Ironically they did eye and face tracking on the Pro, didn't support it properly on the software and UI side (despite the hardware being very capable) and now that people have seen how apple is using it some users have emulated it very well on Pro... Only for meta to ditch eye tracking on Q3 making it a dead end for Meta.
Quest 3 preview
- Thread starter Unseul
- Start date
Better codec will only apply to people having the newest generation of cards. Those of us still on older cards will have to make do with h.264/265. The Quest 3's decoding chip might have improved h.254/265 decoders which could improve wired and wireless PCVR. That improvement might be offset by the higher resolution. Have to wait and see.
I'm in the same boat at the moment. Was going to Pre-Order and get it straight away but I think I am going to wait and see how big a difference there actually will be between the Quest 2 and Quest 3.
They did say that they were going to keep releasing games for both for "quite a while yet" And that games requiring high power and/or mixed reality may start to target the Quest 3 over time.
Soldato
Best Buy listing
-30% increase in res over Q2
-LCD panel
-30% increase in res over Q2
-LCD panel
Apple has taken the wind out of it's own sails. They were forecasting selling a million headsets and making over 3 billion, now they have revised their estimates down to selling 150K.
Honestly, I am not too sure how to respond to the rest of your post. It's all over the place. First of all, Zukenburg has been very clear when he took over Oculus in 2014 that he saw the future of VR as the ultimate Social media platform and has worked towards that goal since then. He talked about people meeting up together in VR to watch the Superbowl or go to movie or festival or whatever. He might not have called it the Metaverse, but that was, and still is the main goal of Meta in VR. Oh, sorry, their other goal is get as many people using VR as possible and they have succeeded in that regard better than anyone else.
Their product line up isn't a mess. The Quest Pro isn't aimed at gamers. It's aimed at prosumers. If you go to the Meta page for the pro it's headline is "Our most advanced headset yet. A whole new way to work, create and collaborate." Gaming is only mentioned at the very end of the page and only after they show the accessories available for sale. It's a work device that you can game on.
At some future point in time they will more than likely release an updated version of the Quest Pro aimed at the business market. And I am sure some of the more well off VR enthusiasts will buy it for gaming just like they bought the Quest Pro, the Varjo Aero, The HTC Focus 3 etc.
And this line of your post is comical.
How have Apple leaped frogged Meta in regards to a VR headset for gaming? Have you even read anything about the Vision pro? The 100 games they are releasing for it are all going to be Ipad/iphone games in your headset and played with a bluetooth controller. The Vision Pro isn't a gaming headset at all, it doesn't support tracked controllers and no plans to. There is no PCVR at all, it can't even connect to a Mac to play games. When you use an Ipad/Iphone/Mac with a Vision Pro, the Vision Pro become a giant 4K screen for that device. It isn't a gaming headset at all. It's basically an AR device with a macbook attached for work.
When it comes to gaming, even a Lenovo Explorer WMR headset has the Vision Pro beaten hands down.
Lastly, your comment about Meta been behind on Audio, Display, contrast, motion controls, OS, software. Right. Are you serious? First of all the Apple Visions Pro isn't even out yet and isn't coming out until next year. And I would hope that a $3500 device been released next year would have better display, Audio etc than all current devices, Never mind a $500 device. As for the OS and Software, how do you know? Again, with the price you are paying it better be very good. But, so far, that hasn't always been the case and Meta does have the best software and ecosystem at present.
Meta isn't competing with Apple in the VR/AR space at present. The Vision Pro isn't going to change that. There won't be many, I would be surprised if there was even one person, who will change their mind about buying a Quest 3 to switch to a Vision Pro. There might be some competition next year in the business space when the Vision Pro actually releases. Meta's next Pro headset will be going up against it.
Don't forget that it's mainly because of those 20 million Budget Quest 2's been sold that gaming developers are developing for VR at all.
Meta took the direction of a social media based VR. Very clear by their recent connects.
Hopefully META will go back to PCVR and VR gaming as their solitary focus rather than trying to create a universe in VR.
Since they released the abomination which is the Rift S and shifted focus to mobile VR gaming, ditching their core audience who thought we'd see higher end and higher fidelity VR from the DK1/CV1 days, I've been very alarmed by the direction they've taken.
Last edited:
The direction leading to better screens, tracking, hand tracking, wireless gaming, and a 100x larger player base that actually has developers interested in developing VR games.
I'll take it...
I'll take it...
Last edited:
It's like you didn't even read my post. Meta/Facebook was taking the direction of social media based VR 2 years before the Civ 1 even launched. He made that very clear when they took over Oculus in 2014.
How you can you be alarmed by the direction they have taken when they have made it clear from the offset what way they were going.
The Rift S was an abomination not because it was a bad headset but because they should have stuck to their guns and went full steam ahead with the Quest line-up and not split their resources between the Rift and Quest lines. It became quite clear a few months after the Quest launch that standalone headsets were the way forward.
Continuing with PCVR would have ended up with VR dying. There was no money in it for developers. The games that were released were either by small indie developers or heavily subsidised by Facebook, HTC, Valve etc. Without paying the developers to make the games we would have never got the likes of Lone Echo, Asgard's Wrath, Robo Recall, Half life Alyx to name but a few.
If you really are a PCVR enthusiast, you should be thanking the budget headsets like the Quest 2 for keeping Developers in the business of making games for VR.
Most VR forums are very quiet lately. I think a lot of people are in a holding pattern, waiting for the Quest 3 to be released. Or at least until the full specs are known. And also waiting to see if the rumoured flood of games will appear.
I bet other VR manufacturers are probably waiting as well. If the Quest 3 is a success, then I believe 2024 will be an awesome year for VR.
