The Best Simracing Games for VR

Sail Sim

I have an AMD 5900x, Nvidia RTX 4090 and HP Reverb G2. For me, the best simracing games with great VR perfomance are: Assetto Corsa (CSP+Pure), AMS2, Rfactor2 and Iracing.

ACC is pure CANCER on VR, no matter what setting you try, It will never look as sharp as the other sims I've named, apart from the poor performance it has.

Cooknn said:

The key for me and my Varjo Aero was the Override Resolution option within OpenXR Toolkit. Took it down to 70% then set ACC Pixel Density to 130%. That plus TAA needs to be set to Ultra. More on my settings at the Discord link below.

Discord - A New Way to Chat with Friends & Communities

Discord is the easiest way to communicate over voice, video, and text. Chat, hang out, and stay close with your friends and communities.

discord.com

Click to expand...

Thanks! I have about the same settings, but it doesn't solve the ghosting effect that TAA brings. Maybe the "motion blur" of the Aero blurs it away so that it's not really visible with the Aero.. Since it's an artifact that is ONLY visible in motion. Otherwise I don't know what the reason is, because the artifacts of TAA are of course there but maybe you're not sensitive to it, in that case you're very lucky.

Andrew_WOT said:

One or the other you just set output resolution, they just cancel each other. For TAAU do its magic you need to drop source resolution.

Click to expand...

I don’t know Andrew, but something magical happens with when I do this. I did it with WMR and now with OpenXR Toolkit. This is from the OpenXR Toolkit Github "Override resolution: Enable overriding the OpenXR target resolution (same as what the “custom render scale” in OpenXR Tools for WMR does)."

This is what I read before I tried it.
...Try to lean on TAA. If you set the render resolution to 50% and the VR pixel density to, lets say, 200% here is what happens: The image is rendered at 1000x1000 then blown up to 4000x4000. Then TAA is used to fill in the empty pixels in the pixel grid. Basically, TAA is using information from past frames to supersample your image. Your VR runtime then takes that 4000x4000 image then downscales it to your headset resolution (This happens AFTER TAA is already applied).

gamma123152 said:

Thanks! I have about the same settings, but it doesn't solve the ghosting effect that TAA brings. Maybe the "motion blur" of the Aero blurs it away so that it's not really visible with the Aero.. Since it's an artifact that is ONLY visible in motion. Otherwise I don't know what the reason is, because the artifacts of TAA are of course there but maybe you're not sensitive to it, in that case you're very lucky.

Click to expand...

I've never noticed the motion blur or artifacts with my current settings either. Lucky? Maybe. Or just old. 63 this year, but I am using VR Lens Lab lenses. And with the latest version of OpenXR Toolkit the Aero is even sharper with adjustments to R,G and B positions (which weren't perfect before). Clarity on the Aero is on another level now. I'm one of the few that loves ACC in VR I guess

stenovitz said:

10: rFactor (the original) through conversion with rFactorTool and raced in AMS1 with CC VR-plugin

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "through the conversion with rFactorTool"? Does rFactorTool for RF1 achieve the same thing CC VR-plugin achieves for AMS1, ie. it makes it work in VR? What do you mean by "raced in AMS1"?

Cooknn said:

I don’t know Andrew, but something magical happens with when I do this. I did it with WMR and now with OpenXR Toolkit. This is from the OpenXR Toolkit Github "Override resolution: Enable overriding the OpenXR target resolution (same as what the “custom render scale” in OpenXR Tools for WMR does)."

This is what I read before I tried it.
...Try to lean on TAA. If you set the render resolution to 50% and the VR pixel density to, lets say, 200% here is what happens: The image is rendered at 1000x1000 then blown up to 4000x4000. Then TAA is used to fill in the empty pixels in the pixel grid. Basically, TAA is using information from past frames to supersample your image. Your VR runtime then takes that 4000x4000 image then downscales it to your headset resolution (This happens AFTER TAA is already applied).

