Meta announced today something that we haven’t previously seen happen in the middle of a VR headset’s lifecycle—a price increase for Quest 2. To soften the blow, the company says it will include a free copy of the headset’s most popular game.

When Quest 2 launched back in late 2020, it did so at $300; a price point $100 less than its predecessor, and significantly less than most major headsets on the market. That’s thanks to Meta heavily subsidizing the headset in an effort to spread VR to the masses.

Well, that strategy has worked, and maybe a bit too well. Meta is believed to have been selling Quest 2 at a price significantly less than it actually costs to make and ship to customers—meaning that as the company sells more headsets it losses more money. The hope is that this loss will be recouped through the 30% fee charged to developers.

Image courtesy Meta

But now Meta says it has become more expensive to build and sell Quest 2, which has only increased the losses the company is incurring as it sells headsets.

In an apparent effort to make things more sustainable, Meta today announced it is increasing the price of Quest 2 by $100—that’s $400 for the 128GB model and $500 for the 256GB model—the same price as the original Quest headset.

“By adjusting the price of Quest 2, we can continue to grow our investment in groundbreaking research and new product development that pushes the VR industry to new heights,” the company said.

The price increase doesn’t take effect until August, so if you were planning to buy a Quest 2 in the near future this is your last chance to pick one up at the current price point.

To soften the blow a bit, for the first time ever Meta is bundling the headset with its most popular game, Beat Saber, for new Quest 2 purchases through the end of 2022. That’s a $30 value, and somewhat interesting because Beat Saber has never gone on sale or been bundled with the headset.

SEE ALSO
Here's a Breakdown of the Newly Increased Prices of Quest 2 & Official Accessories

It’s odd to see the price of a product increase in the middle of its lifecycle, but global inflation certainly doesn’t bode well for subsidized products. To be fair, Quest 2 has been improved in manifold ways since launch, and the company even doubled the storage at the same price point—from 64GB to 128GB for the base model, and from 128GB to 256GB for the top model—for which companies usually charge a $100 premium anyway. Regardless of the price hike, Quest 2 continues to be one of the most affordable headsets on the market with a price that’s still tough for others to beat.

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.


  • Sean Lumly

    Yeah right. The “investment in VR” narrative is convenient and easy to believe. But they are pricing (as companies do) to maximise profit.

    • scientia

      Quest 2 is a loss leader… nothing with profit.

      • Shhh! Don’t confuse the anti-Meta edgelords
        with difficult to grasp business concepts like “loss leader”!
        Just hand ‘im a Pico press release and let ‘im absorb *that*, instead …. lol

        • Cless

          Oh damn, where are those anti-Meta edgelords?! I wanna meet them!!

  • Christian Schildwaechter

    I believe that the cost of production has risen, even if we are accustomed to any type of consumer hardware becoming cheaper over time, and mobile phones based on similar technology to the Quest continuing to do so.

    I do not believe that the costs have risen by 33%, especially considering that Meta isn’t buying on the very volatile short term market, but will have long term contracts providing more price stability. Plus we have just seen prices in the PC GPU market dropping drastically due to a combination of crypto crashing and production facilities catching up, and are now hearing that Nvidia is desperately trying to get rid of TSMC production capacity they booked but will not need. So this is kind of a very strange time to increase the prices, when the worst parts of the shortage are actually over and prices starting to fall again all around.

    So this may be more of an adaption to reality, not only production price, but market perspective. Meta was willing to subsidize the Quest 2 to quickly gain a huge market share, but Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth recently justified switching away from the forced Facebook account with growth and network effect working differently/worse than what they had expected based on their social network growth. Basically VR seriously failed to meet their growth targets, most likely leading them to “re-evaluate” their strategy. We now get a Cambria/Quest Pro with a price “significantly above USD 800”, mainly focusing a completely different target group and use case. Meta probably hopes that VR conferencing will get them the exponential growth they had been counting on with VR, and with targeting business and professional use artificially keeping the cost low isn’t as essential.

    The Quest 2 price hike may be part of that re-evaluation. By late 2021 we had heard of 10mn (produced) Quest 2 and a USD 10bn year loss of FRL in 2021. So technically every Quest 2 ever sold at price/cost came with another USD 1000 recurring cost for staff and research in 2021, and Meta was willing to pay for that. It is hard to believe that adding USD 100 to the base price will significantly change their calculation, this is more of a signal of a strategy change.

