I would buy the full facial cover also. Let me know what you think. As I'm really curious. Some are saying that the full face cover doesn't touch your face and still allows light in.
Both Oculus and Amazon are offering full 30 day returns in the UK so there is no risk to buy it and try it to make your own mind up. If you have an Index and prefer the Quest 2 that's pretty telling that you like the Oculus headsets, despite their supposed limitations, no display port, lower refresh rates and smaller FOV etc. I have a Reverb G2 and the Quest 2. I also bought and returned a Vive Pro 2. The only true PCVR upgrade available right now is the Varjo Aero, at £2000. This has absolutely the best in class visuals, and eye tracking, but no standalone mixed reality features or facial tracking. I didn't buy as I don't the have the base stations and Index controllers any more so thats another almost £700 on top for the full headset, and I'd still need a Quest 2 or Pico to upgrade my standalone experience, but you having the base stations and controllers already have a cheaper road to getting it. The only confirmed headset coming out any time soon is the Pimax Crystal, which is supposed to be out by the end of the year, but they have notoriously over promised and under delivered. Personally, I'm at that stage where I only trust Meta and Valve to make full complete headsets, and Valve haven't even announced anything yet so we have no idea when the Deckard will drop. My advice to you would be try the Quest Pro before you sell your Index, as if you don't like it you may want to hang on to the Index in case the base stations and controllers might be needed for a future Steam based headset. Just send the Quest Pro back if it doesn't meet your expectations.
They have always been excellent with returns. Just yesterday, I contacted them about a pair of Sony WF1000 ear buds that had died on me, they were out of guarantee. Yet, they still offered to replace them.
So first things first. In regard to the light blockers, I challenge you to demo the pro and see what it's like (in full vr) even without the blockers. I know it sounds counterintuitive but it's actually almost better without the blockers. There's something comforting about being able to see below. It really doesn't take away from the vr experience at all. Also the material on the quest pro is incredible it's not a plastic it's a much more sturdy material. I'm not big into the AR/MR uses but I wouldn't worry about the pass-through as they'll be updating this through software updates every couple of months, it'll be better than it is now within the next couple months. I warn you, the pro will indeed still have a better game library as they've acquired numerous studios/developers and still have access to app lab stuff. Yes psvr 2 will have 3-5 incredible amazing looking open world games but uhh that's it. That's literally all you're getting. And they'll take longer for upgrades whereas the pro will upgrade every month. Also, the 37% increase in pixel density mixed with the pancake lenses will make any operation whether it be for work or games or entertainment/tv much better. And new streaming apk's (disney+, hbo max, hulu, youtubetv) will be implemented within the next 4-6 months. 120Hz will be implemented in quest pro within the next 3-4 I presume (same thing that happened with quest 2). Battery life has already been confirmed to be better than quest 2 with face tracking off (I don't use face tracking anyways) and controller battery life is confirmed to be more like 5-8 hours as opposed to 1-2 hours which was lied about online. Everything about the quest pro from display to controllers software to tracking is infinitely better than any other experience you could get in vr especially standalone (I will never go back to wired connection) and that's why the price point is so high. If you want something that is best on the market and will serve you better all-in-one than any other device, pro is for you.
It's funny you should mention about the openness of the pro. I fired up my index today, the first time in over a year, as I usually use the MQ2. Despite the increase in fidelity and device comfort, I began to feel sick after 20 mins. The refresh was set to 144. Strange. Yet on the MQ2 I rarely get motion sickness. It has made me realise why I stopped using the index. Still not too sure why this is, as I've had the HTC and the Rift before it without much issue. I will give it another go in a few days and see what the reviews of the pro are.
