Meta is reportedly teaming up with South Korean tech giant LG Electronics to offer up competition to the Apple’s forthcoming Vision Pro mixed reality headset, which is slated to arrive sometime in 2024.

South Korea’s Maekyung (Korean) is reporting on two new Meta headsets: a low-cost Quest model that will be priced at “less than $200” coming in 2024, and a high-priced model in a joint venture with LG in 2025, which is supposedly set to take on Apple Vision Pro.

The report maintains the name of the Meta/LG headset will be ‘Meta Quest 4 Pro’.

SEE ALSO
Vision Pro Supports AirPlay So Spectators Can See What's Happening

Mass production of the so-called Quest 4 Pro is allegedly being handled by LG Electronics, and LG Display, with LG Innotek and LG Energy Solution supplying parts.

Provided the report is true, it seems some very distinct battle lines are being drawn. Samsung announced earlier this year that it was working with Qualcomm and Google to develop an Android-powered XR device, which may also be positioned to compete against Apple and Meta.

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. See here for more information.


Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 3,500 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • ViRGiN

    Can you guess which company isn’t doing anything VR related anymore?

    • Arno van Wingerde

      Eh… MS?

    • kakek

      Are you a disgruntled Valve ex-employee ?
      Did Gaben molest your family pet ?

      • ViRGiN

        Are you? You certainly sound like you could fit in that corporation.

        • Knock it off both of you. We’re trying to have a mature discussion.

          Sheesh. Internets …

    • xyzs

      Google

    • CrusaderCaracal

      Did they make Portal?

  • ApocalypseShadow

    Wouldn’t doubt it. Next couple of years will be of them copying Apple while trying to offer a lower price. By either losing more billions or firing more employees.

    Same thing will happen on the Samsung/Google front. Much copying.

    • Andrew Jakobs

      It’s not like Apple copied of others. Don’t act like Apple invented every feature people are excited about, most we’ve already seen in previous demos of Meta lab hardware or independant developers.

      • CrusaderCaracal

        Is that you in your pfp

      • ViRGiN

        Crazy old guy alert!!

      • CrusaderCaracal

        Answer my question mate you look about 60. Is this VR headset gonna come out of your retirement funds?

        • Andrew Jakobs

          WTF are you talking about?

          • ViRGiN

            Ignorant old man alert!!

          • CrusaderCaracal

            You heard me

          • CrusaderCaracal

            Geezer

        • Atlas

          You’re an idiot.

  • Andrey

    Instead of doing the right thing and releasing Quest 3 Plus alongside Quest 3 Lite in 2024 while delivering missing features like eye-tracking (literally ALL the competitors have it)/better screen(s)/self-tracked controllers and so on for enthusiasts who need it, ask for it and can afford it, they decided to go the Quest Pro-road once again, but now just in a slightly different direction (instead of “working in VR” they want people to just… “consume content in VR”?). And that’s after they said that they finally “focused on gaming” again and rumors that there won’t be Quest Pro 2. Like, for example, knowing Meta, in 2025 this “Quest 4 Pro” most probably will have this “new” XR2 Gen.2 chip and at that time it won’t be that fancy anymore. And a year after a real Quest 4 will arrive with better hardware. Also, based on other rumors, it will cost around 2000$, so even those few people how bought/thought of buying Quest Pro will think even harder in “Quest 4 Pro”‘s case.
    I only started to hope for some changes for the better in Meta’s actions regarding VR, but now I am not so sure anymore. Connect literally ~20 days away and I still want to believe that they will show a lot of cool things (both new games and MR experiences) that will change my mind again though. If not, Q3 can be DOA as much as PSVR2 is.

    • ViRGiN

      First of all, Meta has no competitors. None. Zero.

      Second – you just sound butthurt about missing obsolete “features” like eye tracking. What are you, a vrchat weeb? A “simmer” who requires 7 fps extra for his PCVR msoft flight simulator? If literally ALL the competitiors have it – why not go their route? Maybe because… they have nothing to offer, and you’re left with playing half life alyx for the 20th time?

      • Andrey

        FRIENDLY FIRE, FRIENDLY FIRE! I am literally one (if not the one) of the people out here who, at least partially, agree with some of your very unpopular opinions (like that Valve literally abandoned VR or that VRChat is a *&^%$! application) and never blocked you, but now you accuse me in all this bullcrap too? After all these years?! I am honestly offended!
        Even if we will forget about potential perfomance gains that can be critical for the standalone headsets (yeah-yeah, because standalone’s chip will need to process information from two additional cameras and make additional calculations for foverated rendering, performance gains are getting closer to zero, but I still believe that Meta’s engineers can make wonders with this in a year or so like they did with hand tracking for example and still make it up to 20-30%), from the game/UI-design perspective it also can make a lot of difference.
        I just replayed a pretty old Call of Huarez Gunslinger game and every second of playing it I thought that it will work great in VR if done properly. One of the things that would be cool are all those “Mexican standoff”-events – and eyetracking could work exaptionally great here (in the original game you need to point cursor on the enemy to gain concentration and shoot faster, so in VR it can be changed to tracking if player is looking closely at the enemy (either it’s hand near the gun or face/eyes) to make the delay of enemy’s movements bigger/enemy can take out the gun if you close your eyes for long enough or avert it away and so on. So yeah, I FOR YEARS wait and ask for an Oculus (oops, sorry – Meta) headset with eye-tracking – and I am talking about mainstream headset like Quest 1/2/3, not Pro – because if it will be there, all developers will be literally forced to use it one way or another and, potentially, it can give us a lot of unforgivable experiences.

        • ViRGiN

          Fair enough, but right now eye tracking doesn’t have real use case. Devs had access to qpro for about a year now, and next to nothing was actually done, and it seems like a glorified pcvr headset.

          Meta completly dropped the ball on pro software. We are not in the era to go beyond old-school vr headset with 6dof tracking just yet.

          Even if you look at psvr2, this feature seems completly unused other than some gimmicks to dumb down the gameplay.

          As for gaming orientation.. we have Xmas soon. If they don’t turn things around buy then – maybe with gta – then we can start to get worried about commitment.

          • Andrey

            Developers don’t use Quest Pro’s eye tracking exactly because it is Quest Pro – a 1500$ (then 999$) headset with an old XR2 chip, moderately better (but not even close to MicroOLED) screens, pancake-lenses, self-tracked controllers and so on – for me (and I believe for many other users) it was never appealing as a potential “upgrade” option over Quest 2. I am not sure how many Pro headsets were sold, but I bet my money that it wasn’t even slightly close to Q2 sales for developers to even start caring.
            On the other hand, let’s imagine that Quest 2 with ~20 millions of headsets sold had eye-tracking or Quest 3 will have it – developers won’t be able to ignore it anymore, because literally almost half of all VR users will have it. It’s a big deal and, imho, a very big miss of Meta. I potentially like the idea of mixed reality, but I would gladly trade it for eye-tracking without thinking even for a second. Because, just as you said, until developers will start using it actively (and not in the “gimmick”-ish way) even something promising as mixed reality can be easily adandoned and forgotten real fast if people just won’t know what to do with it.
            About PSVR2 – well, I mean there are almost no games from Sony’s studios, right? Only ports from Quest with rare occasional VR-ports of flat games (f.e. RE4/8). So I can understand why most of the developers won’t bother adding some eye-tracking features toPSVR2-versions of their games – they are usually too small and can’t spent resources and time on something like that.
            About games – I have very big hopes for Connect. Their Meta Quest Gaming Showcase was rather dissapointing and I want to believe that all juicy announces were put on hold for this very moment. They have a new system and they need to sell it, so system sellers is a total must. Another RE port (or some other good old games) for VR would be great. Maybe Moss Book 3 (though developers worked/work on Glassbreakers so I don’t have high hopes for it)? Assassins Creed Nexus real gameplay and, finally, king of the kings – GTA SA VR… For me, if GTA will be released on the same day as Q3 will, even just that will make all the waiting worth it.
            What about you? Are there some releases/announcements you are waiting for/expecting to happen?

          • ViRGiN

            But Quest Pro was never planned to get anywhere close to Quest 2. It was essentially a devkit to build future experiences. But Meta dropped the ball by not delivering anything with it – you couldn’t even test eye tracking outside Horizon Workspaces, and the ‘cool’ demo where you are some sort of sunflower girl – you had to sideload it, compiled by someone on the internet.
            Adding eye tracking adds real cost and costs battery life – Quest Pro lasts about an hour with all its fancy features on – it would be laughed at as consumer product.

            Mixed Reality costs very little in comparison – and since passthrough is a thing since Quest 1 – it could be used as a low quality devkit to build XR experiences. And there were some. Not many, but even if we ignore XR – it’s a natural improvment that would come anyway and will have real influence. It’s impossible to expect developers to go back to their long-finished project and adds some moving eyes that really doesn’t change the experience all that much. Even on Quest Pro, you had to position the headset nearly perfectly for it to work somewhat properly and not look like you’re half baked.

            At this point in time – my expectations are low. What I want is more powerful standalone headset with pancake lenses – and Quest 3 will deliver on these features. I’ve bought Pro on release, but lack of any software support, uncomfortable headstrap and high price did not make it feasiable to keep it, so I returned it. If Pro launched at $999 – I could deal with it as a beefier Quest 2. But it was too expensive at launuch. Bozworth spoke about “games” coming, but it all takes time. Quest 3 with “double” the performance might make these games more of a reality without trading too much. I think what VR needs is single titles (not single player) that you can pour hundreds of hours into – and by that I mean real games, not beat saber type rhytm games.

            Personally I was always the gamer to sunk tons of hours into handful of titles, instead of playing a little bit of this, little bit of that.

            Contractors proved the multiplayer formula works. As we are approaching 20th anniversary of COD – maybe they will reboot the series with VR port?

          • Andrey

            “I think what VR needs is single titles (not single player) that you can pour hundreds of hours into – and by that I mean real games, not beat saber type rhytm games.” – that’s exactly what I think. People can say what they want (about it’s popularity and how much those titles earned), but I have no much respect for it and it’s developers. Yes, the concept was fun… back when there were no alternatives and it was somewhat “fresh”. But nowadays all those “VR hits” (Beat Saber, Blade and Sorcery, Pavlov and so on) literally exist only because of the fanbase and their mods. I always wonder how many people would play Beat Saber if there were only original songs + DLC song packs? How many poor souls would play Blade and Sorcery every day if there wasn’t their favourite sword in the game to wield it? And if with Beat Saber repeatativity somewhat leveled out by the fact that it is a rythm game (and that you can physically work out too), then in projects like B&S I loose interest very fast. Where am I? Who am I? Where should I go and what should I do? Even something like Battle Talent with a very simple story is much more motivating to play really. Though maybe they finally add some kind of story mode after all this time, but I don’t really care anymore really.
            In my opinion “real” games should have at least some kind of story, setting, lore – and interesting gameplay of course (and one part of being interesting is not being based on one particular gameplay mechanics). It can be rather unpopular, but I actually like “open world” games, mostly the ability to do anything the way I want (through stealth, rushing or even by talking). And if in such story-based game will be an optional COOP… I would gladly pay for it a hundred bucks and play something like that for hundreds of hours. That’s why I wait for Assassins Creed Nexus – even if it won’t be an open world game like it’s “big brothers”, even big levels with working features from the original (like social stealth and parkour) will be pretty dope and innovative if done right.
            About CoD in VR – damn, I would give a lot for the whole MW trilogy in VR! Or even something like WaW/first BO. Though I don’t think it is possible when Activision is [almost] under the Microsoft – and they, as we know, don’t care about VR at all. Maybe Mark will have a sweet little talk with Phil Spencer… But I doubt it. But still hope for it, yeah.

          • ViRGiN

            > I always wonder how many people would play Beat Saber if there were only original songs + DLC song packs?
            For what it’s worth – Beat Saber was (still is?) at the very top of sales for PSVR1, where no modding scene exist.

            So apparently quite a lot would play.. but is it really about playing? If people play it for 5 hours instead of 5000 hours with mods, it’s still just one copy sold. I do not have data on DLC popularity, but even as a non-player I found the DLC songs to be nothing but cash grab.

            I always found its popularity extremely cringe. “Everyone” was waiting for VR for ages at that point, people fantasized about being able to do “anything” in VR, fly, shoot, teleport to ancient rome, escape from police, whatever, you name it – and then everyone forgot about their actual dreams and just accepted perfect Xbox Kinect type of game as the best way to spend time in VR. I highly suspect at least 75% of that is just from overweight people who used it as a “fun VR gym”, believing in the 9000 calories burned on sexpert++ during 10 minutes. Lol the amount of hate I received for even pointing the above years ago was unreal. I was clearly “in bad shape” to play Beat Saber, and if I wasn’t, I would start my own Beat Church.

