Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I went back to tweaking my Air Link settings on my Quest Pro. My resolution is set to 72hz 1.3 (5408x2736) with auto default on steam. Using v55 with H.264's encoding bitrate set to 350Mbps, sliced encoding on, and distortion curve set to low. I was able to achieve a level of performance and quality I find better than what I was able to obtain on Virtual Desktop.
I didn't like the foveation with VrPerfKit, but having it on enabled me to stay at my native resolution with only minor changes to the ingame settings. I disabled the foviation while keeping the upscaling, finding that NIS peformed well. This could be anectdotal.
Decided to turn the ingame sampling down to either .8 or .9 and lower my textures to medium or low. This has enabled me to keep most settings on high or medium. Medium textures look pretty good, and even low is acceptable.
I find setting physics to Ultra is a must. The assumed performance impact is on the CPU, of which, I have overhead.
Prior to this, I had achieved settings that I would consider acceptable in other games, though I did not test my frame times. Combat still felt sluggish and unresponsive. Lowering my settings even further improved the combat dramatically, as such seems intrinscially bound to performance (frames). It was at this point I enabled the ultra physics setting and transformed the game into something rather pleasant.
It's late. I am medicated. I chop chop more tomorrow.
Again a totally empty message. Always mention the hmd you use. Using Vive res 100% is by far not the same as using Aero res 150%.
We're not mind readers in here.
measurement at starting point
INDEX 100%(2016×2240)10/11ms
Quest2 1.0×(3264×1648)7.5-8/11ms
I9 13900KF RTX4090 ( highest quality)
INDEX 150% (2468×2740) 3..7/11ms
INDEX 150%/144HZ poor processing
The Rainy cementery was a big performance hit in default settings.
I was like in permanent slow motion time.
After adjusting a bit here and ther (shadows, terrain and textures) i could complete the level just feeling a bit of slow time.
I'm right back from the cemetery and completed that level, still using Index res 226% in 80 fps with 80Hz, all settings maxed/ultra. Antialiasing fast FXAA1 (or whatever it's called, the default one).
Did get many dips below 80 fps, but all is good. Did get the patch, maybe sword handling felt better, but not sure I'd notice any changes if I did not know about the patch. Two handed control felt better, but could be placebo ;-)
Shadows looked more soft, right? Still looked fine.
Undead Citadel is becoming one of my favorite VR games of all time.
The game reminds me of Severance - one of my favorite games way too long ago :-) That game was from Spain too, if I'm not mistaken.
My rig - Index, 3090, i9 10900K, Win10.
You need to report all your settings and specs or the post is meaningless. Using the original Vive res 100 % and lowest settings with FidelityFX is not the same as using Varjo Aero res 100% with Ultra in-game settings and Fidelity FX.