• Osdk Online Outdated Patch Downloaded Ps4
• Osdk Online Outdated Patch Downloaded Ps4
• Osdk Online Outdated Patch

Osdk Online Outdated Patch Downloaded Ps4

Comments

Osdk Online Outdated Patch Downloaded Ps4

• I am not sure what do you call 'OUDK 2.4' and 'OUDK 2.5'. There is March OUDK, based on OculusSDK 0.1.5, and there is September OUDK, based on OculusSDK 0.2.4.
  You can change player's height using 2 ways: either via Binaries/OculusConfigTool (you can specify your height in cm) or via modifying UDKEngine.ini, section [Engine.Oculus], the parameter AddEyeHeight. This value is adding to the default player's height, it is in UU (Unreal Units). To override this parameter you must set bOverrideAddEyeHeight to True, example:
  To make it work like it was in March OUDK you need to set it to 0.
• Artyom, thank you!!!
  I've got player height back where it should be thanks to your help.
  In regards to OUDK 2.4 and 2.5...yes you're correct...I meant OSDK. I proofread too, ha! I knew I was gonna jumble OSDK and OUDK typing it so many times.
  In terms of the:
  [Engine.Oculus]
  ....
  bOverrideAddEyeHeight=True
  AddEyeHeight=10
  I wasn't sure if 'AddEyeHeight = ' is supposed to be missing or not from the September UDKEngine.ini. When looking at the March UDKEngine.ini I see the
  [Engine.Oculus]
  'AddEyeHeight=#'
  but in the September UDKEngine.ini it wasn't present. I changed the
  [Engine.Oculus]
  'bOverrideAddEyeHeight=' to 'true' and did not add the 'AddEyeHeight='
  When I 'played on pc' I felt a different height...but short. So I decided to go back and add
  'AddEyeHeight=0' to the September UDKEngine.ini since you suggest the value of '0' but it was still off...so then I thought I just made mine match yours
  'AddEyeHeight=10'
  and now it seems to be in working order.
  I'm curious, the 10 unreal units being added to the Eye Height....was that previously automatically added in the march build and now needs to be added by the user in the September build? (sorry if there's an obvious answer...I'm not near my workstation and am not able to download UDK and check the .ini files on the machine I'm on currently) Or are the 10 units making up for a loss in player height for some reason?
  Also you suggested using '0' for the value but '10' looks perfect to me, I'm wondering if you still think the value is supposed to be '0'.
  THANK YOU! Nice to be back on track and know scale isn't a concern.
  -John
• Well, I used '10' just as an example To match it with March OUDK it should be 0, we didn't change anything in this matter since then. But if 10 works better, well...
  This question just indicated to me that UnrealEngine Integration doc should be updated ASAP.....
• Is there any way we can reduce latency in UDK, if so what can we do to reduce it. Ghostship currently has over 100ms latency and really need to reduce it

