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.

I've been on the fence for a while about upgrading from my G2 to a Crystal and one of the things holding me back was the additional standalone stuff that I would never need, paying for it with both additional cost and weight. So the news of this core version has interested me. It depends on how much stripped back it is, I would give it a pass if (probably unlikely) they also removed the eye tracking. The removal of the battery is of course a good thing but wouldn't that influence the comfort? Maybe requiring an additional counter weight instead? But a pcvr only Crystal for say €1000-€1200? I'd take that. Also read that some users face audio issues and that should be removed in a core version as the audio will not be handled by the snapdragon processor which caused latency.

I will try that with the openXR toolkit thanks. Have also noticed some odd shadow behavior with DLSS, namely flickering at certain angles underneath parked aircraft, and dancing terrain shadows similar to those dancing clouds we had about 3 years ago! In VR when you turn your head the shadows rotate. I loaded the V for Victory campaign and F2 viewed to one of the static balloons with a view over Dover and you could see very clearly the odd rotation of shadows, but with DLAA it's not there.

Using a g2 in VR I've never found a game where I've been 100% happy with DLSS and always revert back. With this update its OK but as others have said it does compromise the image. Is it worth it for a gain of 10fps over DLAA? For us to decide individually but at least we have the option now. Biggest improvement for me is the shimmering. Much much better in both DLAA and DLSS quality. Minor issue but disappointed that searchlights are still broken, although no one from ED has even responded to the bug and I guess they have bigger issues to sort at the moment. As a couple of others have said the Spitfire cockpit is looking fantastic! Hope the other warbirds get the same treatment soon.

<posted to wrong forum>

Here's hoping its fixed in the 2.9 update or very soon after, very immersion breaking. I dont understand how it worked previously as shown in recorded missions on YT and not now. What did they change and why? I've tried it MT, ST, N2 maps, Channel map, Causacus Map, high GFX setting, low GFX setting, extreme visability range, pretty much everything. Theres a user created mission that flies some B17s towards some lights using the Causacus map which is handy for testing although you cannot see inside the cockpit. You do see however the zoom effect work.

Seen a few videos of Sortie 2 and the searchlights look fantastic with the beams visible from some distance. I fly it ( and any other mission with searchlights so not just for this mission or campaign) and the visibility of the beams are very limited. The effect on the aircraft both in the cockpit and using F2 view are present but the beams draw distance is so small flying directly over them at 25k I still cannot see them without using zoom. Anyone else experience this, have the beams draw distance changed? It is reported in the WW2 assets bug but only 2 of us have commented. Night flying, low level raids etc are the reason I bought the Mossie and the V for Victory campaign. Sortie two is very atmospheric but I feel I am missing out on something videos have shown others experience.

If you watch the YouTube video of Sortie 2 from V for Victory you clearly see the beams from a distance searching for your aircraft. Looks great. That video was uploaded 2 months ago so has either something changed by the developers since then (and if so I hope they change it back) or is there somehow (doubtfully) wrong with mine and it seems your client or setup? It's something ED need to investigate and give comment on.

Also suffer from this. At first I thought it was a VR issue but tried with a user created test mission in both VR and 2d and its the same. You get the effect on the aircraft in cockpit view and external from a long way out but cannot see the searchlight beam unless you use a zoom. I just flew Sortie 2 in V for Victory which has many searchlights but I cannot actually see any beams of lights whilst flying at 25k unless using zoom, including ones I am pretty much flying over. Its very immersion breaking! All my settings are maxed.

ED said recently on FB one release does not affect the other. Of course what actually happens behind closed doors might be different.

I read somewhere that the mask isnt applied until later on in the rendering process thus is in fact useless at the moment. If true, hopefully it gets fixed soon.