Am I the only one who doesn't really like VR?

[dbzero]

40 minutes ago, Dan_Taipan said:

haha yeah, us techies do enjoy trying new technology and fiddling with stuff. I got caught up years ago in the old MSFS and before I knew it I spent more time managing addons and setups than flying, i think actual flights were like 10% of my time in my rig there was so much to mess around with. VR is not as bad as that, but still has a long way to go before being plug n play.

I'd love 4k per eye, and the graphics cards to run it (if the computer won't heat the room like a bitcoin miner). Looking forward to watching the space anyway

There are 8K TVs being demoed so 4k isn't the end game. NVDIA is about to release its new line of graphics cards priced around what an ounce of gold costs. May even be capable of running Flight Sim 2020 at 4k while maintaining a decent frame rate at ultra settings.

 

You can be sure that in some secretive conference room NVidia and Microsoft has discussed the future move to 8K. Back in 1998 someone mentioned to me foldable display screens. That tech is now being used on consumer phones.

[TAIPAN_]

6 minutes ago, ST_Catchov said:

 

Yeah good times Dan. I've only recently got back into flight simming after a life enforced hiatus (of 8 years or so, can't believe it lol) and I now have time to indulge myself. I'm still a WW1 nerd and thought I'd give FC a go. Hopefully it's the future of WW1 simming but I'm a little worried about the devs silence. Maybe after BoN is sorted they'll get back into what really matters hehe. What happened to all the Oceanic guys? I'm aiming to contact the Unprofessional chaps to see if they want to have regular WW1 gigs. At least I get a decent ping there. 

 

haha yeah I was also away for 6 years, life enforced too. It was only lockdown + job redundancy that gave me the chance to build a PC and HOTAS again.

 

Note sure how the rest of the O crew went, I had to drop everything one day and didn't get back on for years later.

 

I haven't flown FC much yet except for a few single missions, waiting to see if it's going to continue or not before I setup with Pat Wilsons or re-learn the new flight models. kind of exciting to "upgrade" to WW2 planes although I find I like the slower Moscow/Stalingrad planes the best. The Tempest flies through the 10km vision bubble before I have a chance to scan and spot anything! Hope we can get the 1917 planes in FC2, and a career mode. MP will have to come later.

[21.Gr.CT.Ludovisi]

IL-2 VR is not Project Cars 2, but it is not bad.

However, IMHO, Monitor to VR is like early '90s change from third-person-view of many games (racing, flight) to cockpit view. Now, if I play with monitor, it is a "game". With VR, is a "sim". Never come back to monitor.

However, I hope in VR improvement in IL2

[VR-DriftaholiC]

If you can't get 90fps at 2160x2160 SS then your not really going to have good detail in anything. Might as well sell the Index and go to the Reverb G2 while you can sell for $1500. Come back to VR in September when the G2 is shipping and try it at 4k and maybe a little hardware upgrade. Personally I love VR but even with a beast of a rig I couldn't utilise the primary reason to have an index which is the refresh rate of 144hz. IL2 is far to CPU bound in VR. Setting horizon draw to max fixes the "bubble"

Edited August 29, 2020 by VR-DriftaholiC

[Guest deleted@134347]

1 hour ago, VR-DriftaholiC said:

If you can't get 90fps at 2160x2160 SS then your not really going to have good detail in anything. Might as well sell the Index and go to the Reverb G2 while you can sell for $1500. Come back to VR in September when the G2 is shipping and try it at 4k and maybe a little hardware upgrade. Personally I love VR but even with a beast of a rig I couldn't utilise the primary reason to have an index which is the refresh rate of 144hz. IL2 is far to CPU bound in VR. Setting horizon draw to max fixes the "bubble"

 

I don't understand why everyone is so hard pressed to get those elusive 90fps. I've tried several hmd's and as long as the motion smoothing is On the experience is more than acceptable, i.e. 45 fps, etc, it looks and feels (to me) exactly the same, however i must mention that I've been vr-ing since 2016 so my vr legs are 100 feet long, and yes i get that "ghosting" effect from time to time,  but it's nothing to write home about. 

