On the eve of the Oculus Quest 2 launch your favorite retailer might be backordered or out of stock of the headset, but have you looked elsewhere? Here’s a complete list of official Quest 2 retailers and the MSRP price in each country.
Check out our full review of Quest 2 to see why it’s the best standalone VR headset yet, as well as other coverage worth checking out as you consider ordering the headset:
Below you’ll find a list of stores where Quest 2 is officially being sold in all countries. If you’re finding the headset out of stock, be sure to search them all!
When Quest first launched in 2019, we called it the “first great standalone VR headset,” owing to it being a truly complete package between hardware, software, and content. And over the course of its life, we saw Quest improve over time with software updates that added new features and improved existing ones. And now we have Quest 2, which is pretty much the same headset, just better in (almost) every way.
But before owners of the original Quest look at their old headset with disdain, consider this. Quest 2 might be better in (almost) every way, but it really doesn’t do anything new. Quest 2 has effectively zero new features compared to the original, and Oculus says both headsets will share the same game library.
A quandary then… would Quest 2 have been better called ‘Quest S‘? Well yes, but also… no. As you’ll find throughout our review, a good chunk of Quest 2’s potential has not yet been unlocked. Similar to the original, Quest 2 will see improvements over time. In that sense, I think it would be fair to call it Quest S on day one, but once Oculus delivers some promised post-launch improvements, it’ll earn the name Quest 2.
Oculus Quest 2 vs. Quest Specs
Photo by Road to VR
Before we dive into the full review, here’s a breakdown of Quest 2 compared to Quest official specs:
Now onto the full review… if you want to summary without the detail, skip to the very end for our conclusion.
Hardware
Photo by Road to VR
One of the most exciting but as of yet untapped bits of hardware in Quest 2 is the processor. While the original Quest launched with a dated (even at the time) Snapdragon 835, Oculus effectively picked the highest-end processor they could for Quest 2, the Snapdragon XR2. Not only is it significantly more powerful, it’s also a made-for-VR chip which includes some additional features that make it even better for use in a VR headset.
But it’s going to take some time until we see the XR2 really shining in Quest 2. On day one, Oculus says that Quest 2 will run have an ‘experimental’ 90Hz option which will run the headset’s main menu at that refresh rate. Games, however, will continue to run at 72Hz.
“Soon” after launch, according to Oculus, the company will make the 90Hz mode default for the main menu and also allow developers to take advantage of the extra refresh rate, but that may well require per-app updates.
The same thing applies to Oculus Link. On day one, if you plug Quest 2 into your PC to use Link, your PC VR content will run at 72Hz and have the same encoding quality as original Quest. “Soon” after launch, Oculus says, Quest 2 will be able to use Link at 90Hz and higher quality.
So it’s going to take some time before we see the full power of Quest 2.
The good news is that most games can automatically take advantage of Quest 2’s higher resolution, so that’s one benefit that you’ll see right out of the gate, and it’s a big one.
Display & Lenses
Photo by Road to VR
The leap in resolution and framerate are among Quest 2’s most meaningful improvements. Quest 2 has a per-eye resolution of 1,832 × 1,920 (3.5 megapixels) compared to the original’s 1,440 × 1,600 (2.3 megapixels). That’s a nice jump already, but there’s a bit of an extra boost because Quest 2’s LCD display has more sub-pixels—which fill in the ‘screen door effect’ even more—than Quest’s OLED display. On Quest 2, the screen door effect is basically invisible.
Pixels are too small to be seen individually; you can still see evidence of the underlying pixel structure against flat colors, but it fades away against anything textured.
The resolution difference is noticeable right away. Between the extra sharpness and the smoother motion of the 90Hz display, stepping up to the menu in Quest 2 feels a bit more real than with the original Quest.
As some know, the move from OLED to LCD comes with some downsides too. Most notably that LCD can’t get close to the deep blacks that OLED can. Although it doesn’t have those deep blacks of the original, it also has massively reduced smearing which is arguably a worthwhile tradeoff because higher resolution doesn’t mean much if you can’t keep pixels from smearing often.
Quest 2’s lenses are effectively the same as the original. They’re fresnel as before, and have the same issues with ‘god rays’ as any modern fresnel lens (that is: annoying god rays on high contrast elements, but generally not to bothersome in most scenes). Oculus declined to share Quest 2’s official field of view, but said it is equivalent to the original Quest (that is: enough to be immersive, but more would still be nice). The ‘sweet spot’ or clarity across the lens, is roughly the same as the original Quest.
Quest 2’s lenses and display are tuned well. Chromatic aberration, pupil swim, and smearing are effectively invisible. Mura is almost invisible as well, but it’ll show up faintly against certain flat colors if you go looking for it.
