Bigscreen announced its thin and light PC VR headset, Bigscreen Beyond, is facing delays in production, which the company says will see shipping dates for initial preorders pushed later into October and November.
Bigscreen CEO Darshan Shankar says in a blogpost that manufacturing bottlenecks have led to slower-than-expected production rates, making for what the company calls “approximately 25% of the target [production] rate” in some bottlenecks than previously projected.
Bigscreen says around 20% of US-based pre-orders initially quoted for a Q3 shipping window will be shipped by next week, with the rest expected to be completed by November. Most of those Q3 pre-orders were made in February, which was the company’s “biggest month of sales.”
“The remaining 80% will take another 2-7 weeks to ship. We aim to complete all Q3 preorder shipments by November 6-November 19,” Bigscreen says, noting it will reach “full capacity” production by November.
Meanwhile, the company says more recent pre-orders given a tentative Q4 shipment date are still on track, which includes both US and international orders. Here’s the proposed schedule moving forward:
Image courtesy Bigscreen
Bigscreen details a number of issues that contributed to the delays, including important calibration machines lost in customs on the way to a China-based parts supplier, and being out of stock of certain IPDs as they await additional headsets and parts to be produced.
“We’re taking this seriously,” Bigscreen CEO Darshan Shankar explains. “Solving these bottlenecks requires significant effort with multiple flights to China and our team in California working until 5AM. To ensure we improve our manufacturing and calibration bottlenecks, I will personally remain on-site at our factories in China for the next month to ensure ramp up goes smoothly. In addition to these new machines, we will begin a second night shift at our factories to improve production. We’ve also doubled the size of our LA factory team in the past 2 months.”
The tiny SteamVR headset sets itself apart from the competition by offering a much lighter and compact design than traditional PC VR headsets. It does this by including high-resolution microOLEDs, pancake lenses, outside-in SteamVR tracking, and a custom facepad made specially for each customer to insure zero light leakage. Check out our review of Bigscreen Beyond to learn more, and hear our full impressions about what has undoubtedly become a pioneer in VR headset design.
Quest 3 is an impressive leap in hardware, especially in the visual department, but it continues Meta’s tradition of building great hardware that feels held back by its software.
Update (September 27th, 2023): Fixed the link to the second page at the bottom of this page.
After months of teasing and leaks, Quest 3 is finally, officially, fully announced. Pre-orders start today at $500 and the headset ships on October 10th. While you can get the full specs and details right here, the overall summary is that the headset is an improvement over Quest 2 nearly across the board:
Better lenses
Better resolution
Better processor
Better audio
Better passthrough
Better controllers
Better form-factor
The improvements really add up. The biggest improvement is in the visuals, where Meta finally paired the impressive pancake optics from Quest Pro with a higher resolution display, resulting in a significantly sharper image than Quest 2 that has industry-leading clarity with regards to sweet spot, glare, and distortion.
Quest 3 has two LCD displays, giving it 4.6MP (2,064 × 2,208) resolution per-eye, compared to Quest 2 with 3.5MP (1,832 × 1,920) resolution per-eye. And even though that isn’t a massive leap in resolution, the upgraded lenses are so much sharper and it makes a huge difference compared to just the number of pixels.
Photo by Road to VR
Quest 3 also has an improved IPD (distance between your eyes) function and range. A dial on the headset gives it a continuous adjustment between 58–70mm. Given the eyebox of the optics, Meta officially says the headset is suitable for any IPD between 53–75mm. And because each eye has its own display, adjusting the IPD the the far edges doesn’t sacrifice any field-of-view.
Beyond the IPD upgrade, Quest 3 is the first Quest headset with an eye-relief adjustment, which allows you to move the lenses closer or further from your space. As a notched adjustment that can move between four different positions, it’s a little funky to adjust, but it’s a welcomed addition. Ostensibly this will make the headset more adjustable for glasses users, but as someone who tends to benefit from lower eye-relief, I hope that the nearest adjustment goes far enough.
Between the upgraded IPD adjustment and eye-relief, Quest 3 is the most adjustable Quest headset so far, which means more people can dial into the optimal optical position.
Quest 3 has a slightly modified rear strap, but it’s still a soft strap in the end. A deluxe strap and deluxe strap with battery will be available (Quest 2 deluxe straps are unfortunately not forward-compatible) | Image courtesy Meta
Holistically speaking, Quest 3 has the best display system of any headset on the market to date.
The only major things that haven’t improved over Quest 2 are the default headstrap, battery life, and weight, which are all about the same. The biggest benefit of the new optics is their performance, but their more compact form also means the weight of the headset sits a little closer to your face which makes it feel a little lighter and less bulky.
Powered Up
Photo by Road to VR
When Quest 3 is firing on all cylinders—including software that’s well-optimized for its performance envelope—you’ll wonder how you ever got by with the visuals afforded by Quest 2.
Take Red Matter 2, for instance, which was already one of the best-looking games on Quest 2. Developer Vertical Robot put together a demo app, which lets you instantly switch back and forth between the game’s Quest 2 visuals and newly enhanced Quest 3 visuals, and the difference is staggering. This video gives an idea but doesn’t quite show the full impact of the visual improvements that you feel in the headset itself:
Not only are textures significantly sharper, the extra processing power also allowed the developers to add high-resolution real-time shadows which make a big difference to how grounded the virtual world feels around you.
