captainHelmet

Here is a whole thread on editing the config file. I usually delete the block of text that defines the su27.

I edit the vr scene config file to remove the plane from the hangar to save a couple of mb.

I have a large kensington trackball that sits next to my throttle.

I've seen this artifact flying into Nellis on the NTTR map.

I got the new cable today. I have an MSI X570 board and previously I had been able to use one usb 3.0 port on the back but with some audio drop out issues, so I swapped the G2 to a front USB 3.0 port on my case and it was a bit more stable. Now with the new version of the cable I can just use the USB C port on my mb and after flying around for 90 minutes I had no issues.

We'll see. I usually play with all of the motion smoothing disabled both in WMR and SteamVR, but even when I was trying all sorts of settings combinations including a locked 45 fps and motion smoothing I have always seen double of object's like trees and power lines. Here's hoping.

Awesome news! I had come to accept the ghosting as a consequence of not being able to maintain 90fps.

After doing some testing I found that the most performant version of this mod was causing the shimmer and aliasing that I was getting on the Hornet ddi's. No amount of resolution increase or anti-aliasing would get rid of it. Switching to the IC Pass version of the mod fixed the ddi's while letting me still use the other features of the mod. I saw mentions of this scattered around various threads but thought I would mention it again here in case you're like me and automatically enable this mod and might not know that the artifact isn't the vanilla install.

Without going back to play 2.5 it feels like MSAA broke when they fixed the MSAA mask in 2.7. The mask used to do nothing but now you can swipe it and see the difference visually as well as get a small fps boost at lower values. But as has been said already, it seems like MSAA isn’t being applied consistently in the center of your view.

This still works to turn off the double lens flare, while maintaining the sun glare and other effects.

I haven't had a chance to play with this yet. But if I understand what it is doing it doesn't surprise me that people who make no changes to their setup other than installing it are seeing a performance boost. It sounds like it's default setting is .75 which will reduce your resolution by 25% and then upres, so I would expect a performance increase similar to if you just dropped your steamVR resolution by 25%. The question is does that result in better image quality at that lower resolution. I bet the proper way to use this is to set your PD to 1.0, your steamVR resolution to 100% and then use the FSR config to set your actual resolution. If you were already running steamVR at 100% I bet you will see lower image quality, especially for things like clouds that seem to be resolution dependent.

I manually updated on the 10th, but I believe what I installed was a preview version of that build.

Perhaps I should have said: "Am I the only one who can get this to work?" I'm using the wmr beta, getting good performance, and making use of the new fov slider.

Has anyone else been able to get this working? I've been able to use the latest beta with my G2, and I feel like I am getting good performance. I uninstalled WMR, updated to the latest windows 10 preview, then reinstalled the latest WMR and the SteamVR for WMR beta that everyone is having issues with. I wonder if the difference is that I disable all motion smoothing both in the WMR settings and the steam per game settings. It may be placebo (I don't think that it is) but I set the steamVR fov to 70% and I feel like I am getting a sharper image with less aliasing and without a frame time hit. People could use this as a performance tool as well because you could lower you super sample resolution now that you aren't wasting all of those pixels on parts of the image that you can't see. I'm pretty sure it's not placebo because I set it to 50% and was seeing black lines where my vision converges at my nose which is why I raised it to 70%.

I've been flying with your test summer textures combined with Taz's dark trees and it really looks fantastic. It has a un-hyped, natural look to it. I've been flying with the VR optimization shaders and a gamma of 1.6. Nice work!

I uninstalled wmr, updated to the latest windows preview, then reinstalled wmr and the steamVR beta. It’s working fine for me, but I don’t use motion smoothing.

I wonder if this has something to do with the MSAA mask. You can adjust that mask down so that you have no MSAA applied, but it doesn't come with a performance improvement. I wonder if that is related to the way that you don't see any MSAA but still see the performance drop as if it was working.

I had been using the old 446 driver for a while and finally update. Can't say I noticed a change.

I'm going to take a complete shot in the dark and assume that the clouds are rendered in a different buffer, and the quality control is a voxel resolution control, which is also probably somehow tied to your screen resolution. It looks like for VR the voxel resolution is defaulting to a low value. It also sounds like people are having edge aliasing issues in 2D when using certain monitor resolutions. It's a new toy.