IPD
Photo by Road to VR
Quest 2’s IPD can be physically adjusted between three positions: 58mm, 63mm, and 68mm. Rather than a slider on the bottom of the headset which allows you to adjust the IPD while looking through the lenses, to change the IPD on Quest 2 you need to remove the headset and grasp both lenses and tug them into one of the other positions.
Because of the delineated IPD adjustment, even if you’re within the minimum and maximum range, you could be up to 2.5mm out of the ‘ideal’ lens alignment (if you were to fall exactly between the available positions). We can infer that if Oculus felt being up to 2.5mm out of alignment was ok in the middle of the range, it would also be ok on the ends of the range—giving Quest 2 a ‘maximum recommended’ IPD range from 55.5mm to 70.5mm, which is pretty close to the original Quest’s ‘maximum recommended’ range of 56 to 74mm.
Since my IPD is roughly 63mm, I wouldn’t be able to see what the image looks like if it were 2.5mm off center (not with any reasonable precision, anyway). We’ll have to wait for more widespread feedback to know if falling between the three positions hampers the visual experience much, or if Quest 2’s eye-box is large enough to accommodate (clearly, Oculus felt this to be the case).
However, if you use the widest IPD setting you may see a bit of clipping of the field of view (this is a result of the single display design in which the lenses move closer to the edges of the display when adjusting for IPD).
Audio
Quest 2, like its predecessor, has hidden integrated speakers that allow audio to emanate from the headband. Even though the speaker openings are a bit closer, they’re still miles away from being centrally aligned with the ear, which makes them sub-par for accurate spatial audio.
In terms of sound quality and volume, Quest 2’s speakers feel right in line with Quest. Meaning the audio is passable, but a far cry from from the quality you’d hear from something like Index or even the original Rift CV1. For anyone coming from a Rift S at least, you’ll be happy to know that Quest 2’s audio is louder and of better quality.
Many games will do fine with Quest 2’s build in audio, but for games with especially good sound tech and design, you’ll miss out on a lot of added immersion without a better audio solution.
Although it’s a bummer to have to fumble with headphones to get that maximum immersion from Quest, at least the option to add your own audio is available thanks to the single 3.5mm audio input on the side (unlike original Quest, there’s only one 3.5mm audio input on Quest 2).
Design & Ergonomics
Photo by Road to VR
Quest 2’s design isn’t fundamentally different than its predecessor, but it does bring a number of refinements. In terms of size and weight, it’s a bit smaller and a bit lighter.
Quest 2 manages to look slightly less bulbous, if a bit less premium due to the all-plastic finish versus the fabric finish of the original.
The minimal button and port layous are all effectively identical: a volume rocker on the bottom, USB-C charging & data port on the left next to a 3.5mm audio input, and a power button and LED power indicator on the right.
Soft Strap & Elite Strap
Photo by Road to VR
The biggest change to the design is the head strap. Out of the box you’ll get a soft strap which is, at least for my head, a bit of a downgrade over the original Quest’s rigid strap. Rigid straps have the benefit of gripping the back of your head and lifting weight off the front of your head via support from the top and side straps. Soft straps without any structure can’t do this nearly as well because they can only really support the front of the headset via the top strap and can’t grip the back of the head as well without a vice-like tightness. When I use the soft strap I find that there’s more pressure than I’d like on my forehead.
Now, this would be a bummer if not for the fact that Oculus is, finally, offering first-party ergonomic accessories, including an Elite Strap and an Elite Battery Strap, both of which are rigid and specifically designed with a counterweight (fingers crossed for an an Elite Audio Strap in the future).
Quest 2 with Elite Strap | Photo by Road to VR
The good news is that the Elite Strap design is excellent—I’d say Oculus’ best headstrap yet—which makes me really wish they just included it by default. It seems pretty clear that not doing so was largely a cost-saving decision.
For most serious VR users, I’m just going to go ahead and recommend you get the Elite Strap or the Elite Battery Strap on day one. Yes, it’s at least another $50 on top of the $300 base price, but it’s worth it.
Fit Pack
On top of the Elite Strap options, Oculus is also going to be selling a ‘Fit Pack’ ($40) which will include light blockers that fit around the lenses (to cover any light coming from the nose cavity) as well as two different face pads to accommodate wider or narrower faces. I haven’t had my hands on the Fit Pack, but found that the included face pad worked fine for me and I wasn’t bothered by any light leakage. It’s great that these accessories will be available though so a wider range of people can find an ergonomic fit that works for them.
Quest 2 also comes with a glasses spacer which holds the lenses a little further from your eyes so that there’s room for glasses in between. The face pad is slightly less wide than the original Quest, so especially wide frames might be problematic.