Nothing has the extra sensors that the quest pro has right now. Also the software is not final. As for use cases, it has FBT, and passthrough you supposedly can read small text which I would argue is what's important. They've also said they are improving passthrough in a software update after launch
Go for the Pro - definitely wait for the review, which I think will dissipate concerns- but I’m keeping the Valve for now… I think the OQ2 could be sold later
Any decision is for the individual concerned. Only you can say whether or not it is for you, same for us all. Some thoughts though... a) You say that the Pico 4 VR isn't for you because of the eco system, that this would be inefficient or wasteful, to have to buy-in to such. Maybe have to buy the same software again. This is not without merit, however in relative terms, isn't this dwarfed by the savings, and the huge shelling out required to buy the Quest 2 Pro? I mean the latter is vastly more expensive, right? Still get it if you just want it of course, but Hmmm. b) People are talking about how good certain aspects of the hardware seems to be, this inclusive of the upgrade in resolution, ram and cpu capability. However!!! Market penetration? IF as seems likely, very few consumers buy the quest 2 pro, then it absolutely will NOT receive much in the way of software support. Developers will NOT spend the time/human resources, which equals money on either exclusive titles, or more importantly - significant feature sets or upgrades, simply for the pro to be able to take advantage. IF the pro does not sell, we will mainly see Quest 2 games, with no specialist sdk or upgrade for the pro. This would be devastating for anyone considering a buy, because it can simply mean that you don't get to have the games, or even the graphics or performance that the hardware suggests in possible. I speak on this point as a former developer. c) Wont the key advances make their way to the consumer grade quest 3 less than a year later? And crucially, wont that comes at the price point that ensures a large install base, that sees the hardware put to best use, with games being there on the system? I would have thought so. So is the cash outlay worth it for a year and limited experiences?
Good questions to consider, and ones I've thought about myself for my own purchase decision. These are the conclusions I came to. a) My Reverb G2 does not work with Revive so 70 percent of my PC games I can't play on it, meaning it's pretty much just a Microsoft Flight Simulator headset. I really don't want that experience again with another headset. The Pico 4 is a great value headset, but as he said in his video, it's just a basic upgrade on some existing features, better lenses, better screen, lighter. Aside from that it doesn't offer anything that his Quest and Index can't already do. It's kind of like buying yet another Orient or cheap Seiko watch with a different colour dial, when you could save your money and put it towards an Omega or a Breitling. b) It doesn't matter if consumers don't buy this, it only matters that Meta's target audience buy it. All the experts predicted the Quest would be a disaster. Nobody wanted cheap standalone VR with mobile phone graphics, what was needed was a an Oculus Rift Pro. This race to the bottom would ruin Oculus. Of course, they were proven absolutely correct, so much so that now people now longer want a Pro model but rather a budget Quest. Amazing how that worm turned. Now is Meta likely to succeed in their vision to target enterprise? considering the Pro is half the price of its rivals, Magic Deck, Holo Lens. Varjo XR3, StarVR One I'd say they have a good shot. That Microsoft, despite selling their own rival Holo Lens headset and having their own WMR platform have thrown their hat in with Meta and are bringing Microsoft Office, Windows 11 and Cloud Computing and Gamepass to the Quest Pro seems to suggest its being taken seriously by the industry. c) This is subjective to each individual. Yes, many of the features of the Quest Pro will make it to Quest 3, albeit in a much uglier, cheaper form factor judging by the leaked CADs. It seems to be missing eye tracking however, which will severely limit its potential for anything other gaming compared to the Quest Pro. I think for gamers, the answer is simple, wait for Quest 3. But for VR enthusiasts who want to be at the cutting edge of the technology I think its worth it to invest in something like this. Just like a watch collecter with a dozen affordable watches who could have bought a Rolex with the money he spent, it might be worth someone with a several years long passion for VR and technlogy to buy fewer budget affordable headsets and instead one premium one. That's been my thought process this week anyway.
Excellent points. I was thinking something similar with regards the Pico. In that the cost different of the Pico and Quest Pro are so vast, that any app I would likely buy would be covered and then some, by the savings made in buying the Pico 4. However, one of the points I raised, is the ability for AR and working more comfortably connecting the Quest Pro to my laptop and sitting on sofa, with a similar scale screen or greater, than I've currently got for work on my desktop - Samsung ultra wide 21:10. I've not seen enough practical work demonstrations of this, other than the super slick advertising. Also, does anyone know if this can be connected to a Mac?
