The Meta Quest 2 remains the most popular VR headset in the world, at least if we assume that Steam’s hardware survey is an accurate indicator of the VR headset market.
And it isn’t even close: With 38 percent of the userbase, it has more than double the market share of Valve’s own PC-focused Index HMD. So, why is Meta’s newer and far-more-advanced Quest 3 headset so far behind its predecessor at just 17 percent in the same survey?
The answer is obviously its price.
The Quest 2 is still the cheapest standalone VR headset you can find at most retailers, including crucial brick-and-mortar stores where VR headset demos are at least possible, if not commonplace. And it can be connected to a gaming PC with Steam, giving it more functionality than a PC-only headset (even if it’s using far-less-complex tech).
Originally sold at $250 and available at varying prices and bundles since its 2020 launch, the Quest 2 isn’t exactly an impulse purchase, but it is in the same ballpark as the Nintendo Switch, at least.
As for the Quest 3, it launched at $500 for its cheapest version, which means it competes more directly with the PlayStation 5 or Steam Deck. So it’s hardly surprising that it isn’t flying off the shelves.
Meta is now trying to alleviate that issue with the Quest 3S. This cheaper variant will launch on October 15th at $300, much closer to the crucial entry point of the Quest 2. It’s not as sleek as the Quest 3, lacking the “pancake” lenses that made last year’s update considerably thinner. But it has most of the other crucial components of that improved design.
Those components include an identical Snapdragon XR2 processor and 8GB of RAM for games running on the standalone hardware, color pass-through cameras for augmented reality (and, you know, seeing what’s around you so you don’t step on the cat), and the improved motion controllers that no longer need plastic halos.
Facebook’s parent company is discontinuing both the Quest 2, which has been sold alongside the Quest 3 for the last year, as well as the $1,000 Quest Pro. The latter originally launched at $1,500 and was a showpiece for cutting-edge VR tech, allegedly targeted at industrial purposes.
Jim Martin / Foundry
Jim Martin / Foundry
Jim Martin / Foundry
Between all that and a steep price cut for the Quest 3, even as it remains a more premium option versus the Quest 3S, it looks like Meta is earnestly aiming for cash-strapped consumers — and they need to.
Meta’s Reality Labs is losing billions of dollars every quarter, betting big on a VR and AR future that doesn’t seem to be materializing any time soon. Despite integrations with some of the most-used social networking platforms on the planet and a multi-year pandemic that seemed ideal for popularizing virtual spaces, both regular users and businesses have balked at Mark Zuckerberg’s dream of a metaverse. Reinventing the internet in VR — owned, monetized, and crypto-enhanced by Facebook across every facet — doesn’t appeal to anyone who isn’t Facebook.
That doesn’t mean that VR or AR are duds in terms of technology. (I’m personally a big fan of the tech when it comes to gaming.) Apple, Samsung, Google, Valve, and others are still investing heavily in the space, even if not as fervently as they once were. But Meta’s pockets aren’t bottomless, and they’ll have to actually sell headsets in order to make money and build a platform. Making those headsets affordable is the first step… it’s just unfortunate that it took Meta an extra year (and an extra $20 billion or so) to realize it.
Further reading: How a VR game helped me lose 100 pounds