streakeagle

The MCG Pro is pretty much the equal or superior to any other grip unless you are a metal fanatic. The Ultimate is better than the Pro is several ways beyond the metal grip. So if you can afford it and prefer metal, the Ultimate is the perfect choice. I happen to prefer plastic that matches the quality of real grips, which are also plastic. The MCG Pro plastic feels really nice to me. The plastic feel was not a reason for me to get the Ultimate. Despite not being a fan of metal, the Ultimate feels as nice as the Pro, but also has the weight that real stick grips have as well as even higher quality switches and optional axis/hat switch modules. It is the combination of improved switch options, switch quality/feel, and the comfortable rubberized texture on the side of the grip that make the Ultimate stand out from the pro. So, while I have no preference for the feel of metal, the metal gives the Ultimate a higher, more realistic weight while using a rubberized panel to help overcome my dislike of the unrealistic metal feeling. Given that I own both, my only reason to switch back to the Pro after getting the Ultimate is for the use of the analog sticks as 8-way hats in some games that require this instead of the 4-way hat modules I have installed on the Ultimate. I literally get the best of both worlds with only a small firmware update and recalibration required to swap grips back and forth as needed.

I haven't used LeapMotion with the Quest 2, but since the Quest 2, but I have used the Quest 2 and Rift S with DCS World. The Quest 2 uses the same Oculus software as the Rift S, so the procedure for using LeapMotion with the Quest 2 should be the same for the Rift S. I had LeapMotion working as well as it could with my hardware setup and Rift S. The key is that you have to force SteamVR when running DCS. You should be able to search the forums on several ways to achieve this, which basically comes down to starting DCS World with a command line option to force SteamVR or using a 3rd party tool that will automatically force SteamVR through a graphical interface that lets you select that option. LeapMotion has its own software that you have to get working with SteamVR per their directions. Then you need to install other free software that helps integrate LeapMotion into SteamVR controllers. I don't remember all the details, but you should be able to find the information you need in these forum posts, as I once did before giving up on LeapMotion as too high of a performance cost and too low of accuracy and reliability. It looked cool when it worked, but the tracking camera needs the hands to be in a certain spot at certain angles to track them effectively. I found that when I reached down low or too far left or too far right, it was hard to activate the desired control but easy to accidently activate a nearby control such as canopy jettison. If there were more cameras to cross correlate the positions and gestures of hands and I had a PC strong enough to run LeapMotion and supporting software without dropping DCS performance, it could work exceptionally well. It turns out the Point Ctrl you can buy through these forums provides me with something much closer to what I hoped to get from LeapMotion: hand tracking with mouse like precision and accuracy. I made the mistake of waiting for the Point Ctrl V2 when I could have been using V1 for so much longer. Point Ctrl has the performance cost of a USB mouse: virtually none. Once calibrated, it is almost as accurate and fast as a mouse. Maybe some day hand tracking will advance enough to make Point Ctrl obsolete, but until then Point Ctrl is my go to device for operating cockpit controls with minimal effort, performance penalty, speed, and precision. But since you have LeapMotion, get it working in SteamVR, then get DCS World to force SteamVR when starting up and enjoy a glimpse of what hand tracking is going to bring to VR. When it works correctly, it is the ultimate in immersion to just use your hands.

The MCG Ultimate is pretty much the perfect grip for DCS World. I swapped out both analog axes for the alternative 4-way/center depress hat switches, which better suites my needs for DCS World. But sometimes I play other games as well which may need analog axes and/or 8-way POV hats. So, I have created an MCG Pro profile that turns both analog sticks into 8-way POV hats with center depress and simultaneously provides X/Y axes. This provides maximum flexibility for adapting to many games.