Controllers
Photo by Road to VR
At first glance, Quest 2’s controllers might not look much different than the original Quest controllers, but they’ve actually seen a significant ergonomic redesign—or perhaps more of an ergonomic throwback. The ‘new’ controller design is very close to the Touch controllers of the original Rift CV1 headset. And that’s a great thing because they arguably had the best ergonomics of any VR controller to date.
Quest 2 controller (left), Quest controller (right) | Photo by Road to VR
Compared to the Quest controllers, Quest 2’s controllers are larger and feature a much larger, and offset ‘face’ which provides a natural area to rest your thumb without resting them on a button. The handle shape seems to fit into the hand a bit more purposefully too. The Quest 2 controllers are actually a bit larger than the original Rift CV1 controllers as well. For me that makes them slightly larger than ideal (but those with larger hands will surely feel the opposite). Even still, I think the ergonomic shift back toward the Rift CV1 controllers is a nice improvement.
Rift CV1 controller (left), Quest 2 controller (right) | Photo by Road to VR
And there’s another benefit hiding inside. The Quest 2 haptics are notably more powerful than their predecessors. We don’t yet know if they’re capable of some of the advanced haptic effects seen on the Rift CV1 controllers, but we expect to learn more about this soon.
Quest 2’s controllers are also now more power efficient and last up to four times longer than the original Quest controllers, according to Oculus. We’ll need to follow up on that claim because our controller batteries have yet to run out!
Unfortunately Oculus has confirmed that Quest 2 controllers are not compatible with Quest or Rift S.
IPD Adjustment
I already talked about the IPD adjustment up in the hardware section, but there’s a design element that needs to be talked about as well.
I’m glad Quest 2 has an IPD adjustment, even if it can only be moved between three discrete settings (58mm, 63mm, and 68mm). However, the approach is a bit baffling. Rather than a slider on the bottom of the headset which allows you to look at the image as you adjust the IPD, on Quest 2 you need to remove the headset, grab the lenses, push them into one of the other positions, and then put the headset back on.
Given that the different settings are simply labeled 1, 2, and 3—and that there’s seemingly no guidance for the user about which position they should select—I don’t see how users are expected to set their IPD correctly. Even if you could do it by sight, the need to remove the headset, change the lens position, then put it back on means you can’t look at the image as you adjust it, which makes it far harder to set by sight. And even if you’re a VR enthusiast and actually know your own IPD measurement, you have to remember which numbered setting corresponds with which measurement.
Unless I’m missing something, this is a strange approach to IPD adjustment and one which I doubt will result in the majority of users using the correct setting.
A pair of unverified photos of an apparently unreleased Quest headset appeared online from a leaker with a history of authentic leaks. The first photo shows the front portion of an apparent future Quest headset (possibly a ‘Quest 2’) which Oculus is expected to reveal later this year. A second photo, which was released today from the same source, shows an interior look at the face gasket and lenses, appended with a mysterious September 15th date.
Update (July 24th, 2020): A new image has surfaced today on Twitter, again arriving from leaker ‘WalkingCat’. The new, still unverified image shows the interior of the headset. The image, which appears to be the one sighted two days ago, suggests the VR headset includes dual microphones, fresnel lenses, and what could be a fabric interior surrounding the optics, which appears to flair dramatically, indicating a larger light-blocking nose piece.
Image courtesy WalkingCat
Is a fabric interior piece indicative of an IPD adjuster, which is notably missing in the image previously leaked? Like the authenticity of these images, it’s all still uncertain.
Although we’re no closer to understanding how the strap is tightened, as the image is conveniently cut off, we do see integrated audio, like the current version of Quest. The headset itself, at least from the provided angle, appears to be made of a matte plastic instead of the fabric covering on the current Quest.
The most mysterious part undoubtedly is the ‘Sept 15″ date mentioned in the tweet. That would line up fairly well with Oculus Connect 7, which is to be held online due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The original article discussing the first image follows below:
The single photo shows a white Quest-like headset. There’s no additional info beyond what can be inferred from the image alone, but there are some worthwhile details on display.
Implications of a Missing IPD Slider
Beyond minor changes to the placement of the headset’s tracking cameras, which could facilitate a wider field of view (specifically for improved visibility for hand-tracking), it also appears that headset is missing the IPD slider that’s present on the current Quest. This strongly implies that the next Quest may move from dual displays to a single display, like Rift S uses. That would also very likely mean that the headset would move from OLED display technology to LCD (also like Rift S).
Another possible explanation for the lack of IPD slider is simply that it’s been moved to a position on the headset which isn’t visible in this photo. However, all major headsets have historically placed the IPD slider on the bottom of the headset.
