RD Series on Simracing.GP

Daily WTCR races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT3 Endurance races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT3 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT4 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP

Setting up new rig: Screens Vs Oculus

Hi everyone!

This is my first time here. I’m planning on setting up a racing rig, taking to a new level my Logitech G25 wheel, mainly to play Project Cars 2 on my PC.

I still have to take a final decision regarding which rig to buy (I’m considering a range of rigs from the GT Omega up to the Rseat RS1). However, I have a more pressing decision to make first, involving which sort of display I should use.

I’m sort of a casual user. I don’t intend to spend hours and hours on the simulator, I will just play 3-4 days a week, 1 or 2h per day maximum, and I may even spend weeks playing other games instead of sim racing.

My first intention was to use a secondary 32” TV I’ve got at home and later on decide if it’s worthwhile for me to upgrade to a more professional setup, such as VR or triple monitors.
Unfortunately, I’ve just realized the TV I intended to use is not Full HD as I initially thought, but just HD Ready (1366 x 768px) so I think that’s a No Go.


It seems then that I’ll have to spend some extra money on getting a decent display.
I think I’ve got 3 options:

1. Getting a 200-300€ 27-31” 1080p individual monitor such as the 32” Samsung C32F391FWU Curved LED, which costs a very decent 200€

2. Going for a triple monitor setup with three 24” monitors (I’m not really fond of this option, since I don’t want to occupy so much space in my office, and for some casual playing I think it might be too much, aside from being significantly more expensive than the other options)

3. Getting the new Oculus Rift S (450€), which sounds like a good option, since it’s not that much more expensive than option 1 (Single Monitor + Tv Stand will get quite close to the 450€ of the Oculus), aside from achieving a much tidier simulator rig, without screens and screen stands, which is definitely something to take into account in my case.


I’ve never experienced VR and neither have I experienced a triple monitor sim. I’ve read that Project Cars + Oculus Rift is an amazing experience, even though you end up losing some resolution and graphics as compared to a regular monitor. I think I can live with that as long as my PC is capable of running the game with Medium graphic settings and an acceptable frame rate. The other problem that arises with VR is that some people are prone to suffering motion sickness. Since I’ve never tried VR before, I cannot know if that’s gonna be my case. I guess I could just buy the lenses and if I feel sick while playing, ship them back, get a refund and switch to any of the other options.


My question is related to the performance I will get with VR and also with a triple monitor setup.

I’m running on an Intel Core i7 8700, GTX 1070 Ti and 16Gb RAM.

Do you think I’ll be able to get a decent performance with Project Cars 2 together with VR both in terms of graph quality and frame rate? What about a triple monitor?

Thanks!
 

RCHeliguy

Premium
This is a subject that people are divided on.

A group like myself love playing in VR and prefer it over screens. In fact I'm only set up for VR.

Playing in VR has pros and cons.

Pros:
The immersion is better. You can look around corners and feel like you are in the car. I wouldn't trade that for anything.
As you mention, it doesn't take up as much space, which was critical for my mobile rig.
You don't have to worry about changing your view in a game.

Cons:
This is actually a pretty long list.
It requires a more powerful computer.(yours should be fine driving a Rift S)
Not all titles support VR.
Initially you may have a bit of nausea, but you'll get over it. It took me about 30min a day for 5 days to get my VR legs.
Once you've experienced VR and if you love it, you may have added another expensive series of upgrades in the future.
Currently the resolution is lacking compared to monitors.
 
This is a subject that people are divided on.

A group like myself love playing in VR and prefer it over screens. In fact I'm only set up for VR.

Playing in VR has pros and cons.

Pros:
The immersion is better. You can look around corners and feel like you are in the car. I wouldn't trade that for anything.
As you mention, it doesn't take up as much space, which was critical for my mobile rig.
You don't have to worry about changing your view in a game.

Cons:
This is actually a pretty long list.
It requires a more powerful computer.(yours should be fine driving a Rift S)
Not all titles support VR.
Initially you may have a bit of nausea, but you'll get over it. It took me about 30min a day for 5 days to get my VR legs.
Once you've experienced VR and if you love it, you may have added another expensive series of upgrades in the future.
Currently the resolution is lacking compared to monitors.
Thanks! Even though I've never ever used VR lenses, I've always been interested in them, since they seem much more immersing to me than a regular monitor. I don't intend to drive for hours, just some casual gaming trying to get the most amazing and realistic experience as possible, so I think VR might be a great option.
I'm afraid the triple monitor setup will be too much both in price and space for just some casual gaming, aside from not being as spectacular as VR (even with better graphs).
A single TV/monitor could be just fine for now, but since I have to buy a brand-new monitor + Stand, I'm already getting into VR price range.
 
Last edited:
VR is a revolutionary experience but has caveats.. as mentioned above..

Of the options you have given, VR will bring you the best bang for buck IMO.

be prepared to run modest graphics settings to get playable frame rates though.
 
Also, if you're looking to play other titles then you may still need a screen if they're not VR compatible.
If it's just going to be for sim racing then VR could be a good route to take. I for one play other titles that are not VR supported which means I'd still need a screen for regular computing and playing those titles
 
Besides simracing equipment (wheels, pedals, etc.) which simracing wouldn't exist without,I think 3D gaming - be it Nvidia 3D Vision, VR headsets, etc. - is the biggest evolution, the biggest "thing" in all of video gaming since I started playing Nintendo 1 back in the 1980s.

Without 3D, the monitor you're staring at is basically a piece of paper.

I currently use Nvidia 3D Vision with triple 27" 1440p monitors (and Track IR 5 off and on) but will be going with a VR headset once they have wider FOVs (minimum 140-ish h.FOV...maybe I can squeeze down to 130 if that's my only option, maybe, but that's my absolute minimum).

