Pimax Crystal Light

[chiliwili69]

They arrived today, in a much bigger box than Quest3.

First thing I did was to put them on my head without connecting them to the PC and OOHHHH NOOO!!

They really don´t fit on my face, the mask is huge and full leaks on the sides and everywhere. (Quest3 fitted perfectly out-of-box, same with Index and G2).

 

What is the ergonomics studies they have done?? I suppose Pimax want to sell this to the same owners of G2, Quest and Index. So, why not just copy their ergonomics???

 

As advised here I also purchased the Studioform layers and kit which I will need to conveniently adjust here and there, but I hate to do this big customization. It should fit better just out of the box.

 

Another downside is the poor quality of the face cushion, worse than G2 or Index or Quest3.

 

Ah, yes! and this thing is big.

 

For the moment

Quest3: +3

CrystalLight: 0

 

I trust it will improve when connecting to the PC.

[JG27_saffer001]

Well, did it improve? I have ordered mine a week ago this will be my first VR headset...

[chiliwili69]

3 hours ago, saffer001 said:

Well, did it improve?

Not yet, I have some customization homework to do first with the Counter Balance, Apache Strap and Spacer Kit.... 😉 

I wish Pimax had StudioFormCreative as their ergonomic department....

 

[chiliwili69]

Well, I did my homework. I just needed one full spacer plus one spacer on the sides to fit my face shape with no leaks.

The apache strap is sooo nice and I just added only one counter weight.

With all this the confort of the Crystal is very good, at least for 1 hour that I have been playing with IL-2.

 

The setup process is relatively simple with the PimaxPlay software for CrystalLight. It works directly with SteamVR and IL-2. I didn´t took the XR route yet (perhaps in future if I keep the Pimax).

 

My system is a 7800X3D with a 3080 cards.  I know it is not enough for the Crystal, but I know I can always upgrade the GPU if I keep the Pimax.

 

I have been playing with Pimax Balanced (0.75 resolution) and a SteamVR SS factor of 56%, which correspond to the same pixels used by the Quest3 at 150%.

 

 

 

[Dagwoodyt]

 

[dgiatr]

🤪

 

Edited June 13, 2024 by dgiatr

[firdimigdi]

I think he is confused by the silly website design.

 

He is comparing the store pages to the presentation pages:

 

https://pimax.com/products/pimax-crystal-light-no-local-dimming-version

https://pimax.com/products/pimax-crystal-light-with-controllers

(if you scroll a bit down you will see what he calls "the old page")

vs

https://pimax.com/pages/crystal-light

(if you scroll a bit down you will see what he calls "the new page")

 

I see no difference in the store pages and I recall visiting them when the availability was announced and it's pretty clear "the local dimming version is available, the other one is coming up" if someone wants the cheaper version they will have to wait, it doesn't even accept pre-orders for it yet so no possibility of "bait and switch" or whatever. This isn't the controversy that will generate more views for his channel that he hopes it is.

 

The only thing I can agree to is that the rebate/trade-in/discount thing does sound shifty as shit if it's as he's described it (and it seems to be).

 

Edited June 13, 2024 by firdimigdi
details, details

[Panzerlang]

I was given two promised dates for the wide-FOV lenses, both have been broken. They are indeed "shifty as shit".

[chiliwili69]

Well guys, this afternoon I spent about 3 hours with the Crystal Light (with local dimming) with IL-2 testing with the 72Hz mode all kind of things.

I didn´t buy controllers since  they are not needed for IL-2. All settings and room setting can be done without controllers which is good.

 

Firstly, I was just running with Pimax Custom resolution at 0.75 and 56% SS SteamVR, so same pixels I used with Quest3 at 150%, that is 13.8 million pixels. My 3080 handles this very well and I am always at 72fps. The quality of the image is a bit more detailed, but not a huge thing with respect Quest3 at 150% and Airlink.

