Oculus today announced an upcoming PC tethering feature coming to Quest headsets in November. Oculus Link, as it’s called, will let users plug into VR ready PCs and play games originally designed for Rift. Oculus is calling it “the best of both worlds,” but then where does that leave their latest PC VR headset, Rift S?

Quest and Rift S, Oculus’ newest headsets, launched just four months ago, but it wasn’t until today that Oculus announced a PC tethering feature—something which customers had been asking about well before the launch of the headsets.

For many contemplating picking up one of the two headsets, the fundamental equation boiled down to this:

  • Rift S: Costs $400; plays high-end games connected to PC
  • Quest: Costs $400; plays low-end games with no PC

If you wanted the high-end experience, you’d clearly pick the Rift S. If you wanted portability and convenience, you’d pick Quest.

But today’s announcement, as near as we can tell, completely changes that equation.

  • Rift S: Costs $400; plays high-end games connected to PC
  • Quest: Costs $400; plays low-end games with no PC and plays high-end games connected to PC

So why would anyone buy a Rift S for the same price as Quest when the latter effectively has twice the functionality? Yes, there’s some technical differences between the headsets—the display tech is a bit different and so are the ergonomics—but hardly enough to be consequential in the face of mobile + PC functionality vs. PC-only functionality.

In fact, with Oculus Link, Oculus is calling Quest “the best of both worlds.” So… would you like ‘the best of both worlds for’ $400, or ‘not the best of both worlds’ for $400. The choice appears so obvious that the question itself seems an affront to your intelligence.

Granted, Oculus Link won’t come until November, and there’s still some unanswered questions about exactly how it will work, which could make things a little less clear-cut. But at present, our understanding is that Oculus Link will turn question into a full-fledged PC VR headset. Oculus has confirmed to Road to VR that Quest will not just be able to play the entire Rift library, it’ll be able to use all the same platform functionality that Rift uses, like Dash, Oculus Home, etc.

For the record, I think that Oculus is making the right choice for the future by making Oculus Link and Quest PC tethering a reality. That said, there’s no denying that it’s creating an awkward moment for its customers—many of whom had been suggesting all along that Quest should logically connect to PCs to no avail and then being shunted to buying a Rift S when Quest didn’t get have it at launch.

If Oculus Link really does turn Quest into a full featured PC VR headset, then who the hell is Rift S for?

Rift S already seemed like an awkward sibling rather than a proper sequel to the original Rift. Because many of the changes from Rift to Rift S felt like side-steps (or maybe even like downgrades) the Rift S wasn’t exactly an obvious upgrade for existing Rift owners.

SEE ALSO
Oculus Rift S Review – A Good Choice for VR Newcomers, a Difficult Choice for VR Vets

The only reasonable strategy for Oculus from here may follow this line of thought: slash the price of the Rift S down to $300 or even $200, thereby turning it into the unassailable recommendation for anyone looking to take their first step into PC VR. And while they’re at it, Oculus might want to think of a way to compensate their loyal and enthusiastic early adopter customers who may have begrudgingly chose Rift S over Quest so that they could stay in the PC VR ecosystem, only to watch the other headset subsume that functionality a few months later.

So far, Oculus hasn’t said anything about plans to change pricing or strategy. The company tells Road to VR that it will continue to sell the Rift S, and that it is still positioning the headset as “the gold standard for performance, graphics and the most immersive VR gameplay,” but without qualifying that statement against the capabilities of Oculus Link on Quest.

Again, as we learn more about Oculus Link on the path to its November launch, maybe it’ll become more clear why someone would still want to choice Rift S over Quest, but from what the company has revealed thus far, it just isn’t clear.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Ben Lang
Ben is the world's most senior professional analyst solely dedicated to the XR industry, having founded Road to VR in 2011—a year before the Oculus Kickstarter sparked a resurgence that led to the modern XR landscape. He has authored more than 3,000 articles chronicling the evolution of the XR industry over more than a decade. With that unique perspective, Ben has been consistently recognized as one of the most influential voices in XR, giving keynotes and joining panel and podcast discussions at key industry events. He is a self-described "journalist and analyst, not evangelist."

  • It’s about time.

  • Jarilo

    Buys Quest to get away from PC-VR, Gets excited the most about becoming a PC-VR. *Insert D-bag steve hat meme*

  • Gerald Terveen

    I am still curious if it will support SteamVR titles!

    • Jarilo

      It literally turns into a PCVR headset at that point so I don’t see why not.

      • kontis

        Source?
        Someone from FB said it doesn’t connect directly to GPU, but only to USB port, so it will do video encoding and kinda faking it, which means it will be different for the OS.

        Quest cannot accept a true hdmi-like video source. They do some kind of trickery here.

        • Sofian

          Later this year, we’ll also release a premium optical fiber cable to provide a best-in-class experience with maximum throughput to run Rift content

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            This is still just an USB-C connection. The fiber cable has the advantage of being very light and thin and supporting lengths of 5m or more, which requires signal amplification and better, heavier cable isolation with copper cables. It is about comfort, not speed, and don’t expect it to be cheap.

