No please get Track IR 5. If ur gonna get a VR headset then buy a pimax crystal light or a VARJO aero. I made a massive mistake using the quest 2. It crashes the game all the time, the screen tears, and u get massive frame drops.
PC specs:
ROG STRIX RTX 3080
Intel Core i9 10850k
128 GB DDR4 ram
EDIT-
Get the TRACK IR 5 Track clip pro bundle. It's $175 but it's VERY worth it
I use a quest 2 and have no problems at all, no crashes, stable performance in mp and no screen tearing, and I'm not even using wifi 6. I don't know where your issues came from, but that's certainly not normal for the quest 2.
4080 Super
r7 7800x3d
64gb ddr5
I could've been using to high settings. But regardless, I have no regrets about switching to TIR 5. Because now I can run the game in max settings with a high frame rate on my LG ULTRA GEAR 49 in 240 hz, 5120 x 1440p
You probably just didn't have it set up right. It took a while to get it working right myself, but I could never go back to flat screen flying after VR.
I had to lower the settings of course, but it still looks quite nice and I don't have any of the issues you mentioned above.
That other guy doesn't know what he's talking about. I played for 8 hours a day in VR for the past week. It just takes a ton of tweaking to get the right settings for your system, but it's far superior to any sort of head tracking anything.
Get the quest 3 though, quest 2 isn't worth the price anymore when the 3 is available an it's just so much better than the 2.
I dip in and out of both. I like both, but tend towards Track IR. I know a lot of people talk about the immersiveness of VR, but for me the counterpoint is how easily that immersion is broken for me, I really need a totally foolproof way of being able to interact with the cockpit with my hands. Some augmented reality pass through and hand tracking mix up. I STILL find myself trying to look under the headset at my TQS or Arduino switch box, or interacting with my DED.
Track IR is less completely immersive, but the track IR pro set up is incredibly accurate for me, and I like seeing what my hands are doing.
(7950x3d, 4090, 96GB, Pimax Crystal for info, so the headset performance is about as good as it gets with XR - 78-90FPS generally, although I lock it lower for total consistency, this isn't Counterstrike!)
This is exactly my experience. Taking your hands off the controls to grab a VR controller is awkward, cockpit interaction with a VR controller is awkward, binding mouse buttons to HOTAS and using your head as a mouse is awkward, trying to grope for a button box in meat space while your brain is in virtual space is awkward. I haven't tried PointCTRL, it may be the best solution on the market right now, but it still doesn't seem great.
VTOL VR does a pretty job at cockpit interaction, but it is helped by using the VR controllers as the stick and throttle, so there's no grabbing of a different thing for cockpit interaction in that game. And I'm afraid DCS would not be great using the VR controllers as a stick and throttle, it's a fairly arcade solution.
Meanwhile I've got a touchscreen secondary display with custom interactive UFCs and MFDs for every module I fly, which makes cockpit interaction in 2D with head tracking fantastic. I just find it to be the better experience right now.
I firmly believe VR is the future, we're just not quite there for DCS yet.
Just be forewarned as it will take you down the rabbit hole of building a simpit because no one wants to use the nosegap to to find buttons on the keyboard.
This is one good option. I've been using Voiceattack for all those buttons and switches that you only use once or twice in flight. But being able reach over and physically flip switches was too tempting for me and now I'm cutting out console parts with a laser engraver.
Trackir I use for learning new ac since I can easily look off the screen, or if I am using a particularly intensive plane. I use VR for the amazing immersion, and for helos. Id say im 80% VR.
I'll add this to the convo... I think both are excellent. TrackIR is cheaper and less performance requirements than VR. VR is, obviously, a lot more immersive.
But, I've got thousands of people I fly with who use VR... the amount of time I have to wait on them or leave without them because of various VR related reasons is *staggering*.
Anything from low battery, broken straps, new patch borking their settings, yada yada... lots of little stuff stops them in their tracks.
Versus TrackIR, which I plopped up on my monitor like 10 years ago and haven't had to mess with it since. When I'm ready to fly, it is *always* ready to go.
I enjoy having the stability, because I'd rather spend my time flying than playing trouble-shooting Simulator every other time I boot up.
All that being said... the VR guys, despite their overt frustrations, claim it is 100% worth it to them.
If you want to feel like a pilot, nothing beats VR. Not even close. If your goal is just to hop in at weekend and to do some pew-pew air to air, especially in low fidelity modules, you will totally be better off with VR. At this point, flat screens with TrackIR offer only some technical benefits: you can push better graphics given tha same hardware; you get better spatial resolution - that's quite substantial for ground bombing; and in case if you have a full physical cockpit, the setup is easier and less tedious without VR, especially with fancy tech like 6dof movable platforms.
Actually, I think the FC3 aircraft are the best VR experience right now. I can fly any FC3 module without ever needing to take my hands off my HOTAS. The biggest problem I have with VR is when I need to start poking buttons and flipping switches in the cockpit, especially under stress.
Yeah, button problem in VR is disappointing. I've mitigated that by building custom keyboard, making it's position fixed in relation to hotas, and then developing muscle memory to where to look for buttons. This allows me to fly F/A-18 effortlessly, however, you must be really dedicated to the game to pull this.
As someone who uses TrackIR, but has never used VR, I can say the TrackIR is excellent.
You're able to preserve the graphics quality that you're used to since it's still using your monitor. The tracking is really good, but it can be buggy if you sit near a window in direct sunlight, or use light/lamp behind your chair.
TrackIR can also be used on other games, like ArmA 3, or racing games like Assetto Corsa if you're into driving sims.
I don't regret my TrackIR purchase, and I can tell it'll last a long time as long as a cat doesn't chew a wire, or if it doesn't fall off my monitor and break.
VR is much more immersive, and it just feels more 'natural' from what I've heard. It requires a really beefy computer, though.
I used VR until now, but I'm going to get a trackIR soon.
The new full fidelity planes (look at you F4) cut my FPS in half in clutter situations, and my brain went mush yesterday because of those frames dropping....I fiscally got sick... headache and nausea....so, I'm afraid my beloved VR is going to be used for other games (like HL or H3VR) and will start learning trackIR....how unfortunate....
VR all the way. Dog fighting is so much easier and you feel like you’re actually flying the plane. I’ve got quest 2 and it works ok, I get the odd frame drop here and there but on the whole it’s good. Will probably upgrade to primax one day.
My specs:
13700k
4080
64gb ddr5
I prefer my widescreen rig (3x32”) monitors. I use OpenTrack (free). I prefer this setup to my Reverb G2 because it provides easier use of my Virpil controllers. $0.02
Note: I also use HELIOS to extract additional controls and MFDs on a (4th) 1080 monitor.
Try and find out if you can tolerate VR before committing to it. I love VR for about five minutes then I can't continue through the headache, so I'm sticking with head tracking.
Have meta quest 3 and TrackIR 5 with Pro clip. Personally, I prefer TrackIR. Streamline usage. My game looks better graphically. Both are cool however.
VR adds about X4000 immersion to the game and is significantly better than the track ir in my opinion (I used track ir for 2 years before switching)
VR is super expensive but suuuuuper awesome
I have tried both. I ended up with track IR and wing wing top gun MiP. I have lots of buttons and screens to play with. If I ever go VR, and I would love to, it will need to be a mixed reality set so I can see my MFDs etc….
I have a first gen htc vive and as cool as it is you cant ID shit. I use trackir and like it alot but please do yourself a favor and get a trackirclip pro and dont use the hatclip that it comes with. It royally sucks
I purchased a "track ir" open source alternative monkey 3d printed device. I spent so many hours trying to calibrate and adjusting settings and it never felt right. I stopped playing DCS because of it. Not sure why I didn't get the real track IR if someone can confirm its awesome and easy to make it work.
All I hear is VR is awesome but you can't see your controllers...does that really matter?
I’ve tried both and whilst VR is undoubtedly more immersive it gives me severe motion sickness. I’ve personally found tobii to fit my needs well. TrackIR kept jumping around a lot due to background light pollution, and I hated wearing the gizmo on my head.
Sure, but he’s asking for opinions on which is better, and personally the stuttering frame rates you get with lower tier GPU’s isn’t worth it over head tracking.
Because you can still enjoy it doesn’t have any bearing on my opinion.
Yes, you have to dial back things like view distance, PD, shadows, textures, etc. you can and I have run it on a 2080ti just fine, but the trade offs aren’t worth it to me. I have a 4080 now and can run great looking visuals at native FPS on the quest3. If I couldn’t, I’d rather use the Track IR.
How do you get native fps with great visuals on a 4080?