I just did a couple of quick flights in the f5 around Nevada and The Caucasus using a g2 and a rtx2070. I ran into many of the issues that others have reported. Clouds were very low detail, aliased at their lower edges, and bounced a bit on the horizon. I briefly turned on SSAO and didn't see any visual differences but did see a performance hit, so it was doing something. Prior to the 2.7 update I was running a cockpit shadow mod, flat shadow removal, the modified version of the experimental VR shaders, and well as some visual mods that had no impact on performance. For my quick flights I did a clean install and left all of my mods disabled. I feel like my typical modded 2.5 fps range was around 60-45fps. Running vanilla 2.7 at the same settings that has now dropped to 45-35fps. The 2.7 performance is really similar to the performance hit that I saw when I had previously disabled the simplified glass material with 2.5. Which makes sense, because with no mods in 2.7 I was running the high quality glass again and this time with the new cockpit reflections. I bet if I were able to switch back to the old simplified glass shader while in 2.7 that I would see similar performance to what I was getting in 2.5. That said, I always felt like you lost a lot of the feeling of being confined in a cockpit with the old simplified glass shader, and it appears there are a lot of other little visual improvements that come with 2.7 as well. The water in lakes looks a lot better, for example. Even with the performance hit and the visual issues that came with the clouds in VR they were game changing. The shadowing on the ground, flying through different cloud levels, the necessity of using your gauges to maintain situational awareness. They really tie the whole world together. It is still a beta and there are some issues to work out, but wow.

I haven't had a chance to test with 2.7 yet. But prior to 2.7 I was able to get a good image and useable frame rate of > 45fps with an overclocked 2070. You will probably need to lower the super sample resolution a bit and then adjust the settings until you get an image that you like an acceptable frame rate. The 1080 is a more common card and seems to have similar performance to the 2070.

Have you tried emptying the fxo and metashaders2 directories in the "Saved Games" folder? The saved games folder doesn't get cleaned up as part of a fresh install.

I'm new to reshade. Has anyone tried to install new shaders in conjunction with this? Is this a way to get access to some newer Anti Aliasing tech?

I finally got around to trying out my VR cover. I have the stock gasket, the 3dWard printed gasket from ebay, and now the vr cover. I found the stock gasket to pinch the sides of my head way too much. I had to clamp the thing to my face to get my eyes anywhere near the lenses, and even still it was like looking through a snorkel mask. I didn't have sweet spot issues but it greatly limited the fov. I found the soft material of the pad very comfortable. The 3dward gasket is much more comfortable for me; it doesn't pinch my face at all on the sides and I don't feel like I'm going to break the plastic strap of the G2 clamping it to my face like I did with the stock gasket. I bought the 3 pack of Vive pro pads (you may want to use the non pro vive pads that are wider on the sides) off of amazon to go with it and had to use the thickest one. It puts my face VERY close to the lenses, too close with the thinner pads. Being that close to the lenses has it's positives and negatives. The feeling of looking through a snorkel mask is gone, and replaced by the feeling of standing so close to a movie screen that your nose touches it. The fov is greatly improved. It's just a night and day difference. The sweet spot is great but there is more visible chromatic aberration at the vertical extremes, specifically a green offset. You can also perceive the square edges of the lenses, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. The VRcover gasket improves fov slightly and reduces the snorkel feeling, but not much as the 3dward gasket. I also don't think it was wider than the stock gasket so I felt like I was going back to having the sides of my face squeezed. If you don't have an issue with the stock gasket pinching your face the VRCover could be a nice, modest upgrade. You'll get a little bit more fov, but not so much that it starts introducing more distortion. If you want the most fov at all costs, this probably isn't for you. So what did I end up using? I like the 3dward printed gasket, but with the thicker pad from the VRcover. The thicker pad helps alleviate some of the issues that arise from being closer to the screens than HP intended, but not so much that you start getting back to the snorkel look. I didn't have nose light leak issues with any of the gaskets.

Having done plenty of image editing over the years, I was not expecting the results to be this dramatic. It's like a film has been removed from the lenses. Like others have said, sharpening does not help the shimmer. If anything, the sharpening works on contrasty areas where shimmer is going to be a problem. The higher quality an image you feed the sharpening algorithm, the better the result. I used to run my DCS gamma at around 1.5, but doing so didn't leave me a lot of room for color corrections. To adjust the color I set the gamma back up to 2.1 and made very slight color corrections, using differences of .002 for some options for example. It will be exciting to see what you can do with this in the future. This feels like just scratching the surface.