 

 

[TAIPAN_]

1 hour ago, VR-DriftaholiC said:

If you can't get 90fps at 2160x2160 SS then your not really going to have good detail in anything. Might as well sell the Index and go to the Reverb G2 while you can sell for $1500. Come back to VR in September when the G2 is shipping and try it at 4k and maybe a little hardware upgrade. Personally I love VR but even with a beast of a rig I couldn't utilise the primary reason to have an index which is the refresh rate of 144hz. IL2 is far to CPU bound in VR. Setting horizon draw to max fixes the "bubble"

 

So true, I think for me the Reverb G2 should have been my first purchase instead of the Index as I see that level of detail as the minimum..

 

Though it's not for me right now, I'll still watch it with interest and will give it another go at some stage in future.

[=IRFC=Gascan]

I fly FC with an Index, and it's not too difficult to identify what I'm shooting at. The ranges are much shorter in WW1 than in WW2, so it's easier to ID the target before you have to start shooting.

All of you're points are perfectly reasonable. Some are the result of IL2 not being designed for VR from the ground up, some are just limitations of VR as a medium right now. I wish the HUD wouldn't float with my head: it has blocked my view of targets before, and I can't simply move my head to see around it like I would for any other obstacle in the cockpit. Running into the edges of the fixed cockpit (and the physical/virtual disconnect of that motion) can be very nauseating.

Personally I won't go back to flat screen for flying, but I don't hold it against anyone if they don't fly VR. I'm just happy to have another target pilot in the skies.

[RAAF492SQNOz_Steve]

I have the Rift S and while I agree with VR spotting comments I find the overall detail and experience to be very impressive as I can run high - ultra detail at Rift S max 80 Hz setting.

 

I am flying COD Tobruk as well as IL2 so still end up using a monitor for COD.

 

Much to my surprise i found that wearing my normal prescription glasses does make for an improved viewing experience in VR with the Rift S. Have no fitment issues wearing them, when using the Rift S, have no idea if glasses can be worn comfortably with a Valve Index.

 

At least on the plus side, with the Index not available in Australia, the OP should have no trouble selling them for a good price (but I would be tempted to do it before the HP G2 becomes widely available) if VR is a personal no go.

Edited August 30, 2020 by RAAF492SQNOz_Steve
punctuation

[fiddlinjim]

On 8/26/2020 at 8:08 PM, Dan_Taipan said:

I resisted VR for a while, but it was so hyped up that in the end I had to try it. I got the Valve Index, because the existing Reverb is not adjustable and had some other bad review points (my IPD is 68-69). Apparently the Index is a VERY GOOD top of the line headset so the experience should be a good indicator.

I wonder are there some out there still enjoying VR because of the sunk cost fallacy? They've spent so much on VR and hardware, plus time on configuration that it's too hard to go back? Or maybe most of the above points are important to me individually but not so important to others.

 

Keen to hear if anyone else tried and gave up VR?

I'm afraid you are the only one who doesn't like VR, sad to say so but its the truth

[TAIPAN_]

1 hour ago, fiddlinjim said:

I'm afraid you are the only one who doesn't like VR, sad to say so but its the truth

?Y

 Yeah I admit the thread title was a bit rhetorical, I ended up finding alot of people that also quit VR in the end.

 

I did like some aspects of it like the 3D view, depth perception and sense of where I am in space. I just like my curved hi-res monitor while not being locked in better. VR is fun, but it just doesn't do everything as well as I expected.

 

13 hours ago, RAAF492SQNOz_Steve said:

At least on the plus side, with the Index not available in Australia, the OP should have no trouble selling them for a good price (but I would be tempted to do it before the HP G2 becomes widely available) if VR is a personal no go.

 

It was honestly a great experience to try it out for free. I bought new from USA for full price + shipping and waited a month. Listed it on ebay as used at the same price I paid. It sold in 10 minutes, supply is so low here.

Edited August 30, 2020 by Dan_Taipan

[Georgio]

Most of the issues i've seen with people's experiences in VR over the past 5 years is purely rig based.

It usually goes like this 'OMG bought X headset for VR and it's utter rubbish'.

Then when you start drilling down you find that they're trying to run X headset on a crap PC but are blaming VR/ the headset.

 

Even then there are some people who are simply VR intolerant. Usually they are also prone to travel / air / motion sickness and their brain goes into meltdown at the overload in VR.

Some people are never destined for VR, it's as simple as that, they have an excessive primeval reaction where the eye/brain mis-match triggers extreme nausea assuming that the body has been poisoned.

Everyone gets this reaction early on in VR to a lesser or greater effect, but once your brain acclimatises to the new 'reality' you're good to go....?

 

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 8/27/2020 at 2:08 AM, Dan_Taipan said:

Am I the only one who doesn't really like VR?

 

Yep. Pretty much.

 

 

 

Except for those with two left hands, unable to properly set up a system. But such people always had problems finding fun in games. Playing a slideshow never was and never will be any fun. Similar to people buying high-end mobile phones and then only using them for calls and WhatsApp, and afterwards at lunch they tell their colleagues "I bought a new phone, but why I did I wouldn't know, all these fancy features aren't needed by anybody". 

 

In response, others just cringe and hope the conversation goes somewhere else soon. Like the kaputt hand of Veronica, ridden by Tendinitis due to working 9 hours per day with a $15 mouse.

[ST_Catchov]

Yeah baby! Tech-heads rule. Nothin' better than strapping a device to your head. Looks cool and ya can wear it to bed. It's great for sex too. Those .... I can hardly say it .... "other" people are so stoopid. Should be a law against it.

[TAIPAN_]

1 hour ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

 

Yep. Pretty much.

 

 

 

Except for those with two left hands, unable to properly set up a system. But such people always had problems finding fun in games. Playing a slideshow never was and never will be any fun. Similar to people buying high-end mobile phones and then only using them for calls and WhatsApp, and afterwards at lunch they tell their colleagues "I bought a new phone, but why I did I wouldn't know, all these fancy features aren't needed by anybody". 

 

In response, others just cringe and hope the conversation goes somewhere else soon. Like the kaputt hand of Veronica, ridden by Tendinitis due to working 9 hours per day with a $15 mouse.

 

Well done ?

 

You've just made a conclusion based on nothing, while showing you either didn't read or can't comprehend the thread.

 

If you'd read it you would have seen that:

1. The things I didn't like were not related to my system specs or setup

2. There were plenty that chose to walk away from IL-2 VR (although maybe I should have asked them to prove they have both and left and right hand  ?)

 

In response to your comparisons to a person with a $15 mouse or a high end phone, I don't need to reply because you make no sense in relation to this thread.

 

I've got nothing against people who use VR (I even tried it myself). You seem to have something against people who didn't like it though because your post comes across as disdainful.

 

Heaven forbid people in the world are different to each other and like different things.. Let's all stick to tribes and attack anyone who isn't the same

Edited September 2, 2020 by Dan_Taipan

[fiddlinjim]

On 8/30/2020 at 1:41 PM, fiddlinjim said:

I'm afraid you are the only one who doesn't like VR, sad to say so but its the truth

I embarrassed to admit that I have been flying MSFS 2020 for a few days now and can honestly say that flying without my VR 

is not nearly as catastrophic, trauma inducing and soul destroying as I feared it would be and as some respondents have indicated it is.   

In fact I'm finding the clarity in the terrain and panel dials/switches to be quite refreshing however I still fly IL2 and DCS in VR

regularly and find the immersion and blurriness with my Pimax 5K+ to be just as much fun as before.

When MSFS 2020 goes VR then I will put my headset back on and fly happily into the future but until then its MSFS 2020 in 2D.

Stick with what you find satisfactory and don't let us VR elitist deter your enjoyment.

 

[chiliwili69]

On 9/2/2020 at 8:39 AM, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

On 8/27/2020 at 2:08 AM, Dan_Taipan said:

Am I the only one who doesn't really like VR?

 

Yep. Pretty much.

 

My friend, this is not correct. ?

There is a number of people, at least 12+11 who tested IL-2 VR with latest devices and they don´t want VR. Look the poll.

 

For the case of Dan he shared with us all the reasons which is good for us to understand all point of views. I made the poll for this purpose.

