Have Your Say – VR or No VR?

VR Sim Racing 01.jpg

Do you race in VR?


  • Total voters
    215
Sim racing is a perfect gaming format to experience with VR, but some in the sim community are very pro-VR while others are holding back. Have your say in the comments below on whether VR is for you, and why.

A good Virtual Reality sim racing experience is hard to beat, but technical limitations and limited developer support has slowed the growth of VR. So, we want to hear from you. Is VR worth having for sim racers in 2021?

While the global stats on its use on Steam puts the percentage of VR in the single digits, most sim racing polls put the percentage of users who at least own a headset in the 25-35% range. Even with this high level of VR owners, many high-profile racing franchises such as F1 and WRC have yet to implement official VR support. Other sim titles like Assetto Corsa, rFactor 2 and RaceRoom have supported VR for years, and are enjoyed by thousands of sim racers around the world.

For many in the community, VR is the only way to sim race. This crowd even has a slogan: “No VR, No Buy”. Undoubtedly, there aren’t any more immersive or exciting ways to experience sim racing visually than to virtually control the head of the driver. The first sim racing experience in VR is something most people don’t quickly forget. Sitting virtually in cars most of us will never get to drive in real life at a track most of us will never get to experience is undeniably cool.

VR Sim Racing 02.jpg


Contrast the above list of pros with some known shortcomings of VR, and you end up with a divided set of opinions. Among those who have tried VR sim racing and moved on, two of the common complaints are that the video appears grainy and the frame rate is too low. Both issues can be mitigated with higher end hardware, but the cost of such hardware is prohibitive to many. A byproduct of a lower framerate in VR is often motion sickness. Motion sickness can occur in VR at any frame rate, but it’s more common with sub-90 FPS experiences, and makes Virtual Reality impossible for some.

It’s also possible that we’re only in the infancy of VR, and the next generation will improve the visually quality and frame rate even on affordable GPUs and HMDs. Other than flight simulators, no gaming format takes advantage of a VR view quite like racing simulators. If the demand for VR continues from racing gamers, the developers will hopefully look to make support more commonplace in future titles and improve the experience in kind.

So, we want to hear from you. Do you use VR? What keeps you coming back or keeps you away from VR, and what do you think the future will hold for VR sim racing?
About author
Mike Smith
I have been obsessed with sim racing and racing games since the 1980's. My first taste of live auto racing was in 1988, and I couldn't get enough ever since. Lead writer for RaceDepartment, and owner of SimRacing604 and its YouTube channel. Favourite sims include Assetto Corsa Competizione, Assetto Corsa, rFactor 2, Automobilista 2, DiRT Rally 2 - On Twitter as @simracing604

Comments

I very much would like to read your impressions on either, pro and cons from your point of view as related to SIM racing.
I would have thought, without having tried it yet, that the wired Quest 2, would be much better than the Rift S.
Sure! The resolution of the Q2 is much better and no screen door effect visible. But the graphics card is more on the edge (3080). The Rift S feels snappier and the contrast/clarity is a bit better. Also the startup procedure is easier, starting in Oculus App directly. If I had only one, it would be the Q2 though, just because it is so versatile and has such a great image quality. Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
No for VR. Its great invention no doubt it, but it gives you the touch that you are so close to reality that its amazing.. But then, you dont feel nothing, exept the wheel and pedals, maybe shifting. Or if you have that bench that goes back and forth and side to side, but most doesnt have that. They only have wheel and pedals. So.. you are so close to something great, that you get hugely disappointed for the flaws.. No gforces etc. And then other things, you have that box wrapped around your head, hard to use if you sweat a lot (like me) Motion sickness, 15m and burp.... (like me) It makes button boxes irrelevant for example, eats a lot power from pc, low resolution. It is so hard to explain this.. Love/hate relationship. But screens are better, at least for me. And the VR is a toy, or was.. Havent have it anymore like 2-3 years. I keep games to its own, and get VR experience in a real car. But it was great to try! And would still consider it for some use, but not for racing.
Shakers are quite affordable and add very much immersion to VR racing if configured correctly. A seat mover adds an additional dimension. All these items work so perfectly together, it's just incredible fun to drive.
 
