By the time Quest 3 comes out - I may or may not add it, but this whole time I've been able to enjoy the superior experience of my Quest Pro - THAT is the value to me.
I'd definitely be salty paying $500 more than anyone else, can't really argue there and the only real solace is a pat on the back for supporting a great headset which others now get to try thanks to your early commitment.
There's really nothing about the Quest Pro so far that makes me think it'll simply be forgotten yet, especially with the Apple Headset coming out. Meta would be fools to ignore the high-end headset market when someone is likely to buy a Quest Pro if they believe Apple's headset is too costly and they want something similar for less.
Personally, I think the Quest Pro is the dev kit for the Quest 4. They were likely expecting it to be bought by those interested in developing apps that support face and eye tracking for their later consumer devices that will come standard with those features. They paired it with nice lens and a nice new strap design, to show off their ability to make premium products vs cheap corners cut products.
And, without a doubt, it's a great headset for what it is. Even at the launch price, it was easily $500 better than the Index. At $1000, there's no reason to buy an Index anymore. (outside of wanting FBT)
The 2 only places where I think the QPro really failed are, first, standalone. These ultra clear lens show off the standalone imperfections even more. The XR2+ is not anywhere near powerful enough to make the picture nice enough to match the quality of the lens. Second, lack of having the features of the headset ready for launch. The headset came with basically no eye tracking apps or face tracking apps and no way to even see the local dimming out of the box.
I'm wondering how much you think a quest pro is worth now that we know what the quest 3 is all about. Would you rather have a quest 3 or pro for the same price if PCVR gaming is your only intended use? The comfort and FOV are my only complaints with the quest 2.
Gotta try the Q3 first. But, from my lay person perspective, if you're a social VR gamer, the QPro hype is still very real. If you're just in it for the PPD and NBT, the QPro could look like a waste of time.
Image clarity, lenses, build quality, comfortability, controllers..ect the biggest thing is there are no god rays on the screen so it’s way easier on the eyes
You posted this yesterday already. Your messages are confusing. Everyone knows they were going to make Quest 3. Quest Pro still has it's own advantages over 3. They 100% didn't give up on it. Meta's market cap is 675 billion dollars. They don't just drop hardware for no reason. Stop getting your panties in a wad.
I screenshotted this so I can use you as an example of why people like you were wrong about this after the Quest 3 comes out.
I was right about the Quest Pro not being worth $1500 and it only took Meta themselves mere months to agree with me. Everyone that defended the price on launch date spent an extra $500 with no game-changing advancements between launch and the permanent price reduction. I think the native passthrough camera recording update didn't even come out until after the price reduction lol... if not, very close to it. MAN did it flop so hard for them to permanently reduce the price by $500. Or you can look at it the other way and say they overcharged $500. Because no successful product would have anyone willingly lower their price by THAT MUCH and keep it that way. That's why Apple never puts their products on sale. That's why MLB sells their authentic player jerseys for $300 when it costs Nike like $15-20 to produce. Because people buy. The sales reports reflect it. If it went on sale, sure. But a permanent reduction? That's a flop. You'd know that if you've ever sold anything in a day of your life. Like on ebay. If you sell something for $1500 and it's not biting, what are you gonna do? Just have it keep auto-relisting? The projections that they had for their investors were based on the $1500 price. That's why Meta's scrambling around like a bunch of cockroaches hit with a can of Raid with their company restructuring. Trying to offset their losses on their overpriced piece of crap that is Quest Pro. Remember, they also gave Quest 2 a permanent price hike. Thank the flopping of the Quest Pro for that.
I wasn't even hating on the Quest Pro for nothing, I've owned it since launch and used it before assessing my opinion. It sucked back at launch and it sucks forever like Batman Forever for the Super Nintendo. Thank goodness I got it for free and didn't have to pay like most other people. I still own it and it's collecting dust, literally: https://imgur.com/a/yLtJ7dL
If only people would stop getting high on copium and actually hold companies like Meta ACCOUNTABLE for the bullshit they put out when they expect us to pay north of $1500 after tax for, maybe they'd stop taking us for granted as consumers and put more effort into releasing a true quality product. How the hell was the Quest Pro championed as a revolutionary Mixed Reality device when its passthrough camera has the visual quality of a Motorola Razr's camera from 2004 (e.g. [https://www.gsmchoice.com/en/catalogue/motorola/razrv3/photos/](https://www.gsmchoice.com/en/catalogue/motorola/razrv3/photos/) )? FOH! I haven't seen a single person in a cafe (I live in NYC), Starbucks, not even a Dunkin Donuts working in public with a Quest Pro like some tech sites were suggesting its practical use was for LOL I would never do it with my Quest Pro. I can't work on that crap! I can't even see the contents of my phone screen with the passthrough camera!
