shrimpy_dikdik

Yeah it's one of those that you regret not knowing about months ago! Make sure you use the companion app too as can get much better gains than default. 40% fps increase for me and better clarity. So the quad views app and companion works with this patch on a standard G2 using FFR.

But... it also works for non-eye tracking headsets like the G2. I'm not making this up, why would I? Been using it for a few months now, gives me 40% ish fps gain. So this isn't a blanket "quad views issue" like reported on this forum a few times as mine on my G2 is working fine, it's something that involves the eye tracking. Edit: to be clear, the G2 has FFR using the Quadview app and I can use the companion app thing by Tally Mouse to change the outer and inner resolutions, but not the size. Openxr is disabled for DCS as gave no extra gain.

No, hence why I asked if its just eye-tracking headsets. Everyone keeps going on about quad views having the issue but that is false as its working perfectly well. Quad views isn't just for eye-tracking headsets.

G2 VR user and have no issues at all with quad views. Maybe it's just with those headsets with eye-tracking? Very limited time testing as I had to isolate the MiG 21 flight dynamics file through my virus killer as it was flagging up a false positive (those unauthorised error messages!) and that messed everything up which took a bit of time to work out and fix. Not sure on the point of the SC Air Boss to be honest, think it will be used once or twice then forgotten about. But I did notice my Tomcat was missing a lot of the model when viewed from this view, like undercarriage, pilot and RIO. Other aircraft looked ok.

Maybe in hindsight ED made a mistake yesterday by say the patch is delaying only a day, they should have left the date open until sure everything worked and ready for release. But other than that what do people want? Release faulty patches to hit a deadline? Or maybe not give any deadlines or very vague ones and just release ad hoc? They're damned whatever decision they make.

Don't understand the negative responses to be honest. I'd rather a working patch than one that breaks aspects of the game that was released to satisfy the impatient. Take your time ED, get it right even if it takes weeks rather than days. I will enjoy flying what I already have in the meantime.

The only issue I jave experienced is the low level IA mission in Sinai when many aircraft are present, probably due to the radar issue which will be addressed in the next patch. No idea what hardware those having issues are using but I'm using a 5950x and 3090 with a G2 and getting 50 odd on the ground and 70 up high with mostly maxed settings and MSAA x4. For G2 users I suggest using quad views and the companion app, gave me 30% extra FPS than the openxr toolkit. Not sure how it works on other headsets, think it is listed on the download page.

It's still only about playing a game, not anything like a flight delay. If you make plans around playing a game then that is your prerogative, but you can't convince me it's an actual serious issue.

There's another flight sim out there that sure you're all aware of that inuse to play until the incident I'm about to mention. They releases a compulsory patch with a fault that made the game unplayable for VR users. They knew about it, even mentioned in it the notes, but released it anyway hitting their deadline target. It left a very sour taste for VR users, almost a how dare you release something in this state. I haven't played it since. In glad ED haven't gone down this route. It's great to hit deadlines but better to release something fault free. I don't know what the issue is that's caused this delay but even if they announce today they need even more time I'd be happy to wait so they can fix it.

This thread is hilarious. It's mostly grown men ranting that they have to wait 24 hours to play with a new toy. Could maybe understand it if they were 10 years old and Christmas was cancelled! And as for the ones complaining they took a day off work so they could play, talk about first world problems! ED made the best decision they could under the circumstances. Imagine the whine if the patch was released with some major issues.

Mixed feelings after an hour or two scooting about. The Norwegian mountains look amazing from a slight distance or altitude and a sunrise flight over them was breath taking. Up close the textures are not so good however. The rest of the map is mostly forest and there lies the problem, performance. Using a Reverb G2 ( only ever play vr) on a 5950x and 3090 I was getting sub 40 rps in the dense forest areas at around 3000ft. Compare that to a similar scenario on the Caucasus or Syria where I get around 54 fps (would usually lock at 45 but left unlocked for comparison). Sameish altitude in forest areas. Murmansk looked pretty good but also sent my FPS down to around 37. Turning off terrain shadows helped and also reducing forest detail and draw distance to around 70%. I am sure we will see some texture and performance improvements in due course, but in hindsight I think I would have been better off delaying my purchase until this happens.

I only found out recently you can use quad views FFR on a g2 and that gave me significant fps increase compared to open toolkit FFR. If the FFR 2.0 that's mooted to come with the light gives a similar or even better performance enhancement that I might need to reconsider my needs for DFR.

I'm one of those looking to replace my G2 but I am not sure the performance without DFR on a 3090 would be worth the cost. Better visuals yes, but that isn't good enough for me if the performance is lacking.

No eye tracking means no DFR which means you loose the previous FPS gains in the original Crystal. It will have FFR but you can get that with openxr toolkit and the gains are very small in my experience, a couple of FPS maybe.

Deal breaker for me too. I will just stick with my G2 until the 5090rtx comes out and I upgrade my machine and see what is available then.