Discussion | VR, Triple Monitors or Ultrawides?

Cover.jpg

What's your preferred setup?

  • VR

    Votes: 662 42.0%
  • Triples

    Votes: 282 17.9%
  • Ultrawide

    Votes: 311 19.7%
  • Single Screen / Other

    Votes: 323 20.5%

  • Total voters
    1,578
This week HTC are launching two brand new Vive products, in a market that continues to grow at rapid pace. Has VR taken the lead in the sim racing world, and if not why?

I have fond memories of my first virtual reality experience in sim racing. I did a couple of practice laps before jumping into a race at the Circuit de Catalunya, being a track I knew well. Any doubts I had about how immersive the experience would be were dispelled almost immediately. A car in front of me was run wide on lap one, hitting a brake marker board which spiralled towards my head. Instinctively I ducked down in my seat, only for a sheepish grin to spread across my face, feeling rather foolish.

The Vive Pro 2 features a 5K resolution display, and an impressive 120Hz refresh rate.
As it reached mainstream market adoption, it became clear that VR was going to lend itself very well to sim racing. The immersive experience that it offers truly is second-to-none, with many converts of the opinion that they could never go back. That being said triple monitor setups are still a very popular option, with many racers enjoying the peripheral vision it offers. Similarly, this is something that can be very enjoyable about using an ultrawide monitor.

Of all the options then, which one is the best? Naturally the topic is incredibly subjective, often due to personal preference, budget or space. However, each also comes with benefits that even make them more suited to different aspects of sim racing.

One of the biggest criticisms of VR since its adoption has been of the low resolutions offered, particularly for the computing power required, compared with monitor alternatives. While virtual reality is still a very young technology and improving all the time, it has to be said that the more crisp image offered by monitors can be a lot easier on the eye, particularly during longer sessions. Furthermore, setting up a VR rig can be a little more time consuming, particularly for those who want to learn the nuances involved with recording virtual reality gameplay.

Ultrawide.jpg

Ultrawides and super ultrawides have fast become a favourite amongst sim racers.

Having tried all three, I've found my preference to be either VR or triple screens, but it depends entirely on the situation. If I am unwinding or practicing alone, I always choose to go with VR simply for the more immersive experience. However, I have found it a lot easier to use triple monitors, or even a single monitor when competing online. It can be trickier to memorise where everything on the steering wheel is, as required when playing in VR. Similarly, in-game menus tend to be easier to navigate on monitors than in virtual reality, which can detract from the experience of using the latter in some situations.

Overall, my go-to is usually VR, and when we consider how far it has come in such a short space of time, and the investment that is going into virtual reality and augmented reality tech, their future does look very exciting indeed.

Finally, we would love to hear your thoughts on this, and find out more about our community's setups!
About author
Charlie Lockwood
23. Motorsport and Sim Racing enthusiast.

Comments

Just pre-ordered a HTC Vive pro 2. And it will be only for sim racing (not enough time for both race and flight sim where VR is also a dream that comes true).
My current oculus headset is lacking in resolution, but I hope things will drastically change with this new hardware. VR is a big step forward for sim racing.

edit : my other config is a ultra wide 21/9 single screen when I want to get really crisp image.
 
Last edited:
Premium
I have an Oculus Quest2 and a single 24"... ATM I can't do long stints on the Q2 'coz I get headaches after half an hour in VR, so I use the monitor for all my races online.

I love the immersion that VR gives you, especially because of the ammount of depth and dimension it provides... I cannot only measure more intuitively the distance to the apex but I can also see how high the kerbstones are and therefore approach the corners accordingly. VR is thus great for studying the track, then doing the racing on a flat screen for the sake of my eyes.

My monitor is placed quite close, atop the steering wheel, so it works fine. Still, I am considering getting a tad larger monitor, mostly to have less of a deadzone on my peripheral vision... a 34" ultrawide would be just right for the space I currently have. Trying to get anything larger than that inside the house would require negotiations skills of military level... haha! :D
 
Last edited:
Ultrawide 4k 120fps for me!
Although VR is much more immersive I'm not willing to sacrifice beautiful 4k graphics and fluidity, and VR I admit hurts my eyes!