    • They were always under-pricing it to gain market-share. We were all well aware of that. If anything, I was certain the release of the Quest 2 over the Quest 1 would have been a step down to cheaper, less impressive hardware in order to save cost. I was HUGELY surprised to find the Quest 2 to be such a great upgrade. It showed that Facebook was ready to double-down HARD to be the masters of VR. This though… it shows more of a desire to fold.

      Qualcomm has been trying hard to reduce the VR market to 3rd part OEM devices in order to sell more Snapdragon processors. The Pico is their latest “partnership” in their continued attempts to break into mainstream VR.

      China is currently on the ropes over Covid lockdowns and insane housing market collapses, but if Qualcomm can stay afloat and keep pushing over the next couple of years, we might finally see the massive introduction of lowcost Chinese VR headsets overrun the market.

      Worst case scenario, Facebook abandon’s consumer VR entirely, Qualcomm finds the costs too high to continue pushing their own, and consumer VR slips back into a forgotten niche amid a general global recession.

    • bluetoothbday

      I doubt it read the leaked memo vr is doing good,

    • Stuart Burns

      Some Good points Christian. Mr. Z is taking a tremendous risk with Meta’s VR stance, and I’m curious to see how how long the shareholders will be onboard with it.
      Given ad revenue is falling and Facebook usage shrinking, the next 18 months will be critical for Meta and Zuckerburg.
      I think Cambria is a mistake personally, or at least in it’s current incarnation and form factor.
      Post Covid, ppl are used to VC and virtual meetings. Will snr board members / middle mgmt be willing to sit around a confrence table wearing a headset?
      Or at home?
      I’ve never been convinced by the virtual productivity showcases, and I think with it’s intended use case and business market audience it’ll flop.

      Meta are having to spend billions setting what they percieve to be the VR foundations and fundementals. Look at the Neo headset, a blatant Chinese clone with added DP port. Neo haven’t spend billions on research have they, they’ve reversed engineered (as the Chinese usually do)

      Increasing costs? – I can buy it to a degree, at least with rising freight and general transportation costs, but I think it’s more a case of ensuring there isn’t too big of a leap price wise between the Q2 (128gb for example) and Cambria.

      Averge consumer? – $300 or $800-900. That 500-600 differnce is huge.
      Maybe the extra $100 will make ppl think it’s worth going to the Cambria headset?

      As for existing Q2 users (gamers) how many will upgrade to this $800-900?
      I’d bet no more than 10%?
      Why, cos they’ve waiting for a Quest Pro / Quest 3, both at a more attractive price point and incorporating all the latest tech.
      Sadly, the benefits with the Cambria for your existing game library will be slim to non existant.
      Dev’s given a likely low uptake won’t have the incentive (unless paid my Meta) to retro fit eye tracking and other new features into their games.

      Dangerous times for VR imho.

      • sfmike

        I agree it is dangerous time as VR could go the way of 3D TV at any time if various board of directors look to increase profits, which is, of course, all they ever think about.

    • XRC

      Meta market capitalisation substantially reduced since Apple updated privacy policies with subsequent impact on data collection.

      Cannot keep burning cash at same rate, especially for subsidized products?

      Bad in short term for consumers, but longer term much healthier, removing subsidized products will enable smaller competitors to have at least an opportunity, than current situation where hardware market horribly skewed by meta

    • mappo

      The Quest 2 does not cost more to produce now than it did two years ago. All the R&D and sunk costs of production have been well amortized over the 15 million units they’ve sold. Units produced now are practically free in comparison.

      • Tommy

        If it did, it didn’t go up 25-30%. That’s ludicrous.

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        You cannot amortize any costs unless you actually earn money from a product. You can either sell hardware with profit from launch and then use the earnings to pay back the costs you accumulated during development (the usual way), or initially sell the hardware without profit but reduce production cost over time, so future profits will contribute to paying back for development (the last two console generations), or accept the losses as a part of business and make back the development costs solely by selling another connected product like content (console generations up to the PS3).

        Meta said they always sold all their headsets at loss or at cost, so no profit there. The production costs for a lot of electronics have actually risen in the last two years, which also would have crushed any plan of making money later by reducing manufacturing costs. Their app store generated USB 1bn in revenue, about 40%+ of which would have gone to Meta, making them USD 400mn from 10mn Quest 2 that cost around USD 3bn to produce and were sold for around USD 3bn. Actually less, because the Quest 1 isn’t even accounted in this.

        So not only didn’t they recoup any money, if they never sell with profit, every single Quest 2 they sell still increases the total loss, as neither Quest 2 software development or research has stopped, nor did other costs like support, advertisement, game development deals and all the salaries connected to these. Their only chance to ever amortize the money they have already sunk into XR is their metaverse plans actually working out and hundreds of millions of users starting to pay transaction fees to them on a regular basis. And we are decades away from that, if ever.

        • namekuseijin

          but old popular games keep selling crazily at no aditional costs… BS, Super Hot, Onward etc

          software sales has forever been subsidizing console sales… and Quest hit the jackpot here, much to the chagrin of device collectors who just want new crappy hardware every year…

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            Yes, the sole reason to sell cheap consoles is to make a lot of money by selling software and/or the platform provider taking a cut. But no, Quest didn’t hit a jackpot here. We always lack hard numbers, but in February Meta announced that the app store had generated USD 1bn, USD 850mn of that after the launch of Quest 2. Assuming an average app price of USD 15 and the 10mn Quest we had as a number back then, this boils down to about 57mn apps sold, with every Quest 2 owner buying on average just shy of six. Less if the average app price is higher, more if lower.

            Compare that to the PS4, which has much higher average prices due to lots of AAA titles, where Sony sold 1.6bn games to 115mn PS4/Pro owners, averaging about 14 games per console. Assuming the average price was USD 25, software revenue generated per device is USD 350 for a console that was introduced at USD 399, was never sold at loss and got cheaper over time, compared to USD 85 per Quest 2 for a device that was introduced at USD 299, was always sold at loss with a just announced 33% price increase.

            The PS4 of course had much more time to sell all these games, but I think it is highly doubtful that the life/usage span of the Quest 2 will come anywhere close to the seven years it took to replace the PS4 with PS5, which didn’t even end the still ongoing PS4 production. The numbers can of course only be approximations, as neither company provides details. Also Sony makes a lot of money on micro transactions, while a significant portion of Quest store revenue seems to be Beat Saber DLC and Supernatural subscriptions, making them even more difficult to compare.

  • Andrew Jakobs

    Good news for Pico with its Pico Neo3 Link and soon their new headsets.

    • OMG, yah! I mean, it’s still under-featured, second rate junk, but at least it’s in the same price range.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        Oh please, for PCVR it’s way better then the Quest 2, and the other features are also growing.

        • ViRGiN

          just because it has a “DP” connection, does not make it actually, and factually better at all lol

          Clearly you never owned one and just bought into marketing.
          It’s not even a native PCVR headset. It’s still running in standalone, converting data in real time from PC.

          • Cless

            Uhh… You are aware DP from the pico neo runs at 26Gbps, while the USB C from the Quest 2 runs at 5Gbps… right?

          • Carnel

            of course he wouldn’t know about how much better DP is than USB-C, all he has is a Quest 2 lmao

          • ViRGiN

            uhh.. you are aware what it takes to get started with steamvr connection?
            you are aware that you are still limited by battery, no matter the cable you use?
            you are aware that the connection is still absolutetly unstable?
            you are aware that if you take off the second for half a minute, chances are steamvr will loose connection and will struggle to retrieve the session forcing you to restart everything?
            you are aware that numbers are not everything? you are aware that you never measured this yourself and just quoting some pico official right now?
            you are aware that native pcvr headsets like rift s can be plugged into a computer ready to go at any second for months on end without a single restart?

            once again, you’ve bought into marketing. people wanted dp connection, they have it. who cares about any technicalities? maybe tell me more about it’s wireless functionality? why is it still subpar to airlink/virtual desktop?

          • Cless

            I haven’t bought into marketing, since I’ve literally never seen any from it, I’m reading specs and reviews from it and comparing it with my experience with the Quest 2, that’s it lol

            Some people will be interested in having that tradeoff, its just not for you or me. You get uncompressed video in exchange of having a literal countdown over your head because of the battery. Not that its going to make much of a difference with how painfully mediocre both of their LCD displays are though :/

            Like I said, getting an actual good PCVR headset is the better
            solution to having portable VR headsets like the Pico Neo or a Quest 2, so… that should be the solution right there.

          • Andrew Jakobs

            But what headset is a good PCVR headset? The Pico Neo3 Link’s visuals are almost at par (through DP) with the HP Reverb G2 which is considered one of the best PCVR headsets in regard to visuals, but not in regard to controllers/tracking. The Index certainly isn’t the best, nor are the Vive Pro’s or Cosmos and Pimax is also not that great, they all have their Pro’s and Cons. (I own the original Vive Pro).

          • Cless

            I mean, the G2 is already almost 2 year old hardware, and the pico neo is made with older hardware too, like the XR2.
            My main headset nowadays is the original vive pro too, since there isn’t any significant upgrade at the time I’m interested in.

            We should get a nice upgrade with this next wave of VR headsets by the end of this year and next summer. Screens and lenses seem to be getting a nice upgrade overall, and it seems like LCDs will start being dropped (thank god).

            Right now there isn’t anything I would consider really good AND new on the market in the under $1200 range. Like you said, each has its fair share of pros and cons.

          • Andrew Jakobs

            haha, yeah for me the same, especially in regard to LCD. But with the new coming headsets also means I have to upgrade my GPU (still a RTX2060super) otherwise I won’t be able to fully enjoy they new headset, which already would be a problem with current headsets with higher resolution screens as our Pro’s.

          • Cless

            Definitely, I’m going to start building a beefy computer as soon as the 4090 comes out later this year. I’m done with my mxm 1070, it served me right though lol
            As soon as a nice OLED headset with more than 2K per eye comes out, and specially if it has HDR, I’ll be getting that as well!
            The 2060Super can do really well, specially since it can use DLSS

          • Andrew Jakobs

            Yeah, but on my HTC Vive Pro I can see that the 2060Super is having problems driving the headset, so having even much hiigher resolution display AND a higher framerate it will just crash, haha.. But a 4090 (if it’s priced around the same as the current 3090) is way WAAAAAAY to expensive for my taste.

          • Andrew Jakobs

            Well going from the reviews from MRTV all the problems you mention aren’t there with the Pico Neo3 Link, Maybe you are basing your comment on the older Pico Neo3 Pro. And I have more confidence in MRTV’s review/opinion as in yours.

            And it can charge the headset through the cable, yeah you need to plug in the extra powersupply into the cable, but guess what, that’s exactly the same as with almoste all other cabled PCVR headsets, they ALL need an external powersupply connected to the cable.
            And it also took Meta a very long time before they had wireless streaming and also the first couple of months they wireless mode wasn’t as good as it is now.

          • FrankB

            “ rift s can be plugged into a computer ready to go at any second for months on end without a single restart?” not my experience with the Rift S, the Rift S handshake is famously unstable often requiring you to unplug and USB and DP cables. Still prefer to use the Rift S on PC than a Quest though.

          • ViRGiN

            while Rift S seemingly took a deep down after some firmware upgrades, i can’t say i experienced any of it. as you noticed, it’s still superior in many basic ways of how native pcvr headset work, instead of ‘native’ connection which has nothing to do with native and rather just rides off the hype of ‘uncompressed’ signal, that i don’t think is even correct, as if im not mistaken, its still uses propetiary cable that do compress signal but supposedly without quality loss.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            DP over USB-C doesn’t need a special cable, it takes the four bidirectional superspeed wire pairs in USB-C and uses them as unidirectional DP lines. Pico does the same, they only start with a DP connector and then convert it to USB-C, with a separate USB-2 connection needed, as the USB-C connector always includes two extra pairs at USB 2 speed, only one of which is used in the current specification. With all the superspeed lanes taken over by DP, this USB 2 connection is used as the data port.

            DP 1.4 as used in the Pico can carry a 4K signal at 120Hz, which is higher than the resolution of Quest 2/Pico 3. Using DP display stream compression will be necessary with Cambria @120Hz, as it has a 12.5% higher resolution than 4K, but this should be barely noticeable, as DSC only adds some light compression and all of it in stream, meaning no added latency.

          • ViRGiN

            on top of that, there is nothing in the pico neo 3 link box to even keep it charging in pcvr mode. you have to buy separate adapter!

          • Cless

            Yeah, it’s not the best, better to buy straight a good PCVR headset

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            That isn’t really Pico’s fault, this is simply a consequence of regular USB not delivering enough power, a problem that other manufacturers also faced. Which is why Nvidia, AMD, HTC, Oculus, Vive and Microsoft came up with VirtualLink, an additional USB-C alternate mode, just like the DP over USB-C alternate mode that Pico, HTC and Sony now use, but VirtualLink additionally required the connection to provide 15 to 27 watts of power, enough for a HMD.

            Unfortunately VirtualLink never went anywhere, with the only cards ever providing the port being the Nvidia RTX 20×0 Founders Edition plus some AMD Radeon RX 6000, and was abandoned in late 2020. It should now be solvable with USB-PD, which allows to negotiate higher power ratings. USB-C hubs connected to laptops allow both carrying data and fast charging, so a single USB-C data/display connection carrying enough power for a HMD should be possible. Unfortunately almost no desktop GPUs already feature a matching USB-C port supporting DP alternate mode.

            Which is why we now see crude hacks like the Pico Neo 3 Link connection cable that somehow merges a DisplayPort signal with USB 2.0, requiring an additional power supply like any USB hub. The PS5 seemingly does have a sufficiently capable USB port, which would allow the PSVR2 to be driven and powered by a single USB-C cable.

          • XRC

            Virtualink was found on good number of AIB cards from third parties. I had a MSI Duke 2080Ti and pre-order the virtualink adapter for index before valve cancelled and refunded

          • Andrew Jakobs

            It’s as Native a PCVR headset as the HTC Vive, Vive Pro, Vive Pro 2, Vive Cosmos, Oculus Rift, Oculus Rift S, HP Reverb series, Pimax series. So if you don’t consider the Pico Neo3 Link with the DP cable attached not PCVR then there is no PCVR headset as all headsets are ‘converting data in real time from PC’.
            Yes it can run standalone and use wireless streaming from PC, but so can the Rifts and Vive’s with it’s wireless modules.

          • ViRGiN

            the pico os is running at all times. xr2 inside keeps working at all times. it requires charged battery. pcvr headsets are nothing more generally speaking than display+lenses+gyroscope. everything else is done on pc side. you know the difference. it’s not like some laptops that can take true hdmi/dp input, and use built-in screen as external monitor, ie you can plug xbox console to a laptop, and only power up the needed stuff to use as a monitor. you should already know by now how hot standalone devices can get. i think you forgot the comfort of original rift..

        • bluetoothbday

          Nope

    • bluetoothbday

      The pick neo 3 link = 0.5% of steamvr after 6 months, the reviews are atrocious 3/5 on Amazon.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        Uhm, the Pico Neo3 LINK (for consumers) isn’t even out for 2 months, the Pico Neo3 Pro (which the Pico Neo3 Links is merely a rebranding of) was never officially sold outside China except for some grey import AND it wasn’t targeted for SteamVR, so the reviews on amazon are probably based on the Pro which had some problems with SteamVR which are all fixed when the Pico Neo3 Link was released which WAS targeted for SteamVR.
        If you’ve seen reviews by people who actually know VR they all say the Pico Neo3 Link is excellent and only getting better with each new update.

        • ViRGiN

          dude, you are watching mrtv. the guy who started as Google Daydream propagandist; the guy who continous to make VR videos to this day, while constantly falling down on patreon. the kind of guy who takes 10 seconds to land a sniper shot at stationary target at practice range, telling you about how awesome something is for gaming, while unable to play a single game not like a complete wanker for years.
          MRTV tries to benefit of VR hype, but he is in no way VR enthusiast or anything along these lines.

          • Andrew Jakobs

            Well, what have you done for the VR community except always bitch and moan about everything VR related. Because someone isn’t a brilliant gamer doesn’t mean he/she can’t have a good opinion on the hardware itself. And because someone sucks at playing shooting games doesn’t mean they aren’t good at other type of games. What do you mean ‘constantly falling down on patreon’? If it means promote a donation through patreon then you hate most reviewers as a lot of youtube ‘creators’ promote some sort of way to earn themselves money.
            There are more VR reviewers out there that praise the Pico Neo3 Link (mind you I said the Link version, not the older Pro when Pico wasn’t putting effort into getting it better for SteamVR or gaming).

    • Y’know how many Pico will sell …?
      Three.
      All by you.

    • dk

      the new pico headset will be basically cambria it will be interesting to see at what price

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      Possibly, but we will have to see how they adapt their pricing with the Pico 4. Their price target for the Pico Neo 3 Pro was USD 699 plus the costs for the link cable, so the Pico Neo 3 Link is very likely heavily subsidized with TikTok money to compete with the Quest 2. One of the main reasons to rush out a Pico 4 shortly after introducing the Pico Neo 3 Link and even offering upgrade pricing may have been to either introduce a model that can be produced cheaper or is sufficiently different to Quest 2 to justify a higher price, both reducing any loss.

      They never even tried to compete with the Quest 2 base model and now would have a much better chance with the Link, which will benefit customers in the long run. But they may also take this as an indicator that the whole VR industry is now moving towards more professional use and prices, something that HTC was forced to do just to stay alive, Apple seems to target for their first HMDs, Pico originally intended and Meta now also does with an at least partial strategy shift.

