It was always for the gram. Influences don’t actually buy anything.

Or just to try it out. I would totally like to try one on for a few days.

It’s obviously made for porn only, that’s they only thing you can do with it

Same Apple story: great hardware, but their walled ecosystem. They would sell so many more units if they were compatible with software used by millions of people and corporations…

Silicon and engineering has come down in price and vr is hardly revolutionary at this point so yea price point is stupid high but what do people expect from apple

Making a VR headset from aluminium and glass with nothing to balance it in the back is yet again another perfect example of Apple going hard with form over function.

Yea looking at the site I mistook the large gaps between paragraphs to be the end of the article. Going over it and I can see I missed a large deal. But I am still unsurprised with the reasons why people are returning the headsets. Its expensive, sold for productivity yet is restricting and uncomfortable. Vr has a place in the world and that is mostly media consumption.

I think foveated rendering also helps with immersion. Being able to blur things you are not specifically looking at and are farther away is a closer match to reality.

I don’t really look at it as a symptom of lack of graphics throughput, but more as a benefit of eye tracking, which is also potentially something that benefits, say, the immersion of others through portraying your facial expressions more realistically, or something to that effect. You could also use it as a kind of peripheral for games or software, and apple currently uses it as a mouse, so it’s not totally useless. But I also can’t imagine that most developers are going to be imaginative enough to make good use of it, if we can’t even think of good uses for basic shit, like haptic feedback.

Perhaps it breaks even in terms of allowing them to save money they otherwise would’ve spent on rendering, but I dunno if that’s the case, since the camera has to be pretty low latency, and you have to still dedicate hardware resources to the eye tracking and foveated rendering in order to get it to look good. Weight savings, then? I just don’t really know. I guess we’ll see, if it gets more industry adoption.

Problem is it comes with pimax customer support

Make it standalone and there you are.

Portal buyers would be suspicious

Yeah, but surely you’d want actual VR games, rather than just Steam Link to a big virtual screen.

Half Life Alyx is a great game, but there’s no way it would ever come to this headset just because of the lack of VR controllers.

3D VR porn. You can still watch 2D pornhub porn.

That depends on the company that is selling the product, and the reputation of the reviewer.

IGN always give 9/10 for every game they review so they are high on the priority list to get review copies. But they won’t get any if the Developer /Producer isn’t interested in giving any out.

I don’t think Apple is giving away 3500 devices for free to a long list of people. Most reviews I see are reviewing based on an extended store demo.

not the freelance ones, or not always anyway. i think you’re right about the ones that wrote for tech blogs.

Nah, me too. My A-Level Physics teacher had it on Atari Jaguar.

Found the Apple marketing person.

That’s a solid argument toward using an AVP vs a traditional PCVR set up.

… So why not just do that for a fraction of the price on the Quest 3? I do everything you listed on mine, I even take it with me when I travel without any perceived constraints. I, too, can use Steam Link (although I prefer Virtual Remote Desktop currently) and even found myself making some use of the new Xbox GamePass app, and yes, it also pairs with my controller, and my Logitech keyboard and mouse too.

I understand the AVP can fill a wider role than a standard PCVR gaming rig set up, but I feel what you describe as something to compare with the AVP is honestly kind of outdated.

I’m not really a fan of Facebook, but I’m kind of wanting a Quest 3 because the cost of the AVP and other headsets just reinforce how much of a value it must be. Maybe it’s just early days, but the AVP just doesn’t do enough of what I want from a headset at even half its price point.

I do want to see what an AV (non pro) will bring to the table, but I think Meta is in a better position to impress with their next Quest headset now that apple has laid their cards on the table. They could sell a quest 4 at twice the price of a quest 3, add in whatever new technologies that might afford, and still be insanely more affordable than an AVP.

I think they totally understand that there is a legitimate mixed reality / AR use case that people have wanted addressed for decades, but the hardware has never been able to pull it off well.

If I could pop on a light weight headset, and have a desktop with infinite 4K monitors, with a high refresh rate, without breaking my wallet, I would 1000% buy that product.

The hardware isn’t there yet, but I’m glad to see people are investing in platforms that could get us there in a decade or two.

