I should’ve made this point earlier if anyone is still playing one of the legacy sims (FS9, FSX, P3D, XPlane, and others), VR in FS2020 tuned right looks better than all those sims combined. So any criticism from those still using those legacy options is a mute point unless there’s a medical issue.  Visual wise we've arrived and gone past legacy sim quality in today's VR but 4K FS2020 quality we have another couple years.🧐

That being said I feel VR in FS2020 better than anything else we have on the market and on top of that your in VR looking at a full cockpit around you versus a pancake sim with lower res than FS2020.  Forget about VR in those older coded sims.  It's a testament to how far ahead FS2020 is when it's VR can look somewhat less than it's 2D version yet looks far better than anything else on the market in 2D let alone 3D.  VR in all our other options looks like word not allowed.  For those into other sims outside of GA VR looks even better (Reverb G2) and those into general gaming we have arrived (Oculus Quest 2).  Some of the games available for the Oculus Quest look amazing not to mention the Youtube content that's out there for VR.  

So guys we have arrived and I might be wrong in saying two years out to really make FS2020 shine in VR.  That might be next year with the help of not only the VR headset makers but Asobo as well.  If general gaming can look good in VR I'm sure there's more advancement Asobo can make to move us more in that direction with streamlining the visuals for VR.🍺

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by Dillon

7 hours ago, blueshark747 said:

Why do you think tons of DCS and Assetto Corsa simmers went VR and have now become better formation/fighter pilots and race drivers with such titles? Come on let's make some sense here...your statement isn't it

vr or  tr  is  a must for dcs  since  your  are  dead  meat  if  in a dog  fight  with another  aircraft,  and  since its  alot  easier  to land on the  carrier  and  especially  for  aar

4 hours ago, dogmanbird said:

Certainly worth a try, as others are happily using systems similar to yours. If you can go into it with the expectations of not being able to achieve the visual quality (sharpness and LOD etc) of what you have in 2d at this stage. 

 

Lord Farringdon - Yes you probably appreciate VR more with lower level flying, but feeling like your sitting "in" the pilots seat within the cockpit is amazing in itself. Having proper depth perception to judge distance during take-off and landing is terrific. Gazing around is perfectly in sync with your head movement (no lag) and you look where you want to look (no turning your head one way while looking the other way with your eyes - ala Track IR).

Smoothness - yes it can be difficult to get it to run smooth and takes some experimenting with settings, due to the extra processing the PC does to generate two images from different angles. Software "Motion Reprojection" can synthesise/interpolate frames to pad out the FPS. With the Reverb G2, this is possible with only 22.5fps output from the game, and it will generate 90fps for buttery smooth movement. It does generate some graphical wobbling at times, particularly near propellers. To me it's perfectly acceptable considering what it's achieving. So the trick is to tweak graphic settings till you can achieve the minimum FPS that motion reprojection can work with.

Regarding the current range of headsets - if you are mainly seated, and happy to spend closer to $1000 Aus dollars, the Reverb G2 is generally accepted as the pick of them. The Quest 2 is a great all rounder, but doesn't have quite the sharpness required to read small cockpit labels and details without zoomin in a little, or leaning forward, where the G2 can. The Quest 2 can be wireless if you want (with some caveats).  I've got two Huey addons for DCS on two PC's. I use the G2 for the pilot seat for it's clarity, and the door gunner uses the Quest 2 wirelessly so they can move between a second set of cyclic/pedals/collective if needed or a DIY door gun i've made on a tripod.

I've had a chance to use most of the others that have been on the market for at least 6 months. Overall, currently it's hard to beat the two above in my opinion 🙂  Though this new generation of headsets coming out could be a whole other level of clarity. At the moment they sound very pricey.

For anyone considering VR - It's worth doing some research on Sweet Spot, FOV and VR sickness, just so you know what to expect. There's a bit of research needed to get the best out of it all. Although it's maturing, PC-VR's still not particularly user friendly and needs the user to be somewhat tech savvy.

 

 

Thanks @dogmanbird. Informative reply that I'm sure others will find helpful as well 🙂 .

 

Cheers

Terry

 

56 minutes ago, MarkDH said:

 google stereoscopic vision, depth perception, etc. and read a bit before deriding.

Or how about just speaking from actual practical experience of flight simming/ racing since Nvidia 3D Vision (2009) and VR (2014) tech?

What's there to google or read about? 

