How to Drive Le Mans Ultimate in VR

How to run Le Mans Ultimate in VR.jpg
Images: Motorsport Games
As part of its most recent update, Le Mans Ultimate has rolled out a VR beta mode. Here is how to activate virtual reality in-game and what you can expect.

Image credit: Studio-397

Virtual Reality is perhaps the closest many of us will ever get to racing real cars on real circuits. That is even more true when the cars in question are some of the most advanced sportscar racing prototypes ever seen.

But sadly, the official FIA World Endurance Championship game, Le Mans Ultimate does not currently have full, official VR support. In its Early Access development stage, the rendering view has been shuffled lower down the priorities list.


However, as part of the title’s most recent update alongside content such as the final 2024 Hypercars and the Circuit of the Americas, Studio-397 has launched beta access to VR for Le Mans Ultimate. Where previous VR access was limited to simple in-car driving, you now get menu screens, HUD and other creature comforts.

How to Launch LMU in VR​

As aforementioned, accessing Le Mans Ultimate in VR has always been possible. But this required a great deal of back-and-forth settings changes. Thankfully, that is no longer a requirement thanks to this pre-beta rollout of Virtual Reality in LMU.

Now, just one small change before launching the game in Steam will provide you with a VR experience:
  • Step 1: Right click on Le Mans Utimate in Steam and select Properties
  • Step 2: In General => Launch Options enter “+VR”
  • Step 3: Launch LMU in VR

Add +VR to the Steam launch options to play Le Mans Ultimate in VR.

Add "+VR" to the Steam launch options to play Le Mans Ultimate in VR.

Previously, playing Le Mans Ultimate in Virtual Reality would not render the game’s menu screen UI, nor the HUD. However, you can now control everything you need to from your headset, even entering races.

How to Re-Centre VR view in Le Mans Ultimate

Take a stroll through Le Mans Ultimate’s Control Settings menu and you will notice an inexistence of VR-related bindings. In fact, resetting your position for example is one thing you currently cannot do. Officially that is.

Here is how to map a VR head position re-centre button for Le Mans Ultimate.
  • Step 1: Set a control in-game on your keyboard that you do not plan on using ad close the game
  • Step 2: Open “keyboard.json” in “Le Mans Ultimate/UserData/Player”
  • Step 3: Search for the control you mapped earlier
  • Step 4: Replace the binding name with “VR : Re-center head position”
Your input for re-centring VR should look like this.

Your input for re-centring VR should look like this. In my case, key 29 is Left Ctrl. Image credit: Studio-397

You can also bind the control to your wheel. In this case, instead of your keyboard file, open the file relating to your specific input device.

Is it any good?​

When we last gave Le Mans Ultimate a go in VR, we found the act of driving in-game with the headset strapped on an enjoyable experience. The game is already immersive and in VR, that is only improved.

But without a HUD, the game aspect was far from present. Racing itself was impossible as navigating the pit menu is rather crucial to longer races and the odd bug, frame freeze or stutter did not inspire confidence for online sprint racing.

Race Le Mans in VR.jpg

Line up for your first VR session in Le Mans Ultimate. Image credit: Studio-397

Now though, with the HUD fully in-view, one can realistically take part in longer events against the AI with good results. There is no denying that the on-screen display itself is quite large and out-of-view to the left and right. It also blends into the car’s 3D model at times. But for a beta release, it does the job.

For online use, we would recommend drastically dropping graphical settings in case of stutters. You do not want to impact that hard-earned Safety Rating after all. Indeed, we did experience the odd frame drop and graphical glitch at times.

Have you tried Le Mans Ultimate in VR yet? What do you make of the experience? Let us know in the comments.
About author
Angus Martin
Motorsport gets my blood pumping more than anything else. Be it physical or virtual, I'm down to bang doors.

Comments

Premium
VR is definitely too gimmicky for me in racing... Being able to move your head around like that just isn't possible in most racing cars where you are strapped into position as tightly as they do for safety reasons... Great for when you're in a street car drifting around in AC or something like that, terrible for immersion in a race car... Any decent sized screen is far better...

