In Google Earth VR this is even more obvious: everytime you look around or change the view somehow the scenery is limited to a small circle in front of you.
This is because you have comfort mode active: It's there to keep you from getting motion sick and barfing! 
You can turn it off but........ Hope you have a strong stomach.
This is because you have comfort mode active: It's there to keep you from getting motion sick and barfing!
You can turn it off but........ Hope you have a strong stomach.
After a Year of Flying games Space fighter games, DOOM 3 VR the only thing stat still gets me a bit queazy in VR is when i scale myself up or down in google earth.. Going from person sized to 10,000 feet tall is gut wrenching
Yes, and the effect is you are flying in Google Earth, with the flight model and cockpit graphics of FSX (or P3D). Try it!
I would love to try it, but how do youu do it! :confused:
In FSX, it's now possible to fly over Google Earth photo scenery and 3D buildings without downloading tons of tiles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6yvUUVKfJQ
Wouldn't it be nice if this could be integrated into Aerofly?
The lack of time and my professional activity, does not allow me to "dive" and investigate in the forums (as much as I would like) the latest advances in flight simulators. For this reason, I apologize to my colleagues for what I am going to ask, and pray if it is not too much trouble, raise this doubt in relation to the vision in VR.
In this video posted on the forum "flying with Google earth"; Apparently the displacement in flight, is perfectly uniform. I imagine that indicates that both the processor and the graphics card of the device in question have enough power to correctly process all that information of the 3D images of Google, and consequently, the flight is executed correctly.
The connection to my PC. only has a bandwidth of approximately 4 MB./ s. and flight over any city apparently with absolute uniformity and speed. After watching this video several times, I searched Google for this same flight, and I executed it in the same area of Tampa with the same results in terms of speed and uniformity in the displacement; so, where is my error in the interpretation and exposition of this phenomenon of flight on these images, and that at the moment according to some affirm in this forum (and surely they are right ): "the internet has a limiting factor". I suppose that means that it is not possible to download the sufficient number of Mb./s. to make the flight correctly ?. Is my deduction correct?.
Can anyone in this forum, explain me with some amplitude this concept "the limiting factor" applied to the RV ?. As a rule and for a normal vision in VR, what amount of information / second, should we be able to download on the internet ?.
In this forum, there are many users who know very well this aspect of this technology. I ask anyone who wants to make a small sacrifice, to spend a few minutes explaining to me how this works and, where is my error in the interpretation of this reality ?. With this, it will contribute to increase my scientific culture and that of other users who will have the same deficiencies as I, in this specific aspect of this technology.
And ... answering a question that John made to me in his last communication with me:
John, In your last thread with me, you said literally:
"Sims will need to develop innovative features going forward though, otherwise, where is the incentive for people to buy the latest version?".
The incentive of the people who buy the latest version is that they are hungry for games, and will buy almost everything that comes to market. Right now, we have great joy at the arrival of Meigs and Innsbruck airports. They would also buy airports from Florida, Denver, Colorado... etc. People are very hungry for airports, from ... DLCs from everywhere.
Regards: Delfin
Very, very grateful, jschall
Absolutely correct your interpretation of my question and my concern. That is the question: "you are concerned with the data streaming rate (in Mb / s) required to stream scenery from Google Earth into the simulator".
I have this doubt because I think I read in this forum that users with optics fiber did not have enough capacity to reproduce the flight correctly. I understand that, it was because the data transmission speed (in Mb./s.) was insufficient. I also believe I have read that users with 100 Mb./s. of bandwidth, they had the same problem, and that left me really bewildered. It left me completely bewildered, especially when viewing on my PC. that with my bandwidth of 4 Mb./s. apparently I perfectly reproduce the flights from Google earth. Well, I may also have misinterpreted this information, in which case, I hope to have more answers and also more clarifications, because I am very sure that in this forum, there are users who know very well this topic, and I hope they have kindly answer me.
You have written literally:
"I don't know about Virtual Reality, but I just did a flight over Vermont/New Hampshire with Earth Proxy while monitoring the download rate in BitMeter.
As you can see, the bit rate is hovering around 10-20 Mb/s. Not much at all."
I ask you: if instead of flying with Earth Proxy, you did with Google Earth, the bit rate would be equal or higher (between 10-20 Mb./s.)?. Could you fly over Vermont / New Hampshire again, but with Google Earth and tell me the results in Mb./s?
What other pleasure would I like to satisfy now? , ... make a flight like the one you tell me in your answer, but in a scenario of Google Earth and also, on my city and land and take off at the airport in my city.
Initially I would settle for a Cessna cockpit, or ... why not, the F-15 or F-18 (in FS 2)?. Impossible at the moment?. I already know it. IPACS has a hundred times more accumulated work than they can design and realize, but you know: "to dream is nice", and besides ... "if you can dream it, you can do it". The question is ... When?
Once again, jschall, thanks for your clear response.
kind Regards : Delfín
It's not just your bandwidth, it's the connection to Google's servers. So even if you have an 100Mbit connection that doesn't mean you'll be able to use that to the full extend when a connection is made to the Google servers. I think it also depends on the traffic to that server.
Regards,
Jan
I ask you: if instead of flying with Earth Proxy, you did with Google Earth, the bit rate would be equal or higher (between 10-20 Mb./s.)?. Could you fly over Vermont / New Hampshire again, but with Google Earth and tell me the results in Mb./s?
Here is the result while flying in Google Earth's SR-22. The same modest bit rate, less than 20 Mb/s. Not surprising, since Earth Proxy is doing essentially the same thing, but requesting Google Earth coordinates through FSX/P3D rather than through the joystick.