  0
• 100ms is A LOT. How did you measure it? We now sell Latency testers - https://www.oculusvr.com/order/latency-tester/, btw.
  So, first, have you used console command 'SetFinishFrame on'? This should reduce latency somewhat but will decrease the max framerate as well.
• Hey Artyom,
  Looks like I got ahead of myself.
  I did some more testing and after trying multiple user profiles in the Oculus Configuration Utility I realized the September build of OUDK was not adjusting player height for various user profiles when set to default...
  UDK was establishing a default player height regardless of user profile. 'AddEyeHeight' would merely add on top of this default camera height.
  which led me to...
  Previous OSDK's were still on the workstation. Upon removing OSDK 2.4 and the prior SDK (leaving only the OSDK 2.5) the September build of OUDK now 'responds' to different user profiles set to default in the Oculus Configuration Utility.
  Despite this, I'm still getting a height change that no longer matches what the March build was doing with my same exact workflow from maya to udk.
  With the:
  [Engine.Oculus]
  ....
  bOverrideAddEyeHeight=True
  AddEyeHeight=0.000000
  The camera is approximately half a foot lower then it previously was in the March build of OUDK and like I said my process hasn't changed since March.
  In the meantime I'm rechecking the math on my Maya-to-UDK conversion process. Which I'm happy about since I'm catching this now and not later.
  In the unreal integration documentation, I believe it says:
  2 unreal units = 1 inch
  If 2 unreal units (uu) = 1 inch,
  then 73 inches (my height) should be 146 unreal units...for 6'1'.
  And from what I find online the 'utgame' type (what I've been using) has a default player height of 96 uu which is said to be 6 feet....atleast most sources I find say this.
  So these are the arguments I'm staring at:
  146 uu = 6'1'
  96 uu = 6'
  Is there a gametype that Oculus or Epic recommends devs use with UDK and an Oculus Rift other than the 'utgame' when expecting real world scale. Due to the differece of 1 vs. 1.333 inches for every 2uu, I seem to be unsure of whether or not the game type should in fact by 'utgame' or something else to work with the Rift.
  I'm going to be redoing all my scale tests later today in hopes of finding more answers.
  I'll also be trying other game types in hopes of finding an answer to this soon.
  -John
• Profile values for height are ignored if you set bOverrideAddEyeHeight to true, but otherwise AddEyeHeight should be taken from the profile. You can check this value in the game by toggling the debug hud via 'ToggleHmdInfoHud' console command.
  It is calculated assuming that the BaseEyeHeight 64 UU (check Pawn.uc). The formula used to calculate the AddEyeHeight from profiles is as follows:
  pUserProfile->GetEyeHeight() returns total height of the eyes in meters (for example 1.50 = 150 cm). I used 1 UU = 0.02 m ratio.
  Probably, we need to move this code into UnrealScript to make it changeable by game developers (put in my todo list). Or, at least give an access to the pUserProfile->GetEyeHeight() value.
  I can't explain why you feel difference in the height between March and Sep OUDK, again, check the BaseEyeHeight in Pawn.uc (should be 64). I just double checked and AddEyeHeight 0 in March & Sep OUDK look exactly the same to me in UTGame.
• I have moved my map from the old Oculus build to the new one, and for some reason my gun and my main character (Defaulut UDK robot guy) are not rendering. Has anything changed in this department?
  -EDIT- I figured this out. I created a custom game type that builds upon utgame and was set in the world properties. For some reason my scripts are no longer building (this build and the previous either.) so when UDK loaded my map it couldn't find this custom game type and set it to none (default). The default doesn't render your character.

• 100ms is A LOT. How did you measure it? We now sell Latency testers - https://www.oculusvr.com/order/latency-tester/, btw.
  So, first, have you used console command 'SetFinishFrame on'? This should reduce latency somewhat but will decrease the max framerate as well.

  
  I have not measured it myself, it has been mentioned a few sites that Ghostship is one of the games which has 100ms +
  I am not sure of Aftermath is the same. I seen the latency testers, they are on my wishlist
  I have not tried that command. i will give it a try, i presume its ' SetFinishFrame 30 ' for example if i wanted a max of 30 frames per second.

