Why is Meta Slashing Prices on its VR Headsets? (cnn.com) 127
"Meta is cutting prices for two of its virtual reality headsets as it continues trying to boost adoption for the nascent technology on which it has bet its future," reports CNN:
The company announced Friday that it is slashing the price of its higher-end Meta Quest Pro headset by some $500, bringing its cost to $999, roughly six months after it was released. Meta is also lowering the price of its Quest 2 headset from $499.99 to $429.99. The price cut for the Quest 2 will go into effect in more than a dozen countries including the United States on Sunday. The Quest Pro price drop will take effect the same day in the United States and Canada and on March 15 in all other countries where it is sold.
"Our goal has always been to create hardware that's affordable for as many people as possible to take advantage of all that VR has to offer," the company said in a blog post.
Yahoo Finance believes Meta is lowering prices "because consumers are, well, just not buying as many as the company expected." The Verge agrees that the Meta Quest Pro was "an absolute boondoggle of a device" — but suggests that's not the whole story.
"if you look at the Quest 2, which most people use for playing games, as a game console, it's done reasonably well." Mark Rabkin, Meta's vice president for VR, told staff that Meta has sold over 20 million Quest headsets thus far. That includes both the Quest and Quest 2.... That seems like a small number, but the Nintendo GameCube only sold 21 million consoles in its entire lifespan, and the Xbox Series X and S are estimated to have sold approximately 20 million consoles thus far. So if you look at the Quest 2, which most people use for playing games, as a game console, it's done reasonably well.
Their conclusion? "Meta might have big ambitions for VR headsets and their place in the metaverse, but the reality is that the top software on the Quest 2 are all games.... And while Meta is thrusting metaverse experiences onto users, it's kind of ignoring that core gamer audience."
"Our goal has always been to create hardware that's affordable for as many people as possible to take advantage of all that VR has to offer," the company said in a blog post.
Yahoo Finance believes Meta is lowering prices "because consumers are, well, just not buying as many as the company expected." The Verge agrees that the Meta Quest Pro was "an absolute boondoggle of a device" — but suggests that's not the whole story.
"if you look at the Quest 2, which most people use for playing games, as a game console, it's done reasonably well." Mark Rabkin, Meta's vice president for VR, told staff that Meta has sold over 20 million Quest headsets thus far. That includes both the Quest and Quest 2.... That seems like a small number, but the Nintendo GameCube only sold 21 million consoles in its entire lifespan, and the Xbox Series X and S are estimated to have sold approximately 20 million consoles thus far. So if you look at the Quest 2, which most people use for playing games, as a game console, it's done reasonably well.
Their conclusion? "Meta might have big ambitions for VR headsets and their place in the metaverse, but the reality is that the top software on the Quest 2 are all games.... And while Meta is thrusting metaverse experiences onto users, it's kind of ignoring that core gamer audience."
Maybe... (Score:3, Insightful)
Because it sucks? ...and VR is overrated?
Re: (Score:2)
(Probably actually because they're about to completely obsolete them in favor of a newer model.)
Re: (Score:2)
(Probably actually because they're about to completely obsolete them in favor of a newer model.)
The summary mentions that the Pro just came out a few months ago, so that seems unlikely, especially so since it was teased a full year before it came out and nothing new has been teased to replace it yet.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a little of both. First with how many headsets were on the release schedule it was clear that Zuck envisioned an every six months upgrade cycle like cell phones. Second the Quest 3 adds enough that there is no way you can justify triple the price for the Quest Pro... that was mostly early adopter pricing. Since they axed the quest pro replacement scheduled for next year they'll be able to keep making money on the existing design.
I actually think they'll do fine with the Quest Pro if they slow down and
Re:Maybe... (Score:4, Insightful)
I have no idea why this isn't the most highlighted and passed on piece of information in the VR world but the motion sickness normally passes. For me it took a handful of roller coasters but for my spouse it took a couple weeks. She went from getting sick just walking around rather than using teleport movement to having no nausea with any intensity roller coaster in epic rollercoasters. At some point your brain just works it out.
