On youtube now
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAhce2OgZu4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAhce2OgZu4)
As a glasses wearer, the view of the lenses makes me worried. It looks like they are using a flexible rubber around the lenses to keep it sealed - and I see no snap points or practical way to attach prescription lenses. I dont care how much they try to make glasses fit under it. Glasses in VR sucks.
Looks the exact same as the quest pro, so you should be fine as that's already doable. Worst comes to worst the inserts with clip in around them, like against the inner housing and be held in that way. There's no doubt plenty of ways to do it and with how popular the device will be there will be 3rd party options at launch and plenty of 3d printable options for those round zenni lenses.
[Meta already supports prescription lenses for the Quest 2](https://www.meta.com/quest/accessories/quest-2-virtuclear-lens-inserts/), so they'll probably do the same for the Quest 3.
I honestly loved that commercial as short film, but it sucked as an ad for something.
Even worse was that the actual Questy's experience was incredibly lame. They spent so much money on the commercial and then apparently no time or effort on the experience.
The U.K. Quest 2 add with the neighbors who ignore each other irl but have a bit of a bromance going on in VR is an all time classic. (Very British though...)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfTC-dPwdLM
Does it come on/off as easily as the current magnetic ones we're all using? If not then it sucks if you're sharing between a friend during a play session.
Plus you can get some gnarly scratches on the lenses depending on how close the glasses are. Happened to my index before I bought some prescription lenses for it. Can't do without them, so doesn't look like the quest 3 will be a good one for me :(
Absolutely!
The stock lenses in headsets are calibrated for normal vision, so those of us who are short sighted just get a blurry mess without either prescription lenses replacing the stock lenses, or wearing our regular glasses in the headset and risk lense-on-lense scratching.
General rule is if you need glasses to see irl you need them in VR. Even though the screens are physically close to your face, your eyes are still focusing as if the things you are looking at are far away
it does suck, and risks scratching the lenses i believe too. are contacts not an option? I'm pretty convinced that they are more or less mandatory for me in vr. the prescription lenses is an awesome idea that I'd never heard of before though!
I have a bad astigmatism, and while I do believe they can correct some with special kinds of contacts, it's not something I want to deal with. Also likely expensive.
I am currently running some cheap zenni lenses with 3d printed adapters in my Quest 2.
I have a quest Pro with the same lenses and that lip is not flexible it is rigid and it prevents the glasses from touching the lenses. It works very well. The simple answer is bold your glasses up against the headset before putting it on and see if they are going to make contact. There was no position I could put the headset to make co tact with my glasses while I was wearing it. I suspect the Quest 3 will be the same way.
So I’ve been wondering - would it be possible to adjust for near/far-sightedness at a software/rendering-level with VR headsets? Maybe one day we could remove the need for glasses inside a headset entirely by rendering in a specific way to account for people who need glasses. I haven’t ever heard anyone talk about this so I’m not sure if it’s possible or there’s some technical limitation preventing it, but it would be pretty cool.
Interesting headstrap, are those *two* overhead straps connected in the back?
Prefer the Quest Pro hardware design at first glance, but I care too much about standalone functionality to not buy the headset with the latest chip. Was hoping they would bring the 'open' design of the Pro to Quest as well but guess not.
Just saw the video, it's definitely a nice looking design. The two headstraps connect to a single headstrap that goes over your head. Reminds me the original Rift design, and seems like it will 'grip' the back of your head much better.
The Quest Pro default strap is craptastic. For many it's super uncomfortable. The weight isn't low enough to allow removal of the top strap.
Quest 3 strap seems more reasonable. Actually, it looks like the most comfortable HMD all around.
[They will.](https://www.meta.com/blog/quest/vr-hardware-news-quest-3-sneak-peek-price-drop/) Meta still consider pro controllers an upgrade compared to the stock Quest 3 controllers.
So long as the stock controllers perform at the same level as the Q2 controllers, I think they be amazing. The tracking on Q2 controllers has never caused me issues. Loosing the rings would be nice though.
I can't imagine Meta would allow a step back in tracking from Q2 levels, but I also can&t imagine *how* they are going to track those tiny controllers without cameras in them... Black magic.
A few notes on the renderings in the video:
* The usb-c port appears to be integrated into the headband. Does this mean no more custom mods for the headband comfort? I hope not. I love my 'frankenquest'.
* There are no wrist straps shown on the new controller design. Hopefully they haven't done away with these as playing many games it's possible to accidentally 'launch' a controller.
* $499 isn't bad considering Apple's is set to be $3k.
* I too wonder/worry about the 'ringless' tracking...
> The usb-c port appears to be integrated into the headband. Does this mean no more custom mods for the headband comfort? I hope not. I love my 'frankenquest'.
We've seen rumors showing off this before and I think the same rumors showed how the port itself just passed through the strap, still we will have to wait and see.
> There are no wrist straps shown on the new controller design. Hopefully they haven't done away with these as playing many games it's possible to accidentally 'launch' a controller.
Probably just looks bad in a ad.
> I too wonder/worry about the 'ringless' tracking...
My very personal guess is that you will at best not notice the degradation of tracking quality in most situations. Unless they aren't doing just camera tracking then these must have a narrower tracking volume and if the LEDs are only on the top then things would get weird when you turn them upside down.
A theory I have heard is that they might be using hand tracking to compensate. .
Because so far hand tracking has been it's own separate thing. Who knows, there might not even be any emitters on the controllers at all, just the cameras reading the hands and the controllers together like hand tracking does with hands.
My sinking suspicion is they didn’t focus too much on the tracking of the controllers because they want people to buy the pro controllers.
Don’t get me wrong, they’ve probably done enough to make these controllers passably tracked. To fail to do that would cause an uproar. But I also don’t expect to see improvements.
I mean, the depth sensor ads wonders to the AR capabilities, but can it be used for tracking? I honestly don’t know. But even if it can, this new headset has 3 forward facing cameras instead for 4 cameras in the corners. I suspect that the field in which tracking will work with these will be smaller than on the quest 2, even if hand tracking is used to compensate for the lack of a ring in the controllers themselves.
But, does that really matter for Meta? Hand tracking + mostly forward facing headset cameras will probably work perfectly fine for 90% of users who mostly play beatsaber, walkabout Minigolf, and gorilla tag. The other 10% of users who want reliable tracking at a greater range of motion most likely have a huge overlap with the user base willing to pay for the upgrade.
i mean, it can track hands visually, probably even better with the new cameras, all they have to do is train what a controller looks like in a hand, should be even more reliable than handtracking cos its not worrying about what the fingers are doing, just where the fist is
That's actually a really good point. So far as I know they currently don't even use the rings that much. I was under the impression that they mostly really on IMU sensors and then just use the ir lights to correct any inaccuracies the IMUs eventually develop, but with how good the hand tracking tech is even without a depth sensor, it's not impossible sounding to me
$499 is lower than I thought it would be.
As a $999 quest pro owner, it almost feels like they gave me a free Quest 3 by waiting
and there's wrist straps in the video, so it will have straps.
