Posts by Eurostar

    After suffering a devastating breakdown of my main HD a few months back. I purchased a Samsung 1TB SSD drive, and had to re-install Win10 and everything else. All personal files were all backed up on portable HDs, so no loss there. I have just got round to installing Aerofly FS2 a massive 88.6GB download and took a few days to complete, with the PC running for hours and hours. Now it wants to download the High Res Textures at 57.2GB which will take about 11hours to download! As you can see I do not have superfast broadband. And even though I live in London UK, I do not have the option for the superfast broadband. Compared to most other countries, the UK is lagging way behind with its superfast broadband. These 2 downloads add up to 145.8GB, a fair chunk from my 1TB drive. If I were to download ALL of the extra scenery and other stuff, what space would be left on my HD? Some of you do, but what size are your HDs?

    After the spring GPU purchase, and the Rift and Touch, no more spare funds. Maybe in 6 months time I will think about it, and maybe the 1100 series cards will be out. It was annoying that about 1 month after my 980Ti purchase the 10 series came out! You just can't keep up with all the new technology, unless you are rich. I'm not, so a newer card is off for some time.

    In one of my posts, someone suggested that my Asus Strix Nvidia 980Ti was dated! Nonsense! I only bought the card last spring and I have NO desire to replace it. In VR FS2 runs VERY smooth, even with a higher detail setting! I am very happy with its performance. I have a fast CPU, RAM and a fast SSD. My PC is clear of junk, and start-up junk. Overclocked, and optimised. My PC system would give a 1080 GPU system a chase, and may overtake a junked up and under-clocked PC. You would hardly notice the difference!

    Yes, it is awesome in VR, very clear aircraft and cockpit detail, clear buildings and scenery, accurate controls and dynamics. and very smooth frame rates. Well done IPACS for making this in VR. But the sim is lacking in life, you are the only thing that moves in this sim. However, this sim I'm sure will get better, with other air traffic, airport traffic, more cloud and weather options, and more realistic water.

    I did give FS2 VR version the 'thumbs up' on my Steam Review and I gave some positives. However, the scenery is way below par. This is a copy of my negatives on Steam.
    The airports are sparse and missing some scenery, like taxiway signs, and other scenery. There is NO airport moving traffic, NO air traffic, in fact nothing on the airport or in the sky moves, other than you! Other scenery. The water, is flat and lifeless, no reflections or ripple effects The first scenery improvement NEEDS to be the water. Ground traffic on the roads especially at airports, and the main highways would add a bit of life. The weather is very limited, NO selection of cloud types, NO rain or thunderstorms. The distance level of lower clouds (how far you see them) needs to be increased. To sum up, in VR this is an awesome sim, but you are taxiing and flying in a DEAD WORLD. I am sorry to say that FS2 looks and feels like a ported mobile/tablet app!
    I still enjoy FS2 as the VR version IS awesome, BUT come on IPACS, put some life into this sim, PLEASE!

    The render scale factor has a big impact on the performance. If you do not see a difference on your side it can have multiple reasons.


    My guess is that your system is not fast enough to achieve the 90 FPS that is considered optimal for VR, so you are running at either 45 FPS only or somewhere in between, this depends on how your VR glasses are configured.


    So if you are satisfied with what you have now fine, but keep in mind that for some users the 90 FPS is more important than the slight extra detail in the cockpit, so they prefer to leave the render factor lower to stay at 90 FPS.


    Thanks. You have certainly given me something to think about. I was not aware that the Rift could be configured for maximum FPS. I will research into this on Oculus forum. All I know was that the Rift and Vive speed test apps gave my PC excellent results. However, I am very happy with the performance, but out of interest I will try this higher FPS, and see how it performs. Update 6.20 pm, I have checked and I can not see any FPS settings with the Rift? I even went through the Oculus Rift setup again, and there is NO mention of any FPS settings? I am missing something here? Can you please explain where I find these FPS settings. I have posted this on the Oculus Rift forum.

    I can not understand the purpose of this setting? My PC is a fairly basic VR ready setup. The basic RSF of 1.0 showed the graphics detail a bit too fuzzy, I increased the setting to 1.75 and now shows the detail of the cockpit and instruments sharp and clear. However, there is NO difference in sim performance, and it still runs as smooth. What purpose is a a low setting that makes the cockpit instruments look a bit fuzzy? Either your CPU and GPU are fast enough to handle the VR graphics or its not? Clear sharp graphics as in Aerofly are a lot more important in VR mode than monitor mode. I have one other VR game and the graphics in that are terrible, very fuzzy and blurry, you cant go very far without feeling sick! In VR mode keep it clear and sharp as possible.

    What VR setup do you have ?


    Not sure what you mean? My setup is on my signature, Oculus Rift VR headset, CPU is a Intel i7-6700K on a Asus Maximus VIII Hero and DDR4 Ram, with a Nvidia 980Ti GPU. You can go to a less powerful CPU and GPU, but this is cutting it a bit fine. What is a great boost is having a SSD hardrive and I think is essential when playing a graphics intensive game. If you are unsure if your PC is powerful enough for VR both the Rift and Vive have a test app. Hope this helps.

    A screenshot of what you're seeing would be helpful.


    The problem has now gone away for some reason. I have taxied and flown around Las Vegas and McCarran loads and loads of times, but I can not replicate the 'streaks' anymore. A mystery? In VR mode I did however increase the 'Render Scale Factor' from 1.25 to 1.75. The 1.75 setting has not affected performance and the sim still runs very smooth, why do you suggest that performance is decreased? Maybe it is because my PC is running at optimal performance? VR mode is awesome, and rarely use monitor mode. I will make some suggestions about the scenery over next few days, so watch my threads. Thanks for quick reply.

    First post. Not sure if I am the only one, but I get colored streaks (lines) over Las Vegas and McCarran Airport. It is some graphics glitch. They are approx ground level and appear in both VR and Monitor modes. If interested you can see my 'thumbs up' Steam Review 'Lionhart127'
    PC- i7-6700K, Nvidia 980Ti, Win 10, Oculus Rift and Saitek X52.