But gimmicks like VR and FFB that acts like a guiding hand around the track always sells well with a majority of gamers looking to go fast and pretend they are their favourite driving super star... It's how Forza, Need for Speed and pCARS got popular...
so since you race on triples or anything thats not gimmicky. when you race you just think you are yourself driving a pretend car around?nevermind pz666 you are him 666. not gimmicky at all
 
VR is definitely too gimmicky for me in racing... Being able to move your head around like that just isn't possible in most racing cars where you are strapped into position as tightly as they do for safety reasons... Great for when you're in a street car drifting around in AC or something like that, terrible for immersion in a race car... Any decent sized screen is far better...

But gimmicks like VR and FFB that acts like a guiding hand around the track always sells well with a majority of gamers looking to go fast and pretend they are their favourite driving super star... It's how Forza, Need for Speed and pCARS got popular...
I've been using VR for at least 5 years, combined with a low-cost dynamic workstation, I would never go back to monitors...VR is the real evolution we've had in recent years
 
I've been using VR for at least 5 years, combined with a low-cost dynamic workstation, I would never go back to monitors...VR is the real evolution we've had in recent years

The next generation will be better than the current which for me just isn't there yet... Fine for a lot of people, but not for me... A good cheap alternative for many... But not for me...
 
The next generation will be better than the current which for me just isn't there yet... Fine for a lot of people, but not for me... A good cheap alternative for many... But not for me...
cheap? do you think that those who choose vr choose it because it costs less than triple? look, a visor costs more than triple, given that in addition to the visor you also need to have a monitor... and to have a decent visor you need to spend at least 600 euros
 
cheap? do you think that those who choose vr choose it because it costs less than triple? look, a visor costs more than triple, given that in addition to the visor you also need to have a monitor... and to have a decent visor you need to spend at least 600 euros

Absolutly agree, VR is amazing. And with a current gen HMD it is far from being cheap.
"The next generation will be better than the current..." is a great, intelligent comment. The current Pimax Crystal needs so much gfx power we have to wait for the 5090 to unleash all its visual potential.

Btw. pz666 is the clever guy who said VR is an immersion breaker. XD
 
cheap? do you think that those who choose vr choose it because it costs less than triple? look, a visor costs more than triple, given that in addition to the visor you also need to have a monitor... and to have a decent visor you need to spend at least 600 euros

Compared to a full rig set up with projectors or large screens, yes it's cheap... It's also good for those without the space for a full rig dedicated to sim racing... Like your "Low-cost dynamic workstation"...

But it's a fair way off from being a must have in sim racing for me... Load cells and motion rigs fill in the gaps better and are essentials for me well before VR is...
 
Last edited:
maybe it is not clear...you can put as many screens or projectors as you want...it still remains a beautiful 2d picture to see...with VR you are in

I honestly wonder from certain comments, “but have you ever tried it? ”
with which triple, single or projector system are you afraid to make eau rouge?
 
Last edited:
maybe it is not clear...you can put as many screens or projectors as you want...it still remains a beautiful 2d picture to see...with VR you are in

I honestly wonder from certain comments, “but have you ever tried it? ”
with which triple, single or projector system are you afraid to make eau rouge?
Hate to break it for you but VR is still a 2D image. It works by using two little screens in front of each lense. And no, stereoscopy isn't 3D. Proof of this is that you can't focus your eyes on any object no matter how hard you try. If you look at your finger IRL the rest will blur out. Then you can look at the background and your finger will blur out. You can't do that in VR.

Also VR headsets have abysmal FoV compared to real life helmets. A pretty big impediment during racing.

I don't get why VR users can't really be objective and look at the pros and cons of each system. Probably because of the emotional investment and all that. Muh immershun!

Edit: Also I can't stand that people have to "demote" 3D graphics to 2D so that they can be elitist about VR. It's all really 3D, your graphics card calculates 3D graphics. Anyone who's old enough will know that.
 