Click to expand...

This "render resolution" is resolution scale you set in ACC graphics settings.
You drop it below 100%, enable TAAU and increase VR Pixel Density OR SS settings outside ACC whether it's SteamVR or OpenXR.
I think what happened in this specific case is that you effectively dropped "native" VR resolution the way UE4 sees it. So all resolution scales (render) or Pixel Density work against that resolution as basis.
If you check ue4 logs you can see what it's actually using as source and target resolutions.

Spinelli said:

What do you mean by "through the conversion with rFactorTool"? Does rFactorTool for RF1 achieve the same thing CC VR-plugin achieves for AMS1, ie. it makes it work in VR? What do you mean by "raced in AMS1"?

Click to expand...

You are on the right track
In order to VR race rFactor1 and mods, I convert to AMS1. Mostly by using rFactorTool, but sometimes also manual post fiddling.
And using CrewChief's VR plug-in for Ams1, I'm able to VR race my rF1 content/mods in AMS1.
Sorry if that was not clear in my first post.

stenovitz said:

You are on the right track
In order to VR race rFactor1 and mods, I convert to AMS1. Mostly by using rFactorTool, but sometimes also manual post fiddling.
And using CrewChief's VR plug-in for Ams1, I'm able to VR race my rF1 content/mods in AMS1.
Sorry if that was not clear in my first post.

Click to expand...

Thats some next level tweaking...

I wonder if something about the Unreal engine just does not handle VR well..It really is super lucky that games that were already hashed out, like sim racing games, were able to work with VR. With VRs price tag it is not too surprising that it is still just sort of getting by. And considering that it is, in my opinion, the biggest thing to happen in gaming ever, I wonder how long it will be before it really becomes mainstream. As for VR racing, its AMS2 or go home for me. I have been with the game for a while and it really is like that bad girl friend you know you should dump, but you just cant let her go, and now you have been together so long it seems the only thing to do is buy the DLC. Honestly, I wish they would make the tires not do crazy **** like lose half your traction if you lock up or who knows what changes will come up next update. JUST PICK A LANE and stay in it already. I cant learn a new sim every update. But honestly i do love the game and for VR..Forget about it.

JohnyUtah said:

I wonder if something about the Unreal engine just does not handle VR well..

Click to expand...

The devs who have used the engine have stated that its due to something the UR4 engine uses called deferred rendering.

I believe its raised directly in the rennsport section of racedepartment.

Metla said:

The devs who have used the engine have stated that its due to something the UR4 engine uses called deferred rendering.

I believe its raised directly in the rennsport section of racedepartment.

Click to expand...

and if you wonder why Kunos didn't use it, check Issues/limitations section here.

VR Simracing is great. I also enjoy old games like Life for Speed and Richard Burns Rally with VR and Direct Drive Steering.

Best performing VR imo : AMS2, PC2 and Raceroom, every other sim is a nightmare ! Performance wise ACC ask too much same with rfactor....... f1 2022 ??

We often forget AC! It is perfect in VR, the displayed image is beautiful and there is never any slowdown.
Vr is above all immersion, and for that AC is perfect in Vr, too bad this is not at all the case for ACC which has not been optimized for VR at all while more and more of simracers are equipped with helmets.
AC and its mods will satisfy guys who want to diversify the number of circuits and cars as much as possible, I love it.
For me the best compromise is AMS2, because it combines the most beautiful of VR with a grandiose simulation, the immersion is total, even if it makes a lot of people laugh who have never driven a real car in their life to my notice.
For the steering wheel settings, you just have to do nothing at all, just the basic setting in the program itself. it's perfect as it is, at least with a Fanatec steering wheel. Ok, just a little trick, add two hotkeys + and - for the FFB setting on the steering wheel, so you can do it on the fly while driving without getting out of the VR. One car is not the other, and everyone has their own FFB feeling.
I had given up on Dirt 2, because it struggled a bit with my old graphics card, but since I got my 3080Ti I'm rediscovering it.
And also for fun I took RaceRoom with all the circuits and all the cars at once, it cost me 90 euros I think and I have fun with it, good simulation? Too early to tell given my lack of experience but it works well in VR.

