Sorry for slight OT but I wouldn't know where else to ask for a comparison of VR experience OT the 2 sims. 

I tried MSFS with Qest 2 and was not impressed by the performance which is related to my hardware (GTX 1080) 

Now I've read that Aerofly is said to have a very good VR experience and performance (on cost of visual quality of course). Besides Aerofly features helicopters. 

Maybe someone owns both and could tell his VR experience for the two? 

 

Thank you! 

VR in Aerofly is quite a step above FS in terms of playability. The cockpits are excellent, the instruments much more readable and the frames a whole lot higher. A great introduction to what VR can do in flight simulation! But of course you miss out on the fabulous FS scenery, on worldwide coverage, on the great looking live weather, on air traffic and much more. As much as I enjoy Aerofly, I find it hard to return to it after having fiddled around with FS long enough to obtain acceptable performance on my medium rig.

I feel much the same as SimFx.

The VR experience in Aerofly is smooth with well  developed cockpits.

I spent many months downloading satellite imagery, color correcting and enhancing scenery with objects for Aerofly.

However, the level of detail and sense of reality in "MSFS out of the box" leaves Aerofly far behind.

Despite the struggle for acceptable frames rates with a GTX1080TI, MSFS is my sim of choice at the moment.

Thanks guys, so I will save the 60 bucks for Aerofly and try to tweak my msfs settings then (and maybe try to save the money for a better GPU should they ever get available for a reasonable price that is) 

1 hour ago, chatman said:

Thanks guys, so I will save the 60 bucks for Aerofly and try to tweak my msfs settings then (and maybe try to save the money for a better GPU should they ever get available for a reasonable price that is) 

I can't fight with the opinions above. I do note though that when you program the autopilot in Aerofly, the plane actually flys flawlessly and smoothly to its destination, which, unfortunately is never a complete certainty so far in MSFS.

I do find that refreshing. I like the variety of approaches between the various different sims, and I bop back and forth according to my mood.

 

 

Edited January 30, 20215 yr by HiFlyer

Sad Aerofly FS2 could have spearheaded the VR sim world, with such a stable optimized base engine.

I still don't consider it a full world sim unfortunately. It's just too bland on the scenery and empty feeling.

Then again its bland empty world of simplicity is probably what keeps it performing so well.

 

Edited January 31, 20215 yr by blueshark747

Aerofly FS2 will remain strong in the mobile devices market. For PC, it's a shame it did not have a significant progress in the last two-three years.

Cheers, Ed

Edited January 31, 20215 yr by edpatino

Familiar faces showing up here. Hi gents! I agree with all the above.

I also have a GTX 1080 and have both FS2020 and FS2.  My VR headset is the Odyssey+.  I am surprised at how good the experience is with FS2020.  When I first tried this with VR it was almost unusable so I stuck to FS2.  But tinkering has gradually yielded better and better results.  The key is reprojection.  For fast-moving games this may produce horrid artefacts, but in flight-sim you almost have to look for them.  The Odyssey+, for some reason, is not too bad at 60Hz.  I previously had an Acer WMR and could not bear the flicker at 60Hz.  With reprojection enabled in OpenXR and render scale set to 70% (100% in FS2020), I can maintain 20 FPS easily, which reprojects to 60.  I tend not to fly over cities, where I suspect it might struggle.  Flying over the highlands in Scotland and enjoying the sunset is an incredible experience.  I believe Oculus reprojection has a 4-fold frame-rate increase and I have heard of people getting a good experience with the Quest 2 and low-powered graphics cards.  So a while ago I would have said FS2 for VR, especially on low-powered systems.  But that has changed.  Of course, I have to go to FS2 for my helicopter fix and this will be the case for some time to come.

AF2 was my flagship simulator for demonstration flying in VR.
Very fast loading time and off you go, absolutely fluid.
But we only flew in/around LOWI Innsbruck Airport (Orbx version).
With that the graphics it looked good, but the rest of the world is dead and empty.

Its deinstalled now, MSFS2020 world just looks too awesome not only in VR.

Hi all

Have to agree with much of what has already been said and I must say that it is indeed a shame that AF2 hasn't been supported as much as it could have been.

You have to accept that it doesn't have the level of detail that all the other sims have for the hardcore study level of simming people enjoy. That said it's is still the best VR experience for good old simple VFR flying at low level around the detailed scenery areas that are availble. Add in some excellent Helicopter models and flying over areas such as Manhatten, Grand Canyon, Alps, Innsbruck, etc just can't be bettered in my opinion at the moment as the smoothness of the experience is easy to achieve without crossing your fingers. It also loads so quickly such that if I want a quick blast up the north face of the Eiger it only takes a minute or two to get going. And will run nicely on older hardware.

 

MSFS 2020 is already a visual treat so lets hope it can be optimised enough to reach the same smooth VR experience that AF2 has achieved.

 

Cheers