VR Development Details

Supporting DLSS is obvious because the (overwhelming?) majority of MSFS PC users have hardware which supports it.

Whether (or rather to what extent) to support VR can be justified based on how many people are using it. Presumably they’ll have data on this.

I don’t buy into the accusation that VR has specifically been neglected by Asobo. Obviously there are issues, but the same is true for many other aspects of the software - triple screen being an obvious one which has similarities with the VR situation in terms of it being a minority of users. Then there’s ATC, weather, photogrammetry and all the rest.

I wonder if this has something to do with IPD.

Its very niche. Asobo and MS have the numbers. Someone with a little bit of insider knowledge posted in a thread here a while back saying it was an incredibly small number who use the sim in VR on a regular basis. (with a strong emphasis on the word ‘regular’ here)

Its amazing when it consistently works, but it doesn’t for a lot of people. It certainly doesn’t for me. Thats the deal breaker for me. I just can not be bothered with the lack of consistency with VR. I’ve got a G2 with an RTX3080 and 5800X3D. If I want to enjoy a flight in VR its a total lottery whether or not its going to work. At the moment it certainly doesn’t. It was working for a while and I had some great flights. But now I’m getting 20FPS and its a stuttery mess. I just can’t be bothered with it. I just want to enjoy the sim.

I think the problem for us VR simmers is that MSFS will run on fairly mediocre machines (e.g. Xbox!) which will be far and away the majority of players, so MS will be happy that they’re keeping most of their customers happy - that’s just good business.
But you do need a fairly robust system to use VR and, apart from the cost of the headset, much of the target audience don’t have the money to spend on RTX4090 and the like. I run a 4070, a Ryzen7-5800X using a Pico 4 which gives me acceptable performance. But though I long for better the cost of upgrading to a top notch CPU and RTX4090 is somewhat out of the question.
But I remain hopeful that even if they don’t do anything special for VR in MSFS2024 at least the intended performance improvements will roll over to VR too.

1 Like

I wonder how the graphics compare to an Xbox. I suspect a lot better since your graphics card cost several times more than an Xbox. Have you been able to make that comparison?

I hear that. I spent a year trying to get my G2 to work and the Quest 3 has been a dream. VR sure is a slog however you come at it.

1 Like

Yeh to do it right, it is prohibitively expensive.

…sorry, I can‘t make that comparison - I don‘t have an Xbox.

Exactly my experience. The G2 was a lottery. Nothing but problems and troubleshooting. Since I got the Quest 3 and use Virtual Desktop it just works every time flawlessly. Plus, the visual quality is similar, except unlike the G2 it’s sharp almost edge to edge (vertical and horizontal), not just the 10% in the center of the screen.

2 Likes

Yeh it’s true. It’s pretty amazing. I took the Beechcraft 18 up the coast north of Sydney and there were patchy rain showers and I even saw a rainbow. Thanks for reminding me it is actually awesome as well as having some issues!

Mind you, I also have a 4090 and 78x3d. It would be good if there were some efficiencies that could be made so you didn’t have to hold up bank to buy the hardware to run it.

Still waiting for any improvement in VR. 4090 and pimax 8kx. I hope ms2024 will bring VR users the best of Asobo and Microsoft.

It should run at 60fps at least to be good for VR. If they can achieve that in a high end pc it is good for all because in 1 or 2 years many people could enjoy it. At the moment, it is not posible with any hardware. It is not well coded-optimized.