  0
• No, you just need to type 'SetFinishFrame ON'.
  Without latency measure correctly you won't be able to tell a difference. Anyway, the '100 ms' number seems like was taken out of nowhere, so it is close to impossible to give any further recommendations. The recommendation is the only one: get the latency tester and check what the real number is.
• Hey Artyom,
  Scale is still not coming out as I believe it should for real world items in OUDK's September build.
  I'm working on a Real World UDK scale worksheet that I will make available to the community once I believe it is accurate. Until then I will be continuing my search for the proper results. Which means we're not doing much in way of level building until we believe it is correct. Granted this isn't halting all progress, but we'd prefer to know scale is accurate.
  Pawn.uc (this is what ours shows)
  BaseEyeHeight: 64
  EyeHeight: 54
  In the UTPawn (which we extended), it was at 38 for both. Upon changing BaseEyeHeight to 64, it is still too tall for the math that determines a players height. A little over half a foot taller, still.
  In terms of this equation:
  AddEyeHeight = float((userEyeHeight - 64 * 0.02) * (1.0 / 0.02));
  Am I correct in believing that the answer to this equation can be seen next to 'AddEyeHeight' when viewed through the ToggleHmdInfoHud'?
  I don't believe it is, because the answer never matches what the 'ToggleHmdInfoHud' info displays as the 'AddEyeHeight'. However, I wanted to check with you whether or not that equation does in fact relate to the 'AddEyeHeight' in the 'ToggleHmdInfoHud'...since the value always appears close by a marginal difference.
  IF it isn't related to the equation...where does this number come from?
  Also, would the X, Y, Z eye position listed under [Engine.Oculus] (and also viewable in the HMDInfoHud) have any affect on the player height?
  Also I'm noticing that the 'AddEyeHeight' value in the 'ToggleHmdInfoHud' appears to be a rounded number...since the last profile leaves a more specific AddEyeHeight value in the UDKEngine.ini. Is that because there's not enough room in the HmdInfoHud that comes up?
  I would like to share some images with you to show you that the math in UDK appears correct which leaves me thinking somehow UDK is not inheriting the correct player height. What's the best way to do this? A link? PDF?
  Looking forward to nailing this thing down.
  -John
  P.S.
  Is there a file in the UDK folders I can view that has this code in it? (I'm not at my workstation currently and can't view all the files..only the Pawn files)
  if (pUserProfile)
  {
  // If AddEyeHeight is specified it overrides the profile settings
  if (!bOverrideAddEyeHeight)
  {
  // Assuming that BaseEyeHeight is 64 UU, 1 UU = 0.020 m.
  float userEyeHeight = pUserProfile->GetEyeHeight();
  AddEyeHeight = float((userEyeHeight - 64 * 0.02) * (1.0 / 0.02));
  }
  }
• Yes, the AddEyeHeight in the HMD Info Hud is a result of the equation 'AddEyeHeight = float((userEyeHeight - 64 * 0.02) * (1.0 / 0.02))', unless the bOverrideAddEyeHeight true. The 'userEyeHeight' here is not the height of the player (like 176cm for myself), but the height of the eyes (i.e. something around 166 cm, approx).
  I am not saying the formula is completely right, so I am opened for suggestions. In the next release, I'll try not to forget to move this calculation to UnrealScript. Currently, you can't see it in UDK, since it is implemented in C++ code.
  You can easily change how the AddEyeHeight is displayed in the Info HUD by modifying Engine/Classes/OculusDebugHud.uc (search for 'AddEyeHeight' and you'll see the printf-style formatting for it).
  If you want to share any info you can send an email to support@oculus.com and specify in subject line 'for artyom17'. Or you can post a link here - either way works.
• I'll be compiling the information for you over the weekend. I should have it either here or sent to you by early next week.
  In the meantime, I thought of a suggestion for the Configuration Utility (unrelated to UDK)...where should I post a suggestion like that?
• Same, send it to support@oculus.com, just be specific in the subj.
• I found out the cause of why my custom scripts were not building with UDK. I had my (UDKEngine.ini and UDKSystemSettings.ini locked/read only. UDK would overwrite these files from time to time so I locked them.) so Frontend would not build my custom scripts.
  I thought I would give a heads up on this for anyone else that ran into the problem.
  How has everyone else dealt with this situation? Is this something that needs to be addressed in future builds of oculus UDK builds?
• I have issue with last version. When using flash movies with capturing mouse input (bCaptureMouseInput=true) UDK is instantly crushing on mouse drag. In the same version of UDK but without Oculus this worked fine

• I have issue with last version. When using flash movies with capturing mouse input (bCaptureMouseInput=true) UDK is instantly crushing on mouse drag. In the same version of UDK but without Oculus this worked fine