I guess you can think of it as being akin to sea legs. There are some people who will just always get sea sick and more time at sea is just torture but for the vast majority it is just an adjustment, usually quick but for some it make take a day or two.
As for the price... one simply doesn't need an expensive valve index for most things in VR. The Quest 2 is good enough for the vast majority of applications. $400 and you are set. For around the price of a valve index setup you can buy the quest 2 and a mid-range vr capable pc that will let you enjoy most of PCVR and do so wirelessly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Great work, normally people are more subtle about not reading TFS and attempt to hide their biases a bit more, but you, you just put it right out there didn't you.
Re: (Score:2)
Virtual travel? Seems like a lame usecase. VR makes three dimensional space a commodity. MR makes actual space virtually enhanceable. If you can't think of use cases you are smoking something.
For that matter it adds an entirely new dimension to all the use cases we already have and if you think that is pointless I can only assume you are still playing 8bit 2d atari style scrollers and working on a 15" CRT monitor. Even existing traditional 2D content is better in VR.
Re: (Score:2)
The headline asked a question...and received a "to the point" answer.
People thinking the world is made of headlines has resulted in the stupefaction of the human race. If you read any one line out of context you run the very real risk of looking like an idiot.
They're stuck parroting the same use-cases they have been for years. "vIRtUaL TrAveL!" Etc...
Never mind, I feel like you don't even read headlines and instead simply make up alternate relaties in your head.
In search of another monopoly win (Score:2)
Pretty weak FP and a vacuous Subject, too.
It's obviously a quest for market share, though I'm hoping it's a desperate last-ditch effort leading to bankruptcy rather than a nudge to get past a breakeven point. I sure haven't seen any evidence the VR technology has become valuable or sincerely meaningful. The evidence I've seen leads me to think it's a solution in search of creating more mental illness.
Bigger problem: Too many billionaires dominate too many niches in today's economy. Especially in America.
And
Re:In search of another monopoly win (Score:4, Interesting)
"I sure haven't seen any evidence the VR technology has become valuable or sincerely meaningful."
This is what people said about digital music, mobile computing, etc. This attitude is nothing more than inertia from people who've become comfortable in their current technological rut. VR/MR makes it possible to encapsulate fully immersive four dimensional reality into a shareable file or even a web presence.
Very soon experiences will be recordable directly on the device. Maybe you want to remember visiting the pyramids or the grand canyon. Want to remember an intimate experience with your spouse? Perhaps for travel, perhaps after they've passed. Perhaps you want to share it because you are into that. Record it and play it back in combination with a device like found here: https://www.thehandy.com/ Or you can spice things up with Virt-a-mate and metachat and interact looking like anyone you want.
I bike for 30 minutes a day. By biking in VR I have a dynamic environment that adapts based on my heart rate, trophies, enhanced content including fantastic places that couldn't be seen in reality like giant castles and forges taken from world of warcraft.
Hoping on my motion simulator I can fly jets and space craft with fully interactive cockpit controls, buttons, switches. I can race in kart kraft and my southern girl wife is learning how to drive on Ice and Snow in a driving simulator.
Once a week I step into an old 80's style basement with a handful of friends to play a dungeon crawler. Sometimes we play mini-golf or paintball instead.
I've also begun working in VR. All those middle managers love the idea that they can see everyone present in a room during working hours even though they are remote and see faces on Teams meetings. This seems a likely truce on the remote work thing, where one does get rid of the commute but does have an actual accountable presence for the full work day.
Now personally I don't care about Zuck and Meta ruling the Metaverse. But if you think VR/MR/AR doesn't have any use cases, utility or provide a drastically upgraded experience for most content you seriously need to break out of your box. Maybe you've rejected every upgrade since Atari, maybe you just uses the cheap ass straps that came with a quest 2 or didn't use it long enough to get over motion sickness. I don't know. But you are definitely wrong my friend.
Re: Maybe... (Score:2)
VR is awesome, but unfortunately it's difficult to sell. Because 1. You cannot imagine how awesome the tech is, you have to try it yourself ; 2. It's expensive; and 3. It requires an even more expensive machine (a powerful PC) to unlock its full potential.