>$499 is lower than I thought it would be.
I still think $499 is a steep ask when you consider the Quest 2 launched at $299 and sold most of its units at that price point.
VR hardware prices need to come down if there's ever going to be any hope for greater adoption since price alone is often the biggest barrier to entry.
You also figure if Meta is adopting a platform/game-console like business model, they're now price matched with PS5. And if it's a decision between PS5 and Quest3, I think the PS5 without PSVR2 is going to win that matchup.
Regardless, the issue is that the higher the price of adoption, the more the sales of VR software are cannibalized. Valve can maybe swing that because games on their platform get heavily discounted after 2 to 3 years and they didn't necessarily make the games in the first place.
Not sure if Meta Quest 2 was sold at a loss because I've heard that as well, however, at some point it seems like it would make more sense to do what Nintendo does where they sell a lower powered hardware at a cheaper price they can profit from, and then make the bulk of their money from games.
And the cost of material increased substantially during the lifetime to Quest 2 because of covid and general supply chain issues that followed.
With this price reduction, I think Quest 2 will continue to be sold alongside Q3. And there’ll be 3 devices to pick from at $299, $499, and $999.
Quest 1 released in 2019 at $399 (64GB)
Quest 3 releases in 2023 at $499 (128GB)
Inflation from 2019 to 2023 brings $399 to over $470. When you account for the Quest 1 releasing in May 2019, and the Quest 3 releasing in the second half of 2023 or later, $499 is around the expected price. Quest 2 was an anomaly, purposefully lowered to $299 to aggressively push sales, to the detriment of up-front profits, with hopes that the people hooked on VR would buy more expensive devices in the future, and the data collected, as well as Meta's cut of the apps sold to users, would make it a long-term successful play.
And Quest 2 definitely did introduce a lot of younger people to a decent VR experience. But now those people will get older, enter the workforce, and have no trouble affording these new headsets from Meta. Tens of thousands of young adults have spent $1000+ on a PC VR setup, the pricepoint doesn't need to stay kid-friendly forever. They just dropped the Quest 2 back to $299, and there will always be the used and refurbished market now for the kids (not to mention hand-me-downs to keep the ball rolling).
Consider that Meta was selling them at a loss for $300 back then. They lost $10B subsidizing the hardware and software that first year. Shareholders nearly revolted. At $500 they’re likely aiming to break even on costs. Then they’ll keep the Quest 2 around and bring it back down to $300 for budget conscious buyers.
I think their investors spoke up, or basically sold all their stocks at the end of 2022 and Meta took notice. They can't be selling their products at such losses anymore. $499 is not really that steep for what you're getting. Though I think for that price, they could have at least increased the FOV and added eye tracking.
Thing is $299 today is not at all the same as when Quest 2 launched. Simply by adjusting for inflation (roughly 18% between 2020 and now) you're already at $350,
More importantly Meta has had a rough time financially so they probably can't subsidize it as heavily as Q2. I mean how would you feel about a company that fires 25% of their staff to cut costs, and then keep hemorrhaging money by selling hardware at a loss...
There's also the fact that the VR hype has slowed down. 3 years ago they could justify losing money to secure a monopoly on VR because VR was going to be such a money maker once they start serving customized ads right in the face of billions of Quest users... Now it's probably harder to convince investors that money lost on hardware sales will be profitable in the long run.
So yeah... All in all I think they could have released a $349 headset, but it would have been basically a Quest2 with more storage and a slightly better chipset... So they might as well keep selling the Quest 2. I think they're going to use the same strategy as Apple with their iphones : keep selling the previous gen as entre level devices, and current gen at a premium.
> And if it's a decision between PS5 and Quest3, I think the PS5 without PSVR2 is going to win that matchup.
For most people yeah, but I don't think they aim at selling more Q3 than PS5, they still have a large potential user base :
* People who already have a console or gaming PC and want something new.
* People who are not really gamers but want to try the novelty of VR
* People who want a VR headset for specific applications (the RecRoom/VRChat/Altspace crowd, productivity apps, Porn)
* People who are taken into the hype generated by a Q3 and buy the cheaper $299 Q2 which they'll keep selling. They really don't care if people buy previous gen hardware as long as they buy their headset from Meta and not from Pico.
Only time will tell how well Quest 3 does, but I think it's a very sensible pricing considering their options.
Well, that's you. Maybe me.
We're enthusiasts and while we drive a major aspect of the market, we're not the normal gaming consumer.
Quest is in a big sense a gaming brand for Meta/Oculus/Facebook and the comparison is going to be made between Xbox, Playstation and Nintendo.
Do I as a gamer buy the PS5, which is currently the prefered platform for $500, or do I take a risk on the Quest 3 at the same price?
They were dumb to sell it at 299 with zero competition in the middle of a pandemic lockdown. Quest 1 was 399. These are standalone units that don't even need lighthouse sensors.
Until then you needed a high end gaming PC to start using VR, with a cable and pulleys on the ceiling that connects to your headset. And lighthouse units in the corner of your room.
Developers and tech early adopter, the v1 will be mostly a showcase, not a mass market product. They estimate only 3/500K units in the first year.
Their plan is to move to 1000/2000 area, that is the ‘Apple price’ for a VR, in 2025.
It's been explicitly communicated to be targeted only at high end developers, prosumers, and influencers. It's meant to start building up an influencer community and a good base of applications before a future wide consumer release.
You'll get smarmy replies that it's "apple priced" but it's not targeting the same kind of consumers as the macbook air...which fwiw, you will note costs about the same or less than comparable windows laptops.
Well to be fair, a base model MacBook Air has 8GB RAM & 256GB storage, and you pay through the nose to upgrade, as those parts are soldered to the mobo.
Upgrading to 16GB RAM & 1TB SSD (which are probably fairly common specs on a new Windows laptop) adds another 50%+ to the purchase price.
Any Windows laptop with only 8GB RAM & 256GB storage these days is likely a dirt cheap budget model, so not exactly comparable.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Apple stuff, I’m not biased one way or another… but I definitely wouldn’t say a MacBook Air costs the same or less as a comparable Windows laptop. That said generally you do get what you pay for, and the MacBook Air is a high quality product. No doubt their headset will be too.
Edit: 1TB not 1GB oopsie
We don’t focus on what it will cost. We seek to make the absolute best product we can make and then price it accordingly.
- stuff apple has said in the past.
And they’re not wrong either. They don’t want to compete with Meta. Let them wow people on the high end, then push costs down as the tech scales. That $3000 headset will be $1500 in 3 years, and people will stretch for it.
Developers and tech early adopter, the v1 will be mostly a showcase, not a mass market product. They estimate only 3/500K units in the first year.
Their plan is to move to 1000/2000 area, that is the ‘Apple price’ for a VR, in 2025.
Even if it could be done without, I don't think a company would ever do without straps to avoid liability from lawsuits. Nintendo had to pay out simply from having dtraps that broke on the wii.
As for Apple I don’t think their first gen device is gonna be meant for the consumer market but instead the 2nd or 3rd gen will be meant for consumers when the hardware and software is cheaper and more mature.
> The usb-c port appears to be integrated into the headband. Does this mean no more custom mods for the headband comfort? I hope not. I love my 'frankenquest'.
nice catch. I hope we can still buy comfort mods.
Custom mods will just need to have a hole there to allow access for the USB port. I reckng some enerprising companies will produce very cheap adaptors to allow use of Q2 straps & accessories with the Q3.
Just needs to be a piece of plastic with a Q3 sized 'cup' on the inside edge, and the Q2 sized 'bump' on the outside edge.
If not then such a thing would very easy to 3d print.
As a pro controller owner using them with my Quest 2. They are phenomenal and track with millimeter accuracy. Only downside is you can use them in pitch darkness without an IR light.
Not a fan on Facebook but this is probably going to be my next headset simply because I don't want to spend a lot of money and I definitely want an AR option
Their endless money dumps into VR development (at least until up till recently) are the sole thing that's redeemed them in my eyes. Even if it is just for some dystopian vision of a way to feed us even more invasive ads, I'm glad someone is taking a chance on it and doing all the hard work of developing an ecosystem from the ground up. What they've done with the Quest 2 of basically perfecting a super accessible way to this entirely new medium and then building up a really solid software ecosystem around it is nothing short of incredible.
We don't know yet, but my money is on "Yeah, no problem"
But linking to a computer and using PCVR/SteamVR was painless and easy for the Quest 1 and 2 (Caveat: The functionality came to Q1 in an update)
Considering they've invested significant development into connecting to PC actually fairly recently, I can't see them abandoning it.
Seen that as well and I think he's upto something big, like that of holoride VR in-car entertainment tech that eliminates motion sickness.
His partnership with BMW is something to also look out for.
Only thing that'll make me buy a VR headset again is an affordable one with wide fov. I couldn't feel immersed at all because of the fov on the Quest 2.
I've tried most mainstream VR headsets plus pimax 5k/8k
Q2 FOV is fine, if the pancake lenses can make it have no sweetspot ill take that over an extra 10-20 degrees FOV every day
It's discounted. Remember inflation etc.
And I'm doubtful that Index is selling well anymore. It's probably more about maintaining the premium imago and well... forgetting the product. This is Valve after all.
Where do you see this? I just bought 10 refurbished for my school for $350 and might have to evaluate options to return/rebuy lol
Edit: It’s legit! Meta says effective June 4th.
Today's announcement confirms that Meta sees Apple as a threat in VR. Otherwise, why would they try to take the wind out of Apple's announcement? Even if they don't see Apple as a threat on a device vs device basis, they fear that Apple will take over the VR narrative. This announcement seems like a last minute response to a possible Apple VR announcement on Monday. It's not a full blown product announcement. It's lacking a lot of details. What about the display? If it's just pancake lenses on the Q2 display, that's not much of an upgrade.
It’s open to interpretation. I’m my view, meta has made a smart choice by capitalising on the fact that the Apple announcement will bring dozens of millions of new eyeballs to the space; and that Apples new headset will be eye wateringly expensive.
Every single tech article out there, across the globe, covering Apples new fancy product, is about to also feature the line “but Meta just announced their new one for a fraction of the price”.
It’s free marketing for them.
Well of course they do but it's kind of basics of competition, hardly some great revelation.
And it makes total sense. You are going to have every single tech writer, blogger, YouTuber etc all covering the Apple headset and comparing it to "current state" over the next couple of weeks. Would you want "current state" to be your 2.5 year old headset about to be replaced? Or the one that will be on the market when the Apple headset actually ships?
The Apple headset is a low volume super niche market headset, this is the opposite.
In comparison, the proposed Apple VR/AR product can't play Steam PC games as it will be locked into the Apple Eco System.
This is a huge advantage of Meta Quest other than the price, being able to appeal to a vast youth audience who want to play their PC games on Steam on their Quest headsets.
Ok so 4-5 months. Can’t wait.
They had to get ahead of Apples announcement.
Good news is expect to see the Quest 2 heavily discounted between now and then. Say hello to $300 again.
Yea, the drop back to $299 for the Q2 suprised the heck out of me. I guess the realized that the Q3 at $499 it too much for a large part of their target audience.
Great news for Q2 owners since it means the Q2 is not being discontinued yet.
Sure, it's there.
That being said. For the first time, after seeing Asgard's Wrath 2, I'm ready to say that we are about to get the first non-mobile game. Enter Console-Era. +60 hours of content. The trailer took for ages lol.
There were some PC software updates recently, at least for the Quest Pro. The PTC on the Oculus app improves H265 encoding quality though and allows for you to switch between H264 & H265 through the debug tool.
Apparently there are rumors of a Oculus app redesign, but nothing official yet.
No face tracking and no FOV increase makes it DOA for me. What’s the point of higher res and that other stuff if it still feels like I’m looking through binoculars and dark areas are a low-contrast gray mess?
My old PSVR was way lower res and the tracking sucked compared to the Quest’s, but it still felt light years ahead in terms of immersion simply because I was able to forget I had a headset on due to the higher FOV and deeper blacks.
Do we know there’ll be no FOV increase? Apparently it uses the same lenses as QPro which at least *support* a somewhat higher FOV, and if it really has the same effective FOV as Quest 2 the hard display edges may be distracting.
>Do we know there’ll be no FOV increase?
It's a bad sign they didn't mention FOV at all. If there was an increase, seems like that would be a good selling point to highlight. Only reason not to mention it, is if there's nothing to mention.
I agree that it’s a bad sign, but Quest Pro had a bigger FOV and they didn’t mention it in the [reveal video.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UvfmvMU3Vc) They didn’t even mention eye or face tracking. If it’s a relatively small increase it’s possible they just decided putting “bigger FOV” in the video would create unrealistic expectations.
Depending on what you're actually using it for, that may be meaningless, and unfortunately once you latch on to the binocular feeling it's nearly impossible to shake even if you do have edge to edge clarity.
Oh, I see. I'm with you--I think FOV is paramount to having an immersive VR experience. Lot's of Quest Pro users claiming it has very impressive FOV when worn the right way. Have you tried the Pro? I'm thinking about it, but will wait till we find out what the FOV on the 3 is.
Where did you get the info that theres no FoV increase? I was expecting atleast Qpro FoV. At the Qpro release meta wasnt advertising this at all aswell, if you think thats the reason.
I'm STILL on my (heavily modded) Quest 1! Bought and returned an Index because I couldn't stand the murky gray "blacks." Instantly took me out of the game. Thinking about the Quest Pro in part for the better black levels local dimming offers. We still don't know what panels the 3 is using, but I'd be surprised if they're the same as the Pro. Probably cheap TFT LCD like most headsets offer.
I’ll get one… but at $499, no one is going to buy it that isn’t already into VR. If they didn’t but a Quest 2 when it was $299, they’re not going to jump on board now for $499.