            I would say the release of Beat Saber was a very bad thing for VR, because it switched from being for the “real” “enthusiasts”, to people who have completly different goals, zero knowledge but will gangbang publicly on those who dare to even question it. I think you yourself observed how toxic positive internet VR space has become.

            Same stuff with VR Chat – these users act like they are making meaningful connections in high-end metaverse (using PCVR as an example of superior platform because quest versions of the “same” worlds is way way lower, despite PCVR quality being something of a blend of N64 and Wii graphics), when in reality all they ever do is cosplaying cool humans wearing furry/egirl avatars. Take those avatars away, and you kill the whole platform. There is a reason why VR Chat is basically a meme and refugee for all sorts of acronyms like FBT, LGBTQ and so on.

          • shadow9d9

            Most devs don’t use the eye tracking on the psvr 2 either…

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            There are no official numbers, but someone did the math based on Meta’s financial reports for Q4 2022 and came to ~25K Quest Pro and ~1.1mn Quest 2. That ratio of 1:44 would be enough reason for most developers to simply ignore any Pro exclusive feature. In addition the eye tracking is so compute intense on the Pro that it cannot be used while the app is running at the highest CPU/GPU performance levels, meaning demanding games couldn’t even integrate it without changing the rest of the game for it first

            The ratio may have changed later in either direction, as the Quest Pro got cheaper, but it also became obvious that it more of a flop than a slam dunk. So we are most likely looking at (much) less than 100K Quest Pro sold in total.

            Eye tracking usage on PSVR 2 may turn out very different. It is indeed unlikely that cross-platform VR games will make it an important part of the mechanics, but there is a chance that Sony sees the PSVR 2 very different from how Meta sees the Quest. For Meta the Quest is a platform, while Sony possibly treats the PSVR 2 as a accessory to the PS5, meaning they also care less about VR-only games and ports from Quest and instead more about PS5 AAA games getting VR modes like RE8 and GT7.

            Many of these would be technically exclusive to the PSVR 2, as no Quest 3 or 4 would provide the required performance and even PCVR ports may be difficult if the games rely on the extra performance provided by ETFR and the insanely fast storage subsystem of the PS5. Meaning there is a reasonable chance to expect future AAA releases on the PS5 to not only support VR in general, but make use of the special features like HDR, advanced haptics and eye tracking of the PSVR 2. It’s kind of wait and see, as the decision for a hybrid design should be made early during the development, and with the PSVR 2 having released just this year and AAA usually taking years to finish, we may see “proper” hybrid games making full use of the PSVR 2 features only in 2025 or later.

          • Bob

            The PS5 Pro codenamed “Trinity” is also heavily rumored to release in Q3/Q4 2024 (leaked specifications have made the rounds with 60CUs and a much higher memory bandwidth than the existing SKU).

            This new upgraded console will greatly benefit PSVR 2 users with the additional raw processing power offered by the rumored transition to 4nm+ RDNA 3 (with RDNA 4 features backported potentially).

      • CrusaderCaracal

        Usually i disagree with you but you have your moments. Exactly, literally nobody but losers that sit infront of a virtual mirror and look at their anime avatar on VRchat use eyetracking

        • gothicvillas

          Eye tracking works pretty cool in PokerstarsVR.

          • CrusaderCaracal

            Yeah but it’s not essential and isn’t worth the tradeoff imo

          • ViRGiN

            Addicted gambler alert!!

    • MeowMix

      My guess is while the Plus was cancelled, the base Quest3 got some added premium features – like continuous IPD slider, Eye Relief button. This was done as a pivot to make the Quest3 (Stinson) the middle offering instead of the lowend offering.

      Then we get Quest3Lite next yr, and the next QuestPro the following year (my guess it’ll feature the next gen XR2Gen3 chip). Then Quest4 thereafter in 2026.

      Quest 4 Pro in 2025 (w/ XR2 Gen3)
      Quest 4 in 2026
      Quest 4 Lite in 2027

      • Andrey

        I totally agree with the lineup and reasoning, but I really don’t think that Quest 4 Pro will have a new chip if it will be released in 2025. It’s a simple math – XR2 was released with Quest 2 in 2020 and now, 3 years later, Quest 3 ships with XR2 Gen. 2 chip (plus Meta and Qualcomm have some kind of special agreement regarding it based on rumors). So if we will continue this trend, then XR2 Gen.3 (or even XR3) won’t be released until [fall of] 2026. Either the release date of alleged Quest 4 Pro in 2025 is false or Meta want to repeat the pattern with releasing it with an older chip on board like with original Quest Pro. Though, if part of their agreement was about developing and using a completely new chip in Q4 Pro in 2025, then it can be like that, though again I am not so sure if Qualcomm will want or even able to deliver a completely new chip 1 year earlier that usual. Only time will tell.