Also unfortunately there are not many games taking full advantage of the tech. It there would be more "Half Life Alyx" like games, I'm sure or would be more popular.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"I'd gladly take a real trip somewhere over any "metaverse experience" any day."
Sure but how about EVERY day. Like ditching the hour each way daily commute but having an accountable interactive presence in the workplace so your boss stops pushing for a way to force you to come back in? What if you need to move across the country for work but want to keep hanging out with the poker buddies for a game every third Saturday?
When you bug out a couple hours early on Friday... wouldn't it be nice to instantly tele
They messed up? (Score:3)
Everyone associates their VR product with the metaverse now, whether or not that's its best application or not. The metaverse is near universally panned, so why by a device tailored for it?
The long term smater move is probably to sell the technology off to someone less distracted with social network spying.
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all. People associate their stupid Quest Pro devices with doomed idiocy but that's where it ends. No business is forking out that money. It's a failed product to the point where the Quest Pro 2 has been cancelled and all further business targeting has been shelved for now.
In the other space the reality is the Quest 2 is a generation behind, the competition is releasing new things, and Facebook themselves are likely releasing the Quest 3 only a few months. It would be utterly braindead for anyone to b
Re: (Score:2)
You are overstating things. The next release on the Quest Pro roadmap has been shelved that's is pretty much it. That doesn't mean there won't be more business stuff, just that they are getting realistic about the product needing a lifecycle longer than a year.
Re: (Score:2)
The Quest Pro was never on a one year lifecycle and neither was there a plan for a successor. They had a 4 year roadmap for the next Quest Pro device and yet they've now ceased working on it. The Quest Pro was a colossal failure.
We may see more "business stuff" but that "business stuff" is going to look precisely nothing like the "business stuff" we've gotten so far or the "business stuff" which was on their now shelved roadmap.
Re: (Score:3)
THIS! 100x's THIS
I got a Quest 2 when they were $399, and soon wished I had a second set for my partner. I figured I'd wait for another holiday, and hope for a bit of a sale. Soon after, they RAISED the price by $100!!!
IMO, this is _NOT_ a price drop. This reduces the price increase from $100 down to only $30 more than it was years ago. What sort of tech does that??? Who the fuck is surprised that sales declined?
My gut feel is that the price increase was meant to mask the reduction in sales, while eking out
Re: (Score:2)
The metaverse is simply the term for VR the collective and interconnected VR landscape. It has nothing to do with the company called Meta or their apps. As for the Quest devices they work as well as any other headset for other content, they just do it at about 1/3rd of the price.
Re:They messed up? (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because something is shit doesn't mean it won't be popular or profitable. Facebook is the perfect example of that.
It appears that Zuck was hoping businesses would want to get employees into the Metaverse and so pay for their expensive headsets. That isn't happening so they need to slash the price of the headsets dramatically, in the hope of attracting more home users.
So far there are only three categories of people buying VR headsets.
1. Gamers
2. VR porn watchers
3. Child abusers hoping to meet underage people in the Metaverse
Gamers are more likely to buy competing products, especially now the Playstation VR thing has launched. Games like Gran Turismo are finally offering a killer app for VR. The porn watchers only need low end hardware.
Because (Score:5, Interesting)
they don't realize the biggest problem with VR is that the resolution sucks. For VR to get PS5 levels of adoption, they need to get to 8K per eye. If they can make foveated rendering work, the GPU requirement will easily be handleable by a GTX 1080 level graphics card. With foveated rendering, only the part of the screen your eyeball is aimed at is rendered in high resolution. That makes the rendering requirement lower than even HD resolution (if you don't believe that only part of the screen needs to be high resolution rendered, try to read this paragraph without moving your eyeball.)
Re: Because (Score:3)
The long term effects of headset wearing are only now getting studied, and I doubt it'll be cost free.
Funny, if Meta put this much R&D into real-world interactions
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
120 fps is enough.
Re: (Score:3)
640 fps ought to be enough for anybody!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It could be 1000k resolution...but until they get some decent games/applications for it, and exceed Wiimote level of control input, and figure out a decent way to use walking/running as an input (yes, I've seen what's available)...it's going to remain a novelty.
