Convince Me

[Rocky_53 1,579]

OK, I have had limited experience with a friend's VR, about three years ago. I can't remember his headset, but I think it may have been an Occulus? I had so many issues with it that I have never pursued things further. 1) I found the headset constantly slipping down off my forehead and in doiung so was constantly moving the focus of the image so the entire perimeter of the visuals were out of focus. 2) I found I had a headache in a very short period of time after wearing the headset.  3) I found it nauseating, but I was told I would get used to that? 4) The overall resolution was poor, with pixels easily seen 5) I couldn't read any of the instruments, which was the end killer for me 6) the field of view was narrow and so I felt confined.

I run a very nice rig, with a 43" 4K monitor. I have good performance with no stutters and the visuals are excellent. I have to add, that visual quality is very important to me. So... can anyone convince me, who is or has been in a similar situation, to try VR?

[MarcG 2,956]

To respond to your points;

1) You probably didn't have the straps tight enough/setup correctly.

2) & 3) it takes awhile for your brain to get used to VR, when I first started I needed a break every twenty minutes, then thirty, then forty until after a little while I could use VR for a couple of hours with no issues. Everyone is different though, some people don't get over the nausea but you won't know until you have a prolonged period with it.

4) & 5) yeah a three year old and older hmds would've had fairly average pixel density, they're much better now and I can read everything clearly in my Reverb G2.

6) only the Pimax (I believe) has decent FOV, hmd developers have struggled generally to increase this in most headsets which is annoying but hopefully something that may get improved upon in the future.

VR is all about the immersion, whilst hmds are slowly becoming much higher resolution they're not quite 4k monitor yet (unless you pay thousands for a top notch one!). For me, neck when I got an Oculus CV1 with dreadful resolution, it was all about the immersion and even back then I couldn't go back to monitor usage. It's even better since with a G1 and now a G2, most of the time I forget I'm even flying in VR.

Hope that helps🙂

[zmak 331]

G2 looks affordable 

[Bozdog 63]

1 I use a Quest 2. I purchased a Third party strap MUCH better 

2 I also got headaches to start with. Now it’s fine I got used to it.  I can even use it for racing games where you are moving your head rapidly with no problem. However each person is different and risk is you will always get this. The Quest  is a cheap option to try it out  you could always re sell it if no good, better than spending a lot more 

3 got used into it in a week started increasing time slowly 

4  yes it’s not as good as 2D  , w quest is not crystal clear but I would Never go back  the immersion is fantastic 

5  sometimes have to move my head in close to read glass cockpits   Xr toolkit helps but the quest is cheap !

6  again do get used to this .  I find with racing games it helps  its like wearing a crash helmet 

vr still in its infancy but it’s going to be great in 10 years !

I got my vr headset about 4 months ago   Never flown in 2 d since  even with 3 monitors !

 

 

 

 

[qqwertz 780]

1) I am using Quest 2 with standard straps. Not perfect but OK for me. I might get a better strap that has a balancing weight at the back since I can feel my neck after an hour of VR due to the constant pull forward.

2), 3) That's very personal. I got nausea from TrackIR and didn't get used to it, but I am perfectly fine with the Quest 2

4) Overall resolution is indeed much worse than with a 2D monitor, but the general immersion is sooo much better that I happily accept the tradeoff. I just pretend I am not wearing glasses 🙂

5) The instruments are generally readable to me, but it depends a bit on the airplane model. I have the best VR cockpit experience with the Milviz 310, where all important instruments are perfectly clear. I observed that this actually got better over the last couple of months, I believe Asobo did some tweaking on the VR mode.

6) The field of view feels a bit like you are wearing a big set of diver glasses, but it is not too bad. In fact, since you can move your head, I think the biggest plus of VR (apart from immersion) is situational awareness. You can actually fly VFR patterns and orient yourself properly relative to the airfield.

Generally, I am really happy with the Quest 2. It is probably not the best VR headset out there, but very affordable. After my TrackIR experience, I was hesitating to get into VR, but the low price of the Quest 2 made me make the jump. That resulted in the biggest change in my flightsim experience since I invested a comparable amount of money into a Saitek yoke and rudder pedals about 10 years ago. 