        • Blaexe

          Google “Qualcomm Orion”. It’s in development anyway. Might also be only for the Quest Pro line, not for the base Quest line.

          • Andrey

            Huh, never heard of it before, thanks for pointing out! As I read it will be showed in October, right? How much will be the difference compared to XR2 Gen.1/2, even approximately?

          • Oryon is Qualcomm’s in-development CPU cores meant to compete Apple silicon; they’ll first used next year’s Snapdragon 8cx Gen 4 SoCs meant to compete with Apple’s M2-powered MacBooks, and will be used for phones and XR devices as well further in the future (likely the earliest timeframe being late 2024 into 2025).

            Qualcomm’s phasing out ARM-made Cortex CPU cores for its own in-house Oryon cores over the coming years, giving it more control to optimize their performance better (similar to Apple). It’s not a chip/SoC in itself, but it’ll allow Qualcomm to compete with Intel, AMD and Apple in performance instead of only relying on ARM.

            Only a Snapdragon 8cx-powered XR headset can properly compete with Apple’s M2-powered Vision Pro; no XR2 SoC can since it’s a smartphone-based chip versus a laptop chip.

            I’d expect Samsung-Google’s headset to be the first Android XR headset to be powered by one of the Oryon-based Snapdragon 8cx Gen 4 chips given their close partnership.

            It’s very exciting, honestly. I can’t wait.

    • shadow9d9

      Competitors that have it, like psvr 2, have HUGE compromises..like insane screen door laden fresnel lenses with tiny sweet spots, a wire, etc.

    • CrusaderCaracal

      Eye tracking isn’t needed for a headset. only reason PSVR 2 has it is to fix all of the other issues with it.

      • Eye-tracking is available for PSVR2 specifically for ETFR; eye-tracking as a feature will be growingly needed as resolutions increase for XR headsets (for standalone devices the SoC GPU also has to increase for ETFR to be noticeably useful, for the XR2 Gen 1 ETFR isn’t too impactful for performance boosts; and likely won’t be for XR2 Gen 2, either). Apple’s M2 is the minimum viable chip tier I’d say ETFR is noticeably useful (so Qualcomm’s upcoming Snapdragon 8xc Gen 4 once they push it to XR headsets).

        PSVR2 benefits from eye-tracking due to its custom AMD APU being powerful enough to benefit from ETFR.

        The actual eye-tracking hardware isn’t too expensive, it’s the Tobii licensing I think I heard someone say (otherwise they have to handle the software-side in-house, which most can’t/won’t).

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          I’d agree that ETFR will be needed for growing resolutions, but that’s obviously not the reason for it on the PSVR 2 with its by now rather low resolution of 2000*2040 per eye.

          ETFR on PSVR 2 is needed to allow flatscreen AAA titles like RE8 or GT7 to include usable VR modes that run on the same hardware as the regular PS5 version without incurring massive extra development costs for optimizing/”porting” to VR. It is therefore essential for Sony’s “hybrid games” strategy that, instead of getting developers to create expensive VR-only titles for a limited audience, tries to get AAA games that will be developed for the PS5 anyway to offer extra modes for the PSVR 2. Due to the small number of VR users, developers will only be interested in creating hybrid games if the costs for adding VR modes can be kept low, meaning the main benefit of extra performance the PSVR 2 gets from ETFR is making VR ports cheaper and thereby more likely to happen at all.

          This benefit makes the implementation costs for ETFR on PSVR 2 a smaller issue than with other VR HMDs. But as a consequence, ETFR is also less important for other platforms. On the Quest every title is VR only by default without extra porting/optimization costs, so ETFR is not needed to balance different scenarios. And on PCVR the users are expected to buy much beefier hardware than the average gamer, which is possible due to flexible hardware configurations. The 2015 flat version of Fallout 4 asked for a GTX 555 and was released for PS4, while 2017 Fallout 4 VR for PC minimal specs listed a GTX 1070 and never saw a PS4/PS4 Pro release. And in reality FO4VR barely ran on a 1080.