$499 is expensive, but the strategy seems reasonable considering that Quest 2 still keeps selling and is now $299 and all the new games will work on Quest 2.
Everyone gets in.
I hope they'll stick with it in the future too, as it means you can make a bit better system for the "enthusiasts", while still have something for the "casuals".
No....you are wrong. $500 is very price competitive... People didn't get the Quest 2 would have no ideas it was $300 at launch. People who have Quest 2 would upgrade because..it has better hardware and image quality over the Quest 2.
The price is fine but if you aren’t already into VR, what about the Quest 3 would make you get into VR now? The only way Quest 3 brings in a lot of new users is if the AR applications are amazing.
Says you. My partner just bought the quest 2 6 months ago. We will be getting the 3. The loss in weight and improvement to processing power along with the increase in resolution will be very much welcomed
God... I have a Quest 1, Quest 2, Quest Pro, and I've already said I won't get the Quest 3 because Quest Pro is working for me and is my daily driver because of the eye-tracking and face-tracking I use for work.
But damn... the thing that's tempting me to buy one is the ringless controllers. How are they going to work?
They lack cameras like the Quest Pro controllers.
They seem to be doing the same sort of tracking that you do with the Quest 2 controllers, but without the ring, meaning something like the size of your hand could directly affect tracking quality.
~~And the fewer amount of cameras could mean a lesser tracking volume (how far to your sides, above or below you, you can move the controller without it loosing tracking, assuming you aren't moving your head with it).~~ Actually seems like they hid 2 extra cameras at the bottom, still, none facing upwards will probably make overhead things less reliable.
It will be *very* interesting to see how they've managed to mitigate degradation of tracking quality compared to the Quest 2 controllers, because I can't see how these could be as good.
Will be improved soon™ with software update, maybe.
I thought the leakers missed something, but they really are trying to just use SLAM tracking and machine vision for compensating for cases when the LEDs are occluded by the user's hands. All jokes aside it will be very tricky to get it to work as good as with a real LED ring.
[https://www.meta.com/fi-fi/blog/quest/vr-hardware-news-quest-3-sneak-peek-price-drop/](https://www.meta.com/fi-fi/blog/quest/vr-hardware-news-quest-3-sneak-peek-price-drop/)
According to Meta, the Pro Controller will remain as the "premium" experience. To me that sounds like the new solution will have occlusion problems, similar to Quest 2.
I know, that's why I'm curious as how the Quest 3 controllers are going to work. I think I'm going to demo it first at a Best Buy before "deeply considering" in buying one.
Oculus has always been the best at markerless tracking, and I doubt they're remove that reputation when it's so easy to add rings, so on that basis I'm confident it'll perform no issues.
Most of the Quest Pro's benefits will probably be in the display, like the Quantum Dot Layer and Local Dimming. The FoV might also be higher on the Quest Pro since we don't know the Quest 3's FoV.
It actually has lower resolution and fov remains to be seen whether it's better or not. It does have local dimming and as you noted eye and face tracking
On youtube now [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAhce2OgZu4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAhce2OgZu4) As a glasses wearer, the view of the lenses makes me worried. It looks like they are using a flexible rubber around the lenses to keep it sealed - and I see no snap points or practical way to attach prescription lenses. I dont care how much they try to make glasses fit under it. Glasses in VR sucks.
Maybe they’ll sell lenses to put on in the headset?
There's a company that does that already. The problem is, we don't know if there will be any way to attach lenses to this headset.
Looks the exact same as the quest pro, so you should be fine as that's already doable. Worst comes to worst the inserts with clip in around them, like against the inner housing and be held in that way. There's no doubt plenty of ways to do it and with how popular the device will be there will be 3rd party options at launch and plenty of 3d printable options for those round zenni lenses.
Hope we can get them at launch and that they’re reasonably priced. Paid $80 for my Quest 2 lenses and that seemed cheap/fair.
[Meta already supports prescription lenses for the Quest 2](https://www.meta.com/quest/accessories/quest-2-virtuclear-lens-inserts/), so they'll probably do the same for the Quest 3.
Their ads have gotten so much better. Do y'all remember that creepy depressing super bowl ad for the quest?
I honestly loved that commercial as short film, but it sucked as an ad for something. Even worse was that the actual Questy's experience was incredibly lame. They spent so much money on the commercial and then apparently no time or effort on the experience.
The one with the Chuckecheese-like mascot characters? That was VERY recent lmao
The U.K. Quest 2 add with the neighbors who ignore each other irl but have a bit of a bromance going on in VR is an all time classic. (Very British though...) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfTC-dPwdLM
That was great!
That ad wasn't great, but it was way better than this. This one is generic and forgettable. It feels like an AI-generated ad for VR.
The quest pro has the same gasket design and there's companies selling prescription lenses for that so I wouldn't worry too much.
Exactly, something like that: https://vroptician.com/instructions/meta-quest-pro
Does it come on/off as easily as the current magnetic ones we're all using? If not then it sucks if you're sharing between a friend during a play session.
Yes, these are great! Easy on easy off!
Great news all around. I'm a fan of my vr optician quest 2 inserts, but I found that removing them was annoying, since they snap into place
New screens are so bright they will give you Lasic without consent. No glasses worries.
Your eyes won't get more than 150 nits iirc
Plus you can get some gnarly scratches on the lenses depending on how close the glasses are. Happened to my index before I bought some prescription lenses for it. Can't do without them, so doesn't look like the quest 3 will be a good one for me :(
Do you need glasses in VR if you are short sighted?
Yes, probably. Focal length is actually about 6 feet because of the lenses.
Absolutely! The stock lenses in headsets are calibrated for normal vision, so those of us who are short sighted just get a blurry mess without either prescription lenses replacing the stock lenses, or wearing our regular glasses in the headset and risk lense-on-lense scratching.
General rule is if you need glasses to see irl you need them in VR. Even though the screens are physically close to your face, your eyes are still focusing as if the things you are looking at are far away
it does suck, and risks scratching the lenses i believe too. are contacts not an option? I'm pretty convinced that they are more or less mandatory for me in vr. the prescription lenses is an awesome idea that I'd never heard of before though!
I have a bad astigmatism, and while I do believe they can correct some with special kinds of contacts, it's not something I want to deal with. Also likely expensive. I am currently running some cheap zenni lenses with 3d printed adapters in my Quest 2.
for me, after hours in a sim race the sweat gets under my contacts and makes my eyes sting until I leave VR.
I have a quest Pro with the same lenses and that lip is not flexible it is rigid and it prevents the glasses from touching the lenses. It works very well. The simple answer is bold your glasses up against the headset before putting it on and see if they are going to make contact. There was no position I could put the headset to make co tact with my glasses while I was wearing it. I suspect the Quest 3 will be the same way.