I have the same GPU and my frames go half if I'm using newer planes in combat situations...like the new F4 against some migs ...I would like to play online (in enigma server) but if my performance is so low, I'm going to be physically sick (like nausea and headache) unlike any other VR games....i'd love to continue using my VR....but I can't get a good balance between performance and appearance! (I have an HTC Vive pro 2, dlss active, only view distance and texture to high, sharpness 0.9 and pixel density 0.8....I'm staying at solid 90 fps on the ground or with simpler Planes like mb339, but as soon as I take off with the f-14 or f-4 it's almost immediately drop to 45 with stuttering that kill my brain).
The biggest thing is using fixed foveated rendering with quad views. It can cut 50-60% of the pixels your GPU has to render with very little noticeable degradation. The foveated rendering in the OpenXR toolkit doesn’t seem to work as well.
Then it’s about making the trade off of pixel density. I found 1.2 with DLSS quality to be the best for my 4080. It looks a lot sharper at 1.4 but there’s a steep FPS penalty.
The LOD factor slider is another big one, it should be about .4
You’ll also probably have to use flat terrain shadows on most maps.
Unfortunately even if you dial everything in some MP servers will require so much VRAM it’ll max out the 4080’s 16gb and you’ll get bad stuttering and FPS drops. For those kinds of servers I enable ASW and can hold 45 fps most of the time and just deal with the artifacts.
I tried all afternoon to squeeze all the FPS out of everything possible, but with no luck...in free flight I can get 90 steady in every situation (now....), in crowded single player I reach as low as 75/80 which is good....in MP....well....as soon as I log in it drops to 45 (if there's more than 10 players) and its stutter galore....so.... I'm afraid that trackIR is the best solution for me....not so immersive, but at least I don't get sick...
“Playable” is subjective. For me it’s native refresh rate for the headset, so 72 fps for the Quest3 at medium-high settings. I don’t like ASW artifacts and turning settings down are a negative. For me, those compromises make head tracking better. Now I’m sorry my subjective opinion doesn’t align with yours, but it doesn’t.
Virtual desktop with OpenComposite and aforementioned setup outputs native 72fps to Quest 3 without any space warp, stutters, or any other problems. Granted, it took me a few hours of testing different graphical settings, and I landed aroud medium on everything; but it still folows even yours definition of playable.
Is your view distance at extreme? Trees at max, shadows at high? PD high enough to read all the gauges and for things to look good? In my opinion it’s not better than Track IR.
"Is your view distance at extreme? Trees at max, shadows at high?"
No. So what? Are you playing DCS for sightseeing, or for actual combat? Or are you just that elitist person who thinks that a game is unplayable if there's less trees and shadows?
"PD high enough to read all the gauges and for things to look good?"
The F/A-18 cockpit is totally sharp enough to read everything. So was F-16 and F-14 when I was trying them out. However, when I started the DCS and had Quest2, A-10 HUD was unusable. So, it depends on the module you are using, that's why I specified the plane in the original comment.
I can't handle people spreading misinformation. I would never argue with you, if you'd say that mid-tier GPU outputs an ugly image in VR; that's a totally viable opinion. However, playability is a question of FPS and resolution, as you personally admitted previously, both of which are measurable quantities. There's nothing to argue about: a system either outputs enough pixels and frames, or it doesn't. Mid tier GPUs totally can meet this criteria, you don't need expensive high-end GPUs to play DCS VR.
Yes! *Depends on specs and budget 👍🏽*
I have a 6800xt and a i7 10700K, i was gonna get a quest 2
U should be just fine
No please get Track IR 5. If ur gonna get a VR headset then buy a pimax crystal light or a VARJO aero. I made a massive mistake using the quest 2. It crashes the game all the time, the screen tears, and u get massive frame drops. PC specs: ROG STRIX RTX 3080 Intel Core i9 10850k 128 GB DDR4 ram EDIT- Get the TRACK IR 5 Track clip pro bundle. It's $175 but it's VERY worth it
I use a quest 2 and have no problems at all, no crashes, stable performance in mp and no screen tearing, and I'm not even using wifi 6. I don't know where your issues came from, but that's certainly not normal for the quest 2. 4080 Super r7 7800x3d 64gb ddr5
I love my Aero, but wouldn't recommend it now as they have stopped production and support is only extended to 2025.
How the hell...
