Jump to content

wormeaten

Members
  • Posts

    989
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About wormeaten

  • Birthday 12/27/1966

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS: A-10C, FC3, P-51, FW-190D, Mig-21
    Il2 CloD and BoS
  • Location
    Croatia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Did anyone remember this Vive OG and Vive PRO Gear VR lens mod? It is the question of what will happen if you do the same mod on Vive PRO2? PRO2 is similar spec as Aero and such mod should fox most of the PRO2 problems and should be competitive with Aero for half of the price.
  2. For us Europeans is still too much. Varjo Aero + tracking + controllers without the audio is 3000€. Is this price justifie upgread from G2 (650€)? Have in mind in some anouncemant for Quest2 PRO same display was anounced, same as better controlers, full 4K color camera for AR for 1/4 of the Aero price. I don't know we will see soon.
  3. My advice is to get now Quest 2 for start in few reasons. You got more than a biffy rig but just to start with VR and see do you like it at all or not without much investment. If you like you will easily buy some other better headset and will have your Quest 2 for some other more casual VR usage. Simply you want Quest 2 no matter what the future brings. Quest 2 is WiFi capable and because of it for some fun with Dart Vedar or some shooting or adventure in VR is a better choice than any other HMD with cable. Watching 3D movies with friends in BigScreen theatre is great fun as well. You will never regret this 300$ or more with upgrades no matter what. G2 is now the best option for DCS no doubt but ... in the next 12 months, several new headsets are announced so it is maybe better not to buy G2 straight away now and wait to see what will be the best option in near future. So in that 12 months Quest 2 will use for DCS as well and will stay with you in the future for sure. Maybe Varjo consumer version is coming soon.
  4. Maybe this could help you to compare this setting and yours.
  5. Again missing the point and my statements putting out of context. As you just confirming what I was talking about the whole time. Just mention two Modules without a license and that didn't stop their release and to be some of the most popular in the DCS world. If DCS will be developed just fully licensed modules DCS World will stop existing at all long time ago. I like M-2000 and F-14 modules so as do a lot of others as well. Those two modules are playing some of the major roles in the popularization and expansion of the player base in DCS World. So I don't see a problem why not continuing the same way with Rafale and Green? Even if you got a license this module doesn't have to be 100% accurate as well because part of the license is to keep control of this publicly available information and the secret one. So let's stop this pointless debate about is it or not the possible development of Rafale or Grepen lets just summarizing the facts. Is it possible to develop Rafale or Grepen? YES. Is the license obstacle to not developing it? NO - We got other modules developed without the license like for example here mentioned M-2000 and F-14. Is it possible to made FFM without the license? YES - FFM is not represented 100% accurate plane it is more like a level of realism and depends only on the development level, more details more work to do. As we are going away from the real intention of this article and going into a completely different field furder discussion is pointless and better focus on something else. The intention and purpose of this thread are to check the possible interest for developing such a module. I put the idea into HB's head, they could see how interest is existing and is good. Almost 50% of people are already willing to buy such a module what is very good. Now everything is on HB and on plans and resources they have and how this could incorporate into it. As we going away from the theme I decide to close this thread. To HEATBLUR I wish all the best and hoping will seriously think about this idea and soon announce it.
  6. Again who said license is not needed. Euro Fighter is already done and the same principles should be worth it for other same-generation jets. Who are you that you know France will deny license and it is not licensing it is copyrights plus possible NDA as addition with details for keeping certain things under control. Simply if you are not asking you will not have it for sure and I nowhere see someone ask for it and Franch denying it. Of course, it is pointless working on something before getting approval but if you are not asking for it is not a reason to abandon such an idea without asking at all, and you cant ask anything without preparation and presentation of your intentions. Here we are just talking about how this will be a good idea and of course and if you are denied license you know exactly where you are and why without speculation and guessing.
  7. All of it you mention is apply to Euro Fighter as well. It is the same age, same generation, and same time frame jet. Almost all weapons are the same or very similar. Lots of shared technology. So how same principals could not be applied to both? That is not a reason to not developing on Rafale. I'm repeating it. There is no 100% accurate module in DCS. Even if ED works on some professional sim for some country with 100% accurate features and if they work on public version this public version will be different based on publicly available data not on real one even if ED have it done 100% already. My point all this time is how HEATBLUR doing Euro Fighter already has 2/3 work done for Rafale so why not use the opportunity to earn some more money. Guys have in mind if we want a professional job to be done we have to pay for it. Most of the time new modules financing maintenance and update of the