          ETFR now allows Sony developers to at least partly bridge the fixed hardware performance gap and run current gen AAA games with decent graphics and frame rates in VR on the regular PS5. This will (hopefully) encourage developers to integrate VR modes into numerous AAA titles currently in development, though it will probably take a couple of years to see the results, due to long development cycles. Basically ETFR enables (unsubsidized) PS5 AAA VR hybrid development. Those running RE8 with mods on PC without ETFR will still need something significantly more powerful than the RX 5700 XT/RTX 2070 (Super) level of the PS5, but at least that’s possible.

          We don’t know exactly why the long promised benefits of ETFR haven’t panned out the way we expected. The main performance sucker seems to be motion estimation, which adds a lot of latency in the PC version of Tobii’s tracking software, making it barely usable. This is the most likely culprit for it not being included in the Quest 3, as the framerate performance benefits don’t justify the extra computational needs. The reasoning for or against ETFR on a mobile platform with limited performance and battery life is completely different from the PSVR2 with more resources, basically no power limits and a pressing reason for extra VR performance to enable hybrid game development.

          Apple’s Vision Pro has a third reason, the resolution increase you mentioned. Their whole UI is based on eye tracking, though I’d expect that to be less timing sensitive than foveated rendering and therefore require a lot less resources. But with about 4K per eye, they have to render four times the pixels compared to Quest 2/3/PSVR 2, which even their very fast GPUs couldn’t handle without ETFR. Similar to the PS5, they are therefore forced to add the required processing power to the headset, resulting in the R1 SoC that basically seems to be a specialized M2 tuned for fast image processing. Meaning there are actually two M2 variants on the HMD, leading to a lot of design compromises like the external battery with 2h runtime and probably to the heavy weight, as the whole devices is created from a custom metal alloy that most likely serves as a giant heat sink to get rid of all the heat the two SoCs will generate.

          So PS5 and AVP absolutely NEED ETFR for different reasons and have to provide the required compute resources, while the Quest 3 doesn’t. I nonetheless think that it is a huge mistake for Meta not to include eye tracking in the Quest 3. Not because of ETFR, which would indeed be barely useful with the current SoCs and resolution, but because Apple has just shown how powerful eye tracking is for VR user interfaces, even without expensive motion estimation required for foveated rendering.

          It took people just a few days to reimplement the AVP interface on the Quest Pro. It runs just fine with USD 25 DIY eye tracking solution like EyeTrackVR, and Meta is locking themselves out of that important development for several years. Meta obviously already has eye tracking running on the Quest Pro, the extra camera hardware should be cheap, though nobody knows if/how much licenses fees have to be payed to Tobii and others for all their eye tracking patents. Which makes it hard to pin down the reason why Meta decided against eye tracking on the Quest 3.

          • CrusaderCaracal

            889 words, bro is the king of yapping

  • Andrey

    Well, all of us are not ideal. I never blocked anyone here just because we are all in the same boat and, unfortunately, there are not so many of us (VR enthusiasts I mean), so I think every opinion really matters. I agree that ViRGiN usually rude and maybe even trolling people for some part, but I want to believe that he is not doing it for fun but because he really cares about VR and where/how it is going. But at the same time if he really offended you somehow, you should be able to stop it one way or another, especially if it’s make your existance on this site better, so blocking is an option too.

    • ViRGiN

      CaryMGVR sounds like autists, and I met him several times in-game without him knowing I am who I am.
      CaryMGVR still lives off the copium that Dickard is coming soon, and that Valve is actively working on VR.

      He blocked me before, then unblocked cause reasons, and now he makes his entire personality, being proud he blocked me.
      I don’t make “friends” here, and just exchange views/call people out on their – basically – shilling. If you went back few years ago and saw the pile of crap people dumped on me for even doubting VR, maybe you would understand the approach. If I dislike something about PCVR, it’s “obviously” because I can not afford it.

      But yeah, he is pretty autistic.

      • CrusaderCaracal

        I used to dislike you but I think I’ve come to understand that you’re not looking to make mates, you just want to share your view

  • Blaexe

    Let’s be fair: The AVP doesn’t exist now. It will release some time in 2024 in limited markets in limited quantities.

    If Meta can reach a bigger scale in 2025 then it’s fine.

    • William R. Cousert

      Never buy a first generation Apple device. The second generation will probably be much better and cheaper. The first generation Vision Pro is intended for developers who need to get a head start developing AR/VR apps, and can afford to pay a premium.

