FlyIce

No, but it makes any video an IMAX screen experience. Of course the lousy ones may look even worse, but those with decent quality simply breathtaking. I'm not a fan to random Youtube videos at all, but with Q3 + VD, I'm getting hooked.

I have tried everything with Q3, desperately wanted it to replace G2. In the end, with oversampling the crispy sharpness of G2 at the center of view is unbeatable. Q3 wins by miles in terms of edge to edge clarity, but in terms of absolutely sharpness, it can't match G2. Plus, the overall image quality in Q3 suffer from streaming - those compression artifacts, however subtle, give the view in Q3 a video-like feeling that I simply cannot stomach. But, Q3 paired with VirtualDesktop for viewing YouTube videos is an absolute thrill. I'm using dark theatre setting and I'm genuinely in an IMAX theater looking at that gigantic screen. When the 4K video quality is good, the experiences is just addictive. I have a DIY home theater with JVC NX7 4K projector paired with 135' screen, but the experience with Q3 + VD is uniquely impressive in a way that a physical home theater can never match. So in the end I'm pretty happy to have both: G2 for MSFS and Q3 for VR video screening. Life is perfect for me, until .....

Facebook thing is not an issue using Q3. I have both G2 and Q3 and for the MSFS, G2 is still superior to Q3 in terms of image clarity and sharpness. It's a pity that Q3 is streaming only. I would venture that it could easily be as good as G2 if we can directly plug Q3 into video card. What an atrocity.

I sure hope so! M. Bucchia is such a nice and talented guy and I'm ready to pay for his work. I don't know anything about WMR, but I hope WMR headsets are not hardwired for native windows WMR so people like Buchhia can crack it with relative ease.

If this is true this is terrible news to me as I'm very happy with G2 and haven't found any other headsets worth upgrading at the moment. Will it be possible that someone can kindly write a driver enabling G2 to continue to work in MSFS? I'll be happy to pay for it.

Definitely give it a try, just to see how sharp G2 can be. I tried 400% scale / 2x oversampling when I was on 3090. I was astonished to see the true sharpness of G2 for the first time, while flying at a spectacular 8 fps 🤣. Your 4080 should do much better with DLSS.

To maximize the G2 sharpness, you have to oversample the hell out of it. In OpenXR (not OpenXR toolkit), I set scale = 225% which is 1.5x oversampling, and in game I use DLSS Quality. With 4090, the center of G2 looks nearly razor sharp. My fps is around 35-40. If you only run G2 at 100% scale, it definitely leaves a lot of room in terms of being "sharp".

This is exactly what I'm doing now as I'm in the middle of IR training. I genuinely feel every hour I flew IFR in VR is almost equal to a real IR training hour, probably better since I'm in the "real" soup in VR. Of course, no ATC communication is a big minus in VR

I wonder when MSFS keeps getting better and more popular, some countries, cities, tourist spots will be willing to pay MSFS to get their places optimized and look the best in the sim. I kind of think those days probably are not too far away.

Yes. It's amazing with the right addon approach charts in VR look almost as good as display on 2d screen. The process does require a few clicks/adjustments to open and place the chart window, but the visual experience is amazing.

The good thing is with G2 + 4090 we're pretty much already at 80% prime time of VR. Last night I showed it to a few of my friends who never touched VR and flight simulator before and they were all amazed by the experience. All agree that it just feels so real. None of them even noticed the small sweetspot of G2, all praised its incredible (center) sharpness. Two of them tried to fly for the first time ever in their life and I instantly noticed that they flew very gently and smoothly with VR. This is very different from other first timers I had flying 2D screen - they often yanked the stick all over the places. I think the stark difference is due to the benefit of VR giving them the right sense and feeling of being in a real cockpit.

I know. I am just saying visually it almost feels like 4K. Of course once we see the real 4K VR the Quest 3 will be no match.