Peter 

[-Belga- 139]

I honestly don't think one can convince another person of the special experience VR provides by describing it in a forum post or a YT clip. You have to make the experience yourself to really understand the difference versus a 2D environment.

There are a lot of shops where you can rent a VR headset for a few weeks. It's a comparably cheap way to test the advantages and disadvantages of VR. I went that route and was sold within minutes.

[G550flyer 1,013]

7 hours ago, Rockliffe said:

I run a very nice rig, with a 43" 4K monitor. I have good performance with no stutters and the visuals are excellent. I have to add, that visual quality is very important to me. So... can anyone convince me, who is or has been in a similar situation, to try VR?

I'm going to give you a real world pilot's perspective in my opinion. The first thing that I will point out is that you will never get the immersion of sitting in the cockpit/flight deck with a monitor. I bought the Oculus Rift, then the Oculus Rift S and finally the Oculus Quest 2. In the beginning, the resolution wasn't there and many SIMs were not designed with VR in mind. Aircraft 3D cockpits were not designed in VR either. Even at that time you couldn't read much, the immersion was stellar. It matched what I saw day to do in the real jet. Now days, SIMs, aircraft and graphic cards are designed for VR. I can clearly read every thing now. The Rifts did have that issue where it would slip and alter clarity, but my quest 2 is spot on. I also use it with a boxing/exercise app and it's spot on. Even while sweating, I have a anti sweat insert, it does not slip. This means that as I look around and do things in the VR cockpit, the picture is sharp without me having to adjust it. Your monitor is fine for straight in approaches, but you have to use track IR or adjust the view when turning/maneuvering to the runway. It's very unnatural and leads to under or overshooting. In VR, it's just like being in the real jet. I lock my eyes on the runway and let my hands do the rest using the same movements I do in the jet. I hunch down as I roll in constantly negotiating the turn to roll out on final. When you are doing a tricky approach with a bank right near very short final, it's easier in VR. When flying the VFR pattern, you also use the same visual cues as you would in the jet. When the thresh is abeam my shoulder, I am going gear down. When it's 45 degrees aft of my shoulder, I roll on through base and final. This is a key factor when making that turn. At this point, you are picking up the visual path indicators. You are also using your visual cues to be at the right altitudes around that turn. That's difficult with a monitor because you are constantly adjusting the view or having a weird unnatural look with track IR. The same goes for circling as well. Now I will transition from the traditional flightsim to another style.

If you like combat sims such as DCS, VR is all over it. One thing that is essential in dog fighting is that if you choose to engage, you have to always keep your eye on the other jet. Lose sight and you are dead. All of your maneuvering is based on what the other jet is doing and the advantages of your jet. So whether it's a one circle fight, two circle or vertical, you have to keep your eye on them. Using a monitor is just too slow. Track IR works, but is very unnatural. In the tomcat using VR, the auditory buffet sounds tells me my AOA and the wing vapor and other sounds tell me my speed. My head is every where, up/ down looking behind keeping the enemy in sight. Once a mistake is made, I can quickly take advantage or if in the scissors, I can patiently wait till they blow past. At times, opportunity windows are very short so I have to keep my eyes on them. VR is also key when air refueling. Naturally, I can keep my head and eyes moving looking at the tanker and basket as I close in for a nice contact. Helicopters are easier to land/hover because I can move my head naturally to look at my landing spot which may be blocked by cockpit itself.

Again, immersion is the big seller here. I remember one evening in an A10, I was setting up some waypoints and slaving my TGP towards the target are. Once I had things the way I wanted, I looked up and right and  the sun was setting. My wingman was right off my tip. The lenses on my mavericks and LGBs were reflecting the sun and the colors with the faint cloud deck was beautiful. All I could think was, this is awesome. I am literally in the cockpit. I remember looking at some B52s I was escorting on a strike in a F14 and out the corner of my right eye, I could see my RIO lift his head and start looking around. You just can't beat the immersion of looking around and seeing nothing but the cockpit as you would in the real aircraft. Now, you will have to have a good GPU and CPU/MEM combo to make it smooth. You can't skimp on it. SIMs such as DCS have fully embraced VR while other like MSFS is getting there finally. You will have to setup essential keyboard controls to your controllers. Otherwise, you will be lifting your headset to look for a key. You will get headaches and nausea in the beginning, but you adjust quickly. This is another reason you want a good system with no stutters. When I first started dog fighting, I had headaches and nausea and limited how much I did. After three days, it was gone. You brain has to get used to what your eyes are seeing, but your body is not feeling. The same thing happens when you fly aircraft that does more maneuvering than a typical airliner in real life. 