It has to be actually be BETTER...and not just a gimmick interface. I've never seen it applied to games, or CAD, or anything...where it looks like it actually makes something sooooooo much better. I'm sure it's "impressive" for showing off to clien
Re: (Score:2)
There's a ton of non-novelty applications. Once they build the hardware, the applications will come. Virtual tourism (visit places like the pyramids of Egypt, Italy, or a volcano), Real-estate, entertainment (sports events, specially made movies etc), games (fight some epic monsters in VR-- i mean imagine a giant spider or something coming at you in VR).
Re: (Score:2)
VR travel .. yes I would do it. For one thing I am not descending down a volcano or cliff diving off angel falls venezuela in real life. Real estate, I would definitely use VR to tour places so that I can cross off ones I am sure I won't be interested in off the list. VR sports .. I can't travel to attend every game but it would be cool to experience the game like I am on the field like a ref or something. Movies .. presumably the action the director wants me to look at 99% of the time would be in front of
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest problem with VR is not resolution. It's that people don't want to strap an uncomfortable device onto their heads for hours at a time. And that the experience of playing a VR game is a novelty with little value-add over just playing a game in front of a traditional screen. And as a result of the last point; who is actually still making VR games? I watch game reviews regularly and it seems to me the frequency of games even supporting VR has plummeted in the past year.
Re: (Score:2)
Uncomfortable!? So I know to avoid it, which headset have you got?
Re: (Score:2)
Probably a Quest 2 out of the box. Put a halo style headstrap with hot swap batteries on there and a vented facial interface FFS. And I highly recommend going with a thin pad... it moves your eyes closer to the screen and adds 10-15 deg to the FOV.
Re: (Score:2)
What did you do, just strap on a cheapie quest 2 with the included accessories? Seriously just upgrade with some bobovr gear including the fitness interface/fan. Add a trackable keyboard and you've got the rig I use for my regular workday 40+hrs a week.
Even playing the game on a traditional screen is better in VR. If you think playing table tennis, putt putt, pool, or bowling is even remotely comparable on a 2d display to VR don't pass what you are smoking. ;)
VR is like stepping into HD or going from 2d gam
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I got a PSVR specifically for RE7, back when it was exclusive to that platform. It was... fine. I suppose. I played through it once in VR, but I went back to regular TV gaming for subsequent playthroughs. I don't get motion sickness, the headset was comfortable enough, I could do a 4-hour session in it, but the experience just wasn't a big deal. I tried Beat Saber and Tetris effect, both games were good but again, they were good in flat too and I didn't feel the VR added a single thing. In fact I enjoyed my
Re: (Score:2)
they don't realize the biggest problem with VR is that the resolution sucks.
They don't realise this do they? The company that is at the forefront of development of foveated rendering, who has the only widely available headset with eye tracking, and who literally has a patent explaining that the combination of eye tracking, and foveated rendering is a solution to the resolution problem doesn't realise that it's a problem?
Now with a straight face go tell us that you're the only person in the world who has realised the sky is blue.
Re: (Score:2)
Well why have they stagnated on it? We've known since 2020 that displays as high as 10,000 ppi are possible (reference: https://www.extremetech.com/ex... [extremetech.com] ). If Facebook was serious they would have done whatever it takes to get that technology out. Instead, they've been incrementally improving display resolution by a few percent at a time. They should be leaning harder on display suppliers like Apple does when they need something for the iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
There are multiple factors in a display, such as FOV, resolution, refresh, etc. What Meta did in their lab was actually produce the most extreme version display optimized for each aspect as they could while trying to keep the other aspects functional and then did a shitload of R&D on the benefits enabled by each variation.
They are literally throwing billions into the matter despite their stock tanking so they'll be ahead of everyone else in a new field. I'm not sure what more of 'whatever it takes' your
Re: (Score:2)
Well why have they stagnated on it?
Stagnated on what? Released a Quest 2 with higher resolution? Released a Quest Pro with even higher resolution and eye tracking to enable foveated rendering? Planning on a Quest 3 with a combination of both?