I'm still torn. I agree with many of your points and that of others too. Everyone is making some excellent and valid points. For me, if it was just for games, then I'd wait for the Quest 3, absolutely. However, there is a AR aspect that I wish to explore and see whether this makes for a good alternative to sitting at my desk all day for hours on end. If the Quest Pro provides a quality working environment and enables me to be more focused, productive and more comfortable than sitting at a desk, then it could win on that. The games are a given. However, I'm not too sure if the Quest can access the steam store for the PCVR games? I know I can access Oculus games on the PC, using some free software, when using the Index. Also, I have both mac and PC. Does the Quest Pro enable identical compatibility when tethered to a Mac?
@@kevinbrook7033 - With all the will in the world: to say it doesn't matter if consumers do not buy the headset... I'm a former senior games designer and senior producer from the games industry. I worked in development and publishing, worked at companies like Sony and Eidos etc. From this I can tell you that this statement of yours could not be more wrong. Why? Because ownership equals software pipeline, market penetration/numbers of headsets equals the potential number of customers and potential sales, and this is something that I and others in my position and similar positions used in order to put together a budget. Now teams are much smaller typically on vr titles, but the process of evaluation and working out whether or not one can afford to put in the financial commitment to a given project is still based upon such considerations. A lack of sales = severely limited software support and that is in my professional opinion, simply a fact that I will not be arguing or debating with you. The headset to watch analogy fails also. A headset is not an investment, it is a purchase, a sunk cost, that one does not get back, certainly from the perspective of a consumer and gamer. Buying the correct Omega, Rolex etc is different, because one can expect to sell that watch at a later date for a similar sum, or better yet a profit, sometimes a considerable profit. The Quest Pro a year later, or around the time of the Quest 3, how much do you think a person selling that will see of their 1500 sterling? I would be surprised if they were able to realise more than a third of that money. That's within a year! By all means go and buy what you like, I'm not telling you not to, it isn't my place to do so. It is a fine piece of kit for a VR enthusiast, and one might see great usage in terms of productivity, use of business based apps. One might also be able to achieve some usage of the improved tech via tethering and in the PCVR space. Just understand, that bad sales ensure a very limited software support from people like me, that's just a given. Understand I speak ONLY in the context of poor sales. IF this device surprises the market and sells well, then of course the opposite will be true and the software support with games from the games industry will be there. I am being very clear here! IF this device tanks in sales, if it's sales are very small/limited, then one is simply not going to see much if anything in the way of support from the games industry, that's just how my former industry works. If you do buy it, I hope it's everything you want it to be, and I hope it does sell well, so that it has a more positive outlook for you. P.S I also just happen to be a watch collector. Odd.
@@BitsBytesBobs - It may be worth the purchase on the productivity front, that isn't my area, it isn't something I can speak to in a professional capacity. That said, doesn't the battery preclude the usage and gains you hope for and speak to? Unless Meta have a solution in this regard, unless the charging is extremely fast, or there is some alternative answer to this issue? Can it succeed as a productivity tool, if the user has to end their session after an hour to two hours each and every time? I would have thought not. So even in terms of productivity, don't you need some kind of assurance here from someone as to what will allow end users to put the device to use for extended periods? If people want to buy it as enthusiasts and want the bleeding tech regardless of pragmatic issues, then that's their right and I wouldn't want to dissuade anyone in that regard. I buy things all the time that I simply want, things that I couldn't necessarily justify on any given grounds lol. I have purchased watches that are investments, that can be sold for significant profit later, but I have also bought watches that I know at the time of purchase, absolutely will not retain their value. I have purchased them anyway because I liked them and as someone who owns 25 or so watches, it isn't like I could argue that I needed one more watch to tell the time haha. Pleasure comes into purchases, desire comes into it, want, shorn of reason comes in it. At least it does for me on enough occasions. Purchase do not need to be justified, certainly not to others. Talking through the logic is a separate thing.