In closing, if you want a real world flying experience without the real jet, VR is the way to go. It's addicting. The wife will always text, call or come bother you when you are in the thick of it. Yes, big monitors will look nice and have some serious quality. But, you will never capture that true immersion. You will always feel like you are sitting at a desk.    

[Bozdog 63]

52 minutes ago, G550flyer said:

I'm going to give you a real world pilot's perspective in my opinion......`

What a great post,  good to hear a pilots view on it

😉

 

[Rocky_53 1,579]

22 hours ago, MarcG said:

To respond to your points;

1) You probably didn't have the straps tight enough/setup correctly.

2) & 3) it takes awhile for your brain to get used to VR, when I first started I needed a break every twenty minutes, then thirty, then forty until after a little while I could use VR for a couple of hours with no issues. Everyone is different though, some people don't get over the nausea but you won't know until you have a prolonged period with it.

4) & 5) yeah a three year old and older hmds would've had fairly average pixel density, they're much better now and I can read everything clearly in my Reverb G2.

6) only the Pimax (I believe) has decent FOV, hmd developers have struggled generally to increase this in most headsets which is annoying but hopefully something that may get improved upon in the future.

VR is all about the immersion, whilst hmds are slowly becoming much higher resolution they're not quite 4k monitor yet (unless you pay thousands for a top notch one!). For me, neck when I got an Oculus CV1 with dreadful resolution, it was all about the immersion and even back then I couldn't go back to monitor usage. It's even better since with a G1 and now a G2, most of the time I forget I'm even flying in VR.

Hope that helps🙂

 

22 hours ago, zmak said:

G2 looks affordable 

 

20 hours ago, Bozdog said:

1 I use a Quest 2. I purchased a Third party strap MUCH better 

2 I also got headaches to start with. Now it’s fine I got used to it.  I can even use it for racing games where you are moving your head rapidly with no problem. However each person is different and risk is you will always get this. The Quest  is a cheap option to try it out  you could always re sell it if no good, better than spending a lot more 

3 got used into it in a week started increasing time slowly 

4  yes it’s not as good as 2D  , w quest is not crystal clear but I would Never go back  the immersion is fantastic 

5  sometimes have to move my head in close to read glass cockpits   Xr toolkit helps but the quest is cheap !

6  again do get used to this .  I find with racing games it helps  its like wearing a crash helmet 

vr still in its infancy but it’s going to be great in 10 years !

I got my vr headset about 4 months ago   Never flown in 2 d since  even with 3 monitors !

 

 

 

 

 

18 hours ago, qqwertzde said:

1) I am using Quest 2 with standard straps. Not perfect but OK for me. I might get a better strap that has a balancing weight at the back since I can feel my neck after an hour of VR due to the constant pull forward.

2), 3) That's very personal. I got nausea from TrackIR and didn't get used to it, but I am perfectly fine with the Quest 2

4) Overall resolution is indeed much worse than with a 2D monitor, but the general immersion is sooo much better that I happily accept the tradeoff. I just pretend I am not wearing glasses 🙂

5) The instruments are generally readable to me, but it depends a bit on the airplane model. I have the best VR cockpit experience with the Milviz 310, where all important instruments are perfectly clear. I observed that this actually got better over the last couple of months, I believe Asobo did some tweaking on the VR mode.

6) The field of view feels a bit like you are wearing a big set of diver glasses, but it is not too bad. In fact, since you can move your head, I think the biggest plus of VR (apart from immersion) is situational awareness. You can actually fly VFR patterns and orient yourself properly relative to the airfield.

Generally, I am really happy with the Quest 2. It is probably not the best VR headset out there, but very affordable. After my TrackIR experience, I was hesitating to get into VR, but the low price of the Quest 2 made me make the jump. That resulted in the biggest change in my flightsim experience since I invested a comparable amount of money into a Saitek yoke and rudder pedals about 10 years ago. 