If you are convinced with your 3 pancake 1080p screens in surround why wouldn't you be convinced of full scale 6 degrees of freedom in stereoscopic 3D.

Are you not seeking some sort of depth already with 3 1080p surround monitors?🙃

Seems you're already convinced😉

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by blueshark747

You're welcome Terry 🙂

VR in MSFS and other simulators is a technological leap, the one who says that it is worth nothing, that it is not needed, is wrong very much, because either he has never tried it or used it for tests of the first generation googles ... I use Reverb G2 for several months and since then I HAVE NOT DONE ANY FLIGHT IN 2D ... and I fly everyday, someone who skillfully uses VR knows that there is no going back to the traditional monitor as the main picture. BTW, I recommend the new Twin Otter in VR is just mindblowing .. 🙂

1 hour ago, janda said:

someone who skillfully uses VR knows that there is no going back to the traditional monitor as the main picture.

Bit of a misleading statement. 

1 hour ago, janda said:

VR in MSFS and other simulators is a technological leap, the one who says that it is worth nothing, that it is not needed, is wrong very much, because either he has never tried it or used it for tests of the first generation googles ... I use Reverb G2 for several months and since then I HAVE NOT DONE ANY FLIGHT IN 2D ... and I fly everyday, someone who skillfully uses VR knows that there is no going back to the traditional monitor as the main picture. BTW, I recommend the new Twin Otter in VR is just mindblowing .. 🙂

Yeah, but if I want to have a chilled flight in my A320 with a nice coffee and watching Netflix on a second screen - you can keep your VR googles 😉

Yeah, sure the immersion with VR is great. But it has so many downsides. "No going back" - sure. Then why did I go back? Guys, keep in mind that everyone uses his Sim in different ways. So this "you HAVE to use VR" thread leads exactly no where. It sounds more like a religious thing where people should be convinced.

1 hour ago, janda said:

someone who skillfully uses VR knows that there is no going back to the traditional monitor as the main picture

Utter nonsense. Usually my replies are bit longer and thorough but all I can say to this remark is 'utter nonsense.

18 hours ago, Kaboki said:

I bought into VR and like OP I was wow this is so awsome, never want to go back to 2d flying etc etc. But after the wow factor wore off I kinda couldnt stand the bad image quality and went back to monitor. Waiting for the day VR have the same image quality as monitors. I find VR only good for one thing and thats adult entertainment...:p

Wouldn't that depend on the quality of the VR set? For instance, would the best VR set be better than a nice quality1080p monitor at 60 hz that I have?

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by MSFLYER5856

15 hours ago, bszuch said:

   Isn't immersion about actually controlling the said switch / knob where it is located in the plane. 

So you still have to use a mouse to control the knobs as opposed to my custom build mobiflight panel ?

9 minutes ago, tup61 said:

Utter nonsense. Usually my replies are bit longer and thorough but all I can say to this remark is 'utter nonsense.

If someone spent $600 on a VR Head Set, I can see them justifying not putting it aside and going back to using the monitor.

6 minutes ago, MSFLYER5856 said:

If someone spent $600 on a VR Head Set, I can see them justifying not putting it aside and going back to using the monitor.

I actually spend more than that on VR and went back to 2D anyway. 😉

9 minutes ago, MSFLYER5856 said:

Wouldn't that depend on the quality of the VR set? For instance, would the best VR set be better than a nice quality1080p monitor at 60 hz that I have?

IMHO 2d at 1080p still looks as good, and possibly better than what the best of the readily available VR can offer, because in 2d you can crank up all the graphics settings to max.

Regarding 60p, believe it or not, this is not fast enough to keep up with and look smooth enough for the rapid moving stuff, like turning one's head quickly, making tight turns in a helicopter or having a fighter jet pass across in front of you. It's difficult to convince folk of this unless you can show them the difference between 60 and 90 and 120 etc.

6 minutes ago, dogmanbird said:

IMHO 2d at 1080p still looks as good, and possibly better than what the best of the readily available VR can offer, because in 2d you can crank up all the graphics settings to max.

Regarding 60p, believe it or not, this is not fast enough to keep up with and look smooth enough for the rapid moving stuff, like turning one's head quickly, making tight turns in a helicopter or having a fighter jet pass across in front of you. It's difficult to convince folk of this unless you can show them the difference between 60 and 90 and 120 etc.

Thanks, I aim for 30 FPS in the flight sim. I wonder if VR would have been clearer in other games I run at 60 HZ.