Introducing Meta Quest 3

[Dogmanbird]

Apparently we'll have some coming where I work in early October, so should be able to give a report

[Draken35]

1 hour ago, Hoirtel said:

I have pre-ordered so will happily post my beta testing .

I currently use a Q2 so it will be a direct comparison as a DCS headset. I do like oculus/meta's ASW, so that is a big selling point for me. I decided to go Q3 over QPro because of the increased res and new version XR2 chip. Downsides are no local dimming or DFR. I don't use fixed FR currently with ASW so that helped me with the trade-off.

I run a strong system and have been quite happy with my Q2, I have had both HP headsets in the past and didn't get on with them but that was back in the early days. My hopes for the Q3 are really about less aliasing as this is my main issue. I feel I can read everything in cockpits that is realistically readable, extra sharpness is always nice though. The pancake lenses more or less guaranteed to be great, and I also hope for better colors, particularly black levels although I may not get this with this headset.

I still want to buy a DP super high res headset and will do one day. Don't want that massive pimax thing and the aero is now tempting but I don't own base stations, have tax to pay and I hear the reprojection isn't great. The Q3 will hopefully give me an upgrade until something new comes out and although I pre-ordered the Q3 as it feels a safe bet, any new high end headsets I will need to wait until they are well tested before buying. So a year or two from now at least.

 

I shall await your report! Good luck

[falcon_120]

Can any of you confirm if there would be any reason to pick the 512gb version over the basic one if DCS is the only use that the visor will have?

[Draken35]

26 minutes ago, falcon_120 said:

Can any of you confirm if there would be any reason to pick the 512gb version over the basic one if DCS is the only use that the visor will have?

No reason at all. PCVR does nothing with the Quest storage

[diego999]

10 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

Can any of you confirm if there would be any reason to pick the 512gb version over the basic one if DCS is the only use that the visor will have?

 

Not at all. It only matters for standalone use when not connected to your PC.

[TomcatBall]

Dont forget it will be fine only for games made for VR. Remove DCS from your list, it only supports VR games made for VR. I can tell you right now and i can bet my house, that meta 3 will not change anything for DCS. I hope one day a new company will actually develop a VR device for real PC Games, then i would even pay 2000 USD. Good luck for those, who buy quest 3 

Edited September 29, 2023 by TomcatBall

[sze5003]

I feel like they missed the mark without having eye tracking when the psvr has it. I need to upgrade from the G2 but don't really have any options without base stations. If the quest 3 had similar resolution as the G2 but better fov and eye tracking, I think it would have been great. But it's really for standalone and other VR games which they are great for in general.

[falcon_120]

5 hours ago, TomcatBall said:

Dont forget it will be fine only for games made for VR. Remove DCS from your list, it only supports VR games made for VR. I can tell you right now and i can bet my house, that meta 3 will not change anything for DCS. I hope one day a new company will actually develop a VR device for real PC Games, then i would even pay 2000 USD. Good luck for those, who buy quest 3 

 

Care to expand a bit more? As far as i understood most people testing the Meta Quest pro on DCS are reporting a net improvement over the reverb G2 (I'm a reverb G2 owner) specially due to the pancake lenses.

 

I was under the impression that the Quest 3 slightly improve the quet Pro in resolution while keeping the pancakes lenses. So, my question is, shouldn't I consider as an improvement over my reverb G2?

Regards,

Edited September 29, 2023 by falcon_120

[Hoirtel]

3 hours ago, sze5003 said:

I feel like they missed the mark without having eye tracking when the psvr has it. I need to upgrade from the G2 but don't really have any options without base stations. If the quest 3 had similar resolution as the G2 but better fov and eye tracking, I think it would have been great. But it's really for standalone and other VR games which they are great for in general.

VR headsets aren't as simple as pixel count, the type of lenses, type of screens and the positioning of screens to the lenses make massive differences to the actual clarity experienced. There are a few good videos that cover different aspects of this, its quite a complicated science. 

5 hours ago, TomcatBall said:

Dont forget it will be fine only for games made for VR. Remove DCS from your list, it only supports VR games made for VR. I can tell you right now and i can bet my house, that meta 3 will not change anything for DCS. I hope one day a new company will actually develop a VR device for real PC Games, then i would even pay 2000 USD. Good luck for those, who buy quest 3 

 

Well, playing DCS will be possible in it so what else is there to change. It obviously affects performance as with any display device (more needs more power). Can't see what it would be expected to change? Improvements over older headsets? - yes. Trade-offs with other headsets? - yes. Is it compatible with PCVR? - yes. 

[Koziolek]

On 9/28/2023 at 8:48 AM, Fiztex said:

In a year we will likely see new Quest Pro and Pico 5,

 

Pico 5 yes, but there will not be a Quest Pro 2. Meta cancelled it

[Fiztex]

31 минуту назад, Koziolek сказал:

Pico 5 yes, but there will not be a Quest Pro 2. Meta cancelled it

I think I was indeed a bit too optimistic to see new Pro in a year but I still believe that releasing an expensive headset in limited amounts with new features is a good tool to measure public response on this new tech and improve production process to make those things into mass market with next gen Quest. Also helps to decide which final prototype to push to production and gives some time for their partners to be ready. I highly doubt they'll ditch this approach in a so highly competitive market as VR is right now, they cannot risk a failure and need to really push the proper tech into masses otherwise the whole thing just dies.

Edited September 29, 2023 by Fiztex

[sze5003]

Care to expand a bit more? As far as i understood most people testing the Meta Quest pro on DCS are reporting a net improvement over the reverb G2 (I'm a reverb G2 owner) specially due to the pancake lenses.
 
I was under the impression that the Quest 3 slightly improve the quet Pro in resolution while keeping the pancakes lenses. So, my question is, shouldn't I consider as an improvement over my reverb G2?
Regards,

Yea I would like to know the same. I guess we will have to see I'm sure there will be some folks who get the quest 3 and will use it in dcs. On paper though the resolution is less than the G2 but the lenses will probably make a big difference.

[diego999]

21 hours ago, sze5003 said:

I feel like they missed the mark without having eye tracking when the psvr has it. I need to upgrade from the G2 but don't really have any options without base stations. If the quest 3 had similar resolution as the G2 but better fov and eye tracking, I think it would have been great. But it's really for standalone and other VR games which they are great for in general.

It looks like a decent upgrade from the Quest 2. Nothing more, nothing less. 

With a $499 price tag you can't go nuts with the specs. It's just an entry level headset.

[falcon_120]

I've ordered it. I will report back whether it improves the dcs experience of the reverb g2 i currently own. If not i will return it.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Dogmanbird]

Though I've never tried it, apparently there is an alpha version of a passthrough masking app in the making, for masking out areas of your view (see your hardware controls) and the mask is tracking fairly well with the head movement. Apparently tested on the pro.

[YoYo]

22 minutes ago, Dogmanbird said:

Though I've never tried it, apparently there is an alpha version of a passthrough masking app in the making, for masking out areas of your view (see your hardware controls) and the mask is tracking fairly well with the head movement. Apparently tested on the pro.

For me passthrough and DCS MT = crash to desktop (of DCS), but Im on Quest Pro.I don't expect it will be any different with Q3, neither CTD.

[sze5003]

I've ordered it. I will report back whether it improves the dcs experience of the reverb g2 i currently own. If not i will return it.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Looking forward to your analysis whenever it arrives.

[falcon_120]

Looking forward to your analysis whenever it arrives.

It should arrive on October 12th, stay tuned!

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Magic_Jim]

Definitely going to give the Quest 3 a try. I've used a Quest 2 a lot for DCS, and a year ago upgraded to a Pimax 8Kx. To be completely honest, I have been disappointed with the Pimax. The only thing I feel like I gained when going from the Quest 2 to the Pimax was the wide FOV. The image quality in the sweet spot of the Pimax is okay, but not as good as I expected it would be, and that sweet spot is pretty small and hard to keep centered due to the weigt of the Pimax.

Youtubers that got to try the Quest 3 are reporting a very noticeable improvement in image quality over the Quest 2, and with the pancake lenses, the "sweet spot" is a large area, apparently most of the viewable area. Add in the large library of games, many of which I already own because of the Quest 2, and I think it's a great value for 500 dollars. I will miss the Pimax wide FOV, but am ready to give something else a try. 