D
Wow! This just keeps going and going!

Remember this is all just to play games and have fun!

People should do whatever they consider the most fun, period.

There is no right or wrong, just what is fun and puts a grin on your face.

Everyone should do whatever puts a grin on their face and not care about what puts a grin on someone else's face.

Why should anyone care whether I put on a VR headset or look at a screen ?
Exactly, my body, my choice. Wait. :unsure:
 
120hz apparently reduces VR sickness (Index) by quite a lot compared to 90hz (Reverb), let alone 80hz of the likes of the Oculus Rift S.
The Quest2 also runs at 120hz. And wireless, so we don't have to put up with those ridiculous annoying cables, like you old last-gen VR users. To be honest, we kind of look down our noses at you. Cables are so 2018.
 
Premium
The Quest2 also runs at 120hz. And wireless, so we don't have to put up with those ridiculous annoying cables, like you old last-gen VR users. To be honest, we kind of look down our noses at you. Cables are so 2018.

Great! First we have those for and against VR and now we get infighting! My VR is better than your VR !!!!!

We need to start a side discussion about how much better triples are than a single wide screen monitor. I'm not sure about this, but some say triples are much better! :rolleyes:
 
Sure! The resolution of the Q2 is much better and no screen door effect visible. But the graphics card is more on the edge (3080). The Rift S feels snappier and the contrast/clarity is a bit better. Also the startup procedure is easier, starting in Oculus App directly. If I had only one, it would be the Q2 though, just because it is so versatile and has such a great image quality. Hope this helps.

Thank you, yes it helps. I do not have the rift s, just the CV1. I am happy with it, the resolution and the screen door are not great by today’s standard, but at the same time if I do not look for it, I forget about it and just enjoy the 3D space around me. So no rush but I think the Quest 2 will be my next goggles.
 
Premium
As a quick comment on state of the art and VR vs. where it will be sometime soon.

I'm very happy with my Valve Index right now and can easily live within it's limitations. That is today with an i9-9900K and 2080Ti driving it. There are some with more FOV and more resolution and that's fine. I'm hanging out here happily until the next big jump.

Cutting edge right now is the ultra expensive Varjo VR-3 which has a full retina resolution section 27 degrees wide in the center and aspherical lenses so there are no Fresnel lens artifacts. People are running it on existing hardware but just barely. So far everyone who has seen this headset is absolutely flabbergasted by what it can do. This is not a consumer headset, but it shows what is possible today.

The VR-3 will finally make all the pixel peepers happy. That's only one piece of the puzzle, but it is a big one.

Recent rumors suggest that the RTX 4090 will be over 200% the speed of the current RTX 3090. Given the 30 series have been unobtanium and scalped at horrendous prices, how things will play out with the introduction of the 40 series is yet to be seen. However by the end of 2022 we should have a video card capable of handling a headset on the order of a VR-3 in racing sims.

My take is that VR will hit the point of absolutely impressive even for pixel peepers in late 2022 at a substantial cost, but at least at the consumer level. I expect there will be some increase in field of view as well, but I doubt it will be 180 degrees.

Within 3-5 years after getting to pixel peeping nirvana, this type of technology should become more affordable and this is when I expect many more people to make the jump.

VR is a work in progress. I love VR, but it doesn't do everything as well as I would like.
 
Thank you, yes it helps. I do not have the rift s, just the CV1. I am happy with it, the resolution and the screen door are not great by today’s standard, but at the same time if I do not look for it, I forget about it and just enjoy the 3D space around me. So no rush but I think the Quest 2 will be my next goggles.
I upgraded from the cv1 to a q2 and was literally blown away by the clarity and near zero screen door, it’s fantastic!
If you have the power available, running it at 1.7 which is a pixel for pixel match according to the information available, the clarity is absolutely stunning. The q2 has a really nice hi res panel, I can’t believe it only costs £300 with all the standalone stuff too, great bit of kit.
 
It depends on what type of driver you are. Some people play sims to be an experience. It doesn't necessarily matter how fast you can lap Spa or if a car matches the real thing 1:1. At $300. For me, I want to experience iconic and classic cars for myself. Until I get a motion rig, VR is the closest I'll get. VR is becoming as easy to acquire as a wheel. While you could get a motion rig, those are still about ten times the price so they are not really accessible. If you want as high fidelity as possible and that's it, then you don't need VR. But it is in the best interest of every racing game developer to try and accommodate their virtual reality headsetusers.
 
tengo las Oculus Ques2 jugando inalambrico con virtual desktop ,, gtx 1060 .. juego al aseto Corsa y todo perfect nitido a 90fps y sin tanto problemas offine como online .. ............... y no lo cambio por pantallas ni loco ...... es el futuro y ya esta,

tambien es cierto que Asseto Corsa esta muy pero que muy bien optimizado para la VR

Un detalle a tener en cuenta en Virtual Desktop ..yo llevaba tiempo jugando en el apartado Streaming con los VR bitrates a 60 Mbps y como resultado lo veía todo bien pero con algo de borrosidad pero pasable hasta que me di cuenta de que subiendolo hasta 130 Mbps incluso mas ,el cambio ha sido como si tuviera unas gafas nuevas con el doble de calidad ,,,culpa mia de no averme dado cuenta antes ..
 
Last edited:
As a quick comment on state of the art and VR vs. where it will be sometime soon.

I'm very happy with my Valve Index right now and can easily live within it's limitations. That is today with an i9-9900K and 2080Ti driving it. There are some with more FOV and more resolution and that's fine. I'm hanging out here happily until the next big jump.

Cutting edge right now is the ultra expensive Varjo VR-3 which has a full retina resolution section 27 degrees wide in the center and aspherical lenses so there are no Fresnel lens artifacts. People are running it on existing hardware but just barely. So far everyone who has seen this headset is absolutely flabbergasted by what it can do. This is not a consumer headset, but it shows what is possible today.

The VR-3 will finally make all the pixel peepers happy. That's only one piece of the puzzle, but it is a big one.

Recent rumors suggest that the RTX 4090 will be over 200% the speed of the current RTX 3090. Given the 30 series have been unobtanium and scalped at horrendous prices, how things will play out with the introduction of the 40 series is yet to be seen. However by the end of 2022 we should have a video card capable of handling a headset on the order of a VR-3 in racing sims.

My take is that VR will hit the point of absolutely impressive even for pixel peepers in late 2022 at a substantial cost, but at least at the consumer level. I expect there will be some increase in field of view as well, but I doubt it will be 180 degrees.

Within 3-5 years after getting to pixel peeping nirvana, this type of technology should become more affordable and this is when I expect many more people to make the jump.

VR is a work in progress. I love VR, but it doesn't do everything as well as I would like.

I think we'll be seeing the Index Valve 2 in time for the 4000 series and I think it will be a proper generational leap. Reading about some of the things Sony seem to have planned for the PSVR 2 is interesting especially haptic feedback in the headset "for comfort". To truly make VR a thing for all there has to be more of an attempt to tackle VR nausea than just throwing more frames at the problem. Im guessing this haptic feedback is something to trick the inner ear as in balance, which will be an attempt to combat VR nausea.
 
Last edited:
I really enjoy driving in VR. I drove with a screen for a few weeks and then decided VR would be the way to go. 2 PC upgrades and 2 headsets later I have settled for any of the performance issues and just enjoy the racing.
Would like to try a 49" monitor but don't want to waste my money...........
Andrew_Wat I saw that you had started using the monitor now. What are your thoughts driving wise comparing the 2?
Graphics, game performance and ease of use will always be better with a screen but driving wise?
98% ACC user too so not the best VR game graphically.
 
