Ohh the audacity to charge a restocking fee on a product youve used already XD I love my G2 and have no problems other than MSFS not being fully optimized and GPU CPU hardware not good enough yet. Of course they shouldnt just take back the USED VR headset for free, its your mistake.
How exactly do you think I would have discovered that their tracking system is defective without using the headset? How would I have known that the cable was made too long for USB to operate properly? The sales page didn’t mention it but their “tips and tricks” page makes the issue pretty obvious. A little research into the USB standard and recommended cable lengths and sure enough, they did something stupid.
This may surprise you, but people use VR headsets for things besides flightsim.
None of this is relevant however, I ended up keeping it only for FS2020. Finally found a procedure to make it work somewhat properly. I bought a Quest 2 as well, to make up for the G2’s deficiencies. FS actually looks better in the Quest 2 when they’re both properly configured and at relatively optimal settings. But the G2 is more comfortable and that ended up making my decision.
At any rate, sorry you’re impressed with low grade gear. Not surprised though. You come across as a low grade person.
RTX 3070 / Ryzen 5600X here with a Valve Index. I admit my first impression with MSFS VR was a bit of disappointment. Not with the performance but with the visuals. YET I am still enjoying it.
I am ok how it runs with the settings I am using (TAA, 100% rendering, 100% texture/object LOD, 16X anisotropic, 8x8 supersampling, 150% SteamVR resolution), but still looks more blurry than what I expected.
But then I took a minute to think how I started PC gaming in the 90s when we only had 800 x 600 monitors. Games were too blurry compared to today’s standards and I wondered how did enjoy them back then? I don’t recall we complained about the blurriness because that was the best we could get back then, so I convinced myself that VR is a new era of gaming and this is the best we can get today. I even consider myself lucky to be living in an era where I can experience flying in VR like this, so let me enjoy what I have while it keeps getting better in the following years.
So yes even with blurriness I am really enjoying it. I stopped focusing on finding better tweaks after the first week. The experience is so enjoyable and immersive that during turns I unintentionally start leaning sideways as if I am trying to balance myself!
I think the larger FOV really helps feeling I am there. FOV matters to me more than resolution, that’s why I went with the Valve Index.
Personally for me the tracking in the G2 is flawless. My old CV1 had the odd hitch where it would jump around occasionally in MSFS and other sims as well. The G2 never waviers and is super precise.
The issues about cable length I simply don’t see… are you sure these are not actually USB power issues rather than the cable? Look this guy has a 21 meter cable. https://www.reddit.com/r/HPReverb/comments/k94t9n/i_have_successfully_extended_the_hp_reverb_g2s/
Could your device be defective? I mean if there was a head tracking issue in the G2 it would be lighting up the forums but that’s definately not the case.
A 3090 makes a huge difference to VR with the Valve Index and the Reverb G2 has more pixels to push so I can imagine it would benefit from the extra grunt too.
My Index was “ok” in IL-2 with a 1080ti but was utterly unusable in FS2020, with an upgrade to 3090 IL-2 VR is faultless. It literally flies. FS2020 still not perfect but the stutters and other frame rate issues are more CPU related than GPU and it is much less hurl inducing.
I was sort of waiting out to see what the 3080ti’s would look like but the extra VRAM on the 3090 and the fact that it was available already pushed that purchase. It’s a good card, but ■■■■ does the backplate get hot! I’m waiting for a waterblock for the backplate to be delivered next week to take the edge off some of that VRAM heat.
@GoodSmith I find SS124 better than SS150 because it is marginally less perceived pixels than 150, but I find it has aliasing properties enhancing the legibility of small EFIS text (let alone rendering less pixels and better on fps than 150 especially with motion smoothing).
@somethingbrite I don’t know how much you can push the 3090, but the Index at TAA100 + SS200 should give you really great visuals (even at TAA70 + SS200)
Weird my 1080ti handles IL2 flawlessly.
Butter smooth on max settings.
I find SS124 better than SS150
I tried SS124 but couldn’t distinguish a difference from SS150. However I tried your other suggestion on a different post of SS over 200% and TAA60-70 and it seems to look better, so I am going to focus on that.
I agree, there isn’t much difference between SS124 and SS150 visually but the former is rendering less pixels, freeing resources for something else. Otherwise I find TAA60+SS220 (not 200) giving very good results but only for analogue. Anything EFIS requires TAA 100 for legibility hence the TAA100+SS124 combo!
I think that both of you are right. The 980 Ti was top notch 5 years ago, now it is since a viable graphics card for most games but for something more demanding as not just MSFS, but MSFS VR is definitely outdated.
On the other hand, i’m running a decent hardware (R6 3600, 32GB of ram, GTX 1080 Ti) and i often have hard time running the game at 30fps + space warp for frame interpolation (quest 2).
I’m recently playing DCS World, and while it has not the scenery complexity of MSFS, it runs 3-4 times faster, making VR a really nice and viable experience.
Let’s hope for the best for when DX12 hits.
MSFS Devs need also to rethink the way instrument panels are managed and displayed, it will save lot of CPU and GPU time. In MSFS, changing plane make an huge differences regarding the cockpit, Some are playable in VR ar 45fps locked with CPU and GPU headroom, where others go down to less than 15/10fps saturating our machines.