Simplified Strap
Image courtesy WalkingCat
The headset’s straps are also another notable change. Gone are the velcro side straps which tighten the headset between the front and back. Exactly what will replace that tightening mechanism isn’t clear. Many headsets use a tightening dial on the back of the strap to adjust the fit, but it isn’t clear from the photo that the strap is large enough to contain the necessary mechanism.
The current Quest side-strap is also ‘springy’ (the side struts can stretch from their resting position) to make it easy to put the headset on or take it off without changing the tightness of the straps. It’s possible that this new strap design relies entirely on a spring mechanism to ‘automatically’ achieve the ideal tightness. This would be a welcomed design change as it’s common with the current Quest design to see people tighten the side straps too much for long-term comfort.
Interestingly, the rear part of the strap does away with the large triangular opening that’s designed to catch the ridge of the occipital bone to give the headset some leverage to stay in place. This is generally a desirable feature—a headset would need to be much lighter than the current Quest to go without it.
Possible Return to Original Touch Controller Ergonomics
Image courtesy WalkingCat
Another apparent change is a subtle redesign of the controllers which appears to be closer to the original Touch controllers that shipped with first Rift CV1 headset. Among longtime VR users, many preferred the shape and feel of the original Touch controllers to the new design which ships with Quest and Rift S.
The giveaways on the controller redesign is that the index trigger has a more pronounced ridge between its two halves, the grip trigger protrudes more, and the location of the seam along the handle—all of which appear to mirror the original Touch controller. The shape of the ‘face’ of the controllers also appears more round and offset—just like the original Touch controllers—compared to the newer controllers which have a teardrop-shaped ‘face’ that’s perfectly centered with the body of the controller.
A higher refresh rate would be difficult to make much use of with Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 835 chip that’s in the current Quest headset. If Oculus plans to use a 90Hz or 120Hz refresh rate, it will almost certainly need to upgrade the guts of the headset. Newer Snapdragon chips like 855 or XR2 would be a likely choice—Qualcomm did say earlier this year that the first XR2 headsets were expected in the second half of 2020.
– – — – –
While the leaker WalkingCat has a history of authentic leaks, this photo could just as well be a carefully detailed unofficial render that’s an educated guess at what the next Quest might look like. We don’t have independent confirmation of the photo’s authenticity so we’re continuing to treat this as a rumor for the time being.
An unverified photo of an apparently unreleased Quest headset appeared online today from a leaker with a history of authentic leaks. The photo may show the next Quest headset (possibly a ‘Quest 2’) which Oculus is expected to reveal later this year.
The single photo shows a white Quest-like headset. There’s no additional info beyond what can be inferred from the image alone, but there are some worthwhile details on display.
Implications of a Missing IPD Slider
Beyond minor changes to the placement of the headset’s tracking cameras, which could facilitate a wider field of view (specifically for improved visibility for hand-tracking), it also appears that headset is missing the IPD slider that’s present on the current Quest. This strongly implies that the next Quest may move from dual displays to a single display, like Rift S uses. That would also very likely mean that the headset would move from OLED display technology to LCD (also like Rift S).
Another possible explanation for the lack of IPD slider is simply that it’s been moved to a position on the headset which isn’t visible in this photo. However, all major headsets have historically placed the IPD slider on the bottom of the headset.
Simplified Strap
Image courtesy WalkingCat
The headset’s straps are also another notable change. Gone are the velcro side straps which tighten the headset between the front and back. Exactly what will replace that tightening mechanism isn’t clear. Many headsets use a tightening dial on the back of the strap to adjust the fit, but it isn’t clear from the photo that the strap is large enough to contain the necessary mechanism.
The current Quest side-strap is also ‘springy’ (the side struts can stretch from their resting position) to make it easy to put the headset on or take it off without changing the tightness of the straps. It’s possible that this new strap design relies entirely on a spring mechanism to ‘automatically’ achieve the ideal tightness. This would be a welcomed design change as it’s common with the current Quest design to see people tighten the side straps too much for long-term comfort.
Interestingly, the rear part of the strap does away with the large triangular opening that’s designed to catch the ridge of the occipital bone to give the headset some leverage to stay in place. This is generally a desirable feature—a headset would need to be much lighter than the current Quest to go without it.
Possible Return to Original Touch Controller Ergonomics
Image courtesy WalkingCat
Another apparent change is a subtle redesign of the controllers which appears to be closer to the original Touch controllers that shipped with first Rift CV1 headset. Among longtime VR users, many preferred the shape and feel of the original Touch controllers to the new design which ships with Quest and Rift S.
The giveaways on the controller redesign is that the index trigger has a more pronounced ridge between its two halves, the grip trigger protrudes more, and the location of the seam along the handle—all of which appear to mirror the original Touch controller. The shape of the ‘face’ of the controllers also appears more round and offset—just like the original Touch controllers—compared to the newer controllers which have a teardrop-shaped ‘face’ that’s perfectly centered with the body of the controller.
A higher refresh rate would be difficult to make much use of with Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 835 chip that’s in the current Quest headset. If Oculus plans to use a 90Hz or 120Hz refresh rate, it will almost certainly need to upgrade the guts of the headset. Newer Snapdragon chips like 855 or XR2 would be a likely choice—Qualcomm did say earlier this year that the first XR2 headsets were expected in the second half of 2020.
– – — – –
While the leaker WalkingCat has a history of authentic leaks, this photo could just as well be a carefully detailed unofficial render that’s an educated guess at what the next Quest might look like. We don’t have independent confirmation of the photo’s authenticity so we’re continuing to treat this as a rumor for the time being.
The Pico Neo 2 Eye is a standalone VR headset built for business. Going by the hardware specifications, it is an upgrade in many areas compared to the Oculus Quest. Plus, it has some unique features too, like electromagnetic tracking, wireless SteamVR streaming, and integrated eye-tracking. In this article, I share a summary of my first impressions.
Cas & Chary Present
Cas and Chary VR is a YouTube channel hosted by Netherland-based duo Casandra Vuong and Chary Keijzer who have been documenting their VR journeys since 2016. In partnership with the channel, Road to VR shares a curated selection of their content.
Pico’s latest VR headset is the Pico Neo 2. The company is mostly focused on the enterprise market, though consumers in Asia can buy the headsets for personal use also, hence the inclusion of wireless streaming of SteamVR content from a PC on the same network.
Hardware Specifications
There are two variants of the Pico Neo 2. Both have the same hardware specs, except the Pico Neo 2 Eye has integrated eye-tracking. The latter is the version I tested.
The Pico Neo 2 runs on Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 processor and has 6GB RAM. That’s a nice upgrade compared to Quest’s Snapdragon 835 and 4GB of RAM.
Image courtesy Cas & Chary VR
The display has a resolution of 3,840 × 2,160 total (1,920 × 2,160 per eye), which is beautiful and clear. For comparison, the Oculus Quest has a resolution of 2,880 x 1,600 total (1,440 x 1,600 per eye). The Neo 2 only has a single LCD panel though, while the Quest has dual OLED panels. This leads to greyer blacks and software-only IPD adjustment with a range of 55 to 71 mm. My IPD is around 59 mm, so it’s okay for me, but it does feel a little uneasy every time I put the headset on until my eyes get used to it. I prefer a physical IPD adjustment so that the lenses can be best aligned with my eyes.
The lenses and field of view aren’t much different when compared to the Quest. Both are fresnels and have a field of view of around 101 degrees.
Like many other standalone headsets, hidden speakers are built into the headband. If you want to connect your own headphones you can use the 3.5mm audio jack or Bluetooth.
Image courtesy Cas & Chary VR
One feature I like about the Neo 2 over Quest is that it has a storage expansion slot on top of the headset. The Neo provides 128 GB on-board storage, but if needed, you can put in your own SD card for up to 256GB of extra storage.
As for battery life, I was able to get about two hours of playtime while recording at the same time.
Comfort
Image courtesy Cas & Chary VR
The Pico Neo 2 has an interesting head-strap design which doesn’t use Velcro. Instead, it provides you with three adjustment holes and a dial at the back to make the headset tighter.
Image courtesy Cas & Chary VR
The battery is housed at the back, which allows for better weight distribution, thereby improving comfort. The weight of the whole headset is 692 grams. This is a little heavier than the Oculus Quest, but because of the rear-placed battery, the Neo 2 is a lot more comfortable.
Tracking
Image courtesy Pico Interactive
The Neo 2 only has two mono fisheye cameras at the front. Usually, you might get worried about controller tracking loss here, but the Neo 2 doesn’t use optical controller tracking like Quest.
Instead, it uses electromagnetic controller tracking. Without going too techy, this allows for controller tracking without occlusion issues, and it works. I tested this busting some moves in OhShape.
Controllers
Image courtesy Cas & Chary VR
The controllers have a familiar button layout, with joysticks, A+B buttons, trigger, grip, and menu buttons. It has one additional button that functions as the ‘go back’ button in Pico’s software. These controllers are not the most ergonomic and don’t have any capacitive finger sensing, but they work relatively well for most games and apps.
Eye-Tracking
The Pico Neo 2 Eye has integrated eye-tracking by Tobii. This also enables dynamic foveated rendering, which leads to higher quality visuals without using more hardware resources. There were a few eye-tracking demos on the headset, and I found it works well, especially in a demo with a mirror where I was able to compare my avatar with eye-tracking enabled versus disabled. The avatar felt a lot more life-like when I had it on, which makes me feel like this would be a great addition to social VR.