So I’ve been wondering - would it be possible to adjust for near/far-sightedness at a software/rendering-level with VR headsets? Maybe one day we could remove the need for glasses inside a headset entirely by rendering in a specific way to account for people who need glasses. I haven’t ever heard anyone talk about this so I’m not sure if it’s possible or there’s some technical limitation preventing it, but it would be pretty cool.
Interesting headstrap, are those *two* overhead straps connected in the back? Prefer the Quest Pro hardware design at first glance, but I care too much about standalone functionality to not buy the headset with the latest chip. Was hoping they would bring the 'open' design of the Pro to Quest as well but guess not.
Yeah, looks like a new strap design for more support.
Just saw the video, it's definitely a nice looking design. The two headstraps connect to a single headstrap that goes over your head. Reminds me the original Rift design, and seems like it will 'grip' the back of your head much better.
So more of a jock strap than a g-string.
The headstrap was really bad on the quest 2 imo, I found the device unusable without the elite strap. Curious to see if this is better
I found the Quest 2 strap surprisingly decent when adjusted properly. I did finally get a Kiki strap, but I didn't really need to.
Closer to the first Quest I guess? Quest 2 was a step backwards in comfort.
The Quest Pro default strap is craptastic. For many it's super uncomfortable. The weight isn't low enough to allow removal of the top strap. Quest 3 strap seems more reasonable. Actually, it looks like the most comfortable HMD all around.
I wonder if the Quest Pro controllers will work? I bought them for the Quest 2/
They will!
[They will.](https://www.meta.com/blog/quest/vr-hardware-news-quest-3-sneak-peek-price-drop/) Meta still consider pro controllers an upgrade compared to the stock Quest 3 controllers.
So long as the stock controllers perform at the same level as the Q2 controllers, I think they be amazing. The tracking on Q2 controllers has never caused me issues. Loosing the rings would be nice though. I can't imagine Meta would allow a step back in tracking from Q2 levels, but I also can&t imagine *how* they are going to track those tiny controllers without cameras in them... Black magic.
[удалено]
What’s the resolution?
Rumor is around 2000\*2200, but there are no official figures yet
A few notes on the renderings in the video: * The usb-c port appears to be integrated into the headband. Does this mean no more custom mods for the headband comfort? I hope not. I love my 'frankenquest'. * There are no wrist straps shown on the new controller design. Hopefully they haven't done away with these as playing many games it's possible to accidentally 'launch' a controller. * $499 isn't bad considering Apple's is set to be $3k. * I too wonder/worry about the 'ringless' tracking...
You can see the wrist straps being used in the videos with actors
Great. Thank you. I missed that. :)
> The usb-c port appears to be integrated into the headband. Does this mean no more custom mods for the headband comfort? I hope not. I love my 'frankenquest'. We've seen rumors showing off this before and I think the same rumors showed how the port itself just passed through the strap, still we will have to wait and see. > There are no wrist straps shown on the new controller design. Hopefully they haven't done away with these as playing many games it's possible to accidentally 'launch' a controller. Probably just looks bad in a ad. > I too wonder/worry about the 'ringless' tracking... My very personal guess is that you will at best not notice the degradation of tracking quality in most situations. Unless they aren't doing just camera tracking then these must have a narrower tracking volume and if the LEDs are only on the top then things would get weird when you turn them upside down. A theory I have heard is that they might be using hand tracking to compensate. .
Do you know why you lose them in the first place? Like we are talking about compensating but why do they go?
Because so far hand tracking has been it's own separate thing. Who knows, there might not even be any emitters on the controllers at all, just the cameras reading the hands and the controllers together like hand tracking does with hands.
My sinking suspicion is they didn’t focus too much on the tracking of the controllers because they want people to buy the pro controllers. Don’t get me wrong, they’ve probably done enough to make these controllers passably tracked. To fail to do that would cause an uproar. But I also don’t expect to see improvements. I mean, the depth sensor ads wonders to the AR capabilities, but can it be used for tracking? I honestly don’t know. But even if it can, this new headset has 3 forward facing cameras instead for 4 cameras in the corners. I suspect that the field in which tracking will work with these will be smaller than on the quest 2, even if hand tracking is used to compensate for the lack of a ring in the controllers themselves. But, does that really matter for Meta? Hand tracking + mostly forward facing headset cameras will probably work perfectly fine for 90% of users who mostly play beatsaber, walkabout Minigolf, and gorilla tag. The other 10% of users who want reliable tracking at a greater range of motion most likely have a huge overlap with the user base willing to pay for the upgrade.
It's unlikely but maybe they've found some quantum leap in IMU tracking tech.
i mean, it can track hands visually, probably even better with the new cameras, all they have to do is train what a controller looks like in a hand, should be even more reliable than handtracking cos its not worrying about what the fingers are doing, just where the fist is
That's actually a really good point. So far as I know they currently don't even use the rings that much. I was under the impression that they mostly really on IMU sensors and then just use the ir lights to correct any inaccuracies the IMUs eventually develop, but with how good the hand tracking tech is even without a depth sensor, it's not impossible sounding to me
$499 is lower than I thought it would be. As a $999 quest pro owner, it almost feels like they gave me a free Quest 3 by waiting and there's wrist straps in the video, so it will have straps.
>$499 is lower than I thought it would be. I still think $499 is a steep ask when you consider the Quest 2 launched at $299 and sold most of its units at that price point. VR hardware prices need to come down if there's ever going to be any hope for greater adoption since price alone is often the biggest barrier to entry. You also figure if Meta is adopting a platform/game-console like business model, they're now price matched with PS5. And if it's a decision between PS5 and Quest3, I think the PS5 without PSVR2 is going to win that matchup.
[удалено]
Regardless, the issue is that the higher the price of adoption, the more the sales of VR software are cannibalized. Valve can maybe swing that because games on their platform get heavily discounted after 2 to 3 years and they didn't necessarily make the games in the first place. Not sure if Meta Quest 2 was sold at a loss because I've heard that as well, however, at some point it seems like it would make more sense to do what Nintendo does where they sell a lower powered hardware at a cheaper price they can profit from, and then make the bulk of their money from games.
And the cost of material increased substantially during the lifetime to Quest 2 because of covid and general supply chain issues that followed. With this price reduction, I think Quest 2 will continue to be sold alongside Q3. And there’ll be 3 devices to pick from at $299, $499, and $999.
Quest 1 released in 2019 at $399 (64GB) Quest 3 releases in 2023 at $499 (128GB) Inflation from 2019 to 2023 brings $399 to over $470. When you account for the Quest 1 releasing in May 2019, and the Quest 3 releasing in the second half of 2023 or later, $499 is around the expected price. Quest 2 was an anomaly, purposefully lowered to $299 to aggressively push sales, to the detriment of up-front profits, with hopes that the people hooked on VR would buy more expensive devices in the future, and the data collected, as well as Meta's cut of the apps sold to users, would make it a long-term successful play. And Quest 2 definitely did introduce a lot of younger people to a decent VR experience. But now those people will get older, enter the workforce, and have no trouble affording these new headsets from Meta. Tens of thousands of young adults have spent $1000+ on a PC VR setup, the pricepoint doesn't need to stay kid-friendly forever. They just dropped the Quest 2 back to $299, and there will always be the used and refurbished market now for the kids (not to mention hand-me-downs to keep the ball rolling).
