On 10/7/2019 at 7:18 AM, Casualcas said:

Good god! 3,400 €? I'll stick with VR and have money left over to actually take a trip. But go for it if you can.

 

MFST 2020 it may be worth it. 🙂

3 hours ago, Flybynumbers said:

Sry everyone...the mods gave me a time out for posting in the x-plane forum that they should name it "ex-plane", and posting in the Prepar3d forum they should rename it "un-Prepar3d" in response to the previews of the MSFT 2020. 

Anyway...back onto the topic of VR and simulators. 

• A real airplane has a field of view of about 180 degrees from left window to right window. It also has control surfaces and instruments for aviating, navigating, and communicating.
• A home build simulator can easily replicate all of these conditions...and many have done so EXACTLY. 

So if you already have a 180 degree FOV, and have a physical cockpit with all control surfaces, and instruments, then you stand nothing to gain from using VR...in fact you would be losing realism. This goes the same for racing car simulators. If you have a playseat with wheel, pedals, and shifter as well as a 180 degree FOV, you too would be gaining nothing from VR.

NOW...VR changes things significantly in RPG games. I was just playing elder scrolls V - Skyrim...obviously the future is VR as it blows non-vr games out of the water...same for games like boxing...and COD etc. many games out there are obviously better in VR. Truly exciting times for gamers!

I agree that if you’ve built an exact replica of a C172 or a 737 then why compromise and take the lesser experience of VR. So that’s about 0.1% of flight simmers at a guess. Hopefully too, those people would never want to switch from their aircraft of choice to something different like a Spitfire MkIX. 

6 hours ago, Casualcas said:

 I dont want any part of THAT poll. Lol

Nope!

29 minutes ago, Spit40 said:

I agree that if you’ve built an exact replica of a C172 or a 737 then why compromise and take the lesser experience of VR. So that’s about 0.1% of flight simmers at a guess. Hopefully too, those people would never want to switch from their aircraft of choice to something different like a Spitfire MkIX. 

You don't need an exact replica...one can get a 180 degree view easily enough with monitors...and a bunch of saitek controls including instrument pips. As far as changing planes you basically only have to choose between GA and jets.

Edited October 8, 20196 yr by Flybynumbers

9 hours ago, Flybynumbers said:

You don't need an exact replica...one can get a 180 degree view easily enough with monitors...and a bunch of saitek controls including instrument pips. As far as changing planes you basically only have to choose between GA and jets.

Assuming track IR? OK, that gives you pseudo 180, but unless you build a wrap around cockpit you’d struggle to have more than 90 degrees true FOV.

As for GA, saitek gear matches a C172 nicely, and stretches to some twin props with varying degrees of success but is a pretty poor match for a Cub or anything esoteric.

In a recent podcast with AV sim, Microsoft says this about VR:

 VR: Cannot say at the moment whether it will be there on first release but trying to prioritise it

 

Well, this is better that "No VR at launch - and MAYBE it will come...some day, maybe" - but it is still not good enough - sorry MS.

Microsoft need to say: "Yes, we listen to the community, Yes, native VR support will be in the simulator at launch"

Edited October 9, 20196 yr by Thac

Given the incredible achievements already accomplished, VR support (at least whilst still using physical controls) is relatively trivial.  But VR also requires high frame rates and no stutters.  Skipping a few frames now and then on a monitor is barely noticieable, but soon becomes nauseating in VR (not saying that I have seen any evidence of stuttering).  I suspect that they would rather delay official VR support until they know it works well, rather than risk scores of complaints from unhappy customers.  Why should everyone else have to wait?  I'm a keen VR user myself and may not even buy this until VR support is there, but I don't see why it has to be there at launch.  Maybe there is a case for an initial Insider VR launch.

28 minutes ago, Grindathotte said:

Given the incredible achievements already accomplished, VR support (at least whilst still using physical controls) is relatively trivial.  But VR also requires high frame rates and no stutters.  Skipping a few frames now and then on a monitor is barely noticieable, but soon becomes nauseating in VR (not saying that I have seen any evidence of stuttering).  I suspect that they would rather delay official VR support until they know it works well, rather than risk scores of complaints from unhappy customers.  Why should everyone else have to wait?  I'm a keen VR user myself and may not even buy this until VR support is there, but I don't see why it has to be there at launch.  Maybe there is a case for an initial Insider VR launch.

I can run FSX/Prepar3D/XP11 fine in VR (Pimax 5K+) - and those sims have very bad performance.

MSFS2020 will not perform worst than P3D/FSX - so VR performance in MSFS2020 will be "good enough" - most important is to actually support VR at launch.

30 minutes ago, Thac said:

I can run FSX/Prepar3D/XP11 fine in VR (Pimax 5K+) - and those sims have very bad performance.

MSFS2020 will not perform worst than P3D/FSX - so VR performance in MSFS2020 will be "good enough" - most important is to actually support VR at launch.

I'm guessing you have a pretty top-end system.

4 minutes ago, Grindathotte said:

I'm guessing you have a pretty top-end system.

Yes I have a nice system.

This (simming) is my hobby, and I am old (I have money). I use a 2080Ti and 9900K. But a 1080Ti and a much lower CPU than 9900K will run FSX/P3D fine in VR. You just need to lower some (key) settings. 

I'm OK if there's no VR at MSFS2020 launch.  I'm certainly no "VR fanatic" as one recent poster (sadly) seems to want to label the VR enthusiasts.

But I've been using multi-monitor flight sim setups for over 17 years now and I'm ready for the next level of immersion.  So I will not even consider buying MSFS2020 until it supports usable VR on the PC.  I cannot fathom going back to a single-monitor setup.  That would be like taking a step back in time almost 2 decades!

1 hour ago, Thac said:

MSFS2020 will not perform worst than P3D/FSX - so VR performance in MSFS2020 will be "good enough" - most important is to actually support VR at launch.

As it uses a different graphics engine to either P3D or FSX, you have no way of knowing whether or not it will be "good enough". As far as I'm aware, neither of Asobo's most recent games (The Crew 2 and A Plague Tale) have VR support so it may not be quite as straightforward to implement it as some suggest.

 

3 hours ago, Spit40 said:

Assuming track IR? OK, that gives you pseudo 180, but unless you build a wrap around cockpit you’d struggle to have more than 90 degrees true FOV.

As for GA, saitek gear matches a C172 nicely, and stretches to some twin props with varying degrees of success but is a pretty poor match for a Cub or anything esoteric.

Not with track ir...you might as well just do VR...120 degrees would suffice and easily attainable. A cub? Even I would fly a cub in VR...no instruments needed...just stick fly it. 🙂

25 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

As it uses a different graphics engine to either P3D or FSX, you have no way of knowing whether or not it will be "good enough". As far as I'm aware, neither of Asobo's most recent games (The Crew 2 and A Plague Tale) have VR support so it may not be quite as straightforward to implement it as some suggest.

 

You may be right about that it is not straightforward for Asobo to implement VR in MSFS2020. Asobo better start VR implementation  now so that it is ready at launch. Perhaps Microsoft needs to motivate the development team? Developing a brand new modern flight simulator with no VR support? Really?

2 minutes ago, Thac said:

Developing a brand new modern flight simulator with no VR support? Really?

What makes anyone think that it won't, eventually, have VR support? MS has certainly implied that it will, but perhaps not at launch. To my mind, you have to start with a sim which includes features that everyone can use and then gradually add those which appeal to a smaller audience or are hardware dependent.