AMS2 for me anyway, has one of the 'easiest' VR setups.
AC is a very close second.
Haven't used it too much in RF2 or RRE.
ACC is not bad after you get into the car but it requires a lot more effort.
It was almost as if the developers had no real plans for it.

Having said this,..."The best VR games often have the best FFB"...it's hard to understand why rFactor 2 isn't at the top of the list, let alone off it. It is my number 1 also in VR.

I use HP Reverb G2 and Pimax 8KX

jolit said:

Having said this,..."The best VR games often have the best FFB"...it's hard to understand why rFactor 2 isn't at the top of the list, let alone off it. It is my number 1 also in VR.

Click to expand...

Well I'd split this into different immersion experience categories

1. Strictly VR experience (i.e. no account taken on how god/bad base sim engine delivers)
2. Strictly sim-wise immersion and feedback
3. VR + sim engine combo: The cummulative immersion and response.

Since I regard OP with sole focus on the VR-part, my VR chart list in previous post here is solely based on 1)
And far from 'rigid' answer, have changed my mind a couple of times since posting.

I think it also depends on hardware.
When I acquired my entry level Quest 2 a year ago, I started to get my sims work with my Sapphire Nitro+ RX 580 Special Edition .
And rFactor 2 response was without any scrutineering too demanding to get a good VR result, comparing to AMS2.
But must admit that last summer I practiced tons of scrutineering for every of my sims to improve VR experience together with my RX 580. Far more time than actually doing racing. But several Heureka's and just the joy felt on pit-out lap and pit-in again when things succeeded was enough rewarding in itself, having limited sim time.

Then september 2022 finally gave up on my RX 580, or rather got teased by a lucrative offer on the Sapphire Nitro+ RX 6800 XT Special Edition - the one with the dedicated USB-c port - of which performs even better than the built-in USB-c port on my Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra motherboard.

When using full bandwidth and fixed USB-c to USB-c cable I'm able to get very decent VR output for rFactor 2.

So in fact for the category 3), rFactor 2 is topping this chart for me.

But now I mostly simrace in my living room. Either 4K 65'' flat screen using my excellent LG C2 TV or VR racing no-cable solution via my WiFi6+ AP (and now my flexible NLR F-GT seat really comes to justice).

But still, to me, UE4 engine delivers far better here. Even AC CM pp filters delivers better for me than rF2.

And I think the picture on 'what is best VR sim' might be different, using e.g. high end combo of RTX 4090Ti + Pimax Vision 8K X, HTC Vive Pro 2, Meta Quest Pro or higher pro end.

stenovitz said:

Well I'd split this into different immersion experience categories

1. Strictly VR experience (i.e. no account taken on how god/bad base sim engine delivers)
2. Strictly sim-wise immersion and feedback
3. VR + sim engine combo: The cummulative immersion and response.

Since I regard OP with sole focus on the VR-part, my VR chart list in previous post here is solely based on 1)
And far from 'rigid' answer, have changed my mind a couple of times since posting.

I think it also depends on hardware.
When I acquired my entry level Quest 2 a year ago, I started to get my sims work with my Sapphire Nitro+ RX 580 Special Edition .
And rFactor 2 response was without any scrutineering too demanding to get a good VR result, comparing to AMS2.
But must admit that last summer I practiced tons of scrutineering for every of my sims to improve VR experience together with my RX 580. Far more time than actually doing racing. But several Heureka's and just the joy felt on pit-put lap and pit-in again when things succeeded.

Then september 2022 finally gave up on my RX 580, or rather got teased by a lucrative offer on the Sapphire Nitro+ RX 6800 XT Special Edition - the one with the dedicated USB-c port - of which performs even better than the built-in USB-c port on my Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra motherboard.

