mpdugas

Sorry to hear this; I just don't want to fly VR in something looking like the Republican Guard made a mess of. I can only say this decision makes the shabby cat a non-purchase.

They don''t call it "Dell Hell" for nothing; it's not a joke. Read their tech support forums before you spend your money. Dell destroyed them. Caveat emptor when it comes to Alienware. I'll not put another penny in their wretched pockets again.

https://www.amazon.com/HP-Reverb-Virtual-Reality-Headset/product-reviews/B07R768KJP/ref=cm_cr_unknown?filterByStar=one_star&pageNumber=1 Read the reviews; that's where I start with any product. I'm always curious about how many 1 and 2 star reviews show up, and why. If I can get past that as not applicable to my usage, I'm in. Hp Reverb is sitting at 40% 1 + 2 star reviews.

Fantastic scheme; the quality of construction and material choices is pretty extreme. That's definitely a budget-buster.

I sent my vision Rx to https://vr-lens-lab.com/ and they analyzed which distance I should prescribe for, since I wear progressives. The inserts move easily from HMD to HMD (Vive pattern) and make the experience very worth the cost and wait; as Gunner said, shifting back to outside, it's hard to read again until I put glasses back on. Nonetheless, having the HMD without also wearing glasses is great. I highly recommend them.

I'm running the Pro and a 1080ti now, with really good results. So, not quite what you asked for. My Pro has high enough HMD screen resolution to read small text now, which is very important in simulators. However, the Cosmos has one really strong attribute, and that is, it has higher resolution HMD screens; if you have a GPU(s) strong enough to push them. Be aware that it also requires a LOT of ambient light to maintain inside-out tracking, as do most such HMDs. Eventually, it will have the ability to run with base-station tracking, which is far better for positional support. Then you can run it in more normal room lighting. That's why I'm waiting to shift from Pro. Read the reviews for additional info. All good VR is pricey; like PC hardware generally, last generation pricing is better, but VR requires good, bleeding-edge gen HMD screen resolution to be effective, unless you are playing made-for-VR action games, which require very little reading. I'm going for Cosmos, wireless headset, Valve Index finger trackers, and two good overclocked 2080tis (like the EVGA 11G-P4-2589-KR) in SLI, so I will be ready when VR Works and LiquidVR become available. In my personal experience, HTC and Valve have high-quality gear and good support. Oculus has Zuck.

There are some 3D paint software programs, e.g Z-Brush, that will let you unwrap an object's texture, provided that you can obtain the object in an importable format: https://www.slant.co/topics/8643/~3d-texture-painting-softwares I didn't buy the MiG-19, so I can't explore your installation folder to see if you can extract it for painting. Try that out if Razbam won't support you.

This bug has been around since 2011.

Here's one to watch while we wait... If this module lives up to this video, then respect!

"Signal Strength"

I watched the mission through, and I thought the objective was to first use both radar antennas to track and shoot the bomber, then a switch to the track-only radar antenna, to find the low-flying fighter target, using the brilliant Soviet engineering. I saw what I expected for the bomber, but I never saw the track-only radar in action; it seemed to be just a WAG shoot-fest, visual only, with no tracking radar in sight. Where was the track-only radar imagery? Did I miss it? The radar simply appeared to be "off" the whole time of the fighter engagement. A simple time track place showing the tracking antenna in action would be great: thanks!! :thumbup:

MiG-21 textures Yes, please, some cockpit textures that give the users a choice, at least, between the ridden-hard-and-put-away-wet crowd and something more reminiscent of what a normal aircraft working environment, maintained by people who cared about the aircraft, might see. From what I've seen of some other new, up-and-coming aircraft modules, that ultra-worn beater look will keep my pennies in my pockets. I'm not buying something that looks so tatty and damaged. Detailed flight operations and complex aircraft systems are nice but please don't put them into an aircraft cockpit that you wouldn't want to sit down in. It would be so nice if a module-maker didn't force their customers into just one look; user choice is nice. :thumbup: p.s. bug fixes are nice, too; the MiG-21 is such a nice module.

What are your VR frame-rates that make for a "fine" experience (i.e. what settings give what performance)?

If it were true, yes, it would be; not all Grumman F-14s were beaters.