I hope those future XR2+ headsets have direct video ports like DP / HDMI. Based on the experience of Quest 3, I'm not going to try a streaming only headset for MSFS again. I did find though, I enjoy a lot using Quest3 + VirtualDesktop to watch YouTube from my MSFS computer. RTX4090 ensures the highest possible setting and the image is nearly a perfect 4K quality on a virtual screen of ~150" few feet away. Fabulous and very immersive, even it's just 2D in VR. I have a high-end projector + 135" screen, but burning my precious bulb just to watch YouTube videos doesn't make sense. Quest3 does the job perfectly.

I run 7950X3D with a 360mm water cooler. I can run CineBench non-stop, burning around 200W at 90-95C sth. Running MSFS VR with nearly Ultra everything and TLOD=400, I see CPU peaks at ~85W and ~85C, average probably around 70W and 75C. I haven't seen thermal throttling in either benchmark or MSFS.

While I totally agree the first sentence, I'm not sure about the second sentence. To my experience, MSFS provides an experience (especially in VR) incredibly close to my real life IFR training, down to the very details of instrument scanning. Being able to play with a "real" (aka TDS) GTN650 anytime at home is invaluable, and for that, I'm in total agreement with @mryan75, that I don't want to play with a GTN650 in MSFS that has inaccurate "buttonology".

I use TDS too since I want it as close as possible to the real thing. I have flew dozens of approaches at different airports around my home airport with TDS and haven't found database an issue. My major gripe is not TDS's fault. The Piper Archer that I'm training IRL with only has a GTN650. Nearly all planes in MSFS however are preset to use TDS GTM750 as primary GPS and it doesn't seem to be a way I can change it. AzurPoly's TB-30 seems to be the only one default to a single GTN650, but this bird is a bit too fancy comparing to the Archer I fly..

I found it hard to believe that running a business of designing and making Meta Quest 3 would cost tens of billions of $$. If they sold 1 million Quest 3, that's $13k loss per headset. How could it be? I wonder either Meta got hugely ripped off by third party contractors or they have 100x too many engineers and are overpaying by an order of magnitude.

yeah, never had this issue before but got it quite a few times recently - no "Ready to Fly" button in VR and in 2D it's grayed out. I was thinking "that's interesting, I want to se how he can fly hidden .. "

I'm doing my instrument training now IRL and this is so well said. Indeed IFR is such a whole new world that I was aware of but never was able to really appreciate its sheer depth, scale and complexity, until I finished reading the IFR textbooks from cover to cover. IFR in MSFS + VR is unbelievably close to the real flight. The experience is just addictive.

That's a fantastic review about Aero. Happy I didn't buy and try it against G2. Kind of hard to believe G2 is still so hard to beat. XR-4 sounds like a dream on paper, but that's $4000. Half the price I'll be seriously tempted.

Currently I'm driving my G2 at 225% oversampling, that's about 21 mega pixels total and I get 35-40fps with DLSS quality. So if XR-4 does not require supersampling to look sharp, it is kind of within the reach of 4090 with the help of DLSS.

At least it's inside out tracking, no more stations required. That's a big fat save of $500, right?

I want to add a happy ending of my CTD saga. A few days ago my PC all of sudden began to have very frequent bluescreen of death and led me to suspect the RAM might have gone bad. Fortunately I already bought two new 32GB sticks weeks ago. I replaced the old 2x16GB with the new 2x32GB and all have been perfect. I didn't even underclock 4090 and I got no CTDs in MSFS so far. So in the end, I might be suffering from a pair of subpar memory sticks slowly gone bad. I regretted that I didn't listen to @dogmanbird to check and replace the memory early on - could have saved me a lot of time and agony from trouble shooting.

The cockpit of real 152 is indeed tiny. It is seriously a single seat cockpit that Cessna shamelessly squeezed in two side by side seats. Almost feels should be illegal. Asobo's 152 actually feels a bit more spacious in VR.

Just got settled down on Sky4Sim - so far it works ok for showing the charts in VR. Have googled Sim EFB and will find time to test it too.