trevoC

it does not... as I originally stated. It requires none of this (hacks included) just copy a single file.

I've been playing DCS since LOMAC and my first MP session was today. I'm betting there are low single digit numbers of people playing MP.

It does not require a clean install. Not sure where anyone would get that idea. Its a single file that needs to be copied to the DCS dir. It removes the overhead of steam completely. I'm not sure what your concept of a "hack" is. Its all just software. I think there are so many "comprehensive" openXR guides that most can't see the tree in the forest which is just the openXR library that in and of itself is extremely simple to use and implement while offering immediate benefits. To your point, if ED implemented this more "officially", it would remove any confusion.

Video game my ass, I purchased one of the few KA-50's from the former soviet union with my Pepsi points and I'm struggling to learn how to fly it.

why not just avoid steam all together with openXR (for those that aren't on steam DCS oviously)

Definitely something with your setup. I'm running a G2 and don't think I've ever had a single crash or problem starting it in 2 years. The only issue I've ever experienced is the sound garbled. I need to power cycle the headset for it to go away. This may happen 1 in 100 launches. Hope you can find a resolution to this. I realize I didn't provide any help, but hopefully some insight that VR and the G2 in general are not necessarily bad or complex to setup. That being said, I did realize that on my G2 I needed to use a usb-c to usb adapter to work properly.

applications are not aware of boost clocks or speeds at all. An application does not have to be and isn't written to take advantage of these. This is handled by the CPU itself independent of software.

Don't want VR, don't turn on your headset. Launch DCS the same. That simple. In fact simpler because you do not need to launch steam or steamVR. with steam: launch Win VR portal > launch steam > launch steam VR > launch DCS OpenXR: launch VR Poral (or not for 2D) > launch DCS not sure how the first is simpler if that is your goal. Plus, you have the added benefit of not having any steam software overhead..... less software.

I think it would be worth it for you to figure it out. Everyones problem is CPU. OpenXR reduces this (cuts it almost in half for me). I also have a 3090 so we are in the same boat. I have no idea what you think you have to open (openXR silliness). I literally double click DCS, thats it. If you don't want to open in VR, don't turn on your headset. No need to open DCS and switch. It will load directly to 4k or whatever. At this point it seems like your complaints on performance are only exceeded by your unwillingness to fix them. If you have had zero advantages with openXR then you haven't installed it correctly or enabled it. IMO, You've been given a clear solution to improve your performance. OpenXR is far superior to steamVR, hands down even without any optimizations which are many in openXR. This is exactly how it works with openXR also. OpenXR doesn't change this behavior. This is exactly how I start DCS for either VR or 2D. You don't need any of the above software. You simply do not understand OpenXR, thats fine. My advice, spend some time to understand it.

I don't think it is reasonable to expect VR to perform top notch yet at higher resolutions or settings. VR is relatively new and doubles the draw calls on an already demanding game. I think VR users need to have more reasonable expectations. By no means would playing this in 4k or 1440p be difficult. Secondly, not sure how OpenXR is too much trouble for an effective doubling of fps. You literally need to copy one file over to the DCS directory for it to work and then enable one of the presets in game. If implemented properly (file copied) it would be impossible for this not to have an effect as it would cut the required resources to be rendered in half. I would suggest you give it another look.

Not sure why you are here then. You need to either lower your settings or increase your hardware requirements. Welcome to PC Gaming. Its a balance. Not sure of any flight sim ever worth playing that didn't push hardware limits. Does DCS need a major engine overhaul? Yes, that would be nice, and help a lot, but its hardly unplayable. I can run the game in ultra in 4k (pancake) on any mission with little slowdown. I choose to push the boundaries in VR at high but realize I'm in newer territory's that requires a balance. I'd be guessing that you should spend more time finding that balance on your setup before expecting it to perform better than it can. I'd suggest OpenXR and foveated rendering. Works wonders on my setup.

Yes, I have been in a reflected campaign when the bombs drop and experienced a slide show (for that very moment, rest of mission is fine) "Reflected campaigns aren't playable" < not true, I did finish that mission very easily and finished paradise lost campaign and others with little slowdown at all (I think in paradise lost there was a single mission when being shelled at one of the outposts that brought my game to a state that I had to wait 10 seconds or so before resuming) I wouldn't call either of these "unplayable". I enjoyed both campaigns thoroughly. A comment from reflected mentioned that he made changes to the WWII campaign recently to drop less bombs to help with this. I haven't tested since this change. "Reflected campaigns aren't playable in VR with the default unit number" < is kind of like saying that DCS isn't playable in VR at ultra high settings at 8k per eye. Yes, you may have to make some considerations for VR. Thats a thing. VR is all consuming and until ED brings changes to how the draw calls are made (either via vulkan directly to GPU, or separating the main thread and logic thread to separate processors) this will always be a thing. You will need to either lower the requirements against your hardware (less units or graphics) or increase your hardware. This is PC gaming (especially in flight sims). Its always been this way.