Does such a thing exist? If so then would be 5k2k resolution per the Dell and LG, but at 120hz vs. 60. Have not been able to find any monitors with that spec (2160 on the vertical). Are you referring to monitors like the G9 which are not really 4k?
 
Premium
I think these polls are interesting just to see where the market is at the moment regardless of your personal preference.

Personally I think that triples and VR each have their strengths and weaknesses and depending on your situation and priorities either of them could be a winner or you could just have both.

As was mentioned by one person with the cats, sometimes situational awareness is important. I would also add small children as a good reason to be able to see outside your rig.

Fatigue, and heat can be another negative for VR headsets.

I only sim in VR and only game in VR. That works for me, but I don't do marathon races at this point, my kids are grown, my rig is in an air conditioned area and I have a cooling fan on my rig and I have a stout PC that can drive it well.

I do like having depth perception, looking into corners and the immersion of VR and that makes the experience worthwhile for me.
 
For me the sounds are really important , so I play in my theater room .
I roll my rig in front of my 120 inches screen .
Single screen yes, but very big single lol with the best sound possible for immersion.
 
Last edited:
The key word is 'immersion'. VR puts you IN the car, ON the track, AT the race venue. You have to experience it yourself but the sense of presence is incredible. I know there are a multitude of personal, technical and financial reasons why VR isn't for everyone but for me it's an absolute perfect fit for sim racing. Full 360 degree freedom with a view that changes with your head movement is brilliant, but the biggest bonus of VR is the stereoscopic/binocular vision that works just like our eyes do in real life to present things in proper 3D with proper depth perception. Everything you see in VR occupies 3D space and has a solidity that the best 2D screen in the world will never be able to reproduce. Opponents look and feel menacing alongside you, and they have a virtual mass that makes you more wary of collisions. Cockpits come alive in VR, apexes are easier to judge, the sensation of speed is unrivalled, and the scale of the environment can be overwhelming. I think it's pretty bloody amazing. Races are thrilling, feel dangerous, and the first few times you crash in VR you WILL brace for impact. Couple VR with a motion rig and the immersion simply goes of the scale.

I've went back to 2D when my Rift was out for repair (a 50" 4k panel right in front of my wheel, so a pretty good setup) and I found it terribly dull and insipid after VR. I was back to playing a videogame on a letterbox screen rather than feeling like I was actually racing cars on a track. It just felt boring, and detached, and uninvolving in 2D, like watching someone else play a videogame. And all this is compared to a Rift CV1 with its narrow FoV and low resolution. I plan to upgrade hardware next year to something with a higher res and wider FoV, and man... I cannot wait.

2D racing on triples or a curved superwide has its place but comparing it to VR is futile. They are two totally different beasts with common components that achieve a similar thing in totally different ways with completely different results.

VR sim racing a 'gimmick'? No. No it's not. It's actually how it's meant to be played. This is meant to be a simulation, after all. And surely simulation starts with how we perceive things. That's not a 2D panel with your bedroom visible around the edges. After racing in VR I simply cannot go back to looking through a letterbox with the rest of my games room visible around it, and losing proper binocular 3D vision in the process. I'm not a cyclops. Oh, and having to drive like my head is clamped in place, too. Looking over your shoulder in VR never gets old.

Even in my 'old-tech' Rift I can read cockpit instrument detail easily and identify cars off in the distance. I can see rev counter LEDs on the dashboards of other cars as I overtake them. Sure, 4k VR would be awesome but for me, the visual detail even in the Rift is absolutely fine, especially with all the enhancements that proper binocular 3D brings (which is NOTHING like faked 3D movies that are still watching on a fixed screen). Sim racing is all about immersion and VR drops me right into the action.

I've said this before but I'm amazed I ever got into sim racing when a 2D display was the only option. It just seems like a really poor option by comparison now. Even the lighting seems really flat in 2D without the immersion of 3D. Everything seems to comes alive in VR, so the added resolution in 2D is wasted on me anyway as it all seems so lifeless.

I've got a strong suspicion that people who complain about the IQ in VR have been using badly-configured HMDs with IPD set incorrectly, or bad fitment/strap adjustment, or inappropriate in-game settings. VR looked absolutely awful for me before it was configured properly, terribly aliased, shimmery, flat and blocky. After a bit of tweaking it soon looked bloody awesome though and every session is a deeply-immersive thrill.

My opinions of course - yours may differ and probably do, lol.
 