Peter 

 

18 hours ago, -Belga- said:

I honestly don't think one can convince another person of the special experience VR provides by describing it in a forum post or a YT clip. You have to make the experience yourself to really understand the difference versus a 2D environment.

There are a lot of shops where you can rent a VR headset for a few weeks. It's a comparably cheap way to test the advantages and disadvantages of VR. I went that route and was sold within minutes.

 

13 hours ago, G550flyer said:

I'm going to give you a real world pilot's perspective in my opinion. The first thing that I will point out is that you will never get the immersion of sitting in the cockpit/flight deck with a monitor. I bought the Oculus Rift, then the Oculus Rift S and finally the Oculus Quest 2. In the beginning, the resolution wasn't there and many SIMs were not designed with VR in mind. Aircraft 3D cockpits were not designed in VR either. Even at that time you couldn't read much, the immersion was stellar. It matched what I saw day to do in the real jet. Now days, SIMs, aircraft and graphic cards are designed for VR. I can clearly read every thing now. The Rifts did have that issue where it would slip and alter clarity, but my quest 2 is spot on. I also use it with a boxing/exercise app and it's spot on. Even while sweating, I have a anti sweat insert, it does not slip. This means that as I look around and do things in the VR cockpit, the picture is sharp without me having to adjust it. Your monitor is fine for straight in approaches, but you have to use track IR or adjust the view when turning/maneuvering to the runway. It's very unnatural and leads to under or overshooting. In VR, it's just like being in the real jet. I lock my eyes on the runway and let my hands do the rest using the same movements I do in the jet. I hunch down as I roll in constantly negotiating the turn to roll out on final. When you are doing a tricky approach with a bank right near very short final, it's easier in VR. When flying the VFR pattern, you also use the same visual cues as you would in the jet. When the thresh is abeam my shoulder, I am going gear down. When it's 45 degrees aft of my shoulder, I roll on through base and final. This is a key factor when making that turn. At this point, you are picking up the visual path indicators. You are also using your visual cues to be at the right altitudes around that turn. That's difficult with a monitor because you are constantly adjusting the view or having a weird unnatural look with track IR. The same goes for circling as well. Now I will transition from the traditional flightsim to another style.

If you like combat sims such as DCS, VR is all over it. One thing that is essential in dog fighting is that if you choose to engage, you have to always keep your eye on the other jet. Lose sight and you are dead. All of your maneuvering is based on what the other jet is doing and the advantages of your jet. So whether it's a one circle fight, two circle or vertical, you have to keep your eye on them. Using a monitor is just too slow. Track IR works, but is very unnatural. In the tomcat using VR, the auditory buffet sounds tells me my AOA and the wing vapor and other sounds tell me my speed. My head is every where, up/ down looking behind keeping the enemy in sight. Once a mistake is made, I can quickly take advantage or if in the scissors, I can patiently wait till they blow past. At times, opportunity windows are very short so I have to keep my eyes on them. VR is also key when air refueling. Naturally, I can keep my head and eyes moving looking at the tanker and basket as I close in for a nice contact. Helicopters are easier to land/hover because I can move my head naturally to look at my landing spot which may be blocked by cockpit itself.

Again, immersion is the big seller here. I remember one evening in an A10, I was setting up some waypoints and slaving my TGP towards the target are. Once I had things the way I wanted, I looked up and right and  the sun was setting. My wingman was right off my tip. The lenses on my mavericks and LGBs were reflecting the sun and the colors with the faint cloud deck was beautiful. All I could think was, this is awesome. I am literally in the cockpit. I remember looking at some B52s I was escorting on a strike in a F14 and out the corner of my right eye, I could see my RIO lift his head and start looking around. You just can't beat the immersion of looking around and seeing nothing but the cockpit as you would in the real aircraft. Now, you will have to have a good GPU and CPU/MEM combo to make it smooth. You can't skimp on it. SIMs such as DCS have fully embraced VR while other like MSFS is getting there finally. You will have to setup essential keyboard controls to your controllers. Otherwise, you will be lifting your headset to look for a key. You will get headaches and nausea in the beginning, but you adjust quickly. This is another reason you want a good system with no stutters. When I first started dog fighting, I had headaches and nausea and limited how much I did. After three days, it was gone. You brain has to get used to what your eyes are seeing, but your body is not feeling. The same thing happens when you fly aircraft that does more maneuvering than a typical airliner in real life. 

