Cytarabine

I’ve used the HP G2 (and the G1 before it) and the PSVR2 and I would say; - Comfort - the G2 is a bit heavier on the face but sits on the head better than the PSVR2, so both have pros and cons, with the globular cluster though the PSVR2 is super comfortable and being light is a big plus - Colours - no doubt better on the PSVR2, OLED is just so much better than LCD when it comes to colour and contrast - Resolution - here the G2 has the PSVR2 beat. The G2 has a higher resolution display and that display is full RGB stripe so things are sharper. Both suffer from having older fresnel lens designs so have relatively narrow sweet spots. - Depth perception - is probably a bit better on the PSVR2 - Performance - now this is a tough one. Because you can run the G2 at 60Hz, and you don’t need to supersample as much without foveated rendering the G2 has better performance. You simply don’t need to pump as many pixels as quickly to get a similarly sharp image. However with dynamic foveated rendering that performance gap can be bridged and overcome. Which is better? Some will say the G2, particularly if sharp image is the priority, for others though the colours and DFR on the PSVR2 will win out.

If you’re in the sweet spot I find that the loss of sharpness is pretty minimal looking around the cockpit. Like if I’m scanning instruments I don’t really notice it.

I was blown away by the F-14 cockpit at that resolution. Everything is really crisp, the dials all comfortably readable and by using DFR and the transformer model DLSS on performance with a 4090 it runs almost locked at 90 fps (usually if it drops it’s CPU and that’s despite running a 9800X3D and 64gb of RAM). Also @Qcumber if you find things look good at the sweet spot but struggle to keep it there consider getting the globular cluster head strap for the headset. I was struggling to keep it in the sweet spot, now I have the globular cluster setup properly it’s easy to get it there and keep it there.

The magic comes not from any technical wizardry but from how our brains perceive latency. When repeatedly exposed to latency of up to around 150msec our brain adapts and we perceive events such as our motor input on the controls and the visual feedback in the headset as being simultaneous. That however does not make the events simultaneous in reality and means that for things where a delay could be significant (like say oblique gunnery in BFM) the effect is still there even though we don’t perceive it. So when someone says they can’t feel any latency with a standalone headset they are entirely correct, they can’t feel it. That doesn’t mean however it isn’t there.

With the Quest Pro; Comfort is awful unless you get a third party strap, I get a headache after a while. With the pancake lenses you get edge to edge clarity on the QP, as opposed to a sweet spot on the PSVR2 with its older Frenel lenses which makes things less clear outside that spot. The LED panels on the QP while lower resolution are sharper for things like text due to its subpixel arrangement (full RGB stripe) as opposed to the OLED panels on the PSVR2 which uses a pentile arrangement where some pixels share subpixels. On the other hand the PSVR2 has much better contrast, particularly notable on night missions where you either have grey black skies (with local dimming off) or lots of halos (with local dimming on) while on the PSVR2 it’s a true black and just looks spectacular. Other things like looking into the sun or bright clouds are much better on the PSVR2 when they get washed out on the QP. The other big difference is the PSVR2 is providing native display port output while the QP is sending a compressed data stream. Firstly there is an overhead to that compression (even though most graphics cards handle it very well) and there is decompression required on the headset side which eats battery life. The second is that no matter what people say I do notice compression artefacts, particularly on things like the sky. Another factor I noticed is that the stereoscopic vision is better in the PSVR2. It reminds me of when I first put a Rift S on and was blown away by that feeling of being in the cockpit. The Quest Pro feels a lot more like you’re watching the game on a screen to me. Ironically both are helped a lot with a third party strap, the quest pro can be made more comfortable (albeit still not brilliant), and the sweet spot issue on the PSVR2 is helped a lot by having a third party strap so you can get it stable on the sweet spot. I use the Globular Cluster kit on both headsets. The way I would summarise it is that if my absolute 100% priority was having the cockpit as sharp as possible I would go QP over PSVR2. On the other hand if the environments and immersion are the most important thing (which to me is kind of the whole point of VR) the PSVR2 is by far the better of the two now that the performance can be so good. Do a nighttime cat shot in the PSVR2 and you will understand.

A bit of a late reply, but I have both the Quest Pro and the PSVR2. The Quest Pro still has the better edge to edge clarity (those lenses are something else) but in basically every other way the PSVR2 is better for DCS. While I have to suspect the high end headsets will be better; from a value standpoint in DCS having a wired headset with OLED panels and eye tracking support for the price is incredibly good.

I think in part because you have to do a little more to get the most out of the Hornets radar, but if you do that more you get a whole lot more back. The Vipers radar is pretty good with doing nothing (though I hate the way TWS works in it), while the Hornet you have to deal with its quirks a bit.

Not sure if this is a bug or it was some form of damage from over stressing the airframe but after pulling behind a Mirage 2000 in BFM and destroying it with guns (and not as far as I could tell hitting any debris) my F-15E continued to oscillate like it was still in the wake turbulence no matter what control inputs I made. I've included a track file of the incident (including my horrendous BFM skills). Anyone noticed anything similar? Edit: To save having to watch the whole track it is right at the end in the last minute or so. wEIRD.trk

Yeah I have to agree. It just feels amazing. I particularly love how clear the HUD is and the UFC is so good (I am starting to love the old school UFC). Yes there are some issues, and it's far from complete, however it's a great start.

Thanks @mbucchia for your work on this. It is fantastic, running it with my Quest Pro gave me a nice performance boost, and enough that I have gone from 90Hz forced to 45Hz to 72Hz with ASW switched off which is nice. Even over Sinai in a Mudhen with stuff happening all around. Still tweaking the settings a little bit to find the exact right balance, have turned up the render scaling in the center a bit and down in the peripheries (it's so rare that I actually catch the foveated rendering missing). It also makes me feel better about the Quest Pro compared to the upcoming Quest 3 so that's a bonus.

I replaced my warthog throttle with a winwing Orion 2 recently and while it’s a nice upgrade, it doesn’t really compare to the difference the QP makes over the Reverb G2. It might be worth waiting to see what Meta announce at the upcoming event, the Q3 might be most of the feature set for a more reasonable price, particularly as some of the features (like DFR) which might not make it to a consumer level headset don’t work in DCS. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could just restrict mobility no matter how much you move… which would add some nausea so make it a really visceral experience. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the variability of DCS will keep VR a relatively niche area for the foreseeable future. People can post their performance optimizations (speed-of-heat did fantastic work with his guide, which even if not following verbatim did provide useful tips) but ultimately individual users have to decide which trade-offs they find acceptable and what their scenarios are to find their own sweet spot. Some users are entirely multiplayer and fly on Caucuses all the time, and what suits them might be very different to someone who does lots of Liberation campaigns on the Syria map for example. Ultimately DCS (like other flight sims which are similarly cursed) is not designed as a VR title, it's a flat screen title you can play in VR, and so there are always going to be compromises even with the best of hardware. I'd probably rather ED spend their time getting features in to the engine that will help VR users (DLSS/DLAA, Vulkan, ongoing MT work) than spending time on creating a moving feast of VR presets which will ultimately keep nobody happy.

In my experience with keeping resolution set to maximum in the Oculus software with no addition multiplier in OTT and shadows at medium instead of high I can maintain 72Hz the vast majority of the time on any map except Mariana which still kicks me down, which is fine as it is the map I fly least. I’ve found the Turbo option in OpenXR toolkit to help a bit here. This is how I have things set now and I am really happy with it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah night flying is one of the reasons that an OLED based headset would be fantastic. The local dimming is better than muddy grey even with the blooming but I would still love to see a similar headset with OLED panels in it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For me the answer was yes because with the G2 I was always feeling like I was missing out compared to flat screen flying, and with the QP I don’t feel that way anymore. Having blurry vision outside of the sweet spot was for me always a deal breaker and in a way the G2 exacerbated this vs for example the Rift S because it was so sharp dead centre and so blurry out or centre meaning head movement was needed to look at instruments as opposed to just glancing down. Currently all of the headsets on the market are a compromise. If a headset combined DP input of a G2/Aero with Meta’s ASW, the QP lenses, the FoV of the Aero, OLED display of the PSVR2, comfort of the QP and the resolution of the Aero it would be perfect. Right now you just have to choose your compromises and it’s either the best optics, tracking and reprojection (QP) vs uncompressed video, higher resolution and field of view. The other factor is cost. The perfect DCS headset is always going to be expensive because it will always lack the mass market (such that there is in VR) appeal that the stand-alone headsets can offer. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ve found it really comfortable, one thing I did listen to was not over tightening it so I don’t get the forehead discomfort others have reported with it. I find it more comfortable than the Pico 4 (with the facial interface on that being rather uncomfortable). I guess it is kind of a suck it and see. If you find it uncomfortable then trying the head strap idea to improve comfort. It’s actually the first headset since the Rift S that for me I’ve found it comfortable without after market add ons (I use an elite strap on the quest 2, a custom facial interface, strap and weights on the Reverb G2 and custom facial interface on the Pico 4. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So mine arrived and… well I guess I won’t be sending it back to Meta much to my wife’s disgust. Having used the Reverb (original and G2), Rift S, Quest 2 and Pico 4 gives a bit of perspective on this. I never really liked the Quest 2 in DCS, was not sharp enough compared to the Reverb G2. The Reverb G2 is very sharp in that narrow sweet spot but outside that is quite blurry such that you can’t really glance down to read an MFD or instrument you had to move your head. The Pico 4 resolved that issue by being somewhat sharp edge to edge, with a really nice FoV, however even with godlike setting in virtual desktop a few things are apparent vs the Reverb G2. Firstly it is a bit soft across the whole image. Like watching something upscale rather than native resolution. The colours are lacking in dynamic range. Looking in the direction of the sun things get washed out heavily. It’s like watching TV on a cheap 4K panel. Then the Quest Pro. Vs the Reverb it is not quite as sharp dead centre, but it is almost as sharp across the whole FoV which is better than the Reverb G2 and similar to the Pico 4. The sharpness is really apparent in things like MFD’s where every letter is readable in much the same way as looking dead on to it in the G2, just it can be that with a glance. Meta also know what they are doing with motion reproduction which cannot be said for WMR headsets, and it is better than in the Pico 4. The thing that stands out above all are the colours. It is night and day compared to the Pico 4, like looking at a good quality TV in comparison. I also kind of like the open bottom. I can look down onto my HOTAS and MFD buttons to see what I am pressing, and as I have them in positions that are pretty good for the F-18 cockpit it is kind of an AR experience. So right now I’d say the Quest Pro is the best headset I own for DCS. The Reverb G2 is being packed away, and the Pico 4 well it might make a good backup headset. Could the Varjo Aero or Pimax Crystal be better? Absolutely, am I going to spend $3000 AUD to find out? Not if I plan to stay married. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Similarly waiting for mine to arrive in Australia. After seeing the reviews and contemplating a Varjo Aero I figured not much to lose given if it’s not worth it I can return it. Will be interesting having used the Rift S (which to be honest was a great VR experience in DCS), Quest 2, Reverb, Reverb G2 (both of which are great in the sweet spot but a blurry mess outside it and moving your head to glance at instruments just feels wrong) and Pico 4 (which has OK edge to edge clarity but has some issues particularly with dynamic range and text reproduction). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you want a USAF jet that can sling HARMS get a Viper. It’s what they use to do it, and it has the HTS to do the job properly. RAZBAM are already adding stuff from across the service life of the mudhen with the USAF and that is great. There’s a lot of varied ordinance to carry, and even if you can’t be a HARM shooter there’s more than one way to nail a SAM site.

I understand this entirely. I used to be a 100% VR flyer in DCS (to the point where I didn't even have a monitor facing my setup) however I have recently moved to being perhaps 80% flat screen and 20% VR. For my flat screen flying I use a 49" 5440x1440 panel which I have on a monitor extension arm so it can be quite close to me while I am flying. For me I found increasingly I was spending more time playing with settings when something went too way one way or the other (either putting things too low and struggling to read MFD's or hitting some stuttering mess point) than I was flying and enjoying my time. It's not like my setup is underpowered either (Ryzen 5800X3D, RTX 3080 (though that VRAM limitation ), 32GB of RAM) Over time I've found the 3D illusion of VR to be less convincing (I remember when I first put a VR headset on thinking "wow", now not so much) and with the super ultrawide display my whole FOV is occupied by display rather than restricted view in VR (with a Reverb G2, which I know isn't the best FOV). I've also come to appreciate the comfort of not having a pair of screens plastered to the front of my head for extended periods of time. The main thing I miss is the 1:1 head movements which is great particularly for HMD's, but I've gotten better at using headtracking in 2D. Each way is trade-offs, and right now the trade-offs for using VR just aren't worth it for me, however I totally get why for some it would be and for a long time it was for me.

So by that we can take it there has been no progress worth sharing in 4 months?

I know it will. Which is kind of sad given how long we have been waiting for a completed Hornet. At this stage it seems complete will be perhaps ACLS and a trailer on YouTube to say “out of early access” and then maybe a couple of features trickling in if we are lucky over the next couple of years.

So we’ve had 6 mini-updates on the Viper this year (which is great) but nothing on the Hornet since November. Is it possible we can get an update on what work is happening on the Hornet? When we might see the ACLS implementation?

Yes though even the RAAF default liveries are similarly rusty (and those jets never see the decks of an aircraft carrier). Right now the default Hornet liveries are kind of like when someone is making a plastic model and they go overboard with the weathering effects.