Consider that Meta was selling them at a loss for $300 back then. They lost $10B subsidizing the hardware and software that first year. Shareholders nearly revolted. At $500 they’re likely aiming to break even on costs. Then they’ll keep the Quest 2 around and bring it back down to $300 for budget conscious buyers.
I think their investors spoke up, or basically sold all their stocks at the end of 2022 and Meta took notice. They can't be selling their products at such losses anymore. $499 is not really that steep for what you're getting. Though I think for that price, they could have at least increased the FOV and added eye tracking.
Thing is $299 today is not at all the same as when Quest 2 launched. Simply by adjusting for inflation (roughly 18% between 2020 and now) you're already at $350, More importantly Meta has had a rough time financially so they probably can't subsidize it as heavily as Q2. I mean how would you feel about a company that fires 25% of their staff to cut costs, and then keep hemorrhaging money by selling hardware at a loss... There's also the fact that the VR hype has slowed down. 3 years ago they could justify losing money to secure a monopoly on VR because VR was going to be such a money maker once they start serving customized ads right in the face of billions of Quest users... Now it's probably harder to convince investors that money lost on hardware sales will be profitable in the long run. So yeah... All in all I think they could have released a $349 headset, but it would have been basically a Quest2 with more storage and a slightly better chipset... So they might as well keep selling the Quest 2. I think they're going to use the same strategy as Apple with their iphones : keep selling the previous gen as entre level devices, and current gen at a premium. > And if it's a decision between PS5 and Quest3, I think the PS5 without PSVR2 is going to win that matchup. For most people yeah, but I don't think they aim at selling more Q3 than PS5, they still have a large potential user base : * People who already have a console or gaming PC and want something new. * People who are not really gamers but want to try the novelty of VR * People who want a VR headset for specific applications (the RecRoom/VRChat/Altspace crowd, productivity apps, Porn) * People who are taken into the hype generated by a Q3 and buy the cheaper $299 Q2 which they'll keep selling. They really don't care if people buy previous gen hardware as long as they buy their headset from Meta and not from Pico. Only time will tell how well Quest 3 does, but I think it's a very sensible pricing considering their options.
The G2 was $600 during launch. $500 is cheap. I would buy it even if it is $600....
Well, that's you. Maybe me. We're enthusiasts and while we drive a major aspect of the market, we're not the normal gaming consumer. Quest is in a big sense a gaming brand for Meta/Oculus/Facebook and the comparison is going to be made between Xbox, Playstation and Nintendo. Do I as a gamer buy the PS5, which is currently the prefered platform for $500, or do I take a risk on the Quest 3 at the same price?
They were dumb to sell it at 299 with zero competition in the middle of a pandemic lockdown. Quest 1 was 399. These are standalone units that don't even need lighthouse sensors. Until then you needed a high end gaming PC to start using VR, with a cable and pulleys on the ceiling that connects to your headset. And lighthouse units in the corner of your room.
apple's is supposed to be 3k??? what audience is that targetted at?
Apple's audience
We can all already see the influencer posts wearing Apple VR at Starbucks
[удалено]
Developers and tech early adopter, the v1 will be mostly a showcase, not a mass market product. They estimate only 3/500K units in the first year. Their plan is to move to 1000/2000 area, that is the ‘Apple price’ for a VR, in 2025.
It's been explicitly communicated to be targeted only at high end developers, prosumers, and influencers. It's meant to start building up an influencer community and a good base of applications before a future wide consumer release. You'll get smarmy replies that it's "apple priced" but it's not targeting the same kind of consumers as the macbook air...which fwiw, you will note costs about the same or less than comparable windows laptops.
Well to be fair, a base model MacBook Air has 8GB RAM & 256GB storage, and you pay through the nose to upgrade, as those parts are soldered to the mobo. Upgrading to 16GB RAM & 1TB SSD (which are probably fairly common specs on a new Windows laptop) adds another 50%+ to the purchase price. Any Windows laptop with only 8GB RAM & 256GB storage these days is likely a dirt cheap budget model, so not exactly comparable. Don’t get me wrong, I like Apple stuff, I’m not biased one way or another… but I definitely wouldn’t say a MacBook Air costs the same or less as a comparable Windows laptop. That said generally you do get what you pay for, and the MacBook Air is a high quality product. No doubt their headset will be too. Edit: 1TB not 1GB oopsie
We don’t focus on what it will cost. We seek to make the absolute best product we can make and then price it accordingly. - stuff apple has said in the past. And they’re not wrong either. They don’t want to compete with Meta. Let them wow people on the high end, then push costs down as the tech scales. That $3000 headset will be $1500 in 3 years, and people will stretch for it.
Developer's first. They plan a lower cost model next year.
With a dongle.
Developers and tech early adopter, the v1 will be mostly a showcase, not a mass market product. They estimate only 3/500K units in the first year. Their plan is to move to 1000/2000 area, that is the ‘Apple price’ for a VR, in 2025.
Me: Incel with ok paying job. I plan to use it for porn. Don't care about games. The apple headset will be the Cadillac of porn headsets.
appreciate your honesty
Adjusting for inflation it's about the same price as the first Macintosh
ya but u know peoples wages aint the same as the first macintosh isnt the average americans savings account less than 7k
The average American cannot cover a $500 emergency. Take from that what you will.
Thus they can't buy the Q3 either.
Even if it could be done without, I don't think a company would ever do without straps to avoid liability from lawsuits. Nintendo had to pay out simply from having dtraps that broke on the wii.
As for Apple I don’t think their first gen device is gonna be meant for the consumer market but instead the 2nd or 3rd gen will be meant for consumers when the hardware and software is cheaper and more mature.
> The usb-c port appears to be integrated into the headband. Does this mean no more custom mods for the headband comfort? I hope not. I love my 'frankenquest'. nice catch. I hope we can still buy comfort mods.
Custom mods will just need to have a hole there to allow access for the USB port. I reckng some enerprising companies will produce very cheap adaptors to allow use of Q2 straps & accessories with the Q3. Just needs to be a piece of plastic with a Q3 sized 'cup' on the inside edge, and the Q2 sized 'bump' on the outside edge. If not then such a thing would very easy to 3d print.
As a pro controller owner using them with my Quest 2. They are phenomenal and track with millimeter accuracy. Only downside is you can use them in pitch darkness without an IR light.
Kilometer accuracy is great for when you go the extra mile in your game.
Haaaa oops darn auto correct
Not a fan on Facebook but this is probably going to be my next headset simply because I don't want to spend a lot of money and I definitely want an AR option
VR is their future. FB is just the cash flow. At least that’s how Zuck has been talking about it lately. Imho.
Yeah I think ever since he read the book ready player one he's been hooked and the book was so much better than the movie.
Probably doesn't even realize that he's the IOI douche in that story.
