Support NeoGAF

[Dorago]

If I can get this to work with Vivecraft and play Half Life Alyx I'll get it. I used a friend's quest 2 and it was almost there but the resolution and latency gave me a motion sickness. I ain't paying no $3000 for an Index plus suitable GPU either.

The full color passthrough looks pretty neat too. Imagine if they made a game where you got audio-visual feedback as you cleaned your apartment? Or if by mopping your floors you revealed pictures of naked ladies?

Imagine an NES emulator where it overlayed a properly emulated CRT image over your shitty Walmart flat screen? Imagine emulating a Virtual Boy where the red wireframe emanated from your bedroom closet?

The possibilities for VR are truly endless.

 

[Tams]

We have enough console wars as is we don't need fucking VR wars.

It was not if they asked for no VR wars, but merely a matter of when they would have them. For it was not for them to decide if the wars would occur.

- Gamer's 32:9 120fps

 

[Rob_27]

I have a shit laptop so psvr2 is good enough for me.

 

[sendit]

quick sessions of games like beat saber

 

[CobraAB]

It's the same price as PSVR2, but will be a lot less powerful.

Well, PSVR2 is not standalone and not wireless either.

 

[FutureMD]

Jack the price of the Quest2 up so you can "lower it" to suddenly be more accessible.

Fuck the hell off.

"Jack the price" you mean trying not to lose money/barely break even every time they sold a headset as they did for the first few million sold?

 

[CobraAB]

The PSVR2 is the best place to go if you want the highest visual fidelity games, with the least amount of hassle. I find PCVR to be way too finnicky with all the settings you have to fuck about with to get things in a sweet spot. PSVR2 is the best of both worlds... easy to use, with the most advanced games.

If you're after a lot more variety, and are prepared to deal with the hassle, PCVR is better. But I haven't touched my Quest 2 with my PCVR link set up since I got PSVR2.

Actually, that will be the upcoming Apple headset.

But yeah, I know what you mean….

 

[RoboFu]

Here's what I got about all of those so far:

1. PSVR 2: This headset is designed exclusively for the PS5 console, which means you need to own one to use it. It has good lenses that provide a clear and immersive view of the virtual world. It also has gorgeous games that take advantage of the PS5's graphics and processing power. The tracking for the controllers is good and accurate, and it also supports foveated rendering based on eye tracking, which means the headset can adjust the resolution and detail of the image depending on where you are looking, this can help game performance as well . The reviews for the PSVR 2 are very good across the board, and many users praise its comfort and quality.
2. Quest 2: This headset is a standalone device that can run its own games without a PC or console. However, the graphics are not very impressive compared to the PSVR 2 or PCVR games. The controllers are good but not excellent, and they can lose tracking if you move them too much to the side, down or back of your head. You can also play PCVR games with the Quest 2 using a cable or wifi, but there is some latency and compression artifacts that can affect the image quality and immersion. The Quest 2 has passthrough, which means you can see your environment and play mixed reality games, but it is black and white and the lenses have a little bit of fish eye effect.
3. Quest 3: This seems to be a good upgrade over Quest 2, which was released in 2020. It is smaller and lighter, which makes it more comfortable to wear. It has better controllers that track the headset instead of the other way around, which improves their accuracy and range. It also has color passthrough with better cameras, which will allow you to have a very good mixed reality experience. It will probably work very easily with PC VR games, but it is still going with the wifi route, which is not very impressive. Someone pointed out that their new processor has AV1 decoding capabilities, which is great because it has a very good image quality even with low bitrates. However, it will have even more latency than the old h264 one.

Basically:

• If you like to play fast and responsive games that are easily affected by latency(Beat Saber, maybe multiplayer games) PSVR cold be a good option as you already have a PS5.
• If you just want some experience in standalone VR + some PCVR at the cheap quest 2 is a good option but you will have to deal with not perfect image quality and some latency.
• If you want standalone VR plus have a newer hardware(is going to be supported longer and play newer games in the future) with very promising integration with PCVR(better image decoding with AV1) but are willing to deal with latency(isn't going to be better than its predecessor) than quest 3 may be a option for you.

You can also use either quest with a pc.

 

[Romulus]

It's even narrower than most fresnel solutions. I really don't understand why.