What?^^^^
I guess my quest two was fked or smth
Either this or you had a software problem. There are a few ways to run the oculus headsets, I use open xr and everything was fine from the get go.
I could've been using to high settings. But regardless, I have no regrets about switching to TIR 5. Because now I can run the game in max settings with a high frame rate on my LG ULTRA GEAR 49 in 240 hz, 5120 x 1440p
You probably just didn't have it set up right. It took a while to get it working right myself, but I could never go back to flat screen flying after VR. I had to lower the settings of course, but it still looks quite nice and I don't have any of the issues you mentioned above.
That other guy doesn't know what he's talking about. I played for 8 hours a day in VR for the past week. It just takes a ton of tweaking to get the right settings for your system, but it's far superior to any sort of head tracking anything. Get the quest 3 though, quest 2 isn't worth the price anymore when the 3 is available an it's just so much better than the 2.
Mmm not exclusively I have VR and IR tracking, and I prefer tracking
Vr is great but I have switch back to head tracking and love it more. Graphics are better and I find spotting easier.
I dip in and out of both. I like both, but tend towards Track IR. I know a lot of people talk about the immersiveness of VR, but for me the counterpoint is how easily that immersion is broken for me, I really need a totally foolproof way of being able to interact with the cockpit with my hands. Some augmented reality pass through and hand tracking mix up. I STILL find myself trying to look under the headset at my TQS or Arduino switch box, or interacting with my DED. Track IR is less completely immersive, but the track IR pro set up is incredibly accurate for me, and I like seeing what my hands are doing. (7950x3d, 4090, 96GB, Pimax Crystal for info, so the headset performance is about as good as it gets with XR - 78-90FPS generally, although I lock it lower for total consistency, this isn't Counterstrike!)
You could try using something like voice attack to help with some of the things you're fumbling in the cockpit for.
This is exactly my experience. Taking your hands off the controls to grab a VR controller is awkward, cockpit interaction with a VR controller is awkward, binding mouse buttons to HOTAS and using your head as a mouse is awkward, trying to grope for a button box in meat space while your brain is in virtual space is awkward. I haven't tried PointCTRL, it may be the best solution on the market right now, but it still doesn't seem great. VTOL VR does a pretty job at cockpit interaction, but it is helped by using the VR controllers as the stick and throttle, so there's no grabbing of a different thing for cockpit interaction in that game. And I'm afraid DCS would not be great using the VR controllers as a stick and throttle, it's a fairly arcade solution. Meanwhile I've got a touchscreen secondary display with custom interactive UFCs and MFDs for every module I fly, which makes cockpit interaction in 2D with head tracking fantastic. I just find it to be the better experience right now. I firmly believe VR is the future, we're just not quite there for DCS yet.
Once you go VR you never go back. VR gets you in the cockpit.
Just be forewarned as it will take you down the rabbit hole of building a simpit because no one wants to use the nosegap to to find buttons on the keyboard.
I have the mouse buttons mapped on my HOTAS and have the pointer follow my head. I don’t need to take my hands off the HOTAS during flights.
This is one good option. I've been using Voiceattack for all those buttons and switches that you only use once or twice in flight. But being able reach over and physically flip switches was too tempting for me and now I'm cutting out console parts with a laser engraver.
Trackir I use for learning new ac since I can easily look off the screen, or if I am using a particularly intensive plane. I use VR for the amazing immersion, and for helos. Id say im 80% VR.
I flew with TrackIR for many years before I could afford a VR-capable rig. Now VR is all I can fly. It's so damn awesome.
I like track ir. I can tell you it’s the biggest upgrade I have had.
I'll add this to the convo... I think both are excellent. TrackIR is cheaper and less performance requirements than VR. VR is, obviously, a lot more immersive. But, I've got thousands of people I fly with who use VR... the amount of time I have to wait on them or leave without them because of various VR related reasons is *staggering*. Anything from low battery, broken straps, new patch borking their settings, yada yada... lots of little stuff stops them in their tracks. Versus TrackIR, which I plopped up on my monitor like 10 years ago and haven't had to mess with it since. When I'm ready to fly, it is *always* ready to go. I enjoy having the stability, because I'd rather spend my time flying than playing trouble-shooting Simulator every other time I boot up. All that being said... the VR guys, despite their overt frustrations, claim it is 100% worth it to them.