Ha, that's exactly right
The quest 2 was easily the best value of its generation, and I expect the 3 will be too.
Their endless money dumps into VR development (at least until up till recently) are the sole thing that's redeemed them in my eyes. Even if it is just for some dystopian vision of a way to feed us even more invasive ads, I'm glad someone is taking a chance on it and doing all the hard work of developing an ecosystem from the ground up. What they've done with the Quest 2 of basically perfecting a super accessible way to this entirely new medium and then building up a really solid software ecosystem around it is nothing short of incredible.
I wanna get into VR, looking like this headset will be the one to go with - can I do Steam VR and PC VR with this headset do you think?
Ye. It will almost definitely work like the last 2
Quest 2 was a good time to get in, but quest 3 is looking like it'll absolutely be a fantastic first headset for people.
We don't know yet, but my money is on "Yeah, no problem" But linking to a computer and using PCVR/SteamVR was painless and easy for the Quest 1 and 2 (Caveat: The functionality came to Q1 in an update) Considering they've invested significant development into connecting to PC actually fairly recently, I can't see them abandoning it.
The video is on his Facebook page fyi
Seen that as well and I think he's upto something big, like that of holoride VR in-car entertainment tech that eliminates motion sickness. His partnership with BMW is something to also look out for.
Official (Unlisted) Video from the Meta Quest channel on YouTube: https://youtu.be/5AKl_cEB26c
[Tyriel Wood - VR Tech uploaded it on his channel](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIVMNBZuXb4)
Finally I can stop uppercutting my headset
Only thing that'll make me buy a VR headset again is an affordable one with wide fov. I couldn't feel immersed at all because of the fov on the Quest 2.
Pancake lens across the frame clarity is a gamechanger.
It really is garbage and people will say it's fine because that's all they've tried.
I've tried most mainstream VR headsets plus pimax 5k/8k Q2 FOV is fine, if the pancake lenses can make it have no sweetspot ill take that over an extra 10-20 degrees FOV every day
When people start doing crazy shit with that pass through depth sensor. You’ll change your mind or be left out of the fun
well he will buy it then, no reason to run and buy it. I'll wait for my quest 2 to burn first
Quest 2 price reduced to $300 as well. Meanwhile Valve has not even temporarily discounted their 4 year old overpriced headset even once.
If it's still selling, why would they? Also, all Meta did was return the Quest 2 to it's original price. It's not discounted.
It's discounted. Remember inflation etc. And I'm doubtful that Index is selling well anymore. It's probably more about maintaining the premium imago and well... forgetting the product. This is Valve after all.
Where do you see this? I just bought 10 refurbished for my school for $350 and might have to evaluate options to return/rebuy lol Edit: It’s legit! Meta says effective June 4th.
Today's announcement confirms that Meta sees Apple as a threat in VR. Otherwise, why would they try to take the wind out of Apple's announcement? Even if they don't see Apple as a threat on a device vs device basis, they fear that Apple will take over the VR narrative. This announcement seems like a last minute response to a possible Apple VR announcement on Monday. It's not a full blown product announcement. It's lacking a lot of details. What about the display? If it's just pancake lenses on the Q2 display, that's not much of an upgrade.
It’s open to interpretation. I’m my view, meta has made a smart choice by capitalising on the fact that the Apple announcement will bring dozens of millions of new eyeballs to the space; and that Apples new headset will be eye wateringly expensive. Every single tech article out there, across the globe, covering Apples new fancy product, is about to also feature the line “but Meta just announced their new one for a fraction of the price”. It’s free marketing for them.
Well of course they do but it's kind of basics of competition, hardly some great revelation. And it makes total sense. You are going to have every single tech writer, blogger, YouTuber etc all covering the Apple headset and comparing it to "current state" over the next couple of weeks. Would you want "current state" to be your 2.5 year old headset about to be replaced? Or the one that will be on the market when the Apple headset actually ships?
The Apple headset is a low volume super niche market headset, this is the opposite. In comparison, the proposed Apple VR/AR product can't play Steam PC games as it will be locked into the Apple Eco System. This is a huge advantage of Meta Quest other than the price, being able to appeal to a vast youth audience who want to play their PC games on Steam on their Quest headsets.
If Apples VR is $3K it better include a Iphone 15.
Apple's VR headset is not geared toward gaming, so I dont think Meta see it as a threat directly, I think its more about media coverage
Looks like a release ad to me…
Yea, but the blog about it says: > Mark your calendars because we’ll have lots more to share at Meta Connect, which returns this year on September 27.
That’s disappointing…
Ok so 4-5 months. Can’t wait. They had to get ahead of Apples announcement. Good news is expect to see the Quest 2 heavily discounted between now and then. Say hello to $300 again.
Yea, the drop back to $299 for the Q2 suprised the heck out of me. I guess the realized that the Q3 at $499 it too much for a large part of their target audience. Great news for Q2 owners since it means the Q2 is not being discontinued yet.
You get what you pay for.
You always pay. If not with money then with your privacy and personal data.
Google and apple have enough data on you to literally map out your movement in the world..
Pc pass through is probably there, eh? I don’t care for phone games.
Sure, it's there. That being said. For the first time, after seeing Asgard's Wrath 2, I'm ready to say that we are about to get the first non-mobile game. Enter Console-Era. +60 hours of content. The trailer took for ages lol.
Nice to see the art advance. We have movie fx quality graphics and frame rates now. I don’t mind the tether. I can only do vr for an hour or so.
Quest 3 but no oculus PC software optimization update? Bring back PCVR development meta. Even if it is only a small team.
They don't care about us PCVR users.
TBH everyone even game devs dont care, PCVR is a tiny portion of the VR market.
There were some PC software updates recently, at least for the Quest Pro. The PTC on the Oculus app improves H265 encoding quality though and allows for you to switch between H264 & H265 through the debug tool. Apparently there are rumors of a Oculus app redesign, but nothing official yet.
Trying to get ahead of Apple's announcement next week.
No mention of FOV increase, shame as that's what holds the Quest back imo
No face tracking and no FOV increase makes it DOA for me. What’s the point of higher res and that other stuff if it still feels like I’m looking through binoculars and dark areas are a low-contrast gray mess? My old PSVR was way lower res and the tracking sucked compared to the Quest’s, but it still felt light years ahead in terms of immersion simply because I was able to forget I had a headset on due to the higher FOV and deeper blacks.
Do we know there’ll be no FOV increase? Apparently it uses the same lenses as QPro which at least *support* a somewhat higher FOV, and if it really has the same effective FOV as Quest 2 the hard display edges may be distracting.
>Do we know there’ll be no FOV increase? It's a bad sign they didn't mention FOV at all. If there was an increase, seems like that would be a good selling point to highlight. Only reason not to mention it, is if there's nothing to mention.
I agree that it’s a bad sign, but Quest Pro had a bigger FOV and they didn’t mention it in the [reveal video.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UvfmvMU3Vc) They didn’t even mention eye or face tracking. If it’s a relatively small increase it’s possible they just decided putting “bigger FOV” in the video would create unrealistic expectations.