However, the exceptionally well-optimized Red Matter 2 is a rare exception compared most apps available on the platform. Walking Dead: Saints & Sinners, for instance, looks better on Quest 3… but still pretty rough with blotchy textures and shimmering aliased shadows.
And this was an example that Meta specifically showed to highlight Quest 3’s improved processing power…. And yes, the Walking Dead example shows that the developers used some of the extra power to put more enemies on screen. But the question here is, what good is a phone call if you are unable to speak what good is better optical performance if the textures aren’t matching them in the first place?
So while Quest 3 offers the potential for significantly improved visuals, the reality is that many apps on the platform won’t benefit as much from it as they could, especially in the near-term as developers continue to prioritize optimizing their games for Quest 2 because it will have the larger customer base for quite some time. Optimization (or lack thereof) is a systemic issue that is more complicated to address than just ‘throw more processing power at it’.
Quest 3 is the first headset to debut with Qualcomm’s Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 chip, which claims up to 2.5 times the graphical performance of XR 2 Gen 1, and up to 50% better efficiency between identical workloads | Photo by Road to VR
But as we all know, graphics aren’t everything. Some of the most fun games on the Quest platform aren’t the best looking out there.
But when I say that software is holding back the headset, more than half of that sentiment is driven not by the visuals of apps and games, but by the headset’s overall UI/UX.
This applies to all Quest headsets, of course, but the platform’s obtuse and often buggy interface hasn’t seen the same kind of consistent improvements that the hardware itself has seen from Quest 1 to Quest 3—which is a shame. The friction between a player’s idea of wanting to do something in the headset and how seamless (or not) it is to put on the headset and do that thing is deeply connected to how often and how long they’ll actually enjoy using the headset.
Meta has given no indication that it even acknowledges the deficiency of the Quest UI/UX. With the release of Quest 3, on the interface specifically, it doesn’t seem like it will make any meaningful changes on that front. In terms of UX at least, there’s two general improvements:
Passthrough
Photo by Road to VR
Quest 3’s passthrough view is a big leap over the low-res black-and-white passthrough of Quest 2. Now with full color and higher resolution, passthrough on Quest 3 feels more like something you can use all the time (granted, I haven’t had enough time with the headset to tell if the passthrough latency is low enough to prevent motion discomfort over long periods, which was a problem for me on Quest Pro).
And while it isn’t clear to me if the software will enable passthrough by default (as it should), being able to easily see a reasonably high quality view outside of the headset is a notable UX improvement.
Not only does it make users feel less disconnected from their environment when putting on the headset (until they’re actually ready to be immersed in the content of their choice), it also makes it easier to glance at the real world without removing the headset entirely. That’s useful for talking to someone else in the room or looking to make sure a pet (or child) hasn’t walked into your playspace.
I was surprised to see that with the newly added depth sensor there’s still warping around your hands, but overall the passthrough image is much sharper and has better dynamic range. Unlike Quest Pro, I was able to at least roughly read the time and some notifications on my phone—an important part of not feeling completely disconnected from the world outside the headset.
This also opens the door to improving the flow of putting on the headset in the first place; if passthrough is enabled by default, Meta should encourage users to put on the headset first, then find their controllers (instead of awkwardly trying to fit the headset with controllers already in their hands). And when the session is over, hopefully they turn on passthrough and instruct people to put down their controllers first, then remove the headset. These are the kinds of UX details the company tends to miss entirely… but we’ll see.
Room Scanning
The other real UX improvement coming with Quest 3 could be automatic room scanning, which automatically creates a playspace boundary for users instead of making them create their own. I say “could be” because I didn’t have enough time in my hands-on with this feature to tell how quickly and reliably it works. More testing to come.
Similar to implementations we’ve seen on other headsets, the room scanning feature encourages users to look around their space, giving the headset time to build a map of the geometry in the room. With enough of the space scanned, a playspace boundary will be created. The same system can also be used to establish the position of walls, floors, and other geometry that can be used in mixed reality applications.
Paid Parking
Also worth mentioning is the optional (and fairly expensive) official Quest 3 dock. Keeping the headset and controllers powered, updated, and ready to go is a big challenge when it comes to VR friction. Having a dedicated place to put your headset and controllers that also charges them is definitely a boon to the UX.
Photo by Road to VR
This feels like something that should really be part of the package, but you’ll have to pay an extra $130 for the privilege. Hopefully we’ll see more affordable Quest 3 docks from third-parties in the near future.
Bigscreen Beyond is the most interesting and promising new dedicated PC VR headset to come out in years, and while there’s a lot to like, we’re still waiting on a key piece that will make or break the headset.
Bigscreen Beyond has one goal in mind: make the smallest possible headset with the highest possible image quality.
Generally speaking, this unlikely headset (born from a VR software startup, after all) has ‘pulled it off.’ It’s an incredibly compact VR headset with built-in SteamVR tracking. It feels like a polished, high-end product with a look and feel that’s all its own. The visuals are great, though not without a few compromises. And it delivers something that no other headset to date has: a completely custom facepad that’s specially made for each customer.
