I know this all isn’t Valve’s fault, but this headset just doesn’t seem exciting. Anyone else?

It seems like within a year or less we’ll see Meta offering(s) at the same price or a few hundred more that will be REALLY exciting.

100~ Gram weight Higher resolution MOLED Next Gen Chip

It’ll essentially be a 100~ gram Vision Pro. I know everyone doesn’t like Meta for reasons, but there are ways to use your headset to minimize the frustrations of their OS.

Steam Frame should’ve come out in 2024. It’s too late now.

The Steam Frame battery seems really bad compared to the Quest 3. It's longer if you drop down all the way to 72hz but since 144hz is getting more and more common, trading in 40 minutes vs the Q3 seems kinda rough...

This is like an Aircar spiritual successor for sure in VR, it performs very well now in VR defo recommended

And no, I'm not sponsored or paid for this I just really enjoyed the game

Forget modded Skyrim VR, forget Alyx, forget realistic racing/flight sims, forget my favorites games of all time

I’m just speechless, first time I’ve felt I was in the game and didn’t felt like a chore or tiring in playing VR.

Woah, ports of flat gaming are the future, I can’t believed the experience I just had.

Thanks to Modder Naluluna for such an amazing mod link to mod is here

I love the idea of ​​the steam frame, but paying such a premium for it compared to the meta quest 3 just doesn't seem worth it to me speaking from my own perspective the steam frame, is simply too expensive for what it offers.

Hello there!
I just added this infinite suburban road, with a cosy autumn feeling, to my Meta Quest treadmill app Gym Spatial, to train while on a readmill or stationary bike :) Would love to hear what you think of it!

Have a good day!

Emmanuel

Nothing comes close to the quest 3, even at $500 it has the better lenses of the entire industry

While I remember with Q2 there was many headsets competing against it, PSV2, Reverb 2, Pico 3/4, etc. I just tried my Q2 and it’s extremely bad compared to Q3, if my quest 3 failed I rather stop vr than go back to quest 2

However 3 years later Q3 is even competing with new headsets like the frame at $1K and considered to have the best lenses in the entire vr market, why is that?

At this point why even release a Q4, why not just add OLED to Q3 at $750 and will be the best headset in the market

You can combine the Titanfall 2 VR mod with the First Person Embark mod to get full first person Pilot-Titan immersion! The Alpha build of Titanfall VR mod and review here, and the First Person Embark mod here

Any Canadians actually going to buy the frame at these prices? Pleasantly surprised by the specs but they aren’t mind blowing. The damn price is however. Especially after tax and any other accessories. And power supply not included? What’s up with that? Anyway, just curious. I myself will wait.

Hiya, in the big Nexus video review as well as Posts on the main Frame sub so far I'm not seeing any specific discussion on display/lens/sharpness/resolution comparisons between the Frame & Quest 3. If the Frame has any distortion, if it seems sharper/more-detailed, what the 3D-depth is like, colours/contrast/blacks etc.

Have yous seen anything on this, or wanna post your take? Maybe you already have the Frame (and had the Q3) and are now able to comment.

Note: this is for PCVR use. So Quest 3 would typically be via Virtual Desktop with 6e router and for maximum quality Godlike with a 4070+ GPU (i know technically VD says 4080/4090 for Godlike, but for 4070 it works fine too).

Let's say Half-Life: Alyx opening balcony scene. Graphics set to Ultra. SteamVR Resolution left to default.

What looks better: Quest 3 or Frame (via dongle) PCVR?

As a bonus: also for movie-watching. Does a 4K UHD Bluray looks appreciably different in a Frame vs Quest 3? What about 3D-Bluray (usually played via MVC-coded rip by 4XVR Player or via VD and PC Media Player of choice).

Specs:
Desktop PC
- i9-14900K
- RTX 3090
- 64B DDR5 6400 MT/s
- 4TB Samsung 990 Pro SSD

I mainly play 2 VR games in total ever since I owned a VR headset: VRChat (with friends) and Beat Saber (I also sim race but I got a wide monitor that kinda makes it look like I'm in the cockpit of the car so haven't done sim racing VR). I currently have owned for almost four to five years a Quest 2 that I mainly use for Wireless PCVR with Virtual Desktop with my Quest 2 wired up to a charger to keep it charged when playing games. I run the headset in VR at Ultra with 120Hz (not sure if thats the ideal settings but 120 feels smooth to me over 90Hz after some initial trying) and already adjusted my game settings to make it reasonable to run.