old modules and keep positive motivation for further development. Devs have to live from their work not volunteering or live from charity donations. Same as all of us who work something else. So why not combining some modules if could be combined? The next logical step will be Gripen for the same reasons. This is a simple economy not military or else decisions. That is how is business done so you keep steady cash flow to keep the company stable and alive. And as I see the interest is here, it is 50/50 so that is a very good ratio to start. With minimum marketing, this could be much more in favor of Rafale. I made my point. Interest is here, business logic as well no matter on few bitching comments. In reality, HB could in the next 3 years easily release 3 modern jet modules, Euro Fighter, Rafale, and Gripen. They will go well with existing maps and future who is in developing. With future F15 and existing F16, F18 from west and MIG 29, SU 27, SU33, and SU35, BTW all are already released as DCS module and are still in RL service, will create great addition for future scenarios on those maps. I will buy them all 3 no doubt. I will just say HB takes my money.
  8. If we are looking at 1:1 realistic models then nobody will fly DCS or any other flight sim, especially with modern jets fighter. Don't get me wrong, DCS is the most realistic fighter planes sim very close to full realistic features but still not 100% accurate. That is normal and never can't be. In the end, this is a game no matter how realistic it is but need to keep that fun factor and balance modules to keep them competitive and fun in PvP normally compared to real fighters. Another part of the realism is probably any top-secret anyway and no one will ever talk about it publicly so we who are not real-life fighter pilots for some models will never know any way how much are they accurate compared to the real thing. Real pilots will never talk about it in detail anyway. So in general in DCS I'm more than satisfied with the level of realism and with ED intention to be most realistic as it is possible and will never complain about it if it stays like it is so far.
  9. This is just my possible prediction and to be honest wish. Rafale will be logical step after release of the Euro Fighter. It is similar aircraft as EF, delta wings, dual motor almost the same weapons. Practically half of the job for Rafale is already done in EF, just will need tweaks for some differences and visually different 3D model but core will be the same. Also I think how Rafale could be commercially very successful similar maybe even more successful among all HEATBLUR modules. So Gentleman's from HB think about it! Community, what do you think about it?
  10. I can confirm that Quest 2 runs on 980Ti, i5 11400 with 32GB RAM on 3600 all set up on default values. 980Ti is eaqual as 1070Ti by performance. Just go for VR. Price of the GPU is droping and even 6700XT as lovest price GPU is by performance around 10% slower than 2080Ti and will be under 500$ soon.
  11. I'm owner of Quest 2 and can tell you you want it both. G2 is best buy option with perfect balanced quality and price. Quest 2 is cheaper but have in mind you have to upgrade it for comfort and audio and cable. With this upgrades it is not any more that cheep but WiFi is the blessing. For sims like DCS, ED, ACC what ever else title G2 is perfect solution and way better then Quest 2 but Quest two shining with his simplicity and WiFi/standalone even when you are playing Half life Alyx or Onward from your PC. To be honest I'm using it more for multimedia then for games and I love it. That's why you want it too. Personally it is even good experience in DCS, I'm satisfied but G2 is definitely better for it and I'm still aiming for it but will never sell my Q2 because I will use it for casual usage as stern games where Wireless freedom means more than perfect clarity. Now all depend on you and what do you need for. You can chose Q2 to see is the VR for you at all and than latter upgrade to G2 or even maybe Pimax 8KX or go straight for G2 and than latter get Quest 2 for more freedom. What ever you decide you will want them both in the end. Trust me.
  12. Agree with this. The G2 is the best HMD VR for DCS. If it's not the best then definitely is a BestBuy option. To be clear I got Quest 2, not G2. I'm not disappointed with it, just as opposite I'm pleasantly surprised with it but to be honest, G2 is a better option for few reasons. If you want your Q2 to reach the level of comfort and audio near to G2 you need to invest in additional upgrades as a Link cable, better strap, and audio. With these upgrades, Q2 comes much closer to G2 who has perfect comfort and audio with perfect picture better clarity and colors than Q2. Even performances are better on G2 because to reach clarity near G2, Q2 needs higher SS for it. So my advice as a Quest 2 owner is: if you have 600$ and want it just for DCS go for G2. If you have some budget issue and want VR now then go with Q2 but don't spend money on upgrades because you want it both in the end. Just need to prioritize which one you want first. Quest 2 is very good but G2 is better exactly for that double price. Worth every penny. Quest 2 has some advantages especially WiFi but not in DCS. That is why you will end up with both VR HMD's in the end no matter which one you will buy first.
  13. From 1 to 10 in my opinion your PC rate is 7. With upgrade your GPU to 3080/6800XT you can reach 9. For 10 you need upgrade and CPU to 5800X. I think this is answering your question.
  14. You have to set any PD/SS to 1.0 (1:1) in all instances. If you got room to increase some PD/SS do it only true SteamVR, leave everything else on 1.0. Real 100% on steam is when it is showing resolution closest to the native G2 resolution 2160x2160 no matter what percentage SteamVR showing.
×
×
  • Create New...