      • WRONG.
        The reason AVP exists is to softly introduce
        Ma & Pa Farmerdell to the idea of non-2D/spatial computing.

        • Jistuce

          I mean, it actually exists because Apple wants a piece of this “metaverse” pie they’ve heard about and thinks they can print money.

          They might be right, but with silly ideas like “we put a screen on the outside that displays a picture of your eyes”, I doubt it.

    • I disagree.

  • shadow9d9

    The quest pro is incredible, so I expect the exact opposite of you.

    • OK.

    • Arno van Wingerde

      Let’s hope so, I believe you when you say the Quest Pro is good… but does it play anything better than the Quest2/3 as in: better game experience?

      • ViRGiN

        Pancake lenses are game changer in itself. Anything you play, will look and feel better than in other headsets.

        Like, take sniping for example. You can look to the sides outside scope and see everything clearly.

  • fcpw

    I have zero technical problem with Quest. I have massive problems with Facebook the company and Zuck as my would-be protector of privacy…

    • CrusaderCaracal

      i don’t think you’re important enough for zuck to handpick your data out of the billions of others he has access to

      • Tabp

        They have AI to automate the handpicking.

        • CrusaderCaracal

          I honestly don’t get why people are so terrified of their data in the hands of facebook

          • Tabp

            I don’t see how anyone could honestly say that about the company with numerous scandals involving data breaches, misuse of data, political abuses, turning a blind eye to child abuse, locking people out of their accounts and vr hardware, etc.

            We already switched from the “authorities would never do anything illegal” phase to the “everyone knew they were doing it, why are you surprised?” stage with Facebook quite some time ago.

            Also, in some professional contexts, especially the medical industry, it can be illegal to use the Quest for certain work.

          • Because they are very not smart.
            Because these dumb fucks don’t get
            through their fucking thick skulls that EVERYBODY DOES THIS NOW.
            Your druggist.
            Your grocer.
            Your dry cleaners.
            EVERYBODY FUCKING DOES IT.

            No: they’d much rather read some bullshit on Twitter [I refuse to call it “X”],
            and then parrot it around online because it’s cool, maaaaaan ….
            So lacking any kind of meaningful Human contact IRL,
            they really and truly believe that by bandwagon-jumping,
            this will garner them “internet friends” …. lol Astonishingly pathetic.

        • … in Reagan’s voice!

      • AMY FATWELL

        What you think doesn’t matter. You don’t KNOW.

        • Precisely.

        • CrusaderCaracal

          Hahahah amy FATWELL

      • Atlas

        Of course the issue isn’t that.
        The issue is that personal data is sold to third parties and that data can be used to gather information about just anyone.

  • Arno van Wingerde

    PSVR2 is certainly not perfect, which is why I returned it: no sound (loose earplugs), cable, small sweet spot, short battery life controllers, monitor required, – even if you happen to have one sitting on your nose.

    But… the PSVR2 also has foveated rendering + plus a strong graphics engine PLUS a very bright & beautiful screen PLUS impressive haptic feedback PLUS a few excellent games, that leave my entire Quest library in the dust. Of course, Horizon is a very linear game and like The room VR: beautiful, but after it is over you may not go back very often, although the mountain view alone is worth it!

    • You and two others think that way. lol

      • Arno van Wingerde

        Make Thatcher 2 Million and you coups be Right.

  • Andrey

    But you just read it, right…? And even commented under it! Thank you so much!!!!

  • Gato Satanista

    I really dont care. I just wanted to play games. This AR/VR spacial computing of Apple Vision Pro thing will take too long to concretize. I could have more patience if the gaming side of VR had worked. But no, its metaverse this, horizon that, apple future of work here… megalomaniacal plans everywhere and not many good AAA games being launched. Ok, quest 2 has some nice games but in the last months I returned to the old and proved tradicional desktop games from gamepass and steam.

  • Naruto Uzumaki

    Quest pro was complete shi t bad battery 1 eye tracking games bad battery on controllers bad cost performance

  • Jistuce

    And 2020, and 2019, and 2018, and…

    I miss the internet where most people actually gave a crap about privacy instead of the one where the standard is to belittle people that give the slightest poop about it.

  • Jistuce

    That’s a helluva standard you’re shooting for. Literally every product ever released has compromises.