Revealed today on stage at Oculus Connect, Mark Zuckerberg teased “the next phase of virtual reality,” an inside-out tracking solution that would allow a headset to go entirely without the need of an outside tracking tech like the Rift’s IR camera and Constellation tracking.

Update: Our hands-on with the prototype reveals the tech to be very impressive

Teasing a video showing a modified Rift, completely wireless with a additional module on the back, Zuckerberg maintains that the next step, between mobile solution Gear VR and cable-bound solution Rift that it will be “a stand alone virtual reality product that is high quality, that is affordable and that you can bring with out into the world.”

rift-wireless-oc3Although there’s no product yet to speak of, Zuckerberg maintains “we’re working on it.”

This story is breaking. Check back for more news on Oculus’s new inside-out tracking solution.

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.


Scott Hayden
Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • Ian Shook

    Well damn! I mean we all sort of expected it eventually, but I’m excite!

    • DiGiCT Ltd

      Dont get too excited, “high quality” has many meanings nowadays lol.
      The reality is that it will not be possible with current hardware or even on that small scale.
      History already showed us that oculus has many beautiful stories and promises, but the end product is rather different as mentioned before.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        oh, is it? the CV1 is better than what they initially told us. Don’t mistake your expectations for what actually was said..

        • DiGiCT Ltd

          what is better on the cv1 compared to the dk2 ?
          The xbox controller ?
          I tried the rift and no matter how hard i try it is not user friendly for people wearing glasses !
          It looks better but it is not better, it is in my list the 2nd placed VR device.
          They also told that room scale was not important, and now they move all to roomscale (which is a good move for occulus but after lots of denials ahead)
          For the CV1 they said gamepads were absulutely no go for VR but still it came with it.
          At the end you pay more for a rift complete set compared to a vive, better?? maybe for some people it is,
          I know you like the oculus a lot, and i cant say its bad, rather it always lacks things that need to be added later.

      • Get Schwifty!

        I think that we will see this come to market, no question. I think the article indicated it would fall quality-wise between the Gear and the cable-bound Rift, so given say another two years I would think basically it is using today’s CV1 with the wired version due up about the same time with improvements to offer the best quality. Quality VR just has to get unhinged from the PC and consoles to make a real dent, the Gear is just a sampler to get started in the market.

        • Bob

          Wireless seems a bit of a stretch and I wouldn’t count on a wireless solution with high fidelity and very good ergonomics (lightweight and compact) to be released within the next 2 years. Inside out tracking is more realistic within the next two years.

        • DiGiCT Ltd

          Yes, daydream is already improved compared to Gear, even samsung is going to make a daydream model.
          It is as i said with a standalone HMD tyou have more room to get better focus on VR performance as in a phone, even you can shape it bigger where the hardware goes as you never hold it in your hand anyway.
          It will be better as phoneVR but less as PC.

      • Bob

        “he end product is rather different as mentioned before.”

        What are you talking about?

      • Dave

        Yes what are you talking about – the Oculus CV1 is an amazing product!

  • Charles

    This seems like a bad idea. Why not just improve GearVR? A standalone VR device will have one purpose only, while a phone has many purposes and is usually considered a necessity. People are much more likely to buy an improved GearVR and a new and better phone than this. And the graphics power of this device will surely not be much more than a phone.

    • DiGiCT Ltd

      A standalone VR HMD will have more room for better hardware and can easy work on higher heat compared to a phone.
      It is the only way to get more performance out of a mobile device for VR.

      Although mobile is still far away from any PC based VR, just a huge gap between their performance on as well CPU as well as GPU.

      Take the “high quality” more like for a mobile device, but tethered ones still will be much better.

      • Charles

        I didn’t mean that it wouldn’t be a good product – I just don’t
        think it would sell well. There’s no way this will be any cheaper than
        $1000, especially with motion controllers. And the visuals will be much
        worse than a PC with a good graphics card.

        Someone who cares most about graphics will buy the PC headset. Someone who cares about budget would buy a GearVR for their phone (especially if they add positional tracking). This seems like it would be an extremely niche market. Especially since it’s already been announced that there’s a wireless transceiver coming out soon for the Vive (and presumably there will be one for Oculus later).