I’ll dig more into the visual details soon, but first I need to point out that Bigscreen Beyond missing something important: built-in audio.
While there’s an official deluxe audio strap on the way, as of right now the only way to use Bigscreen Beyond is with your own headphones. In my case that means a pair of wireless gaming headphones connected to my PC. And it also means another thing to put on my head.
For some headsets this would be a notable but not deal-breaking inconvenience, for Bigscreen Beyond, however, it’s amplified because the headset’s custom-fit facepad means absolutely zero light leakage. It wasn’t until I started using Beyond that I realize just how often I use the nose-gap in the bottom of most headsets to get a quick glimpse into the real world, whether that’s to grab controllers, make sure I didn’t miss an important notification on my phone, or even pick up a pair of headphones.
With no nose-gap and no passthrough camera, you are 100% blind to the real world when you put on Beyond. Then you need to feel around to find your headphones. Then you need to feel around for your controllers.
Oops, something messed up on your PC and you need to restart SteamVR? Sure, you can lift the headset to your forehead to deal with it in a pinch, but then you put it back down and realize you got some oil on the lenses from your hair or forehead. So now you need to wipe the lenses… ok, let me put down the controllers, take off the headphones, take off the headset, wipe the lenses, then put on the headset, feel around for my headphones, then feel around for my controllers. Now I want to fix my headstrap… oops the headphones are in the way. Let me take those off for a minute…
All of this and more was the most frustrating part of an otherwise quite good experience when using Beyond. And sure, I could use wireless earbuds or even external speakers. But both have downsides that don’t exist with a built-in audio solution.
Photo by Road to VR
A lack of built-in audio on a VR headset just feels like a huge step back in 2023. It’s a pain in the ass. Full stop.
Until we have the upcoming deluxe audio strap to pair with Beyond, it feels incomplete. We’re patiently waiting to get our hands on the strap—as it will really make-or-break the headset—and plan to update our review when that time comes. Bigscreen says it expects the deluxe audio start to be available sometime in Q4.
Bigscreen Beyond Review
With the audio situation in the back of our minds, we can certainty talk about the rest of the headset. Before we dive in, here’s a look at the tech specs for some context:
IPD (fixed, customized per headset) eye-relief (fixed, customized per facepad)
IPD Adjustment Range
53–74mm (fixed, single IPD value per device)
Connectors
DisplayPort 1.4, USB 3.0 (2x)
Accessory Ports
USB 2.0 (USB-C connector) (1x)
Cable Length
5m
Tracking
SteamVR Tracking 1.0 or 2.0 (external beacons)
On-board Cameras
None
Input
SteamVR Tracking controllers
On-board Audio
None
Optional Audio
Audio Strap accessory, USB-C audio output
Microphone
Yes (2x)
Pass-through view
No
Weight
170–185g
MSRP
$1,000
MSRP (with tracking & controllers)
$1,580
And here’s where it fits into the landscape of high-end PC VR headsets from a pricing standpoint:
Bigscreen Beyond
Varjo Aero
Vive Pro 2
Reverb G2
Valve Index
Headset Only
$1,000
$1,000
$800
–
$500
Full Kit
$1,580
$1,580
$1,400
$600
$1,000
Smaller Than it Looks
Bigscreen Beyond is an incredibly unique offering in a landscape of mostly much larger and much bulkier PC VR headsets. Beyond is even smaller than it looks in photos. In fact, it’s so small that it nearly fits inside other VR headsets.
Getting it so small required that the company individually create custom-fit facepads for each and every customer. Doing so involves using an app to 3D scan your face, which is sent to the company and used as the blueprint to make the facepad that ships with your headset. At present the face scan is only supported on iOS devices (specifically iPhone XR or newer) which means anyone without access to such a device can’t even order the headset.
And this isn’t an illusion of customization, the company isn’t just picking from one of, say, 5 or 10 facepad shapes to find the one that most closely fits your face. Each facepad is completely unique—and the result is that it fits your face like a glove.
Photo by Road to VR
That means zero light leakage (which can be good for immersion, but problematic for the reasons described above). The headset is also dialed in—at the hardware level—for your specific IPD, based on your face scan.
Eyebox is Everything
If there’s one thing you should take away from this review it’s that Bigscreen Beyond has very good visuals and is uniquely conformable, but getting your eyes in exactly the correct position is critical for a good experience.
The eyebox (the optimal optical position relative to the lenses) is so tight that even small deviations can amplify artifacts and reduce the field-of-view. In any other headset it would be far too small to make the headset even a viable product, but Beyond’s commitment to custom-fit facepads makes it possible because they have relatively precise control over where the customer’s pupil will sit.
The first facepad the company sent me fit my face well, but the headset’s sweet spot (the clarity across lens) felt so tight that it made the already somewhat small field-of-view feel even smaller—too small for my taste. But by testing the headset without any facepad, I could tell that having my eyes closer would give me a notably better visual experience.
When I reached out to the company about this, they sent back a newly made facepad, this time with and even tighter eye-relief. This was the key to opening up the headset’s field-of-view, sweet spot, and improving some other artifacts just enough to the point that it didn’t feel too much of a sacrifice next other headsets.