When using full bandwidth and fixed USB-c to USB-c cable I'm able to get very decent VR output for rFactor 2.

So in fact for the category 3), rFactor 2 is topping this chart for me.

But now I mostly simrace in my living room. Either 4K 65'' flat screen using my excellent LG C2 TV or VR racing no-cable solution via my WiFi6+ AP (and now my flexible NLR F-GT seat really comes to justice).

But still, to me, UE4 engine delivers far better here. Even AC CM pp filters delivers better for me than rF2.

And I think the picture on 'what is best VR sim' might be different, using e.g. high end combo of RTX 4090Ti + Pimax Vision 8K X, HTC Vive Pro 2, Meta Quest Pro or higher pro end.

Click to expand...

You should change from HMD to one with DP. The video compression and decompression required for wireless transmission consumes resources from your GPU and results in worse image quality than DP.

jolit said:

You should change from HMD to one with DP. The video compression and decompression required for wireless transmission consumes resources from your GPU and results in worse image quality than DP.

Click to expand...

Yes I know Even though WiFi6+ AP with low ping times and raw througput, rF2 with DP and USB-c cable is still another fabulous universe VR-wise and think is the reason why VR rF2 is being praised.
I don't experience the difference as that huge using my UE4 engine sims, WiFi6+ AP + VD + SteamVR vs. USB-c connection + either SteamVR or Oculus entrance.
Still I experience that 4K flat screen is far more demanding for my RX 6800 XT GFX than my typical 1080p res when in VR, even turning up TAA, shadow resolution, reflections, crepsular rays, etc, requiring almost double wattage in 4K flatscreen comparing to 1080p VR.

When on WiFi6+ I'm using Steam Virtual Desktop and in-SteamVR alter resolution typically by a factor of 1.5-1.7 to suggested and frequency to 90-120Hz. Which ofcourse is quite power demanding for my Quest 2, but doing endurance VR racing, I just plug in USB-c as power cable.

Looking in the rearview mirror there have been many levels of what was considered acceptable and good VR performance.

Mostly it has all centered around reaching 90fps with whatever the latest CPU/GPU/Headset combos were.

I've gone through the following so far( slightly abbreviated )
At each step I managed 90fps mostly. DCS has always been painful until now.

I5 , 1080Ti, Oculus Rift CV1 ( Dirt Rally 1.0, PC2, Eve Valkyrie, tried DCS couldn't run it)
I9-9900K, 2080Ti, Valve Index (iRacing, Dirt Rally 2.0, DCS )
I9-13900K, 4090, Varjo Aero ( iRacing, Dirt Rally 2.0, DCS, MSFS2000 )

There have been hiccups. The initial Dirt Rally 2.0 was horrible for non-Oculus headsets in VR, but a few months later improved dramatically. Drivers improved and most recently OpenXR has exploded onto the scene.

The irony is that DCS now looks the best of all. Varjo builds high end professional headsets for use by the military. So DCS actually wrote native dynamic foveated rendering supporting the Varjo headsets using eye tracking. Technically they wrote it for the 4 display XR-3, but a developer wrote an OpenXR plugin that embraces that. That means it is the only title I have that supports 39ppd and that the the native DFR actually comes with a 30+% efficiency gain.

Obviously this is at the high end of VR and the costs are high.

OpenXR is where all the action is happening right now and it's where people with dev skills who care about sims and VR are contributing a lot.

I just added an HTC Vive Tracker 3.0 to my rig and because of an OpenXR plugin, I can add motion compensation to most games to make my cockpit more stable while I'm bouncing around.
That native Varjo DFR plugin was recently added by another great guy.
Yet another came out with a color shift correct tool for people who noticed an issue there.
There is even a plugin for flight called "neck safer" that is supposed to save your neck by letting you press a button to flip your VR view point behind you so you can quickly look around with hurting your neck.

The list goes one, but watch the OpenXR space closely and see what kind of support you have for your headset there.