Pancake lenses are game changers.

Also let's not forget subpixels (because unlike TVs, it's a few inches from your face)

Quest 2: 1,832 x 1920 x 3 = 10552320
PSVR2: 2000 x 2040 x 2.5 = 10200000 (It's 2 pixels with a shared subpixel, 5/2 = 2.5, diamond pentile)
Pico 4: 2160 x 2160 x 3 = 13996800
Quest 3: 2064 x 2208 x 3 = 13671936

It's 34% more subpixels.

I didn't realize Pico 4 was that high.

 

[CrustyBritches]

I've never used a headset with pancake lenses, but the Through the Lenses comparisons look awesome on Quest Pro and Pico 4, like, super-sharp with great clarity everywhere. Really looking forward to trying the Quest 3.

 

[BackBackPunch]

Super underwhelming. VR is kinda dead to me in its current state. Unless Apple can really bring something new and amazing to the table, I'm just going to keep playing pancake games primarily from here on out.

 

[Buggy Loop]

I've never used a headset with pancake lenses, but the Through the Lenses comparisons look awesome on Quest Pro and Pico 4, like, super-sharp with great clarity everywhere. Really looking forward to trying the Quest 3.

Oculus lenses are ahead of everyone also. Pancakes lenses have a characteristic ghosting, the kind where you see multiple copies of an high contrast image. They nearly removed all of it for Quest pro and likely the Quest 3 is gonna be the same design and coating.

That's not to represent what you see on PSVR 2, but it represents how hard it is to make a through the lens video on it as the sweet spot is abosolutely small. Even Quest 2 on the left is somehow pulling ahead with fresnel lenses.
On pancake lenses it's like... pretty damn clear, everywhere.

Getting a better than Quest pro for $499, i'm getting HYPED! I think the passthrough/AR will blow some peoples away. Apparently a HUGE improvement over Quest pro.

 

[Haint]

Oculus lenses are ahead of everyone also. Pancakes lenses have a characteristic ghosting, the kind where you see multiple copies of an high contrast image. They nearly removed all of it for Quest pro and likely the Quest 3 is gonna be the same design and coating.

That's not to represent what you see on PSVR 2, but it represents how hard it is to make a through the lens video on it as the sweet spot is abosolutely small. Even Quest 2 on the left is somehow pulling ahead with fresnel lenses.
On pancake lenses it's like... pretty damn clear, everywhere.

Getting a better than Quest pro for $499, i'm getting HYPED! I think the passthrough/AR will blow some peoples away. Apparently a HUGE improvement over Quest pro.

Not just Oculus, PSVR2 has the worst lenses in modern VR history without contest. HTC and Valve are also miles ahead of the absolute dogshit Sony used. They REALLY fucked up letting a small team of Japanese salary men design this thing, it straight up doesn't work and is not fit for purpose for a probable majority of users. The terrible strap and the terrible lenses conspire to murder it.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Did they give a date on the quest 2 update? My kid has a 2 and asked

 

[Trogdor1123]

Not just Oculus, PSVR2 has the worst lenses in modern VR history without contest. HTC and Valve are also miles ahead of the absolute dogshit Sony used. They REALLY fucked up letting a small team of Japanese salary men design this thing, it straight up doesn't work and is not fit for purpose for a probable majority of users. The terrible strap and the terrible lenses conspire to murder it.

This is literally the first time I have heard this complaint

 

[R6Rider]

Not just Oculus, PSVR2 has the worst lenses in modern VR history without contest. HTC and Valve are also miles ahead of the absolute dogshit Sony used. They REALLY fucked up letting a small team of Japanese salary men design this thing, it straight up doesn't work and is not fit for purpose for a probable majority of users. The terrible strap and the terrible lenses conspire to murder it.

WTF does "modern VR history" even mean

Also, the PSVR2 doesn't use a "strap"

 

[THE DUCK]

I don't know what you can or can not.

But you may be "less sensitive" (I'm really hard to use words that doesn't hurt your feelings this time) to latency(which also could read slow brain...).

About the image quality yes you can have an "almost lossless compression from 17gb to 200mb using h264" (/s, to help this brain of yours)

You do realize even the meta design team has stated that perceivable difference ends at around 150mps. Not to mention the wired isn't running at 17gb.

 

[DemonGamerTTT]

You do realize even the meta design team has stated that perceivable difference ends at around 150mps. Not to mention the wired isn't running at 17gb.

Are you serious?

They are talking about how much difference there is between 200 and 150... They would never say such dumb arguments like that compressed h264 would be the maximum quality you can get.

Also 17gbs is based on resolution, fps and colors dsph so yes let's see... Quest 2 can run at 1832×1920 res PER EYE at 120 fps at 10 bit color... So yes it does in fact cap the display port(1.2) bandwidth EASILY.

WTF are you people on trying to compare air link with display port VR... Stop... It's not even close.

 

[ArtHands]

Can someone break it down for me? I want to buy a set but don't know which. I'm thinking the psvr2 for my ps5 but might get a new headset for pc as I'm looking at building a new one any ways

I would say the Quest 3 seems to be the next big thing. Its going to have mixed reality, wireless, much smaller form factor, cheaper, bigger library, and hand tracking.

 

[hlm666]

This is literally the first time I have heard this complaint

Most VR reviewers that had been doing VR and have tested other devices before psvr2 came out mentioned the lenses were not great, some mentioned tracking problems aswell and both of these issues were talked about in the psvr2 thread on this very forum.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Nothing here is absolutely screaming "must have" to me. I am curious about the resolution and FOV improvements, but they don't sound massive. Comfort improvements and color passthrough count for something as well. But I'm not sure if it's all adding up to a $500 upgrade for those that already own a Quest 2, and I have concerns about the controller tracking.

 

[Haint]

WTF does "modern VR history" even mean

Also, the PSVR2 doesn't use a "strap"

By modern I mean the "re-launch" and re-popularization of consumer VR products dating back to the HTC Vive and OG Rift CV1 in 2016, or the DK1 and DK2 a few years prior to that. Basically the post Carmack/Luckey era.

This is literally the first time I have heard this complaint

Read or watch some impressions from people who actually have thousands of VR hours logged in a dozen different headsets, cause this isnt new or unique to me. PSVR2s lenses have a microscopic vertical sweet spot (by far the smallest and most finicky on market), you have to be within literal millimeter precision to see a focused image. The real gotcha is that the patented "halo" strap some high ranking salary man has a hard on for does not allow for vertical adjustment, its molded to sit on one part of the head and one part of the head only, and where your eyes fall in relation to that determines what you get. Your genes decide whether you'll have a good or bad experience. It also shifts wildly from minor head movements (e.g. just looking around), so even if your head was the template that formed the master mold used in mass production, you'll still be eating shit after 5 minutes of use.

 

[THE DUCK]

Are you serious?

They are talking about how much difference there is between 200 and 150... They would never say such dumb arguments like that compressed h264 would be the maximum quality you can get.

Also 17gbs is based on resolution, fps and colors dsph so yes let's see... Quest 2 can run at 1832×1920 res PER EYE at 120 fps at 10 bit color... So yes it does in fact cap the display port(1.2) bandwidth EASILY.

WTF are you people on trying to compare air link with display port VR... Stop... It's not even close.

I dont know, are you serious? Lol.
You don't even know what you are talking about when it comes to quest 2 (and 3). They (meta) maxed out the wired connection at 250 even though the slider goes higher. Max theoretical limits mean nothing when they aren't being used by the hardware.

Plus it doesn't use displayport at all, so that just shows how little you know.

 

[Agent_4Seven]

So,....what? First they've rised the price for Quest 2 by effin' $100 for no other reason that they just can, and now they're descended from heavens to earth to make filthy and poor pesants a favor and lower the price? How goddamn generous and thoughtfull of them, JFC.

 

[RavenSan]

As someone who just moved to the UK, that regional pricing is dumb AF. I'll now probably wait until I'm back stateside to buy one. Wild that they don't appropriately regionally price things, but I guess I should start getting used to that.

 

[DenchDeckard]

I think the harsh reality is. For any average person, this destroys the psvr2 before its had chance to get a footing in the market.

Sure, maybe a couple of mill hard-core ps5 fans will pick up psvr 2 but the vast majority of people arw going to just grab this. It's got a 12 million userbasr that's already bought games and others that can play this where ever.

I just hope its a really good step up in graphics and performance.

 

[Snake29]

WTF does "modern VR history" even mean

Also, the PSVR2 doesn't use a "strap"

New PC hardware comes out so the console hardware needs to be downplayed very hard so they feel better over their future purchase. I'm not gonna say the PSVR2 is perfect, but some here act if the Quest 3 is already perfect.

Ontopic: Great looking headset. I'm still getting the PSVR2 in september and might pick up the Quest 3 next year for pc if their still isn't any official PSVR2 driver, otherwise some nonofficial driver will do the work.

I think the harsh reality is. For any average person, this destroys the psvr2 before its had chance to get a footing in the market.

Sure, maybe a couple of mill hard-core ps5 fans will pick up psvr 2 but the vast majority of people arw going to just grab this. It's got a 12 million userbasr that's already bought games and others that can play this where ever.

I just hope its a really good step up in graphics and performance.

The competition here are other direct compatitor PCVR headsets not the PSVR2. You have no choice when you buy a VR headset on PS5 other then the PSVR2. On PC it's something else. When the PSVR2 gets some official drivers, i bet it will sell a lot on PC also. Previous PSVR sold over 5+ million i think? Was the Quest 2 or 1 any threat?

 

[THE DUCK]

I think the harsh reality is. For any average person, this destroys the psvr2 before its had chance to get a footing in the market.

Sure, maybe a couple of mill hard-core ps5 fans will pick up psvr 2 but the vast majority of people arw going to just grab this. It's got a 12 million userbasr that's already bought games and others that can play this where ever.

I just hope its a really good step up in graphics and performance.

I think you are right to a point, the product is very good and the backwards compatibility is great. And also that it appeals to a way bigger group than psvr2. But I think it has some challenges still.

The graphics are better, but they are still in the same league. For a casual, the jump won't compel an upgrade. Same as what you said for psvr2, there will be a core group that buy it but beyond that the casuals will hesitate.

If they can get the price back down to $399-$299, it will still sell a decent number, but I think there's a big group that won't buy another stand alone vr headset. There's a big group of quest owners that played it for a few months and never touched it again.

 

[FunkMiller]

I think the harsh reality is. For any average person, this destroys the psvr2 before its had chance to get a footing in the market.

Sure, maybe a couple of mill hard-core ps5 fans will pick up psvr 2 but the vast majority of people arw going to just grab this. It's got a 12 million userbasr that's already bought games and others that can play this where ever.

I just hope its a really good step up in graphics and performance.

Casual gamers are always going to go for the easiest option. And Quest is easy, thanks to being standalone. But those wanting a better experience, with more advanced gameplay and graphics will still go for the PSVR2, even though there will be fewer of them. I think Sony are well aware of this. They are trying to poach the PCVR market, not so much the Quest market. Quest is like a Wii, whereas PSVR2 is like... well, a Playstation.

 

[nemiroff]

Any news on whether it will use foveated rendering? I'm interested for the exclusives, but not if it will look significantly blurrier than PSVR2.

There are quite a few misconceptions around foveated rendering and lens blur..

I'm not going to go on a deep dive here this time, but keep in mind that the Quest 3 might as well be LESS blurry than the PSVR2 despite lacking eyetracking. And it will most likely STILL have fixed foveated rendering (!).

Why? Well, it's important to notice that no matter how efficient the foveated rendering is in itself, it's still dependent on the fixed physical blur naturally created by the lens configuration. So if the fixed sweet spot of the lens is narrow, foveated rendering will not be able to compensate for that, and the image will still be blurry when looking at the side of the fixed sweet spot. That's why foveated rendering sometimes have massively reduced inefficiency and thus why many headsets brands simply went for fixed foveated rendering instead.

TLDR; Foveated rendering does not make it less blurry.

 

[JMZ555]

I bought the original DK Oculus and was sold on VR instantly, although I knew it had a long way to go. I then had a HTC Vive for a little bit just to see the progress, decent but resolution/image quality not good enough for me.
I have since sat out of VR waiting to jump back in. Lots of options around now and in near future.
I will wait for reviews and full hands on the Quest 3 before jumping back in.
I feel like Valves next VR if they release one will be the one for me.

