dax

It's officially stated that Rift S is “Best for users between 61.5 and 65.5mm IPD" I'm about 65 and, provided it is positioned correctly, it's sharp except along the edges of the fov.

Wags said 2 days ago: "2.5.5 will not be this week, but not too much longer now." So I doubt it's for today.

It depends on your hardware., but with a good CPU/GPU, and MSAA 2X enabled, I would not go above PD=1.2 Don't care about this resolution when in VR Yes it shows on the monitor. And the additional work for the GPU is negligible as it's the same image as the one displayed in the headset, so it's computed only once. I don't think it is possible, and wouldn't recommend to do so anyway as it will make you sick like hell! :) Try to move your head while the VR zoom is enabled, you'll quickly understand it's a bad idea. ;)

I agree... S is really much much better than CV1 from an image quality point of view. And it's obvious if you put back your CV1 after an hour with the S. :) Now for sure it's still not perfect, but good enough to fully enjoy DCS, which was not really the case with my CV1.

Never tried the O+ myself, but there seems to be a consensus now among guys having tested both O+ and Rift S, that the S sharpness and clarity is much better. Now, on paper, the Index might be even better... I'm really curious. Future will tell. But it's more than twice the price of an S. Unlike what I did for the S, I think I'll wait for first true reviews in DCS before ordering.

Spent again one hour with the S tonight and definitely, the more I use it, the more I love it. My Rift CV1 will now get back to its box. I'm now curious to see how the Index will work... On paper, it looks like the main competitor of the Rift S and might be slightly better. Future will tell. But the Reverb is probably a no go for demanding games like DCS. First, because the significantly higher resolution will have a performance cost. Then because the Rift S just prove that not only resolution matters. Display type and lens quality have a huge impact. Finally, Reverb is more business oriented, while Index is clearly made for gamers. Like Oculus, Valve guys know probably what they're doing.

So far, no noticeable difference for me.

No. They're embedded into the halo, just above ears. But there's a jack to connect any other earplugs.

Don't do that! It took me a few days with short sessions before getting used to the CV1. Now I can fly hours without any issue except an angry wife :)

Different, but actually very similar. Main difference is the location of the protective plastic ring. In hand they feel the same.

I'm 65, and it's ok when positioning correctly the headset. Just slightly more blurry along the left/right edges of the Fov.

Same for me. I tightened a bit more and put the lenses as close as possible to my eyes and it helped slightly enlarging the sweet spot.

I'm then not the only one noticing this...

According to Facebook's declarations, the fixed lens are perfect for 63.5mm IPD, and should be almost perfect for the 61.5 - 65.5 range. Then quality degrades slowly as you're getting farther outside that range. How bad is the degradation... no idea.

Last time I quickly checked I measured my IPD around 65mm... so not so far from optimum for Rift S. But I didn't have a lot of time yet to play with headset position etc. Will re-measure IPD asap and do further testing tonight.

As mentioned earlier above, I have a similar feeling about sweet spot size. What I noticed is that looking off-center at around 50% the distance towards FOV edge, the picture gets quite blurry. So e.g. in the F18, when looking straight at the hud, if I move my eyes towards an MFD, it's not tack sharp, and I have to slightly turn my head toward it to get it sharp. I haven't yet played with IPD setting, but I don't think it will help a lot. That said, this issue might be also present in CV1 but less noticeable as the picture was everywhere much less sharp. And I don't want to reconnect my CV1 to double check. :) But overall, I'm more than happy with the improved picture quality.

There might be an honeymoon effect to some extent, but it's a fact that picture is definitely much sharper and gauges much more readable than in CV1. This is probably mainly thanks to the subpixel architecture which is classical RGB vs. PenTile for many other headsets. Now after testing a bit more I noticed that this seems only true for the central part of the image. Looking off center at around 50% of the distance to the edge, the sharpness seems to degrade significantly. Probably because of the lenses. Maybe this was also the case with CV1 but less noticeable because the overall sharpness was much lower. I don't know if I'm the only one noticing this...

Same for me :)

I can confirm. Visual quality is much better and overall picture is much clearer, but I still can't live without msaa 2x. Increasing PD doesn't help that much. So I keep msaa, with PD at 1.2 - 1.3 (on a GeF 1080)

Got mine today and gave it a try with the Hornet. First impressions are: - Definitely much sharper and less SDE. - More comfortable - Comparable FOV, but the edges look a little more blurry. I might have to try optimizing headset positioning and/or ipd - Sound is really crap... but I don't really care as I can anyway use my 5.1 speakers or some earplugs - Tracking is flawless so far So far I just tried same graphics settings as with my CV1: msaa 2x and PD 1.2. Cockpit is definitely more readable, although I still need to zoom in some cases. So still not 100% clear. For me, msaa 2x is still a must. Without it, I still get shimering everywhere. It's running at almost steady 40fps everywhere, except when looking at the sky where it goes to 80fps. Conclusion: So far happy with the purchase. I'm quite impressed by the significant improvement over the CV1, although raw specs (resolution) doesn't look that much higher.

+1... I'd like to see VR performance improvement, but I'm not sure it is fully possible without significant hardware evolution (GPU...). In the meantime, I play VR just for fun, and non-VR when I want to play missions the best I can. Therefore, I preordered both F18 and Persian Gulf map :)

I don't think many people are interested in watching youtube while playing DCS... [emoji848] I can probably understand it's fun to try just once, but appart from that... Never tried myself.

:) Anyway... I haven't checked by myself but it was stated before that DCS uses 7-9Gb of RAM. Ok, that should be sufficient to know that you then need more than 8Gb. Because if the application needs even just a tiny bit more RAM than what is available, you'll get some swapping and hence stuttering. Knowing that the OS and other background services are also using RAM... that's clear. No one should buy less than 16Gb if planning to play DCS.

All this is still true. Spotting target is possible, but for sure more difficult than on a screen. And yes, most instruments are difficult to read. This can indeed be improved by increasing pixel density, but there is no miracle and it's still difficult. Also, you should have a very high end computer. So, VR in DCS is very far from perfect. But for sure the immersion is just amazing.

For sure it's not bad. The problem just comes from the fact that DS is needed to have a good looking environment (especially trees), but then MSAA is not an option in VR as this kills FPS. And we're then stuck with ugly shimerings everywhere...