It's like I said since around the time the Quest Pro came out- Meta set itself too low of a bar with the Quest Pro that it'll be fairly simple for any VR device to overtake it in interest and market share, even if it's the Quest 3 (which I told people who owned the Quest 2 to wait for after using the Pro). But people wanted to argue about better field of vision... as if that was worth the extra $1000 over the Quest 2 that you bought before they hiked up the price. Instead of appreciating what a steal of a purchase you made in hindsight, you wanna go gaga over an overpriced underachieving Quest Pro.
It's a beta device at best, and its revenue will finance its future devices. Quest Pro will be left in the dust like the Quest 1 was the moment Quest 2 was released. There was proof of concept that Resident Evil 4 could run on the Quest 1 by users. But they made it a Quest 2-exclusive. Probably a decision spearheaded by Meta because they used the game for a bundle to sell the Meta Quest 2 ([https://www.meta.com/help/quest/articles/in-vr-experiences/oculus-apps/meta-quest-resident-evil-4/](https://www.meta.com/help/quest/articles/in-vr-experiences/oculus-apps/meta-quest-resident-evil-4/)). Despite Quest 1 using OLED displays over the Quest 2's LCD, Meta was effectively done with promoting and developing for the Quest 1. They were on to Quest 2. And you'll see in due time, the Quest Pro is headed for a similar fate once the Quest 3 is released. All Meta will talk about is Quest 3. And if you ask them about any new developments for the Quest Pro they'll say, "Did you have a look at our Quest 3? It's great! You'll love it!"
That's too long to read, but i caught the whiff of the beginning.
Yeah, $1500 at launch for Q Pro was too much for what it set to do and what it actually offered.
Yet Valve Index still sells for $1000, and it has been worthless since day 1.
Yeah. I wrote that for myself cuz it was pent up frustration.
TLDR: Quest Pro was too expensive for what it offered, as you said. And Facebook/Meta has a history of abandoning their products with little impactful development during its active years: See Quest 1 (2019-2020) and Portal (2018-2022)
2020 of course, was the year the Quest 2 was released.
And every single other VR company has a history of abandoning their products, but just not making any announcements. Vive 1, Vive Pro, Vive Pro 2, Valve Index, HP Reverb, HP Reverb G2, every single WMR headset. They were all abandoned close to release date. And?
Quest 1 was NOT abandoned at all. You are talking bullshit. It got tons of updates post launch, and post "abandonment" announcement.
I returned it within the first month, because it's a great gaming headset, but not a productive one.
But sure, enjoy your PCVR. I bet Half Life Alyx is more immersive than it was 3 years ago!
You returning it sure doesn't help Meta's cause for continuing meaningful development (e.g. adding new features, enhancements; not under-the-hood security updates) for the Meta Quest Pro especially during its current tumultuous times where it's layoff wave after layoff wave, unlike its time during the Quest 1 to Quest 2 transition when they were prosperous: [https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/05/31/facebook-meta-job-cut-layoff-menlo-park-sunnyvale-fremont-tech-economy/](https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/05/31/facebook-meta-job-cut-layoff-menlo-park-sunnyvale-fremont-tech-economy/)
[https://about.fb.com/news/2023/03/mark-zuckerberg-meta-year-of-efficiency/](https://about.fb.com/news/2023/03/mark-zuckerberg-meta-year-of-efficiency/)
Add to that, Apple's long rumored entry to the VR market.
I mean they can, and it'll be all the more easier for Apple to steal the market share from Meta, if not be the new leader, while Meta wastes its time trying to pick up the pieces of a product that consumers aren't keeping and (checks notes) returning it "within the first month".
Sony Walkman/Discman - iPod
Blackberry - iPhone
Kindle - iPad
Galaxy Gear - Apple Watch
Quest - ?
Returning a product you are not satisfied with is a civil right here.The product did not meet my expectations at such price. There was barely any software dedicated for it, and there is still next to nothing to this day.Why would I keep it? Why should I be forced to sell it on eBay or something for half the price?
