Quest 3?

[threexgreen 3,156]

4 minutes ago, EGLD said:

When the burden of big headsets that cut you off from the real world are gone, I think VR will explode in popularity in simming.

What do you mean? Isn't being cut off from the real world the whole point? I sure enjoy being completely inside the sim with no reminder whatsoever I'm actually still in my room.

Agree with the rest. Keeping some visual limitations with current headsets in mind, the only thing different from sitting inside a real aircraft is the lack of feel like g-forces, vibration, etc.

IFR is just as amazing as VFR when you're in thick clouds at night keeping the head down looking at the instruments to avoid getting spatially disoriented, which has actually happened to me in VR. I could have sworn I was banking when I was in fact perfectly level. You're blind and wrapped in darkness all around you except for the instruments. Pretty scary experience and good training for real IFR flights.

[EGLD 439]

yes, but the VR experience needs to provide easy and quick ways to interact with the real world, as well as generally a smaller form factor for the device

just my opinion of course

[craigeaglefire 197]

& btw,

Quest Pro ‘streams’ MSFS VR really well - just using AirLink,

been doing it for a year now,

a good WiFi 6 router using dedicated 5GHz band does the trick 🙂

[Donka 654]

Quest 3 is a great option for MSFS. I agree with those who recommend Virtual Desktop to handle the connection. With its built in VDXR runtime, it's as close to plug and play as you will get but I would also recommend the free OpenXR Toolkit to fine-tune the experience.

With your 3080Ti, you should get very acceptable visuals and performance. Run the headset at 72Hz and use SSW (motion reprojection) in Virtual Desktop to aim for 36fps or higher in MSFS which will translate to 72fps in the headset for a smooth experience. Run DLSS Quality or Balanced mode in MSFS and also use the Fixed Foveated Rendering (quality preset) option in Open XR Toolkit for an extra boost in performance. The main point of tweaking will be the override resolution in Open XR Toolkit which will let you increase the resolution (supersample) to get more detail in the VR image.

[zorro747 33]

6 hours ago, strider1 said:

My next headset is going to be a pcvr, probably Bigscreen-Beyond.  

But Quest 3 is good enough, I think. But I have never tried the alternatives. So, it is difficult to compare. But at the current stage it is good enough. 

[dbw1 446]

On 1/14/2024 at 7:35 PM, mryan75 said:

So I was wandering around a small local shop called Walmart earlier today and they had a Quest 3 from this upstart company card Facebook. As someone with zero experience with VR, what are my prospects with a 12700k/3080TI/36GB to get any enjoyment out of the thing? I will state for your reference that I am completely happy with my 2D performance. 

I am much the same as you. Happy with 2d performance on my 34" monitor but very interested in VR. My knowledge of VR is limited.

My computer: is amd... 7900xt(20gig), 7800x3d, m.2 drives, 32 gigs 6000 ram.

[Sabre57 47]

I've also seen a few videos showing the quest 3 using pass through portals showing things like your yoke, button boxes, and the like.  This would support the folks who want to see their physical devices as well as their VR environment.

[Donka 654]

Just an option for those looking for longer wire free sessions with the Quest 3 or looking for an optional counter weight.

I hooked up a power back to the back of a headstrap via velcro cable ties and a short USB C cable.

Safuel (Iniu) 10000mAh power bank.

Velcro cable ties and a USB C right angle 30cm cable.

 

This is all connected to the BoboVR M3 Mini headstrap which is the most comfortable I could find. A single cable tie around the top head strap, just above the rear head pad. A couple of cable ties wrapped around the middle of the power bank and just stick it on when needed. Nothing permanent and it holds perfectly in place.

 

Fired up MSFS2020 via Virtual Desktop. Quest 3 battery was at 66%. Played for 45mins and battery had gone up to 69% so this combination is perfect to even charge the Q3 in use.

 

Picked up the power bank when they offered a 50% voucher for £7.64 which that brand do very often and the USB cable was only £3.16 off eBay. All 3 including the Velcro cable ties for less than £16. Works great as a counter weight, charges in use with no buzzing and easily removed when needed.

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/SAFUEL-Charging-10500mAh-Portable-Slimmest/dp/B09QPCM59Z

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B09KXJQ9B3/

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204356410206

[strider1 575]

7 hours ago, threegreen said:

Although this isn't ideal either, because the GPU has to do more work to render the picture for the headset via streaming than if you plugged a PCVR headset straight into the GPU via display port. There will be a performance penalty.

I'm also not sure if it's a good idea to have high intensity Wi-Fi signals right next to your brain all the time with a streaming headset.

I think the quest 3 would be a great headset if you could plug into the GPU Display-port. The visual quality was subpar streaming. I tried various settings with the available Oculus and Steam software. The usb cable it came was to short and I don't think it was a link cable to transfer data from the computer. 