 

Secondly, because I saw I had some margin in the GPU frametimes, I raised the SteamVR SS to 68% (that is 16.6 million pixels, the same than the panels of pimax) and the 3080 was still doing a good job keeping always fps at 72fps but near to the reprojection limit (13.8 ms)

 

Within the Spitfire at night I switch on the cabin lights and the view of the cockpit was quite nice! (But there is a but that I will explain later)

 

Then, I raised the Pimax custom resolution to 1.0 and the SteamVR SS to 100%, that is 43.9 million pixels. Something that can not be handled by my 3080 and perhaps neither a 4090 at 72fps. But the interesting thing is that the quality of the details didn´t increased in that proportion (43.9/ 16.6 is 2.6 times more pixels). I looked again the inside of the Sptifire cockpit with lights and no big big differences.

 

It means that perhaps I would not need to upgrade to a higher graphic card (If I keep the Pimax) since with 16.6 million pixels the view is already quite good. Perhaps this weekend I will do through the lenses pictures to explain what I am saying.

 

Another important thing is the tracking. During my dogfights I had 3 or 4 times the issue of being outside my cockpit, something really weird. I disabled then the option in the Pimax software which is "Automatic Active Set Area" (which I have not clue about what it is) and I have less issues but still from time to time I was outsite my cockpit, but by pressing recenter button I was again inside the cockpit. All very weird. And my room had good ligths.

 

BUT, BUT, BUT... Let´s talk about the IMPORTANT ISSUE.

 

There is a BIG "BUT" with the Crystal Light.

I don´t know well how to explain it, but it is like something in the view is not right. It doesn´t feel 100% a perfect 3D world. Something is off. My eyes, need to adjust to the lenses view. The true is that the Eye-Box of the Crystal Light is really small. You need to be exactly "there", but even being exactly there the 3D thing is a bit mixed view.

It is a subtle thing but really noticeable. Maybe it is just me (I use reading glasses but I see well at long distance). With other headsets like Index, G2 or Pico4 I had not this feeling.

 

I have tried all settings of IPD and also I have been playing with the IPD offsets of each eye (which is a thing quite unique in Pimax), but I could not finde a solution for that.

 

So, after being about 3 hours flying and testing with the Pimax and decided to just try the Quest3 with Airlink for 10 minutes.

 

You know what?

 

The Quest3 is a CLEAR WINNER!! NO DOUBT!

 

WHY?

 

- LENSES!: The eye-box of the Quest3 is huge and everything looks well in 3D, you are there, no strange off feelings. You really breath through that lenses!

- FOV: Yes, I think FOV is a bit bigger and more defined along all range. Not a big difference but noticeable.

- LIGHT and COLORS: Yes, There is more light and vivid colors in the Quest3. Don´t ask me why.

- Weight, size and inertia: Although the Pimax is well kept to your head in quick turns, it is unecessarily big, and you notice it.

- Tracking: Zero issues with the Quest3 tracking.

 

Other less important factors:

- Default Speakers of Pimax are just a joke, But speakers of Quest3 still can do the job, but obviously far from Hi-Fi headphones.

- No cable with Quest3. Normally I don´t care about the cable being sit, but not having cable is nice. The downside is charging batery!

- No need to upgrade GPU to get the most of the Pimax.

 

Today I surprised myself about this. In a headset not all is about panel resolution and DP cable, the most important thing is to try the heaset by yourself. 

 

So, most likely I will return the headset next week within the 15days period of the EU goods.

 

If you had told me 4-5 years ago that I would prefer an standalone Mark Zuckerberg device over a pure PCVR device with DP-cable....

But that fact is that I prefer the Quest3 over the Pimax Crystal Light.

 

See my Meta hate for killing Rift and Rift-S:

 

[Dagwoodyt]

My understanding is that Meta can at any time demand that the user submit a photo ID such as a driver's license. If the user declines Meta can "brick" the HMD.

[dgiatr]

7 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

Well guys, this afternoon I spent about 3 hours with the Crystal Light (with local dimming) with IL-2 testing with the 72Hz mode all kind of things.

I didn´t buy controllers since  they are not needed for IL-2. All settings and room setting can be done without controllers which is good.

 

Firstly, I was just running with Pimax Custom resolution at 0.75 and 56% SS SteamVR, so same pixels I used with Quest3 at 150%, that is 13.8 million pixels. My 3080 handles this very well and I am always at 72fps. The quality of the image is a bit more detailed, but not a huge thing with respect Quest3 at 150% and Airlink.