Here’s a look at my field-of-view measurements for Bigscreen Beyond (with the optimal facepad), next to some other PC VR headsets. While the field-of-view only increased slightly from the first facepad to the second, the improvement in the sweet spot was significant.
Personal Measurements – 64mm IPD (minimum-comfortable eye-relief, no glasses, measured with TestHMD 1.2)
Bigscreen Beyond
Varjo Aero
Vive Pro 2
Reverb G2
Valve Index
Horizontal FOV
98°
84°
102°
82°
106°
Vertical FOV
90°
65°
78°
78°
106°
It’s sort of incredible that moving from the first facepad to the second made such an improvement. At most, the difference in my pupil position between the two facepad was likely just a handful of milimeters. But the headset’s eye-box is just so tight that even small deviations will influence the visual experience.
Comfort & Visuals
Photo by Road to VR
With the ideal facepad—and ignoring the annoyance of dealing with an off-board audio solution—Bigscreen beyond felt like I jumped a few years forward into the future of headsets. It’s tiny, fits my face perfectly, the OLED displays offer true blacks, and the resolution is incredibly sharp with zero evidence of any screen-door-effect (unlit space between pixels).
While it does feel like you give up some field-of-view compared to other headsets, and there’s notable glare, the compact form-factor and light weight really makes a big difference to wearability.
With most VR headsets today I find myself adjusting them slightly on my head every 10 or 15 minutes to relieve pressure points and stay comfortable over a longer period. With Beyond, I found myself making those adjustments far less often, or not at all in some sessions. When playing over longer periods you just don’t notice the headset nearly as much as others, and you’re even less likely to have the occasional bonk on the headset from your flailing controllers, thanks to its much smaller footprint.
Brightness vs. Persistence
While Beyond’s resolution is very good—with resolving power that I found about equal to Varjo’s Aero headset—the default brightness level (100) leads to more persistence blur than I personally think is reasonable. Fortunately Bigscreen makes available a simple utility that lets you turn down brightness in favor of lower persistence blur.
I found that dialing it down to 50 was roughly the optimal balance between brightness and persistence for my taste. This level keeps the image sharp during head movement, but leaves dark scenes truly dark. Granted you can adjust the brightness on the fly if you really want.
Of course this will be content dependent, and Bigscreen is ostensibly tuning the headset with an eye toward movie viewing (considering their VR app is all about movie watching), where persistence blur wouldn’t be quite as bad because you move your head considerably less while watching a movie vs. playing a VR game.
Clarity
While Beyond doesn’t have Fresnel lenses, its pancake optics still end up with a lot of glare in high contrast scenes. I’d say it’s not quite as bad as what you get with most Fresnel optics, but it’s still quite notable. While Fresnel lenses tend to create ‘god rays’ which emanate from specific objects in the scene, Beyond’s pancake optics create glare that’s appears less directly attached to what’s in the scene.
Beyond the issues noted so far, other visual factors are all top notch: no pupil swim, geometric distortion, or chromatic aberration (again, this is all highly dependent on how well your facepad fits, so if you see much of the above, you might want to look into the fit of the headset).
Varjo, the Finland-based creator of high-end XR headsets, announced their businesses and prosumer-focused SteamVR headset Aero is now permanently 50% off its original $2,000 price tag.
Aero is essentially a pared down version of the company’s strictly enterprise headsets, offering industry-leading fidelity and advanced features such as eye-tracking.
Released in October 2021, Aero was (and still is) the company’s least expensive headset; it’s now priced at $990 (€990), bringing the Helsinki, Finland-based company into a new price segment which its hoping will appeal to at-home simulator fans.
Photo by Road to VR
Ther news was revealed during the company’s hour-long ‘Aeroversity’ livestream celebrating the device’s two years since launch. Besides the price drop reveal, Varjo focused heavily on the headset’s use in both driving and flight sims.
When we reviewed Varjo Aero in late 2021, we called it the “dream headset for VR simmers who aren’t afraid to trade cash for immersion,” as it offered some pretty stunning clarity (35 PPD) that’s beaten only by the company’s more expensive headsets.
Notably, the $990 package doesn’t include SteamVR base stations and motion controllers, making it appeal mostly to users already in the SteamVR tracking ecosystem. What’s in the box: Varjo Aero headset, VR adapter, power supply unit with 6 x power plugs (EURO, UK, US, AUS, KOR, CHN), in-ear headphones with microphone, user guide, cleaning cloth.
The price drop looks to be, in part, a response to the growing number of new PC VR headsets offering higher resolution micro displays, notably with the Bigscreen Beyond leading the charge at $1,000 for just the headset, which includes 2,560 × 2,560 (6.5MP) per-eye resolution microOLEDs clocked at 75/90Hz.
Immersed, the team behind the titular XR productivity and co-working app, announced Visor last month, a slim and light VR headset designed for work. Now the studio has opened “fully refundable” pre-orders for two distinct flavors of the device.
Immersed is offering a 2.5K per-eye Visor model for $500 and a 4K per-eye Visor model for $750. Besides including different resolution OLED microdisplays, functionally both models are the same. The company is also offering a Founder’s Edition Visor 4K for $1,000, which is said to ship six months before the standard Visor 4K.