Driving high resolutions requires high fill rates. The hardware for it doesn't exist. Most computers have trouble driving current gen headsets in many cases even with RTX 30 series graphics cards.
If by "stagnating" you meant to say "I don't have a clue what's going on in the world" then I agree.
Re: (Score:2)
"For VR to get PS5 levels of adoption, they need to get to 8K per eye."
I think you are trapped in the 'the fully immersive 4 dimensional experience has less eyecandy than my cheap and easily to render 2d console image' mindset and no matter what happens it will always lag behind that mark. And no, nobody is confused about the benefits of increasing visuals but a RTX 4090 doesn't have enough VRAM to load the textures for the resolution you describe. In fact, your PS5 can't render it either.
"If they can make
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Playstation system renders the centre of the display at higher resolution, and relies on the player learning to move their head instead of their eyeballs. It doesn't take too much practice. I learned to do it in a few minutes when I was learning to drive, so that the examiner could see I was checking mirrors regularly.
I'm told the Playstation one works extremely well.
Because of Facebook (Score:5, Interesting)
I have an older Quest of and a mobile one that I just gave away. The Quest was used for a few days and put on a shelf, something I keep meaning to go back and play with. Then I got an email from Facebook saying I needed to make a Facebook account to keep using my hardware that I (didn't actually) pay for (long story, test sample) but did own. FSCK that. There are a few things that are dealbreakers for me in the tech world and a forced Facebook/Meta spyware account is near the top of the list.
At CES this year, VR/AR stuff was in pretty high numbers in high profile areas but the interest seemed a bit tepid. At MWC last week, there was precious little VR/AR and it was mostly ignored. I think we have reached the 3D TV phase of VR and it is all downhill from here. Discounts are telling, not much to save the sector now, it will become an admittedly useful niche device but mainstream is dead. AR is a different story but we are years away from basic usefulness there.
Yawn. It deserves a quick flaming death but VR will drag on for a while yet. The sooner it drops out of the media hype cycle, the better for us all.
-Charlie
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FSCK that. There are a few things that are dealbreakers for me in the tech world and a forced Facebook/Meta spyware account is near the top of the list.
Agreed, that was a shitty move that soured Oculus in the eyes of many, but they have backpedalled on that quite heavily. Linking a Facebook account with your Metaverse account is now completely optional. Not that this changes the ultimate entity spying on you mind you.
I think we have reached the 3D TV phase of VR and it is all downhill from here.
Have we? Growth numbers are high, adoption rates are high, development is high, and being a special purpose device rather than something you can bundle in as a feature in another device it is ultimately incredibly different from 3D TVs, someth
It's the inflation, silly (Score:3)
When your grocery bill is through the roof, you don't have as much money to spend on Zuck's playthings. It's really that simple.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if your grocery bill wasn't through the roof would you really pay money for a previous gen Quest 2 at 25% above launch price knowing the Quest 3 will launch this year?
It's really quite simple: There is no price drop. Even with these post drop prices the Quest 2 is 7.5% above launch RRP, 2 years later, and right before it gets replaced. It's a bad deal.
I convinced 2 people that they want to get a VR headset this week (one like zombie games so that was easy, throw him in with After the Fall and he fell i
Re: (Score:2)
"And the Quest Pro is an abortion, Facebook already cancelled development of its successor."
They canceled the release slated for next year which isn't quite the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
No, there was no release scheduled for next year. There was a release scheduled for 2025 and they cancelled development of it.
Too expensive (Score:2)
They're a novelty toy outside the simulation players. Ethical concerns about Meta aside I imagine they have lots of consumer metrics and I have to imagine a lot of people are curious but $400 is probably too steep for something they may not get a lot of use out of, especially compared to a Nintendo Switch.
Get something like the Quest into a $200 price point and more people might be willing to give it a shot.
If Meta sets a new price bracket the other industry players may follow suit. Meta may face
Re: (Score:2)
Meta may face the music that to really get their goal closer to reality they'll have to loss leader the hardware.
Problem is, then they have to make that loss back somehow. I'm picturing that scene from Ready Player One where the IOI president talks about how much of the VR field of view can be turned into ad space.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need a $200 price tag, $400 is perfectly fine price for adoption. No one is pretending this is targeted at every one.