Some of the arguments are totally unavoidable (be aware outside world) so it could be better for him to wait for a less demanding environment.

 

But his reasons to not play in VR are as valid as our reasons to play VR. Along the time, I have learn from my own experience that VR is not for everyone. Something I consider a SUPER-MEGA-ULTRA-AWESOME MINDBLOWING experience could be not seen the same for others. And with the OP it is easier for me to understand him. As said, some reasons can be solved today, other with future devices (perhaps G2) and others are unavoidable.

 

I hate the idea to be part of a group (VR IL-2) and sistematically disqualify any other people who thinks differently. VR is a very subjective experience. Like flying a plane or being in a rollercoaster. Some people like it , other not.

 

In the other hand, There is another second category of non-subjetive topics (like flat-earthers, Homeophaty, Feng Shui, Astrology, Creationism and many other pseudo-sciences) which should be actively combated at any time,, without a rest!!

Edited September 4, 2020 by chiliwili69

[ST_Catchov]

17 hours ago, fiddlinjim said:

Stick with what you find satisfactory and don't let us VR elitist deter your enjoyment.

 

Well said man. But don't be embarrassed to say you also enjoy 2D head tracking. Different strokes for different folks and all that. And this is coming from a WW1 elitist. 

[vonGraf]

I have VR but can't play BoX well without seeing the buttons/joystick/keyboard. I prefer the clickable cockpit in other sims.

But that's just a general problem I have, finding hotkeys etc. in a game.

[TAIPAN_]

Yeah in terms of numbers of people there was a few here but the most I found was on Reddit who prefer BoX with the headset off. Surprisingly someone even told me DCS VR is done better but I'd heard the opposite previously.

 

In the middle of the range there was some that would do single player VR then Multiplayer switch to 2D. They liked VR but not as much as they liked being competitive which I can understand from when I used to do alot of ROF MP.

 

Everyone has their own preferences and reasons, some were limited by their system and others like me had a top line system but had personal reasons why it didn't suit us.

 

Myself and others are happy to see people enjoying it (that's why I tried it because you guys are having so much fun) and happy to follow the progress to see how much it improves. I don't know why 2-3 people feel threatened by someone not sticking to VR-only. That's life I guess not everyone respects others if they find out they're different.

Edited September 4, 2020 by Dan_Taipan
Stuffed up on mobile

[=420=Syphen]

Could be because you're on your soapbox talking about how you think VR sucks and they have had the opposite experience. Just like you said: "Everyone has their own preferences and reasons, some were limited by their system and others like me had a top line system but had personal reasons why it didn't suit us." .   How many threads have you seen of people posting "Am I the only one who doesn't like TrackIR????". I'm sure plenty folks who like VR could easily do that but I haven't seen it.   

 

This post just seems like senseless signalling for no gain or reasonable discussion to me. Play the game how you want and let others play how they want. No need to stoke fan boys on either side of the fire. 

[von_Tom]

On 8/30/2020 at 3:10 AM, gascan said:

I wish the HUD wouldn't float with my head: it has blocked my view of targets before, and I can't simply move my head to see around it like I would for any other obstacle in the cockpit.

 

My opinion - completely remove the HUD for all iterations of the game be it GB, FC or TC.  Much more realistic and fun, and after a short while you don't even notice that you're naturally scanning the instruments.

 

von Tom

[dburne]

35 minutes ago, von_Tom said:

 

My opinion - completely remove the HUD for all iterations of the game be it GB, FC or TC.  Much more realistic and fun, and after a short while you don't even notice that you're naturally scanning the instruments.

 

von Tom

 

Yeah I never fly with the HUD on. Might occasionally take a quick peek to check ammo situation but that is about it.

 

2 hours ago, Dan_Taipan said:

Yeah in terms of numbers of people there was a few here but the most I found was on Reddit who prefer BoX with the headset off. Surprisingly someone even told me DCS VR is done better but I'd heard the opposite previously.

 

 

Yeah I would find that surprising. Don't get me wrong I enjoy DCS also and fly exclusively in VR with it as well.

But IL-2 GB VR implementation is way better than in DCS currently. Namely in the performance department.