Last edited:
Hate to break it for you but VR is still a 2D image. It works by using two little screens in front of each lense. And no, stereoscopy isn't 3D. Proof of this is that you can't focus your eyes on any object no matter how hard you try. If you look at your finger IRL the rest will blur out. Then you can look at the background and your finger will blur out. You can't do that in VR.

Also VR headsets have abysmal FoV compared to real life helmets. A pretty big impediment during racing.

I don't get why VR users can't really be objective and look at the pros and cons of each system. Probably because of the emotional investment and all that. Muh immershun!

Edit: Also I can't stand that people have to "demote" 3D graphics to 2D so that they can be elitist about VR. It's all really 3D, your graphics card calculates 3D graphics. Anyone who's old enough will know that.

In theory you are right, we are just looking on 2 displays but VR is so much more. Try it and you will feel the magic. There is a big differents between flat and stereoscopic. The FOV doesn't matter because you can turn your head in every direction. Best for open wheelers, especialy classic formula cars :inlove:

Played Alien Isolation a few years ago on my TV. Sure, it was scary. Revisited it a while ago with the VR mod and now I **** in my pants everytime the Xenomorph is spottin me. XD

Like it or not, but VR is a big improvement after 40 years of flat gaming.
 
Hate to break it for you but VR is still a 2D image
Hate to break it to you, but that comment is beyond inaccurate.
Assuming you have had the privilege to wear VR goggles, you know that the statement is not correct.
If you have not, then please, experience it and come back here with a straight face and tell us that VR is not 3d.

VR is a big improvement after 40 years of flat gaming
I share you opinion, for me as well it is the biggest step to immersion and the better the goggles resolution, the better it gets.
But many have tried it and did not like it or were not that impressed, it has nothing to do with VR itself, just that we are not all experiencing SIM racing the same way and not enjoying it for the same reasons.
Talking only about immersion, which for me is the most important aspect, then, for me VR is light years ahead of pancake(s),
 
Last edited:
Another aspect is the spatial noise in VR. It's super cool how the surround sound changes its direction when you turn your head. It's very understated but a big immersion improvement. Nothing a screen and a headset can provide.

Everytime I have a good VR experience I feel like a little kid at Xmas. :D
 
Hate to break it to you, but that comment is beyond inaccurate.
Assuming you have had the privilege to wear VR goggles, you know that the statement is not correct.
If you have not, then please, experience it and come back here with a straight face and tell us that VR is not 3d.
How is my comment inaccurate? How is my statement incorrect? Simply saying I'm wrong doesn't make you right. You have said absolutely nothing as a counterpoint. "Hard to break it to you" lol try again.

I did try it and yes it's amazing, i'm not denying that. What I'm saying is that comments like yours where people make this arbitrary this distinction between "flatscreen" and "3d" are absolutely arrogant. There is no real hard distinction other than your vision being potentially isolated from the outside more than a projector or a triple screen. The immersion is top notch and it makes for good experience. But if you're into realism you need to admit that FOV is still too low. There are limitations, pros and cons.
Re read my comment about graphics cards and focus. Try focus your eyes on any near object on your tiny flat screens you call "3D". It's the same principle of a projector, the lenses are re-projecting the light coming from a flat screen. No more 3D than a normal screen.
The FOV doesn't matter because you can turn your head in every direction. Best for open wheelers, especialy classic formula cars :inlove:
"Realism only matters when it fits my views", got it. Unfortunately it does matter, unless you're one of those people who drives with the head sticking from the seat 30 cm above. Drivers cannot move much their head because of head protections, namely HANS devices and seat side headrests. Not to mention that you will spot cars much later when are by your side. No wonder many VR users still need radars.
Drivers helmets sit on the sides right where the visor ends. So they got a full 180° field of view.

The feel I get from the VR crowd is that they only care about the experience. Basically the sim rig becomes just a home made arcade cabinet.
 
Hate to break it for you but VR is still a 2D image. It works by using two little screens in front of each lense. And no, stereoscopy isn't 3D. Proof of this is that you can't focus your eyes on any object no matter how hard you try. If you look at your finger IRL the rest will blur out. Then you can look at the background and your finger will blur out. You can't do that in VR.