Less $3.5k and more 3.5mm headphone jack Apple

Honestly, no one should buy a Quest 3, or any other Quest for that matter… Meta doesn’t need any more money or tracking data. PS VR2, Vive Pro 2 or even the Valve Index would be better.

I’m thinking on buying a Quest to dip into PCVR. I’ve heard horror stories about the Index’s poor QC (which is weird given the Steam Deck’s done me well so far) and PSVR2 isn’t compatible with PC. Yes, iVRy exists but that driver is in development and the developer basically said “just buy a Quest if you want a cheap PC VR headset”.

They’re a public company, we’ll get sales figures and enough proxy numbers to have a good guess. Shareholders are going to want to know.

I’ve tried it at a friend’s house, quest 2, like the other guy, and I think an oculus at another friend’s house, but a quest 2 more recently. It was probably due to game selection, but it was kind of underwhelming, personally. headset was also way too heavy for me.

I dunno, I was more impressed when I used a wii back in 2009 or whatever, when I was like 7. Partially because I was a kid, probably, partially because wii sports is based, but I also think there’s something to be said of the natural symbiosis between motion controls, couch co-op, and a shared screen, even if there’s a lot of inherent limitations to that approach in terms of game design. I might be falling behind all of that in terms of the internet being the new couch co-op, though.

I also think the lack of easy, built in locomotion is something that probably needs to be solved, because it seems like a pretty big limitation in terms of game design and immersion, and I also wanna bring up haptic feedback again because I like haptic feedback and find it useful but nobody else does and it has no support. I think it might help.

I also haven’t really seen many devs taking advantage of the platform’s actual like, capabilities. I’ve seen more devs try to recreate things as they exist in the real world almost 1 to 1, and almost constantly in first person, instead of devs that are like, okay, we have head tracking, we have active motion controls in both hands, we have 3D capable perspective, what can we do with all of that? I haven’t seen many games that are playing with that in a more abstract way. Something like ping pong, for instance, would kind of make a lot of sense, when you look at it from the angle of, what are the specific capabilities are of the platform. You could make a lot of interesting perspective based puzzle games, like echochrome on the PSP, I think that would be worth pursuing.

As for future capabilites, I really have no idea. I think we’ve kind of achieved optimal pixel density for whatever screens we might employ, right, mostly as evidenced by the smartphone market (though we might see some innovations there, I really don’t know). I think the main limitation now would probably be how optics are designed, which seems like kind of a harder problem to deal with. I’d like to see phased array optics with lasers and holograms and stuff become a thing, but that’s still quite a ways off.

I’ve tried Quest 2 once at a friend’s house. I thought it was pretty neat but nothing about the experience made me want to run out and buy one or even plan to buy one in the future. I believe that unless good VR headsets come down in price significantly (sub $100) they’re never going to be more than a niche hobby.

damn, I didn’t really know it was that intense, that serious. I guess I have, once again, underestimated the furries, my greatest rivals on this god forsaken planet.

nah but fr that makes a lot of sense. I would’ve just kind of thought, you know, stereotype of wealthy furries in IT shelling out for fursuits and shit, and furries in VR, put 2 and 2 together and blam, wow, the math checks out, but yeah, I do believe there’s probably a good proportion of people for whom it’s important enough to kind of get on top of it asap.

also VR headsets are getting cheaper than I thought, so that’s another factor.

Yes. If “Sadly It’s Bradley”'s YouTube channel is anything to go by, furries (and maybe enterprises) will be the primary purchasers of the AVP. He’s absolutely over the moon about it.

That kinda sucks. I would expect more of your mainline 3D modelling things to be on top of this, or there to maybe be some sort of blender modification, some blender fork, that gets it to work in VR. Seems like kind of an obviously much better use case, to me, compared to memorizing a shit ton of hotkeys, and having to maybe buy one of those space mice they sell for the same price as a whole ass VR headset.

VTOL VR is awesome too. The problem with a lot of games that support VR is they don’t support the controllers to the same extent. Playing VR with an Xbox controller instead of the motion tracking Index controllers just ain’t the same.