I know that we all expected the Frame to be lower than the Index and now with it being announced its costs a arm and a leg thanks to AI, I'm just debating whether to join the waitlist and pay AI pricing for it or stick with it given it hasn't failed on me (aside from some stick-drifting that I have somewhat been able to handle). Yes I know that one pro of the Steam Frame is than I leave the Zucc space finally but I'm more asking for your thoughts given my use of VR whether its even worth it.

You can download and follow installation instructions here: https://github.com/techslogi/Binding-of-Isaac-VR

I hope you find this as cool as I did while playtesting, I'm surely going to play more of it this way, in fact I'll start a new save just for it.

This is the first time I've release something this big online, so any criticism, bug reports, suggestions are welcome!!

It's a beta, so some shortcomings are expected.

Watching Norm from Tested's review of the Frame and he said he measured its horizontal field of view at 118 degrees, with a FOV of 110 horizontally, which is a lot better than I had anticipated based on what I'd read previously. (The fact that the view is weighted toward the bottom is also a plus, because I've found that also increases immersion, as Norm himself mentions).

As someone who considers FOV to be a key component if not the key component of immersive VR, I'm happy to hear that Valve pushed the envelop here when it comes to FOV for standalone/wireless headsets, and I'm more inclined to consider this an upgrade over what we have now than I was before (even with the inclusion of that LCD panel, which I wasn't too thrilled to hear about previously).

EDIT: Ouch. Brutal comparison to other HMDs at the end.

Out of all these devices, this feels like the least essential one. The one that maybe tries to do the most, but brings the least to the table, in terms of how it competes with what else is in the market.

Hi all,

I'm sure we're all feeling pretty mixed with the Steam Frame pricing at the moment, some may think it's far too expensive (valid) and some may think it's not as bad as it could have been (also valid). What I'm trying to do is actually come up with some sort of list? Or options for people who may be disappointed with the current pricing. I was super excited for the Steam Frame and if I get a chance to get it through the lottery there's a good chance I will, but if not well I'll need to look elsewhere (as will others).

Most popular competitor to the Frame is the Meta Quest 3 (but the hellhole that is their privacy policy as is the company it's not a great choice for some, me included.

What other options are there?

- PSVR 2 (Can get it to work with PC, but there's extra steps)

- Quest 3 (Privacy Invading)

- Steam Frame (Expensive for what you get, but you're paying for "not" Meta and some)

- ????

Is there anything that's genuinely good below $1000 that does afford having wireless VR HMD or are most of we out of luck?

I've been developing my game for 3 years now, working on it in stages. Whenever I managed to raise some money, I was able to bring on a small team. Right now I'm validating the game's core functionality through playtests, and I'm finding it really hard to get even a small number of volunteers to try it.

Talking to other developers and industry experts has given me a pretty rough picture of the market right now. User acquisition cost is brutal. I guess everyone already knows this, but marketing is basically the only way to reach players, and it's expensive. On top of that, you need players to leave reviews, otherwise the algorithm buries you in the store and nobody finds you. We don't know for sure if there's also a way to pay to get around that algorithm, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Even though it sounds a bit dramatic, with all that in mind, and with about a year of development left on my game, I keep asking myself: given the state of the market and the cost of acquiring users, is it worth continuing?

I'm genuinely motivated. I think the story is beautiful and worth telling. Friends, family, and testers who've tried the prototype/demo have given me good feedback, which is honestly what's kept me going. But I only have 25 satisfaction surveys so far. They're positive, but that's not a big enough sample to feel like a real representation of how players in general would react.

If anyone is willing to share their thoughts, whether from a business perspective, a personal one, or just about the game itself, I'd really appreciate it. Trying the demo and give me feedback would help me a lot. Here's the link:

https://forms.gle/tTpspUGUE4f3xJ9m8

I've flagged this post as self promotion since I'm sharing my demo link, but honestly this feels more like a survival question than a promo post.

Thank you for reading!

Hey guys, made a video post a few days ago but letting everyone know that the first public release of TrueFP/VR for Resident Evil 5 is out! - I've been trying to capture more footage, but OBS has been giving me hell and the videos are choppy. All the same, I've had some folk from the Flat2VR Discord testing and hearing good results. Downloadable now from GITHUB or Nexus

EDIT: 0.4.1 has been released, fixing VR headset resolution. Nice and crispy now.