 

Secondly, because I saw I had some margin in the GPU frametimes, I raised the SteamVR SS to 68% (that is 16.6 million pixels, the same than the panels of pimax) and the 3080 was still doing a good job keeping always fps at 72fps but near to the reprojection limit (13.8 ms)

 

Within the Spitfire at night I switch on the cabin lights and the view of the cockpit was quite nice! (But there is a but that I will explain later)

 

Then, I raised the Pimax custom resolution to 1.0 and the SteamVR SS to 100%, that is 43.9 million pixels. Something that can not be handled by my 3080 and perhaps neither a 4090 at 72fps. But the interesting thing is that the quality of the details didn´t increased in that proportion (43.9/ 16.6 is 2.6 times more pixels). I looked again the inside of the Sptifire cockpit with lights and no big big differences.

 

It means that perhaps I would not need to upgrade to a higher graphic card (If I keep the Pimax) since with 16.6 million pixels the view is already quite good. Perhaps this weekend I will do through the lenses pictures to explain what I am saying.

 

Another important thing is the tracking. During my dogfights I had 3 or 4 times the issue of being outside my cockpit, something really weird. I disabled then the option in the Pimax software which is "Automatic Active Set Area" (which I have not clue about what it is) and I have less issues but still from time to time I was outsite my cockpit, but by pressing recenter button I was again inside the cockpit. All very weird. And my room had good ligths.

 

BUT, BUT, BUT... Let´s talk about the IMPORTANT ISSUE.

 

There is a BIG "BUT" with the Crystal Light.

I don´t know well how to explain it, but it is like something in the view is not right. It doesn´t feel 100% a perfect 3D world. Something is off. My eyes, need to adjust to the lenses view. The true is that the Eye-Box of the Crystal Light is really small. You need to be exactly "there", but even being exactly there the 3D thing is a bit mixed view.

It is a subtle thing but really noticeable. Maybe it is just me (I use reading glasses but I see well at long distance). With other headsets like Index, G2 or Pico4 I had not this feeling.

 

I have tried all settings of IPD and also I have been playing with the IPD offsets of each eye (which is a thing quite unique in Pimax), but I could not finde a solution for that.

 

So, after being about 3 hours flying and testing with the Pimax and decided to just try the Quest3 with Airlink for 10 minutes.

 

You know what?

 

The Quest3 is a CLEAR WINNER!! NO DOUBT!

 

WHY?

 

- LENSES!: The eye-box of the Quest3 is huge and everything looks well in 3D, you are there, no strange off feelings. You really breath through that lenses!

- FOV: Yes, I think FOV is a bit bigger and more defined along all range. Not a big difference but noticeable.

- LIGHT and COLORS: Yes, There is more light and vivid colors in the Quest3. Don´t ask me why.

- Weight, size and inertia: Although the Pimax is well kept to your head in quick turns, it is unecessarily big, and you notice it.

- Tracking: Zero issues with the Quest3 tracking.

 

Other less important factors:

- Default Speakers of Pimax are just a joke, But speakers of Quest3 still can do the job, but obviously far from Hi-Fi headphones.

- No cable with Quest3. Normally I don´t care about the cable being sit, but not having cable is nice. The downside is charging batery!

- No need to upgrade GPU to get the most of the Pimax.

 

Today I surprised myself about this. In a headset not all is about panel resolution and DP cable, the most important thing is to try the heaset by yourself. 

 

So, most likely I will return the headset next week within the 15days period of the EU goods.

 

If you had told me 4-5 years ago that I would prefer an standalone Mark Zuckerberg device over a pure PCVR device with DP-cable....

But that fact is that I prefer the Quest3 over the Pimax Crystal Light.

 

See my Meta hate for killing Rift and Rift-S:

 

Whats is your face ipd?

 

Or you think it has to do with low binocular overlap?

 

Do other Pimax Crystal users feel the same?

[T24_Martin]

Hey,

 

I switched from a G2 to a "regular" Crystal Sim 6 month ago. Absolutly true, that the G2 has much better ergonomics and fits better my face. I also have a narrow face shape. My IPD is about 60mm.

