VR being quite demanding on CPU and GPU, it would seem logical that implementing foveated rendering is the best way to quickly improve performance.
Even fixed foveated rendering (requiring head movement) could still be very useful for existing headsets without eye tracking.
But one would expect headsets with eye tracking such as the Vive Pro Eye and the Varjo Aero to become more common with time.
Microsoft/Asobo, please consider supporting foveated rendering for VR!!!
Hello,
There is a separate VR Wishlist. I have moved your request there.
Yes would love to see that since it brings a good impact of Performance in other Games.
For my SteamVR (OpenVR) Games i use this Mod who helps with the Performance and i would love to see such things also in MSFS directly implemented.
Still not enough VR users around, I’m afraid. If we were a market like Xbox, we’d have seen a feature like this one months ago. It’s sitting on the bottom of their list of priorities, believe me.
what has Xbox got to with anything? There are millions of PC users for this game, less so for VR but Xbox has nothing to with anything and “believe me” what special information do you have that we should “believe you”?
Oh boy, no need to get upset about anything here! 
I’m just saying that if the VR market had a comparable size than the one for Xbox, Microsoft’s focus would also be directed at VR. And you can’t seriously claim that this was the case at the moment, can you?
We have hardly seen any significant progress on the VR front since its release, for me (and others if you look at the respective forum) it went rather backwards than forward.
What’s bugging me a bit more is that there’re still issues in the game since early Alpha stages, which are quite significant if it indeed wants to be called a “simulation”. Ground physics is just one of them. Instead of fixing those things, we’re getting air races and Maverick stuff…
And that’s the whole point: The attention goes where the money is, no way around it. I’d be happy with that, as long as it helps improving things steadily in the core of the game. Now, after SU6, I’m having a hard time landing at night because the runway lights are flickering like crazy and the taxiway center-lines are invisible until you just went over them–doesn’t matter though, air races don’t happen at night, right…?! 
p.s.: You don’t have to “believe me”–it’s just an opinion based on personal experience
Yes, we need anything that can help us with more frames in VR and one of those things is foveated rendering. The game should support it natively. Microsoft and Asobo, it’s time to push VR and show a good sim for VR.
I agree that even fixed foveated rendering could be helpful at this point. As someone who’s trying to run this in VR with an old GTX 1080, my poor system struggles mightily in busy areas.
If you have an older GPU, try disabling “Volumetric Atmospheric Effects” in Developer mode (you can also do that by setting “VolumetricClouds” “Enabled” to “0” in the UserCfg.opt file).
That feature eats a HUGE amount of fps even when you specify clear weather (no clouds) for your flights.
You’ll see an immediate and VERY SIGNIFICANT improvement in fps in both VR and non-VR mode.
For lower specs PCs, the improved performance is worth not having clouds.
Also try reprojection with OpenXR Developer Tools.
At this time, even the fastest GPUs (RTX 3090…) can’t render anywhere close to 90Hz at current headset resolutions, resulting in ghosting and blurry trees & buildings at low level flying. In the meantime, headset resolutions are expected to increase at breakneck speeds (i.e. Pimax 12K by the end of next year). It will be a very long time before GPU hardware will catch up with headset display resolutions!
There is really no reason not to implement fixed foveated rendering, since our eyes are only focused where we look, and the peripheral vision is normally blurry anyway. Having to turn your head slightly to look at something isn’t that bad a price to pay for improved performance, right? Eyeglasses wearers must be happy because they’re used to doing that anyway 
The 12k pimax suggests it will have built in foveated rendering …but doesn’t a game have to support?
There must be experts lurking around here who can clarify this subject
It seems that even if it’s implemented at driver level, applications must still provide some support to make it work.
Pimax’s Fixed foveated rendering requires specific graphics engines like Unreal or Unity at application level. MSFS uses a proprietary graphics and physics engine.
Nvidia’s Dynamic foveated rendering (VRS) needs integration into applications.
And while its Fixed foveated rendering (VRSS) can be implemented without application level coding, it requires support for Forward rendering with MSSA at application level. MSFS does not support MSSA.
Seems like the boys and girls at Varjo have already helped Microsoft out (but not really). The Varjo developers have developed an extension to OpenXR to support foveated-rendering which can then be used in the Varjo headset.
It would be wonderful if Microsoft could partner with Varjo and get this into the OpenXR SDK properly so it can be used by other software developers as more headset manufactures bring the ability to perform foveated-rendering into their devices.
A better solution is to use foveated rendering to track the user’s gaze and render content in the highest resolution only where the user is looking. Varjo has designed an OpenXR extension that makes it easy to implement foveated rendering. See the official specification for an example and a detailed explanation of the main concepts related to foveated rendering.
https://developer.varjo.com/docs/openxr/openxr#foveated-rendering
God I thought I posted this as I read it. You read my mind!
My Pimax 8kX already has eye tracked foveated rendering so they have gotten it to work without the need to get game devs involved. Though I don’t think every game works with it.
This is great news!
No doubt the Varjo Aero is the best consumer level headset right now (they even beat the HP Reverb G2 performance wise by a long shot, and this, while rendering at much higher resolution. Hopefully HP will learn something from them and improve the Reverb G2’s performance as well).
I would buy it in a heartbeat if Varjo would include HP Reverb style audio and articulated head strap to make it easier to get it on and off (putting on and removing the HP Reverb is a breeze, without readjustment each time, especially with eyeglasses).
Unfortunately, Pimax foveated rendering requires specific graphics engines like Unreal or Unity at application level. MSFS uses a proprietary graphics and physics engine, so it would take quite a bit of work to make it happen.
I have 8kx and ffr or dfr don’t work in msfs. It would be better if the developer adds the feature because it could have much better performance.
I use it in dcs and asetto corsa and it works well although you need a good graphic card to use high resolutions otherwise you perceive the pixels of the outer foveated area.
I think this is a little too vague to be a successful wishlist item in the way it is presented right now. There’s no real dynamic foveated rendering option available currently for game devs to implement so we’re left with some form of fixed foveated rendering as far as that particular feature goes.
Nvidia’s VRWorks includes a number of potentially performance-enhancing features for VR like variable-rate shading, lens-matched shading, single pass stereo, etc. I think it would be great if Asobo devs could look at the different options available via VRWorks and implement the ones that are useful.
Why should foveated rendering be a major priority in MSFS?
The sim performs great as is in VR without it.
The goal of MS/Asobo was to implement working VR across all WMR,Oculus,SteamVR,OpenXR, ecosystem headsets. They succeeded in doing just that!
We can’t simply move goalposts another mile and expect it to be MS/Asobo’s standard.
Features like foveated rendering, VRSS, raytracing etc etc are great but they aren’t exactly make or break for great VR in MSFS at this stage.
Not exactly. Can’t speak for wmr or oculus now, but for SteamVR devices, the implementation is acceptable. But nothing more. Errors in geometry and visual representation are still abundant.
So rather far from great.