Solid disagree from me - the argument is moot… whether Pimax pushed for it or not, Asobo dedicated significant engineering time to implementing a VR specific optimisation (along with frankly, quite a few other VR fixes in SU2 so far). If they didn’t care about VR they wouldn’t do it and Pimax, being a VR company, would have no sway.
As I said, there’s more to go but I honestly think anyone using SU2 in VR has to see that things are getting better.
A VR optimization that doesn’t work well even with a 5800x3d/7900xtx in medium settings is hardly something to cheer about.
I will give them credit when they put real effort in having great performance in VR.
You are free to your opinion. I don’t share it.
I mean you can’t just magically make a game run better. Its come a long ways since November and still getting better. Quad Views is a massive upgrade that we should all be very excited about.
I’m glad people are enjoying. On my system I lose 20%fps, on top of the 30% lost from moving from 2020. Having to lower all your settings is not the way forward so until I can get back some of that performance lost I remain sceptical they care enough.
5800x3d is your problem, not quad views.
Yep, just like those guys with 9800x3d that are also reporting fps loss using it.
You sound like Asobo with the vram bug, “it’s the hardware” they said, and then we got a bug logged.
I get it, it’s stressing the cpu🤷
There’s a lot of variables, if you’re losing performance on it with a 9800x3d then they’re probably running a super resource heavy aircraft and a million add on
It’s actually very simple, there is no one-size-fits all solutions. The current implementation has pros and cons. It’s literally impossible for a developer to implement every single performance optimization for every single combination of hardware/software/settings. I’ve tried with OpenXR Toolkit and look where it is today - abandoned because it is impossible to make that happen.
Today you have a 4-ish optimizations in the sim, upscaling (DLSS, FSR2), quad views foveated rendering, frame pipelining and (partial) multi-view instancing. This level of optimizations is close to something like Unreal Engine, which isn’t bad at all considering the small team.
What we need the most is full(er) multi-view instancing to help with CPU (RdrThread).
The dev working on this atm, Jerome, is very knowledgeable and talented. This probably doesn’t speak to you, but the implementation of quad views rendering in MSFS 2024 is extremely unique, as it enables foveated rendering to live alongside screen-space post-processing. To put this in perspective for you, this has never been attempted AFAIK and it is literally pushing innovation into the quad views technique. The gains are limited today, mostly due to the partial multi-view instancing (I believe). This is how you build software, you do it incrementally. Let’s hope that Asobo continues to give Jerome some time to complete more optimizations.
That’s ultimately the key, that Asobo let him continue to refine and give the time needed to do so. Glad to hear you hold him in such high esteem Matt.
I really hope they do!
They could really make this game into the poster child for the benefits of eye tracked foveated rendering, a reliable and highly compatible (plus user friendly) technique, and with more and more headsets now coming with eye tracking one can only hope that this is the start of the snowball.
Is it perfect, no. But it’s a start and I’m enjoying the sim more than ever with SU2.
Imagine we’re we’d be had Asobo not disbanded the original “VR Team” back in 2021? 4 years of potential lost and we’re only just now seeing the benefits of a dedicated VR coder thanks to Jerome.
But there’s still so much to do, whether or not he or someone else works on the fundamental basics of mouse click spots is another major area that needs urgent attention. Other flight Sims have this area nailed down, yet here we are 5 years on and yet there’s still serious issues with the most basic peripheral, whether it’s Toolbar scaling, sizing, click spots for switches etc or even the mouse going AWOL after exiting the menu (seemingly fixed at least in SU2 beta).
Performance and optimisation aspects still have a long way to go, but yes it’s great to see they have a dedicated individual to finally help us achieve a better experience within this franchise.
So yes Asobo, you simply must allow him (and others) to continue to push forward with VR development, you owe us that at least after ignoring our requests for so long.
Quad views wasn’t low effort though. My argument was based on it being low effort 
If 2D has a usable fps meter / performance analyzer, VR should too imo. It should’ve been there from the beginning. It’s not like I’m asking for cutting-edge innovation here (though that would be nice too!).
Is anyone else’s foveated region showing up as just a super narrow vertical strip? It seems to only take up like 10 degrees of my view. With its hard edges, it’s super noticeable if you pan across a busy landscape, lights at night, or POI marker text. Creates some nausea when moving my head due to the sharp change in sharpness/resolution at the lines. I wish we could adjust the size, or at least add a gradient mask.
I thought it was something to do with adjusting FOV or crop in OpenXR Toolkit, but I reset to default, disabled the toolkit, and even uninstalled MSFS and installed fresh vanilla, but I still get the small strip by default. So not sure what is controlling it, unless it truly is supposed to be like that. But I can’t image they wouldn’t make it at least 30 degrees or so. At night or dusk, you can see it is noticeably darker too in certain situations too.
This image is not completely accurate because it is just a flat screenshot from Quest 2. There’s a lot more peripheral around me, but this somewhat shows it. But it looks even narrower in the headset.
Nope, it’s the normal box for me still.
re the brightness - there are seemingly, to my mind at least, some metering issues that become apparent in certain conditions (flight through clouds being the worst offender), and I wonder if due to the vastly different scene between large and small view, the auto exposure MSFS is doing is perhaps causing the problem. Who knows!
If they can somehow harmonise the scene brightness between the views it would go a long way to making it less perceptible.
Perhaps Matt has some insight as to what’s behind the brightness discrepancies at times.
I take it back - as of the latest beta I too have the tall narrow rectangle foveated area
edit - I turn back on eye tracking (had it off due to the motion comp) and it’s back to square.
edit 2 - yup, turn off eye tracking and it’s a tall thin rectangle, turn on eye tracking and it’s a small square
Seems like the eye tracking version should be the smaller area.
Interesting. I assume you only get the eye tracking option if you have a compatible headset right? I just have a Quest 2 so I only have one checkbox for foveated rendering.
Yes it knows if you have eye tracking
Yeah so on the Pimax Crystal I can select whether or not to use the eye tracking in the Pimax software. If I turn off eye tracking then the sim just defaults to FFR, if I enable eye tracking it defaults to DFR.
If I enabled eye tracking it looks normal, if I turn it off then re-enter VR it turns into your weird tall rectangle, turn eye tracking on again and re-enter VR then it’s back to normal.
However, in an odd result I tried in my Quest 3 via virtual desktop and despite no eye tracking, that shows up as a square, not the tall thin rectangle.
Out of interest are you using oculus’s runtime, virtual desktop’s VDXR or Steam as OpenXR?
I was using Virtual Desktop’s VDXR