I don't like the idea of strapping a low power microwave to my head either. I don't think any of this wireless technology is safe long-term.   

[JacquesBrel 641]

1 hour ago, strider1 said:

The usb cable it came was to short and I don't think it was a link cable to transfer data from the computer. 

It is for charging and it doesn't have sufficent bandwidth to stream at an acceptable image quality.

1 hour ago, strider1 said:

I think the quest 3 would be a great headset if you could plug into the GPU Display-port.

That would indeed be ideal. But with my link cable I get quite acceptable image quality with H.264@700Mbps. It looks much better to me than H.265/AV-1@200Mbps which is the max bitrate the Quest Snapdragon processor can decode H.265/AV-1. With H.264@700Mbps it is only in certain situations in certain games that I notice the image compression, and I have to actively look for it - but overall, 99% of the time, I just don't notice it and don't think about it.

[threexgreen 3,156]

5 hours ago, strider1 said:

I don't like the idea of strapping a low power microwave to my head either. I don't think any of this wireless technology is safe long-term.   

It looks like short term is fine, but no one yet has been exposed to Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, cellular, etc. at the same time all day every day for 70 years. Keeping a short distance of something like 8 in/20 cm minimum from things like routers and Wi-Fi antennas is generally recommended, but not feasible with a VR headset for obvious reasons. As with all things radiation, it's long term/prolonged exposure that's the problem rather than short term/brief exposure, even if quite intense. So a normal sim session is probably fine, but, you know, no one knows for sure at this point.

3 hours ago, JacquesBrel said:

That would indeed be ideal. But with my link cable I get quite acceptable image quality with H.264@700Mbps. It looks much better to me than H.265/AV-1@200Mbps which is the max bitrate the Quest Snapdragon processor can decode H.265/AV-1. With H.264@700Mbps it is only in certain situations in certain games that I notice the image compression, and I have to actively look for it - but overall, 99% of the time, I just don't notice it and don't think about it.

It seems good streaming visual quality can be achieved, but I'd rather use my full PC hardware power for the best visuals with a stable connection rather than "quite acceptable" with a performance penalty due to extra GPU encoding. I know I'm repeating myself, but personally, I find all the streaming solutions with standalone headsets pretty awkward.

Edited January 19 by threegreen

[qqwertz 797]

23 hours ago, threexgreen said:

I'm also not sure if it's a good idea to have high intensity Wi-Fi signals right next to your brain all the time with a streaming headset.

I don't think the risk is greater than with cell phones. Most likely it is much lower since cell phones need to communicate with receiver antennae that are much further away.

[Donka 654]

1 hour ago, qqwertz said:

I don't think the risk is greater than with cell phones. Most likely it is much lower since cell phones need to communicate with receiver antennae that are much further away.

These devices all use internal shielding as well to keep the signals as isolated from the human body - it's part of how they get their classification for use.

[Tierborn 191]

22 hours ago, Donka said:

Quest 3 is a great option for MSFS. I agree with those who recommend Virtual Desktop to handle the connection. With its built in VDXR runtime, it's as close to plug and play as you will get but I would also recommend the free OpenXR Toolkit to fine-tune the experience.

With your 3080Ti, you should get very acceptable visuals and performance. Run the headset at 72Hz and use SSW (motion reprojection) in Virtual Desktop to aim for 36fps or higher in MSFS which will translate to 72fps in the headset for a smooth experience. Run DLSS Quality or Balanced mode in MSFS and also use the Fixed Foveated Rendering (quality preset) option in Open XR Toolkit for an extra boost in performance. The main point of tweaking will be the override resolution in Open XR Toolkit which will let you increase the resolution (supersample) to get more detail in the VR image.

So, is Virtual Desktop really any better than using Air Link?

[Dillon 2,198]

On 1/15/2024 at 7:18 AM, turbomax said:

we should not drive potential VR beginners away, that's all I wanted to say.

This and price is why HP/Microsoft will stop supporting VR (Reverb G2 is still an amazing mid-range option as it's use won't go away fully until after Windows 11).  So good point here. VR is a game changer but you need a video card with at least 16gigs of RAM.

Here's the break down for people wanting to get in the game:

Low end/Cheap/Performance may vary - Quest 2/3, anything in the $200 - $600 range (I put Quest 3 here because you get cheap performance is many cases because you're using it over WiFI, you need a solid connection to the PC for a stable experience in most cased)

Mid-Range/Decent visuals/good performer/stable/$400 to $600+ - Reverb G2 (currently the only game in town as a mid-range solid performer.  Lack of interest in VR got this one killed but it's still supported now and well into the future if you keep Windows 11 installed for longer than you normally would)

High End/Pricy/Great visuals $1,500 to $2000+ - Somnium VR1, Primax VR

😔

Has Affordable PC VR just DIED in 2024? A Flight Simmer's Perspective | MSFS VR (youtube.com)

Edited January 20 by Dillon