Also VR headsets have abysmal FoV compared to real life helmets. A pretty big impediment during racing.

I don't get why VR users can't really be objective and look at the pros and cons of each system. Probably because of the emotional investment and all that. Muh immershun!

Edit: Also I can't stand that people have to "demote" 3D graphics to 2D so that they can be elitist about VR. It's all really 3D, your graphics card calculates 3D graphics. Anyone who's old enough will know that.
it's nice the way you look at details like focus or reduced fov, and then drive by looking at a picture...
like saying “pizza contains gorgonzola cheese which may have traces of nettle, then I prefer to eat s**t”
 
Last edited:
it's nice the way you look at details like focus or reduced fov, and then drive by looking at a picture...

A very limited picture with a frame XD Fortunately our VR view is borderless.

The feel I get from the VR crowd is that they only care about the experience. Basically the sim rig becomes just a home made arcade cabinet.

That's funny, typically arcade cabinets have flatscreens. My sim rig feels more like a race car. ;)

I will never drive flat again and if a game doesn't offer VR I'm not interested. Just my (arrogant) opinion. :inlove:
 
How is FFB a gimmick?

It can be very gimmicky in what is given to the player...

Some games FFB focus more on the steering rack and tyre forces... Whilst others have all sorts of canned effects that help the driver around the track... Those are the gimmicks I referred to...

VR is a better option over a small screen set up, be it singles or triples... But large screens and projectors are the ultimate way for me until VR gets lighter and works better than it does now...

I am also someone who has been spoiled by the ideas of Star Trek's holodecks... Which I'd like to see in my lifetime...

 
From what you wrote below, this is hard to believe.

This statement is so inaccurate, again!
No hard distinction between vr and triple or projector! really? Just isolation!!
again you keep saying innacurate but you don't make any point. This is a forum, you have to expand on your point. "Me good you bad" doesn't work.
From what you wrote below, this is hard to believe.
Looks like you want to believe, not understand. I said I liked the experience, but you all seem to avoid the point I'm making by simply saying "this is mind blowing I enjoy it very much" I am not denying that.
My point is that it isn't any more 3D than a screen or a projector with head tracking... that's what a HMD literally is. A screen with head tracking. Hard to accept, I know.
it's nice the way you look at details like focus or reduced fov, and then drive by looking at a picture...
like saying “pizza contains gorgonzola cheese which may have traces of nettle, then I prefer to eat s**t”
Mama mia, you are driving by looking at a picture too. You completely missed the point.

I very much pity developers, they have to deal with people of this level...
 
again you keep saying innacurate but you don't make any point. This is a forum, you have to expand on your point. "Me good you bad" doesn't work.

Looks like you want to believe, not understand. I said I liked the experience, but you all seem to avoid the point I'm making by simply saying "this is mind blowing I enjoy it very much" I am not denying that.
My point is that it isn't any more 3D than a screen or a projector with head tracking... that's what a HMD literally is. A screen with head tracking. Hard to accept, I know.

Mama mia, you are driving by looking at a picture too. You completely missed the point.

I very much pity developers, they have to deal with people of this level...
if 2 2d screens can give the same effect as a truly 3d view I don't see what the problem is if in the end the result works... in my opinion if you want to criticize VR you are doing it for the wrong points... I can list you MANY bad points for VR, but they are not the ones you described
1) the viewer weighs
2) having it attached to the face generates heat
3) in summer without an air conditioner it is impractical
4) it is inconvenient to have interaction with reality (seeing the smartphone)
5) it completely isolates you and is not always an advantage
6) the resolution and sharpness is not that of a monitor
7) it only takes a little to send it out of focus (index)
8) I don't think everything can do long sessions (I've done it even 24h lemans on iR, but I don't think it's x everyone)

i could go on and on... the point is, if you are willing to have these problems in exchange for immersiveness that in my opinion no hw can give you... even projectors don't have stereoscopy, since two eyes will always look at ONE monitor
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Angus Martin
Article read time
3 min read
Views
9,637
Comments
56
Last update
Back
Top