FlyIce

No, but it makes any video an IMAX screen experience. Of course the lousy ones may look even worse, but those with decent quality simply breathtaking. I'm not a fan to random Youtube videos at all, but with Q3 + VD, I'm getting hooked.

I have tried everything with Q3, desperately wanted it to replace G2. In the end, with oversampling the crispy sharpness of G2 at the center of view is unbeatable. Q3 wins by miles in terms of edge to edge clarity, but in terms of absolutely sharpness, it can't match G2. Plus, the overall image quality in Q3 suffer from streaming - those compression artifacts, however subtle, give the view in Q3 a video-like feeling that I simply cannot stomach. But, Q3 paired with VirtualDesktop for viewing YouTube videos is an absolute thrill. I'm using dark theatre setting and I'm genuinely in an IMAX theater looking at that gigantic screen. When the 4K video quality is good, the experiences is just addictive. I have a DIY home theater with JVC NX7 4K projector paired with 135' screen, but the experience with Q3 + VD is uniquely impressive in a way that a physical home theater can never match. So in the end I'm pretty happy to have both: G2 for MSFS and Q3 for VR video screening. Life is perfect for me, until .....

Facebook thing is not an issue using Q3. I have both G2 and Q3 and for the MSFS, G2 is still superior to Q3 in terms of image clarity and sharpness. It's a pity that Q3 is streaming only. I would venture that it could easily be as good as G2 if we can directly plug Q3 into video card. What an atrocity.

I sure hope so! M. Bucchia is such a nice and talented guy and I'm ready to pay for his work. I don't know anything about WMR, but I hope WMR headsets are not hardwired for native windows WMR so people like Buchhia can crack it with relative ease.

If this is true this is terrible news to me as I'm very happy with G2 and haven't found any other headsets worth upgrading at the moment. Will it be possible that someone can kindly write a driver enabling G2 to continue to work in MSFS? I'll be happy to pay for it.

Definitely give it a try, just to see how sharp G2 can be. I tried 400% scale / 2x oversampling when I was on 3090. I was astonished to see the true sharpness of G2 for the first time, while flying at a spectacular 8 fps 🤣. Your 4080 should do much better with DLSS.

To maximize the G2 sharpness, you have to oversample the hell out of it. In OpenXR (not OpenXR toolkit), I set scale = 225% which is 1.5x oversampling, and in game I use DLSS Quality. With 4090, the center of G2 looks nearly razor sharp. My fps is around 35-40. If you only run G2 at 100% scale, it definitely leaves a lot of room in terms of being "sharp".

This is exactly what I'm doing now as I'm in the middle of IR training. I genuinely feel every hour I flew IFR in VR is almost equal to a real IR training hour, probably better since I'm in the "real" soup in VR. Of course, no ATC communication is a big minus in VR

I wonder when MSFS keeps getting better and more popular, some countries, cities, tourist spots will be willing to pay MSFS to get their places optimized and look the best in the sim. I kind of think those days probably are not too far away.

Yes. It's amazing with the right addon approach charts in VR look almost as good as display on 2d screen. The process does require a few clicks/adjustments to open and place the chart window, but the visual experience is amazing.

The good thing is with G2 + 4090 we're pretty much already at 80% prime time of VR. Last night I showed it to a few of my friends who never touched VR and flight simulator before and they were all amazed by the experience. All agree that it just feels so real. None of them even noticed the small sweetspot of G2, all praised its incredible (center) sharpness. Two of them tried to fly for the first time ever in their life and I instantly noticed that they flew very gently and smoothly with VR. This is very different from other first timers I had flying 2D screen - they often yanked the stick all over the places. I think the stark difference is due to the benefit of VR giving them the right sense and feeling of being in a real cockpit.

I know. I am just saying visually it almost feels like 4K. Of course once we see the real 4K VR the Quest 3 will be no match.

I hope those future XR2+ headsets have direct video ports like DP / HDMI. Based on the experience of Quest 3, I'm not going to try a streaming only headset for MSFS again. I did find though, I enjoy a lot using Quest3 + VirtualDesktop to watch YouTube from my MSFS computer. RTX4090 ensures the highest possible setting and the image is nearly a perfect 4K quality on a virtual screen of ~150" few feet away. Fabulous and very immersive, even it's just 2D in VR. I have a high-end projector + 135" screen, but burning my precious bulb just to watch YouTube videos doesn't make sense. Quest3 does the job perfectly.

I run 7950X3D with a 360mm water cooler. I can run CineBench non-stop, burning around 200W at 90-95C sth. Running MSFS VR with nearly Ultra everything and TLOD=400, I see CPU peaks at ~85W and ~85C, average probably around 70W and 75C. I haven't seen thermal throttling in either benchmark or MSFS.

While I totally agree the first sentence, I'm not sure about the second sentence. To my experience, MSFS provides an experience (especially in VR) incredibly close to my real life IFR training, down to the very details of instrument scanning. Being able to play with a "real" (aka TDS) GTN650 anytime at home is invaluable, and for that, I'm in total agreement with @mryan75, that I don't want to play with a GTN650 in MSFS that has inaccurate "buttonology".