I have both the WinWing and the VKB Gunfighter (both of my Gunfighters are Mk2s with full Mk3 upgrades). The WinWing has a dual cam system that is not that much different from the Warthog, and therefore is less than perfect in its feel near the center. The WinWing is way better than the Warthog, but you can definitely feel the transition across the center. The VKB has a smooth cam for aviators: no hard detent. If you use max springs (2 x #40), I can feel the center just a little bit. But with single #50 springs, it is butter smooth across the center with no feeling of a detent at all... yet if you slap the stick and let it self-center, it hits dead center almost every single time. I haven't tried the Virpil sticks, but in my experience with the VKB, the best any competing stick can do is match it because I can't think of anything that could improve it in terms of accuracy, precision, and feel. My one complaint with the VKB is the means for swapping grips. The locknut requires an allen wrench and on early versions doesn't have a D shape to keep it from rotating. So it is a minor hassle to swap grips. But the newer grips have a D-shaped hole and a D-shaped lock nut that makes it a little easier to use. My WinWing stick sits in a corner collecting dust while my much older but better VKB remains in service. I used the WinWing stick for about two weeks straight to see how well it worked. I loved the grip. I just couldn't stand the feeling and sound of the cams near the center after being spoiled by the VKB. I prefer the WinWing over the Warthog any day. The WinWing also uses a serial cable similar to what is used in Warthog extensions. I don't really care for that. The VKB connector is superior with no loose cables to twist or break and no real chance of bending/breaking pins. The WinWing also needs a lock screw to keep the stick from slipping. Unlike the VKB, it locks by taking a bite into the mount. I haven't used the lock screw, so I sometimes my WinWing grip and/or extension breaks loose while using it. If you are looking for just a stick and money is no object, I don't think anyone can beat VKB's Gunfighter series right now. But despite some apparent quality control issues in the struggle to meet high demand, WinWing is not a bad choice, just not as good as VKB.

I think the reason it doesn't cause an issue for me is that I grip the throttles from the top/front. The front still slopes a bit in the correct direction so that my knuckles follow a natural angle. The result is only a small misalignment between my arm and hand at the wrist. The simple action of moving the throttle through its entire range causes much greater angles than this grip angle. Anywhere from mid range to idle causes a fairly steep wrist angle, which still does not cause me any discomfort in countless hours of flying. While I almost always prefer 100% accuracy, this is still a non-issue for me. The overall scale and functionality are very close. I am pretty sure I would never have even noticed if I had not seen this post.

Clearly, the angle of the WinWing product is incorrect. The stick grip is also slightly inaccurate in scaling/shape. But I have my Taurus throttle positioned very realistically and would have never noticed the angle problem if this post had not pointed it out. I am sensitive to wrist angle. I work on computers most of the time at work and then come home and play on them. I have to position my keyboard and mouse to prevent repetitive motion / carpal tunnel injuries. The Taurus does not bother my wrist at all. I can see the angle my wrist has to contort to rest on both grips, but my hand rests naturally on both grips without feeling uncomfortable.

1. I am presently not interested in an F-35 throttle at all. But I am interested in a modular throttle that can quickly/easily accommodate different throttles. Having a modular throttle will only be useful if several different modules are available. The Warthog stick was modular... but until the Hornet grip was released many years later, it was just a Warthog stick. As I principally fly DCS World and own all of the aircraft and helicopter modules, I would be interested in having accurate throttle grip and lever mechanism options for many if not all DCS World aircraft. But their choice to use a linear throttle as the base limits which aircraft can be accurately simulated. Without a long term plan for what the consumer product will provide and knowing the only version available in the near future will be the F-35, I would not commit to buying their initial product. 2. I like building a dedicated console out of wood and/or aluminum to position the throttle accurately compared to the aircraft throttle it replicates. But desk clamp mounts as a quick and dirty solution over having to build a dedicated console is far more practical. With a fully adjustable desk clamp mount with the right dimensional ranges of motion, I could in theory match the physical position I want without even building a console.

No. That is one of the advantages of the MCG Ultimate. I can use the software to get just about any functionality I want, but in terms of hardware, the MCG Pro was not designed to be modular like the Ultimate.

I have been flying regularly with the "Forgotten", which hosts the Korea and Vietnam PVE servers and flies co-op missions on Sundays alternating between F-86 and A-4/F-5 themes.

Simply awesome! I would love to have a dedicated F-86 cockpit. I fly it it quite a bit.

I found a use for my MCG Pro. I want to keep the ultimate set up as-is: with no analog axis. But I need an 8-way POV hat for another application, so I need to reprogram my MCG Pro to provide that functionality so that I don't have to put one of the analog axes back in. Are there any real aircraft grips that use an 8-way switch? My experience is that they only use 4-way switches with guides to lock out any other direction. What I should do is put the analog axis back in the cursor control to the left on the Ultimate, then program it to be an 8-way with center depress and analog axis at the same time. But I love the feel of the 4-way switch too much.

Someday I am going to get the FSSB and F16 grip. My collection of controllers would not be complete without it. However it is a luxury, principally because I rarely fly the F-16. The F-35 throttle is a monster. I have not interest in the F-35, but if the throttle will support other types, I am interested in it.

