diego999

B. And for a silly reason: I love B liveries.

Only one: disk space. Release and openbeta installs will mantain their files in separate folders, so no problems on that front. YOU will be the problem, as you'll probably forget in which one you have a mod, a particular mission, or some config changed. I have 3 installs: Release, Openbeta with a ton of mods to play alone, and Openbeta vanilla for multiplayer. Zero issues.

I have 64GB of RAM but I'm suffering from this also.

It is for me. I live in a thirld world country. Thanks for the life lesson though.

What is the problem? 1 - Install DCS Standalone version 2 - Connect your Quest to your PC through your preferred method (cable or Airlink) 3 - Launch DCS And there you go.

This. With the new spotting system in VR I can only see darks blobs that I can't even notice which way they're going. Do we really need 50GB of high resolution liveries for them?

Is Link Sharpening enabled on ODT? Mine once turned off randomly after an update and I felt like I was a 80 year old who forgot his glasses.

I don't have a Quest 3, but I've been using my Quest 2 with a Kiwi Design USB-C cable for almost a year, zero problems. It actually charges the headset when plugged in a regular USB-C port of my PC. I play in 2-3 hour sessions and the battery never goes below 95%. Bear in mind the Quest 3 seems to be more power hungry that the 2, specially when using higher refresh rates.

Do you have another overlay running? For me OpenXR menu doesn't appear if I'm using Oculys Tray Tool or Virtual Desktop overlays.

Thing is the MiG-21 doesn't look very good in VR. It's an older module and its age is showing. Aside from that, it's fun to fly and it has an unique and particular character.

Can I suggest the Skyhawk mod? It looks amazing in VR, it's free and it has some vibe I don't find in any other module, even paid ones.

Don't buy a 4060ti. At high resolutions like the 4k you want, the 4060ti is effectively equal or even worse than a 3060ti. Those 16GB of VRAM are useless as you'll never fill them considering the modest graphic chip capabilities and the pathetic 128bits memory bus (just for comparison, the previous generation 3060ti has 256bits). See here: If you want a 4xxx card, get (at least) a 4070 as the guy above is suggesting.

Tried 90/45 but I almost spent the whole time at 45 with reprojection activated. 72/36 is way better for me as I have 72 all the time except when on the ground or above a city. 120 is waaaay too much for my rig but I imagine it must be amazing.

Any updates on Steam? I'd like to buy the Phantom before my country explodes on the 22th.

4xxx series are worth it if you can get one at good price, but only 4070 or higher. Stay away from the 4060 or 4060ti, they're garbage. At higher resolutions the equivalent previous generation cards (3060 and 3060ti) are actually FASTER on several tests. Watch this:

I'm out of ideas. I can only mention a couple of benchmarking tools that might help you locate where the bottleneck Is. fpsVR - I've used it back when I played IL2. Very nice, lots of data. Available on steam. OpenVR benchmark - never used it but it comes recommended and it's free. On Steam too.

There are some tricks you can try, but they come at the expense of visual quality. - If you're struggling with VRAM, set Terrain Textures to low. - Reduce PD a bit. I think 1.5 is too much, too many pixels to render. If you can read mfds and the HUD with 1.4 or 1.3, don't go any higher ( I play at 1.25). - Are you using motion reprojection (or whatever name Pimax uses for it)? It can make the game playable, but there's going to be artifacts with fast moving objects or rapid head movement. In nvidia control panel, set "Low Latency Mode" to Off, and "Virtual Reality Pre-rendered frames" to 1. Then find the option to activate Motion Reprojection in Pimax software. - There's a program called OpenXR Toolkit. I don't know if it works with your headset, but it has the option to activate foveated rendering. This renders only the center at full resolution and the edges at lower resolution. For me, this brings a 3-5% better performance. - Reduced fov. This option is the worse when it comes down to visuals, but it is what made DCS playable in VR for me back then when I struggled with a regular 2060. What this does is simply cutting the edges. You lose immersion but can gain a lot of performance. It depends on the headset obviously, but in my case with 0.90 (90% of the total size of the image, you're cutting 10% of the most external pixels) I can't even see the edges, and that's 10% less pixels your GPU has to render all the time. Once you start to see the black square limiting your view, you've gone too far. Yes, it's horrendous for immersion, but it's worth to try if you're on the edge of playability, as it seems to be your case.

Nothing in VR. I leave it on for playing in 2d sometimes.

Your GPU won't let you reach the max possibilities of your headset I'm afraid. But, with some compromises I think you can reach acceptable visual quality with decent fps. These are my DCS settings, running with 125% resolution from Oculus software. 3060ti - Quest 2.

Depends on where you're setting it: 1.0 in the Pimax software? Yes I think that's the native resolution (anyone with a Pimax correct me please) 1.0 in DCS? No, that's the multiplier applied to the resolution that's being fed to the game. If you've changed it in Pimax Software or SteamVR, that's not native resolution. It depends on those settings. First is the resolution you set in Pimax That resolution is modified by your SteamVR settings Then it is modified again by DCS Pixel Density setting DCS Pixel Density is just the final layer of the resolution's cake, so to speak. Sorry if I can't explain myself in a more clear way. In my case I leave DCS PD at 1.0. I've had better results changing the resolution in the first layer only: Oculus software.

Yes. It is possible to adjust headset resolution. The software of your headset should let you do it. You can change it too in SteamVR options and in DCS itself. The option you're looking for within DCS is "Pixel Density". For example, 1.0 is "normal" resolution (not quite, but more on that later). 1.2 means 20% more pixels, 1.5 means 50% more pixels, and so on. Lower than 1 means downsampling and it should be avoided as it's going to look bad. The golden rule for this is to change resolution / pixel density in one place only, as these settings multiply each other and it can get complicated very fast. Plus, SteamVR measures it differently, in a "per eye" basis, so for example, setting 1.2 PD in DCS equals 144% resolution in SteamVR settings (1.2x1.2). Final resolution presented before your eyes is: headset's software configured resolution * steamVR resolution * DCS pixel density So, again, it's better to change only one of these and leave the others at 100% or 1.0. I can't answer your second question as I use DCS standalone with OpenXR Toolkit (and I'm loving it). Which headset are you using? If you have a Quest I can show you how to find the settings.

How can the G2 offer better picture quality while having virtually the same resolution as the Quest 3? Did you test the Quest 3 connected to the PC or standalone? Wifi or cable? Those conditions can affect picture quality. I agree eye tracking is amazing, but that comes at twice the price tag. Plus the high end rig you need to drive all those pixels.

Enjoy!

Quest 3. Reasonable price, good specs, and it's just brand new, so you're getting support and improvements for at least a couple of years. Doesn't require base stations. No eye tracking though, but if you want that you're looking at $1000 or more.

After more testing, I think I found the best settings for my hardware. QVFR didn't work for my older CPU, so I went back to the OpenXR's Toolkit fixed foveated. Then I switched from Oculus ASW to Turbo Mode in OpenXR Toolkit, then turned on DLSS in quality mode with sharpening slider to max (1). This combination gave me better performance with slightly better visuals. Nothing amazing, but it was noticeable better. I remember testing Turbo Mode some months ago and discarding it as the artifacts were bad. I don't know if it got better or my perception is wrong, but now the visuals seemed better and the artifacts were not worse than the ones you see with Oculus ASW. PROS: - Slightly better performance - Slightly better visuals in general - Almost no terrain stuttering (this is the most important for me) - No more shimmering CONS: - some minimal but annoying ghosting. - no way to measure frametimes as Turbo Mode ruins benchmarking tools I will play with these settings for a while see how they perform in complex missions with a lot of units, but I think I now have headroom to crank pixel density a bit more, from 1.15 to 1.25 perhaps. i5 10400F, 3060ti, 64GB RAM, Quest 2.