I believe the majority of what impresses people so much about VR headsets is the 3D/Stereoscopic vision. If I had to quantify it, I'd say 75% of people's positive impressions about VR are purely down to the 3D vision while the head-tracking, real world world around you disappearing, etc. would contribute the remaining 25%.

My only worry about VR is this:
1. I hear object scaling can be different with different headsets. This makes no sense to me. Object scaling should always be identical no matter the headset just like object scaling will always be identical no matter what monitor setup you use assuming you're using the proper 1:1 FOV for your given setup.

2. I see, time and time again, slightly arcadey/unrealistic views in so many VR headset videos. The views are so often created from a too high and too downward looking position.

If VR headsets allow you to change the FOV and camera/head position and angle like every simracing game does, then my 2 points above shouldn't be a problem; I don't know if that's possible though. I never see people adjusting their view/"seat" or their FOV in VR headset simracing videos.
 
Once you try VR you will find it hard to go back to a monitor.
If you do go the VR route then you will still need a monitor too in order to set things up.
I have never heard about scale being out lately and those that were out was due to the game software itself and not the HMD.
You can adjust the seating/view position but again it’s game dependent.
Pcars2 is a great experience in VR and looks and performs amazingly.
 

Mascot

Card-carrying mod whore
I don't know where these VR scaling and positioning concerns come from. VR puts you in the drivers seat and everything scales 1:1.
Like sitting in a real car.
And of course you can always change the seating/viewing position to your personal taste. You can 'sit' high up in the air behind the car if you want. It's a bit trippy.

And NEVER judge how VR looks from flat 2D images. Everything comes alive in 3D stereoscopic view. You'd never judge how a meal tastes from a photo in a recipe book, would you?

Personally I think VR and sim racing are perfect partners, even at this early stage. Immersion goes off the scale. Why anyone who's able to enjoy VR ever goes back to 2D displays for sim racing is beyond me. It feels like such an immersive downgrade, like being an observer rather than a participant.
 
Mascot, can you remember when Dirt came out?
It looked like your hands were massive, or that you were a child sat in the drivers seat as the scale was way off. That's been sorted now though. I am sure a few other games had issues, but as I said, it was due to the software and programming not the HMD itself, and those that did have issues were sorted by the software houses fairly quickly.

I agree on the rest of your post, the level of immersion is off the scale, despite its flaws, when you strap that headset on you are transported 'into' the drivers seat of a race car. No number of screens can do that the same.
 
thank you all for your opinions. Looks like VR might as well be the way to go.
I intend to setup the rig 3-4 meters away from my current desktop PC, at the corner of the room, so I already have my desktop monitor and keyboard to set things up, as well as for regular computing and playing non VR and non racing games.
I thought Oculus was almost the only option for VR gaming, but thanks to this forum I've just found out about Lenovo Explorer. Is it as good as it looks like? Equal or even better performance than the Oculus at half the price?
https://www.pccomponentes.com/lenov...MInICC8uip4gIVxlQYCh0hwgmeEAQYASABEgKOUfD_BwE

If I decided to choose the single monitor option, what sort of screen and price range would you recommend for a casual experience?
What about triple monitors?
 
Last edited:

RCHeliguy

Premium
Which headset is best is another can of worms.

For years the Oculus Rift was a great goto headset, lightweight, comfortable, good headphones and good performance. It was also excellent for room scale and has great hand controllers.

The Rift S will be less demanding on your rig, but it doesn't have physical IPD adjustment. So depending on how wide your eyes are ( if your eyes are narrower or wider than average ) . However it is still a very light and by all accounts comfortable headset.

Other than the Samsung Odyssey+ which can still be found on sale for $300 periodically, the other WMR headsets that were not considered quite as good have been heavily discounted.
 
Which headset is best is another can of worms.

For years the Oculus Rift was a great goto headset, lightweight, comfortable, good headphones and good performance. It was also excellent for room scale and has great hand controllers.

The Rift S will be less demanding on your rig, but it doesn't have physical IPD adjustment. So depending on how wide your eyes are ( if your eyes are narrower or wider than average ) . However it is still a very light and by all accounts comfortable headset.

Other than the Samsung Odyssey+ which can still be found on sale for $300 periodically, the other WMR headsets that were not considered quite as good have been heavily discounted.
I think I have a pretty normal interpupillary distance, so the lack of IPD adjustment should not be an issue...
What I really like about the Rift S as compared to the original Rift is that the motion/position sensors are integrated into the headset, so no need to fill my room with cameras and cables. Same applies to the Lenovo Explorer.

Regarding the Samsung, I don't think they've ever been available in my country, so I think I could discard them.

I've found a local store (see link on my previous message) where you can get the Lenovo for just 199€. Seems an unbeatable price as compared to the 450€ they are asking for the new Rift S. If quality and specs are accpetably similar, the Lenovo look like a great deal.
 

RCHeliguy

Premium
Be VERY careful looking at specs like resolution alone and also consider that there is a reason the Lenovo is priced lower than the other WMR headsets.

The Rift S has a much larger sweet spot which encourages you to look around. The Lenovo has more of a tunnel with a small sweet spot where things look clear in the middle.
 
I've been doing some research and it turns out the IPD may be an issue after all.
The Lenovo is almost discarded since it has a smaller sweet spot which I don't think is going to fit my 59mm IPD (I've seen a video of a guy with this IPD saying he had some problems with the image)
The Rift S has no physical IPD adjustment either, and it's designed for 63-64mm IPD, so I fear it may end up being a problem too, despite its wider sweet spot.
I've been unable to find any previous version of the Rift (which did have IPD physical adjustment) at a decent price.
I may end up with the individual monitor option. A pitty now that I had become quite fond of the VR option.
 
Top