But your post is still right for another reason. The Quest 2 is now several years old, and had a launch price of $400 Yeah it's too expensive, because Facebook fucked up. At this point I'd have expected it to be available for $330 not $430, especially since the Quest 3 is about to launch.
Re: (Score:2)
"The Quest 2 is now several years old, and had a launch price of $400 Yeah it's too expensive, because Facebook fucked up."
Unless you are going with the Zuck bucks election angle I don't think it is entirely fair to blame the D's trashing the economy and soaring inflation with the argument "people can afford to pay more"* solely on FB.
* Yes. I know they stopped saying that and switched to pretending inflation wasn't on them, as if that is tenable after having owned it, when they realized how suicidal that s
Re: (Score:2)
They're a novelty toy outside the simulation players. Ethical concerns about Meta aside I imagine they have lots of consumer metrics and I have to imagine a lot of people are curious but $400 is probably too steep for something they may not get a lot of use out of, especially compared to a Nintendo Switch.
If there is some sort of business application that can only be done with these things - maybe But I can't think of any outside of a very few.
This situation reminds me a little bit of the old 3D movie craze. It comes up again every so often, people get excited, then goes away. As you note, it's a novelty. Then it goes away for one reason or another.
The issue that Lizard Lord Zuck has is that Meta is thinking Facebook 2, and it's my opinion that the market is not big enough to be a new Facebook. Not even
Re: (Score:2)
"If there is some sort of business application that can only be done with these things - maybe But I can't think of any outside of a very few."
Actually I think I've found a very simple business application that will do the trick in that space... though the $400 set isn't targeted at business. I currently work in VR using an application called Immersed, it loads a tracked keyboard and my displays only replacing the peripherals. One of those peripherals is the webcam. Instead of showing an image of me sitting
Sony & Quest 3 (Score:5, Insightful)
Sony is launching a competitor with the PSVR that has good content, and Meta is likely soon launching Quest 3 which may require clearing inventory.
Re: (Score:2)
Reviews on the PSVR aren't so hot but the Quest 3 is definitely a factor... I think they know the Quest 3 is going to appeal to some who would have bought the Quest Pro.
Two reasons, one obvious (Score:5, Interesting)
Really surprised no one mentioned it but very obviously the new PSVR2 system is part of why Facebook is having to lower prices. Even at the lower price of the Quest Pro the PSVR2 system is still cheaper!
Well, cheaper if you already own a PS5.... Although come to think of it, at $1k for a Quest Pro you could get a PSVR2 ($549) *and* a PS5 ($399) for less!
The second is, what is "pro"about the pro? I have a Quest 2, I looked at specs of the "pro" and I saw no reason to get the pro model at all. The extra things it added I did not really care about for VR (though I will admit from reviews that eye tracking is a great feature addition on the PSVR2, and so probably is on the Quest Pro as well.
Meanwhile games I had thinking about playing on the Quest 2 I am holding off until I get a PSVR as that looks like it would be a better experience.
I feel a bit bad for Meta on this one, I don't know if they can compete with the scale Sony has in production.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would -anyone- feel bad for Facebook or Zuckerberg?
Zuckerberg bet the company on this tech? That's *great*! So Facebook will die when VR dies. Can't happen soon enough.
Re: (Score:2)
You really shouldn't. There is no cultural, moral, ethical, intellectual or any other obligation or basis to feel bad for horrible people when they fuck themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. The PSVR and Quest are in wildly different markets, one a standalone headset, and the other a tethered extension to the PS5. They aren't competing.
The real reason is Meta themselves are about to launch a Quest 3. The other reason is their brain dead price rise last year which means that even after this "cut" it's still $30 more expensive than at launch a few years ago.
The Quest 2 is just a frigging bad investment right now, has been since the price increase, and people know it. PSVR has little t
Re: (Score:2)
because I am square in the target market and I assure you they are very much competing.
No you're not in the market for both. You're in the market either for a $1000 tethered device you can use in your living room, or a $400 self contained device.