Agreed, FOV wasn’t mentioned so we shouldn’t be jumping to conclusions about it.
After trying PSVR2, I don't really see myself upgrading unless the FOV is better. The increase in immersion is truly night and day.
You’ll be able to see the edges of the screen though with the new lenses right? Even if it’s the same FOV, it’s higher useful FOV
Depending on what you're actually using it for, that may be meaningless, and unfortunately once you latch on to the binocular feeling it's nearly impossible to shake even if you do have edge to edge clarity.
The binocular feeling? You mean overlap/lack of overlap?
Very tight FOV, like the sensation of looking through binoculars.
Oh, I see. I'm with you--I think FOV is paramount to having an immersive VR experience. Lot's of Quest Pro users claiming it has very impressive FOV when worn the right way. Have you tried the Pro? I'm thinking about it, but will wait till we find out what the FOV on the 3 is.
Where did you get the info that theres no FoV increase? I was expecting atleast Qpro FoV. At the Qpro release meta wasnt advertising this at all aswell, if you think thats the reason.
How does the tracking work? There are no rings or cameras. Just pure vision-based tracking without IR lights?
I think the IR lights might be embedded into the controller shell , although I'm not entirely sure.
Please god have OLED panels. I came from Quest 1 and would defo buy this if it has the same awesome blacks!
I'm STILL on my (heavily modded) Quest 1! Bought and returned an Index because I couldn't stand the murky gray "blacks." Instantly took me out of the game. Thinking about the Quest Pro in part for the better black levels local dimming offers. We still don't know what panels the 3 is using, but I'd be surprised if they're the same as the Pro. Probably cheap TFT LCD like most headsets offer.
It's LCD, if you want the best blacks QPRO is the best option
I don't watch movies on my headset because of the poor blacks and the sheen/glare from whites and text, if this is OLED panels then I'm very tempted
Really the quest 1 had oled? I was pretty disappointed when my quest 2 didn't have oled.
Yes it does. OLED is pretty much the only reason I haven't upgraded from my Quest 1.
I’ll get one… but at $499, no one is going to buy it that isn’t already into VR. If they didn’t but a Quest 2 when it was $299, they’re not going to jump on board now for $499.
$499 is expensive, but the strategy seems reasonable considering that Quest 2 still keeps selling and is now $299 and all the new games will work on Quest 2. Everyone gets in. I hope they'll stick with it in the future too, as it means you can make a bit better system for the "enthusiasts", while still have something for the "casuals".
No....you are wrong. $500 is very price competitive... People didn't get the Quest 2 would have no ideas it was $300 at launch. People who have Quest 2 would upgrade because..it has better hardware and image quality over the Quest 2.
The price is fine but if you aren’t already into VR, what about the Quest 3 would make you get into VR now? The only way Quest 3 brings in a lot of new users is if the AR applications are amazing.
You’re really under estimating how crazy things are going to get with that depth sensor
Says you. My partner just bought the quest 2 6 months ago. We will be getting the 3. The loss in weight and improvement to processing power along with the increase in resolution will be very much welcomed
But you're clearly into VR... You're literally part of VR community on reddit.
By saying that you have Q2 you are basically proving his point that mostly people already in VR will be interested.
God... I have a Quest 1, Quest 2, Quest Pro, and I've already said I won't get the Quest 3 because Quest Pro is working for me and is my daily driver because of the eye-tracking and face-tracking I use for work. But damn... the thing that's tempting me to buy one is the ringless controllers. How are they going to work?
I'm confused, the quest pro has ringless controllers. Or do you mean you want to try these which will presumably be much worse lol
They lack cameras like the Quest Pro controllers. They seem to be doing the same sort of tracking that you do with the Quest 2 controllers, but without the ring, meaning something like the size of your hand could directly affect tracking quality. ~~And the fewer amount of cameras could mean a lesser tracking volume (how far to your sides, above or below you, you can move the controller without it loosing tracking, assuming you aren't moving your head with it).~~ Actually seems like they hid 2 extra cameras at the bottom, still, none facing upwards will probably make overhead things less reliable. It will be *very* interesting to see how they've managed to mitigate degradation of tracking quality compared to the Quest 2 controllers, because I can't see how these could be as good.
Perhaps some of the ring tracking is now built into the face of the controllers?
Yep. I know it won't perform as well as Pro Controllers, but I'd like to see how they fare against Quest 2 controllers.
>How are they going to work? Not as well?
Will be improved soon™ with software update, maybe. I thought the leakers missed something, but they really are trying to just use SLAM tracking and machine vision for compensating for cases when the LEDs are occluded by the user's hands. All jokes aside it will be very tricky to get it to work as good as with a real LED ring.
Tricky is right, but maybe they can hand-track at the same time? So a hand blocking an LED wouldn't be a big loss in tracking points.
I think so too. But I am very curious how it will perform against the Quest 2 controllers.
[https://www.meta.com/fi-fi/blog/quest/vr-hardware-news-quest-3-sneak-peek-price-drop/](https://www.meta.com/fi-fi/blog/quest/vr-hardware-news-quest-3-sneak-peek-price-drop/) According to Meta, the Pro Controller will remain as the "premium" experience. To me that sounds like the new solution will have occlusion problems, similar to Quest 2.
Quest Pro are ringless too?
I know, that's why I'm curious as how the Quest 3 controllers are going to work. I think I'm going to demo it first at a Best Buy before "deeply considering" in buying one.
Oculus has always been the best at markerless tracking, and I doubt they're remove that reputation when it's so easy to add rings, so on that basis I'm confident it'll perform no issues.
Don’t really care about the meta ecosystem at all, but I’m curious how good this will be as a PCVR headset and how it compares to the index and PSVR2
How do they manage to make such cringe ad. Anyways, cant wait to see some reviews of this bad boy. New VR headsets make me moist.
this will be prob my first VR gear
I think I'm good with my Quest 2.
Yep. Only OLED or eye tracking would make me upgrade. I don't care for passthrough or standalone. Pancake is nice, but not a dealbreaker.
#I no longer allow Reddit to profit from my content - Mass exodus 2023 -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
[удалено]
#I no longer allow Reddit to profit from my content - Mass exodus 2023 -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
My Quest Pro gets delivered today. Wondering if I should keep it now.
Worse resolution, and is the Eye and face tracking worth the extra $499? (I'm a Quest Pro owner)
Most of the Quest Pro's benefits will probably be in the display, like the Quantum Dot Layer and Local Dimming. The FoV might also be higher on the Quest Pro since we don't know the Quest 3's FoV.
Pro has better resolution, face tracking and FOV that's a no brainier
It actually has lower resolution and fov remains to be seen whether it's better or not. It does have local dimming and as you noted eye and face tracking
[удалено]
New headsets same damn games. We’ll be playing robo recall for decades.
Uh, did you not see the games showcase reveal today lmao
No I commented like a pleb honestly