 

[systemr123]

Well, PSVR2 is not standalone and not wireless either.

I don't get these wars. Both devices are awesome in their own ways. Maybe the world could be a little bit better place if Gaf users would talk about the good things of their headsets instead of what the other headset doesn't have?

In my opinion:

PSVR2 for the graphics and excellent AAA games. Quest 3 for easy access and pron.

 

[Pelao]

There are quite a few misconceptions around foveated rendering and lens blur..

I wasn't talking about lens blur, though.

 

[Davevil]

 

[DemonGamerTTT]

I dont know, are you serious? Lol.
You don't even know what you are talking about when it comes to quest 2 (and 3). They (meta) maxed out the wired connection at 250 even though the slider goes higher. Max theoretical limits mean nothing when they aren't being used by the hardware.

Plus it doesn't use displayport at all, so that just shows how little you know.

Dude being dumb it's not a sin because you born that way but... But you keep saying stupid shit so I think you must have some learning disorder or something...

Since my first post I've been talking about how THE LACK OF DISPLAY PORT is the problem... Right after that you and some others guys started saying that airlink/link gave you a almost perfect image quality, which is objectively not true, then I decided to run some numbers to show how ridiculous it would be to say that h264 at 200mbs would COMPARE to display port which gives a real lossless image quality.

This entire thing is about me saying that IMO quest 3 it's not good enough because of the possible (I'm yet to see the spec sheet) lack of display port which would made PCVR with it a lesser experience.

The one thing I have to give to you is how amazed you got me with this level of retardism you displayed here...

 

[Tams]

As someone who just moved to the UK, that regional pricing is dumb AF. I'll now probably wait until I'm back stateside to buy one. Wild that they don't appropriately regionally price things, but I guess I should start getting used to that.

We're paying 25p per fucking Fredo.

£500 is too much.

 

[Senua]

Meh. I'm good.

Such a vast library you've got there

 

[Klik]

I really don't know why did Sony opt to go with Fresnel lens instead Pancaka. I tried Pico 4 and its so much better than Quest 2 that uses Fresnel lens..

Quest 3 for 500$ is gonna be amazing. It will sale lika hotcakes.

The only thing i wish is a bit higher resolution, something like 2400x2400..

 

[Klik]

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

Such a vast library you've got there

quality > quantity, for those with a life

 

[Senua]

quality > quantity, for those with a life

Whatever helps you justify your purchase bud. Awesome hardware but such a shame otherwise.

 

[nemiroff]

I wasn't talking about lens blur, though.

Ok..? Am I crazy, you clearly implied that the lack of foveated rendering would make things more blurry. But foveated rendering is only applying sofware pheripheral blur (tracked or fixed) and is definitely not a remedy for fovea blur (which will vary dependent on where you're looking in the physical lens configuration). So what was you talking about then?

Anyway, the Meta Quest 3 has pancake lenses and should therefore have a much larger sweet spot / be much less blurry than the PSVR2 which uses fresnel.

 

[Romulus]

Casual gamers are always going to go for the easiest option. And Quest is easy, thanks to being standalone. But those wanting a better experience, with more advanced gameplay and graphics will still go for the PSVR2, even though there will be fewer of them. I think Sony are well aware of this. They are trying to poach the PCVR market, not so much the Quest market. Quest is like a Wii, whereas PSVR2 is like... well, a Playstation.

I think the PCVR option is omitted here. I used Quest 2 is my PCVR headset more than standalone.
One of the things that is really changing is the emergence of injector VR mods on PCVR. The amount of AAA games you can play is pretty crazy. Cyberpunk, Atomic Heart, and dozens of others are already playable and some are working near flawless. I played RE8 with a mod before PSVR2, and while the PSVR2 version was better overall, the PC version was close. That's considering it was early in development. Also, RE2/3/7 work well. Not sure about 4. That's not counting all the older stuff like Skyrim VR, Fallout 4, and Morrowind. Or the Quest native mods like Doom 3 or Jedi Academy.

I would actually take this path over the 2-4 AAA official ports were getting before this on PCVR because the quality is very good for mods now.

