![]() So, too, does the 40% louder speakers, paired with 3D spatial audio tech. They’re higher res and crisper, which goes a long way toward adding immersion to the whole experience. ![]() The visuals are a marked improvement over the last generation. It’s far easier to imagine working out in Quest 3, versus the professional model. It’s also not a huge bump from the Quest 2’s 500 grams. But at 515 grams, it’s a good bit lighter than the notoriously heavy 722 gram Quest Pro. ![]() Again, I admit that I didn’t have a ton of time with it - I’ll have to save the more comprehensive writeup for a review. I admit I’ve got a childhood soft spot for that one - but also, when I close my eyes and think about VR’s promise, it’s these sorts of immersive experiences. Of the three, Ghostbusters is the one that really stuck with me. Among the titles were Ghostbusters: Rise of the Ghost Lord, Samba de Amiga and Stranger Things: Tender Claws. But that’s kind of the whole deal with these sorts of events. Our hands-on experience with the handset involved some quick game demos, none of them nearly long enough to give you a full-on review. There are also 50 entirely new titles coming up on the platform. Or you can just go ahead and play any of the 500 or so Quest 2-compatible games/apps. In keeping with that, 50 upcoming titles are actually graphicly improved versions of older games. The system is powered by the newly announced Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 chip, which itself promises double the GPU processing power than the Gen 1. Man wearing the Meta Quest 3 mixed reality headset, holding a controller, viewed from the side. The Quest 2, on the other hand, is a week or two short of its third birthday - in fact, it was released so long ago that it still carried the Oculus name. The obvious answer is that the Pro is less than a year old. The big question is why the Quest Pro is sticking around. It’s no surprise, then that the new Quest 3 maintains that technology. For the AR bit, opaque headsets like the Quest Pro rely on passthrough technology, using on-board cameras to effectively reconstruct an image of the world around you. Sticking to mixed reality affords a fuller spectrum of applications, including more immersive VR experiences - including games. Many big corporations will spend $1,500 (or even $3,300) without batting an eye, if it means saving money in the long run.īut Meta is not quite ready to abandon the consumer market just yet - nor is it ready to put all its eggs in the AR basket. Meta and Magic Leap both - I think rightfully - determined that the real money is in selling headsets for training, prototyping and other business-minded functions. The Quest Pro isn’t the Magic Leap, even though the two are effectively going after the same subset of users: enterprise clients. I probably shouldn’t have tried it on immediately after the Magic Leap 2 - which was the ultimate example of very good, but entirely too expensive XR technology. I had the opportunity to try the headset back in January at CES, along with the latest from HTC, Magic Leap and Sony PlayStation. If that sounds at all familiar, it’s because that’s more or less the same feedback we see every time an intriguing new headset hits the market. The consensus - if one can be found - was that the headset presented some impressive technological leaps over its consumer predecessor (the Quest 2), but the $1,500 price tag was ultimately prohibitively expensive. Meta’s Quest Pro arrived to a mixed reaction when it launched late last year.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |