About FOV etc:
I visited a racing buddy over the last weekend and he has 3x 32" right behind the wheel, in front of the wheelbase.
FOV exactly calculated, my head position was pretty much identical to his (same height).
Yes, track and car looked like they would in reality and the monitors were big enough to see the roof and the bottom of the cockpit-dash.
Could I drive well? Absolutely not. Since it's not 3D, I couldn't judge speed and distances at all and as in Nils' video, everything moved super fast from left to right but I felt like I'd be driving at 30 kp/h.
I drove about 2 hours on each of the 3 days and although I got pretty well used to it throughout the Saturday, I was still slow, got headache and my eyes started to hurt a bit.
It was just too close to me to focus on a quickly moving image.
Now you'd think that I just needed to get used to it since I never really drove with 1:1 FOV. But nope, that's not it!
He also has a G2 and when I put that on, everything looked virtually identical compared to his triples. Which of course makes complete sense.
But now I could match my lap times within a few laps, didn't get the hurting eyes, things didn't feel slow and also didn't move too fast side to side.
Going back to triples, still the same issues.
When getting back home, I couldn't drive well at my own setup either. So I definitely got used to the 1:1.
Another racing buddy was also there, and although he could match his times and got used to it way quicker, he didn't felt the "oh, everything is like in reality!" either.
He did with the G2 though.
My conclusion: seeing things 1:1 can help, but can also be wrong for each individual. I'm with Nils' regarding FOV and my theory is:
The brain has to do 2 things when simracing:
1. Making us feel like it's "real", taking in the virtual world and basically build an alternate reality/simulation inside of our heads, which enables us to drive well. For this, the physics etc need to be consistent within themselves. Otherwise you slide off without understanding why.
2. Scaling the visuals to "look like an alternate reality" in our heads. It's part of the first point, but we can actually influence this via monitor size, distance and FOV.
In VR, this point isn't necessary. Instead our brain just has to get over the flyscreen/pixelated looks.
Now my theory regarding mathematically correct FOV is that it makes the 2. point easier for some brains, which makes total sense.
But I think the 1. point is the way bigger task for our brains, which makes the correct FOV a bit irrelevant, depending on how your internal brain-geometry-scaling-simulation works.
For me, it's completely irrelevant. I simply have a "feel good" range of monitor size/distance/FOV where it works best for me.
Or rather, 42-55° vertical always look best for me and my eyes don't like to stare at anything closer than about 1.0m.
So 1:1 FOV could probably work very well for me too, but it would require 75" 4k triples in 1.5-2.0m distance from my eyes.
Calculated FOV says I'd need 70", 16:9 at 1.0m distance for 47° vFOV.
I visited a racing buddy over the last weekend and he has 3x 32" right behind the wheel, in front of the wheelbase.
FOV exactly calculated, my head position was pretty much identical to his (same height).
Yes, track and car looked like they would in reality and the monitors were big enough to see the roof and the bottom of the cockpit-dash.
Could I drive well? Absolutely not. Since it's not 3D, I couldn't judge speed and distances at all and as in Nils' video, everything moved super fast from left to right but I felt like I'd be driving at 30 kp/h.
I drove about 2 hours on each of the 3 days and although I got pretty well used to it throughout the Saturday, I was still slow, got headache and my eyes started to hurt a bit.
It was just too close to me to focus on a quickly moving image.
Now you'd think that I just needed to get used to it since I never really drove with 1:1 FOV. But nope, that's not it!
He also has a G2 and when I put that on, everything looked virtually identical compared to his triples. Which of course makes complete sense.
But now I could match my lap times within a few laps, didn't get the hurting eyes, things didn't feel slow and also didn't move too fast side to side.
Going back to triples, still the same issues.
When getting back home, I couldn't drive well at my own setup either. So I definitely got used to the 1:1.
Another racing buddy was also there, and although he could match his times and got used to it way quicker, he didn't felt the "oh, everything is like in reality!" either.
He did with the G2 though.
My conclusion: seeing things 1:1 can help, but can also be wrong for each individual. I'm with Nils' regarding FOV and my theory is:
The brain has to do 2 things when simracing:
1. Making us feel like it's "real", taking in the virtual world and basically build an alternate reality/simulation inside of our heads, which enables us to drive well. For this, the physics etc need to be consistent within themselves. Otherwise you slide off without understanding why.
2. Scaling the visuals to "look like an alternate reality" in our heads. It's part of the first point, but we can actually influence this via monitor size, distance and FOV.
In VR, this point isn't necessary. Instead our brain just has to get over the flyscreen/pixelated looks.
Now my theory regarding mathematically correct FOV is that it makes the 2. point easier for some brains, which makes total sense.
But I think the 1. point is the way bigger task for our brains, which makes the correct FOV a bit irrelevant, depending on how your internal brain-geometry-scaling-simulation works.
For me, it's completely irrelevant. I simply have a "feel good" range of monitor size/distance/FOV where it works best for me.
Or rather, 42-55° vertical always look best for me and my eyes don't like to stare at anything closer than about 1.0m.
So 1:1 FOV could probably work very well for me too, but it would require 75" 4k triples in 1.5-2.0m distance from my eyes.
Calculated FOV says I'd need 70", 16:9 at 1.0m distance for 47° vFOV.
![Luca [OT]](/data/avatars/s/3235/3235113.jpg?1697196734){kind=avatar}