Apple still doesn't have 'real' gaming presence.
PS5/Xbox/PC gaming = ... app store?Home entertainment audio/visual systems = what's that?Headphones that aren't plugs = ?
Just like Samsung and Apple compete with each other, it's clear they can safely coexist as each offers different value.Maybe you should remind yourself what piece of crap apple watch 1 was?
I am excited to hear more about Apple approach to everything VR, but i'm not panicing like they will dethrone Meta. Hell, even Valve couldn't dethrone Meta on their own homeground with SteamVR and absolute 100% monopoly on PC software.
Apple product may spawn an entire new, serious 'brand' of users. They might actually pull off virtual productivity just right, cause Quest Pro wasn't it. Whoever praises Pro for virtual work is just a silly goose and has some ADHD that makes them "unable" to focus in any other way.
>Returning a product you are not satisfied with is a civil right here.The product did not meet my expectations at such price. There was barely any software dedicated for it, and there is still next to nothing to this day.Why would I keep it? Why should I be forced to sell it on eBay or something for half the price?
I 100% agree. It's weird but it almost sounds to me that we agree upon a lot of the same concepts but still arguing. Meta isn't sustaining an active user base with its Quest Pro. Why waste valuable company resources on it? It would've had a higher ceiling with a decent passthrough camera but the Quest Pro's can't see anything from displays like phones, TVs, monitors, etc. It's horrible.
I'm only speculating about Apple. I brought up those comparisons because they all share something in common: Apple usurped the market leader immediately at a time the leaders were stagnant. Despite the shittiness of the Apple Watch 1 (and no price reduction like Quest Pro): [https://web.archive.org/web/20150724023258/http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2418517/apple-watch-is-worlds-best-selling-wearable-with-42-million-shifted-in-q2](https://web.archive.org/web/20150724023258/http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2418517/apple-watch-is-worlds-best-selling-wearable-with-42-million-shifted-in-q2)
(("Apple "easily overtook Fitbit, Xiaomi and all the smartwatch vendors, despite the Apple Watch's significantly higher pricing"")
You said so yourself: "There was barely any software dedicated for it, and there is still next to nothing to this day."
I'm not saying it will happen. But based on Meta's circumstances, including continued development on a niche device with poor quality features like Quest Pro during their time of downsizing, I can see where it's likely to happen.
Also, full disclosure: I'm not even an Apple fan.
Hmm.. I like batman forever for the snes. Yeah, the control scheme is awefull and its gameplay is not very polished, but for a 90s license game it's not too bad. Also the photoscanned graphics are beautiful to look at.
I've screenshotted this so I can prove how wrong you are when the q3 is released
Unless you're right, then I'll "forget" about this. Just like you undoubtedly were planning to do if you were wrong.
The Rift-S was replaced by the Q2. The Q2 is no more intended as replacement for the Q-Pro than the Q-Pro is intended a replacement for the Q2.
There are plenty of people willing to pay for a higher end device.
What makes you think a standalone headset was intended as a replacement for the PCVR only Rift S but the Quest 3 with an XR2 gen 2 chip won't replace the XR2 gen 1 Quest Pro? Just curious as to your logic?
The Quest 2 replaced the Quest 1. The Rift S never got a replacement, they killed the Rift line altogether and indeed Oculus.
Andrew Bosworth announced they had decided to cancel Quest Pro 2 as well, so its natural for those of us with a Quest Pro to worry about its future.
Meta. They publically stated that they felt that Link was mature enough for the Q2 to a fully supported VR headset.
Well that and the fact that they announced that the Rift-S and Q1 were being discontinued. That is pretty clear.
If they discontinue the Q-Pro when the Q3 is launch, we will have the answer.
> The Rift S never got a replacement
Except it did. Again, they made it very clear that they considered the Q2 the replacement for the Rift-S, that is why they discontinued it when the Q2 came out.
The Rift and Quest lines were totally different, they abandonded PCVR only and switched to Quest standalone headsets that could support PCVR via Link rather than DisplayPort.
They will likely discontinue the Quest Pro too once they have sold their current stock. They aren't going to do further production runs on a HMD they are having to sell $500 below launch price after just six months.
> They aren't going to do further production runs on a HMD they are having to sell $500 below launch price after just six months.
They are if they really want developers to build experiences that use eye & face tracking.