 

[DemonGamerTTT]

I think the PCVR option is omitted here. I used Quest 2 is my PCVR headset more than standalone.
One of the things that is really changing is the emergence of injector VR mods on PCVR. The amount of AAA games you can play is pretty crazy. Cyberpunk, Atomic Heart, and dozens of others are already playable and some are working near flawless. I played RE8 with a mod before PSVR2, and while the PSVR2 version was better overall, the PC version was close. That's considering it was early in development. Also, RE2/3/7 work well. Not sure about 4. That's not counting all the older stuff like Skyrim VR, Fallout 4, and Morrowind. Or the Quest native mods like Doom 3 or Jedi Academy.

I would actually take this path over the 2-4 AAA official ports were getting before this on PCVR because the quality is very good for mods now.

Risk of rain VR baby...

PC VR rocks!

 

[Melon Husk]

Quest 3 is kinda expensive imo, compared to the cheapest (original) Quest 2 model. For 40% price hike you still get no eye tracking, no varifocal optics yet, only a small bump in resolution.

Its biggest draw is ergonomics. If they can get the fit and comfort to par with more expensive PSVR-style hard plastic halo headbands, that's an enormous achievement. Quest 2 without the deluxe/elite/whatever strap is very meh.

I really don't know why did Sony opt to go with Fresnel lens instead Pancaka. I tried Pico 4 and its so much better than Quest 2 that uses Fresnel lens..

Quest 3 for 500$ is gonna be amazing. It will sale lika hotcakes.

The only thing i wish is a bit higher resolution, something like 2400x2400..

"Pancake" lenses are less light efficient. That's why they're paired here with a brighter micro-LED backlight. I guess the production / price was an issue for Sony.

Nothing's stopping Sony from releasing a "PSVR2 Slim" (alongside PS5 Slim), but that's just my conjecture.

 

[R6Rider]

Whatever helps you justify your purchase bud. Awesome hardware but such a shame otherwise.

 

[Senua]

Salt and vinegar crisps are my favourite!

 

[Romulus]

Quest 3 is kinda expensive imo, compared to the cheapest (original) Quest 2 model. For 40% price hike you still get no eye tracking, no varifocal optics yet, only a small bump in resolution.

Its biggest draw is ergonomics. If they can get the fit and comfort to par with more expensive PSVR-style hard plastic halo headbands, that's an enormous achievement. Quest 2 without the deluxe/elite/whatever strap is very meh.

"Pancake" lenses are less light efficient. That's why they're paired here with a brighter micro-LED backlight. I guess the production / price was an issue for Sony.

Nothing's stopping Sony from releasing a "PSVR2 Slim" (alongside PS5 Slim), but that's just my conjecture.

I think they took a big loss to get Quest 2 out there.

Pancake lenses are a massive underrated upgrade that rivals ergonomics.

There's also a big bump in GPU power to consider. That puts it right between a PS4 and PS4 Pro but with a better CPU than both and more RAM. Now we can get some impressive-looking games on it for a standalone.

 

[BootsLoader]

Such an un inspired commercial and product. It's like they just threw a shitload of money and told devs "add more features etc" and then just made a short video for it.

 

[Haint]

I really don't know why did Sony opt to go with Fresnel lens instead Pancaka. I tried Pico 4 and its so much better than Quest 2 that uses Fresnel lens..

They made some really dumb tradeoffs. They used fresnels cause they wanted HDR and OLED at a low price, and they used especially bad fresnels with a microscopic sweetspot cause it reduces"god rays" somewhat vs. other fresnel designs. Pancake lenses absorb like 80% of display light output, which rules out traditional OLEDs and HDR. They would have had to use LCDs or Micro OLED on silicon displays (which are traditionally expensive) just to hit 100 nits or so.

Ironically Sony is reportedly making the awe inspiring 4K x 4K Micro OLED displays in Apples impending VR headset, which will make PSVR2 look shittier than a Dollar Store toy thanks to Sony's own displays. While PSVR2 probably didn't need 4K x 4K due to the cost, there's no reason they couldn't have made their own more economical 2.5K x 2.5K micro OLEDs like Bigscreen Beyond is using. Sony absolutely has the scale and vertical integration to make something like that at $550. The problem is they don't really care about PSVR, or see it as an important business like Facebook and Apple do. So they're doing the minimum effort and minimum investment just to keep a foot in the door.