Meta PCVR. Why don't they listen?

[Qcumber]

I have used oculus headsets for about 5 years and meta PCVR has not significantly improved in that time. In reality it has got worse because of no DP support since the rift s. 

OpenXR 1.1 enabled implementation of QVFR but this is something that meta do not appear to be interested in. 

This is not about headsets. The Quest Pro and Quest 3 are great headsets. It is about how meta support PCVR. 

What can we do to get meta to listen and give us a better PCVR experience? 

 

[Dodge]

In my opinion, they don't, or won't, and have their own agenda.

My first purchase was TrackIR when I first started in DCS (start of the pandemic) - I could not get on with it alongside  monitor. So my first purchase into VR headsets was the Quest 2. While the immersion was fantastic, with the updates they provide it wasn't for me, as there would be no improvement. The updates seemed to make using DCS worse.
There would be posts on the Oculus forum about the Quest 2 and DCS but nothing towards making the experience better.

The updates would cause me all sorts of issues, and tweaking constantly was very frustrating. If I recall, v24 or v26 was the better of all updates (still issues mind you). I loathed the constant tinkering of settings, and not being able to have stability; whether FPS issue, display issues, or otherwise.
I  then decided that enough was enough and to look for another VR vendor headset. At that time I decided to move to the HP Reverb G2 (which I use today). The difference was night and day. Once setup I've never had to change settings again; and I have never used the Quest 2 since - Its sitting in my loft gathering dust.

And, going back to your comment about how to get Meta to listen - It would really take a huge effort for us as gamers to come together (it's an ask), as well as DCS as a business to reach out (they may have already). Where do you/we reach within Meta where they will understand the situation (if not already)?

 

[schmiefel]

6 minutes ago, Dodge said:

In my opinion, they don't, or won't, and have their own agenda.

Exactly that. Nothing besides maybe stopping buying their products will make a change. I think Meta will only do what its ‘mastermind’ will see as a profit for his (!) business. And in the case of the VR devices that doesn’t seem to be PCVR at all as he wants to push and sell his vision of a standalone Metaverse. And if he now sees a bright future in all about AI I have no doubt that he will abandon VR completely like he already seem to have stopped developing a more professionally addressed Pro device.

[Johnny Dioxin]

So stop buying them and get something else - I did and am well pleased. Since I got my Pico 4 18 months ago I have only used my Quest twice - and that was just for a couple of minutes each. I have a huge amount in my Meta library but couldn't care less - I got all the titles on other platforms, too. Had the Varjo Aero not been dumped I would have bought one of those, too.

Meta don't get my money any more, although I was 100% behind Oculus.

[Qcumber]

9 minutes ago, Johnny Dioxin said:

So stop buying them and get something else - I did and am well pleased. Since I got my Pico 4 18 months ago I have only used my Quest twice - and that was just for a couple of minutes each. I have a huge amount in my Meta library but couldn't care less - I got all the titles on other platforms, too. Had the Varjo Aero not been dumped I would have bought one of those, too.

Meta don't get my money any more, although I was 100% behind Oculus.

Fair point, but I find the quest pro is a lot better than the Pico 4. I own both. I can abandon the meta software and use VD, which I do still use. The only reason I use meta link is because the cable gives less compression and ASW is still better than SSW. My only hope is that VD will continue to improve and surpass meta in this regard. 

The reason meta will continue to survive is because they offer a relatively cheap headset with high quality. Pico don't appear to want to follow up on the P4 and availability is limited for some countries. Pimax crystal light looks promising but is still a lot more expensive than a Q3. Until someone brings out another Q3 alternative, meta will continue to dominate. 

Edit: I bought my rift s from oculus and my QP was used so I don't feel too much like I supported meta directly, especially as I got it for a good price. I would not buy a full priced QP. 

Edited April 19, 2024 by Qcumber

[speed-of-heat]

2 hours ago, Qcumber said:

OpenXR 1.1 enabled implementation of QVFR but this is something that meta do not appear to be interested in. 

OpenXR1.1 is just really at the standards stage... it can take months or years for a standard to be adopted... both by headset vendors and software vendors... 

That said... I will likely only purchase a headset with a display port unless there is a significant change

 

[Qcumber]

7 minutes ago, speed-of-heat said:

I will likely only purchase a headset with a display port unless there is a significant change

There are no affordable new options for DP at the moment. Even the new Crystal light is not that cheap and does not have DFR. I might start saving for the Crystal Super. And a 5080 to run it. 

[speed-of-heat]

3 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

There are no affordable new options for DP at the moment. Even the new Crystal light is not that cheap and does not have DFR. I might start saving for the Crystal Super. And a 5080 to run it. 

agreed, i got my Varjo Aero when it was on sale. and it was not "super cheap" but it was worth it

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, Qcumber said:

What can we do to get meta to listen and give us a better PCVR experience? 

