Discussion
Down to £230 on Amazon at the moment.
Are they a decent price of kit? Good fun?
Good a 9 year old who is getting I to his gaming and I won't complain if we get one...
Are they completely stand alone or can you use alongside a ps5 for example?
Plenty of free decent games or do you have to pay for everything too?
Are they a decent price of kit? Good fun?
Good a 9 year old who is getting I to his gaming and I won't complain if we get one...
Are they completely stand alone or can you use alongside a ps5 for example?
Plenty of free decent games or do you have to pay for everything too?
That's the '3S' rather than the '3'?
Was tempted but the fresnel lenses, same as on the '2', puts me off as the focal point is so narrow. The '3' has better lenses for a wider in focus field of view but the prices are a lot higher.
I'd see if any local shop has one to try first to see if it's really that bad as otherwise it does seem a bargain.
Was tempted but the fresnel lenses, same as on the '2', puts me off as the focal point is so narrow. The '3' has better lenses for a wider in focus field of view but the prices are a lot higher.
I'd see if any local shop has one to try first to see if it's really that bad as otherwise it does seem a bargain.
Bought a Quest 3 about a year ago. I use it not for VR but as a big screen to play GeForceNow any where in the house.
The tech is very good, however the display resolution isn't any where as sharp as you expect from 4K. The screenshots are much clearer than how it looks on the device. It's something to do with FOV and eye resolution. Essentially the Quest 3 to me looks like 720P at best and often worse, to get to a point where pixelation isn't visible VR headset have to deliver at least the equivalent of 8K!!!
https://vrarwiki.com/wiki/Resolution
The other issue I've had is it does make me feel uncomfortable after about 30-45 minutes even when just using it as a big screen and having owned it for a year.
I did try some true VR games, but genuinely they make me feel sick after 5 minutes (and the graphics are awful). You can connect up the Quest 3 to a PC but that's a whole different level of faffing I cannot be bothered with.
I think the tech is good, but needs to get better on the resolution side, the demands of 8K optical ouput however I suspect is still a good few years away from the current 4K output. But for £200-300 it's a good bit of kit to have a play with.
The tech is very good, however the display resolution isn't any where as sharp as you expect from 4K. The screenshots are much clearer than how it looks on the device. It's something to do with FOV and eye resolution. Essentially the Quest 3 to me looks like 720P at best and often worse, to get to a point where pixelation isn't visible VR headset have to deliver at least the equivalent of 8K!!!
https://vrarwiki.com/wiki/Resolution
The other issue I've had is it does make me feel uncomfortable after about 30-45 minutes even when just using it as a big screen and having owned it for a year.
I did try some true VR games, but genuinely they make me feel sick after 5 minutes (and the graphics are awful). You can connect up the Quest 3 to a PC but that's a whole different level of faffing I cannot be bothered with.
I think the tech is good, but needs to get better on the resolution side, the demands of 8K optical ouput however I suspect is still a good few years away from the current 4K output. But for £200-300 it's a good bit of kit to have a play with.
Been into VR on and off ever since getting an original HTC Vive in 2016. Had a Vive Pro 2 and now a Quest 3, which is fantastic.
I think the reduced one on Amazon is the Quest 3S, which would be a downgrade for me because it has fresnel lenses. Definitely worth trying out the 3S before you buy. I couldn't get on with the fresnel lenses in the Vives at all, anything high contrast has shimmery lines all over it!
Are they standalone : you can play games on the Quest on its own, but I use the Quest as a passthrough for PC games with my PC doing all the rendering. This is probably the best price/performance way to do PC VR at the moment. Untethered Alyx+mods is brilliant. VR pool is fun as well, until you try and lean on the table. If you don't have a PC, GeForce Now is also another option as a poster above showed, as long as your internet is up to it.
If you have a PS5, you'd probably be better off with PSVR2, although it's pricey, and it uses a form of fresnel lens. I've not tried this headset but it's generally well-regarded. With an adaptor you could use the headset with a PC as well as your console. Like the upcoming Steam Frame, the PSVR2 headset also supports foveated rendering, which is a magic trick that tracks your eyes and downgrades quality wherever you're not looking. This should really help performance when rendering games without needing a PC. Steam Frame should help this tech gain traction in PC VR as well.
Bit of a brain dump there but I never expected VR to keep going this long, glad that there are still games and hardware being made almost ten years after I got into it. I think from your point of view PSVR2 might be the best way forward, but it depends which games you want to play, and whether you'll be prioritising using the console, a PC, streaming from GeForce Now or playing on the device itself?
I think the reduced one on Amazon is the Quest 3S, which would be a downgrade for me because it has fresnel lenses. Definitely worth trying out the 3S before you buy. I couldn't get on with the fresnel lenses in the Vives at all, anything high contrast has shimmery lines all over it!
Are they standalone : you can play games on the Quest on its own, but I use the Quest as a passthrough for PC games with my PC doing all the rendering. This is probably the best price/performance way to do PC VR at the moment. Untethered Alyx+mods is brilliant. VR pool is fun as well, until you try and lean on the table. If you don't have a PC, GeForce Now is also another option as a poster above showed, as long as your internet is up to it.
If you have a PS5, you'd probably be better off with PSVR2, although it's pricey, and it uses a form of fresnel lens. I've not tried this headset but it's generally well-regarded. With an adaptor you could use the headset with a PC as well as your console. Like the upcoming Steam Frame, the PSVR2 headset also supports foveated rendering, which is a magic trick that tracks your eyes and downgrades quality wherever you're not looking. This should really help performance when rendering games without needing a PC. Steam Frame should help this tech gain traction in PC VR as well.
Bit of a brain dump there but I never expected VR to keep going this long, glad that there are still games and hardware being made almost ten years after I got into it. I think from your point of view PSVR2 might be the best way forward, but it depends which games you want to play, and whether you'll be prioritising using the console, a PC, streaming from GeForce Now or playing on the device itself?
Virtual PAH said:
That's the '3S' rather than the '3'?
Was tempted but the fresnel lenses, same as on the '2', puts me off as the focal point is so narrow. The '3' has better lenses for a wider in focus field of view but the prices are a lot higher.
I'd see if any local shop has one to try first to see if it's really that bad as otherwise it does seem a bargain.
I upgraded from a Quest 2 to a full Quest 3 and the image quality through the pancake lenses is a massive improvement. It's not that the fresnel lenses in the Quest 2 were particularly bad - just that they took a lot of faffing around to get the sweet spot and things towards the edges of your vision would tend to 'fringe'. The Quest 3 'picture' is just genuinely impressive. The only area I could fault it is the contrast which isn't up there with OLED headsets.Was tempted but the fresnel lenses, same as on the '2', puts me off as the focal point is so narrow. The '3' has better lenses for a wider in focus field of view but the prices are a lot higher.
I'd see if any local shop has one to try first to see if it's really that bad as otherwise it does seem a bargain.
The vastly improved passthrough (enabling XR software) was also pretty impressive - and the 3S would still have that. As well as the extra oomph of the processing hardware. The 3S is definitely a better entry level than the already great Quest 2 but if you are really interested in VR, well worth paying for the full Quest 3. Maybe for the person just dabbling, pick up a cheap Quest 2 and if you like it then go for a Quest 3 (or Steam Frame) later. As a PC only headset, the Quest 2 would be pretty much as good as the 3S for a lower price.
Lucas Ayde said:
I upgraded from a Quest 2 to a full Quest 3 and the image quality through the pancake lenses is a massive improvement. It's not that the fresnel lenses in the Quest 2 were particularly bad - just that they took a lot of faffing around to get the sweet spot and things towards the edges of your vision would tend to 'fringe'. The Quest 3 'picture' is just genuinely impressive. The only area I could fault it is the contrast which isn't up there with OLED headsets.
The vastly improved passthrough (enabling XR software) was also pretty impressive - and the 3S would still have that. As well as the extra oomph of the processing hardware. The 3S is definitely a better entry level than the already great Quest 2 but if you are really interested in VR, well worth paying for the full Quest 3. Maybe for the person just dabbling, pick up a cheap Quest 2 and if you like it then go for a Quest 3 (or Steam Frame) later. As a PC only headset, the Quest 2 would be pretty much as good as the 3S for a lower price.
My main interest is for sim racing to get a more immersive experience than large/multi-monitors, so the '3' is better for being able to look around without having to move your head like on the '2'/'3s' to ensure the fresnel sweet spot is where you're looking.The vastly improved passthrough (enabling XR software) was also pretty impressive - and the 3S would still have that. As well as the extra oomph of the processing hardware. The 3S is definitely a better entry level than the already great Quest 2 but if you are really interested in VR, well worth paying for the full Quest 3. Maybe for the person just dabbling, pick up a cheap Quest 2 and if you like it then go for a Quest 3 (or Steam Frame) later. As a PC only headset, the Quest 2 would be pretty much as good as the 3S for a lower price.
Hopefully the interest in VR keeps increasing, though not sure how Meta are getting on with trying to temp everyone into their Matrix, so we get better cheaper options that fit our use cases.
Virtual PAH said:
My main interest is for sim racing to get a more immersive experience than large/multi-monitors, so the '3' is better for being able to look around without having to move your head like on the '2'/'3s' to ensure the fresnel sweet spot is where you're looking.
Hopefully the interest in VR keeps increasing, though not sure how Meta are getting on with trying to temp everyone into their Matrix, so we get better cheaper options that fit our use cases.
Quest 3 definitely the better choice for that.Hopefully the interest in VR keeps increasing, though not sure how Meta are getting on with trying to temp everyone into their Matrix, so we get better cheaper options that fit our use cases.
Also, the improved video passthrough means stuff like passing through the real world wheel with software such as reality mixer is a possibility:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UDOF40QhLg
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff