Brief Room Episode 3: Questions and Answers Session

[IckyATLAS]

6 hours ago, 86th_Leifr said:

VR will never be the future of video gaming, any more than 3D screens took off at the cinema or at home.

VR and 3D screens are two different things.

 

3D screens did provide the same experience as the 2D screens with the added depth perception but again on a screen. 

That additional dimension came at the cost of having to wear googles (even with the best LCD ones) which would diminish the luminosity as well as the color contrast and crispness of the image, and also reduce the perceived overall size of the image. To make it simple you get a 3d dimension but to a very high cost on the visual quality. And as a user of those screens a few years ago I also noticed that you get used to that 3D image and finally it brings nothing more.  And for many people (not in my case) they did find it tiring, some could not handle it, some had headaches etc. etc. 

 

VR is different. It has also similar issues as with 3D screens like heavy gear, and issues for many people, like headaches, nausea etc. But what you get is a completely different experience. It is not just looking at a 3D screen, but it is to enter the 3D world and become part of it, and you can act on it like in the real world. You are active and not just staring at it. This is a completely different level than 3D screens.

 

The only common factor for both is that for many people the experience is not pleasant for various physiological reasons. 

 

My bet here is that VR is here to stay and continue improving, and that the people using it will increase over time as the gear becomes lighter, computer hardware to fully use this capability cheaper and mainstream, images better and games or sims make a priority to have their software also perfectly adapted to it. 

 

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

34 minutes ago, Lusekofte said:

The development of bigger more clumsy headset is to me a setback and evolvement backwards. It has in no way proved itself to be a successful marked and I will not invest in any new set until prices and size decline. 

Guess you haven't seen the Pico 4, Quest 3, or Bigscreen Beyond?

[Lusekofte]

40 minutes ago, drewm3i-VR said:

Guess you haven't seen the Pico 4, Quest 3, or Bigscreen Beyond?

Yes and I am not impressed yet. But you and me get a different view of immersion. I spent a lot of money on other things than vr. 
And you are totally missing my point. Flight sims in general do not have a healthy growth due to the expenses and people leaving it as fast as new come in. Prices will continue to stay high and if the genre are dependant on vr it has no future. I have nothing against people praising the vr experience. But you kind of live in a bubble thinking you the only one seeing the light. 

[Ribbon]

I tried to go back to monitor and TiR, couldn't do it......no VR no fly for me!

I used to play Elite in VR, once they relesaed Odyssey expansion not supporting VR i quit that game completely.

Luckly flight simming isn't only hobby of mine so i just move to other games and RL hobbies.

 

Didn't like to hear VR and MP optimizations are off chart but i appreciate their honesty, by the time they release PTO i hope VR will be/remain capable option at least as it is now.

[Koziolek]

9 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

 Flight sims in general do not have a healthy growth

You are right but only when it comes to IL-2 or DCS. 12 million MSFS copies sold paints a bit different picture.

The problem I see with VR is it is still too early. When we have 2 x 8K headsets and the GPU/CPU combo to run it at 120MHz then it will be something

Now it is just a taste of what's to come.

But even if the picture is still bad it is still impossible for me to come back to 2D ?

[354thFG_Leifr]

3 hours ago, IckyATLAS said:

VR and 3D screens are two different things.

 

3D screens did provide the same experience as the 2D screens with the added depth perception but again on a screen. 

That additional dimension came at the cost of having to wear googles (even with the best LCD ones) which would diminish the luminosity as well as the color contrast and crispness of the image, and also reduce the perceived overall size of the image. To make it simple you get a 3d dimension but to a very high cost on the visual quality. And as a user of those screens a few years ago I also noticed that you get used to that 3D image and finally it brings nothing more.  And for many people (not in my case) they did find it tiring, some could not handle it, some had headaches etc. etc. 

 

VR is different. It has also similar issues as with 3D screens like heavy gear, and issues for many people, like headaches, nausea etc. But what you get is a completely different experience. It is not just looking at a 3D screen, but it is to enter the 3D world and become part of it, and you can act on it like in the real world. You are active and not just staring at it. This is a completely different level than 3D screens.

 

The only common factor for both is that for many people the experience is not pleasant for various physiological reasons. 

 

My bet here is that VR is here to stay and continue improving, and that the people using it will increase over time as the gear becomes lighter, computer hardware to fully use this capability cheaper and mainstream, images better and games or sims make a priority to have their software also perfectly adapted to it. 

 

 

I know they are different things, but the way some folk bleat on about VR being the be all and end all isn't too dissimilar to folks with 3D screens ten years ago.

 

That said, I acknowledge that VR has an obvious future in flight-simming and new titles moving forward should definitely be supported - I just don't think it's going to be the way to play flight-sims as standard for a long, long time, if at all, like some people would like to think. Until headsets and GPUs drop in price, and the resolution picks up to that of the best pancakes, it's going to remain a niche for those with the money to invest. ?

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, Ribbon said:

Didn't like to hear VR and MP optimizations are off chart but i appreciate their honesty, by the time they release PTO

I think vr is excellent in gb. And I do use vr when flying gb. But to me like in ka 50 and Apache in dcs screen Are far more immersive if you have screen for the systems. 

Edited January 25, 2024 by Lusekofte

[Youtch]

I think it would be worth considering conducting a survey to assess what people think about VR and if there is room for improvements.

 

Playing VR with GB is a fantastic experience, but the trade-off for most of us is low or average quality graphics or low resolution (not being able to take benefit of max resolution of headset) or low fps perfermance, which is all together is very frustrating for most of VR users.

 

There is huge room for improvement in this field, and some tools and solutions already exist that could fill this gap.

[Dagwoodyt]

Prices of hardware are not going to decline. That is a "pipe dream". What may well decline is quality of VR support from software developers. In GB I am noticing increased  gpu frametimes compared to prior versions. In 1v1 QMB scenarios with a 3090Ti frametimes used to be in the 11-12ms range. When the DFR mod was working that would drop into the 10-11ms range. Now gpu frametimes are in the 13-14ms range, solid orange and the DFR mod has ceased to function for my Aero.

Edited January 25, 2024 by Dagwoodyt

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

1 hour ago, Dagwoodyt said:

Prices of hardware are not going to decline. That is a "pipe dream". What may well decline is quality of VR support from software developers. In GB I am noticing increased  gpu frametimes compared to prior versions. In 1v1 QMB scenarios with a 3090Ti frametimes used to be in the 11-12ms range. When the DFR mod was working that would drop into the 10-11ms range. Now gpu frametimes are in the 13-14ms range, solid orange and the DFR mod has ceased to function for my Aero.

From my experience purchasing hardware in general,  if your buying bleeding edge, top shelf, just released hardware,  it's alway expensive.   However prices do in fact go down if you are buying last years (or 2) products.   When new hardware is released,  the old "newer" stuff typically drops in price.  Very often a good buy for the average consumer. 

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

From my experience purchasing hardware in general,  if your buying bleeding edge, top shelf, just released hardware,  it's alway expensive.   

Interesting 

 

 

[[CPT]Crunch]

Started suffering the old age vision deterioration about four years ago, even with glasses there is now eyestrain using a monitor for even short periods.  VR is a relief with prescription inserts, I see better and can go for hours with the guys with no eyestrain.  I'll take that even with its all current limitations.  Vision within four feet is pretty much horrid glasses or not, need readers even with glasses, for some reason all is fine in my HMD, my old eagle eyes are back.  For me VR's really become a necessity.

[LukeFF]

With VR, I'll believe when I see it (literally) when it comes to be adopted at a more universal level than we see now. Yes, the feeling of flight is great, no doubt about it, but with my Reverb G2 I just was never satisfied with the visual quality; combined with the mediocre headphones and the inability of the thing to not crash on me randomly (even though I had the latest cable revision), I got fed up with it. 

 

I'll also add that a certain former producer used to remark not that long ago that he preferred a high-quality 4K monitor over VR, simply because the picture quality is still superior. ?

[tattywelshie]

10 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

With VR, I'll believe when I see it (literally) when it comes to be adopted at a more universal level than we see now. Yes, the feeling of flight is great, no doubt about it, but with my Reverb G2 I just was never satisfied with the visual quality; combined with the mediocre headphones and the inability of the thing to not crash on me randomly (even though I had the latest cable revision), I got fed up with it. 

 

I'll also add that a certain former producer used to remark not that long ago that he preferred a high-quality 4K monitor over VR, simply because the picture quality is still superior. ?

I feel the same and have done the same, going back to Track IR has been so refreshing. Yeah obviously missing out on some immersion sucks, but the picture quality is just so much better. 

[Blitzen]

LukeFF

I found that using OpenComposite solved many VR glitches ( I'm using Reverb G2 as well,) and allows me to use the NeckSaver app ( I can't guess why this isn't simply included in the sim?)as well. I tried the Meta Quest 2 ( wireless) and liked the ease of install but couldn't get it to adjust the level of contrast with either CloD or GB, so back they went. For me the ReverbG2 offer a higher than just acceptable level, but I do look forward to the next step up that people here recommend.

[Gambit21]

2 minutes ago, tattywelshie said:

I feel the same and have done the same, going back to Track IR has been so refreshing. Yeah obviously missing out on some immersion sucks, but the picture quality is just so much better. 

Which is why I never bothered with VR in the first place. 

 

 

[RedeyeStorm]

Well I am in the opposite camp. A do not buy a flightsim if it is not in VR. A year ago my headset had to be returned and I fell back on Track IR. I quickly stopped playing until my headset got back. Visual was better but the experience of flight was gone. 

[Blitzen]

6 minutes ago, RedeyeStorm said:

Well I am in the opposite camp. A do not buy a flightsim if it is not in VR. A year ago my headset had to be returned and I fell back on Track IR. I quickly stopped playing until my headset got back. Visual was better but the experience of flight was gone. 

It is hard to go back to TrackIR. Very hard....

Edited January 25, 2024 by Blitzen

[Dagwoodyt]

1 hour ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

Started suffering the old age vision deterioration about four years ago, even with glasses there is now eyestrain using a monitor for even short periods.  VR is a relief with prescription inserts, I see better and can go for hours with the guys with no eyestrain.  I'll take that even with its all current limitations.  Vision within four feet is pretty much horrid glasses or not, need readers even with glasses, for some reason all is fine in my HMD, my old eagle eyes are back.  For me VR's really become a necessity.

Hopefully you're being evaluated periodically for vision related problems.

 

          It amazes me how some folks demand that cost for VR hardware must decrease while simultaneously demanding increasing performance. Not going to happen.

I think it's obvious from comments above that VR support is now or will become subject of benign neglect by software developers. ?

[Blitzen]

 

Oh Maybe yes...then again no...

 

[BlitzPig_EL]

They need to do some work on the sound of that Jeep.  They sound NOTHING like that in real life.

[Geleitzug]

20 hours ago, Youtch said:

I have a reverb G2 and i am not pleased with the quality of the image, i strongly dislike how small the sweet spot is, the resolution is far away from what i can get in my 2K monitor, and quality settings is average, making me lose all the eye-candy, and it on the top of that it gets laggy from times to times, BUT...

 

I am incapable of switching back to 2D after flying in VR.

 

Nothing replace being in the cockpit.

 

Even taxiing or flying long distance formation is pure joy in VR, while monitor makes it the dullest thing ever.

 

My aiming in dogfight got to the sniper level also thanks to the stereo vision.

 

A good friend of mine is a jet pilot and i never managed to get him to have any interest in flying a flight sim with a monitor, he tried VR just recently and I could not get him out of the headset.

 

 

Couldn't agree more with the above said !

 

The very first time I'd fly IL-2 in VR (biggest thanks to @MiGCap) is still indescribable, even it is more than a year ago. It was absolutely overwhelming, like playing a complete new game. Even just only sitting in the respective cockpits, look around and getting an impressions of how cramped you are sitting in it was an amazing experience - and still is.

Every time I put the HMD on and get "into the cockpit" it's again a fantastic feeling of "being in it" which I never had when flying 2D with Track-IR. 

Also, the overview and the anticipation you have in the 3D world can never get reached by looking on a monitor, independent how good and fancy the resolution and graphical quality might be. When flying GB for more than six years with Track-IR my fighter skills in MP were in best case on intermediate level, much too often loosing track of the enemy fighters and in consequence only rarely being succesful or even surviving dogfights at all. With VR things changed significantly, you can orientate yourself much better, get a better spatial feeling and estimate heights and distances more easy...

 

All that said there is only one conclusion for me - I will never return to monitor/2D flying ! 

Edited January 25, 2024 by Geleitzug

[ITAF_Rani]

1 hour ago, Geleitzug said:

 

Couldn't agree more with the above said !

 

The very first time I'd fly IL-2 in VR (biggest thanks to @MiGCap) is still indescribable, even it is more than a year ago. It was absolutely overwhelming, like playing a complete new game. Even just only sitting in the respective cockpits, look around and getting an impressions of how cramped you are sitting in it was an amazing experience - and still is.

Every time I put the HMD on and get "into the cockpit" it's again a fantastic feeling of "being in it" which I never had when flying 2D with Track-IR. 