Just because you want to buy a car doesn't mean you're in the market for both a Ferrari and a Ford Focus at the same time. The feature set are different and they don't compete with each other, and if you think they do it means your research has extended to: "is it a headset" and no further.
And also like I said, I considered a Quest Pro
Which is a 3rd device in the market, with a cool $3000+ invest
Re: (Score:2)
The PSVR2 reviews have been pretty meh so I doubt that is a big factor. By failing to support PCVR it really limits its audience.
As for the Quest Pro it has substantially better lens technology, huge bump in processing/gpu, the huge upgrade in controller technology, color passthrough to support MR and expression tracking... there really is a lot there for VR. The expression tracking for your avatar on a Teams meeting is actually the kind of thing that will go over well in business. They probably should have
Few things would make me happier (Score:2)
... than to see Facebook/Meta lose its "all in" bet on VR and end up turning into the next Yahoo.
Simple reason (Score:4, Insightful)
The Valve Index VR kit now costs 999 bucks. Without Facebook spying on you and without constant badgering that you really, really, REALLY have to take a look at that Metaverse, pretty please.
Re: (Score:2)
The Valve Index VR is just as bad of an investment as the Quest 2. It has *always* cost 999 bucks. Great idea 3 years ago, but now, you're paying full retail price for last generation's gear.
Do not get a Quest 2, but don't get an Index either. There are other far better options out there. Also the Index may be a good competitor to the Rift S, but even then the latter represented far better price / performance to say nothing of having inside out tracking. No one should be investing in a lighthouse based syst
Re: (Score:3)
> No one should be investing in a lighthouse based system in 2023.
Lighthouse still offers better (and more consistent) overall tracking, and for that reason alone it's going to stick around.
But I agree that it's kind of overkill in 2023 for consumer-level headsets. Inside-out tracking is good enough at this point for pull-out-and-play needs. Lighthouse is going to become a more niche product for pro users and other environments where VR can be setup on a full time basis.
Re: (Score:2)
Lighthouse still offers better (and more consistent) overall tracking, and for that reason alone it's going to stick around.
Yes but at this point the benefit is incredibly marginal and only in the extreme limits of movement. You can see the results in rhythm and movement games where some of the top players use headsets with inside out tracking. They very much were a problem in the early days of the Rift S / Quest but tracking has improved remarkably since then. About the only thing you can't do is track your arms behind you now.
Re: (Score:2)
"It has *always* cost 999 bucks."
A little disambiguation here. The full kit now costs $999, not just the headset. The recall this being something like $1400/$1500 last I looked.
Re: (Score:2)
The lighthouse based system is still the best for optimal tracking. It's main drawback is that you can only use it in a particular place due to the problems putting it up, but then again, how "mobile" are you with a clunky headset anyway...
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed it's the "best" the way a Koenigsegg is faster than a Bugatti. Both exceed 310mph making one basically irrelevantly faster than the other for the common man.
Even rhythm and movement games have leaderboards which have people using inside-out tracking up in the top 10, so among the people for whom it matters it's almost a wash these days.
It wasn't always like this. The Rift S and Quest on release where abysmal compared to the Index / Vive. But the gap was closed a lot largely through software updates a
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I would give it another spin if I didn't detest the idea of having to have some sort of Facebook profile just for the sake of using some hardware that will never ever be used in anything remotely "social media" related... but the original Quest made me dizzy with its fairly bad and inaccurate reaction times.
VR is too niche, Desktop AR is where it's at. (Score:2)
Until you can fool all your other senses, immersing a human in a 3D visual environment is only really good for examining a 3D model.
Now, give me an AR headset instead of VR, with something close to as slender as Google Glass, and you're getting started on something good.
Re: (Score:2)
That is pretty much what you do with a Quest Pro today.
