ackattacker

Crystal Super (QLED version) uses a single large asphyrical glass lens and large panels. MeganeX uses a pancake optics stack with medium size panels. BSB (both 1 and 2) use a pancake optics stack with very small panels. Each design has pros and cons. People are excited about the BSB v2 mostly because their new pancake optics stack greatly improves upon most of the "cons" that have plagued pancake optics in the past, namely excessive glare, poor edge clarity, poor brightness, and poor FOV. It likely still trails behind asphyric lenses in most of those categories, but it has advantages of much smaller and lighter, oled contrast and black levels, and good sweet spot and low distortion. It seems that with the improvements it *may* be the era of pancake optics coming to the forefront of VR tech.

I think we are starting to talk in circles. OpenXR is an open source software platform which is what game developers use to interface with headset software. So in this case, BSB talks natively SteamVR basically emulating a Valve Index and SteamVR is therefore the headset application and "runs" the headset. OpenXR applications talk to SteamVR via OpenXR protocol and in this way they pass the data back and forth. Another way to do it is for headset manufacturers to use their own headset software which can talk OpenXR, bypassing the SteamVR application. That's how Pimax does it currently. This requires them to develop their own software to run the headset but gives more control over things like passing eye tracking data or doing their own implementation of motion reprojection. If you run a Meta headset you can also use OpenXR but once again Meta software is communicating with the headset. Basically almost all the headset manufacturers now work with OpenXR and almost all the VR applications now talk OpenXR. But OpenXR always requires to interface with the headset through another software layer, be it SteamVR, Pimax Play, Varjo Base, Meta Quest Link etc. etc. etc. There is no such thing as OpenXR application that directly communicates to the headset AFAIK. Personally I think it makes sense for small boutique headset manufacturers to just use SteamVR because it's a polished product that works fine. It may have limitations though when you try to do things SteamVR wasn't designed to do like quad views foveated rendering.

Yes when the CEO of Bigscreen, Darshan Shankar, sat down with Adam Savage's Tested youtube channel, he talked about how the focus for eye tracking is on social (VRchat) and performance applications (DFR) is a down the road aspiration. Based on that, I wouldn't be buying the BSB2e with the assumption that it will help with DCS. Somebody has to do the actual coding to make it work and there is no longer any friendly developer doing this work for free, either ED or BSB needs to put the development time in.

One caution for those ordering the eye tracking version is that there is no guarantee that eye tracking will work with DCS. Right now there are basically 2 ways to get DFR/Quad views in DCS, with Virtual Desktop (Quest Pro) or PimaxXR. SteamVR doesn't really support this natively and BigScreen Beyond is a SteamVR headset. Now that Mbuccia is no longer doing this type of development it's not clear how or when BSB will support DCS eye tracking.

The bigscreen beyond is a bare headset. Doesn't include controllers or base stations. Bare minimum for DCS would be one lighthouse station. You don't really need controllers for DCS although they come in handy sometimes for setup. You can get by without them. Many people considering the BSB 2 already have old Index controllers and base stations lying around. If you don't, it's going to add a lot of money to the cost equation.

I agree but playing devil's advocate, Pimax demoed the Crystal Super at CES with just an AMD 7800xt roughly equivalent to a 4080 and that ran DCS pretty well. With quad views, I think it'll be totally playable but maybe not at "full render resolution", but clearly more than BSB2. Compared purely spec wise the Super definitely better... more resolution, way more brightness, way more FOV. I think it comes down to the ergonomics and the company reputation, and what matters most to you. Also BTW I think some more recent review of 5090 (VR flight sim guy) show that the 5090 really stretches it's legs when given a very high render resolution. Much more than 10-15% improvement if you pushing those crazy high resolution numbers.