Last edited:
Premium
Very good article indeed. It's VR for me, not sure I could go back to flat screens for sims now, I'm quite happy with my G2/quest2 now I've got the balancing act sorted with decent frame rates in AMS2, AC (70fps with sol and csp and 40-50 with rain on) and ACC (50ish fps) and most of the bells and whistles turned up running a 2070super. I just wish kunos would pull their fingers out and do some decent optimisations as it would benefit VR and flat screen alike. VR will always win for me simply down to the space needed for a full rig with an utlrawide or triples plus using VR as a design/sculpting tool and stroke rehab.
 
Triples all the way! I knew I'd end up with triples eventually, but tried a 49" super ultrawide to start when I got back into sim-racing recently, but I couldn't deal with the lack of FOV. It made me feel like racing horse with blinders on. It was uncomfortable not seeing to the left or right very well, so I had to change course and re-engineer my rig to go triples. A bigger hassle, for sure, but well worth it. It's amazing every time I use it. The immersion is great.

I have tried VR, but it did what I expected it to do, made me feel very sick, a motion sickness issue I've always had. Vision was weird afterwards, too. Nothing else does that type of thing to me, doesn't feel right or healthy, so I opted out. I hated not being able to see anything around me either. It's not that immersive when you see CGI arms covered in clothing you're not wearing, a wheel rim you don't have, legs that aren't yours if you look down, etc. Otherwise, it was neat to a degree, but it made not being able to deal with it much easier to take considering I didn't prefer it anyways.
 
For short races VR for sure (reverb g2+rtx 3080). However for longer races (and other games, e.g. shooters or rpgs) i use triples. Dint underestimate how cool triples are for other games!

I find the main issue with VR is still insufficient resolution at the point you often focus in simracing, that is cars before you 50m-200m. Also the smallish sweetspot.
 
I find the main issue with VR is still insufficient resolution at the point you often focus in simracing, that is cars before you 50m-200m. Also the smallish sweetspot.
On a G2 you should be pin sharp at native res of the headset screen, on my Q2 at max res of 5408 x 2736 its as good as a monitor for clarity, virtually no difference.

AC isnt as clear as AMS2, i wish it was, but its not, in AMS2 you can put a sharpening filter on too, i advise around .05 as then it doesnt make it shimmer, its much clearer than AC, to the point of monitor clarity. You can see perfectly to apex from distance.

Resolution of the screens in the headset is a curious statement, as they are now extremely clear (with the right software / game).

G2 does have a small sweet spot though you are correct on that.

Sadly ACC, Raceroom and others are lacking in VR implementation, AMS2's graphics engine is top of the tree by some distance i think.
 
I have a 49" ultrawide screen, I plan to move to triples when I upgrade my GPU (I have everything ready except the GPU but I am not in a rush to pay more than MRSP especially since the Samsung G9 is pretty good to begin with). I also have VR and I agree that VR gives you another level of Immersion. However, it also brings another level of discomfort for longer sessions and limits your awareness of and interaction with outside elements (Button boxes, people).
The triples are my first choice but I would also like to do VR now and then.
For me it is not "either... or" but "both ... and".
 
I would say that today the choices are somehow simple:

1) If you are a very competitive racer, i think nothing can beat monitors. Resolution, reliability, buttons, the list goes on and on.
2) If you can't afford a top of the top PC and headset, same thing: monitors all the way.
3) If you are into simming for the fun of it, AND you can afford a top specced PC + Headset, AND you are willing to tinker around, then nothing will ever beat the immersion you get from VR. Not even close.
4) In a few years, i do think VR will be the only rationale choice, but computing power, headsets resoutions and FOVs, ease of use, etc. will need years to improve to this level.
 
VR is a game changer for me on par with the jump from game pad to wheel.

The ability to assess relative speed, depth, reference points, etc are light years better in VR than on a flat monitor. I'll never go back.

Try driving an open wheel car on flat screens and then in VR back to back. The difference is mind blowing. On flat screens, I used to drive open wheelers on TV pod cam whenever possible because it was just so darn hard to see out of the cockpit even with FOV properly set. If you've ever driven (or even sat in) an open wheeler in real life, you know how awesome the view *really* is. VR replicates that for me.