            The video signal still has to be compressed on the PC and decompressed on the Quest. Oculus themselves said that it took a lot of effort to come to an “acceptable” solution, and it includes FVR like other Quest apps, only this time to cope with bandwidth instead of performance limits.

        • Jarilo

          No source, I just figure “why not” as I see the ability to go through the USB port simple to run Steam if it can mimic the Rift and make Steam think it’s a Rift too, the community might do it eventually. If not then not, oh well.

        • sebrk

          It transport data. Just like HDMI. USB-C is perfectly fine for video. In fact it is part of its spec

        • q23main

          https://youtu.be/ukOAMPNt3ks?t=1586
          “[…] basicly treating the Quest as if it was just a Rift that was plugged into your PC.”

    • Jarom Madsen

      You can launch SteamVR from Oculus Home so absolutely!

    • Jonathan Winters III

      Carmack and Oculus both replied to inquiries about it and said YES it will be able to access your steam apps.

  • AlexanderBailey

    Why is it so hard to understand that this has everything to do with the HTC Vive Cosmos? Who cares about the Rift S, it’s purely about competition.

  • gothicvillas

    I thought Rift S has higher resolution screens?

    • johann jensson

      Actually they’re quite on par – 1440p pentile vs 1280p RGB matrix. But the difference is minimal, AFAIK.

  • Jack Liddon

    So a high end PC VR headset limited to 72fps. That might be my only real complaint. Still, a very compelling argument for buying a Quest.

    • Terrence Giggy

      Yeah, 72fps. I just can’t stomach that…

      • Xron

        They are saying its possible to run quest at 90hz while connected to pc. 72hz was due mobile chip limitation.

        • Foreign Devil

          This is why I’m waiting for 3rd party testing of it. What you say makes sense. . but I want ot know for sure before purchasing.

        • Jonathan Winters III

          And more due to the fact that it was FCC certified at 72 so they can’t go above that due to the certification. They’d have to recertify, which won’t happen.

    • Nikolai Dragnes

      It’s not a high end headset. For one the lack of GPU hardware makes the gaming content limited. It’s a nice enough headset, but it has limitations, and can’t do large complex VR games and software in terms of detailed graphics in complex scenery.

      A USB-C connection being the only cable connection also means that this add-on will have to lower and compress graphics through software, and that also probably also will mean less fps and for sure worse graphics. So it won’t be the same as HDMI or Displayport connection that the PC based VR headset like the Vive Cosmos or Index have, which will have the same screen resolution. Also 72hz is not great, you really want 90hz or more for comfort in VR.

      I feel the Quest has a lot of design issues also. For one the strap at the back of the head does not fit well, and I’m about average height for a European. They could have done a lot better than that cheap head strap.

      Also the foam face padding is coarse and makes deep red indentations on my face almost immediately, while if I do not tighten the straps the headset just sits too loosely on the head for any meaningful usage.

      And there is that annoying nose gap glare that ruins immersion and also makes it really easy for the screens to fog up.

      It’s also really annoying you only get to use what apps/games Oculus/Facebook allows to be sold on your device. Also you are forced to use their limited web-browser which collects your browsing data if you forget to turn on the “private mode.”

      And with just *very* limited content in terms of what apps you are allowed to install compared to the huge library of VR titles now available on other platforms. And the games Facebook/Oculus allows you to buy are all expensive, $29,99 for games that could be free or cost half of that on Steam, you start to realise the savings on the cost of the hardware actually are no savings at all when you factor in software costs.

      Also it’s simply not finished when it comes to the software of the hardware, it’s annoying you can’t connect it to external storage devices. And you can’t use wifi or bluetooth to connect to a PC either. So a USB-C to USB cable (which isn’t even included in the package) is needed to connect to a PC.

      An other software issue I found is for a non-room scale experience it gets annoying with the guardian net being really close to the headset, which becomes a problem when the controllers are not functioning properly if I’m in a reclined seated position, and it’s annoying there being a guardian net at all for a seated experience. If I stick my hand out to click browse on I don’t want to see that red net around my VR experience and I want the controllers to respond further anyway.

      The GUI has several usability issues also. Why for instance do I have to see a glaring black download icon in the middle of the screen if I’m watching a movie? Also the headset does not multitask apps well at all. So if you are in the middle of browsing in the google street view app, or in the youtube app and want to go browse the web, well you just have to close those apps and start over again.

      Also they use AA-batteries in the controllers, so bring on that slow AA-recharge unit or be prepared to buy a ton of wasteful AA batteries, you will need new ones several times a month. The controllers are also of cheap quality even though they are light weight, perhaps a bit too light weight, especially compared to the Index controllers with it’s finger tracking system, but perhaps better than the really heavy Vive controllers.

      Basically it’s a cheap uncomfortable design with low complexity gaming and software, with *very* limited and *controlled* content and a plain stupid OS and GUI design. But if you can’t afford a Gaming PC and/or really need a portable device that also does some fun enough gaming experiences and software – sure why not.

    • mepy

      It’s not a high end headset. For one the lack of GPU hardware makes the gaming content limited. It’s a nice enough headset, but it has limitations, and can’t do large complex VR games and software in terms of detailed graphics in complex scenery.

      A USB-C connection being the only cable connection also means that this add-on will have to lower and compress graphics through software, and that also probably also will mean less fps and for sure worse graphics. So it won’t be the same as HDMI or Displayport connection that the PC based VR headset like the Vive Cosmos or Index have, which will have the same screen resolution. Also 72hz is not great, you really want 90hz or more for comfort in VR.

      I feel the Quest has a lot of design issues also. For one the strap at the back of the head does not fit well, and I’m about average height for a European. They could have done a lot better than that cheap head strap.

      Also the foam face padding is coarse and makes deep red indentations on my face almost immediately, while if I do not tighten the straps the headset just sits too loosely on the head for any meaningful usage.

      And there is that annoying nose gap glare that ruins immersion and also makes it really easy for the screens to fog up.

      It’s also really annoying you only get to use what apps/games Oculus/Facebook allows to be sold on your device. Also you are forced to use their limited web-browser which collects your browsing data if you forget to turn on the “private mode.”

      And with just *very* limited content in terms of what apps you are allowed to install compared to the huge library of VR titles now available on other platforms. And the games Facebook/Oculus allows you to buy are all expensive, $29,99 for games that could be free or cost half of that on Steam, you start to realise the savings on the cost of the hardware actually are no savings at all when you factor in software costs.

      Also it’s simply not finished when it comes to the software of the hardware, it’s annoying you can’t connect it to external storage devices. And you can’t use wifi or bluetooth to connect to a PC either. So a USB-C to USB cable (which isn’t even included in the package) is needed to connect to a PC.

      An other software issue I found is for a non-room scale experience it gets annoying with the guardian net being really close to the headset, which becomes a problem when the controllers are not functioning properly if I’m in a reclined seated position, and it’s annoying there being a guardian net at all for a seated experience. If I stick my hand out to click browse on I don’t want to see that red net around my VR experience and I want the controllers to respond further anyway.

      The GUI has several usability issues also. Why for instance do I have to see a glaring black download icon in the middle of the screen? Also the headset does not multitask apps well at all. So if you are in the middle of browsing in the google street view app, or in the youtube app and want to go browse the web, well you just have to close those apps and start over again.

      Also they use AA-batteries in the controllers, so bring on that slow AA-recharge unit or be prepared to buy a ton of wasteful AA batteries, you will need new ones several times a month. The controllers are also of cheap quality even though they are light weight, perhaps a bit too light weight, especially compared to the Index controllers with it’s finger tracking system, but perhaps better than the really heavy Vive controllers.

      Basically it’s a cheap uncomfortable design with low complexity gaming and software, with *very* limited and *controlled* content and a bad OS and GUI design. But if you can’t afford a Gaming PC and/or really need a portable device that also does some fun enough gaming experiences and software – sure why not.

    • Shepard

      What high end PC VR? Even Oculus reps (John Carmack, CTO from Oculus) say that Rift S is STILL a choice over Quest for real PCVR gaming… All this hype for Link is a marketing strategy…

      Source to read:
      https://www.provideocoalition.com/oculus-quest-link-review-an-afterthought-or-marketing-strategy/

  • Jarom Madsen

    Why they did it: They wanted to consolidate manufacturing to a streamlined process that created parts for both supported headsets. They couldn’t sell the Rift S for cheaper even though it was clearly a cheaper product to produce than CV1 because that would incentivise buyers to go with that for the “cheaper” option (minus gaming PC) and take sales away from their flagship headset that they frankly needed to succeed.

    What they should have done: Stagger the release of Rift S for a lower price i.e. should have released it at OC6 for $299 making the Quest the premium package and the Rift S the more affordable option (like a Switch Lite).

    What they’ll likely do: Lower the Rift S price substantially as sales drop off the charts and eventually end up with the same end result but with a lot of pissed off early adopters of Rift S instead.

    • Bob Nichols

      Oculus doesn’t manufacture the Rift S, Lenovo does.

      • Jarom Madsen

        My understanding is it’s a combined effort. Oculus provides cameras and controllers and likely several other components, Lenovo provides halo, display, and whatever. Still took a huge load off of Oculus manufacturing of outside-in tracking cameras, cables, IR sensors, etc. Also combined software implementation for both headsets.

      • Niklas Fritzell

        Sure, but it is Facebooks responsibility to inform their customers since it is their brand after all.

    • JakeDunnegan

      I just got my Rift S a month and 5 days ago, so I can’t return it. Yeah, I’m pissed. They could have announced the Quest LInk more than a month before they planned to release it. Between this and Nvidia effing us hard over the last six months, I’m getting pretty pissed at PC hardware manufacturers.

      • david vincent

        What’s happening with Nvidia ? I didn’t follow too much the GPU market…

        • JakeDunnegan

          Sorry, didn’t see your question (I don’t follow Discqus as much as I used to). Essentially, Nvidia sat on their hands on the market for a LONG time while the “bitcoin mining” essentially gobbled up GPUs for 2-3 years. Now, all of a sudden, as soon as AMD has some new technology available, Nvidia magically produces something to compete with it. And, they undercut their own products and prices to do so.

          https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/07/02/nvidias-de-facto-price-cut-sets-up-a-battle-with-a.aspx

          Nvidia came out with a new line that was puzzling (1600) and not only had the typical standard (1650) and TI (1650ti) lines, but introduced another one – the “Super” (1650Super)versions as well. Not only is this confusing pricing, but, as I mention, it essentially undercuts their own pricing and their own customers who were foolish enough to buy just a few months prior. Had they at least announced the upcoming cards, their customers could have budgeted better.

          Here’s a pricing example:

          https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1650S-Super-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB/4058vs3639

          • david vincent

            Wow, thanks mate !
            Not a “super” move from Nvidia, indeed…

      • Shepard

        Why did you get Rift S in the first place, if Quest was readily available? Sounds like you wanted a quality real PC VR headset, not a cable free mobile headset that can only play none-graphics heavy VR games? Now you are going along with all this HYPE, which that’s what it is, nothing more, nothing less. You Rift S is still a more superior PC VR headset. Don’t listen to anyone that says otherwise. They are either technologically incompetent, or Quest owners.

        • JakeDunnegan

          At the time, you are correct – I didn’t want to be limited to just the capabilities of the wireless Quest. I wanted the better graphics, but more importantly, the game library. I also didn’t want to essentially park my game library on a system (the original Rift) that I would play less and less going forward. (Essentially having two libraries, one with less of the newer games as I expect Oculus’ efforts to push the Quest going forward – of course, with the Link cable they don’t need to make that choice, now, eh?)

          Well, with the link, that changes other things as well. Had they announced it earlier, I would have made a different call.

          I would have slightly less graphics, yes, but I’d be mobile if I wanted to be (which is a thing – right now, my VR sits on a computer that’s also in a streaming studio.. being able to move it out of there easily would be helpful…). I’d also be able to access my old library, (which I’ve invested many hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars).

          So, yeah, overall, I’d gladly exchange my Rift-S now for a Quest with the Link cable.

  • lynx

    If the Quest is the jack of all trades then maybe they can now have Rift 2, a high tier VR headset. They were originally going to have a low, mid and high tier head sets. There are some feature for the Rift 2 that maybe impossible to have on the quest and still keep the quest portable.

  • Christopher

    If anything, this is great for developers. Id like to test my Quest live in Unity and cant till a build is done.

  • Torsten Balle Koefoed

    There will inevitably be caveats that we won’t hear about until release. I bet Rift S will still be the best choice if you’re primarily a PC gamer.

    • Niklas Fritzell

      With a cyclop ipd range…

    • Abion47

      If you’re looking at exclusively the Oculus ecosystem, maybe (and that’s a big maybe until we know more). But the Rift S is a sideways upgrade at best compared to the Rift, and there are a lot of non-Oculus headsets out now that are more direct upgrades like the Vive Pro/Cosmos and the Index. And with Revive being easier and more compatible than ever, I’m finding it really hard to recommend any Oculus headset for high-end PC VR anymore. (I mean, hell, I would almost recommend the original Rift over the Rift S if Oculus was still selling it.)

      • Niklas Fritzell

        And they all cost 399. Oh wait :)

        • Charles

          The Odyssey+ costs $299, and I think it’s the best headset out right now. Definitely much better than the Rift S.

          • Malkmus

            Bu those WMR controllers…

          • Charles

            Yeah, though I think they improved the tracking since the original Odyssey. Almost never an issue for me.

        • Abion47

          Point missed. Carry on.

      • Adil

        I have Oculus CV1 and Rift S, and I can tell you that the rift S is much better than CV1 (no lost tracking in some hidden places, resolution is much better, RGB LCD screen that’s not tired eyes, easy to install)

    • Niklas Fritzell

      Vooodoo seemed very happy with it in stormlands.

  • James Cobalt

    USB 3.1 Gen2 cables are hard to find at more than 3′ due to rapid speed degradation. Active cables are now available but they aren’t cheap (such as $100 for a 10′ cable). This is why Facebook said they are offering an active fiber optic cable for this. Every USBFiberUSB cable I’ve seen has been well over $100 though.

    We don’t know what Facebook’s price will be yet, and this needs to be taken into account when comparing the capabilities of the Quest to the Rift S.

    • Jonathan Winters III

      $79

  • Pablo C

    The Rift S is much lighter and confortable though. IMO, the freedom of the quest is great for the VR experiences it supports, but not for games that are more complex and requiere longer time use.

  • The Bard

    Guys….72 fps. Is this the experience you expect from PC VR? Quest is a nice choice if you prefer portability. Odyssey+ is better than Quest and Rift S combined together. Hardware IPD, OLED 2880×1600, built-in high quality speakers. You can get Odyssey+ for 299$, way cheaper than Quest and Rift. You can play Oculus games, Vive games and Steam VR game. Why would you buy other stuff than Odyssey+? Completely does not make any sense.

    • Immersive_Computing

      Unfortunately in Europe we can’t buy Odyssey from in country retailer so no warranty and shipping hassles if bought by an import specialist. Such a weird decision by Samsung…

      • Fabian

        I think you can just buy it on amazon.com, they ship to europe and there should be no problem with warrenty but I agree it’s a weird decision by Samsung.

        • Immersive_Computing

          I just checked and your information is good, it’s £375 with import fees and and shipping. Amazon would cover warranty as retailer, so it’s a valid choice for some.

          Personally I couldn’t live with the WMR controllers on my Lenovo and returned it.

    • Candy Cab

      I bought one for sim racing and resolution is fine but I find it uncomfortable and for anything else its just not very good imo. Poor tracking and terrible controller ergonomics are what kills WMR headsets for most people. Its truly step down for Rift CV1 owners in every way other than resolution.

      • The Bard

        WMR controllers of Odyssey+ are one class higher in every aspect than Rift controllers. I tested both. Clickable touchpad circle + normal joystick, also clickable is amazing. I wouldn’t buy thing which don’t offer both experiences. Tracking is super good. You only need 1.6V batteries and good ambient light, well lit room. Seriously. I have Oculus Rift for a few years on my desk in game development company. I know what I am talking about. I used both Rift and Odyssey+. Odyssey+ is like Mercedes, compared to some VW Golf leaking oil in engine…

        • nejihiashi88

          are you a salesman for samsung everyone knows controllers for odyssey+ is one of the worst stop this nonsense we have dozens of reviews talking about this issue would we believe unknown person on the internet.

          • Gary Antel

            Being an owner of both Rift S and Odyssey+ I can say without a doubt that the Odyssey’s controllers are worthless junk and the main reason why the Odyssey + continues to collect dust. The touch controllers are far superior to anything WMR has come up with and it isn’t even close.

    • Gonzax

      Because the controllers suck big time, I guess, that’s the main problem with WMR headsets.

      • The Bard

        Did you have any WMR headset? I own Odyssey+ and the controllers are one of the strongest points! Touchad + joystick = a must, perfect. Very comfortable to grip and use. WMR needs good ambient light in room and that is it about its “bad tracking”. I have no any problems with tracking on Odyssey+. It is really great. What is missing only is some simple way to re-center, but it is Steam VR fault mainly. If you didn’t use WMR for longer time and have no experience, do not talk about it. I used Rift in work for a few years and use now Odyssey+. I know what is good and what is bad better than you, sorry. Cheers.

        • Gonzax

          Calm down boy, relax! So the controllers are one of WMR’s strongest points, right? ha ha, well, at least you have the gift of comedy. Keep it up!

          • Immersive_Computing

            The Samsung controllers have a rounded shape compared to the square edges of the reference design the other WMR use, and Samsung were smart to build in Bluetooth, but..

            WMR controllers are poorly conceived in terms of ergonomics, controller tracking is poor for active gaming especially gun and bow games, ERM haptic motor is weak/crude and they chew batteries due to visible light pattern on tracking ring. Also felt like they were about to snap, very flimsy. Really not a lot to love.

            The headset sounds good, but I won’t touch WMR again until they have multi camera tracking and V2 controllers. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a48345876b09a7c89233e3dec3a096c48ea3e2c60bb4557d2aa27f46d60927d5.jpg

    • MeowMix

      WMR tracking is no where near ready for “VR Gaming”. People had already had enough concerns and complaints with the Rift S, and that has 5 inside out cameras.
      Just because it can play games does not make it a VR Gaming headset.

    • Slobodan

      One word: Availability.

      I cannot get Odyssey+ where I live. It’s just not sold anywhere in my country. I would need to order it from abroad (Amazon etc) and pay expensive shipping (no Amazon prime available) + import tax, custom and other fees that would add easily $100-$200 to the price.

      Or I could just walk couple kilometers to the nearest store that sells Oculus Rift S.

  • paratay

    Where are the ARTICLES ABOUT THE NEW PIMAX ANNOUNCEMENTS ROADTOVR, you’re all paid trolls for Oculus and Beatsaber.

    Here are the new pimax headsets, the TRUE VR headsets not the shitty Oculus TOY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yup1PTH_1v0
    200 degree FOV with 4K panels on each eye

    • sjefdeklerk

      Ha, knowing pimax they probably didn’t even send out press releases

      • Immersive_Computing

        I got all the Pimax PR release and I’m not a customer, just signed up to their mailing list a year ago

      • benz145

        That is correct, we had no communication from the company about Pimax Day ahead of the announcements. We proactively reached out to Pimax to ask for details and didn’t hear back until just this evening.

        @paratay:disqus I’d appreciate you not slinging unsubstantiated slander around here.

    • Jistuce

      You can’t have a 200-degree field of view. You literally can’t see 200 degrees, because that means you have eyes behind your ears.

      • Zantetsu

        Try rotating your eyes left and right sometime. Also try reading up on the subject instead of making completely incorrect and uninformed posts.

      • benz145

        That’s incorrect. When you turn your eyes you can see beyond 200 degrees, and therefor having an FOV beyond your natural human vision isn’t a waste. That said, in my experience with the Pimax headsets, the field of view does not extend beyond natural human vision.

        • Immersive_Computing

          Human FOV often quoted at 180, more like 190-195 degrees for many (total internal reflection)

      • Adderstone VR

        200deg field of view is specified as diagonal FOV
        They state the Horizontal FOV is 170deg
        But, yes humans can actually see more than 200deg horizontal by rotating your eyes

        • Michael Kim

          Actually you don’t need to rotate your eyes. Human eye’s FOV while looking straight front is about 210 degree. You just can’t see the object at the edge clearly but you can still see the presence of the object at the edge of the FOV without moving your eyes.

        • Jistuce

          I grudgingly admit to being wrong on the human horizontal view angle. I rotate my head to see things due to needing glasses to see things, so… I forget the actual extent of peripheral vision(and have never cared about the more limited field of view offered by non-Pimax headsets).

          I still maintain that diagonal field of view is a “making shit up” spec that carries no actual meaning, though.

          Even if they were measuring the actual angle of view instead of just making up a number, it would be a meaningless datum without there being a standardized display ratio like 4:3 or 16:9 or 3:2 behind it.

          A 170-degree horizontal field of view sounds both credible and impressive.

    • MW

      Pimax? Really…? No controllers, no real software (please…), availability is a joke, customer support doesn’t exist. Headsets are break down all the time (pimax forum).

    • Niklas Fritzell

      Crapimax can go drown in a fishbowl.

    • Niklas Fritzell

      For f***s sake it is not even 4k. Pimax has a shitty 2K display which is upscaled to 4k (so not much better). Multiply with two (number of displays) and you get the classic chinese scam logic = 8K. Go die Pimax.

  • Trenix

    Oculus is the Walmart of VR.

  • Luis Mariano Paolino

    Something I will personally love to see, is a link between Oculus Quest and game engines such Unity. A link that let you test in play mode what are you developing without compile your project.

    • James Thornton Art Studio

      That’s included. Direct play mode, just like a PCVR headset. Not sure if processing is on the PC or mobile chip though.

      • Luis Mariano Paolino

        You mean directly in Unity?

        • Adderstone VR

          Watch the day 1 keynote (on Oculus’ official youtube channel)
          at 40:50 Stephanie Lue details this feature, directly from Unity and Unreal “no need to compile and transfer new APK”

        • James Thornton Art Studio

          Yeah just play. Pretty awesome

      • GigaSora

        Okay.. but what about multi-view support?

  • Xron

    Guys. did you see how uninspired was Abrash at the end when he had to say, that everything they have for now and near future is Quest or questlike hmd’s… that means he got shown a direction from Pc Vr to more mobile Vr…
    Ofc if they will include all the goodies from Pc into mobile Vr all will be ok… but there is always question of Bandwidth… for next gen Vr. Current Usb speeds won’t be enough for it.

    • Immersive_Computing

      Time to return to Valve?

      • MeowMix

        Or Microsoft , or id.
        Abrash’s small stint at Valve was the shortest tenue of his career.

  • Justin Davis

    “hardly enough to be consequential in the face of mobile + PC functionality vs. PC-only functionality.”

    Wrong. Rift S = 8 more Hz, RGB display, less SDE, much more comfortable, higher bandwidth cable.

  • dk

    can’t wait for quest2 with sd855+ and 90hz and less foveated rendering ….other things will be good too but that will be a great start

  • Yes, the Rift S is better, but not that better to justify buying a separate headset. And then can we also spend a minute of silence for who bought a game two times, one for Rift S and one for Quest?

    I see the Rift S losing AT LEAST half of sales after this move… unless it becomes $200 as you say. Anyway, now the Quest is unbeatable on the consumer market.

    • dk

      the rifts price will be going down ….max $250 …using the Go display and so on …it was designed with low cost in mind

  • gothicvillas

    I really hope there will be Quest 2 announced together with the pc link. I may finally get it then.

    • adasd

      the quest just came out a few months ago….

      • gothicvillas

        Yes true, bet hand tracking etc is not coming out tomorrow either. By the end of next year when all this gets close to release, it would be nice to have option for Quest Pro. Let’s not call it 2.0, but “pro” option. Newer snapdragon chip, perhaps slightly increased FOV. I would consider buying the device then.
        Real 2.0 may be a few years off.. but PRO is needed now.

  • Greyl

    I’m still fairly confident a $50 price cut is coming for the Rift S (perhaps in 2020), despite them not announcing it. But yeah, I totally agree that the Quest is looking like a more attractive option, atm, even at 72fps and slightly worse controller tracking.

    Regardless, it’s fantastic news and may potentially help grow the PCVR userbase as Quest owners buy/upgrade their PC to take full advantage of their Quest headset.

    • Slobodan

      What makes it more attractive option in your opinion?

      • Greyl

        Price, PCVR Link and Standalone; better value proposition than Rift S.

        • Slobodan

          I’m still torn between the two. What I’ve seen now on reviews and comparisons in the early 2020. There is still lag/delay problems with the Quest + Link and the image quality still seems to be better on the S and also the 8hz higher refreshrate is sill a bonus towards to S.

          They are both the same price (over here) but Quest gets more expensive if you buy the link too.

          As a complete “PC gamer” with VR usage mainly for racing/flying simulators and the occasional beat saber and similar without the need for portability or standalone unit, would you still recommend to get the Quest + Link instead of S?

          Cheers.

          • Greyl

            In that case, just get the Rift S. However, be warned that a price cut or new hardware may be announced this year/ soon at F8.

            The Quest is still cool for standalone purposes, like private home theater, hand tracking demos, and sideloaded content. But if that doesn’t interest you, then yeah, just get a Rift S.

            For what it’s worth, I’d say the Rift S is a much better value proposition than the Vive Cosmos range, and in some respects it’s even better than an Index; you certainly won’t have the same sense of buyers remorse and the set up is much simpler compared to the Index.

            Check out some videos for Pavlov on the Rift S if you want to get a good sense of how good the tracking is.

  • grindathotte .

    The big question is whether this will be a direct digital feed (like HDMI) or an encoded stream with associated lag and artefacts.

    • david vincent

      It’s a compressed stream but the guys from Tested who tried it didn’t see compression artefacts.

  • MW

    All headsets on market (from Oculus, htc and Samsung) are from the same generation. Basically, they are the same for end user, because experience is the same.
    So, buy whatever you want, cheaper=better.
    Or wait for next generation headset.

    P.s. for small rooms (majority) difference between quest and s is irrelevant.

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      Even in small rooms the Quest allows you to turn freely with wrapping yourself with or trapping over a cable.

      • vtid

        I never understand this falling over a cable argument. I’ve used my cv1 most days for over 3 years and not once have I even nearly tripped over the cable. Give me tethered over wireless all day.

        • Abion47

          The cable has tripped me up maybe once in the nearly two years of me owning a VR headset, so that argument doesn’t hold much clout. However, I did briefly have the pleasure of playing around with a TPCast, and I have to say the feeling of being in VR without the weight and feeling of the cable is way more immersive than any tethered experience. The problem is that the TPCast was a royal pain to set up and frequently ran into issues with video flickering or loss of signal that shatters the immersion. If wireless PC VR is to be a thing, it needs to be a first party solution that just works.

          • Master E

            I’ve seen mixed opinions on TPCast as well. Haven’t personally had the chance to try it, sounds promising, but not quite there yet. Still feel like we are a few years from what gamers are going to accept with more open arms

            Wireless
            Better resolution
            And FoV

            Close, but not quite there

            Hoping Sony has some hidden gem in the pipeline with PSVR2

          • Abion47

            My experience with the Index has covinced me that we don’t need much higher resolution than what we already have. I mean not only is demanding 4K for each eye not attainable at reasonable FPS with current graphics hardware, it’s also hugely overkill when with the Index I had no trouble reading text and making out details. Honestly, with some improvements to lens technology, 1440×1600 is a fine pixel count per eye that I see no real reason to need to exceed any time soon. (Maybe made slightly wider to accommodate higher FOV.)

            So in my opinion, I’d replace resolution in your list with higher refresh rates. It’s more achievable with graphics hardware being what it is and IMHO would ultimately make a bigger difference to immersion anyway. Even then, though, 120/144 Hz is plenty, and past that it should take a back seat to things like first party wireless and tactile/force feedback.

          • Master E

            Totally agree with 4K for VR being overkill. I guess with resolution I was speaking more to PSVR and lens clarity like you mentioned

            I do also feel if clarity and 1440×1600 is the aim the chance that we get that with a higher FoV goes up vs aiming for something like 4K which would undoubtedly leave a wider FoV far too distant in the future

            Good to know about Index. I’ve been contemplating on getting it

        • Nikolai Dragnes

          It’s not about actually tripping over the cable and falling over. It’s about not having to think about the cable being there at all. So much more immersive when you don’t have to dedicate part of your mind to considering where that cable is all of the time. Also it’s about freedom of movement, you can spin around etc. as much as you like.

  • The VR Addict

    I’ve got a Samsung Odyssey+ having had a Vive Pro, Vive and Pimax 4k. No problems ordering from Amazon US for EU delivery. After 4 months with the O+ I had to stop using it. Unlike the other headsets, the eye strain from the O+ ‘blur’ grid gets ridiculous. Everything close looks fine but anything mid to far away is smudged. 3 weeks after stopping with the O+, my eyes have mostly recovered but it’s degraded my prescription significantly. Again, was never a problem with the other headsets. If someone wants to wreck their vision, happy to sell them mine :) I’m ordering a Reverb now HP ( claim ) to have fixed the problems.

    • grindathotte .

      Have to say I’m dissappointed by the Reverb (I use one at work). Although the SDE is finer, I’m just as aware of it and for me at least, only the centre is in focus. Also, either chromatic aberration is worse, or the better resolution makes it more apparent; either way it’s a distraction. But experience differs from one individual to another depending on your eye position relative to the lenses; let’s hope it works for you. I was considering importing an Odyssey+; from what you say, I’ll give that a miss.

  • Niklas Fritzell

    Just bought a quest. It’s been a good ride CV1, but this is just too good to pass up.

  • CURTROCK

    Its a great idea to offer PC tethering, for a myriad of reasons. (especially for Devs) Im gonna suspend my judgement on whether or not this makes the Rift S obsolete until i try it. There are a few reasons why Oculus Link may be a great “value added” option for Quest users, but not necessarily a better choice for PC gaming. (long play comfort, for one). I will concede however, that this does seem to pave the way for the next generation Quest to be the THE all-in-one PC/Stand-Alone unit.

  • care package

    My question is, will the Quest be able to track as accurately as the Rift S, especially with those Onward type games, considering it’s one less camera and they’re arranged differently.

    • adasd

      I stream onward and other games to my quest with no tracking issues

    • MeowMix

      It’ll be close. But Oculus is very open about the Rift S having a larger tracking volume for controller tracking (Rift S – 5 cameras, Quest – 4 cameras)

  • I still sit here not willing to purchase anything on offer from Oculus. The Quest with tethering is nice… sort of. We all suspect this tether will be somewhat less than ideal. In fact, it will definitely be total garbage. But that remains to be written later.

    Here’s the proper way to build a VR headset as I see it right now:

    Screen quality/resolution at least as good as current Quest
    High contrast screen
    Refresh rate of 90 or better
    Inside out tracking AND room scale sensor tracking
    Tether option
    IPD hardware adjustment
    Field of view – eh, whatever… 120 maybe
    Controllers that aren’t broken

    Foviated blah blah – unimportant waste of time
    Eye tracking – unimportant waste of time

    Make that one and give it a reasonable price: $300 – $500

    I’d buy that in 5 minutes flat. No question.

    • asshat

      okay then go make that…. everyone acts like they know more then those actually making them and its sad.

    • Xron

      Hmz… they are thinking about making quest run at 90/120hz..

      • Yeah, but it has 4 cameras and that’s it for tracking. Bad.

  • looks like everybody forget that quest can be streamed from pc wirelessly too, and it works well!(not perfect but well!)

    • Foreign Devil

      What extra equipment is required to stream wirelessly? Could I stream movies that way?

      • need a 5ghz router to stream vr games, for movies any router will probably do fine

  • ECGUY

    Soooo??? I have an older Rift on my PC which I use for cruising Google Earth and a Quest next to my bed that I use for watching Youtube when my wife gets their first and captures the TV. Does this mean that I will be able to use both the Rift and the Quest at the same time for multi player on the PC. That’s a bonus I hadn’t seen coming!

  • MeowMix

    They’ve already shown the Link will take a hit on the image quality, and Carmack said today in his keynote that Link players will experience more latency vs the Rift S users.

    Link is a neat feature, but it still doesn’t replace a proper PCVR experience.

  • Tags I812

    just bought a rift s and no regrets. at the this time i have an excellent time with the rift s , i started with the cv1 now rift s and next summer get the perhaps the quest. going to just wait and see.

  • Brettyboy01

    It will come down to Lag if it will be wireless.

  • nejihiashi88

    i remember talking about this move when they announced rift S but people disagreed with me, im really optimistic about the next move when they merge quest and rift S as a 1 product untethered you play a mobile vr, tethered you play as a pc vr , with foveated rendering and a good mobile cpu gpu, this will make an excellent product too good to pass on.

  • Pablo C

    I have a Quest and a CV1. The Quest is fairly uncomfortable and it´s great for short experiences, overall considering the freedom it gives. For long-complex gaming the Rift S is still a better choice IMO. I don´t think I could play with the Quest for more than 1 or 2 hours, my face start hurting after a while.
    I often play 30-60 min with my Quest and then I switch to a complex game in my CV1. It feels such a relieve to switch headsets. And IMO the Rift S is more comfortable than the CV1. That´s a big deal.

  • dota

    I hate PC dinosaur
    as well a box on the face
    now tell me what should i buy

  • The Mogget

    This is a big deal to Rift people, I guess. As a Quest-from-the-start guy, I could care less. What do I need a link for when my Quest works great as it is? Stand-alone is the only way to go. I have lots of great games already, and new ones arriving faster than I can buy them. That Rift library is coming to the Quest in the long run anyway, because Quest will soon be the dominant user base if it isn’t already.

    If you have a Quest is the Rift library worth buying a gaming PC for? Maybe if you had something you really really cared about. Me? Not interested. I expect this will get a shrug from the majority of Quest users, who will be the majority of Oculus customers. I am happy that this helps someone somewhere…

  • Shepard

    I don’t want to start a headset war, but … Rift S is still more superior headset for PC gamers. Even with Link, the Quest will still have issues and less graphic fidelity, while playing PC based graphics heavy games. I am surprised that people don’t see this… A cable that connects a weaker mobile Headset to a PC, will not suddenly make it better. Yes, it gives Quest owners an alternative to play some PC games, but the tech is different in two headsets, so Quest will always be Quest, no matter you tether it to PC or not, you will still have issues playing graphics heavy PC games, your screens will still be blurry, and your harness will still burn your face.