1CGS has made great strides with their VR implementation for the game. And they continue to do so, the new VR zoom levels are a good example.

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by dburne

[Varibraun]

11 hours ago, vonGraf said:

I have VR but can't play BoX well without seeing the buttons/joystick/keyboard. I prefer the clickable cockpit in other sims.

But that's just a general problem I have, finding hotkeys etc. in a game.

 

VoiceAttack was the answer for me - maybe the best $10.00 I have ever spent. 

 

Anything that isn't intuitively mapped on my joystick & throttle is a couple of words - I never touch the keyboard.  As a VR Only convert since 2017, I couldn't play IL2, ED or soon, Star Wars Squadrons, without it.

 

The only downside is sometimes my "BAIL OUT!!" command can sound a little stressed...at least that's the report I get from my wife. 

[ZiggyZiggyStar]

42 minutes ago, Varibraun said:

 

VoiceAttack was the answer for me - maybe the best $10.00 I have ever spent. 

 

Anything that isn't intuitively mapped on my joystick & throttle is a couple of words - I never touch the keyboard.  As a VR Only convert since 2017, I couldn't play IL2, ED or soon, Star Wars Squadrons, without it.

 

The only downside is sometimes my "BAIL OUT!!" command can sound a little stressed...at least that's the report I get from my wife. 

Yes, Voice Attack is the way to go. My command for bailing out is “Eject Eject” and in reality is “eject eject eject eject..” with increasing level of loudness and panic in voice as the flames start burning through my flight suit. I’m then either dead or floating under the chute, but yes, I do feel either a bit silly as my flatmate is sometimes in the room, but the sweat is real!

[vonGraf]

3 hours ago, Varibraun said:

 

VoiceAttack was the answer for me - maybe the best $10.00 I have ever spent. 

 

Anything that isn't intuitively mapped on my joystick & throttle is a couple of words - I never touch the keyboard.  As a VR Only convert since 2017, I couldn't play IL2, ED or soon, Star Wars Squadrons, without it.

 

The only downside is sometimes my "BAIL OUT!!" command can sound a little stressed...at least that's the report I get from my wife. 

 

Ok, thanks. Never heard from till now, I'll have a look.

[VR-DriftaholiC]

On 8/29/2020 at 6:04 PM, Didney_World said:

 

I don't understand why everyone is so hard pressed to get those elusive 90fps. I've tried several hmd's and as long as the motion smoothing is On the experience is more than acceptable, i.e. 45 fps, etc, it looks and feels (to me) exactly the same, however i must mention that I've been vr-ing since 2016 so my vr legs are 100 feet long, and yes i get that "ghosting" effect from time to time,  but it's nothing to write home about. 

 

 

 100% Because of ghosting, nobody wan't to look at a smearing mess. If its ok with you maybe you aren't looking around fast enough for it to matter.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 8/30/2020 at 3:04 AM, Didney_World said:

 

I don't understand why everyone is so hard pressed to get those elusive 90fps. I've tried several hmd's and as long as the motion smoothing is On the experience is more than acceptable, i.e. 45 fps, etc, it looks and feels (to me) exactly the same, however i must mention that I've been vr-ing since 2016 so my vr legs are 100 feet long, and yes i get that "ghosting" effect from time to time,  but it's nothing to write home about. 

 

Yeah,... no.

 

First: It has nothing to do with VR legs. Mine are 100ft long as well.

 

Second: Motion Smoothing is inacceptable as soon as many objects move in different vectors at high velocity. In racing, it's all just one vector, with lower relative velocities. In a Flight Combat Simulator, Motion Smoothing can be highly disturbing, immersion breaking, as it creates double pictures of the leading wingtips, as well as strong ghosting of perpendicular moving objects, as well as sun flashes creating literal lightning into your pupils. That ghosting is not just the opposite of eye-candy, but it also makes identification during dogfights much harder.

 

It would be great if all this did work properly, but it doesn't. There is a lot of room for improvement.

 

I am certain the Devs are onto it, but it's a small team, will take time, and the engine hasn't been written with VR in mind. So it's a long, steady road of Kaizen.

Edited September 8, 2020 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[Guest deleted@134347]

4 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

 

Yeah,... no.