[TED]

11 hours ago, Magic_Jim said:

Definitely going to give the Quest 3 a try. I've used a Quest 2 a lot for DCS, and a year ago upgraded to a Pimax 8Kx. To be completely honest, I have been disappointed with the Pimax. The only thing I feel like I gained when going from the Quest 2 to the Pimax was the wide FOV. The image quality in the sweet spot of the Pimax is okay, but not as good as I expected it would be, and that sweet spot is pretty small and hard to keep centered due to the weigt of the Pimax.

Youtubers that got to try the Quest 3 are reporting a very noticeable improvement in image quality over the Quest 2, and with the pancake lenses, the "sweet spot" is a large area, apparently most of the viewable area. Add in the large library of games, many of which I already own because of the Quest 2, and I think it's a great value for 500 dollars. I will miss the Pimax wide FOV, but am ready to give something else a try. 

This . I'm in same boat. I have a pimax 8kx after a g2. It was definitely an upgrade but I do have a bit of a love hate relationship with the 8kx. Fov is great but it's big and heavy and visuals a pretty good but as u say the weight means u can kinda lose the sweet spot. The set up is a pain too. I'm definitely going to be following closely the real world reviews of the q3 as they come out. Alternatively I'll wait for a pico 5 as I'm not in a rush to replace the 8kx yet. It's certainly a good time now for vr development. Prices are coming down, tech is improving rapidly and lots of really interesting features are becoming mainstream. 

[Dogmanbird]

Another through the lens post on reddit by a helpful person. The uniform sharpness, minimal distortion and minimal CA, right across the lens looks amazing

 

Edited October 2, 2023 by Dogmanbird

[sze5003]

There is another reddit thread where a guy got to play with one for 3 hours. He's answering a bunch of questions and pretty much saving it's got a large fov with clarity in the lenses same as the G2 but all over instead of just the middle.

That is really good to hear if that is the case. Although I'm thinking the quest pro will still have an overall higher fov as it's dual lenses vs single.

[TimberWolf]

41 minutes ago, sze5003 said:

Although I'm thinking the quest pro will still have an overall higher fov as it's dual lenses vs single.

The FOV is basically the same. Not sure what you are referring to when you say single lens vs dual. The Q3 does have separate lenses and separate panels, like the QP. The Q3 has higher resolution panels and similar lenses as the QP, and has a higher PPD (25 vs 22). It lacks the local dimming, so not as deep blacks, and the quantum dots, so only 99% sRGB gamut vs 129% (which is irrelevant for DCS). And of course, lacks eye tracking. On the other hand, it has a significantly higher resolution pass-through display and is half the price of the QP. It has now become the go-to reasonably-priced VR headset for PCVR.

[sze5003]

The FOV is basically the same. Not sure what you are referring to when you say single lens vs dual. The Q3 does have separate lenses and separate panels, like the QP. The Q3 has higher resolution panels and similar lenses as the QP, and has a higher PPD (25 vs 22). It lacks the local dimming, so not as deep blacks, and the quantum dots, so only 99% sRGB gamut vs 129% (which is irrelevant for DCS). And of course, lacks eye tracking. On the other hand, it has a significantly higher resolution pass-through display and is half the price of the QP. It has now become the go-to reasonably-priced VR headset for PCVR.

I think it will be the go to headset to get for the masses in terms of VR games and standalone but for PCVR we will have to see some comparisons, specifically in dcs.

[TimberWolf]

1 hour ago, sze5003 said:

but for PCVR we will have to see some comparisons, specifically in dcs.

Sure, I'm eagerly awaiting full reviews, as well as my own, which I've pre-ordered. But I'm not expecting any surprises.

Previews have already confirmed that the lenses are as clear and edge-to-edge sharp as the QPs. The LCD panels are 2064x2208 compared to 1800x1920 on the QPs, so they should be a bit more detailed. Blacks should be about the same as the QP with the local dimming disabled. Since I'm coming from a Reverb G2, I'd be happy if there was any improvement in blacks and colours. Both use the same link cables and the Q3 can use wifi6e, so connection should be the same or a bit better on the Q3 over the QP. Q3 has a faster chip too, so better decompression speeds.

Really, the only questions are comfort (Q3 is about 200g lighter), audio quality, and controller tracking (which is largely irrelevant for DCS). I don't see any other headset challenging this for anywhere near it's price. Every other decent PCVR headset is at least double the price.

Edited October 2, 2023 by TimberWolf