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?

Initially I had many similar problems with the eye tracking that were apparently related to USB issues. I cleared it up by plugging the headset into the USB hub and plugging the USB hub into a USB 2.0 port. NOT USB 3.0. If your PC doesn’t have any USB 2.0 ports you can get a USB 2.0 hub and use that with the USB 3.0 port. The important thing is that the Crystal should connect over 2.0. Now it works fine and also stays charged.

Up until fairly recently, there was a distinct tradeoff going to VR where you got more “immersion” but significantly poorer visuals. the Crystal has finally matured enough with working eye tracking that you truly get good immersion and visuals as well. It’s really pretty amazing, although still a little finicky and not a polished plug and play experience. I spent a lot of time getting everything working to my satisfaction. But I can’t go back to 2D. That said, competitive players still use 2D and trackIR. It is more comfortable for long sessions, it is easier to spot, and easier to keep track of your opponent. In some ways I feel the 2D players are actually kind of cheating. The VR experience is more realistic but the 2D experience is, well, easier. I would say if you fly for fun VR is the way to go. If you want to mop up a multiplayer server then maybe not.

You have titled your post as a review, not as your subjective experience. You believe these issues are important enough that other people should not buy the headset ("do not recommend"). While I don't discount your experiences, I think it is important to note that some of your difficulties are not generally experienced by other Pimax users, myself included. This is useful information for other people reading this thread who may believe your words that the Crystal is "beta" and buggy. To me, it sounds like you have a USB issue. It may be the headset is defective, or it may be the USB hub is defective, or cables, or ports, or who knows. But the fact that other people don't have the same issue, means that whatever the issue is; is not inherent in the design of the headset.

I’m not clear on the technical details, but Quadviews is much much better than either FFR or DFR using the OpenXR toolkit. My understanding is that the OpenXR method of foveated rendering occurs in the video card pipeline whereas Quadviews occurs in the game engine pipeline. Also at a certain point the video framtime is not just about the total pixels, but about the number of objects and their texture resolution. Even a low end system could display a simple solid polygon with millions of pixels.

I have always thought, that in a perfect world where more time and money was being thrown into VR development, that a huge performance increase is on the table. Instead of rendering a high-resolution square image and downsampling to apply the barrel distortion profile, the distortion profile should be pre-loaded into the render pipeline so that it is rendered correctly pixel for pixel the first time. This obviously would require much deep integration than what we currently have, because the rendering pipeline is really designed for square monitors.

I have no doubt that it will be eventually possible to play DCS on the Vision Pro. The Apple name means developers will focus on solutions. The real questions are whether the experience will be worth the price tag compared to the competition, given the limitations (Wifi compression, FOV, etc). My personal opinion is that if you are reason to buy the Vision Pro *other than DCS*, and want to also play DCS, then cool. But I seriously doubt this will be the "ultimate" DCS headset...

Reverb G2 is a good headset that was the gold standard DCS headset for a while, and is very cheap nowadays, so a good way to dip your toes in. You can read the MFD’s fine the pixel density is very good but only in the center. So you have to move your head and point it directly at what you want to look at. Newer generations of headsets are much better in this regard. The FOV is good enough but not great. And again, the sides are blurry. Imagine wearing a motorcycle helmet, or eyeglasses. You do lose peripheral vision but you also adjust to it pretty quick and it just becomes normal. You cannot crank the settings in Syria and expect good results. Everything maxed out? A slideshow. You will learn that a 3080Ti does not have enough VRAM. Maybe 20-30fps (guessing here). But dial everything back a small amount, run the MT build, you can expect to maintain steady 45fps at all times which will be motion smoothed (frame interpolated) to 90HZ in the headset and the result is very playable. To get true 90FPS you would need a 4080/4090 or run medium/low settings. The headset is pretty plug and play but there is a lot of tweaking you can (and probably should) do to get maximum performance and visual clarity. It’s a pretty deep rabbit hole you can go down with reshaders and OpenXR foveated rendering and such.

I don’t have the Aero but I am maybe an odd one and prefer to play DCS with regular speakers on my desk. My play space, however, does not disturb the other members of my household.

Varjo Aero has a steam VR resolution of 4148x3556 per eye, 14.7 megapixels... And folks have been happily running the Varjo for 2 years with DCS on 30 series cards... by turning the resolution down a bit from the highest setting. Visual impact is minimal. Although eye tracking provided a have cake and eat it boost. I suspect the Crystal is in the same boat.

I believe you will have to wait for the lighthouse faceplate. Might be waiting a long time. Other people have successfully merged inside-out tracked headsets such as Quest 2 with lighthouse controllers using some software workarounds such as Open Space Calibrator , but AFAIK nobody has successfully done it with the Crystal, there are some software conflicts.