Immersed says on the website both 2.5K and 4K headsets include:
Hand & eye tracking
6 Degrees of freedom
5+ Screens
100° Field of view
Ultra widescreen
Custom IPD, nose-insert, and light-blocker
25% lighter than a smartphone
HD Color Passthrough
Stems & strap attachments Included
Image courtesy Immersed
It’s still early days, it seems. The Visor hardware is said to be “both wired and wireless,” indicating it has onboard processing for mobile VR experiences and a battery, however the company hasn’t released any specs yet on chipset or battery life.
The company says headsets are custom-built for each user however, which includes locking in each user’s interpupillary distance (IPD) and shipping nose inserts and light blockers which are “closest to your face’s shape,” Immersed says in the product’s description.
As for shipment dates, so far Immersed says it’s slated to “commence and continue [shipment] throughout 2024.” What’s more, Immersed says it’s offering those pre-orders as “full refundable reservations.”
Here’s the fine print:
Refund Policy: Preorders are fully refundable reservations. You may cancel your reservation at any time before your Visor is produced and receive a full refund to the original payment method by emailing [email protected]. Due to the custom-built nature of Visor, fulfillment time will vary and shipment dates are our best estimates. Delays, if any, will be communicated via email.
There’s a rumor going around that Nintendo is making a VR headset in partnership with Google. The rumor is still unconfirmed, but when the world’s oldest extant gaming company finally thinks it’s time to make a dedicated XR device, you know it’s going to be something special. Having seen how far the technology has come though, it raises a question: why hasn’t Nintendo made a VR headset yet?
Nintendo basically has a singular MO, and it does it well: create broadly accessible hardware to serve as a vehicle for its exclusive swath of family friendly games. Ok, it’s more complicated than that, but it’s a good starting point to understand why Nintendo hasn’t made a proper VR headset yet, and probably won’t for some time yet to come.
Wait. Didn’t Nintendo have that Virtual Boy thing in the ’90s? And what about Labo VR for Switch? Those were VR headsets, right? Yes, and no. Or rather, no and kind of (in that order). I’ll get to those in a bit.
In short, the reason Nintendo hasn’t made a real VR platform like Meta Quest has a lot to do with risk aversion, since the company generally prefers to wait until technologies are more mature and have proven market potential. Over the years, Nintendo has also become increasingly reliant on big singular projects which, while not always exactly cutting-edge, have allowed it to comfortably exist outside of the PlayStation and Xbox binary.
Lateral Thinking with ‘Withered’ Technology
Much of Nintendo’s market strategy can be attributed to Gunpei Yokoi, the prolific Nintendo designer best known for pioneering the company’s handheld segment. Yokoi is credited with designing Nintendo’s first handheld, Game & Watch, which at its 1980 launch made use of the cheap and abundant liquid crystal displays and 4-bit microcontrollers initially conceived for calculators. Among many other accomplishments, Yokoi is credited with designing Gameboy, creating the D-pad, and producing both Metroid and Kid Icarus. His last project before leaving the company in 1996: Virtual Boy. More on that later.
Yokoi’s career at Nintendo spanned 31 years, covering its transformation from the then nearly century-old Japanese playing card company to worldwide video gaming powerhouse. His philosophy, mentioned in his Japan-only book ‘Gunpei Yokoi Game Hall’ (横井軍平ゲーム館), sums up the sort of thinking that vaulted Nintendo to the world stage; Yokoi coined the phrase “lateral thinking with withered technology,” outlining the company’s strategy of using mature technology which is both cheap and well understood, and then finding novel and fun ways of applying it to games. That’s basically been the case from Game & Watch all the way to Switch and Switch Lite.
And it’s not just handhelds though. Nintendo consoles don’t tend to focus on cutting-edge specs either (as any former Wii owners can attest). For Nintendo console owners across the years, it’s more about being able to play games from a host of recognizable franchises such as Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros, Pokémon, Pikmin, and Animal Crossing. Since the success of Wii, it’s also been about creating new types of games centered around novel input schemes, like how the Wiimote lets you bowl in Wii Sports, or how Joy-Cons let you grove on-the-go in Just Dance. In short, Nintendo is really good at serving people with what they’re already used to and baking in novelty that owners can engage with or equally ignore.
Virtual Boy Failure, Labo VR Experiment
When Nintendo sticks to its principles, we usually get a DS, Switch, Gameboy, Wii, Game Boy Advance, 3DS, NES, SNES, Game & Watch, Nintendo 64—10 of the top 20 bestselling video game platforms in history. When they don’t, we get Virtual Boy.
Accounts hold that Yokoi was rushed to finish up work on Virtual Boy so the company could focus on the launch of Nintendo 64, which is partially why it failed. Timed right at the peak of the ’90s craze, Nintendo released what essentially was no more than a 3D version of Gameboy—a 32-bit tabletop standalone console that just so happened to have stereoscopic displays, making it no more a VR headset than Nintendo 3DS. Besides relying on some objectively useless stereoscopy, being shaped like a headset, and having ‘Virtual’ in the name, that’s where the comparisons between it and virtual reality stop.
Image courtesy Evan-Amos, Wiki Commons
Note: Every time someone refers to Virtual Boy as a VR headset, or pretends to wear it like one in a YouTube thumbnail, I scream into an empty paint bucket, hoping the residual fumes will calm my nerves.