Now, here’s the thing about the Pico headset, it’s primarily built for businesses and not for consumers. So as a consumer in the West, you will likely find content lacking. Even though the headset technically runs on Android, like Oculus Quest, you can’t just sideload Quest content unless developers specifically port their games for the headset. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of developer momentum on that front though, unless a lot more consumers buy the headset.
For now, I think the Pico Neo 2 is mostly interesting for developers who are looking to create apps for enterprise.
SteamVR Streaming
In addition to native VR content made for the headset, Pico Neo 2 also supports streaming SteamVR content from a VR ready PC. If you want to know more about that I did a dedicated video exploring the feature here:
– – — – –
The Pico Neo 2 is currently the most powerful 6DoF standalone headset out there, and I think that having specifications like leading resolution in a standalone headset and in such a small form factor with wireless content streaming is pretty impressive.
As a consumer, I think it is interesting to look at these specs as this could indicate what’s coming next in future standalone headsets.
Pico Interactive today announced the price and availability of both Pico Neo 2 and its eye-tracking variant, Neo 2 Eye.
Both headsets are available for purchase starting today, with Neo 2 priced at $700 and Neo 2 Eye at $900. With its new Neo 2 headsets, Pico is targeting the enterprise market and will be selling both versions direct to companies.
Outside of Neo 2 Eye’s integrated eye-tracking from Swedish firm Tobii, the two variants differ only slightly in specs. Neo 2 Eye is 20 grams heavier and comes with slightly more RAM than the standard version to account for eye-tracking, something that’s tasked with things like foveated rendering, UI selection, and making social VR more of a natural experience, as a user’s eye movement is translated to a virtual avatar.
Image courtesy Pico Interactive
When we tried out Neo 2 and Neo 2 Eye at CES 2020 earlier this year, we called it the next best standalone after Oculus Quest for its comfortable thanks to Pico’s inclusion of a rear-mounted battery, serviceable positional and controller tracking, and overall experience.
The headset’s two motion controllers aren’t tracked optically like, for example, Oculus Quest though, instead using tracking based on a NDI’s Atraxa controller platform which fuses data from an on-board electromagnet (EM) and inertial measurement unit (IMU). This essentially allows Neo 2’s controllers to be immune from controller occlusion.
Oculus is reportedly readying a Quest successor which will iterate on the existing headset with a smaller form-factor, faster refresh rate, and new controllers. Rather than an outright Quest 2, it seems Oculus may be aiming first for a Quest S.
According to a Bloomberg report citing unnamed sources, Oculus is testing multiple new iterations of Quest and had plans to launch the headset in late 2020, though the Coronavirus pandemic could push the headset back to 2021.
The source told Bloomberg that some versions of the Quest successor are 10% to 15% smaller than the existing Quest and lighter too. Some of the weight could be cut by removing Quest’s fabric accents and redesigning the headstrap to be lighter, they said. Oculus has previously shown prototype headsets with significant improvements in form-factor, but that tech is likely won’t leave the lab for some time.
Additionally it was said that the next Quest would have a higher refresh rate of at least 90Hz, potentially up to 120Hz, which is higher than the headset’s current 72Hz. A faster refresh rate means smoother and more comfortable motion in the headset, but is likely to demand more performance.
Oculus has previously said that the current Quest’s displays are technically capable of 90Hz, but the company would have to re-certify the headset with regulatory bodies if they wanted to change that after the fact, something they were unwilling to do. Given that at least some iterations of the Quest successor reportedly use a 90Hz display, it’s possible that the new headset would still use the same displays as current.
If 120Hz, we’d expect this would be a new display entirely, and also that such a high refresh rate would require an upgrade from the current Qualcomm 835 processor in Quest to something more powerful, unless Oculus opted to do something like interpolate 60 FPS to 120Hz (similar to PSVR).
Early Quest prototypes were largely a hacked up Rift with a rear-mounted computing module | Image courtesy Oculus
The source told Bloomberg that Oculus is working on a redesigned controller for the headset to fix the issue of the battery cover sliding off during vigorous use; the controller would reportedly be backwards compatible with the current Quest (and thus likely with the Rift S as well). Some of the Quest iterations being developed retain an IPD slider like the current headset, they said.
The source also noted that the new Quest model would continue to support Oculus Link, allowing the headset to tether to PCs to play high-end VR games.
With what’s been reported so far, it sounds very much like this won’t be a Quest 2, but rather a ‘Quest S’ which would continue to be compatible with all existing Quest content. Some three years after the company’s first PC VR headset, the Rift, Oculus opted to release a Rift S last year rather than a Rift 2. The Rift S was less expensive than the original Rift and focused mostly on convenience features over improvements in hardware and performance.
