Baldrick33

I too suffered badly from my first experience (DK2 with Project Cars) to the extent I was convinced VR probably wasn’t for me. A few days later I tried again for 10 mins or so until I started to feel a bit nauseous. Then I tried again and again extending the time until it didn’t effect me at all, took a couple of weeks as I recall. The important thing is not to try an push through feeling nauseous, it will just get worse and take longer to recover. You have to train your brain to cope with the mismatch in what you can see and feel through the inner ear, the brain believes you are poisoned and wants to make you sick. Some people won’t be able to ever get over the motion sickness but fortunately most can. I still can’t do motion stuff like first person shooters with locomotion but seated stuff is fine.

Like many ideas here a multicrew WW2 trainer has some merit but as mentioned everything comes with an opportunity cost of what else doesn't get done whilst it is designed, developed, tested and supported. Personally I have such a wishlist of WW2 aircraft, assets and scenarios that the concept of spending time on a multicrew trainer would be a negative choice for me. Just my opinion but I really would question whether the numbers who would place it above other WW2 projects is sufficient to justify it. Of course if was such a lucrative project that it could fund additional resource or be picked up by a new third party development team so as not to impact existing projects then great but I really don't think it is.

Another vote for pilot bodies in VR here. Essential in my view and generally excellently done from an immersion perspective.

You could use the mission editor and change the Spitfire to FW190-A8 (and save it with an appropriate name)

You can backup the the controller settings in saved games, config, input, aircraft name folder and copy them back if needed

Sounds like you have the WMR settings at 60hz if you are seeing 30fps. I comfortably get a solid 45 with my G1 for reasonably lightweight missions and the occasional 90 on very lightweight stuff

You need to map a control to recentre the VR display in the UI Layer in controls. Also under options there is a VR tab. You can click “Use Mouse” here which will enable the mouse in VR. Good luck and hope you enjoy your G2

I don’t think it is disingenuous to say DCS in VR is fantastic but I agree there needs to be a caveat in terms of what you can do in DCS with VR. For me with a 8600K and 2080Ti - pretty high end but not the latest tech, there are many single player instant action missions and reasonably lightweight downloaded user missions I can run. I have quite a range of aircraft so more than enough to keep me occupied for the foreseeable future given how much I have to learn with a decent amount of content. I do appreciate though if you are a DCS veteran used to playing complex multiplayer missions VR is likely to struggle performing wise, to the point of being unplayable. It is a tough call as personally I find the experience second to none but players need to invest in VR with their eyes open which hopefully with our experiences we can provide a balanced view.

At 100% SteamVR the G2 is significantly higher resolution than the G1. The lenses are optimised at higher values with the same res screen. It can give some visual benefit over a G1 but at a cost in performance and psychologically running at significantly lower than 100% feels like you are missing out. So it doesn’t surprise me that compared to the G1 some are struggling with G2 performance.

That only works with the use mouse option off, which leaves an HMD cursor visible at all times. Personally I find that annoying preferring to just see it when I want to interact with the cockpit. With use mouse on the comms menu uses a separate (round dot) cursor which requires the mouse to access. I guess it comes down to preferences but I would prefer the HMD cursor to work with the comms menu with mouse on, just as it does with every clickable component.

The married guys on here probably think DCS is a steal!

It can all get a bit subjective, I said package as it isn’t just about performance. The DCS graphics engine just works better for me in terms of visuals, plus the sensation of flying just somehow feels better in VR in DCS than anything else I have tried. The combination works best for me even if performance isn’t the very best. Conversely the latter sim mentioned just never performs well enough to get visuals to a level to compare in my experience.

Yes it is somewhat confusing terminology. The F10 menu is a subset of the comms menu. The F10 branch is customisable by mission builders and is often referred to as the “F10 Menu” but as stated above it is accessed from the comms menu. Press the key assigned to comms menu, then F10 to see the options available.

I have an 8600K and 2080Ti. I have all three sims mentioned above and always find DCS the best package in VR. I have no reason for bias, I have invested in all three, DCS just works for me the best and is the most believable for my little mind. Of course I would love to be able to play any mission and fill the skies and ground with objects but picking and choosing the scenarios that do work in DCS is for me the most immersive experience currently available in VR right now. I still regard VR as a fairly immature technology and accept things as being a bit experimental now.

As you surmise I think you are overestimating the importance of multiplayer on the impact of sales. I believe it is niche. Almost definitely the most hardcore group of players, the most vocal on forums and probably provide some of the best feedback and most demanding in terms of realism. So they certainly deserve ED’s ear, maybe more than simple percentages of customers who play online would suggest but in pure business terms I believe it is a small minority.

I went from O+ to Pimax 5K+ to Reverb G1. Never missed the FOV of the Pimax, the clarity of the Reverb was (is) simply amazing in comparison!

There is an option in settings in the WMR Portal to change input switching. I think it needs to be set to manual from recollection, after that the mouse and keyboard stay on the desktop unless you switch it with win-y. I simply load DCS and the mouse is visible.

It can be the nature of a complex sim with many options and a hugely variable set of PC hardware and operating system settings. I have none of the issues mentioned so it should be fixable although I have Intel rather than AMD. I have only experienced stuttering as described in VR when Windows 10 introduced Hardware Accelerated GPU Scheduling. Turning this off fixed it. Sometimes graphics driver updates have impacted performance, sometimes SteamVR updates there are heaps of variables outside of the developer’s control, not untypical with PC sims. That said I do pick and choose what missions to run in VR as in order to look good there are some compromises to make in terms of mission complexity, which are well worth it in my view. The end results have been worth the investment in getting it set up to find the sweet spot in settings. Better VR performance would be welcomed but there are awesome experiences available right now in this sim in VR which and would highly recommend giving it another go.