There was no head tracking, motion controllers, or even games that wouldn’t have played equally as well on a standard Gameboy. Moreover, its red monochrome displays were criticized for giving players eye strain, nausea, and headaches during gameplay. Its awkward tabletop stand also didn’t articulate enough to adjust to each user’s height, making users strain their necks to play. The nail in the coffin: it was priced at $180 at launch in 1995, just $20 less than Nintendo 64 which arrived one year later and promised to deliver true 3D graphics (something which Virtual Boy couldn’t do, despite supporting stereoscopy!).
Still, I don’t think Nintendo tied Virtual Boy’s failure to the larger failure of VR at the time, but rather recognized what happens when it innovates in the wrong direction and abandons its core principles. Nintendo’s successive handhelds focused on keeping the pocketable form-factor, and typically offered a generation or two of backwards compatibility so consumers could easily upgrade. Gameboys to follow were truly portable, and offered all of the games you wanted to play on the bus, train, plane, wherever.
But what about Nintendo Labo VR for Switch? Well, it was a pretty awesome experiment when it was first released in 2019. The DIY accessory pack made of cardboard actually got Nintendo involved in VR for the first time, and it did it with the same family friendly flair the company seems to bring to everything it does.
Image courtesy Nintendo
It’s a fun little kit that uses Joy-Cons in some unique ways, but with only a few high-quality native VR ‘taster’ experiences to play with, it’s basically a one-and-done deal that Nintendo critically hasn’t iterated on beyond its initial release despite a generally good reception from its target market.
Granted, Nintendo did provide Labo VR support for a number of first-party titles, including Super Smash Bros Ultimate, Super Mario Odyssey, and The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, but this just provides basic 3D viewer support, and doesn’t convert these games into any sort of full VR experience.
To boot, Labo VR actually has Unity support, meaning third-party developers can create games and experiences for it; the fact is the headset and slot-in Switch form-factor just isn’t built for long-term play like a standalone or PC VR headset though. It’s front-heavy, doesn’t have a strap, and just isn’t the basis of a modern VR platform. It’s a toy more than a platform.
Switching It Up with One Big Platform
The big question is: when? When will Nintendo feel like VR is mature enough to enter in full force with something like a standalone headset, replete with a host of beloved Nintendo franchise games? If past performance predicts future outcomes, it’s pretty unlikely we’ll be seeing such a device in the near term.
The company has spent the better part of the last decade recovering from the failure of Wii U, the company’s least successful video game console to date (next to Virtual Boy). Going headfirst into the XR niche soon with a dedicated hardware release doesn’t seem plausible given how focused the company has become on melding both handheld and console product development with Switch.
Fun Labo VR adds-on aside, Nintendo has expressed some skepticism of VR in the past. Speaking to TIME, Nintendo’s Shigeru Miyamoto said in 2014 that VR just wasn’t the sort of broadly accessible player experience the company was trying to crack with Wii U:
“When you think about what virtual reality is, which is one person putting on some goggles and playing by themselves kind of over in a corner, or maybe they go into a separate room and they spend all their time alone playing in that virtual reality, that’s in direct contrast with what it is we’re trying to achieve with Wii U. And so I have a little bit of uneasiness with whether or not that’s the best way for people to play.”
Granted, the technology has changed a great deal since 2014, the same year Oculus Rift DK2 came out. With mixed reality passthrough becoming a standard on standalone headsets such as Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro, Nintendo would be crazy not keep tabs on the technology, albeit with same hesitation it has mostly shown in the past with its adoption of cutting-edge technology.
Nintendo VR patent | Image courtesy USPTO, via Levelup
In fact, the company is actively creating patents around mixed reality systems that focus on cooperative gameplay using players both in and out of a headset. Above is one such patent from 2022 showing a multiplayer game based on some sort of proposed tabletop platformer.
Unlike a lot of the tech companies out there trying to spin up multiple products and maintain large, interconnected platforms, Nintendo’s main MO is to gamble on one big thing that will probably come with additional functions and a few input quirks. Whether that’s some sort of additional headset peripheral or not… you never know. In the end, the more inclusive nature of mixed reality may change some minds over at Nintendo, although you can bet whatever comes next from the Japanese gaming company will be another experiment, or similar add-on that uses mature hardware in a new and different way.
– – — – –
What is certain is Nintendo isn’t in any rush, as both hardware and software sales of traditional games still far outweigh VR games. Still, you can’t help but wonder what a Nintendo headset might look like, and what a full-throated XR release from Nintendo would do for generations of kids (and adults) to come.
Bigscreen announced it’s now shipping Beyond, the company’s thin and light PC VR headset unveiled earlier this year.
Created by the same team behind theBigscreen Beta VR app, Bigscreen Beyond is a tethered PC VR headset that uses Valve’s SteamVR tracking standard. Priced at $1,000, the headset makes for an interesting value proposition for users already hooked into the SteamVR hardware ecosystem, offering up a slim design thanks to the inclusion of pancake lenses and micro-OLEDs. Check out the specs at the end of the article.
Now Bigscreen says it’s started shipping Beyond, with packages going out daily to customers in the United States; international shipments are said to begin in “mid to late Q4.”
“Since launching in February, demand was stronger than expected and we’ve got an overwhelming amount of headsets to build! We’ve spent the past few months ramping up production in order to ship tens of thousands of units in the coming months ahead,” the company says.
To meet demand, Bigscreen says it’s hiring more engineering and production staff for its LA-based factory, and meeting with overseas manufacturing partners in China to ensure production proceeds “without a hitch.”
There’s also a bigger international expansion on the horizon. In addition to taking preorders from customers in the US, UK, most of Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan, the company is also set to expand preorders to Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. The company says it also plans to sell in South Korea, Israel, “and more soon.”
Check out our hands-on with Beyond back in March, where we tested out every aspect of the headset, including its display clarity, brightness, custom ergonomics, and got to grips with its next-gen form-factor.
Imaging company Almalence has released a trial plugin for its Digital Lens technology which makes use of eye-tracking to purportedly increase the resolving power and clarity of XR headsets.
Almalense argues that the lenses on most XR headsets today aren’t being used to their fullest potential. By taking advantage of eye-tracking and smarter calibration, the company says its image pre-processing technology can actually increase the resolving power of a headset, including expanding the ‘sweet spot’ (the part of the lens with the highest visual fidelity).
The company has released a trial version of its technology through a plugin that works with Pico 3 Neo Pro Eye, HP Reverb G2 Omnicept, and HTC Vive Pro Eye. The plugin works with OpenXR compatible content, and even allows users to switch back and forth between each headset’s built-in image processing and the Almalence Digital Lens processing.
Based on through-the-lens demonstrations by the company, the technology does objectively increase the resolving power of the headsets. The company focuses on doing more advanced pre-processing to account for artifacts introduced by the lens, like chromatic aberration and image distortion. In essence the software increases the sharpness of the image by making the light passing through the lens land more precisely where it’s supposed to.
Almalence has shared heat maps comparing the changes in visual quality with and without its image technology, along with a broader explanation of how it works.
Another big advantage over the status quo, Almalence says, is the Digital Lens tech uses eye-tracking to perform these corrections in real-time, meaning that as you move your eyes around the scene (and off-axis from the center of the lens), the corrections are updated to account for the new angles. This can expand the ‘sweet spot’ of the lens and ‘pupil swim’ by making adjustments to account for the position of the pupil relative to the center of the lens. This video demonstrates the pupil swim correction:
The plugin, which anyone can use until January 2024, aims to demonstrate the company’s claims. Ultimately it appears the company wants to license its technology to headset makers to improve image quality out of the box.
The team behind XR productivity and co-working platform Immersed announced it’s creating its own PC VR headset designed for work.
Following the lead set by Bigscreen with its recently unveiled PC VR headset Bigscreen Beyond, Immersed has partnered a still unnamed “tech giant” to release its own VR hardware for the first time.
Dubbed the Immerse Visor, the tethered PC VR headset’s primary claim to fame is its slim and light design coupled with dual 4K micro OLEDs, providing a 100-degree field of view. It’s said to be “25 percent lighter” than a smartphone, probably putting its weight somewhere below 200g.
It’s also slated to include optical inside-out tracking, so users won’t need external base stations like with headsets that hook into the SteamVR tracking standard, such as Bigscreen Beyond and Valve Index.
Exact specs and features are still thin on the ground, however Visor is slated to provide a “custom fit,” making each headset unique to the user. While the studio hasn’t revealed how it will achieve this, it may do something similar to Bigscreen, which provides Beyond users to download an iOS app which scans the contours of their face, allowing the company to create custom facial interfaces.
It’s probably not going to be cheap either—at least not cheaper than hardware like Quest 2 and Quest 3, which are undoubtedly subsidized to incentivize software sales. The company says its main focus is professionals working on laptops, allowing users to have multiple screens. Immersed hasn’t announced pricing yet, however pre-orders are said arrive at some point later this year, so we should know more then.
You can watch the full announcement below, which includes interviews with the creators at Immersed.
“I am afraid the VIVE Cosmos headset has been discontinued in the US. I suggest you to check with resellers if they have it available,” an HTC service representative confirmed with Road to VR, echoing the statement provided to Kody1996.
At the time of this writing, new units are still available direct from HTC in select markets, including Europe, Australia, Taiwan, and Japan.
Photo by Road to VR
Vive Cosmos has always been a bit of an odd duck. Launching a little over a year after Vive Pro hit the market, Cosmos was set to be the company’s first consumer VR headset since the original HTC Vive. Cosmos’ claim to fame in 2019: integrated audio, competitive displays, and an inside-out optical tracking, which was… not great.
At its 2019 launch, the $700 Cosmos was sandwiched between two primary competitors: Oculus Rift S on the low-end at $400 and Valve Index on the high-end at $1,000 (controllers and base stations included). It would have to perform better than Rift S to defend its seat in the middle ground, but it was actually so bad at launch we postponed our review because we thought we had received a faulty unit. Nope. The headset’s inside-out tracking was just really unreliable in everything but perfect lighting conditions.
Those tracking woes were partially improved with successive updates, although the only real way to get ‘perfect’ tracking out of the headset was to ditch its modular faceplate and middling controllers and swap it out for the platform’s rock-solid SteamVR-tracking faceplate, courtesy of Vive Cosmos Elite. When Cosmos Elite launched in 2020, that would have set you back $900 for the all-in kit, putting it $100 below Index, which is still broadly considered the reigning champ for best all-around PC VR headset.
Despite lowering the price of the all-in Cosmos Elite kit in the US from $900 to $750, and even offering a headset-only option for as little as $550, HTC’s modular headset never really managed to serve up competition to Oculus or Valve, making only a sliver of an in-road on Steam in its first year.
John Carmack, legendary programmer and former CTO of Oculus, is known for giving his unfiltered thoughts on almost every aspect of the XR industry. While he departed Meta in December, concluding his “decade in VR,” Carmack is still very interested in the medium, as he recently went hands-on with one of the latest PC VR headsets to hit the scene, the slim and light Bigscreen Beyond.
Bigscreen Beyond is a tethered PC VR headset that uses Valve’s SteamVR tracking standard, which starting at $1,000 for just the headset makes it an interesting value proposition for users already hooked into the SteamVR hardware ecosystem. It’s largely praised for its slim and light profile, which is thanks to the inclusion of pancake lenses and micro-OLEDs, serving up 2,560 × 2,560 pixels per eye at 70 to 90 Hz refresh.
You’ve probably already heard what we think of it though. Now for the master:
“Bigscreen Beyond feels like a prop for a futuristic movie, but it works!” Carmack said in a Twitter thread on Monday. “Far and away the smallest and lightest PC VR headset.”
That’s high praise coming from a key figure in the Oculus genesis story, not to mention co-founder and lead programmer of id Software, the studio behind pioneering ’90s 3D games Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, and Quake.
Image courtesy John Carmack
To hear all of Carmack’s thoughts on Bigscreen Beyond, we’ve formatted his tweets below for easier reading:
Bigscreen Beyond feels like a prop for a futuristic movie, but it works! Far and away the smallest and lightest PC VR headset.
As a result of the iPhone based face scanning before ordering, the fit is perfect, with zero light leaks. The custom printed facial interface is comfortable, but not breathable, so it isn’t great for fitness activities.
The prescription lens inserts snap in with magnets and work well. The visuals are a trade off vs Quest Pro. The resolution is clearly higher, but there are more internal reflections in the pancake optics, and the quality falls off more toward the edges. There are parts of the view where screens look fantastic, good enough for actual productivity work, but not across the entire view.
I sorely miss integrated audio. Having to mess with headphones severely impacts the minimalist feel of the headset. I know some people have strong opinions, but I still feel Quest made the right decisions around audio.
The cable to the PC and the tracking base stations are the biggest downside. The magic of stand-alone VR is real, and while some people happily trade it away for the raw power and flexibility of a PC, I wouldn’t recommend any PC VR setup as an entry point to VR.
For people considering an upgrade to a PC VR system, Bigscreen Beyond should be in the mix. I am very happy to see this extreme focus on light weight, and I hope it impacts Meta’s future designs.
In a follow-up tweet, Carmack points to a review from Adam Savage’s Tested, which he says “hits most of my points in more depth.”
In it, Tested’s Norman Chan reports back after having lived with the headset for a month, using a development unit as the office’s primary PC VR headset. Chan shows through-the-lens images, and discusses “the good, the bad, and the weird with this unique approach to high-end bespoke VR,” the video’s description reads.
Quest 3 was announced just three weeks ago, and yet the headset is already listed at Best Buy. Though its resolution hasn’t been officially announced, the page gives us a big clue.
Meta offered a partial reveal of Quest 3 earlier this month, promising that we’d get a more full look at the new headset during the company’s annual XR conference, Meta Connect, at the end of September. The timing of the headset’s reveal came just ahead of the reveal of Apple Vision Pro (and we don’t think that was a coincidence).
The store page already lists the headset with a model number, SKU, UPC, correct price, and product description, suggesting this isn’t an early fluke, but rather a product page for a soon-to-launch product. These details also suggest that Quest 3 has already passed FCC certification, which is required before it can go on sale.
And there’s a big hint on the page about the Quest 3 resolution, which Meta has yet to confirm.
According to the description, the headset has “a nearly 30% leap in resolution from Quest 2.”
Quest 2 has a resolution of about 3.5MP (1,920 × 1,832 per-eye); a 30% jump should mean Quest 3 has around 4.5MP—probably meaning around 2,160 × 2,160 resolution per-eye.
An Early Release Date for Quest 3?
Prior to its appearance at Best Buy we would have guessed that Quest 3 would launch in mid-October at the earliest—almost four months from now—which would align with both the 2023 holiday shopping season and the same timeframe of the Quest 2 launch.
But with the Best Buy product listing, it’s starting to look like the headset is rearing to go, making it feel like there’s a chance that Meta doesn’t just reveal the headset at its Connect conference at the end of September, but might even make it available immediately thereafter.
But why? Well, it’s clear that Meta has been responding to Apple’s moves now that Vision Pro is out in the wild. Even though the $500 Quest 3 isn’t remotely in the same ballpark as the $3,500 Vision Pro, Meta can already see the writing on the wall. The company may be posturing to protect its early lead in the XR space, trying to get Quest 3 out the door and in as many hands as possible before the Vision Pro’s early 2024 release.
