Just now, dongdongliushui said:

This is for Microsoft and Asobo if you are listening.

VR is not only good for those who love VR, but also for those who don't care for VR. Most of all, it's good for Microsoft and Asobo yourselves: so we have a next generation of flight simulator that's miles and miles ahead of all competitors in every aspect...wait not every aspect...there is one aspect that's completely lacking from the very beginning.

Just think of the relief on those competitors' faces.

I understand all developers want to make money out of their products. That's completely fine. But I think you must also understand that Microsoft Flight Simulator is not an ordinary product. It's not just a cash cow. It's more than that. It's higher than that. It's rich in cultural meanings.  It's also a height of human achievement, a symbol of freedom, a step into higher dimension.

Talking of higher freedom and dimension, and you don't think VR is the most urgent matter?

As a secular saying goes, a bucket can only fill with the volume of water the shortest plank allows. Please don't make VR your shortest plank.

In the ultimate sense, VR is about flying, and flying is a form of VR. They are one and shouldn't be separated.

It would make absolutely no sense not to at lease design the sim without accounting for the possibility of VR gaining being more mainstream in the future.  I am confident that they did since FS2020 was borne because HoloLens (HoloTour) tech.

What is really helpful, unbeknown to the VR detractors, is that they are actually making the argument for VR when they make VR proponents defend it. Therefor we have one of the largest threads.  Hint (this was suppose to only be a thread to request VR be implemented, not defend it).

It find it rich that some make a point to come here and argue against it. VR detractors may end up kicking themselves in the future should VR use skyrocket and it is not included in MS2020. 

2 minutes ago, daveinca2000 said:

VR detractors may end up kicking themselves in the future should VR use skyrocket and it is not included in MS2020. 

And honestly MS would be the ones really kicking themselves.

They are building a product platform for the next decade and beyond and being on the cutting edge means not just graphics, but interaction methods, especially of interest to the newer, younger and "not currently using ANY sim product" demographics.

Edited October 2, 20196 yr by irrics

I agree… it sounds as if MS is setting the bar very high and not willing to settle for simple VR. Maybe they have something in the works that we don’t know about yet. Next year...  new XBOX, new MSFS2020, new VR? Speculating with the last part.

Edited October 2, 20196 yr by rjetster1

1 minute ago, irrics said:

They should be focusing on "seasons" instead

I know LOL. I want all of these things as well.

Just now, rjetster1 said:

new XBOX, new MSFS2020, new VR?

Hope so!

People that use and love PSVR rave about it - it's simply always in need of killer content.  The new FS could be exactly that for MS here.

Maybe Microsoft is smarter than we think and have predicted that VR will go out the way of the 3D TV...

 

3D TV died because mainstream viewers did not want to wear headgear!

1 minute ago, irrics said:

Hope so!

People that use and love PSVR rave about it - it's simply always in need of killer content.  The new FS could be exactly that for MS here.

Yes. It's incumbent on VR users to push for inclusion because WE know that once people try in in MS2020, it will only help grow VR and flight simulator use.  VR will get cheaper and cheaper so most simmers will be able to afford it.

6 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

VR will go out the way of the 3D TV...

Honestly there really are not many parallels.

For simulation usage (there are many games using it right now), VR is an incredibly compelling experience and one that you never want to go back from (for sim usage) once you try it.

3DTV never approached that.

 

Also - it does crack me up a bit when people use the term "mainstream" for high powered, high spec, realism oriented, civilian flight simulation.

Folks - this niche of gaming/simulation is not in the mainstream and never will be.  This is not Minecraft or Candy Crush.

Edited October 2, 20196 yr by irrics

4 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

3D TV died because mainstream viewers did not want to wear headgear! 

3D TV was hot garbage. They really wanted VR.

34 minutes ago, daveinca2000 said:

Do you not believe multi-monitors should be supported? What about people who have home cockpits? 

I never said that, as it's quite frankly, ludicrous.  Multi-monitor is likely used more widely in the sim community than VR, but they both have a small install base compared to single monitor.  

3 minutes ago, irrics said:

Also - it does crack me up a bit when people use the term "mainstream" for high powered, high spec, realism oriented, civilian flight simulation.

Folks - this niche of gaming/simulation is not in the mainstream and never will be.  This is not Minecraft or Candy Crush.

It is actually hilarious and sad at the same time.

12 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

Maybe Microsoft is smarter than we think and have predicted that VR will go out the way of the 3D TV...

3D TV died because mainstream viewers did not want to wear headgear!

VR adoption has been increasing year-on-year since 2013. If it's a fad, it's a very long lived one that hasn't reached its peak yet.

3D TV arguably died because

• TV is a shared experience. Everyone had to want to wear the glasses to watch a 3D movie.
• The wow factor wasn't enough to make up for the hassle of having to wear the glasses
• You had to be at the right angle to the TV for the "effect" to work properly
• Unlike VR flight simming, watching a movie isn't an enthusiasts pursuit. Plenty of people simply didn't care enough about the feature.

Edited October 2, 20196 yr by nickhod

VR is still a new technology that pushes the limits of what computers can do. When the last microsoft flight sim X came out many moons ago, I recall it being built for machines that didn't exist yet. If you had the beefiest rig available at the time you would crawl when maxing out the settings. But I don't recall people clamoring to the forums asking for worse graphics and less future proofing. The highest settings back then only appealed to people with gold bar budgets. Today the same is True for VR. You do need a 1080ti or above and a smoking hot processor to be able to really take advantage of the quality offered by VR. That hardware limitation obviously limits the amount of people that can take advantage of the technology. But VR is really only 5 years old from release of the DK2, something that is already showing its age. I would argue that VR really didn't get a mainstream start until the oculus CV1 and HTC vive which was 4 years ago. And even then it was limited to people with pablo escobar budgets. Now you can pick up a Oculus quest for 399 and that's all you need. From 2018 to 2019 the amount of people using VR went from 800k to 1.9 million. I would argue that microsofts WMR would have made the market huge if they had implemented support for the xbox like playstation did for it's VR. The headsets they created are pretty darn good and the power in an xbox one is more than sufficient to run a vr headset. 

My point of all this is, VR is what will be in the future of gaming. It's had a rocky start, mainly because it has risen so quickly. Companies are just now figuring out how to take advantage of the platform. Adding something huge like flight sim 2020 to the lineup of new games will certainly help to mainstream the platform. 

Do you believe VR will not grow in numbers and possibly help attract more simmers as VR becomes cheaper?  Maybe I should throw away my headsets now since it has no value

3 minutes ago, adamv1 said:

Adding something huge like flight sim 2020 to the lineup of new games will certainly help to mainstream the platform

Ding ding ding!