We can't. Zuckerberg's goal is to create a standalone AR headset. The Rift S was only ever a means to an end, as the mobile APUs of the time were not powerful enough. As soon as they were, they switched to making a standalone-first headset.

It's the same for Apple, BTW.

Of course, if customers would reject the standalone headsets and would prefer PCVR, then there would be commercial pressure to make mass-market headsets, but the opposite seems true. Customers mostly reject PCVR and prefer standalone. Simmers are the exception and a relatively small group that simply cannot provide the tens of millions of customers that a company like Meta wants.

This is why only niche companies like Pimax make PCVR-first headsets and why Varjo cancelled the Aero with no replacement and why HP stopped doing VR.

The future of VR simming is almost certainly going to be to either use standalone-first headsets, or to use products from a niche company like Pimax.

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, Dodge said:

I  then decided that enough was enough and to look for another VR vendor headset. At that time I decided to move to the HP Reverb G2 (which I use today). The difference was night and day. Once setup I've never had to change settings again; and I have never used the Quest 2 since - Its sitting in my loft gathering dust.

Of course the product that was abandoned by HP and didn't get any investment anymore, was very stable. But this also means that there will not be a Reverb G3 or other HP headset aimed at PCVR.

Quote

And, going back to your comment about how to get Meta to listen - It would really take a huge effort for us as gamers to come together (it's an ask), as well as DCS as a business to reach out (they may have already). Where do you/we reach within Meta where they will understand the situation (if not already)?

Why would Meta ever cater specifically to DCS players or simmers in general? I think that you are missing the bigger picture, which is that simmers are a tiny part of their customer base and an even smaller part of the customers that they are aiming at, which is pretty much every person with a phone.

The goal of these companies is to (eventually) create a product that is as useful and used as much as smartphones are today.

[Qcumber]

14 minutes ago, Aapje said:

The future of VR simming is almost certainly going to be to either use standalone-first headsets, or to use products from a niche company like Pimax.

I have "spontaneously" pre-ordered a Crystal Light because of exactly these reasons. I'm not sure if that is a good idea yet but I am very intrigued by this approach. I would have preferred to have DFR but I'm interested to see what the FFR 2.0 will look like and if the native upscaling will be better than DLSS. 

[HiWay]

I have used oculus headsets for about 5 years and meta PCVR has not significantly improved in that time. In reality it has got worse because of no DP support since the rift s. 
OpenXR 1.1 enabled implementation of QVFR but this is something that meta do not appear to be interested in. 
This is not about headsets. The Quest Pro and Quest 3 are great headsets. It is about how meta support PCVR. 
What can we do to get meta to listen and give us a better PCVR experience? 
 

Steam are listening...try Steam link

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[Qcumber]

53 minutes ago, HiWay said:

Steam are listening...try Steam link

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk
 

I've not had a good experience with steam link. It's very laggy. Hopefully it will get better. I'll keep trying with it to see what my issues are. I've not spent as much time with it as I have with meta-link and VD. 

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, Qcumber said:

I have "spontaneously" pre-ordered a Crystal Light because of exactly these reasons. I'm not sure if that is a good idea yet but I am very intrigued by this approach. I would have preferred to have DFR but I'm interested to see what the FFR 2.0 will look like and if the native upscaling will be better than DLSS. 

 

Unfortunately, it seems that eye tracking is very expensive and probably needs a powerful onboard processor. So far we've never seen it in a cheap headset.

Oculus explained before how hard it is:

[Dogmanbird]

someone mentioned on reddit that the base crystal light is about 700grams. If accurate, it's quite heavy for a pcvr only headset

[Qcumber]

25 minutes ago, Dogmanbird said:

someone mentioned on reddit that the base crystal light is about 700grams. If accurate, it's quite heavy for a pcvr only headset

It also looks very bulky compared to newer headsets. 

[maxTRX]

3 hours ago, Aapje said:

...Why would Meta ever cater specifically to DCS players or simmers in general? I think that you are missing the bigger picture, which is that simmers are a tiny part of their customer base and an even smaller part of the customers that they are aiming at, which is pretty much every person with a phone.

The goal of these companies is to (eventually) create a product that is as useful and used as much as smartphones are today.

Yep, round up as many 'normies' as possible into the spiderweb.  I have a grumpy old man's approach to all this... The bigger picture and I simply don't like zuckerberg, lol.

[Aapje]

The Quest 3 is 515 grams, but the Quest pro is 722 grams and I don't really see people complaining about its weight. Although in reality the difference between the two isn't that big, because part of the reason why the Quest 3 is so light, is their horrible headstrap, which anyone who is sensible replaces with a heavier one anyway.