 

I had several serious issues so this is my fourth (!) Crystal in half a year. But... What ever others may have experienced, the support was excellent! I got answers in about a day or two. They send me replacement parts or at the end new headsets. So I am very happy with this, although I had all this problems.

 

I have to say, there is room for improvement, in terms of quality. I had big chromatic aberration and now very little. Larger and smaler sweetspots. More or almost no mura. My latest version has mura and not the biggest sweetspot, but I am happy with the overall experience and will keep it.

 

Audio is much better with DMAS! In my opinion it is superior to G2.

I am using lighthouse tracking, so this is also perfect. But inside out tracking I also had to adjust my position from time to time, because it was shifted.

Comfort... I use 15mm foam from Pimax, because I need lenses or glasses. And for the comfort, I bought the Pimax topstrap which is really great and adjustable.

 

The visuals are simply awsome! It is like looking on a 4k screen. Sure, lokking to the edges, the picture get's more blurry, but nothing serious. E.g. I can read gauges on the lower part of my sight, when looking straight forward in the cockpit. It may be, that the 3D effect is less than G2, but I can actually not remeber and I do enjoy the perfect picture so much, that it doesn't bother me much. It is definetly a thing, how you wear it. A different position in front of your eyes can make the picture worse, or cause barrel distortion or such things.

 

In terms of performance (4090, 7800X3D) I can run IL-2 with all settings on max/ultra (except raw distance, I choose 130km) at 90 FPS when using 83% resolution in Pimax play and OpenXR. Without OpenXR I have to reduce the resolution to about 78%. For me, I see a clear diifference with lower or higher resolutions... by the way I had to delete some left over from the G2, that prevented the resolution in steamVR to work! It was limited to a resolution much lower, then the native Crystal resolution. The slider and percentage changed, but not the actual resolution used in game.

 

In DCS I achieve 90 FPS almost all the time. I use Quad Views. 100 resolution in Pimax play and most of the settings in DCS in max. Especially in DCS the Crystal is night and day compared to the G2 in terms of performance and visuals. But also IL-2 is so much better. I can identify ground and air units at larger distances.

 

So I am happy. It is not perfect. I still got mura (a little, but visible against the sky) and other units of mine had a better sweet spot. Comfort is not the best. But overall the pros in visuals and performance are such a big upgrade, that I am very happy with the Crystal.

[chiliwili69]

54 minutes ago, dgiatr said:

Whats is your face ipd?

 

Or you think it has to do with low binocular overlap?

 

Do other Pimax Crystal users feel the same?

 

My IPD is 64 mm, which is quite in the middle.

 

The overlap of the Crystal (83) is very similar to the Quest3 (80): Look this table https://risa2000.github.io/hmdgdb/

 

I remember also this post about eye confort: 

 

 

It is perhaps that the focus distance of the Crystal is shorter than the Quest3.

[chiliwili69]

29 minutes ago, T24_Martin said:

Audio is much better with DMAS! In my opinion it is superior to G2.

I am using lighthouse tracking, so this is also perfect. But inside out tracking I also had to adjust my position from time to time, because it was shifted

 

Yes, I have lighthouse from Index and definetely would buy Lighthouse faceplate if I would kept the Crystal to have better tracking.

 

Overall, to fully enjoy the Crystal Light (assuming you don´t have my eye comfort issue) you will need to add to the basket:

 

- Apache strap or similar + custom foam or spacers  (I paid 60$ for the full studioform kit)

- DMAS speakers or your own headphones (95€)

- Lighthouse basestation and device faceplate (1x150€+190€)

- 4080/4090 GPU

 

 

[T24_Martin]

1 minute ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

Yes, I have lighthouse from Index and definetely would buy Lighthouse faceplate if I would kept the Crystal to have better tracking.

 

Overall, to fully enjoy the Crystal Light (assuming you don´t have my eye comfort issue) you will need to add to the basket:

 

- Apache strap or similar + custom foam or spacers  (I paid 60$ for the full studioform kit)

- DMAS speakers or your own headphones (95€)

- Lighthouse basestation and device faceplate (1x150€+190€)

- 4080/4090 GPU

 

 

 

True! I was lucky and got almost all included with no price extra. 