In comparison, I can fly a big airliner with a bunch of refreshed panels screens, or a simple glider, and I have the exact same 90fps without ASW kicking in Aerofly FS2 in VR at ultra settings and supersampling 175%… Night and Day…
That’s because Aerofly isn’t a flight simulator. It’s an arcade game.
I couldn’t agree more!
There are different issues with EFIS and the main problem from my experience and cross-testing (in modifying the default EFIS code) is not so much the rendering engine but the JS code.
I did try enlarging 2x the A320 screens for example so that it renders 4x more pixels and there wasn’t much perf impact doing this. It might still be a problem if this causes other CPU/GPU sync issues, but in itself the raw drawing part of EFIS is running good. The main problem however in my opinion is the JS code logic and the way they plug this all into the game:
CoherentGT is meant for GUI first and even only. This is the kind of tech you use to prototype your game UI first with easy to use layout framework (aka HTML+CSS), and easy to code interaction (JS). However, FS2020 is using this for gauge systems and drawing as well, and this is where I believe it is over pushing the framework for what it is not designed to do.
CoherentGT is rendering its own graphics with its own rendering engine (a separate DLL for DX11, DX12, Vulkan etc…) This limits a number of optimizations you could achieve in managing the EFIS rendering alongside your existing game rendering loop. It also imposes some GPU/GPU sync constraints because you can’t directly control where/when you’d push the EFIS specific draw calls inside the 3D world draw calls.
FS2020 is updating all EFIS at once. I’ve commented already how setting Gauge Refresh Rate HIGH is helping reducing stuttering because it would prevent FS2020 updating all EFIS at once from time to time only, which is causing a drop of perf. With HIGH, it is constantly updating and although you get less fps in the end, you don’t suffer the intermittent hiccups. I’ve recommended they instead update the EFIS in a round-robbin fashion, spreading out the computations over multiple frame (like they do for clouds, shadows, some reflections etc…).
Although in theory JS code is not interpreted but somewhat transformed to native code at runtime, it is still running in a single thread and this means the main game loop is dependent on this, most likely in a synchronous update way.
But the most important point to me about this tech, and the “bonus” of sandboxing 3rd party devs, is that there are no faster way to render EFIS than this technology in the simulator. In other simulators, you’d get direct access to the rendering context and can directly use the video card resources for your add-on if needed. With FS2020, the fastest pixel update you get is a CPU bound memcpy to a RAM buffer (unnecessary double allocation), and the fastest path rendering is either a low level vector drawing API in WASM (I don’t even know if this is hardware accelerated or handled on CPU with a backend like Cairo/Skia etc…) or the JS/HTML heavy weight machinery (for drawing a textured square, the entire stack is probably taking 100x resources you’d need).
I do believe the idea of such framework/middleware is sound in the great scope of things, but I believe even more they shall revisit its integration and the way it is processing unnecessary amount of data, and even its level of optimizations, because generally, these frameworks meant for UI are not coded to be the most efficient and optimized implementations. The game render loop is dealing with tight frame time budgets, the UI framework is dealing with abstracted user interactions where rendering is an after thought. Using UI framework for real-time game loop rendering elements and logic is definitely not what it is supposed to be nor coded for in my opinion, but I might be wrong.
You might want to support these “somewhat” related topics:
Coherent gt draw - FPS limiting glitch - Archives / Bugs & Issues - Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums
[BUG/FEATURE] EFIS Screens Problems and Solutions for higher legibility
I don’t really care how we call MSFS or Aerofly FS2. Instrument panels in Aerofly are all animated and work flawless without eating any CPU or GPU time, refreshed at 90fps and not with this dirty trick they implemented in MSFS to lower the framerate trying to hide the problem.
Edit: I like Arcade game when they work:
I don’t know why Aerofly devs didn’t push this envelope as its a great solid performing base for a full flight sim. It has all the basics in place and they work flawless. Just fill the rest of the bland world outside of the dedicated scenery and the sim would be a solid VR experience.
Agree. But they have to deal with keeping great fps we have right now, probably not that easy. Look this one, an ILS fly in A320 in VR using VR hand.
I want this in MSFS!
Asobo MUST optimize the sim in VR so that I can work very well on the 2000 series GPUs, not many people are able to spend a gaming PC priced GPU, whenever they’re available again.
Here it is some nice information about performance and issues in the simulator.
Let’s see if with the new updates the sim can fix all the performance issues. It seems that even with a 3090 you can’t solve the performance issues and stutters.
I disagree. The flight mechanics and depth of the planes in aerofly is just as good if not a little better than MSFS2020. Neither of them hold a candle to X-Plane in those aspects.
Aerofly crushes everyone in VR performance.
I have all 4.
All of that being said, MSFS is my current sim of choice because you just cannot beat the eye candy and for how young it is, I think its on a track to dominate the competition. VR is VERY young in MSFS and they are releasing it piecemeal to get it to us sooner. None of us are looking at the final product. X-Plane has taken years to get to where it is and its more or less just even with MSFS from a VR standpoint. The aftermarket developer community in X-Plane is what shines.
VFR is already pretty solid in MSFS (Why its my choice for now, low and slow!) but for people working on instruments or flying airliners at FL 350, MSFS has a long way to go to catch XP.
It seems MS/Adobo are dedicated to taking the market share in the sim world, and they have literally 10,000x the horsepower anyone else does so I think they’ll get there and sooner rather than later.
Though the first one to integrate Leap VR type hand tracking is going to be a major step forward.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.