adamv1

I have replaced all my my mechanical drives with SSD's totaling 8.5tb's. It's very cheap these days and very much worth it if using Ortho scenery. I went from a 2tb SATA SSD to the intel 660p m.2 ssd and even ssd to ssd showed a huge difference in stuttering when loading scenery. Ryzen is great for multi threading but the 9900k is still king of the hill for IPC. For x-plane I would use the 9900k over any ryzen, but if FS2020 is multi threaded than you could swap that out for a threadripper with 64 threads and still come in under the $5,000 price tag of the dell. Even though we won't need ray tracing, the extra 3gbs of ram on the 2080ti plus the extra boost in power from even the 2080 super is substantial enough to make it worthwhile, I mean, he's still saving 1,700 over the dell and getting the more powerful card. And the card i listed here is very epic, with a dual radiator liquid cooling.

Bugged out and posted 3 times, how do i delete a post?

Sorry I'm late to this game, but pfffftttt!!!! That's me barfing up a drink. 5,000 USD for that! Don't shoot yourself in the foot! First off, 8tb 5400rpm drive, no thanks. 64gb of ddr4 might be great for someone with a google chrome open tabbing issue, but anybody else will be just fine with 32gb and even 16gb is enough for most mere mortals. I put together a build on newegg like this: Intel 9900k, 32GB DDR4 3200 Corsair, MSI MPG Z390M GAMING EDGE AC LGA 1151, Corsair 570X case, 2x 2tb m.2 intel 660P SSD's, GIGABYTE AORUS RTX 2080 TI 11GB, Corsair RM 850W PSU, Corsair H150i PRO Liquid cooler total cost: 3,242.06 W/shipping

Wouldn't it be cool if the snow was deform-able. Like OSJJ1985 said kind of, where it covers proceduraly based on the vericality of an object and depending on the depth it could deform toward the surface. Like in red dead:

It's probably hard to say right now since tethering isn't out yet, but how is the resolution on that quest? Have you tried a rift to compare?

I'm using the oculus CV1, was planning on upgrading at some point because I have a sun blob from the lens being exposed to sunlight. It's not major, but its there. I am holding out though to see what happens with the oculus hand tracking. I think it would be cool to be able to use my hands so I can grab the physical controls I have without having to put the touch controllers down.

I own about 30 games for VR, beat sabre is not one of those. But VR users tend to have more purchasing power than non vr gamers. One thing I have seen parried around is the amount of VR users on steam being 1%. One thing this doesn't account for is the more than 50% of "gamers" on steam that are running hardware that could never play any modern games and most certainly aren't going to be using MSFS 2020 on those machines. If you look at the current top selling items on steam, the valve index is 4th right behind destiny 2 and all of its variations. That is a $999 dollar kit! Clearly the market is growing. But VR users tend to purchase all of the best VR games as a method of testing the platform I would suppose. Fallout 4 vr and Skyrim VR are top selling VR titles, most of the people that purchased those games already owned and played the non vr versions. How many casual gamers buy a game twice just to see what its like on another platform? Skyrim VR sold 1 million copies, the skyrim enhanced edition, which is basically skyrim VR minus the VR part, sold 1.3 million. Obviously there is a market for VR and it is a fast growing one.

I think in the real world, god rays are a rare occurrence. They happen when humid condensed air or smoky air combine with sun coming through thick clouds. Many games just have god rays everywhere there is sun, and that's just not realistic. If you are seeing god rays all the time in the real world, you should probably get your eyes checked. Or your living next to a smoke factory and should probably move for your health.

Cortana will be the ATC in FS2020.

VR is still a new technology that pushes the limits of what computers can do. When the last microsoft flight sim X came out many moons ago, I recall it being built for machines that didn't exist yet. If you had the beefiest rig available at the time you would crawl when maxing out the settings. But I don't recall people clamoring to the forums asking for worse graphics and less future proofing. The highest settings back then only appealed to people with gold bar budgets. Today the same is True for VR. You do need a 1080ti or above and a smoking hot processor to be able to really take advantage of the quality offered by VR. That hardware limitation obviously limits the amount of people that can take advantage of the technology. But VR is really only 5 years old from release of the DK2, something that is already showing its age. I would argue that VR really didn't get a mainstream start until the oculus CV1 and HTC vive which was 4 years ago. And even then it was limited to people with pablo escobar budgets. Now you can pick up a Oculus quest for 399 and that's all you need. From 2018 to 2019 the amount of people using VR went from 800k to 1.9 million. I would argue that microsofts WMR would have made the market huge if they had implemented support for the xbox like playstation did for it's VR. The headsets they created are pretty darn good and the power in an xbox one is more than sufficient to run a vr headset. My point of all this is, VR is what will be in the future of gaming. It's had a rocky start, mainly because it has risen so quickly. Companies are just now figuring out how to take advantage of the platform. Adding something huge like flight sim 2020 to the lineup of new games will certainly help to mainstream the platform.

I think seasons will come in time. Why do I think this? Because already in x-plane there is a way to create seasonal scenery in ortho4xp tiles by simulating snowfall, the add on is called simtiles I believe. Using azure AI, they could get sample images of small areas of terrain in different seasons and implement those algorythmically. So not beyond the ability of the software to achieve this but I would assume they are going to focus on the current base layer before creating secondary layers. For HDD size, 100 petabytes seems a bit unrealistic for the size of the scenery in total. Maybe it is that big, but if it really is that big you would need google fibre at 1000/1000 speed to achieve a usable frame-rate. I have ortho4xp for the whole US in HD and ORBX oregon and washington and dozens of add on airports and I am only using up 2.5TB. So unless they are pulling some magic tiles that use 100x more storage space I'm not sure how they are going to be pushing that immense size. They already said you could download areas for use offline, im pretty sure they aren't saying you can download California at a size of 15TB.

With DCS, it's almost a requirement to have VR these days. I don't know many regulars that aren't using it. If you are getting sick in VR, that sucks. I couldn't imagine going back to 2d, especially in DCS, I would feel severely disadvantaged.

Quite an active forum, the news about no VR at launch was 2 days ago and already this forum is over 9 pages. I would like to add my 2 cents as a VR user. I have all the desktop equipment for flight simulation in 2d flat screen and 3d VR. Right now my 2d simulation experience is dead, I just don't use it anymore. I never thought I would be a fan of X-plane until I got a taste of their implementation of VR. Now I am fully 100% an x-plane user. I removed my copy of P3D because it's VR implementation was just bad and I had probably $1000 worth of add on scenery and aircraft, I haven't looked back. Why did I do this? First, the biggest problem I always had in 2d flight simming was looking around the cockpit. If I'm on approach to an airport, I want to be able to look for that 45 degree angle behind the wing and keep my eyes open for traffic. In VR this is natural and instant, in 2d it's awkward and slow. Second, I actually fly real planes, and I want to be able to train on the actual equipment I use. In VR i can do this. With the upcoming oculus hand tracking through the rift quest update this might become even more natural. In VR i reach for things and they are right where i expect them to be. If I want to replicate this in 2d I need to build a cockpit, buy thousands of dollars in equipment and dedicate a ton of space to replicating the environment. In VR I just need rudder peddles and my hands. If I don't want to fly a cessna I can switch to a 737 and everything is where i expect it to be, in a 2d cockpit, flying a 737 with cessna controls is a bit strange and certainly not natural. Third and final thing, nothing is more natural than actually being in the cockpit of the plane you are flying. Even level D training simulators don't feel quite as real as VR. It's this level of immersion that made me love VR. When I look back in a cessna 172, I am looking at the back seat and out the back window, in a 737 I am looking back into the passenger compartment, if i stick my head out the window I see the aircraft with my own eyes as if i am there. I'm not looking at a picture of an airplane on a screen, I am in that airplane, isn't that why we got into flight simulation?

I cannot go back to monitors for flight sim. Over the years I invested thousands in scenery, aircraft and all the high end controllers offered, probably over 10k for MSFS. But once I got a taste of VR in x-plane with the Zibo 737, I quit flight sim, even un-installed it as of now. I gave away most of my hardware. Using my hands in the cockpit to push buttons and flip switches is the most immersive experience ever for me. And this is coming from 3 curved 4k monitors. The biggest problem I had with flat setups is seeing what is behind me in a realistic fashion, using a hat switch isn't very immersive, turning my head is literally "as real as it gets". Also reaching out and seeing what I am about to touch is amazing. The only thing comparable is a full cockpit reproduction that can run into the tens of thousands. The problem with that, beside the cost, is I am stuck with whatever cockpit I built. If I built a full 737 cockpit and want to fly a cessna 172 I'm not going to feel very immersed in my sim. With VR I can load a 737 with full cockpit, then switch to a Piper cub and in both situations everything will be where I expect it to be in the real world. For those with VR that have trouble with blurry textures, I highly recommend OTT or the Oculus tray tool at 1.5 resolution scaling. In x-plane scaling the resolution doesn't affect the performance since the code for the simulation is the most problematic portion for frame rate. My 1080ti barely works hard at all running around 50% utilization where my overclocked 5.1ghz i5 7600k is pinned at 100% all the time. I maintain 45fps even in the most dense scenery and with asynchronous re-projection the sim feels solid.

Thanks for the link. Apparently this isn't an obscure problem, a few people reported it with other aircraft with dual throttles. They also created a fix for it. This page has the problem and the fix.