In closing, if you want a real world flying experience without the real jet, VR is the way to go. It's addicting. The wife will always text, call or come bother you when you are in the thick of it. Yes, big monitors will look nice and have some serious quality. But, you will never capture that true immersion. You will always feel like you are sitting at a desk.    

Thanks for all the replies and advice fellas, very much appreciated. You have all made some interesting points and I am going to take a serious, closer look at VR.

[peloto 213]

All already stated above, plus you can play Resident Evil 7 with its VR mod like me now since 2 weeks, in the beginning was terrific haha, till you mentalize that they are not real, and even still you get really scared from time to time haha, incredible-amazing-disgusting at the same time haha, not recommended for to all.

It has some scenes from time to time that do not accomplish with one of the VR rules, "do not move the head camera of the player", and what I do is almost close eyes or suffer it it by a moment each time I know that it is going to happen, although I think I am accustom my brain a bit more too, don´t know if I will achieve it totally someday, I don´t mind too much either, applying the trick of closing eyes.

 

Plus, very important, you can have a shotgun and a machine gun to destroy bad ugly monsters.

 

After some months of psychological and brain accustom, FS20 0 dizziness, simulator is the most 0 VR dizziness almost from day 1, nothing to do with this type of shooters. To play an action game in an immense virtual screen like VorpX does and in great 3D too, it is 0 dizziness for me too, I played in that way the last Tomb Rider totally and was addictive and amazing, this time with RE7 I play by first time with "real" VR game, and it is a bit more dizziness, but I think I am accustomed more, I can play more than 2-3 hours continually, the dizziness in more or less grade can be beaten.

[Rocky_53 1,579]

My pal has the HP Reverb G2 and has given me some useful feedback, but I'm wondering if anyone has hands on experience with this headset who can compare it with other headsets? As G550 flyer said above, he has the Oculus Quest 2, is there anyone else who has this headset? I understand it is a standalone unit and am wondering what, if any, constraints there may be in using it with MSFS, I'm thinking mainly about performance?

 

Edited July 20, 2022 by Rockliffe

[craigeaglefire 197]

there is quite a learning curve to correctly adjust the various software required for VR HMDs - lots of tweaking, & some good guides like VR FlightSim Guy on YouTube…

personally, use the Quest 2 because of its excellent value & its ability to run wirelessly plus standalone mode for other experiences,

waiting to see what the Project Cambria HMD offers later this year,

VR is something you have to dive into - it’s a bit insular compared to using monitor/s - & adds a different dimension of immersion…

[peloto 213]

2 hours ago, Rockliffe said:

My pal has the HP Reverb G2 and has given me some useful feedback, but I'm wondering if anyone has hands on experience with this headset who can compare it with other headsets? As G550 flyer said above, he has the Oculus Quest 2, is there anyone else who has this headset? I understand it is a standalone unit and am wondering what, if any, constraints there may be in using it with MSFS, I'm thinking mainly about performance?

 

I had Quest2 about 3 months first and I had the opportunity to return it for an entire world problem of their face foam quality and some batches, and I had a refund and I bought a G2 and I have it since last year summer approx.
For flight sim and PC games G2 it is a noticeable bit better in all, there was or there are still offers of the G2 that cost almost the same of the Quest 2 or even cheaper because you don´t have to buy the expensive cable if you want, and there is a new version of the HP G2 than the last year with some small improvements.

[qqwertz 780]

2 hours ago, Rockliffe said:

My pal has the HP Reverb G2 and has given me some useful feedback, but I'm wondering if anyone has hands on experience with this headset who can compare it with other headsets? As G550 flyer said above, he has the Oculus Quest 2, is there anyone else who has this headset? I understand it is a standalone unit and am wondering what, if any, constraints there may be in using it with MSFS, I'm thinking mainly about performance?