[chiliwili69]

48 minutes ago, T24_Martin said:

For me, I see a clear diifference with lower or higher resolutions... by the way I had to delete some left over from the G2, that prevented the resolution in steamVR to work! It was limited to a resolution much lower, then the native Crystal resolution. The slider and percentage changed, but not the actual resolution used in game

 

I will try to make some comparisons with through the lens pictures with high/low resolution on the Crystal. I know it was not limited on the resolution because I saw my GPU frametimes skyrocketing when I used custom resolution 1.0 and SteamVR 100%.

But quality of the image is better on the Crystal, this is a clear fact.

[T24_Martin]

Why don't you use OpenXR with PimaxXR? At least for me it is a hugh boost in performance. 

 

I can see the difference in ojects, that are more away from me, jaggies get less and distant objects are more clear. Even when looking at wing tips I see a difference. By the way... I am not using in game AA in IL-2.

[dgiatr]

6 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

 

But quality of the image is better on the Crystal, this is a clear fact.

You mean for the same resolution between q3 and Pimax Crystal , you have better image quality in Pimax or you have to go to higher resolution?

Its probably due to video compression losses in q3?

4 minutes ago, T24_Martin said:

Why don't you use OpenXR with PimaxXR? At least for me it is a hugh boost in performance. 

 

I can see the difference in ojects, that are more away from me, jaggies get less and distant objects are more clear. Even when looking at wing tips I see a difference. By the way... I am not using in game AA in IL-2.

Indeed i get better visuals with openxr and cas sharpening from openxr toolkit

[firdimigdi]

2 hours ago, T24_Martin said:

I had big chromatic aberration and now very little. Larger and smaler sweetspots.

 

This might be down to the fact that the non-Light Crystal has removable lenses and they are not always screwed in the same exact position from the factory.

 

1 hour ago, chiliwili69 said:

- Apache strap or similar + custom foam or spacers  (I paid 60$ for the full studioform kit)

 

If you are inclined those are very easy to DIY and probably to a more personalized fit. It's just two pieces of cloth, velcro and a couple of weights.

[chiliwili69]

2 hours ago, T24_Martin said:

Why don't you use OpenXR with PimaxXR?

 For the moment I was not worried about performance and I was not going to take this factor to decide which device to keep.

Definetely If I would keep the Crystal I would explore all the OpenXR route and also improvements that the tools couldbring to the table.

2 hours ago, dgiatr said:

You mean for the same resolution between q3 and Pimax Crystal , you have better image quality in Pimax or you have to go to higher resolution?

Its probably due to video compression losses in q3?

 

For the same number of pixels rendered 13.8 million the image is better in the Pimax, and then a bit better as I increase %. But this is very subjetive, that´s why  I want to do through lense pictures with Quest versus Pimax.

8 minutes ago, firdimigdi said:

If you are inclined those are very easy to DIY and probably to a more personalized fit. It's just two pieces of cloth, velcro and a couple of weights.

Yes, with the Index I took the DIY route:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/54107-valve-index-weight-compensation-for-better-comfort/

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/68347-index-or-other-devices-small-mod-for-increased-comfort/

 

Now with the Crystal I have been more lazy and went to the easy way, but with a cost.  😉 

[dgiatr]

20 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

For the same number of pixels rendered 13.8 million the image is better in the Pimax, and then a bit better as I increase %. But this is very subjetive, that´s why  I want to do through lense pictures with Quest versus Pimax.

 

Please do it ...! my finger almost "touches the trigger" 👉

Edited June 14, 2024 by dgiatr

[firdimigdi]

5 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

For the same number of pixels rendered 13.8 million the image is better in the Pimax, and then a bit better as I increase %.

 

Considering the compression involved with the Q3 that's not surprising I guess.

 

5 hours ago, dgiatr said:

my finger almost "touches the trigger" 👉

 

Squeeze. We need more guinea pigs.

[chiliwili69]

9 hours ago, dgiatr said:

Please do it ...! my finger almost "touches the trigger" 👉

Here you are:

 

9 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

For the same number of pixels rendered 13.8 million the image is better in the Pimax, and then a bit better as I increase %. But this is very subjetive

 

I was wrong here!!. For the same number of pixels the Quest3 look a bit better. My eyes were cheating me.