Last edited:
VR only! This is so much better than flat gaming. The immersion is killin me. There is no comparison between my Index and the 82" gaming TV, I used before. And don't get me wrong, the screen is amazing.
But you need a high end machine, a decent HMD, a lot of tweaking (espacially ACC), the AMD FSR mod, motionsickness resistance and a cool gaming environment. If this is the case give it a try and you will never regret.
NEXT LVL SIMRACING :inlove:
 
It depends on what type of driver you are. Some people play sims to be an experience. It doesn't necessarily matter how fast you can lap Spa or if a car matches the real thing 1:1. At $300. For me, I want to experience iconic and classic cars for myself. Until I get a motion rig, VR is the closest I'll get. VR is becoming as easy to acquire as a wheel. While you could get a motion rig, those are still about ten times the price so they are not really accessible. If you want as high fidelity as possible and that's it, then you don't need VR. But it is in the best interest of every racing game developer to try and accommodate their virtual reality headsetusers.
Btw if you want to combine a motion rig with VR, in my opinion (based on my own experience with both systems) a seat mover makes more sense than a full motion rig: if you use a seat mover in VR, no motion compensation necessary because It simulates the G forces and the motion in VR correspond to your movement in the seat IRL. Full motion rig, completely different story: This simulates the car movement that require motion compensation, because when the entire car moves IRL you stay in line with the car itself, but without motion compensation in VR, you will move around in the car instead. Hope that makes sense :)
 
The sweating problem is easily solved with a facial cover and a fan.
Motion sickness is beatable in most cases, unless you have a severe eye/inner ear problem.
I for one have a hereditary inner ear disfunction, and I was still able to adapt.
Patience is the key.
As for the abovementioned "flaws", yes they're noticeable, but not overwhelming.
I have an Oculus CV1, bought it second hand, and it has a dead pixel that I didn't spot right away.
I realized that when I start thinking about it, I get really annoyed with that black spot in front of my eyes that is destroying my experience.
BUT, when I stop thinking about it and focus on all the good aspects - the depth perception, realistic scaling, the sense of being IN the car, the sense of speed, being able to use the mirrors just like you would in a real car, THEN I loose my self in the sim.
It is pure bliss.
I will never be able to drive a Porsche 962 on the Nordschleife.
I will probably never get the opportunity to even see that car/track in real life.
It is just so damn expensive and inaccessible.
But when I'm in VR, I'm living the dream.
You forget it is not real, literally.
It all comes down to what kind of person you are, are you nitpicky, are you always looking for the downside.
Cheers!;)
Not nitpicky etc. I have been playing since 80's and seen the development of games. And 3-4 years use of Oculus CV1. And after some other tryouts at my friends, i can say what my opinion is. And it is screens to me, and that games are mentioned to be played on the screens. Im not denying anything from anyone if i say how i see it. I continue to play with screens and thats how i like it. I tried all kinda things with VR, but it is just a toy for me. But maybe some day i get back to it, in my opinion, it came out a bit too early on its development, the whole VR thing, and it bited itself a bit. We will see how it starts to turn out in the future. But games should also be fun to play, thats what for those was made for in the first place, but if i have to puke after 15min even slow drive etc. Thats no fun to me. If you just cant go and play for fun, then the original meaning of playing is already lost. Who has fun with it, then it has an thats it. But not for me, at least not now.
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Mike Smith
Article read time
2 min read
Views
40,051
Comments
437
Last update

How long have you been simracing

  • < 1 year

    Votes: 380 16.3%
  • < 2 years

    Votes: 258 11.0%
  • < 3 years

    Votes: 247 10.6%
  • < 4 years

    Votes: 181 7.7%
  • < 5 years

    Votes: 304 13.0%
  • < 10 years

    Votes: 262 11.2%
  • < 15 years

    Votes: 168 7.2%
  • < 20 years

    Votes: 130 5.6%
  • < 25 years

    Votes: 101 4.3%
  • Ok, I am a dinosaur

    Votes: 306 13.1%
Back
Top