Was the Quest 2's success down to VR becoming more mainstream or was it because of when it launched, during lockdown with consoles and computers parts almost impossible to get?
I think the Quest 3 has to be success and to that end I hope it's better than the current leaks are suggesting and that Meta are holding something back.
I bet other VR manufacturers are probably waiting as well. If the Quest 3 is a success, then I believe 2024 will be an awesome year for VR.
Was the Quest 2's success down to VR becoming more mainstream or was it because of when it launched, during lockdown with consoles and computers parts almost impossible to get?
I think the Quest 3 has to be success and to that end I hope it's better than the current leaks are suggesting and that Meta are holding something back.
No point developing games for VR if the hardware isn't upto scratch or priced so far out of this galaxy that only the rich can afford to play it. You'll never make back what you put in development costs if that was the case.
Q3 needs to be a success and cheap enough for the masses to buy and use.
Q2 will remain the cheaper option, and I suspect it'll remain supported for some time.
Thats why im holding onto mine though i haven't touched it in a good few months now. Still a very capable headset tbh, if anything i need a more powerful gpu to drive more frames. The 3090 is right up at the upper limit but a 4090 would be nice to be able to hold those higher frame rates.
I sold my Quest 2 months ago in preparation for the Quest 3. I've not used my remaining headset (8KX) much at all recently, i've still remained interested in vr stuff and kept up with most developments etc, seems on the hardware front things have been progressing, but unfortunately still no new games to rival Alyx (imo). The break i've had i think will have done me good, i'm really looking forward to getting hold of a Quest 3 even though i know for a lot of the time i won't be playing anything new.
Edit: that sounds a bit defeatist! I will be trying new games i have a load in my library i've never tried and i'm sure more will be released in the coming months, i'm just not expecting Alyx quality.
Edit: that sounds a bit defeatist! I will be trying new games i have a load in my library i've never tried and i'm sure more will be released in the coming months, i'm just not expecting Alyx quality.
Last edited:
Soldato
If this has the same scuba goggle FoV as the Q2 I'll pass.
Underboss
haha i know what you mean, binoculars ahoy !
same with my Pico 4 , but its nice not to see them in some games and scenes
cant remember what Rav told me if its the same on the pro or not
It's rumoured to have the same FOV. But it's also rumoured that it has dual screens. So if both those things are true then the FOV will be better on the Quest 3 as there will be much less, if any, of that "scuba goggles" affect. It also means that it will look the same at all points of the IPD range.
Underboss
I wish they would up the fov..
Some thoughts:
- Standalone VR has never really interested me. The Pro can do it, but frankly, I don't care. For me, the Pro is a good PCVR solution, though I'd prefer it even more if it were given a Displayport and had the onboard CPU capability removed to save money
- Not all of us were interested in the Quest 1 or 2. The Pro is the first headset that was a good enough improvement on the Rift S to want to change
- I'm amazed that Meta aren't talking about eye tracking and DFR, especially as they're got it working on the DP and Sony have it working on the PSVR
- I see the Q3 as being more of a direct competitor to the Neo Pico 4, which I owned and returned. Whilst the Pico 4 had good visuals, I simply couldn't get it to consistently work with PCVR due to their utterly naff software I'm guessing that the Q3 will have comparable visuals (i.e. good), but with software that actually works. I've had very few issues with the Oculus software, having been through a CV1, Rift S and now the QP
- Standalone VR has never really interested me. The Pro can do it, but frankly, I don't care. For me, the Pro is a good PCVR solution, though I'd prefer it even more if it were given a Displayport and had the onboard CPU capability removed to save money
- Not all of us were interested in the Quest 1 or 2. The Pro is the first headset that was a good enough improvement on the Rift S to want to change
- I'm amazed that Meta aren't talking about eye tracking and DFR, especially as they're got it working on the DP and Sony have it working on the PSVR
- I see the Q3 as being more of a direct competitor to the Neo Pico 4, which I owned and returned. Whilst the Pico 4 had good visuals, I simply couldn't get it to consistently work with PCVR due to their utterly naff software I'm guessing that the Q3 will have comparable visuals (i.e. good), but with software that actually works. I've had very few issues with the Oculus software, having been through a CV1, Rift S and now the QP
Some counter thoughts
- Hard to make money in PCVR. That's why Bytedance, after doing the trial with the Pico 3, made the Pico 4 without the display port adapter. Standalone will be the mainstream future of VR.
- That's fine, if you were only doing PCVR than the Rift S was good enough. The Quest Pro was also 3 times the price of the Quest 2.
- For the Quest 3, Eye tracking and DFR would make it too expensive for the market they are aiming at. It's probably something that they will introduce in either a Quest Pro replacement or a more expensive version of the Quest 3.
- The Quest 2 and Pico 4 are direct competitors. I expect the Quest 3 to be better than both.
Soldato
According to MRTV, the Neo link came in to exitance due to a demand from enterprise, there was never a requisite for it's inclusion in any future device. Regardless of what you make of his opinions and reviews, he does know the industry as he actively talks to people within.
Unless you have a source, i'm inclined to believe him.
lol the rift s is junk compared to the quest pro in PCVR.Some counter thoughts
- Hard to make money in PCVR. That's why Bytedance, after doing the trial with the Pico 3, made the Pico 4 without the display port adapter. Standalone will be the mainstream future of VR.
- That's fine, if you were only doing PCVR than the Rift S was good enough. The Quest Pro was also 3 times the price of the Quest 2.
- For the Quest 3, Eye tracking and DFR would make it too expensive for the market they are aiming at. It's probably something that they will introduce in either a Quest Pro replacement or a more expensive version of the Quest 3.
- The Quest 2 and Pico 4 are direct competitors. I expect the Quest 3 to be better than both.