With modern prototype cars, the difference might even be more extreme. The cockpit in some of those were literally undriveable for me on flat screens. Again, in VR, totally different.

Interestingly, for flight sims, I still use flat screen and TrackIR. Many more things (switches, levers, etc) to fiddle with in a plane than in a car and I haven't really seen a suitable solution yet (though "capto-gloves" look promising).
 
On a G2 you should be pin sharp at native res of the headset screen, on my Q2 at max res of 5408 x 2736 its as good as a monitor for clarity, virtually no difference.

AC isnt as clear as AMS2, i wish it was, but its not, in AMS2 you can put a sharpening filter on too, i advise around .05 as then it doesnt make it shimmer, its much clearer than AC, to the point of monitor clarity. You can see perfectly to apex from distance.

Resolution of the screens in the headset is a curious statement, as they are now extremely clear (with the right software / game).

G2 does have a small sweet spot though you are correct on that.

Sadly ACC, Raceroom and others are lacking in VR implementation, AMS2's graphics engine is top of the tree by some distance i think.
Maybe you are right. Its mainly in AC where i notice this, even at 120%SS in steam VR. The cars just become sort of pixelated blobs. In ACC its the same story but there im quite a bit below 100%SS...

AMS2 i can run at 85%SS or so and its def better than AC but in my view its far from monitor sharp. Ill give the filter a go...

Anyway whether its panel resolution or gfx engine its my main VR "con": the fuzzyness at the point where you typically focus in simracing. Cockpit etc is fine.
 
Les gars, comment se passe-t-il avec la configuration VR pour simracing en ce qui concerne les capteurs VR que vous devez installer dans la pièce à des endroits spécifiques? Je ne sais pas si je serais capable de le faire pour différentes raisons (comme dans un coin il y a une énorme armoire / placard, la pièce n'est peut-être pas assez grande pour placer les capteurs là où ils doivent être, etc.)
Serait-ce un problème pour la simulation de course? Je sais que c'est probablement principalement pour la reconnaissance du mouvement / de l'espace pour d'autres jeux et ce n'est pas nécessaire, je suppose, pour les courses de simulation, car vous vous asseyez au même endroit. Mais pouvez-vous utiliser la VR sans ces capteurs ou l'utiliser si les capteurs ne sont pas très bien positionnés et ont toujours toutes les fonctionnalités dans les titres de course sim sans aucun problème, etc.?

Hi, you don't need any more sensors, it's all in the headset (for me an Oculus Rift S). I can play a car sim in a very small space, much less than 2 * 2 meters. I would recommend the Oculus Quest 2, cheaper than the Rift S and better in everything, usable without wires with the small games developed for li and compatible with our simulations by adding a cable or by connecting it to Wifi (it's better ). There are of course other helmets, sometimes better but don't forget that if your pc is not powerful enough you will not be able to sufficiently exploit the qualities of your helmet. For my part, I have a 7700k and a 1080Ti, with my rift on AMS2 which is very well optimized for the Oculus I hardly reduce any parameters and I have a perfect view for example on the horizon in the straight line of the Nurburg. I am always incredibly amazed when I put my helmet on and find myself at Francorchamps, I'm crazy about VR, it's so fantastic!
 
Last edited:
Got a samsung G9 super ultrawide, and I never going back to triples. VR runs too hot for me and the UX is not perfected yet, I have to lift my headset all the time, etc..
 
I will never forget the first time using the Rift in the Cobra in AC with a slight breeze coming through the window and saying out loud "HOLY SH!T"!! Then it continued with the F1 cars WOW WOW WOW. Then work got in the way and I gave the rift to my nephew which is now collecting dust as he is using an xbox with his friends lol. Now I use a curved AOC and like it. But I definately will get a headset again just not sure which one. :thumbsup:
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Charlie Lockwood
Article read time
3 min read
Views
51,346
Comments
197
Last update

What would make you race in our Club events

  • Special events

    Votes: 62 29.1%
  • More leagues

    Votes: 41 19.2%
  • Prizes

    Votes: 44 20.7%
  • Trophies

    Votes: 26 12.2%
  • Forum trophies

    Votes: 14 6.6%
  • Livestreams

    Votes: 32 15.0%
  • Easier access

    Votes: 117 54.9%
  • Other? post your reason

    Votes: 35 16.4%
Back
Top