[dgiatr]

1 hour ago, chiliwili69 said:

Here you are:

 

 

I was wrong here!!. For the same number of pixels the Quest3 look a bit better. My eyes were cheating me.

 

Indeed you are right, quest3 seems to have clearer image for the same resolution!

You can see it better while looking the buildings...

Colours in Pimax seem more natural in the sky thought...

 

How is that possible ? Video compression works better than uncompressed signal?

Life never stops to surpise..

 

It would be very interesting if you could make the same comparison in open composite plus openxr toolkit with different sharpening methods..

 

Thank you chiliwili69.

Edited June 14, 2024 by dgiatr

[firdimigdi]

7 hours ago, dgiatr said:

How is that possible ? Video compression works better than uncompressed signal?

 

The Q3 is running at 180%SS and downscaling the image to the panel's native resolution+distortion correction while the Pimax is running at 75% and upscaling it to the panel's native resolution+distortion correction. The upscaling is what makes it worse. Plus the Q3 has a processor on board that is actively taking care of said downscaling likely using a better algorithm for upscaling/downscaling than what the Pimax software is using on the PC to send it to the Crystal Light. It's possible that the non-Light edition of the Crystal is better at this as it too has a processor onboard and can spare the extra processing time to use a better rescaling algorithm.

 

Edited June 15, 2024 by firdimigdi

[BOO]

Its getting close to a time where Im either going to jump into VR fully or buy something more for the novelty and Half Life Alyx that I can perhpas use with sims (or both). 

 

Reading through varous threads so far would it be a fair assumption to make that the Q3 is a better general use headset than the Lite and that the Crystal and Super would make a better choice if one was going to be playing accross sims including those with eye tracking support? (money isnt the object, wasting it is)

 

 

[chiliwili69]

10 hours ago, dgiatr said:

Colours in Pimax seem more natural in the sky thought...

Don´t put too much attention to the colors of the image. The brightness and color were very much dependent on how the camera took the shot.

For every picture I took about 10-15 shots, I then I was selecting the best defined, not the best in colors.

[chiliwili69]

11 hours ago, dgiatr said:

How is that possible ? Video compression works better than uncompressed signal?

Life never stops to surpise..

The comparison of the Quest3 with the 16Mpx tells me two things:

- The compression method used for the QuestLink is doing a good work for this level of resolution.

- The lenses+panel geometry of the Pimax has a more streched distorsion correction mesh (http://doc-ok.org/?p=1694) that the Quest3. That´s why the internal SS ratio of Quest3 almost no need (factor of 1), but the Crystal needs 1.49 (Balanced) or 2.65 (Maximun).

 

So, to obtain the same quality than the Quest3 with 180%SS (16.4 Mpx), in the Pimax Crystal you will need to render more pixels. Maybe something in the range of 25-30 Mpx.

[chiliwili69]

11 hours ago, dgiatr said:

It would be very interesting if you could make the same comparison in open composite plus openxr toolkit with different sharpening methods..

 

I have never used OpenComposite or OpenXR toolkit (never had the need with my previous headsets).

 

I believe that those tool are used to decrease the GPU load without compromising the performance. They will not get a better image than the 44Mpx images, but they could be closer to that but rendering less pixels, so the GPU is not constrained.

 

If I would keep the Crystal I would definetely will investigate those methods to obtain the best quality/performance ratio with a new GPU for sure, but I already have a very clear idea about what I will do (return Crystal for the reasons above).

[chiliwili69]

2 hours ago, BOO said:

the Q3 is a better general

 

If you are new to VR I would not spend too much on it to start with. You just need to test the water to see if you like it.

So for that you have two options:

 

- Go for a cheap second hand PCVR hand inside-out device: Rift-S, Reverb G2, DPVR E4, Pico Neo 3 Link, etc

 

- Go for a new Quest2 or Quest3 or Pico4

 

Based on all my previous testing I would recomend the Quest3 (but you need a Wifi6 router). And I really hate to recommend Meta products (basically they killed the Rift, Rift-S lines).