  
  Oculus Udk uses newer version of Scaleform (due to necessity of stereo rendering), so issues could be different between them. If you can send us a reproduction case (a map and swf) I will investigate. Send it support@oculus.com, mark it 'for artyom17'.
• I have seen 3 bugs:
  1. UTPortal actors don't work. I realize this may be difficult but portals are currently useless for the rift
  2. camera views mapped onto a texture have the rift distortion applied to them
  3. Certain lighting effects only work on the left eye. I noticed it trying to do 24 hour lighting. When the sun came up the right eye went all wonky.
  If there is a workaround for any of these I'd love to know what they are, otherwise I have pulled these features from my demo. Removing the portal possibility was a huge downer. I had big plans that went into the trash can.
• #2 and #3 issues are fixed, just not published yet.
  You can download a preliminary fix from here:
  32-bit UDK.exe: https://static.oculus.com/sdk-downloads/udk_32bit_fix_no_simplygon.zip
  64-bit UDK.exe: https://static.oculus.com/sdk-downloads/udk_64bit_fix_no_simplygon.zip
  Note, these files are compiled without Simplygon, and they are not digitally signed (therefore, will not be included into installation package by UnSetup.exe). But could be good enough to try.
  As to the first issue.... Can you make a simple map as an example of the issue and send it to support@oculus.com (in subj specify 'for artyom17'), and I will verify if the issue is already fixed or not, and if not I'll work on it?
• I will build a simple map tonight that demonstrates the portal issue. Fixing that would be awesome. It reminds a bit of valve's 'accidental' portal release. Only the left eye works. This may not be easily fixed.
• Got your udk-map, and even though the current version looks better (there is no green color leaking), it is still not right. Will investigate and hopefully fix before next OUDK release. Thanks!
• 0
• My #1 wish right now is fixed console commands. Or in the completely possible scenario that I'm just doing things wrong, a clearer bit of documentation. For example, the UE3-Oculus text file included in the Oculus UDK lists all the console commands, but in my experience the majority of them don't work.
  I've tested them in a number of situations and configurations, including base-install latest version Oculus UDK, latest version with my project, latest version with absolutely no changes or gamemodes set on the default map, and all of the above using the no-simplygon fixed version posted by artyom last page.
  For example:
  'stereo fov fx=82 fy=90 a=1 Fov, x and y, aspect ratio override (don't do this)' - Does this mean don't mess with the a parameter? Either way, the command does absolutely nothing for me, FOV never changes.
  'stereo hud|nohud Separately configure hud offsets' - Does nothing at all for me. No message, no error, no effect.
  'ToggleHmdInfoHud Toggles HMD info HUD (displaying roll, pitch, yaw, FOV, mag, etc in real time).' - Does nothing. No info applied to HUD, which reading the code in Oculus.uc seems to be what it should do. I've tried this with my project's custom HUD class and without, same lack of effect.
  None of these settings seem to do anything. I've even tried changing the FOV X and Y values in UDKEngine.ini [Engine.Stereo3D] section, it never changes.
  I really need to alter the FOV in my project, but I don't know if I'm just doing things wrong, or if these commands and settings currently don't work.
• You listed 3 commands out of... I don't know, 30? Definitely not a 'majority', right? However, I admit, documentation could be (and should be) better. We are working on it
  I can explain the issues with the commands you listed.
  'stereo fov' command should be split to work correctly:
  stereo fov
  stereo fx=82 fy=90 a=1
  stereo nofov
  However, we do not recommend to mess with FOV, this command is for debugging purposes only. Otherwise, you may create a very bad VR experience.
  stereo hud | nohud just toggles a boolean variable bOverride2D. When it is 'true' (stereo hud) you can use command 'stereo h=somenumber cc=somenumber', where h= specifies HudOffset and cc= specifies CanvasCenterOffset. You can see the default values by typing 'stereo show' command.
  As to the last one, ToggleHmdInfoHud: it works only in the UT Game. You can find the call to OculusDebugHud. DrawHudIfNeeded in the UTGame/Classes/UTGFxHudWrapper.uc. If you game is not based on UTGame you must integrate this code into you game to make this command work.
• You're right, I admit to a bit of hyperbole there and apologize. I was hoping to adjust the FOV enough to hopefully fix a bit of claustrophobic feel in my game, but it's not a satisfactory solution. I'm still not seeing any change in output on the headset after changing the FOV, but I'll bow to more seasoned heads and try to fix the feel of this game in other ways. I suppose it's new territory for all of us who don't work at Oculus
  I do appreciate the info on the HMDInfo HUD command. I didn't even think to look in the UTGame classes since I pretty much never extend from them.