Quest was originally released in May 2019, and if a Quest successor was in fact planned for 2020 it would be a very fast turnaround compared to existing precedent.
As mentioned, it was three years between the Rift and the Rift S. It was roughly the same amount of time between the original HTC Vive and the company’s next consumer-focused headset, Vive Cosmos. Sony meanwhile launched its PlayStation VR headset in late 2016 and still hasn’t revealed a next-gen headset, though it has all but confirmed that it’s coming eventually.
The Bloomberg report indicates, however, that the Coronavirus pandemic may have pushed that aggressive refresh of Quest from late 2020 and into 2021.
As if announcing three new Cosmos headsets wasn’t enough, HTC today also revealed Vive Proton. The company is calling this a “prototype” headset with two different flavors: a standalone VR headset and a ‘VR viewer’ which would be powered by a tethered device like a smartphone.
HTC offered up its first glimpse of Vive Proton today, a new VR headset from the company which aims for a more compact form factor. Few details are being offered at this time and the company is making clear that Proton is still in an early state.
“Project Proton is a prototype of a future a XR glasses-style device from HTC Vive that we hope to hear feedback on from the community as we continue to work on the product,” an HTC spokesperson told Road to VR.
HTC envisions two versions of Proton, a standalone headset which includes its own processing and battery power, and smaller ‘VR viewer’ version which would be powered by a host device like a smartphone or PC.
HTC isn’t offering up any specs or release date details for Proton. From photos provided by the company we can spot cameras hidden under the reflective outer shell which would very likely be used for inside-out tracking and possibly hand-tracking. Granted, only computer renderings have been shown so far and it isn’t clear if there’s an actual working prototype just yet.
Though HTC says Proton is a “glasses-style” device, it’s still much closer in size to goggles than glasses. That said, it definitely looks more compact than contemporary VR headsets, including the company’s own Vive Cosmos. This is likely achieved with ‘pancake’-style optics—similar to what we saw from the compact Pico VR Glasses prototype at CES—which can shorten the distance between the lenses and the display (though potentially at the cost of some field of view).
Speaking of the Pico VR Glasses: we were impressed with the form-factor, but felt that 3DOF tracking simply isn’t going to cut it in 2020. HTC has confirmed to Road to VR that Proton will support 6DOF tracking, so that’s definitely a step in the right direction for this compact form-factor.
It isn’t clear at this stage when HTC will commit to bringing Vive Proton to market or at what price point, though the company’s prior standalone VR headset, Vive Focus, starts at $600. Ostensibly the tethered version of the headset would be cheaper than the standalone version (thanks to lack on-board power and compute).
LYNX is a startup building a standalone MR headset that’s primarily focused on passthrough AR scenarios for enterprise applications. The France-based company revealed its R-1 headset earlier this month and expects to deliver the first units this Summer for $1,500. We spoke to founder Stan Larroque to learn more about the company’s background, ambitions, and tech.
Speaking with Road to VR, Lynx founder Stan Larroque said that his company has raised $2 million as of 2019, and is presently in talks with investors for the company’s next funding round.
With $2 million raised Lynx is still very much in the early startup stage; while this amount is just a drop in the bucket compared to the resources of XR incumbents, it’s a starting point similar to Oculus which got its start after raising $2.4 million on Kickstarter back in 2012.
Furthermore, $2 million goes further today toward a creating an XR headset than it did years ago thanks to more readily available and mature hardware, supply chains, and software. For instance, the Lynx R-1 will use Qualcomm’s made-for-XR chip, Snapdragon XR2, and Lynx has several other huge shortcuts to market that weren’t available to companies just a few years ago.
Software & Content
Image courtesy Lnyx
One of those shortcuts to market comes through Qualcomm’s hardware accelerator program and its XR SDK. Qualcomm supports partners with hardware and software reference designs which act as blueprints for companies like Lynx to quickly commercialize headsets. The Qualcomm XR SDK includes core functionality like inside-out head tracking and the ability to run applications on a headset without writing a new application framework from scratch.
Larroque tells us that Lynx R-1 will run Android 10 and the company will supply an SDK that’s built on top of the Qualcomm XR SDK. A Unity plugin will be offered, and Larroque says the headset will support OpenXR, which means any content or developer tools built against that API should have little problem getting up and running on the R-1.
It’s still not clear if the company plans to operate its own storefront or (given the enterprise focus of the R-1) simply leave it up to customers to acquire and load content within their organizations as necessary.
Larroque told Road to VR that the R-1 could support tethering to PCs to run high-end content that would be too much for the headset’s standalone processor to handle.
