I’ve never used quadviews, so I’m curious: I always thought its only effect is to increase performance. But you are saying it increases visual fidelity too, is that really the case? Or is it just that the increased performance lets you run higher resolution and/or settings?
You can choose to increase the resolution in the middle even higher than the native resolution giving you a clearer image. I do that as well and it works great.
1 Like
See my other replies (might be in another thread). Just because you see the foveated region doesn’t mean it’s being applied at every pass (which is what saves performance). The every pass is the important part. There is no easy way to tell unless I go spend some time on it.
Quad views lets you control more finely the resolution, as opposed to VRS which only lets you coarsely select 1/2 - 1/16x reduced resolution. With quad views you can set slight supersampling in the center region to increase quality. To do what with VRS, you’d need to bump the overall resolution up, but then the 1/2 - 1/16x might not help you compensate for the loss of performance without too much of visual degradation.
1 Like
Do you think people might contribute to a gofundme if you were interested?
I think and hope a 5090 might help in this better performance in VR regard. 
Money is not and was never a factor in maintaining my tools. Time is the limitation.
At the end of the work day/work week, fundraised “pocket money” isn’t going to buy time.
7 Likes
Understood! You have contributed so much of your time and knowledge to help my hobby be a lot more pleasurable! Thank you!
2 Likes
@mbucchia First, I know you aren’t supporting this tool anymore - so don’t worry about my question in that manner!
I’ve been a longtime user of your tool in MSFS 2020. I tried using it with MSFS 2024, but it caused repeated crashing. Since MSFS 2024 was patched (1.2.7.0), the tool started working for me again without crashes! I’m surprised because it used to crash with DirectX 12 in MSFS 2020 - maybe it’s luck of the day; we will see.
I’m running an AMD 7700X, 32GB RAM, RTX 3090, Windows 11 23H2, HP Reverb G2
What I saw in your tool is that if I activate foveated rendering with MSFS 2024, I see an FPS increase of as much as 3 to 5 FPS. It’s not a huge increase, but I’d rather be north of 30 than south of 30 in VR mode. Unless I’m mistaken, I’m also not seeing the artifacts that foveated rendering introduced in MSFS 2020 in 2024 (e.g. it’s not necessary to turn settings down or off to avoid them) - but I could be mistaken; at least it’s not yet obvious.
I’m using Turbo mode via the OpenXR platform (rather than your toolkit).
Here are my questions:
- The quad views foveated rendering you are talking about in this thread - is it different from what you already have implemented in your openxr toolkit?
- The FPS counter with latency readings and indications of being CPU / GPU bound, etc. Do you think the info is still accurate with MSFS 2024?
Thanks in advance.
1 Like
It’s a totally different method, it needs game support and won’t work in any MSFS.
Doubtful. The CPU time is probably OK. The GPU time with DX12 is likely bogus. I’ve see many screenshots of it reading 0. Timers are more complex in D3D12, it needs to be built into the game to be accurate.
1 Like
Unfortunately due to poor graphics engine development, and needlessly heavy implementation of new features like trees, MSFS 2024 has completely tanked GPU bound setups (eg for most people who’ve been enjoying decent detail / resolution in 2020). I see some people talk about VR improvements but those people are packing older CPUS who had issues getting to 30FPS before, or are on low res headsets, or used to / ‘happy’ with 0.5-1x recommended render resolution because they dont know how much better it can get.
1 Like
@mbucchia OpenXR toolkit is still working for me in MSFS 2024. I have a Varjo XR-4. I have been using the toolkit to squeeze the image FOV down to 50% to see what it looks like. The image looks very impressive. Unfortunately it’s only using half the display. But when I go into Varjo desktop, the entire FOV of the headset is rendered in this very impressive resolution and it feels great. My question is…what is MSFS doing when it renders an image to the headset? When you expand the FOV to full size in MSFS, the image looks blurry even with DLSS or TAA compared to Varjo desktop. Objects like airport beacon light poles and trees have very obvious aliasing as if it’s rendering a 480p image on a 4k screen. This is even when I have the headset set on 48 ppd and textures on ultra in MSFS 2024. Supposedly Varjo switches to 35 ppd when you run MSFS, but it certainly doesn’t look like it given the image quality. But when I squeeze the FOV down 50% using your toolkit, I don’t need antialiasing. All aliasing disappears and everything looks very impressive. I then use DLSS for better FPS. What’s going on? Is MSFS sending a low resolution image to the headset that other games don’t do? Why isn’t it one-to-one, pixel for pixel? Is barrel distortion compensation, which the XR-4 needs far less of than other headsets, that terrible? What resolution is being sqeezed down with OpenXR Toolkit? Can something be done to fix the image so it renders in the cockpit as good as it does in Varjo Base desktop?