• Definitely looking forward to the next update. We finally got around to creating a cart ride, so here's hoping for more additive movement control in the next version!
• Am beginning to feel it was a mistake to go with UDK for my project rather than Unity -it's been five months since the last Oculus UDK update (so we're still missing the important improvements in the 0.2.5 version of the SDK which Unity and Unreal 3 devs have had access to for almost half a year), and the documentation page doesn't even list anything for Unreal (and the most recent UDK pdf I could find anywhere on the website dates back to last April, although we were told back in October that updated docs were being worked on).
  Is anyone at Oculus really still working on UDK or are you guys all too busy playing EVE Valkyrie on Crystal Coves? (Not that I could entirely blame you, I'd probably be doing the same thing if I had access to that stuff ), but if you do manage to tear yourself away for a while I do have some feature requests:
  1. Player Height
  The Unreal 3 Oculus integration had a load of fixes in September which still aren't available in UDK like the improved drift correction and, perhaps most importantly, bugfixes relating to player height. IMO this is kind of a big deal as the two most important variables in any VR implementation are IPD and player height -if either of these is wrong the sense of scale and immersion are ruined (and right now 50% of them are broken in UDK). Can we get these fixes too please?
  2. Scale
  The most recent UDK documentation I can find says that 'We assume that the game world uses the Unreal standard of 2.0 = 1”. If this is not true, you will have to adjust many configuration variables to account for the difference in units.' However it doesn't actually say what or where these other configuration variables might be. Could we instead get a simple world scale variable in which we could specify the size of each world unit so that those of us in the 99% of the world which use the metric system could use a sensible scale like 1UU=1cm rather than 1UU=5/16 of a hogshead (or whatever the idiotic UDK default scale is)?
  3. Examples
  An SDK without working examples makes development much more tedious than it should be as every dev has to reinvent the wheel. It would be really helpful to have some example mini-games for UDK showing how to implement common useful features in VR. These might include:
  -A very simple flight sim which demonstrates headtracking in a cockpit view and different types of HUD (both a traditional reflector type gunsight and a more modern helmet mounted Iron Man type deal).
  -A character interaction demo showing how to make an NPC react when looked at by the player and also how to have the NPC's gaze track the position of the player's eyes so they can maintain eye contact etc.
  -A 3D menu system demo with the ability to activate options by looking at them (or by looking at them and then pushing a button).
  -A demo showing a dynamically scaling player model which would automatically adjust to changes in the player's height from the Oculus Config Utility.
  -A demo with a sniper rifle which when aimed would magnify the view but only for the eye which is looking through the scope.
  Cheers,
  DD
• We are definitely planing to release new UDK pretty soon (after GDC). Unfortunately, we can't build UDK ourselves, we have to ask Epic guys to do this. Therefore, we can't release it as fast as we would want to.
  Another factor that delayed new OUDK: we expected that Epic releases new UDK last November-December, so we could sync code base of the new Epic's UDK with our OUDK. But Epic is pretty busy now and new UDK is still not there.
  I really like your ideas about small demos, it makes a lot of sense to me. I will talk to our devs about this.
• Any news on fixing portals for Oculus/Rift UDK for the next build? I would love to incorporate them into my final Stacks demo. I want to use portals to create picture frames of real locations and a Howl's Moving Castle style door.
• Not yet, but definitely planning to fix it before releasing new OUDK.

Osdk Online Outdated Patch

THE OFFICIAL MADDEN 16 PS4 LEAGUE THREAD: SEASON 4 (2018) - RISE OF THE TEFLON DON (DADA F POPPA)!! Discussion in 'The Arcadium' started by Rekkapryde, Jul 18, 2014. Madden 18 Not Installing? Here's How to Fix It. However, if it does not resume, you'll want to pause and reinitiate the download. Wait about 45 seconds. Oct 04, 2016  Notes regarding the new Madden 17 patch update / title update from 10/4/2016! BIGGEST MADDEN PATCH UPDATE SO FAR THIS YEAR! Major Improvements to MUT 17 including BULK ADD TO SET Kliquid T.V. This is a work in progress attempt at rewritting the main site. All the important sub sites can be accessed from the left hand bar. The legacy content is still available on the old site but will hopefully be migrated and modernized over time. If you are interested in knowing what has happened, here is the complete history of Defence-Force.org.