45 is the lowest. Marianas in the Huey is about as bad as it gets. That doesn't mean that a campaign with a hundred bombers dropping 20 bombs each won't give you some pain. I also do not use motion reprojection, can't stand it. Not sure how I implied it wasn't stable. Its a stable 40-45 fps minimum with a head of around 90 (usually around 70 in the air) Doesn't mean I haven't experienced a moment or two (during hours of play) that produces a lower fps. Usually near the ground and a bunch of stuff getting hit (some moments during paradise lost campaign). 99% of the time I'm fine. Do I want better performance? Yes. Is DCS unplayable in VR? Absolutley Not. It's plently playable.

Yeah, those numbers are out to lunch. I target 45 fps on Marianas islands in a huey on ground level (which is damn good), usually settle for 40ish which gives me a good 60-80 in the air with most aircraft and not too much going on. plenty playable at 45 fps (actually thats an understatement, its very playable). In short, I'm running a 5900x Overclocked 20% (water cooled) and a 3090. Settings are all high and 4x AA on an HP G2

I'm hoping like BS2 and the original, BS3 will be a full product with a number of campaigns built in etc... BS3 wouldn't feel complete without it IMO. FC and BS have always had many options for campaigns unlike the modules for DCS that may come with one. I think the BS3 module price would be a little high for first time buyers without the full experience with campaigns. (Obviously the upgrade price is a no brainer but I'd like to fly the think with some purpose at some point)

I kind of hope they stay up to date on the new systems hoping that it will relate over to a ka-52 in the future. Hoping black shark 4 is alligator 1

What makes you think the KA-50 is fictional? Designed in the late 70's against the Mi-28 to become the frontline combat helicopter it won hands down in most respects and was operational (I think less than 20 were made though) and did serve in combat operations. It just never "took flight" so to speak until the 2 seat version ka-52 was made (from the body of the ka-50). DCS version of the ka-50 would be a bit of a frakencopter, but the majority of the actual ka-50's were all different from each other as they were more of an ongoing testbed for most of their lives. Again, they did serve in combat operations though.

I just don't understand the number. I wouldn't spend $20 from goodpricerchelicopters.cn but won't think twice about $200,000 from Dell Enterprise. Its who you put your trust in, not how much trust that matters IMO. I couldn't imagine where I would begin to find all of the goods that I purchase if I had to purchase them offline. I'm guessing the answer to your wonder "why anyone will buy any products online for more than $250" is the same reason you purchased the varjo online.

finished the campaign, but I'll re-fly a few and give you some feedback. I guess I could do the practice missions to save some ingress egress time.

? Spend a thousand times that online. Why would some arbitrary number be a limit to spend online? And how would one go about purchasing products not available elsewhere?

You are missing some big guys from this list. Tu-160... bad ass, how could you not want to fly the largest flying object to ever go mach 2+ in history. For me it would be the F-111 / Tu-160 (any TU really) / B1-B I'd have no problem navigating high or low level across a map to fence in on a target and fence out across the map again.

I'm waiting for a 7900x3D w/4090 build, hopefully the gen 5 nvme drives are out at the time. Hopefully I can snap most of this for MSRP, but I doubt it. I don't mind paying for a 4090, but I won't pay more than retail for one. Will just sit with my current build until this nonsense is over.

looking forward to getting a 40xx < at MSRP . Hopefully in the new year.

More AMD Hype as usual. Would love for them to prove me wrong but Its been too many years of the same hype/bust cycles from them. They are behind in GPU hardware They are behind in driver/software They are behind in AI upscaling They are behind in capture/encode They have a lot of work to do to bridge the gap between the two.

I've owned most top end cards from AMD and NVidia for the last 10 years or so. I don't care to start an AMD/NV thread war but the card that has been in my personal gaming (flight/racing) rig has always been an NVidia card. AMD is a giant hype machine pre-launch that rarely delivers. I'm not considering a value proposition here. Where AMD has excelled is in their CPU's. I've had an AMD 3900x and now 5900x and will get a 7900x3D in the new year. They got slightly bumped by intel in the 3900x generation but I have not regretted that CPU purchase much. If I had to purchase a CPU right now it would be the Intel 13900 series, but that CPU was released sort of in the middle of my upgrade cycle which should land on the 7900x3D which I fully expect to beat out the Intel. (If not, I may switch back to intel). I digress. The only time I've enjoyed the AMD cards was in their value per hash in crypto mining which was far superior (580 over 1070ti) when comparing price to performance. Gaming not so much. If every dollar is important in your purchase than I understand the consideration for AMD, but if you are seeking bleeding edge performance to squeeze the most from your rig, AMD just doesn't have the edge.