 

Ideally Meta could produce a Quest3 but removing the battery, the XR2 chip and putting a DP cable. I really don´t know what is preventing Meta to have two lines of products (Quest line for Standalone and Rift line for PCVR). So, all technology for lenses and panel will be common and will benfit the two worlds.

[BOO]

13 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

Based on all my previous testing I would recomend the Quest3 (but you need a Wifi6 router).

 

So no direct cable connection to a PC?

[chiliwili69]

8 minutes ago, BOO said:

So no direct cable connection to a PC?

 

There are severals ways to use Quest3 for PCVR games:

 

With USB cable:

- Meta Quest Link

 

Wireless (need a Wifi6)

- Meta AirLink

- Virtual Desktop (third party)

- SteamVR Link

 

I have tested all of them. Initially I used the QuestLink, but recently discovered that the AirLink is as good as the QuestLink, so I am using it wireless.

 

 

 

[firdimigdi]

1 hour ago, chiliwili69 said:

I really don´t know what is preventing Meta to have two lines of products (Quest line for Standalone and Rift line for PCVR).

 

Investment turnaround and profit projections in a spreadsheet most likely. With the Q3 even those who want it mostly for PCVR will still be tempted to buy software off their store just to have something to play that takes advantage of the standalone mode without need for WiFi or a PC turned on. Add a fully PCVR HMD and those people will never buy anything from the Oculus store. And this is just taking in to account their main money-maker (software) and not the requirement for the extra manufacturing line, the extra design work, support, software/driver development and testing, etc.

 

Edited June 15, 2024 by firdimigdi

[kissTheSky]

3 hours ago, BOO said:

Its getting close to a time where Im either going to jump into VR fully or buy something more for the novelty and Half Life Alyx that I can perhpas use with sims (or both). 

 

Reading through varous threads so far would it be a fair assumption to make that the Q3 is a better general use headset than the Lite and that the Crystal and Super would make a better choice if one was going to be playing accross sims including those with eye tracking support? (money isnt the object, wasting it is)

 

 

If you’re on W10 or W11 and don’t need to update beyond the last 23H2, G2 is still a good choice (Microsoft is removing WMR starting from 24H2). I use it for all sims and will be staying on 23H2 until a better/valid option comes along. Right now, unfortunately, there aren’t any that I have confidence in.

 

Varjo discontinued the Aero, PiMax has a reputation that I don’t trust, Somnium is still far from manufacturing, BSB has mixed reviews but with good customer service, Sony VR announced they’re working on a PCVR adapter, but do not have it out yet. Q3 and Pico are wireless, but I prefer a connected headset as I only play seated (sims).

 

If my G2 dies, and I’m desperate, I’ll look into a used Aero, or the Crystal Light Super, or even a used G2 if there’s credible newcomer at the near future when/if my current G2 is not useable. I would/could go to triples for racing simulators, but flying sims would be done for me if I can’t have VR.

[[CPT]Crunch]

Wonder who will be the first battery head fire victim?  Your cruising along happily planning your dive attack on the unsuspecting airfield below when suddenly Bang, your cockpit starts flaming and you feel the heat rising and smell the smoke, thinking dang this sim is so realistic, until the pain and heat on the back of your head becomes so intense you reach back, but it's too late.

[Aapje]

5 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

Ideally Meta could produce a Quest3 but removing the battery, the XR2 chip and putting a DP cable. I really don´t know what is preventing Meta to have two lines of products (Quest line for Standalone and Rift line for PCVR).

 

The reasons are that:

A. The market is not there in PCVR for the volumes they want to move. This is why Pimax tried to make the Crystal into a standalone headset (LOL), because they also wanted these big sales.

B. The end goal of Meta is to create a standalone mixed reality headset.

[chiliwili69]

7 hours ago, firdimigdi said:

Add a fully PCVR HMD and those people will never buy anything from the Oculus store.

 

OK, this is true, but on the other side, why Meta allowed Valve to create the SteamLink?  This is opening directly the door to all PCVR games from Valve, so zero revenue for the store of Oculus.

