cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

UPDATE: Qualcomm Statement [reversed] Suggesting Quest 2 Sales Numbers

kevinw729
Level 15

kevinw729_0-1637145084021.png

 




https://usa-sciencenews.com/2021/11/16/metas-oculus-quest-2-has-shipped-10-million-units-according-t...

https://vrawards.aixr.org/ "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities" https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
26 REPLIES 26

nalex66
Volunteer Moderator
Volunteer Moderator

That’s in line with my expectations. We knew from the recall earlier this year that there were 4 million sold in the US, and various developers (like Virtual Desktop dev Guy Godin) have said that their sales are roughly 50% in the US and 50% in the rest of the world, so that’s around 8 million several months ago.

 

Not hard to see why, given the amazing value the Quest 2 offers.

i7 5820K @ 4.25GHz | RTX 3080 Ti FTW3 | Gigabyte GA-X99-UD4 | Corsair DDR4 3000 32GB | Corsair HX 750W
SSDs: Intel 660p M.2 2TB, 3x Samsung Evo 1TB | Startech PCIe 4x USB 3.0 | Startech PCIe 2x USB C 3.1 gen2

Agreed - also seems Facebook pays more than half of the hmd, other standalone hmds with the XR2 don't seem to be able to go under $700. That may be the benefit of having the Quest Store - making it possible with a console like approach making up for what you've lost on the hardware on the software - and other hmd producers with XR2s can't do that. So close to impossible for other producers to be competitive - and then there're the drivers, tracking etc., where Oculus has much more experience and know-how. 

 

Really hope Cambria comes with oled and DisplayPort support 🙂

Valve Index & Oculus Rift CV1, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 8TB
"Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"


@RuneSR2 wrote:

Agreed - also seems Facebook pays more than half of the hmd, other standalone hmds with the XR2 don't seem to be able to go under $700. That may be the benefit of having the Quest Store - making it possible with a console like approach making up for what you've lost on the hardware on the software - and other hmd producers with XR2s can't do that. So close to impossible for other producers to be competitive - and then there're the drivers, tracking etc., where Oculus has much more experience and know-how. 

 

Really hope Cambria comes with oled and DisplayPort support 🙂


I personally don't see that happening. I think they will use Cambria to test new features to implement in Quest line and maybe even AR glasses with heavy focus on stand alone for use with the new Metaverse. I think all of "Meta's" focus will be on that going forward. All of course strictly conjecture on my part. I don't think Zuckerberg has any interest in what we would consider a native PC-VR device. I think this Cambria will likely be even a slimmed down version over the Quest. The smaller the footprint, the more folks will buy into it.

Rift CV1| Rift S| Quest| Reverb G2| Index| Vive Pro 2

Nekto2
Level 9

Great news! Lot's of people to join Metaverse! 🙂

 

Those devices (and CPU in it) not only mobile, but also have great connection speeds (support for faster WiFi standards).

I think Metaverse will be mostly about data streams and less about objects or stand alone apps.

 

As an example let's see a multiplayer VR room with 10 ping-pong players. To join it you'll need to get data streams for audio, player movement, ball movement, racquet movement and other events.

You could think that avatars and room itself are just static, but those could also be data streams to lazy load even after you start to hear audio and see people (you'll see low detail avatars and textures first). Metaverse/Digiverse server will select priority for all those data streams and their quality (how fast/detailed those streams would be). You may want to look at a single ping-pong game from all those in the room. So you'll get fast movement updates for nearest racquets, hands moves etc and slow updates for all others (for object coordinates and shape it may be an update once a second or less with some local interpolation in between). Not all of the streams would be real time. Some will get a delay (audio?) and some will be ahead of time (precalculated physics for ball movement).

 

So the question is, where would be sources for all of those data streams? 🙂

Some will start on a different headsets, some will be on servers (physics calculation?) and it may happen that for 5 games in a same room that could be different servers (which a better/faster/near those players).

 

Let's see an example with a video/film streaming, Suppose a person in a multiplayer room (some nice nature or park around) would like to watch a video on a virtual laptop screen and some other person will walk near by like 5 meters away. Will a second person get same data stream with best quality and sound as the first one? Or Digiverse server will select small quality stream (like 100x80px) just to be barely visible from 5 meters on small virtual screen? And what will be audio quality? Low or high def?

And what if that person from other country and have not bought a license for same film? Will there be any video at all? Or low quality film version will be free of charge for this case? What company will make a decision? Will there be a query to film owner company to check if it is allowed? Or there will be trailer only and a request to buy own license? Which country and film distributor that payment will go to? Some countries will have discounts, but only for local language translations. Will all people in a vr room see same translation?

 

Lot's of questions 🙂

 

Or we can't have that film in high quality be streamed for some users and it should be preloaded first? Will that first person know that some people are not able to get those data streams fast enough?

 

And what will happen if you want to "record session" or "stream it as 2D video" (will there be black boxes instead of a film so no license issues)? Or could buy that film later and that same VR session "recording" will show it instead of a black box? 🙂

 

Seems like an async Metaverse World happening :))

 

> I think all of "Meta's" focus will be on that going forward.

Agree!

But same time that means that different devices will be supported. Much like Internet now could be used on lot's of different devices.

 

> .. in what we would consider a native PC-VR device. 

I think it may be possible only if there would be custom PCs with own OS 🙂

Like a back pack PC or some "VR PC for work".

It's too much work to support all different PCs devices and configurations. It could slow VR development a lot. 🙂

DaftnDirect
Volunteer Moderator
Volunteer Moderator

Yeah I think high-end means Cambria will have advanced features.

Possibly they'll throw in no-expense spared components if the idea is that it's also a no-expense spared headset but I don't see that as its purpose. More like a Quest 4 before the Quest 3 is even released.

 

I've long since let go of the idea that PCVR via Link isn't native PC support, for me having tried it with Q1 and now Q2, it is, and probably is for anyone using Quests now, and as we go on to Quest 3 and 4 fewer people are going to see it as anything other than a hybrid system.

 

Their will always be prejudices about stand-alone and its effect on PCVR but having seen Steam numbers grow, they are just prejudices. Meta have done what they've needed to do for stand-alone and PCVR, replacing

a proprietary cable with Link and then wireless Link. those have been the right decisions. They only people that think Quest is a bad move or isn't a hybrid are the people not using it... or not using consumer VR at all. Everyone else is enjoying VR with a Quest as much as prior to Quest, more so if Steam numbers, or the majority of comments on other forums are anything to go by.

 

The focus will definitely be on the Meterverse and hardware features that make that better but nothing so far indicates to me that PCVR would suffer because of it, it's way too simplistic a view and not born out from what's happened so far.

 

Recognition of facial expressions for example may go a long way to addressing the shortcomings of location based VR. I described my experiences of a VR coaster a few years back and the biggest issue I had was that you were isolated from the people you went to have fun with while in VR, you couldn't see them, you couldn't interact with them, nothing, and when you got off and watched others on the ride you were struck with how silent everyone was compared to a non-VR coaster, the whole experience was underwhelming. Seeing other people in VR and their expressions could transform that completely and the more I think that coaster, the more I can see how it could transform any form of interactive VR. That's just an example, but new features often tend to be downvoted based solely on a certain view of what's good for PCVR... or whether it's Meta who's doing it.

Intel 5820K OC@4Ghz, Titan X (Maxwell), 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4, ASRock X99 Taichi, Samsung 500Gb 960 Evo M.2, Corsair H100i v2 Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v21H1 (19043.1348)

nalex66
Volunteer Moderator
Volunteer Moderator

@DaftnDirect wrote:
...

I've long since let go of the idea that PCVR via Link isn't native PC support, for me having tried it with Q1 and now Q2, it is, and probably is for anyone using Quests now, and as we go on to Quest 3 and 4 fewer people are going to see it as anything other than a hybrid system.

 

Their will always be prejudices about stand-alone and its effect on PCVR but having seen Steam numbers grow, they are just prejudices. Meta have done what they've needed to do for stand-alone and PCVR, replacing a proprietary cable with Link and then wireless Link. those have been the right decisions. They only people that think Quest is a bad move or isn't a hybrid are the people not using it... or not using consumer VR at all. Everyone else is enjoying VR with a Quest as much as prior to Quest, more so if Steam numbers, or the majority of comments on other forums are anything to go by.

...


Yeah, I agree with this. Going back to a video cable plus a USB cable (or DisplayPort plus WiFi for the non-video signals) would feel like a step backwards at this point. Link and AirLink were the right moves to advance the state of VR. It already works very well with high-resolution video (I run my PCVR stuff at 5408x2736 these days), and newer wireless standards will improve it further in the future. WiFi 6E will allow greater bandwidth, or perhaps 5G will be the next thing, as some have declared with great certainty. In any event, I think it will be all about portability rather than being tethered to your PC. Meta's eventual goal is for people to be always connected to the Metaverse, which means you need the ability to easily take it with you. Cambria will focus on the features that make that more feasible.

i7 5820K @ 4.25GHz | RTX 3080 Ti FTW3 | Gigabyte GA-X99-UD4 | Corsair DDR4 3000 32GB | Corsair HX 750W
SSDs: Intel 660p M.2 2TB, 3x Samsung Evo 1TB | Startech PCIe 4x USB 3.0 | Startech PCIe 2x USB C 3.1 gen2


@DaftnDirect wrote:

Their will always be prejudices about stand-alone and its effect on PCVR but having seen Steam numbers grow, they are just prejudices. Meta have done what they've needed to do for stand-alone and PCVR, replacing

a proprietary cable with Link and then wireless Link. those have been the right decisions. They only people that think Quest is a bad move or isn't a hybrid are the people not using it... or not using consumer VR at all. Everyone else is enjoying VR with a Quest as much as prior to Quest, more so if Steam numbers, or the majority of comments on other forums are anything to go by.

 


 

Very well said. The thing that is most observable about this reality is the fact that:

  • Quest 2 drives PCVR software sales more than dedicated PCVR HMDs.
  • Quest 2 drives the expansion of Commercial VR more than any other headset.

 

Nearly every public-facing Location-Based VR initiative (studios, developers, etc) support both Quest 1 and Quest 2 as part of their offerings. In many cases, Quest is their primary and only offering. 

 

So if the prejudice against Quest as a piece of hardware was put aside, then we would be left with the hard facts around Quest being responsible for driving success in these key areas.

 

For example, the concept of "support PCVR" shouldn't be limited to just "support Valve" with Index sales or "support HP" with Reverb sales. In order to support PCVR, we need to support the actual development studios building software on the PCVR platform. And it is clear as day that Quest is driving that software platform far more than Index; by at least 3 times the amount.

 

If it wasn't for Quest 2 and its Link support for PCVR, the number of people on Steam's PCVR platform would be incredibly tiny, and PCVR as a whole will be all but dead. Just looking at the Math (not our own personal preferences and bias), it is quite clear that Quest 2 is driving PCVR forward moreso than any other HMD on the market - including Index, Vive, and Reverb.

 

Rinse/repeat for the whole of mainstream LBE VR. 😁

DaftnDirect
Volunteer Moderator
Volunteer Moderator

I'm about to spend a couple hours sitting on my sofa sculpting in Medium, PC is upstairs. I'm comfortable with something decent playing on the hi-fi, this is as real as VR gets as far as I'm concerned. If that scenario can be mirrored on another headset, out of the box, at any price, let me know. It's one of the reasons the headsets are selling.

 

Edit: that'll teach me... spoke too soon, something's updated and now Medium's stuck on the launch screen, wasn't that long ago I last used it with air link!

Intel 5820K OC@4Ghz, Titan X (Maxwell), 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4, ASRock X99 Taichi, Samsung 500Gb 960 Evo M.2, Corsair H100i v2 Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v21H1 (19043.1348)