When you are using the FOV override, you are effectively multiplying PPD. 50% will quadruple your PPD, this is why the image looks very crisp (50% render half of the FOV both horizontally and vertically, but using the same render resolution, aka 4x more pixels for the rendered region). This is also why FOV override doesnt affect performance, because it just renders the same amount of pixels as 100% FOV, just more concentrated it one area of the view (affectively accomplishing “super-sampling anti-antialiasing” aka SSAA).
There is no issue in MSFS, you could go and quadruple the resolution with the resolution override (as opposed to FOV override). The problem is that quadruple resolution with 100% FOV will also means 4x more GPU and your performance will tank. SSAA is the most effective, but most expensive anti-aliasing you can perform.
This is why a tech like quad views works awesome, because you could improve pixel density in the foveated region and get that crispness where you are looking, and just render the peripheral view at a much lower PPD to compensate and regain some performance.
Without quad views, you can only control the overall resolution for the whole screen, which deprives you of the performance/quality tradeoff.
Varjo Home uses quad views (this is why you see the PPD change in Varjo Base when you enter/leave the Home, and you also see it change from Foveated Rendering to Stereo). There’s your answer.
Varjo Home is an Unreal Engine app, so it’s very easy for the developer (well Varjo) to enable quad views there.
Thank you for such an immediate response; this makes sense! So Asobo will have to do something with MSFS 2024 the same as Unreal Engine is doing to make quad views work. I wish they would hire you for goodness sake! It would mean so much to the platform. You are the GotFriends of the platform for VR. MSFS is the killer app. That’s my opinion.
1 Like
If you and Microsoft have a strained relationship, I hope you are able to work-out a relationship that’s peaceful and reasonable for the both of you because it would benefit the community immensely. Please take care!
I work for Microsoft so idk why you might guess that.
I have no beef with the MR team (they have moved on to supporting productivity apps on Quest and I moved to a non-MR team since that doesn’t interest me) nor Asobo. I’m a platform developer, not a game developer, so I would have no interest in writing game engine code and gameplay code.
Honestly my sole beef in the XR industry is with Meta and how they have killed off PCVR gaming over the last 3 years. I don’t think end users realize how much damage they are doing to the developer ecosystem and OpenXR 
, instead they praise them for their half-supported cheap hardware that is obviously not built for PCVR
7 Likes
I tested DCS with the HP G2, and now a pleasure of smoothness in VR, clarity and definition, without blurry frame generators, not a nightmare like a pair of years ago that I tested it also.
Quad views is a must and a priority and any other thing that helps and appears, in the VR hungry of resources.
FS24 is a no go at all for me vs FS20, FS20 is so superior in VR, almost a dream.
Hope in the next months/years MS/Asobo do their work well, and I can change to FS24 without buying an RTX 8090 and a 12800X3D…, …and a good replace for the PCVR HP G2 appears meanwhile also…, if I could and I had to buy another VR HMD, between all actual VR HMDs, I would buy again an HP G2 if not shamefully almost bricked and abandoned like now…
I think if there is a conspiracy to destroy VR and not let it take off, or incompetent CEOs?, haha.
1 Like
Quad views isn’t going to happen, basic vr can barely be implemented and maintained
2 Likes
Hello, QuadViews is a must have in VR, I have Pimax Crystal now ( previously had 5K, 8KX and older G2, CV1, DK2, PSVR 1/2 ) with RTX3090 and so far most of games including DCS at High settings maintains solid 45/90 fps ( using QV ), only Flight 2024 performance is really poor… I had played MS Flight for many years ( X, CFS3, Flight 20, Flight 24, etc ) and what Asobo did last 4 years is simple GREAT job and I admire them ! It could be almost perfect in case of optimalisation, if quad views implemented - it will be really game changer ! I am waiting untill it happened, hopefully soon 
Is there any chance that someone from DEV/support reads this thread ?! It would be really small amount of development but huge improvement of performance/ FPS ( should be +80% ) - why noone from Asobo is interested ? Eagle Dynamics did in DCS and was a huge improvement ( please check over internet ). Please don’t force us to buy 6090/5090 RTX ( unavailable btw ) when it possible to make small improvement in SW instead…
1 Like