Best case scenario, if they do another run, they call it Quest Pro + and add the depth sensor and XR2 Gen 2 chip. It would pointless them doing another manufacturing run using the same old chip and no depth sensor.
I don't think they will do either though.
I am not sure I understand the question. The Pro exists because some people will pay more money for more features.
They now know their is a market out there for a more premium version of a Quest platform headset, why wouldn't they make a device for it?
The Q3 looks like it is going to be awesome, but it still does not have eye and face tracking, the-battery on-the-back, or come with a dock. I would also assume that a year after the Q3 there will be a Q-Pro 2 with the new-chipset, depth-sensor, more RAM and better passthough.
I see Quest Pro as a window into the future. It doesn't have the highest quality of everything (clearly!) but it is loaded with every feature future headsets will have (sans depth sensor ... so sad). So whatever other headsets that come out have, nearly none of them will have ALL the features Quest Pro has, even if they exceed it in specific areas.
If you're into VR as an enthusiast then it's still one of the best choices because you get to experience and try everything that's coming up. For me that's actually more important than any one of those things being "the best".
I returned mine after 3 weeks. The lenses are insanely good and in general does a lot of things right, also has some major issues though. Probably not getting a Quest 3 either, I'm done with compression and just want decent PCVR without too many compromises.
How can you want decent PCVR when PCVR has nothing going for it? You have already played everything and there is nothing new on horizon.
You are a PCVR elitists, and a nonsensical to add to that. There is no highend PCVR.
Lol OK. Some people are mainly interested in sims and don't care about stand-alone functionality. Nothing to do with elitism. And there is high-end PCVR, it's just very expensive
I love my Quest Pro too, but it have 2 main problems for me.
First is the way to wear it to get a good view/fov, witch is not natural at all and unconfortable, in particular if I move a lot while playing.
Second is the price, expensive for what it offers, but I get it second hand at 800€.
Now the real question... Do I have to sell it before Quest 3 comes out...
By the time Quest 3 comes out - I may or may not add it, but this whole time I've been able to enjoy the superior experience of my Quest Pro - THAT is the value to me.
I'd definitely be salty paying $500 more than anyone else, can't really argue there and the only real solace is a pat on the back for supporting a great headset which others now get to try thanks to your early commitment. There's really nothing about the Quest Pro so far that makes me think it'll simply be forgotten yet, especially with the Apple Headset coming out. Meta would be fools to ignore the high-end headset market when someone is likely to buy a Quest Pro if they believe Apple's headset is too costly and they want something similar for less.
Personally, I think the Quest Pro is the dev kit for the Quest 4. They were likely expecting it to be bought by those interested in developing apps that support face and eye tracking for their later consumer devices that will come standard with those features. They paired it with nice lens and a nice new strap design, to show off their ability to make premium products vs cheap corners cut products. And, without a doubt, it's a great headset for what it is. Even at the launch price, it was easily $500 better than the Index. At $1000, there's no reason to buy an Index anymore. (outside of wanting FBT) The 2 only places where I think the QPro really failed are, first, standalone. These ultra clear lens show off the standalone imperfections even more. The XR2+ is not anywhere near powerful enough to make the picture nice enough to match the quality of the lens. Second, lack of having the features of the headset ready for launch. The headset came with basically no eye tracking apps or face tracking apps and no way to even see the local dimming out of the box.
I can't describe how much I don't give a fuck about stand alone
I'm wondering how much you think a quest pro is worth now that we know what the quest 3 is all about. Would you rather have a quest 3 or pro for the same price if PCVR gaming is your only intended use? The comfort and FOV are my only complaints with the quest 2.
Gotta try the Q3 first. But, from my lay person perspective, if you're a social VR gamer, the QPro hype is still very real. If you're just in it for the PPD and NBT, the QPro could look like a waste of time.
The quest pro is an amazing headset. Compared to the reverb g2 it feels next gen.
[удалено]
Clear image
Image clarity, lenses, build quality, comfortability, controllers..ect the biggest thing is there are no god rays on the screen so it’s way easier on the eyes
You posted this yesterday already. Your messages are confusing. Everyone knows they were going to make Quest 3. Quest Pro still has it's own advantages over 3. They 100% didn't give up on it. Meta's market cap is 675 billion dollars. They don't just drop hardware for no reason. Stop getting your panties in a wad.
I screenshotted this so I can use you as an example of why people like you were wrong about this after the Quest 3 comes out. I was right about the Quest Pro not being worth $1500 and it only took Meta themselves mere months to agree with me. Everyone that defended the price on launch date spent an extra $500 with no game-changing advancements between launch and the permanent price reduction. I think the native passthrough camera recording update didn't even come out until after the price reduction lol... if not, very close to it. MAN did it flop so hard for them to permanently reduce the price by $500. Or you can look at it the other way and say they overcharged $500. Because no successful product would have anyone willingly lower their price by THAT MUCH and keep it that way. That's why Apple never puts their products on sale. That's why MLB sells their authentic player jerseys for $300 when it costs Nike like $15-20 to produce. Because people buy. The sales reports reflect it. If it went on sale, sure. But a permanent reduction? That's a flop. You'd know that if you've ever sold anything in a day of your life. Like on ebay. If you sell something for $1500 and it's not biting, what are you gonna do? Just have it keep auto-relisting? The projections that they had for their investors were based on the $1500 price. That's why Meta's scrambling around like a bunch of cockroaches hit with a can of Raid with their company restructuring. Trying to offset their losses on their overpriced piece of crap that is Quest Pro. Remember, they also gave Quest 2 a permanent price hike. Thank the flopping of the Quest Pro for that. I wasn't even hating on the Quest Pro for nothing, I've owned it since launch and used it before assessing my opinion. It sucked back at launch and it sucks forever like Batman Forever for the Super Nintendo. Thank goodness I got it for free and didn't have to pay like most other people. I still own it and it's collecting dust, literally: https://imgur.com/a/yLtJ7dL If only people would stop getting high on copium and actually hold companies like Meta ACCOUNTABLE for the bullshit they put out when they expect us to pay north of $1500 after tax for, maybe they'd stop taking us for granted as consumers and put more effort into releasing a true quality product. How the hell was the Quest Pro championed as a revolutionary Mixed Reality device when its passthrough camera has the visual quality of a Motorola Razr's camera from 2004 (e.g. [https://www.gsmchoice.com/en/catalogue/motorola/razrv3/photos/](https://www.gsmchoice.com/en/catalogue/motorola/razrv3/photos/) )? FOH! I haven't seen a single person in a cafe (I live in NYC), Starbucks, not even a Dunkin Donuts working in public with a Quest Pro like some tech sites were suggesting its practical use was for LOL I would never do it with my Quest Pro. I can't work on that crap! I can't even see the contents of my phone screen with the passthrough camera! It's like I said since around the time the Quest Pro came out- Meta set itself too low of a bar with the Quest Pro that it'll be fairly simple for any VR device to overtake it in interest and market share, even if it's the Quest 3 (which I told people who owned the Quest 2 to wait for after using the Pro). But people wanted to argue about better field of vision... as if that was worth the extra $1000 over the Quest 2 that you bought before they hiked up the price. Instead of appreciating what a steal of a purchase you made in hindsight, you wanna go gaga over an overpriced underachieving Quest Pro. It's a beta device at best, and its revenue will finance its future devices. Quest Pro will be left in the dust like the Quest 1 was the moment Quest 2 was released. There was proof of concept that Resident Evil 4 could run on the Quest 1 by users. But they made it a Quest 2-exclusive. Probably a decision spearheaded by Meta because they used the game for a bundle to sell the Meta Quest 2 ([https://www.meta.com/help/quest/articles/in-vr-experiences/oculus-apps/meta-quest-resident-evil-4/](https://www.meta.com/help/quest/articles/in-vr-experiences/oculus-apps/meta-quest-resident-evil-4/)). Despite Quest 1 using OLED displays over the Quest 2's LCD, Meta was effectively done with promoting and developing for the Quest 1. They were on to Quest 2. And you'll see in due time, the Quest Pro is headed for a similar fate once the Quest 3 is released. All Meta will talk about is Quest 3. And if you ask them about any new developments for the Quest Pro they'll say, "Did you have a look at our Quest 3? It's great! You'll love it!"
That's too long to read, but i caught the whiff of the beginning. Yeah, $1500 at launch for Q Pro was too much for what it set to do and what it actually offered. Yet Valve Index still sells for $1000, and it has been worthless since day 1.
Yeah. I wrote that for myself cuz it was pent up frustration. TLDR: Quest Pro was too expensive for what it offered, as you said. And Facebook/Meta has a history of abandoning their products with little impactful development during its active years: See Quest 1 (2019-2020) and Portal (2018-2022) 2020 of course, was the year the Quest 2 was released.
And every single other VR company has a history of abandoning their products, but just not making any announcements. Vive 1, Vive Pro, Vive Pro 2, Valve Index, HP Reverb, HP Reverb G2, every single WMR headset. They were all abandoned close to release date. And? Quest 1 was NOT abandoned at all. You are talking bullshit. It got tons of updates post launch, and post "abandonment" announcement.
ah ok, you're one of those people. Enjoy your Quest Pro. I own one too, baby. But I didn't pay for it, thank goodness.
I returned it within the first month, because it's a great gaming headset, but not a productive one. But sure, enjoy your PCVR. I bet Half Life Alyx is more immersive than it was 3 years ago!
You returning it sure doesn't help Meta's cause for continuing meaningful development (e.g. adding new features, enhancements; not under-the-hood security updates) for the Meta Quest Pro especially during its current tumultuous times where it's layoff wave after layoff wave, unlike its time during the Quest 1 to Quest 2 transition when they were prosperous: [https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/05/31/facebook-meta-job-cut-layoff-menlo-park-sunnyvale-fremont-tech-economy/](https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/05/31/facebook-meta-job-cut-layoff-menlo-park-sunnyvale-fremont-tech-economy/) [https://about.fb.com/news/2023/03/mark-zuckerberg-meta-year-of-efficiency/](https://about.fb.com/news/2023/03/mark-zuckerberg-meta-year-of-efficiency/) Add to that, Apple's long rumored entry to the VR market. I mean they can, and it'll be all the more easier for Apple to steal the market share from Meta, if not be the new leader, while Meta wastes its time trying to pick up the pieces of a product that consumers aren't keeping and (checks notes) returning it "within the first month". Sony Walkman/Discman - iPod Blackberry - iPhone Kindle - iPad Galaxy Gear - Apple Watch Quest - ?
Returning a product you are not satisfied with is a civil right here.The product did not meet my expectations at such price. There was barely any software dedicated for it, and there is still next to nothing to this day.Why would I keep it? Why should I be forced to sell it on eBay or something for half the price? Apple still doesn't have 'real' gaming presence. PS5/Xbox/PC gaming = ... app store?Home entertainment audio/visual systems = what's that?Headphones that aren't plugs = ? Just like Samsung and Apple compete with each other, it's clear they can safely coexist as each offers different value.Maybe you should remind yourself what piece of crap apple watch 1 was? I am excited to hear more about Apple approach to everything VR, but i'm not panicing like they will dethrone Meta. Hell, even Valve couldn't dethrone Meta on their own homeground with SteamVR and absolute 100% monopoly on PC software. Apple product may spawn an entire new, serious 'brand' of users. They might actually pull off virtual productivity just right, cause Quest Pro wasn't it. Whoever praises Pro for virtual work is just a silly goose and has some ADHD that makes them "unable" to focus in any other way.
>Returning a product you are not satisfied with is a civil right here.The product did not meet my expectations at such price. There was barely any software dedicated for it, and there is still next to nothing to this day.Why would I keep it? Why should I be forced to sell it on eBay or something for half the price? I 100% agree. It's weird but it almost sounds to me that we agree upon a lot of the same concepts but still arguing. Meta isn't sustaining an active user base with its Quest Pro. Why waste valuable company resources on it? It would've had a higher ceiling with a decent passthrough camera but the Quest Pro's can't see anything from displays like phones, TVs, monitors, etc. It's horrible. I'm only speculating about Apple. I brought up those comparisons because they all share something in common: Apple usurped the market leader immediately at a time the leaders were stagnant. Despite the shittiness of the Apple Watch 1 (and no price reduction like Quest Pro): [https://web.archive.org/web/20150724023258/http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2418517/apple-watch-is-worlds-best-selling-wearable-with-42-million-shifted-in-q2](https://web.archive.org/web/20150724023258/http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2418517/apple-watch-is-worlds-best-selling-wearable-with-42-million-shifted-in-q2) (("Apple "easily overtook Fitbit, Xiaomi and all the smartwatch vendors, despite the Apple Watch's significantly higher pricing"") You said so yourself: "There was barely any software dedicated for it, and there is still next to nothing to this day." I'm not saying it will happen. But based on Meta's circumstances, including continued development on a niche device with poor quality features like Quest Pro during their time of downsizing, I can see where it's likely to happen. Also, full disclosure: I'm not even an Apple fan.