I still use a virtual environment rather than running passthrough on my Quest 2. I have full hand tracking and can use it to manipulate up to 5 virtual displays and settings. I have a tracked keyboard that is visible in VR (I don't bother with the mouse but I could) and when I move my hands down to it they change from virtual objects to my actual hands shown in passthrough so there are no quirks in mapping my finger movements over the keyboard.. I have
Vive XR Elite - Quest killer & released this w (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
A $1500 headset isn't remotely in the same market segment as a Quest 2. It didn't kill anything. What is killing the Quest 2 is Facebook's idiotic price rise last year and the rumours that the Quest 3 will be launched shortly. (Of note, is that even after this cut the Quest 2 is still $30 above it's RRP from 2020. Facebook doesn't need anyone's help to kill it's product, they are more than capable of doing that themselves.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Quest 2 Pro? You've got to be kidding... it is only marginally favorable vs the Quest 2!
Re: (Score:2)
Oh absolutely. Thought you meant the consumer line. That said the Quest Pro does have one thing over the Vive XR - eye tracking. Mind you it doesn't have any practical use right now.
In the past there was also the Oculus store. The Rift / Quest had the best games available. But fast forward to 2022 and all the latest VR games are released on Steam and with Revive working perfectly fine it's another -1 for Meta.
Re: (Score:2)
2021 called and wants its facebook authentication requirement back.
They dropped this by popular demand quite awhile back.
Re: (Score:2)
A Quest 2 has 1832 x 1920 vs 1920x1920 so marginal difference, 120hz vs 90hz, has hot swappable batteries with any of the typical aftermarket straps although the XR Elite appears to have an integrated and not swappable battery, the same processor, more storage and the Quest 2 is half the price.
Your idea of a Quest 2 killer and my idea are quite different.
But does it come with legs? (Score:3)
Nt.
It's got the same problem 3D TV did (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't. Which is to say that the real problem you describe has nothing to do with the failure of 3D TVs which were just f-ing stupid to begin with.
As for VR sickness, that's a very real thing that affects most of the population... for about a day or two. It's something you get used to incredibly quickly. It's like the Matrix line "everyone falls the first time".
But your job thing is on point. I am a huge proponent of VR, absolute fucking fanboy and I sure has heck do *NOT* want to use it for work, an
Re: (Score:2)
I use mine for work. It's fine.
I wish there was more effort to warn people and set expectations on VR sickness. I call it getting your VR legs.
Avoiding Zuck (Score:2)
Maybe it's the model (Score:2)
Call me when you have decent AR (Score:2)
I'd love to have a giant virtual screen to be my daily driver monitor if they could get to that resolution in the center of the monitor FOV. I want at least 1440P in the middle of my FOV with enough other resolution that I could turn seamlessly to a 2nd monitor.
I need to see the real world through the headset so that I don't feel like I'm living in a science experiment or a made for SyFy movie.
Maybe a different use case than the gaming headsets.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually they have an AR set on the roadmap, it will be ad-supported though.
There is no killer application (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If there was a superb must-see game, or a killer application, people would flock to it.
People don't flock to things they haven't had an easy ability to try. I'm 4 for 4 by the way. That's 4 events I've been to dragging a PC and headset with me which has resulted in someone buying a VR headset after trying mine, and in all cases it was the result of playing games that came out 3 years ago, games people have heard of but not had the "ability" to try. I say "ability" because a lot of people don't realise that in major cities you can find a VR lab to play games by the hour. If they don't know abo
MMO with microtransactions (Score:2)
But I have a life and have no interest in replacing my life with VR
and when your facebook account gets disabled?? (Score:2)
What happens when your (required) Facebook account gets disabled for no communicated reason, boom you now own a $500 piece of 'artwork' with no functionality.
Re: (Score:2)
A Facebook account hasn't been required since August 2022.
There's a new model coming: Reality Pro (Score:2)
https://www.macrumors.com/roun... [macrumors.com]
To Set the Hook Before Apple Does (Score:2)
Simple. (Score:2)
Bringing us (almost?) full circle, one year on... (Score:2)
I'm going to take a shot in the dark here and suggest that maybe the fact that they raised the price [arstechnica.com] of the Quest 2 by $100 about seven months ago contributes just a little bit to those lackluster sales figures. Now they're reducing that price by $70... which means it's still $30 more than it was a year ago.
I wonder if the new price still includes the $30 Beat Saber game?
Re: (Score:2)
There is no longer a requirement for a facebook account.