 

I use Quest 2 since January and have few complaints (mainly the lower resolution compared to a monitor). It was a fairly painless installation to get it running with MSFS: download and install the Oculus Link app from the Oculus store (for free), and you are set. Others use OpenGL, but I like it simple. You can use the Quest 2 with or without cable via Wifi. I prefer using a cable. I have to connect the Quest 2 and enable Oculus Link before starting MSFS, then it works without any problems on my system. If I don't, I get big stutters for some reason, but frame rates are perfectly fine (no stutters) if I launch the two programs in correct order. The only plane where I have some minor issues with stutters is the PMDG DC6 (even with a monitor, it reduces my fps from 60 to 40; with Quest 2, I am down to about 30 fps), but if you avoid fast head movements, even that is not too disturbing.

Generally, VR settings are lower than 2D settings. Clouds do not look as pretty, and anything that more than a few km away looks blurry. However, the cockpit itself is pretty sharp, and the outside world is still pretty enough to enjoy the ride. 

Yes, Quest 2 comes in a box with two controllers and is stand-alone, but I found it a good idea to buy a long USB cable for it. Quest 2 has its own operating system and you need a Facebook account. You can download a lot of other games, for instance a 3D ride through the ISS, or various fitness apps. They work independently of a PC, but if you are connected to a PC, you can get additional software from Steam. You can buy various versions of Quest 2, which mainly differ in how much internal memory they have. I went for the cheapest version since you only need that internal memory for downloaded games, not for games like MSFS that run on a PC and use the Quest 2 as monitor.

[JacquesBrel 639]

I had a Reverb G2 but sold it last summer and got a Quest 2 instead. I had frequent annoying issues with the tracking in the G2 and spent too much time again and again fixing the tracking and getting it working somewhat reliably for a while until it started being unreliable again, and eventually I just got fed up spending too much time fixing things rather than racing or flying and I decided to get a Quest 2. And the Quest 2's tracking Just Works™ - period. No issues at all. No annoyances. And that to me is just far, far more important than the better resolution the G2 had. I don't mind the step down in resolution as long as the Quest 2 simply works and is hassle free.

I did a lot of research online about the tracking issues and it seems to be a common complaint with the G2. For some it works no issues. But not for me. It is my understanding that the tracking cameras on the G2 are just normal cameras rather than the HDR cameras that most other VR headsets use. And I could definitely tell that my G2 often had tracking issues when the light changed or when I turned my head towards a slightly brighter or darker part of my room. I tried all workarounds I could find, but nothing that would work reliably in the long run. So I decided to just give up, and after that ordeal I've been more than happy with my Quest 2.

If you get a Quest 2 you will probably also need to get the Elite Strap or some other aftermarket headstrap, because the default one the Quest 2 has is not great. Maybe it will be OK for some, but for me it was too loose unless I tightened it uncomfortably much. The built-in speakers in the Quest 2 are pretty word not allowed but I just use my wireless headphones instead. A really nice quality of life feature with the Quest 2 is the hand tracking, so I don't need to use the controllers at all when connecting the headset to the PC. I just put it on, select OK with finger gestures to activate the PC link, and then I'm up and running in less than 10 seconds without using one of the Quest 2 controllers. Pretty handy - pun intended. 

Another nice feature of the Quest 2 is that you can select different refresh rates like 72, 80 or 90 Hz (or even 120 Hz), and the lower refresh rates are especially good for MSFS as you will never reach more than half or even 1/3 refresh rate in MSFS, but you will still get fairly smooth frames as long as you stay around 1/2 or 1/3 refresh rate, which at 72 Hz will be as low as 36 or 24 fps. With the G2 your only options are either 90 or 60 Hz, and I briefly tried 60 Hz but that was absolutely too low and the flickering would no doubt give you either migraine or epilepsy or both, whereas the 72 Hz refresh rate in Quest 2 is fine for non-action games like MSFS.

So my experience:
Reverb G2
 - More expensive
 - Better resolution, but therefore more demanding on MSFS
 - Higher refresh rate, and therefore also more demanding 
 - 60 Hz refresh rate is 100% useless
 - Very unreliable head tracking for me
 
Quest 2
 - Cheaper but might require a few extra accessories
 - Lower resolution and refresh rates, and therefore less demanding on MSFS
 - Smooth when running 72 Hz refresh rate
 - Hand tracking
 - Head tracking totally and utterly works for me which is soooooo nice 🙂

Edited July 20, 2022 by JacquesBrel