Milquetoast was a cartoon character created back in the 1920s, my limited knowledge of French is that milk is lait

I have previously had an Odyssey+ and now have a G1 and the clarity difference is amazing. I run the G1 at 100% which is 2196x2156 so not too much difference to yours. Note that the G2 lenses are optimised in SteamVR to run at higher resolution although the panel is the same resolution, so 100% is something just over the 3000x3000 mark as I recall. I did get a G2 but ended up selling it and keeping the G1 as I couldn't see any real improvement without hurting performance and frankly cranking up the resolution on the G1 was so close. I use speakers so don't care about the audio. Just throwing this out there in case a decent G1 was available at a good price .

I use Joystick Gremlin. It adds the option of adding short and long presses to any button (like the TMS & DMS hats work for the A10 and others) so has the potential to add more button presses to your HOTAS. If you don't want to use VJOY then I can also recommend Joy2Key. In my experience with both the performance impact is negligible. Currently I use both products, Joy2Key allows me to easily recentre the mouse cursor plus I use it to control speaker volume - which is handy when the wife tells me to turn it down mid combat

I think we fly in VR because it is awesome! Of course I would like more performance but I personally find flying in VR in DCS an amazing experience and one I am eternally grateful I have been able to experience in my lifetime. It doesn’t mean I don’t have huge expectations for improvement in what is still a relatively immature technology. I also find the whole immersion aspect fascinating, what works for one is no guarantee for others and I enjoy these discussions even if they can get a bit passionate about opinions. I fly for immersion and would feel if you want to be an ace at DCS you might be better with monitor(s) and trackir for the clarity and speed of looking around in the right hands. That said I couldn’t fly without VR now and the skills required to use trackir expertly in combat are almost definitely beyond me so it isn’t meant as an excuse.

Personally I find a massive difference in VR between simulated motion in a seated vehicle and simulated movement of my body. I have been playing seated sims since the DK2 some seven years ago. It took me several days to get my VR legs and I thought I was sorted. I can handle pretty much anything in a car or plane, huge jumps in rally cars, ridiculous barrel rolls in planes and so on. I have tried multiple times to get into standing VR games but the disconnect between what I feel my body doing and see differently just either kills the immersion or makes me feel ill. It isn't through lack of trying. I couldn't cope with locomotion in HL:Alyx so persevered with transportation but soon got bored - seated games just feel so much more made for VR in my case. Whenever the positional view shifts independently of me moving is a completely different experience from vehicle motion. We see many posts from disappointed people new to VR saying the plane/car moves with me - what is wrong? It is explained that positional tracking is not working and how to fix it their eyes get opened up to VR working correctly. When positional tracking fails mid race/flight it can mess with our brains completely differently than dealing with the vehicular motion. TL:DR In my view the experiences of motion of flying a plane in VR and switching been 3dof and 6dof tracking mid flight are two distinct aspects when it comes to motion sickness.

The first thing I do in any driving sim or flight sim is to ensure that all head movement options like g forces, look to apex, moving forward and back under braking and acceleration are turned off. I have to have movement of my virtual head to match the movement of my physical one. Some people love all the g force simulation stuff and believe it makes them feel the forces better and makes them drive better/faster. It is why we have the options and why seated games work so well as there is no necessity to artificially move the head in relation to the vehicle or plane we are strapped into. The motion we encounter is the motion of the vehicle. It then becomes perfectly natural to lean into apexes and turns with our own heads just as we would in the real thing. This motion and the disparity between visual and vestibular system can be challenging for some but it is completely different than dealing with tracking issues which can cause motion sickness and be the biggest immersion killer in VR when the head movement becomes disconnected from the visual display. I totally get why some would want the hard limits option even if for me it feels like when the VR headset loses tracking, so be it, we are wired differently. However, we also need to understand that for some (myself included) the current option feels the best and any occurrence where this option might be replaced with something else needs very careful consideration as to whether it does more harm than it fixes.

I genuinely have no clue if I am in the minority. I know that the "other sim" option of breaking tracking is the worst solution for me. I can't speak for others but VR can be a very subjective thing which is why titles like Half Life Alyx have multiple methods of locomotion and movement, there is no magic one size fits all solution. In spite of the years of experience developers have with VR they still get it wrong and have to rush out patches to provide new options of (Medal of Honor: Above & Beyond etc.). There is no research paper that can tell what works best for me. All I can do is state my view and we see if there is consensus, even then it is a tiny sample and short of surveying the entire VR DCS user base I am not sure how we determine who is in the minority. Absolutely the solution is not to stick your head out but we need to understand where the boundaries are and currently the solutions are to see the onset of clipping or tracking gets broken and world moves with you. For many (the majority? Who knows?) the former is sufficient to know where the boundary lies and not move any more. The alternatives are to make the outside world fade away or blur it out. Neither of which are any more immersive for those wishing to avoid going beyond the boundary, I would argue far less subtle than clipping a screen which changes the transparency a little. If we need to stop someone deliberately going beyond the boundary to seek an advantage then sure fade out the world beyond the initial clipping but keep the option for those that just want to know where the boundaries the option to stop moving before the outside world turns black or goes fuzzy. Does a sim player's actual head stop when he hits the canopy? If the answer is no then you need to find a solution to the situation that the VR user's head is moving but the world isn't. This is an issue real pilots don't face, hence we need unique to sim solutions.