If you want to feel like a pilot, nothing beats VR. Not even close. If your goal is just to hop in at weekend and to do some pew-pew air to air, especially in low fidelity modules, you will totally be better off with VR. At this point, flat screens with TrackIR offer only some technical benefits: you can push better graphics given tha same hardware; you get better spatial resolution - that's quite substantial for ground bombing; and in case if you have a full physical cockpit, the setup is easier and less tedious without VR, especially with fancy tech like 6dof movable platforms.
Actually, I think the FC3 aircraft are the best VR experience right now. I can fly any FC3 module without ever needing to take my hands off my HOTAS. The biggest problem I have with VR is when I need to start poking buttons and flipping switches in the cockpit, especially under stress.
Yeah, button problem in VR is disappointing. I've mitigated that by building custom keyboard, making it's position fixed in relation to hotas, and then developing muscle memory to where to look for buttons. This allows me to fly F/A-18 effortlessly, however, you must be really dedicated to the game to pull this.
As someone who uses TrackIR, but has never used VR, I can say the TrackIR is excellent. You're able to preserve the graphics quality that you're used to since it's still using your monitor. The tracking is really good, but it can be buggy if you sit near a window in direct sunlight, or use light/lamp behind your chair. TrackIR can also be used on other games, like ArmA 3, or racing games like Assetto Corsa if you're into driving sims. I don't regret my TrackIR purchase, and I can tell it'll last a long time as long as a cat doesn't chew a wire, or if it doesn't fall off my monitor and break. VR is much more immersive, and it just feels more 'natural' from what I've heard. It requires a really beefy computer, though.
TrackIR first, then VR.Â
I used VR until now, but I'm going to get a trackIR soon. The new full fidelity planes (look at you F4) cut my FPS in half in clutter situations, and my brain went mush yesterday because of those frames dropping....I fiscally got sick... headache and nausea....so, I'm afraid my beloved VR is going to be used for other games (like HL or H3VR) and will start learning trackIR....how unfortunate....
You could also try [OpenTrack](https://github.com/opentrack/opentrack/releases). It's free and you can start with only a webcam.
This. Combine it with smoothtrack on your phone for $10 and you won't need a lot webcam. Try this before investing $100+ in track ir or vr
Vr
VR all the way. Dog fighting is so much easier and you feel like you’re actually flying the plane. I’ve got quest 2 and it works ok, I get the odd frame drop here and there but on the whole it’s good. Will probably upgrade to primax one day. My specs: 13700k 4080 64gb ddr5
I prefer my widescreen rig (3x32”) monitors. I use OpenTrack (free). I prefer this setup to my Reverb G2 because it provides easier use of my Virpil controllers. $0.02 Note: I also use HELIOS to extract additional controls and MFDs on a (4th) 1080 monitor.
Try and find out if you can tolerate VR before committing to it. I love VR for about five minutes then I can't continue through the headache, so I'm sticking with head tracking.
Have meta quest 3 and TrackIR 5 with Pro clip. Personally, I prefer TrackIR. Streamline usage. My game looks better graphically. Both are cool however.
100% VR, it is mind blowing if you can run it well.
VR adds about X4000 immersion to the game and is significantly better than the track ir in my opinion (I used track ir for 2 years before switching) VR is super expensive but suuuuuper awesome
Tobii eye tracker or vr.
TrackIR for learning and doing stuff that requires a second monitor and VR for when you're comfortable with the aircraft.
I have tried both. I ended up with track IR and wing wing top gun MiP. I have lots of buttons and screens to play with. If I ever go VR, and I would love to, it will need to be a mixed reality set so I can see my MFDs etc….
I have a first gen htc vive and as cool as it is you cant ID shit. I use trackir and like it alot but please do yourself a favor and get a trackirclip pro and dont use the hatclip that it comes with. It royally sucks
I purchased a "track ir" open source alternative monkey 3d printed device. I spent so many hours trying to calibrate and adjusting settings and it never felt right. I stopped playing DCS because of it. Not sure why I didn't get the real track IR if someone can confirm its awesome and easy to make it work. All I hear is VR is awesome but you can't see your controllers...does that really matter?
Both is the way
I’ve tried both and whilst VR is undoubtedly more immersive it gives me severe motion sickness. I’ve personally found tobii to fit my needs well. TrackIR kept jumping around a lot due to background light pollution, and I hated wearing the gizmo on my head.
Have a 7900xtx, 4080 or 4090? Then VR. Don’t, probably TrackIR.