Also, the overview and the anticipation you have in the 3D world can never get reached by looking on a monitor, independent how good and fancy the resolution and graphical quality might be. When flying GB for more than six years with Track-IR my fighter skills in MP were in best case on intermediate level, much too often loosing track of the enemy fighters and in consequence only rarely being succesful or even surviving dogfights at all. With VR things changed significantly, you can orientate yourself much better, get a better spatial feeling and estimate heights and distances more easy...

 

All that said there is only one conclusion for me - I will never return to monitor/2D flying ! 

IL2 VR the best...VR is game changer

[Gambit21]

3 minutes ago, ITAF_Rani said:

IL2 VR the best...VR is game changer

Completely - changes the game to low res. ?

[Youtch]

1 minute ago, Gambit21 said:

Completely - changes the game to low res

In many cases it changes to lower resolution than 2D of course, because there is a lot of room for improvement in term of performance for VR, because VR is very demanding, and the game is very far from being optimum in VR.

 

The lucky ones with Crystal or Aero headsets do not seem to complain about resolution anymore and the next gen of headset will be in par with 4K monitor or better, but the biggest problem that remains is not the display but the fact that it requires a beast of a machine, machine. Probably zen5 3d + GTX 5000 will improve that, but i very much doubt they will be able to max out every setting and run smoothly the Pimax 12K for instance.

 

While I understand that complex multithreading core optimization or reviewing all the coding inside out to find performance improvements is a lot of hard work and might not be worth the investment at this stage, there are solutions already here developed by modders which can improve significantly performance at a minimum cost. 

 

There is also the foveated rendering and quadvision which do not seem to require astrophysician level of coding to be implemented.

 

All these are quick wins for the grab which can ensure that IL2 GB remains the most attractive flight sim to play in VR.

 

I love IL2, really do, but it would be a shame to totally neglect VR community, based on the assumption that it is good enough.

[Koziolek]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

Completely - changes the game to low res. ?

I don't know - my monitor is FHD so in VR the game goes to higher resolution ?

[Aapje]

Some of you seem to be under the illusion that there is serious money to be made in simming. There is not. Just because there are companies making low tech products specifically for simmers like joysticks, does not mean that simming can sustain an ecosystem that requires billions in investments, like VR.

 

So VR technology will never be developed specifically for simmers. It will at most be developed for a variety of use cases where simming is just one market. The screens and other technology that will power future headsets are not developed for a couple of simmers, they are developed with the idea that billions of people will use headsets in the future. The only reason why Meta, Pico, Pimax and Vario target gamers is that this is a group who is willing to accept a level of jank, tinkering and limited functionality that most other people are not.

 

Of course, the same is true for many other things. Video cards are not developed specifically for simmers either and you can argue that with the AI boom, even gamers in general have become a side hustle for Nvidia.

 

In practice the market has spoken too, with a clear preference for standalone headsets by most consumers. This is not a optimal direction for the headsets to go in from the perspective of simmers. However, technology is still progressing and there are some very nice screen technologies in early and late development. The issues that many people have with VR simming will become less and less as VR and GPU technology becomes better and better.

 

I think that more and more people will move to VR simming over time. It makes perfect sense to not focus too much on VR support, but also to invest in it to some extent.

[Dagwoodyt]

3 hours ago, Youtch said:

I love IL2, really do, but it would be a shame to totally neglect VR community, based on the assumption that it is good enough.

Seems like they've already decided that VR users comprise a small segment of the GB base such that development efforts are better directed elsewhere.

[Lusekofte]

I am not sure what you guys talk about. I am pretty satisfied with current vr situation 

Am I missing something

[Dagwoodyt]

8 minutes ago, Lusekofte said:

I am not sure what you guys talk about. I am pretty satisfied with current vr situation 

Am I missing something

maybe previous posts in this thread

[rowdyb00t]

7 hours ago, LukeFF said:

With VR, I'll believe when I see it (literally) when it comes to be adopted at a more universal level than we see now. Yes, the feeling of flight is great, no doubt about it, but with my Reverb G2 I just was never satisfied with the visual quality; combined with the mediocre headphones and the inability of the thing to not crash on me randomly (even though I had the latest cable revision), I got fed up with it. 

 

I'll also add that a certain former producer used to remark not that long ago that he preferred a high-quality 4K monitor over VR, simply because the picture quality is still superior. ?

 Best VR for me and I’ve went from oculus to Pimax, is the Vive pro with the mod lenses. Color, quality and performance and that’s through steam VR. 

Edited January 26, 2024 by rowdyb00t

[Ribbon]

Back then when trying to go back to TiR i found out that while in VR with  less crisp picture and lower resolution compared to 2k monitor where picture is very crisp but with level of il2 and dcs graphics looks very plastic so i end up preferring more blurrish quality of VR which gives me feel like in old movies over substandard graphics that are not on 2024 level....add to it 3D immersion.

I just dont find il2 and dcs graphics worthy tradeoff over VR immersion.

Only sim i stayed on TiR and monitor is msfs2020 due to superb graphics.

 

[Youtch]

People may despise VR, there are a lot of reasons for it, its cost, its low performance, plus all the parafernalia and the fact that it is opposite of plug&play and you need to spend days finetuning to get something decent in term of balance quality/performance (which speaks for itself on the fact that VR is still far from being ok in IL2).

But, unfortunately (or fortunately), none of us will be able to experience first hand flying a ww2 warbird into a dogfight or anything similar. So, as of today flying in VR (and till they invent a new technolgy even better) is still the closest ersatz to it (maybe combined with a motion platform to add even more immersion).

 

I thrust that with the investments of Apple/Google/Samsung in XR/VR, we are still going toward seeing better headset gears with higher resolution and smaller form factor and it will also contribute gradually to a wider adoption (so far most of headset brands were totally unknown to main stream customers), although the one limiting factor (except for stand alone headsets) will remain the beefy machines that are required to run everything smoothly.

 

According to Enigma's survey (which I am fully aware might not be representative of IL2 but is still more reliable than general steam stats to measure the temperature and trends for flight simmers, especially after the massive switch from SteamVR to OpenXR), 13% are sometimes using VR headset and 33% are using a VR headset.

 

It would be good to have similar survey focusing exclusively on IL2 GB to know exactly how many IL2 are currently using from times to times VR, how many are flying all the time in VR, and how many are planning to buy a VR headset.

 

But one thing for sure, VR is here to stay, and neglecting VR and the enthusiasm of flight sim community for VR will force people to look somewhere else. The same way that people were flying more IL2 than DCS just because VR in DCS used to be real bad, people will be tempted to migrate from IL2 to somewhere else if the implementation of VR and perspective of improvements in VR is more satisfying/reassuring.

 

Again, i am not talking about big investments, as it makes no sense for a product which engine has reached end of life, but just to consider implementing some quickwins taking benefit of what already exists now to still significantly improve the performance of GB in VR without any major change to the code.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

17 hours ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

Started suffering the old age vision deterioration about four years ago, even with glasses there is now eyestrain using a monitor for even short periods.  VR is a relief with prescription inserts, I see better and can go for hours with the guys with no eyestrain.  I'll take that even with its all current limitations.  Vision within four feet is pretty much horrid glasses or not, need readers even with glasses, for some reason all is fine in my HMD, my old eagle eyes are back.  For me VR's really become a necessity.

I am young and have relatively perfect vision. When I first started VR, it gave me bad eye strain. After getting the lens inserts you're talking about with blue-light blockers, I can fly for 8 hours if I wanted with no eye strain. 

14 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Completely - changes the game to low res. ?

Guess you've also never heard of the Aero, Big Screen Beyond, and Crystal. ?

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

7 hours ago, Youtch said:

People may despise VR, there are a lot of reasons for it, its cost, its low performance, plus all the parafernalia and the fact that it is opposite of plug&play and you need to spend days finetuning to get something decent in term of balance quality/performance (which speaks for itself on the fact that VR is still far from being ok in IL2).

But, unfortunately (or fortunately), none of us will be able to experience first hand flying a ww2 warbird into a dogfight or anything similar. So, as of today flying in VR (and till they invent a new technolgy even better) is still the closest ersatz to it (maybe combined with a motion platform to add even more immersion).

 

I thrust that with the investments of Apple/Google/Samsung in XR/VR, we are still going toward seeing better headset gears with higher resolution and smaller form factor and it will also contribute gradually to a wider adoption (so far most of headset brands were totally unknown to main stream customers), although the one limiting factor (except for stand alone headsets) will remain the beefy machines that are required to run everything smoothly.

 

According to Enigma's survey (which I am fully aware might not be representative of IL2 but is still more reliable than general steam stats to measure the temperature and trends for flight simmers, especially after the massive switch from SteamVR to OpenXR), 13% are sometimes using VR headset and 33% are using a VR headset.

 

It would be good to have similar survey focusing exclusively on IL2 GB to know exactly how many IL2 are currently using from times to times VR, how many are flying all the time in VR, and how many are planning to buy a VR headset.

