cerebrave

I hope this get resolved soon.. Apparently ED may had assumed that everyone will upgrade. I had this problem before and eventually upgrade to FC2024. The problem gone and all is fine now with the authorization. I also find this upgrade is also better that now every single FC3 aircraft had their own wallpaper. Here is my analysis: 1. ED had somehow converted client side FC3 planes from single license (bundle) to 6 different licenses with the recent patch. This can be seen from a tool called "DCS updater by Skatezilla" that license of FC3 is now gone in client side, replaced by 6 different licenses. 2. When user login, the authentication server now see that client has 6 licenses and fail to authorize, as server side recognized only FC3 purchased. This is a mismatch that causes the problem. In my case, I had error for 5 licenses while I got Su27 purchased separately and I can still use it. Those who own SC also granted Su33. they can still use it. 3. FC2024 license purchase seems change/add server side authentication for a user to be granted to have 9 licenses, that is why I now see 9 wallpaper for my planes. This server side change now matches the 6 client side FC3 planes so that it passes authentication. Hence if someone upgrade, this resolve the issues for all 9 FC planes. I think this could be server side problem that ED shall getting fixed. I might be wrong, but that is what I learn so far.... Again hopefully this get fixed soon.

I would like to add about my mention of the missile in the Mission Editor (ME), an ED beta tester confirmed to me that it shouldn't be there by default. After some confusion on how those are there, I found out that the missiles are apparently being there because I had 'stolen' the configuration from an ME server/map that had the mod. For instance I did mentioned that my J-11A had two SD10 in ME, it is because I saved my load-out during a SATAC match I play recently. Knowing that, I try just now in GS, save the load-out during a GS match, then voila! PL-12 missiles can be used in your own ME for your own mission for J-11A and Su-33. It is a great way to obtain these for your own play (and yes, it is now with pylons). Cheers!

I think it got nerfed (or other may say realistic adjustment). I played the frogfoot a lot in the past where I remember I can launch at max range carrot, and recently I got bit confused with the now limited LA range of 29T. The rook seems now losing it's long range TV guided standoff fire-and-forget solution.

Hey.. thanks buddy. So all is good now! amazing, problem solved!

I was wondering if you have ever jumped into GS MP server, they got all PL-12 all over the place for J-11A. FOX-3s are now getting further and plenty in J-11A or even Su-33 in GS. Additionally, If you are flying solo, from mission editor, you can arm two SD-10s for J11A, i find it somehow saved/stored within the bottom default weapon load-out configuration. We are still however, unable to rearm mid-game, you can only have SD-10/ PL-12 when the mission begin (or when you are slotting in within MP server). Also, few graphical glitches like missing pylons will be seen. Other than that, its all good! Cheers!

I think only a very few people may do. Because the two headsets are in a very far away in term of their pricing segment, i.e. prosumer vs consumer. Youtouber may have both of them (MRTV for example). So go ahead visit their channel to get their views, as I did. From my own understanding coming from multiple youtube reviews, I would think the 8KX will beat pico4 in term of FOV and overall picture quality, while Pico 4 will beat 8KX mostly in term of comfort, simplicity, and price. The question will be whether the price gap justifies the increase of picture quality? If money is no object, go for the higher segment. I did consider pimax once, but I leave it out mostly due to the practicality of the headset, and the better feeling of value that pico4 brings. (I also play beatsaber very often, so I dont think I play pimax with that huge log and cables in my face, also I’d hate to alternate headset between my wireless quest2 and pimax switching between games. So pico4 is an ideal upgrade to my existing quest2).

It is hard to judge a through-the-lens capture (i.e. some spot can be blur for the lack of focus of the camera, but may give impression the headset is blurry). But in case you are still interested to know, you may want to visit TyrielWood Youtube channel. He got such video showing comparison of headsets, he even also have DCS as one of the demo game. https://youtu.be/5wlUvshUBrw But in my testimony, Tyriel's video didnt do justice (with the reason I mentioned above - and indication to see this is the pixel screen door effect - if we cant see SDE and the image is blurred, then it is the camera distortion effect). As an owner of couples of headsets, since Rift CV1, Quest1, Quest2 and now Pico4. I can say Pico4 is by far, the best!. It has greater sweet spot compared to the puny Quest 2. similar resolution as HP G2, and is quite cheap compared to the other recent headsets (in my country). I'm saying that in PCVR experience. The only downside of my Pico4 (in my case) is that it has a noticeable mura effect, which might be vary from unit to unit. Quest 3? may be a different story though - but seeing Carmack leaving meta - we may not see his vision being realized....

Guys, have you tried VD recently? @RealDCSpilot@VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants I had a blast with Virtual Desktop -- the recent updated version brings a whole new level.. I got like about 10 fps gain vs previous version. Guy Godin were right, he promised improvement in the new update. This makes Pico 4 as an undisputable consumer level best PCVR solution as of now. I got like 60-75fps in highskies of GS server. On its ground, I got around 50-55 fps, with only my 3080 : high settings, medium shadow, flat terrain object shadow, msaa2x (High VD @2544x2544 per eye). This is totally playable everything is so sharp I am very happy with my purchase

I took the liberty to jump in… @Dogmanbirdas pico user, I can confirm it is now in 2D. I also do not think that in the future it will be in 3d, because the color camera is only one, in the center. Technically to me, it seems is not possible from its central position to generate stereoscopic passthrough with color, although some software engineering magic may still happen (i.e. by overlaying the color info into stereoscopic monochrome images utilizing the other cameras… but I still think the physical angle of the color camera could make it difficult). if I may add as well, pico headset tracking in VD is not as good as in native pico OS in dark room. May be it is VD issue, but definitely quest 2 doesn’t have this issue. Other than that, to me, it is definitely an upgrade to Quest 2 in term of visual and audio quality, I have boxed my quest 2 now

@VR Flight Guy in PJ PantsCan you share us the result of this upgrade? the comparison? i.e. in fps, network latency, or else? I simply upgraded mine with an earphone jack so I can connect headset while charging. But at the end, I don't use it, as it turns out I prefer the built in speaker (for simplicity over sound quality).

@Oellness, got it. I think I had the same issue sometime with steamVR (mentioned in my long post). It appear you might be using OpenVR runtime? (you can see which runtime used by turning the performance fps monitoring in VD). I use standalone DCS, and run VD with a shortcut using command like this : "C:\Program Files\Virtual Desktop Streamer\VirtualDesktop.Streamer.exe" "C:\GAMES.ED\bin\DCS.exe" (to avoid having to rightclick the VD icon and pick the DCS.exe manually). This way I never had similar crash, and the runtime VD use will read Oculus. I suppose, you may have to install Oculus software also - (but I'm not sure if this is necessary or not, because I previously was using Quest 2)

@Oellnesscan you describe a little bit more on the crash? is it VD crash, PC crash or else?. Can you still move your head while seeing picture in its place, or does it move with your face hence make you dizzy? Does it crash in loading screen or already in the mission but crash? any error messages? etc etc. DCS is a well known CPU and RAM hogs... so it may just be stalled but not crash, where you could just give it more time to load. On heavy multiplayer mission (especially if it is a first mission load after you start DCS), I could even have to wait 1-2 minutes to let it load fully.

@RealDCSpilotThanks mate! its a helpful tips for my next upgrade. About the new engine... sigh!... everytime ED added more features, like clouds, weather, moving clouds, even modules.... I am feeling this "new engine" is moving further away... Other than It obviously show what they are actually working on, I would imagine that they might need to ensure those additional features (and modules) already thrown, are working in order under the new engine. So yes, we need to reach our pocket deeper to throw more money to our rig to keep up...