Lenses, Displays, & Manufacturability
Image courtesy Lnyx
Compared to other headsets on the market, the Lynx R-1 is using a completely unique lens which Larroque says reduces the distance between your eye and the display, making the headset more compact than if the company used a traditional lens. He also confirmed to Road to VR that the Lynx R-1 will use the new VR displays from JDI that entered mass production this week.
The novel “light folding” optics also allow the R-1 to ‘hide’ an eye-tracking camera positioned directly at the center of the lens. This allows for the best view of the eye, which could improve eye-tracking accuracy compared to other approaches which often view the eye from extreme angles.
Image courtesy Lnyx
Clearly the R-1 lens is more complicated than what’s seen in most contemporary headsets. Larroque told Road to VR, “it’s hard to design, but it’s not hard to manufacture,” when asked about the complexity of the optics. “It’s a simple block built using injection molding. So the price is not an issue,” he claimed.
Another benefit of the lens, Larroque said, is optical supersampling; while the display itself has a resolution of 1,600 × 1,600, the image is split into four quadrants and reassembled in the lens where portions of it are overlapped, which improves sharpness in those areas. Luckily this approach doesn’t require rendering four individual views for each frame; a shader is used to split the image appropriately in a single draw-call.
As for the ‘effective resolution’ Larroque said, “you still have a 1,600 × 1,600 image, but with a sharper feeling at the center.”
The company says the R-1 will have a circular field of view of 90 degrees and 18 pixels-per degree. If the supersampling works as described, the headset should have very impressive clarity, which will be important as enterprise use-cases are more likely to require high text legibility than a gaming-focused headset. Compared to headsets targeting similar use-cases, like HoloLens and Magic Leap, at 90 degrees, the R-1 would have a significantly larger field of view for its AR content than those headsets, though it would restrict the user’s natural field of view by comparison.
Startup LYNX revealed the R-1 earlier this week, a standalone MR headset with a unique optical design. Speaking at a conference on Monday, the company’s founder shared more about the headset and it hopes to achieve with its novel optical approach.
Larroque said that the headset is aimed primarily at enterprise applications and is expected to ship this summer, priced at $1,500. Pre-orders are available now on the company’s website with a $150 down-payment.
Image courtesy Lnyx
One of the R-1’s most unique attributes is its novel lenses which the company describes as a “4-fold catadioptric freeform prism.” The lenses are much more complex than the simple lenses seen in the majority of VR headsets available today. Surely they’re bulkier and may be more difficult to manufacture, but the benefits, Larroque said, are “not only about the optical performance we get, it’s also about the [headset] form-factor and the fact that we can hide things right at the center.”
Image courtesy Lnyx
What might you want to hide in the center of the lens? An eye-tracking camera, said Larroque. While most headsets with eye-tracking place cameras at extreme angles to the eye (to avoid the camera being visible to the user) Larroque said that the R-1’s optics allows an ideal central placement for the headset’s eye-tracking camera, potentially allowing for greater precision and accuracy.
The “light folding” optics are designed to wrap the image from the display around the eye-tracking camera to make it invisible. Larroque said that the image on the display is divided into four quarters and then reassembled into a single image by the optics. He showed the headset’s ‘distortion map’ which defines how the initial image is pre-warped to counteract distortions in shape and color introduced by the lens. While pretty much all headsets use pre-warping, the R-1’s distortion map is pretty complex by comparison.
Image courtesy Lnyx
The optics also appear to have a very compact focal length, allowing the displays the be flush with the lenses; other things being equal, this would make the headset more compact than those with more simple lenses which need to be a certain distance from the display in order to correctly focus the image into the user’s eye.
Larroque said that the R-1 uses a 90Hz, 1,600 × 1,600 LCD display for each eye, and that the lens overlaps portions of the image which allows for “supersampling” in those regions. From the brief description, we take this to mean that overlapping pixels in those regions will fill in some of the screen door effect (the unlit spaces between pixels), though we’ve reached out to Lynx for clarity.
While there’s purported benefits to this lens approach, the R-1 headset only achieves a 90 degree horizontal field of view, and it’s hard to imagine that some of the lens seams won’t be visible, though we haven’t had a chance to look through the headset in person just yet.
Larroque reiterated that the Lynx R-1 headset is aimed mostly at B2B applications and some ‘exploitative’ B2C use-cases, though the company will sell the headset to individuals as well.
Image courtesy Lnyx
“I’m very excited for all the hobbyists and some developers and the cool ideas they will explore with this device,” he said. “We are already partnering with a big game company and you will see amazing stuff coming out this Summer.”
That said, there’s still lingering questions about the software stack that Lynx R-1 will use and what tools will be available to developers. While we can expect and Android foundation and an SDK, it isn’t clear how much the company will layer on top, or if it plans to launch its own software distribution ecosystem for the headset. We’ve reached out to the company for more details.