I don't have these but I'll say the overall ppd seems similar to Pimax Crystal which is very good resolution wise for DCS. With a 4090 the Crystal runs very well with eye tracking and pretty good without eye tracking. So what I'm trying to say is that at 75Hz the BSB should run fine with or without eye tracking, a Crystal Super is probably going to need the eye tracking working properly with quad views to run well. I'm actually on the fence cancelling my Crystal Super order and getting the BSB 2. Way I see it: Pimax Crystal has advantages - Higher resolution, higher FOV, inside out tracking, eye tracking that already proven to work software wise with DCS. Disadvantages - heavy, poor record of quality control, often fiddly and half-baked drivers Chinese company with questionable business ethics, aspheric lenses require very high render resolution to apply distortion profile due to inherently high native distortion. BSB 2 has advantages - much much much lighter, custom fit, much more comfortable. I already own lighthouse stations and Index controllers. OLED screens and colors. Perfect eyebox position and IPD. Much more ethical and honest company. Lenses require much lower render resolution to apply distortion profile which makes for an easier time for the GPU. Disadvantages, lower FOV and lower resolution, but still very good. I'll also say that early previews from CES 2025 on the Crystal Super where very bad. Not just major distortions, but major mura. And that the high resolution is not that "wow" compared to existing headsets. Noticeable but not a "game changer" like you might expect.

Unfortunately the reality of the situation is that the closer VR is to real life the harder it is to spot. Because spotting in real life is hard. Low res VR and flat screen has an advantage because a plane far away is one pixel, and its a big easy to see pixel.

I have Ultraleap controller 2 mounted on the crystal using a 3d printed mount, and it works "reliably" but not "flawlessly". Not really Pimax's fault. It all comes down to DCS implementation of hand-tracking. What I mean by "reliably" is that I can pretty reliably see my hands in DCS. What I mean by "not flawlessly" is that actually manipulating switches and knobs can be a frustrating experience. There are a number of configuration options, none of which provide a truly great experience. I play around with it sometimes, and usually go back to just using the HMD cursor and buttons assigned to my HOTAS.

Sorry for the necro-post, but Jameco electronics appears to have the correct female socket. https://www.jameco.com/z/MD-50SN-20MM-JVP-Jameco-ValuePro-Mini-DIN-Socket-Receptacle-5-Pin-Panel-Mount_2272799.html I'm updating my MSFFB2 to accept Thrustmaster sticks using a 3d print adapter and this should do the trick... For the male part in the stick, doesn't seem to exist, but you can just use a regular socket 5 pin mini din from ebay/aliexpress and then 3d print the mounting : https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4901949

It's true I actually ordered one to check out. It can be paired with a PC and shows up as an input device but despite repeated attempts I can't make the buttons register/do anything. Unfortunately probably needs a driver that doesn't appear to exist. I've also ordered a "Genius" brand ring mouse from AliXpress that seems to fit the bill and is designed for PC use (using a 2.4Ghz dongle). I believe these are old stock from like 10 years ago so not sure how well it will still work.

First, the Pimax crystal has eye tracking and quad view foveated rendering makes a huge difference in performance. You should be able to achieve similar performance to your Reverb G2. Like you, I find 60Hz screen refresh rate unbearable. I literally cannot take it for more than 10-15 minutes. However I run my Pimax at 120Hz refresh rate and 60fps from the game (“locked to half refresh rate”. The result is pretty good. It is my preferred, and lets me crank the graphics pretty high. I find native 72Hz (and 72FPS from the game) to be pretty good also. Very acceptable if the game can keep up. 72Hz/36FPS is no good for me in DCS. It’s ok in more sedate flight sims like MSFS. The issue is that fast motion causes double images, like being cross-eyed. 90Hz/90FPS is sublime but you need to turn down graphics quite a lot to achieve it. 90Hz/45FPS is marginal. 120Hz/120FPS in unachievable with even the highest end hardware.

Are you making your code changes and new design public, like the original?

They do seem to work with PCs. The main issue is that most have only three buttons. Really you need left/right and scroll up down. Not sure if software could make 3 buttons work well enough or not. But there are some with more buttons. Such as this: https://www.amazon.com/Bluetooth-Wireless-Scrolling-Recording-Smartphone/dp/B0C8B7X8RC

Seems like an elegant solution, although I’m curious if it is necessary to build your own. You can buy a number of devices online (“TikTok scrolling rings”) which should do basically the same thing?