 

But one thing for sure, VR is here to stay, and neglecting VR and the enthusiasm of flight sim community for VR will force people to look somewhere else. The same way that people were flying more IL2 than DCS just because VR in DCS used to be real bad, people will be tempted to migrate from IL2 to somewhere else if the implementation of VR and perspective of improvements in VR is more satisfying/reassuring.

 

Again, i am not talking about big investments, as it makes no sense for a product which engine has reached end of life, but just to consider implementing some quickwins taking benefit of what already exists now to still significantly improve the performance of GB in VR without any major change to the code.

This. Implement these code enhancements and features devs! There also used to be a really good adaptive sharpening vr mod that used reshade injectors so it didn't work online, but it really helped with stuttering/ghosting.

 

 

[Zooropa_Fly]

I had a quick shot of an early Headset years ago - the old diving with sharks and wrecks..

I think the resolution might have been 360, but to be honest I was so immersed the crappy resolution was barely noticeable.

Never experienced anything else, but I expect my mind would be blown playing this with a decent headset.

 

But none of the arguments matter to me.. quite simply I'm not prepared to cut my main senses off to the world (call me paranoid if you like !).

Plus, I really don't think having all that tech wrapped around your brain for any length of time is good for your health.

 

I'd have no objection if the Devs spent some time making improvements to the VR experience, particularly if anywhere near 30% are using it.

However, I'm not so sure it's going to be the 'future' as such.

 

If investments in hardware to keep up are going to be 4-5K every 2-3 years.. how many IL2 players would be able to finance that ?

Particularly in the times we're living in.. which are only getting worse.

There's current energy costs, future energy costs, future energy availability.

You have regimes now restricting / looking to restrict personal gaming time.

Supply routes are slowly breaking down.

 

So with so much uncertainty in the world, I'm not convinced that things will advance as we would normally expect - it's not the 1980's anymore.

The world has changed and it's not going back.

 

So if an already niche product like IL2 had to survive on income purely generated by VR users, it surely wouldn't survive.

I think that'll be the case for a long time yet, even when the Tom Cruise shades VR appears.

 

I would expect Augmented Reality to be the major focus of tech development going forward, rather than VR.

And I ain't never wearing that either !

 

[Lusekofte]

You know there is a sort of fanatical thing going on when it comes to vr. 
I know a lot of simmers going on for twenty years and had 3 or 4 vr goggles and are now building themselves sim pits that in the end will cost them between 7 to 15 k$ 

And they are constantly get peppered by vr users typically simming for a few years and gone into vr latest years asking them why they not go into vr instead. 
Get one thing into your heads , vr is not the saviour of flight sims. Flight sims is just one small reason for using vr. 
I seen too many purchase vr , gpu , psu and ram and new motherboard in order to get new ram. Just to sell it again because doing this every second year had drained their economics into a crisis. It is like you guys are on heroin or into some kind of heavy church stuff.  To me a sim pit is immersion. Right now I own 4 sticks and one yoke. Probably worth 2 k alone. I am still not quite where I want to be on the feel on controls. I know how to be an addict. But I am not religious about it

[ST_Catchov]

Too much expense and faffing about with VR and those awful goggles. I still use trackir reflectors on a cap. No wires and so light you don't even know it's there and you can use the keyboard AND keep an eye on the missus. No problem drinking and smoking either. Freedom.

[Ribbon]

I think u guys exaggerating heavily on VR costs!

Yes if u want best enthusiastic level as soon new hardware is available it will cost u same as any other die hard gamer who plays on 4k monitor and want best there is out there.

Mid range VR headset is ~400-600€ and it will last more than 2-3 years.

Also with pc, u will invest same as in 4k or even less and it will last 4-5years same as regular gamer do.

 

For over 3 years i've been using G2 with 10700k and 3080 and i dont aim to upgrade year or two more.

Upgrade costed me G2 (600€), rtx3080 (900€ with shipping and tax), cpu+mobo (500€), psu 200€, so in total of 2200€ and im 3,5years with it amd will stay year or two more.

 

Catchov with VR headset and its small gap around nose i use m&k normally, i roll cigarets and smoke and drink coffe/beer without problem.

Edited January 26, 2024 by Ribbon

[JG4_Deciman]

Hi there

 

Whenever I look at the postings from the last pages there is nothing but VR...

Maybe it would be a good idea to open a different topic only for the discussion about VR initiated by the Q&A session.

 

The session contained much more than VR...

 

Deci