I really enjoy MSFS, and I previously enjoyed XP11 very much. MS2020 keeps taking that dive, it won't be around long. Looks like Xplane has a nice steady following, lets see what happens to the blue line (over time) after XP12 gets release. With the release of XP12, those numbers below will only go D O W N further! I truly believe MS2020 users come here because they are 'VERY WORRIED' about XP12's release!!! Just look at their stats, seems the novelty for buildings that turn to mush up close has worn off. My argument isnt that you should just ignore frame rate, but to claim (in a later post) that its not worth going beyond 'max' objects if you cant hit 90fps is in itself a subjective statement and not an absolute truth in so far as enjoyment of VR is concerned.Īs far as the gateway, a genius idea having users create airports for your sim at no cost to the company, one large depository with the ability to check quality before adding them into the mix! Silky smooth 90fps+ playback is great, but if it requires an excessive simplification of the visuals to get there its not worth the compromise for me. To me, there is a balance tradeoff between frame rate and visual fidelity and in my personal case I tend to go more for fidelity as it lends just as much (perhaps more) to the suspension of disbelief as the higher frame rate. The often bandied term 'immersion' is also subjective and derives from a combination of effects. The occasional 'jutters and stutters' that drive some to distraction dont bother me at all. I have a high tolerance for motion sickness so am able to wear a headset quite comfortably with 30fps for several hours (have had it on nearly 6 hours straight before).

For me, 90 fps is NOT needed to enjoy VR - a smooth 30fps is more than plenty. This is why the likes of Beat Saber are so successful even though technically speaking their object complexity is about as basic as it gets (some cubes and a tiny bit of vector graphics with no fill).Īt the same time, even current mid range hardware can achieve the 90fps mins, they just need much lower settings to keep it there, turn the weather off, turn the scenery complexity down further: Even xplane/MSFS on minimum settings in VR blows MSFS on Ultra but 2D out of the water (but the wallet is going to hurt after, because no one wants to use min settings)įor what its worth, no matter what this research says, frame rate requirements is a personal measure and not absolute. There is a whole different conversation in there about the details, things like the lighting (more accurate formula rather than more formula) and better use of hardware resources (Mmmmm treees, millions and millions of treesss, and those clouds, yeah baby). I'm oversimplifying because the details are much less important than the point that current very high end tech (regardless of application) can not do XP11 max world objects without creating unwanted sensory perceptions, so more than XP11 max world objects is worthless any time soon.

X plane scenery gateway