@HarkeSo we have the same problem... and I would like to share some development of my testing below, which might also help you figuring out. @RealDCSpilotThanks for your comments, ideas and suggestions, I have done another series of testing and here are my findings below: 1. VD has internal resolution rendering, as below (taken from their official Discord bot message), and I think this is one of the key to my below findings Virtual Desktop Setting - Graphic Quality : Render Resolution per eye Quest Potato: 1200x1344 Low: 1536x1728 Medium: 1824x2016 High: 2208x2400 Quest 2/Pico Neo 3/Quest Pro Potato: 1440x1536 Low: 1728x1824 Medium: 2016x2112 High: 2496x2592 Ultra: 2688x2784 Godlike: 3072x3216 (Quest Pro Only) Pico 4 Potato: 1488x1488 Low: 1776x1776 Medium: 2064x2064 High: 2544x2544 Ultra: 2736x2736 Godlike: 3120x3120 2. Auto resolution seems to lock steamVR to my previous super-sampling setting (around 1.5x). So then it seems SteamVR was multipliying my VD rendering above, making my PC running too heavy hence slow fps. Things didn't go this way if I use Oculus runtime. Oculus runtime seems to be following VD's setting, including its sharpening level (btw VD's sharpening effect doesn't appear to be working with SteamVR/OpenVR runtime - but you can use reshade in OpenVR). 3. Airlink by default has lower res in Oculus app setting and that is the only resolution used by airlink. If I use VD under Oculus runtime, it use VD's resolution which is higher than my airlink res (my VD is high 2496x2592 vs Airlink 1856x1872), hence Airlink performs better under this situation. 4. Having said the above, I take an approximation of equivalent resolution within both VD setting and Airlink, and they now performs nearly the same. So @RealDCSpilot, you are correct that resolution is the #1 factor to check. 5. I was remembering an incorrect fps count with Airlink. The previous airlink test fps was with DCS2.7, and now we all see a slight worsening fps with 2.8. (this is also additional factor) 6. Hence based on my limited testing above, below is my quick conclusion over resolutions used (happy to get any input) - and now it just seems obvious actually after I write it down.. lol... Quest2 Airlink: Oculus App setting -> DCS PD multiplication Quest2 VD Oculus runtime : VD setting -> DCS PD multiplication Quest2 VD OpenVR runtime : VD setting -> SteamVR multiplication -> DCS PD multiplication PICO4 VD Oculus runtime : VD setting -> DCS PD multiplication PICO4 VD OpenVR runtime : VD setting -> SteamVR multiplication -> DCS PD multiplication Now moving to PICO4, when at the end of the above equations resulting into similar resolution, Quest and Pico could perform the same within VD and Airlink, so therefore I can say that I'm now able to achieve my objective on to ensuring that I get the same performance as Airlink. In term of VD, I wont be using SteamVR/OpenVR runtime as they are : a. seems to miss the sharpening level that I like (that VD has). You can use Reshade in SteamVR, but the downside, they crash quite often in my case. b. seems to have another unnecessary pipeline with nothing to gain. c. To my liking, the visual quality (despite of everything tried), is better when using Oculus runtime used. So I'm now settled with PICO4's Ultra: 2736x2736 VD setting, MSAA-off, wireless VD, Oculus runtime. It is very sharp and almost make those jagged aliases gone, and still keeping up the fps to be playable (above 45fps). My 5Ghz router is just 1.5meter away from my face so excellent bandwith and signal, no need cable for now. Regarding the hardware, I'm still awaiting how RX7900XTX performs over 4080 or 4090. So I can decide which one to grab to replace my old VGA (and CPU) all together. Is DDR5 performs better than DDR4? this is for another topic over my next upgrade. Thanks - and hope this can help anyone looking for answer.

@RealDCSpilotThanks for your comments. The first one, this was also my speculation, thus the above screenshots were actually made with PD1.0. SteamVR resolution has been set to "auto". let me change back the auto setting to something neutral (like the 2160x2160 res PICO has). On your second speculation, I will try to shutdown Oculus.. by closing the app, and close those something called OVR service, OVRserver, etc right?. Any other tools or ways that one can do to switch over Oculus and OpenVR runtime? The way I do it, to get Oculus runtine is to run DCS through the VD Streamer command. And to get OpenVR runtime, I run DCS directly by clicking the DCS after starting SteamVR. Again, on top of this, even though I'm running Oculus runtime (which is better than OpenVR on my case), the Airlink can perform much-much better, and can give me 10-15fps headroom to improve visual qualities. for me "Airlink" > "VD-Oculus" > "VD-OpenVR". Hence actually, my mission is to bring VD (of any runtime) at Airlink performance, not VD-OpenVR to VD-Oculus. Because PICO4 is not possible to use Airlink, hence if I can bring Quest 2 VD to Airlink level, I think I shall be able to achieve that with PICO4. That is the idea.

I think now its time to share screenshots.... This is using identical setting, same headset, different Runtime. Oculus one runs better and I wonder why Steam's openVR always like this (I tried both Quest and Pico 4 in VD). On top of this, if I use Oculus Airlink (with Quest2)... the game will perform much better and smoother. (screen shots in menu and in game (F16 Training Mission 5))

Can you do this with F16 training mission 5? For me It is an ideal test bed benchmark because the plane is static in the sky but the world is moving, a lot of objects appearing and flying, and can comparable to medium mission load… lastly, things are easier to compare between system as they are static.

@RealDCSpilot @VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants here my previous post about the detail, the benchmark I use (f16 training mission 5) and the fps result. To add, the above conditions werent mentioned are: 1. medium detail, high terrain texture, msaa 2x, shadow high, terrain object shadow, vr ss 1.3x, etc etc… I wonder if I needed to mention further over dcs settings, because the difference I got over my test above are using the same settings, same headset, the only difference is Airlink vs VD. 2. ram 48gb, i5 9600, rtx3080, again I dont think this is relevant because it is me vs me, Airlink vs VD. 3. quest link is at 1x resolution (in oculus app), while VD setting is at medium (3070). I think this is worth mentioning All I am asking, that if anyone here have ever compare airlink fps performance vs VD? In quest 2. If they got better fps in Airlink over VD, then I will accept the situation. btw, I got 1200mbps over my router, and about 45-55ms delay, where game delay dominates about 20-30ms. Network delay is always below 10ms, so I dont feel the need to use usb cables. I dedicate the 5ghz band from my router to my headset. The above post I made before I get Pico 4. The idea here, to know if it is possible for me to tune up VD to get the same fps with Airlink (now I got 10-15fps lower). And If I can do it with Quest, I will do it with Pico 4 But knowing whether it is possible or not, Is key. To date, seems dcs is much friendlier toward Airlink. thank you for any input given Edit: I asked GuyGodin directly about this over Discord just now, he seems acknowledged the problem, and said this will get fixed in the next update. Hopefully we can squeeze more performance in VD.

@RealDCSpilot or anyone here.. Can you help me…. What I’m struggling to understand is how I can improve VD’s “FPS”, compared to oculus airlink. Whether I use Pico4 or Quest2, My VD performance is almost identical between the 2 headsets. But if I use Airlink (which is only in Quest2), I could yield another 10-15 sweet fps. This also means Im using all the same settings in DCS. VD can use both OpenVR or Oculus runtime, which I tried both, with Both Quest and Pico, and the result is the same. I still wonder how I can achieve Airlink performance with VD or pico’s software, because Airlink is Meta compatible only. I dont have any issue with latency… (yet).. my current issue is fps. My hypothesis was, Airlink render lower resolution than VD. But when I downsample VD to get to Airlink fps performance, I almost have to sacrifice everything. Visually, Airlink is just much better, sharper and smoother, with more fps. Or its is just how dcs is more optimized with Oculus? p.s. i finally decided to give Pico a go. Nailed it at $339… which I thought a good deal for me.

Since you own and are playing with both Q2 and P4, would you mind sharing here, considering with a similar resolution and bitrate, how does the fps compared between the two headsets? How Do they differ in term of performance? what will be the best method of connection used in the current state? You have mentioned before that P4 PCVR is still need some improvement. How does this translated in term of fps? Thanks a lot. This will help me decide whether or not to replace my Q2.

Guys, I’m from Q2 user here (driven by 3080 10G) and is in a crossroad whether I should purchase P4 or wait for Q3. (Qpro is definetely a big NoNo - not because its price, but because the features I have to pay that I won’t use - facetracking, camera controllers, etc). I’m using standalone DCS, and in Q2, the VD fps is always like 10-15fps worse than the native Quest Airlink (both wireless method). This make me worry that in P4, as of today, the VD is the better solution for PCVR (given the compression artifacts exist in the native P4 pcvr). Because if they do, it means I have to deal with lower fps if I adopt P4. So, May I ask for VD user of P4, do you see a different fps performance between VD and the native method?. I’m also wondering whether my worse VD fps in Q2 was due to the standalone DCS or anything else? (My VD resulting like 42fps compared to 55fps in F16 training mission 5 - my testbed). thanks for any suggestions or shared views.