo, is not the same as VorpX
I usually play my games in cinema mode anyways, so maybe I’ll check it out.
I find cinema mode a lot better.Hi,
I ve tested reshade + depth3d and vorpx , it works
You have to use the rise of the tomb raider profile for each game.So you activate 3d + head tracking but it s z buffer only .
I suppose I’m trying to understand if VorpX has better performance in this scenario than Virtual Desktop/BigScreen/Steam VR Cinema.
Ralf – can you comment? If all we’re doing is using VorpX as a virtual cinema – does it have architectural advantages over the alternatives?
Rise of tomb raider already has built in geometry 3D, so I don’t understand what extra you’re getting there.
i used this profile because when i tried to launch the games from desktop viewer , it crashed and not with the profile.
on my pc vorpx works way better than virtual desktop, and you can activate headtracking
@ andybak: directly hooking into games is almost always the better alternative compared to capturing the output with extarnal program like the vorpX desktop viewer or other programs that work similar do.
Sorry Ralf – I might be being thick here.
I’m asking:
“What is the most performant way to display a game inside VR in ‘virtual theatre’ mode”.
I know of a few alternative methods:
1. VorpX’s virtual cinema
2. Steam itself
3. Bigscreen
4. Virtual DesktopI don’t expect you to know for sure whether 2, 3 or 4 are more performant. But is VorpX likely to be faster or slower than any of them?
In your answer you said “directly hooking into games is almost always the better alternative compared to capturing the output with external program like the vorpX desktop viewer or other programs that work similar do.”.
I wasn’t actually talking about the desktop viewer – I’m talking about playing a game in VorpX’s virtual cinema for any game that can be tricked into doing so.
Is *that* likely to be more performant than the other 3 options?
The answer to that question is the one given above: directly hooking into games is almost always the better alternative compared to capturing the output. Sorry that I can’t get into technical details.
I’m not asking for technical details.
When you say “directly hooking into games” I just don’t know whether you mean “VorpX directly hooks in and is therefore fast” or “VorpX doesn’t hook in and is therefore slow”.
I had always assumed the former.
And to reiterate – I’m not talking about the desktop viewer – I’m talking about virtual cinema.
(Sorry if this sounds pedantic but I’ve been confused by all the answers you’ve given!)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.