You could organize tye chart in 2 sections. Bottom line if it is not being tested openly with real info then your only getting manufacturer’s info.
ie if vive pro2 was not released your chart would have to say it has 120° Horizontal FoV. And we learned that was false after release.
iirc there was a statement somewhere they are still finalizing somethings in software so the FoV may improve; though that might have been only in regards to the 42ppd lenses as there was 2 modes.
Time will reveal all things.
Thanks for creating this.
Suggestion. Perhaps put it in a public google sheets doc (with your own protection in place) and embed it on the forums?
So it could automatically be updated via that and the embedded link so you wouldn’t have to keep posting revisions in the table here.
Not sure if this is possible, nor how you’re planning to update the current table.
Apologies if I’m way off base on this.
It would be nice to see a few more columns. It’d be cool if the user could see and use the embedded table on these forums and filter/sort etc the date on their own too.
Just thoughts.
if you look at my post with the vr hardware compendium link that one is a google spreadsheet. As far as I know at present the link is the only embed option. But will see if there is maybe a new method that is better.
100% with you here, it looks totally subjective.
My original idea was to have points per column. 10 columns each worth 10 points.
If all columns were green the HMD would accrue 100 points - perfect score.
But when it came down to it was far more complicated in reality. Awarding 10 points for OLED seemed unfair to Pimax who use LCD with LED back panels which gave similar performance. Apple might accrue 90 points for Spec but the price might be so high no one would buy it which made 90 RoS look ridiculous compared to Quest2.
So my RoS method is subjective but I think it’s correct for every headset.
Index gets 100 because it’s Spec at the time (4 years ago) where great. Best in class Audio, Controllers, FOV, Comfort, Steam support, 144hz and HL Alyx.
Big Screen get 10 because while it has OLEDs and small it’s still tethered, no onboard computer, mid price, fits one person only, has no controllers and no exclusive App.
So the RoS is justified and has no bias towards one manufacturer or the other.
But I’m open to discuss this column further.
Pimax Crystal gets RoS of 20.
While Crystal has some good specs like resolution, Aspheric lenses and LED back light for local dimming. The score gets offset by its low 107 FOV for its huge size, unfinished features, high end price and store that might not get supported due to low sales. With no exclusive App. If Quest2 is at one end of a scale Crystal is at the other.
Varjo Aero gets RoS of 30.
While Crystal offers more in specs like LED back light, Aero is smaller befitting of its FOV. Lighter. Has better build quality, has been on sale since 2021 and is regarded as the best HMD by flight simmers.
I’ve now updated the chart with STATUS of each HMD.
That’s a bit of of a problem.
Pico gets 100, yet almost every day I read about a user so disappointed in it that they return it. That doesn’t sound like success.
Meanwhile, almost every day I read about a user going from a G2 (which for some reason isn’t in your chart despite its popularity) to an Aero, and they’re all pretty happy with it. I rarely hear anyone talking about returning the device. That sounds like success.
Well that makes even less sense now, because ROS therefore has a “at the time” component yet is presented as a comparison in a single table with devices 5 years old and devices not even releases. How come for the same column, something that was worth a 10 4 years ago would still be worth a 10 today?
Meanwhile, there is no scoping as to what the use case/scenario the “success” is measured for. Not having an on-board computer has no impact for scenarios where standalone doesn’t matter. If you are a hardcore PC gamer, you probability don’t care for standalone. If anything it’s a benefit for weight/power. Not having exclusive apps… also doesn’t matter if those apps are useless for the scenarios the user cares about. If your success criteria is how good the device is for casual movie watching, then not having exclusive games doesnt matter to you.
Oh and I added the 8KX too. RoS 30 - same as the Aero and 12K
The 8KX has one of the widest FoVs ever featured in a consumer HMD. But many found the lenses strained their eyes due to over canted lens or wrong diopter. Still it found a lot of love in the Simming community. Price seemed fair due to it’s unique USP. No controllers and relied on Lighthouses.
And replace it with what, Quest2?
The chart reflects the intire VR Market where Stand-alone does matter as Quest2 is by far the biggest market seller. I also put PSVR2 as RoS 100 but that does not have onboard compute but is backed solidly by the PS5 and exclusives.
I’ve added the HP Reverb G2. RoS 70.
Backed by Valve the HP Rever G2 was a side step to the Index. A needed uplift in resolution but still reliant on WMR tracking. The G2 adopted Indexes off ear speakers and was well liked by flight simmers who benifited from the extra clarity.
Yes, or whatever they had before. But that’s not the point. The point is customer satisfaction doesn’t seem quite there from users speaking about it, yet it’s getting the highest score.
But hey, there are plenty of movies bombed by media critics and that eventually get a great user score on rotten tomato, and vice-versa.
Index is great and deserves a high score, but thats not the point. Per your reasoning, we could enter PSVR1 in the table and it would probably have a very high score based on criteria from 2015 and the fact that it was one of the best selling devices at the time (perhaps even the best selling one IIRC?). But it certainly hasn’t aged as well as the Index. The ROS score feels like a comparative measure, but I don’t think it’s quite relevant to compare a 100 from 2015 to a 100 from 2023.
Does that include enterprises for example? Because PSVR2 on a closed platforms would literally yield close to 0 in that market, in spite of the hardware being awesome, it wouldn’t be usable for those scenarios.
I love the effort and the table is very useful, but ROS doesn’t really make sense and IMO hurts the credibility of the table.
Pico 4 must be selling in the tens of thousands. More you sell, more returns you have but its down to the ratio of sales v returns.
If you look at the Steam Hardware usage, Pico 4 is doing well concidering the few months it’s been on sale and the fact Quest2 is highly competitive. Plus no US sales.
I would give PSVR1 RoS 70.
While PSVR1 was a great seller for Sony the controllers and tracking camera were horrible.
I’ve dropped the Pico4 down to RoS 90 as on reflection it does not have the big exclusives as the Quest2 store.
Yeah pretty bad.
VR is a world of compromises. No matter where.