What actually matters is the weight of the front part, not the headstrap, and the Crystal light weight loss is mostly on the front. So it should be a lot better due to the better balance.

But we'll need to wait for the reviews to see how exactly it works out in practice.

Quote

It also looks very bulky compared to newer headsets. 

That's in part because they didn't design a new form factor, which is probably a good thing, given how they use customers as beta testers.

[NAM]

Size or form factor is not the major issue for me, but how balance it is.

I found the 8kx is front heavy, i have to put counter weight on the back.

Crystal is more balance with the battery.

Crystal light is basically the same form as the Crystal, but wihout the battery.

So it likely will be front heavy.

Interesting to see how pimax going to address it.

[nikoel]

DisplayPort is overrated. The future is wireless. Hell, the present is wireless too as far as I am concerned

With Virtual Desktop we can have our cake and eat it. Zack develops a headset. Sells it at a gigantic loss hoping to recoup it through his MetaVerse bullcrap. We buy it. Purchase Virtual Desktop from the store give him the forks and Bob's ya uncle

My favourite thing to do when I am dogfighting my friend is to go into rolling scissors. He has a crystal. It only takes a few revolutions and he loses every fight no matter the advantage. His wife sent me a video of him trying not to lose visual with that massive pimax headcrab on his face. It is a sight to behold and I'm trully surprised his head is still attached to his neck. That cable upsets balance and gets in the way. It's just not good - WiFi 6E modems are super fast and have very low latencies with throughput similar of USB. It's not perfect and I get a few artefacts here and there if I look for them. So I don't look for them.

The only part where meta truly grinds my gears, is that they only released eye tracking via their social API. It's literally only there for social chat and this is the reason for gaze latencies. There is an other layer that is super fast; our headsets have it but we can not have it for PCVR. We could have flawless super fast DFR, but no - Aaaaaagh!

Edited April 19, 2024 by nikoel

[Aapje]

57 minutes ago, NAM said:

So it likely will be front heavy.

No, the front lost 250 grams by ditching the APU, heatsink and eye tracking camera's. The rear lost 60 grams due to the removed battery.

It will thus be more balanced.

[mbucchia]

7 hours ago, Qcumber said:

OpenXR 1.1 enabled implementation of QVFR but this is something that meta do not appear to be interested in. 

Fwiw, I said it my other post "there is no indication they will support it in 1.1", but it's just a guess. We might might be pleasantly surprised. I highly doubt it though.

Looks to me like they only care about standalone in their strategy (and unarguably there are good reasons for that).

IMO best thing that would happen to us is them 100% abandoning Quest Link (as in: it's not available at all). This way something innovative and cared for, like Virtual Desktop, becomes the new standard and sets the bar. Virtual Desktop already has the features you want, without Developer Mode limitations. Virtual Desktop will soon have quad views support out-of-the-box without the need for any mod.

[Qcumber]

13 minutes ago, mbucchia said:

Virtual Desktop will soon have quad views support out-of-the-box without the need for any mod.

Fantastic. That's what I had hoped was going to happen. Any idea on timeline? 

46 minutes ago, nikoel said:

With Virtual Desktop we can have our cake and eat it. Zack develops a headset. Sells it at a gigantic loss hoping to recoup it through his MetaVerse bullcrap. We buy it. Purchase Virtual Desktop from the store give him the forks and Bob's ya uncle

I like that sentiment. 

[mbucchia]

12 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

Fantastic. That's what I had hoped was going to happen. Any idea on timeline? 

Probably not the next update (which is multi-monitor) but the one after that.

One big challenge is unfortunately the incompatibility with many of the OpenXR tools out there like OpenXR Toolkit or OBSMirror and the lack of toggle in DCS for quad views... means it won't be enabled by default and require a user toggle in Virtual Desktop. Otherwise <profanity>'s gonna hit the fan if it's enabled by default.

Edited April 19, 2024 by mbucchia

[Johnny Dioxin]

As long as I can connect up my standalone headset to my PC and get good performance wired or wirelessly, I don't really care if it was made for PCVR or not. I don't see the issue there. As long as the performance is good enough - like I currently get with Pico 4 and Virtual Desktop, the rest doesn't matter.

I won't buy Meta any more because I don't like their policies. They want to force us to do the things they want, either by giving us no other option or by constantly shoving it in our faces every time we put on their headsets. It's not about Zuckerberg or the actual hardware.

Personally, I'm really hoping Valve will come up with something in the next couple of years. Even if it's expensive (to a point) I'd be happy to consider it. At least I know what I get from Steam - and for me their customer service for my Index has been excellent.