That is what I did with my MCG Pro. But I like the feel of the dedicated switches over using the analogue sticks, particularly when using trim where the solid click and strong spring back to center is very useful.

My original settings are in-game pd of 1.0 and SteamVR at 48% (very close to native resolution). Did an experiment with in-game pd of 0.5 and varied the Steam level. I didn't really see any performance or quality gains compared to using pd of 1.0 and various steam levels. I had MSAA off the other day for a specific mission that needed every fps I could give it. As soon as I stopped playing that mission, I turned it back on. The shimmering textures and aliasing bother me too much to not have some MSAA.

Pixel density was never cost effective for me. After experimenting with everyone else's setting suggestions, I left my PD at 1.0 and run MSAAx2. The cost of MSAA is worth it to me because it reduces shimmering terrain effects. I only wish I could run MSAAx4 and still have solid frame rates. It has never occurred to me to try PD 0.5. If I like 1.0 better than 1.4 why not 0.5 better than 1.0, presuming the Steam setting cancels out the loss in quality. My replacement G2 just arrived today. Time to try this out.

PointCtrl replaces the mouse for using the cursor. The key is that you calibrate its horizontal and vertical limits to roughly match the movement of you hands so that your finger will be roughly in the same place in reality that the cursor is in the sim to give the illusion of touching the controls. Solutions using the VR controllers and hand tracking (Leap Motion is the form that I own) provide both a 3d capability, such as using your finger to push a button or flip a lever, and a 2d capability in the form of a "laser" beam that shoots out from your finger. The virtual hands have proven to be too clumsy for me. They are always there and often toggle or push something accidently, or won't quite stay on the control in the correct way and therefore leave me struggling to operate a control for precious seconds in dogfight. The worst case for me is that there always seems to be an emergency canopy release handle near a control I frequently need to use. Sooner or later, I lose my canopy in mid flight. When I use a mouse, I have absolute precision. I can quickly and easily operate the desired control without accidently operating some other control. The problem with the mouse is you need to have a hand free to reach over to wherever the mouse is located. I keep the mouse on my right, so I a have to let go of the stick, or take control of the stick with my off hand while using the mouse. Sometimes, that has results as bad as the VR hands blowing off the canopy: such as collisions while flying low or in formation. PointCtrl is almost the perfect compromise. You get speed and precision comparable to the mouse, but can use either hand at will in a very immersive way in that the cursor seems to almost perfectly mimic the location of your fingertip. I say almost perfect because it has two limitations: Battery life and sensitivity to sunlight (like TrackIR). Brand new, the batteries charge quick and last a long time. I don't know how well they hold up over the long haul. I went with the magnetic charging cable connectors because my charging connectors always fail on my cell phones from daily use no matter what brand of phone or type of USB port. I didn't know it, but I had been put near the beginning of the original point control buyers list. I could have had V1 a long time ago! But when I finally got around to committing to V1, I saw information on V2 development and decided to wait. I probably should have bought V1 right away and then went on the V2 list, too. Because I would rather have had this control a whole lot sooner! I can already use if fairly well after just one night. It will only get better as it becomes more reflexive. This is pretty much a must have for me now!

Having followed PointCtrl from the start, I have read so many of the comments/reviews. There's really nothing I can say about PointCtrl that hasn't already been said. So, I will just confirm some of the things many others have said. PointCtrl V2 does not disappoint. I have leap motion. I have tried using VR controllers. I always fall back to using the mouse and muscle memory with real-world controls. Out of the box, without any calibration, I was able to try this out and it worked great. I struggled a bit follow the voice assist, but once I figured out the exact sequence of events necessary to begin, I was able to blow through the calibration. Compared to leap motion: what makes all the difference are the little buttons. Leap motion tracks the position of your hand fairly accurately, but depending on where you are looking and how you are reaching for a control, it has trouble recognizing gestures. In fact, just making the gesture can create movement that causes you to touch a different control. Leap motion also causes a performance hit. PointCtrl has the overhead and precision of a mouse. The ultimate test I use to judge virtual hand controllers is turning on the ejection seat in the F-14. Because the switch is above and behind you, you have to look directly to the rear at that top of the seat's headrest. With the mouse, it can be difficult. With leap motion, it can be very difficult. If I try to use my left hand while turning my head to the right, PointCtrl has trouble tracking hit. The left hand can do it, but it is a little jumpy. But if I use my right hand, I can hit the ejection seat arm switch quickly and easily. The only way to do it faster is to map it to a physical switch that is easy to reach and identify. I think point control ranks up there with VR and the vibrating seat pad. You may not need VR, a seat pad, or pointctrl to play DCS, but if you have the money to afford it, I wouldn't fly without it.

Just got mine in the mail today! Hopefully I can get it set up and working tonight.

I have both. Hands down the G2 is better for DCS. But, the Quest 2 is surprisingly good. My biggest problem with the G2 is that it started failing and I had to send it off for warranty replacement. The estimated replacement date of March 12 has come and gone. Supply is low, demand is high (like everything else for PCs these days). The G2 is great if it is available and works correctly. But I am still waiting for a replacement to prove it can do the job over the long haul. One aspect I don't like about the G2 is having to run WMR and SteamVR. The Oculus software is better in almost every way, especially in stability, performance overhead, and ease of use. When I shipped off my G2 a month and a half ago, I tried using the Quest 2 in its place. Once I sorted out the software settings, I ended up with image quality far superior to my other alternatives, my old Rift S and Rift CV1. It is still clearly inferior to the G2 as can be seen when I am reading cockpit gauges/labels. But it still looked really good. However, the link kicked me out of DCS every now and then and the only way to fix it was to restart DCS. I think a software/firmware patch fixed that. But the biggest problem I had is that if I played long enough or didn't make sure it wasl 100% charged before I started playing, I would end up killing the battery and having to stop playing DCS. Some nights and on weekends, I may have the chance to play for quite some time and the Quest 2 drains the battery faster than it charges when in use. I finally got tired of it and went back to the Rift S while I am still waiting for my new G2. If you can only afford one or the other, the Quest 2 is cheaper and dual-role. Although the cost of the Quest is more than it looks if you get a good head strap, link cable, case, and the extra battery pack. I like some of the Quest 2 games and being able to play them in the middle of the room with no cord is great. If I was going to use it this way all the time, I would get the extra battery pack. Though killing the battery is a sign I have been gaming too long and should take a break. But if you are only interested in DCS World and can find a G2 in stock, it is the way to go. If you can afford both, get both: the Quest 2 is a great standalone headset, but can act as a backup PC headset while the G2 gives you the best possible DCS experience. I know the Facebook account requirement for Oculus is a deal-killer for some people. I already had a facebook account, but only linked it to the Oculus software when I was forced to. I can't escape the prying eyes of big tech anyway and I wanted the full functionality supported by Oculus software, so I can live with the Facebook account being linked.

DCS has a problem with damage control modeling in general, but some aircraft are worse than others. When someone has flown a MiG well and "destroyed" a Viggen in multiplayer, but the Viggen keeps going despite visually showing catastrophic damage, it is very frustrating for the MiG pilot.

I love the Viggen, but it is not for everyone. I don't fly it all the time, but when I do, I fly it exclusively for a while to regain proficiency with every weapon and system. Whereas the F-5 is just a supersonic F-86, which was a transonic P-51: I can jump between all of those aircraft and fully employ them with little practice or refresher time. A dedicated sim pit with all the of the Viggen's unique controls and cockpit arrangement would make it a lot more fun to fly. For reference: I don't really like to fly air-to-ground missions. I much prefer WVR ACM. Yet, I still love the Viggen. Of course, as an air-to-air fan, I would rather have the JA-37 or the J-35. But there was no way I was going to pass up the chance to fly the Viggen just because it is the AJS-37 attack variant.

Unless my memory is faulty, I believe it was a firmware update. I now have buttons for both idle detent on and idle detent off and I don't recall having those before.

My v2 is has been shipped. I can't wait to try it out.

While I thoroughly love the improvements offered by the Ultimate, if you already have an MCG Pro, it is still an over indulgence. The new optional hat switches feel great compared to the analog sticks they replace. All of the buttons and levers feel better, too. The weight and feel from the metal body and textured rubber grip are great. But, the MCG Ultimate doesn't really add any functionality. The MCG Pro was already my most versatile grip and I even retrofitted the twist grip. It is not a cost effective upgrade. There is no significant justification for replacing my MCG Pro. But I had bonus overtime money. The cpu and gpu market are so over-inflated right now that I am holding off on what I really need: a new PC with a high end gpu for VR as mine was built in 2014. So I indulged myself with an MCG Ultimate and I don't regret it one bit, but I will not deny that it was an unnecessary purchase that many would see as a waste of money that could have used more wisely.

I love the J-35 and would like to see Heatblur make it a full DCS module with the quality they have put into the AJS-37 and F-14.