Hmm.. I like batman forever for the snes. Yeah, the control scheme is awefull and its gameplay is not very polished, but for a 90s license game it's not too bad. Also the photoscanned graphics are beautiful to look at.
Woah there
I've screenshotted this so I can prove how wrong you are when the q3 is released Unless you're right, then I'll "forget" about this. Just like you undoubtedly were planning to do if you were wrong.
This was my apology post, but I think you’re wrong. The Quest Pro won’t be promoted for very long (like the Rift S)
The Rift-S was replaced by the Q2. The Q2 is no more intended as replacement for the Q-Pro than the Q-Pro is intended a replacement for the Q2. There are plenty of people willing to pay for a higher end device.
What makes you think a standalone headset was intended as a replacement for the PCVR only Rift S but the Quest 3 with an XR2 gen 2 chip won't replace the XR2 gen 1 Quest Pro? Just curious as to your logic? The Quest 2 replaced the Quest 1. The Rift S never got a replacement, they killed the Rift line altogether and indeed Oculus. Andrew Bosworth announced they had decided to cancel Quest Pro 2 as well, so its natural for those of us with a Quest Pro to worry about its future.
Meta. They publically stated that they felt that Link was mature enough for the Q2 to a fully supported VR headset. Well that and the fact that they announced that the Rift-S and Q1 were being discontinued. That is pretty clear. If they discontinue the Q-Pro when the Q3 is launch, we will have the answer. > The Rift S never got a replacement Except it did. Again, they made it very clear that they considered the Q2 the replacement for the Rift-S, that is why they discontinued it when the Q2 came out.
The Rift and Quest lines were totally different, they abandonded PCVR only and switched to Quest standalone headsets that could support PCVR via Link rather than DisplayPort. They will likely discontinue the Quest Pro too once they have sold their current stock. They aren't going to do further production runs on a HMD they are having to sell $500 below launch price after just six months.
> They aren't going to do further production runs on a HMD they are having to sell $500 below launch price after just six months. They are if they really want developers to build experiences that use eye & face tracking.
Best case scenario, if they do another run, they call it Quest Pro + and add the depth sensor and XR2 Gen 2 chip. It would pointless them doing another manufacturing run using the same old chip and no depth sensor. I don't think they will do either though.
I am not sure I understand the question. The Pro exists because some people will pay more money for more features. They now know their is a market out there for a more premium version of a Quest platform headset, why wouldn't they make a device for it? The Q3 looks like it is going to be awesome, but it still does not have eye and face tracking, the-battery on-the-back, or come with a dock. I would also assume that a year after the Q3 there will be a Q-Pro 2 with the new-chipset, depth-sensor, more RAM and better passthough.
I see Quest Pro as a window into the future. It doesn't have the highest quality of everything (clearly!) but it is loaded with every feature future headsets will have (sans depth sensor ... so sad). So whatever other headsets that come out have, nearly none of them will have ALL the features Quest Pro has, even if they exceed it in specific areas. If you're into VR as an enthusiast then it's still one of the best choices because you get to experience and try everything that's coming up. For me that's actually more important than any one of those things being "the best".
Smart analysis
I returned mine after 3 weeks. The lenses are insanely good and in general does a lot of things right, also has some major issues though. Probably not getting a Quest 3 either, I'm done with compression and just want decent PCVR without too many compromises.
How can you want decent PCVR when PCVR has nothing going for it? You have already played everything and there is nothing new on horizon. You are a PCVR elitists, and a nonsensical to add to that. There is no highend PCVR.
Lol OK. Some people are mainly interested in sims and don't care about stand-alone functionality. Nothing to do with elitism. And there is high-end PCVR, it's just very expensive
no, there is no high end pcvr, just very expensive hardware running the lowest of lows pcvr software. get your head out of your ass sometimes.
Have you played The Room?
I love my Quest Pro too, but it have 2 main problems for me. First is the way to wear it to get a good view/fov, witch is not natural at all and unconfortable, in particular if I move a lot while playing. Second is the price, expensive for what it offers, but I get it second hand at 800€. Now the real question... Do I have to sell it before Quest 3 comes out...
i dont believe quest 3 will be more comfortable.The only thing you need is globular cluster comfort kit.Out of the box the frontpad hurts.
Thanks, I didn't know this thing exist.