 

I know Meta is not going to resurect the Rift line again, but Meta could also compete if they want in the PC software and games area. It is an existing growing market. They don´t need to create that market.

Perhaps they could do a PCVR headset with just profit on the hardware, not the software. Without XR2 chip and battery they could produce a high end device in the range of 600-700$ and have profit on it.

 

Just look Sony, which has released the adapter for PCVR of the PSVR2.

Edited June 15, 2024 by chiliwili69

[chiliwili69]

2 hours ago, Aapje said:

The market is not there in PCVR for the volumes they want to move. This is why Pimax tried to make the Crystal into a standalone headset (LOL), because they also wanted these big sales.

B. The end goal of Meta is to create a standalone mixed reality headset.

 

Yes, I know that reasons. But what Meta doesn´t consider is this:

 

- The grow of the PCVR market will accelerate the adoption of VR for the industry in all segments.(Starting by the young people)

- If they want the "Spatial computing" thing, (just a replacement of the monitor for work), why it has to wireless? A DP cable will reduce dramatically the cost of the device (no XR2chip, no battery and more sustainable)

- A new rift line for Meta (for PCs and laptops) could be based on profit on the hardware. Laptops are still there, tablets and phones didn´t replace them, so a PCVR device for laptops for work can be there.

[Dagwoodyt]

Perhaps it is different for the EU, but I purchased QPro's x3 and had to return them because the Meta script always stalled unless I would install as a "business" license. Meta can at any time decide that you cannot continue to use their HMD unless you submit a picture ID. Additionally it seems the Meta app must be installed onto your mobile device. Even if it could be uninstalled after first setup it would have to be repeatedly reinstalled for updates. The level of invasiveness would make me always uncomfortable even if their hardware were totally reliable and readily serviced.

[Varibraun]

11 hours ago, BOO said:

Its getting close to a time where Im either going to jump into VR fully or buy something more for the novelty and Half Life Alyx that I can perhpas use with sims (or both). 

 

Reading through varous threads so far would it be a fair assumption to make that the Q3 is a better general use headset than the Lite and that the Crystal and Super would make a better choice if one was going to be playing accross sims including those with eye tracking support? (money isnt the object, wasting it is)

 

Boo - I know you have been looking at all this pretty thoroughly over the past few months.  As a current very happy owner of a Crystal (with many other headsets in my past), here is what I would do if you are getting ready to pull the trigger (and I am one of the often hated "I only fly in VR club"):

 

Considering @chiliwili69 has now had time to take a look at the Crystal Light (and he is one of my forum heroes for the research and perspective he brings) and that he feels that it is a close decision between CL and the Quest 3, I would go with the Q3 as an interim headset to see what the longer term holds for the Super and potentially even the Varjo XR-4 (depending on budget).  For me visual quality has always been the driver to upgrade which is why I am excited to see how far the higher PPD takes us beyond my Crystal (which is very good).  But I think you are still trying to decide if VR makes sense again for you with the improvements over the past couple of years (I think you said somewhere in the past that you have tried it before, but the visuals weren't worth the downsides), the Q3 is probably close enough to tell.

 

I don't currently own a Q3, but have used one at my brother's house.  Right now, it seems to be a reasonably priced, comfortable, good all rounder that can also be enjoyed with family in a way that the Crystal or other PCVR cannot (say what you want, but a Beat Saber tournament with the family is very entertaining when mirrored on the TV).  As much as I love my current Crystal, I would not invest in the full Crystal right now for the eye tracking with the new high PPD headsets on the horizon.  Moreover, Meta will continue to support the Q3 past when Microsoft boots WMR support for the G2.  I have even thought about picking up a Q3 for broader entertainment value in addition to whatever PCVR headset I am using for flight sims. 

 

Anyway, that's my 2 cents...bottom line, I wouldn't wait longer to get (back) into VR, you can always upgrade later and @chiliwili69's Q3 endorsement here would be enough for me if I was on the fence about which direction to go.  The Q3 will still have utility even if you upgrade to a PCVR headset with eye tracking in a few months.  Plus, it should be an easy Amazon return if it or VR doesn't seem the right fit for you after setting it up.  Good luck! - I look forward to hearing about the next steps in your journey into your new system.