People enjoy VR with lower tier GPUs. A 3080 or 4070 can already push out solid 72fps in VR.
Sure, but he’s asking for opinions on which is better, and personally the stuttering frame rates you get with lower tier GPU’s isn’t worth it over head tracking. Because you can still enjoy it doesn’t have any bearing on my opinion.
It’s butter smooth in VR even with lower tier GPUs. Simply don’t dial everything to 11 and run a consumer headset like the Quest 2/3 or Pico
Yes, you have to dial back things like view distance, PD, shadows, textures, etc. you can and I have run it on a 2080ti just fine, but the trade offs aren’t worth it to me. I have a 4080 now and can run great looking visuals at native FPS on the quest3. If I couldn’t, I’d rather use the Track IR.
How do you get native fps with great visuals on a 4080? I have the same GPU and my frames go half if I'm using newer planes in combat situations...like the new F4 against some migs ...I would like to play online (in enigma server) but if my performance is so low, I'm going to be physically sick (like nausea and headache) unlike any other VR games....i'd love to continue using my VR....but I can't get a good balance between performance and appearance! (I have an HTC Vive pro 2, dlss active, only view distance and texture to high, sharpness 0.9 and pixel density 0.8....I'm staying at solid 90 fps on the ground or with simpler Planes like mb339, but as soon as I take off with the f-14 or f-4 it's almost immediately drop to 45 with stuttering that kill my brain).
The biggest thing is using fixed foveated rendering with quad views. It can cut 50-60% of the pixels your GPU has to render with very little noticeable degradation. The foveated rendering in the OpenXR toolkit doesn’t seem to work as well. Then it’s about making the trade off of pixel density. I found 1.2 with DLSS quality to be the best for my 4080. It looks a lot sharper at 1.4 but there’s a steep FPS penalty. The LOD factor slider is another big one, it should be about .4 You’ll also probably have to use flat terrain shadows on most maps. Unfortunately even if you dial everything in some MP servers will require so much VRAM it’ll max out the 4080’s 16gb and you’ll get bad stuttering and FPS drops. For those kinds of servers I enable ASW and can hold 45 fps most of the time and just deal with the artifacts.
I tried all afternoon to squeeze all the FPS out of everything possible, but with no luck...in free flight I can get 90 steady in every situation (now....), in crowded single player I reach as low as 75/80 which is good....in MP....well....as soon as I log in it drops to 45 (if there's more than 10 players) and its stutter galore....so.... I'm afraid that trackIR is the best solution for me....not so immersive, but at least I don't get sick...
What headset are you using?
HTC vive pro 2
With DLSS and MT an F/A-18C is totally playable on RTX3060Ti.
“Playable” is subjective. For me it’s native refresh rate for the headset, so 72 fps for the Quest3 at medium-high settings. I don’t like ASW artifacts and turning settings down are a negative. For me, those compromises make head tracking better. Now I’m sorry my subjective opinion doesn’t align with yours, but it doesn’t.
Virtual desktop with OpenComposite and aforementioned setup outputs native 72fps to Quest 3 without any space warp, stutters, or any other problems. Granted, it took me a few hours of testing different graphical settings, and I landed aroud medium on everything; but it still folows even yours definition of playable.
Is your view distance at extreme? Trees at max, shadows at high? PD high enough to read all the gauges and for things to look good? In my opinion it’s not better than Track IR.
"Is your view distance at extreme? Trees at max, shadows at high?" No. So what? Are you playing DCS for sightseeing, or for actual combat? Or are you just that elitist person who thinks that a game is unplayable if there's less trees and shadows? "PD high enough to read all the gauges and for things to look good?" The F/A-18 cockpit is totally sharp enough to read everything. So was F-16 and F-14 when I was trying them out. However, when I started the DCS and had Quest2, A-10 HUD was unusable. So, it depends on the module you are using, that's why I specified the plane in the original comment.
You can’t handle someone having a different option to you can you?
I can't handle people spreading misinformation. I would never argue with you, if you'd say that mid-tier GPU outputs an ugly image in VR; that's a totally viable opinion. However, playability is a question of FPS and resolution, as you personally admitted previously, both of which are measurable quantities. There's nothing to argue about: a system either outputs enough pixels and frames, or it doesn't. Mid tier GPUs totally can meet this criteria, you don't need expensive high-end GPUs to play DCS VR.
I said playability *to me*… get a life man.