      With Pico mostly relying on Quest developers for their software and also driving VR hype, any Meta move away from consumer VR would impact their own plans as well, possibly forcing them to retarget towards professional use with much smaller unit numbers. So a Pico 4 could end up significantly more expensive than the Pico Neo 3 Link.

    • Pablo C

      Since I got the HP RG2, I understood that making VR devices is not easy. I mean, HP couldn´t do it properly. Much less I expect from an unknown brand.

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        Pico is no unknown brand. They have been selling multiple different VR HMDs for years, starting with 3DoF models similar to the Oculus Go. Western users are just unfamiliar with them because they pretty much stuck to the Chinese market, at least partly because they didn’t have to compete with subsidized Meta headsets there. So they aren’t new, they only just started taking on the rest of the world thanks to getting access to a sufficiently large war chest after being bought by ByteDance/TikTok.

        And they aren’t newbies in XR research either. Pico was actually founded out of Goertek, the Chinese XR OEM manufacturer that produced every single Oculus HMD besides the Lenovo based Rift S, and also produces the Index, HTC Focus, Pico, all Qualcomm reference HMDs and pretty much everything else. They also have a very significant research facility, and it isn’t easy to determine which Quest features were actually developed by Meta and which by Goertek

        • Pablo C

          My point is: they are less experienced and have less resources than HP.

  • Wow… that’s not a small amount. And to include that crap-fest lame-game. Man, double insult. They used to include Vader! I guess you still get the light-saber, only now they throw cubes at you instead of droids.

    • Tommy

      Lol

  • GunnyNinja

    Most of the people who would buy one already have. The only people this will affect are those who have been told have cheap they are to get into VR, just to find out they have been lied to. Too bad I wasn’t on the fence.

  • Tommy

    So what I see is that the Quest 2 is the same price but the free Beat Saber game now costs $100 and you have to buy it ;)

  • ViRGiN

    Meta is morally and financially bankrupt, ONLY VALVE is capable of saving VR
    Lord Gaben <3

    • Cless

      WHO ARE YOU!? LMAO

      • ViRGiN

        ufff, i forgot to switch my account to one of my pro-pcvr alter egos

        • Cless

          Damn, they weren’t kidding when they say you are your worst enemy :P

  • Till Eulenspiegel

    No more Facebook login in August, so Quest 2 needs to pay tax for tracking and spying exemptions.

    • Lemmee guess …. lol You’re not one of those überparanoid nutzoids
      who really think that Q2’s cameras are being used to spy on you, are you …?
      #CuckooForCocoPuffs

  • Cless

    … If you consider buying outdated old hardware that is. And that goes for 90% of the current headsets out there atm.

    • ender707

      It’s not really outdated until something better comes out. A lot of the best looking/performing games for consoles come out towards the end of their life.

      • Cless

        You are technically correct, yet paying full price today for an rtx3090 is a very dumb thing to do, since the rtx4090 is going to most likely retail for the same MSRP in just a few months.
        I’m pretty sure we are getting better hardware pretty soon too, not necesarily from Facebook, mind you.

        • namekuseijin

          pc master racer spending a kidney on the bleeding edge to play Team Fortress PS2 graphics with their faster racer laptop friends yay

          • Cless

            Some of us need it to do work, so its not really expensive at all when you are thinking at a company level ;)

  • ShaneMcGrath

    Way too much, I was about to get one with them removing Facebook login but I won’t bother and hold off until next gen.
    $20-30 more ok I grit my teeth but $100? I take it that’s US dollars so more like AU$140 for me, That is a huge increase.

    • Andrew Jakobs

      If you were about the get one, then why not get one before august?

      • ShaneMcGrath

        I need more time than just a few days, Money doesn’t grow on trees for everyone.

  • Paul Schuyler

    The evolution of all new technology such as VR depends upon a thriving, complex energy-based economy. As we intentionally suppress the primary energy upon which our advanced civilization depends, for purely idealistic reasons, we can expect a de-evolution of everything. Costs have risen, which will reduce demand, which will reduce innovation. There are so many ignorant idealists in the world of tech and Facebook is the embodiment of this dichotomy. It should be no surprise, this is just the beginning.

  • namekuseijin

    hey, isn’t that what you all wanted? no facebook, no data tracking, no ads… so, just like apple, pay with your wallet!