 

First: It has nothing to do with VR legs. Mine are 100ft long as well.

 

Second: Motion Smoothing is inacceptable as soon as many objects move in different vectors at high velocity. In racing, it's all just one vector, with lower relative velocities. In a Flight Combat Simulator, Motion Smoothing can be highly disturbing, immersion breaking, as it creates double pictures of the leading wingtips, as well as strong ghosting of perpendicular moving objects, as well as sun flashes creating literal lightning into your pupils. That ghosting is not just the opposite of eye-candy, but it also makes identification during dogfights much harder.

 

 

 

yeah, no..

 

if it were useless then this feature wouldn't have existed, or nobody would've used it. But alas that's not the case.

 

It just goes to show you how subjective VR experience truly is.

[Alonzo]

1 minute ago, Didney_World said:

 

yeah, no..

 

if it were useless then this feature wouldn't have existed, or nobody would've used it. But alas that's not the case.

 

It just goes to show you how subjective VR experience truly is.

 

That's a total strawman argument. The feature exists so more people can get into VR on lower-end hardware. It's great for a game like Beat Saber or Robo Recall or whatever. Frame interpolation exists for all games because it's part of the SteamVR / Oculus runtimes. It's perfectly reasonable to say "that feature over there that works great for arcade games doesn't work very well for simulators."

 

The subjective part, sure, ok, you're right. It's reasonable for you to say "looks good to me". But it's also reasonable for Fenris and other competitive multiplayer pilots to tell you it causes problems. Remember, you're the one who asked "why are people trying to get 90 FPS?". They've told you the answer, now you're arguing about it.

[Guest deleted@134347]

1 minute ago, Alonzo said:

 

That's a total strawman argument. The feature exists so more people can get into VR on lower-end hardware. It's great for a game like Beat Saber or Robo Recall or whatever. Frame interpolation exists for all games because it's part of the SteamVR / Oculus runtimes. It's perfectly reasonable to say "that feature over there that works great for arcade games doesn't work very well for simulators."

 

The subjective part, sure, ok, you're right. It's reasonable for you to say "looks good to me". But it's also reasonable for Fenris and other competitive multiplayer pilots to tell you it causes problems. Remember, you're the one who asked "why are people trying to get 90 FPS?". They've told you the answer, now you're arguing about it.

 

kind of difficult to produce a non-strawman argument where the whole basis of it is extremely subjective, isn't it?

 

My initial response was that 90 fps isn't a requirement, which obviously is based on my purely subjective experience. But if you look at everyone else's arguments they are just as subjective as mine. So I brought up another side of it.. big deal..

[Alonzo]

13 minutes ago, Didney_World said:

 

kind of difficult to produce a non-strawman argument where the whole basis of it is extremely subjective, isn't it?

 

My initial response was that 90 fps isn't a requirement, which obviously is based on my purely subjective experience. But if you look at everyone else's arguments they are just as subjective as mine. So I brought up another side of it.. big deal..

 

Your strawman was "that feature must be useful or it wouldn't exist".

 

I'd argue the artifacts introduced by frame doubling are not subjective. They are there and I'm sure people have produced screen shots. What is subjective is whether they have a negative impact on gameplay.

 

But again. YOU ASKED. THEY ANSWERED. Now you're arguing like a child.

[Guest deleted@134347]

2 minutes ago, Alonzo said:

But again. YOU ASKED. THEY ANSWERED. Now you're arguing like a child.

 

I didn't ask anything. Even though my statement ended with a question mark at best it was all rhetorical. You guys are arguing with me.

 

anyway, this is silly. Let's just agree to disagree.

[dburne]

That is one thing I will miss with Oculus. Their ASW2 for the Rift is actually pretty good.

It is not often I drop into ASW with IL-2, but when I do it is not game breaking for me at all.

While I have not yet gained first hand knowledge, I have a feeling the Motion Reprojection for the Reverb might not be as good.

Will be interesting to compare once I have the Reverb G2.

[Lombra]

So you've listed a few different types of issues here.

• Issues that are inherent to the concept of VR as it exists today
• Issues with your specific headset
• Issues relating to the computational intensity of VR
• Issues relating to IL-2

All of which are fine to dislike, but I don't really agree with dismissing VR as a whole because of issues other than the inherent ones.

 

I do agree that the Index has some issues with off center lens clarity. The nose gap doesn't bother me personally, but I guess others might have a greater gap.

Not sure what you mean by poor graphics. In the same sentence you mention that you have turned your settings down, so what did you expect?

 

Not sure what you mean by the cockpit restriction modes either. The restricted mode is bad because it dislocates your head, I agree, but then you say that the unrestricted mode is bad because it doesn't do that? What solution would you like to see? Sure, the ideal solution would be to be physically restricted from poking your head through the frame, but that's not happening.

 

The performance issue is what it is. Not really a flaw in VR. It just requires a high performing system. Of course, in some cases even that doesn't really help, due to poorly optimised software, but I think IL-2 is among the better VR optimised titles.

 

All in all, I think VR is the end game of any simulator. All those people using triple monitors and TrackIR? What they were trying to achieve is VR.

 

Personally, my immediate issue with VR is that I can't really use all my button boxes. And on a longer term I would like to see headsets that don't weigh your head down more than a pair of glasses.

[simfan2015]

1 hour ago, Lombra said:

All those people using triple monitors and TrackIR? What they were trying to achieve is VR.

Agreed, IMHO, but until people have to wear a stormtrooper's helmet to get into VR ... Triple monitors and TrackIr will live on and prosper !

[TAIPAN_]

2 hours ago, Lombra said:

So you've listed a few different types of issues here.

• Issues that are inherent to the concept of VR as it exists today
• Issues with your specific headset
• Issues relating to the computational intensity of VR
• Issues relating to IL-2

All of which are fine to dislike, but I don't really agree with dismissing VR as a whole because of issues other than the inherent ones.

 

 

 

Almost correct - yes I dislike it, no I don't dismiss VR as a whole. I choose my monitor over VR (for now) but still respect that others can enjoy VR already.

 

In your list you didn't include the most important issues to the decision - the personal preference ones that are not related to the technology. I just had to try it for myself to know for sure, I like technology so I couldn't resist. Yeah there was some expectation of reduced quality by reducing graphics settings to get the FPS, combined with the index the quality was worse than expected. I knew some reduction would be there, but since everyone raves about how great VR is I had extremely high hopes it would be a minor thing but it was worse than I expected then combined with everything else it wasn't worth it (for me).

 

If it was only computational intensity I'd be lining up to buy the RTX 3090. I may even still buy it for future. But its more than that. I'll try again one day though when there's new headsets or improvements (or when I forget and get curious ?)

[Bernard_IV]

I love mine, I feel like I'm really IN THE PLANE!  Great feeling.  The visibility is a bit less and a few things are a little annoying.  The narrow field of view is the biggest drawback for me.  Otherwise it is really great.  The higher resolution Reverb really added a lot to the experience for me.  I've also gone above and beyond to make it good with stupid overclock speeds and whatever else.

[dburne]

34 minutes ago, Bernard_IV said:

I love mine, I feel like I'm really IN THE PLANE!  Great feeling.  The visibility is a bit less and a few things are a little annoying.  The narrow field of view is the biggest drawback for me.  Otherwise it is really great.  The higher resolution Reverb really added a lot to the experience for me.  I've also gone above and beyond to make it good with stupid overclock speeds and whatever else.

 

Yeah once you go VR and get hooked, look out! It can be quite the money pit LOL.

I used to never buy the top end Nvidia card on release, I always went a step or two down.

Not anymore, here I am salivating over the prospect of snagging a 3090 card already.

[chiliwili69]

8 hours ago, dburne said:

I am salivating over the prospect of snagging a 3090 card already

Hey Don, be wise!

Your 2080Ti would probably more than OK for the Reverb G2. Wait first to test it in October and then decide.

In addition, we will know then if the 3080 (or future 3080Ti) is as good as NVidia claims for non-RTX games. So you can have a nice dinner or some wood golf clubs with your saved money ? 

[Bernard_IV]

Even a 1080ti is good with a reverb, just low clouds, grass, and no AA.