        • Get Schwifty!

          This is where people forget who owns Oculus and their plans for VR over the long haul. Facebook wants to change our interactions on the Web, and a detached device is the way to go.

          You are not Oculus and really cant say what the costs will be like per their specs, and what applications they are looking to focus on (I suspect 3-D video and browsing), so its hard to be critical without knowing how they intend the device to be used.

          • Charles

            Sure, but knowing how the tech industry works, I know that there will not be even GTX 970 quality graphics in a computer barely bigger than a phone for less than $200 within the next few years. Assuming the rest of the headset (with motion controllers) is still $800, even $1000 is extremely unlikely. Unless they want to sell at an extreme loss, which I doubt. My guess is it’ll be maybe GTX 770 quality at $1000 total. Which isn’t very exciting to me.

          • Bob

            No you’re right. Graphics processing is advancing rapidly but software developers are not taking advantage of it due to the limitations present in the current game consoles which cater to the lowest common denominator where all the money is to be made. If a new games console was released every year software developers would have to keep up with the upgraded graphical fidelity provided by more powerful GPU’s and things would go faster and cheaper which would mean higher resolution virtual reality headsets at sub 500 dollars and we’re talking even 4k resolution per eye at under 500 dollars in this ideal world. Unfortunately that is not the way things work currently so your estimates are more or less right unless the company wants to sell at a significant loss.

          • Get Schwifty!

            My point is that they are not striving in this model for graphics on the fly untethered to rival a PC. My belief as I stated they are aiming at a lower graphic quality-based experience, hence why I said 3-d video and browsing, social media, etc. No one even hinted they were aiming at eve 960 level graphics with this headset, I guess because we all like games that is the natural assumption, but I don’t believe this is the play Facebook has in mind for this design. Crappy phone games, maybe, but that’s it.

            On top of that, as we see in the articles Facebook/Oculus are working on new app designs that could utilize such a headset but not be focused on heavy graphics.

      • Charles

        Hmm. My earlier comment was incorrectly “detected as spam”. Here it is again:
        ———-
        I didn’t mean that it wouldn’t be a good product – I just don’t
        think it would sell well. There’s no way this will be any cheaper than
        $1000, especially with motion controllers. And the visuals will be much
        worse than a PC with a good graphics card.

        Someone
        who cares most about graphics will buy the PC headset. Someone who
        cares about budget would buy a GearVR for their phone (especially if
        they add positional tracking). This seems like it would be an extremely
        niche market. Especially since it’s already been announced that
        there’s a wireless transceiver coming out soon for the Vive (and
        presumably there will be one for Oculus later).
        ———-

    • victor

      Definitvely NOT a bad idea. GEAR VR or any display that uses your phone is only good for simplistic games and not for full complex games. A phone can simply NEVER have the processing power of a dedicated processor like in a PC or specifically designed hmd’s with their own processors.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        I would agree with you, but phones and their CPU/GPU’s have already become very powerfull, in the coming years it will surpass the current PC’s needed for VR.. BUT I still rather have a device which is only a screen and be able to update the PC for better visuals, than having to replace the whole damn headset (or phone in this case)..

        • Adrian Meredith

          It will be a very long wait till mobile chips get up the scale of VR minimum spec, were talking more than 5 years here. both cpu and gpu evolution has slowed dramatically

          • Bob

            What’s funny is that more efficient and better performing cpu’s are becoming smaller to the point where the progression of Moore’s law is grinding to a halt and more powerful gpu’s are actually becoming larger. There would need to be a complete paradigm shift or technological breakthrough (whatever that maybe) if companies wish to start producing smaller and significantly more powerful gpu’s but it doesn’t seem like that’s happening anytime soon.

          • victor

            True!

          • Andrew Jakobs

            Don’t count on it to take 5 years, think more in terms of 2 years for the 1070 performance.. And displays don’t need to be higher, they need to be better (or just use DLP which is capable of the needed framerate and even with 1920×1080 it doesn’t have SDE, so no real need to have higher resolution (as gamedevelopers still don’t even have photorealistic quality like an actual bluray movie.) The only reason higher resolution at this time is needed, is due to the ‘low’ quality of the screens..

        • victor

          Yes surpass the CURRENT PC’s power, but at that time PC’s will still always be more powerful than mobile, hence always more complex games and visuals than mobile . It’s just plain physics.

  • wheeler

    Let’s hear the actual accuracy, response time, and reliability and then I’ll start getting excited.

  • Jose
    • Mike Handles

      I don’t get it?

      • Get Schwifty!

        He’s saying they are blowing smoke… yeah, I’m sure it was all a lie LOL. No words to actually make the point just pictures to create an impression.

  • David Herrington

    Sooooooo…. Why did I buy a VR ready computer if they were going to pull this??…………….. But for real, will any of their current Oculus Home games even run on a mobile platform (other than Gear VR games)? If not then this is a huge hit to content.

    • OgreTactics

      Because the one you bought should already have sported that. And aas you said, there’s NO fucking point in this or Intel Alloy, nobody wants to use something that is so underpowered that it can’t run more than mobile apps, except it’s not a versatile mobile VR HMD…

      • Get Schwifty!

        Man, dude did you forget your meds or what? Why do you not see that this is first a prototype, and the end result may be very different. Also it partly explains Oculus decision to go the camera route instead of the ultimately more limited Lighthouse design. This tech clearly will end up in the headset of the typical home Rift user.

        • OgreTactics

          I made my point clear. This should NOT be a prototype in late 2016, it should’ve been worked-on, iterated then implement in its first version on the first consumer product (alongside external tracking and put’n’lock ergonomics) already, and the stand-alone idea is stupid.

          In fact I refined it by arguing with contradictory arguments here: NONE of the currently released “virtual headsets” are complete and operable as consumer products. Cue the examples of the first consumer smartphone, TVs, computers etc…

          I work in a prospective (consumer, techs and trends intelligence) agency, there’s a reason we projected a maximum of 150-200.000 when marketers and kool-aid drinkers that are legions here projected close to a millions or more, not that they shouldn’t but that it couldn’t happen in the current state of headset, even despite price. Another example is that we projected the Wii U’s failure even before it released, just based on what was announced, not a year, not 3 years ago but before, not based on magic or intuition, but because there are mechanical, causal or sociological reasons.

          This is the same thing for VR, if it doesn’t take of but early 2018, the vast majority will dub it “yet another gadget fad that has no actual point for everyday enthusiasts, consumers and professionals” because when the momentum for a new paradigm of technology comes to pass, the continued investment, fun experimental or ads content or even price matter. And Virtual Headset won’t take of until they’re a finite operable consumer product like the first iPhone was.

          And just on the surface, there are very simple cognitive reasons why it’s not, for example the fact that you are in a spatial virtual environment that you can’t walk in freely, the fact that you’re whole body is supposed to be immersed in a virtual environment yet you can’t see or interact with your hands which the first things people try to do, or the fact that putting or launching a GearVR or Vive requires 8 steps instead of 1 or 2 (repeated hundreds or thousands of times) etc…

  • OgreTactics

    NO SHIT. And then in 2 years we’ll get at least 150° Fov and in 4 years will get hand-tracking. No wait, by then VR will have died of slow development, stalling and lost all momentum for consumer and professional adoption…

    • victor

      hmmm… Personally I doubt it. Sooner or later it WILL become mainstream. Cannot stop technology.

      • OgreTactics

        Yeah, but instead of being now or in 2 years, there are chance that it only comes back 10-15 years

        • victor

          I would agree with that possibility if I would not have actually tried VR. I ended up buying last gen headset oculus DK2 and can say I can never go back to playing games on normal 2D monitors(even 50″)-EVER!!….even with the present technical shortfalls of the hmd’s/pc.

          • OgreTactics

            You’re speaking from an amateur (like I am) who just got a DK2 POV. How many time have I said or heard “I can’t go back to normal monitors”…

            Now add 2 years of almost no-content, discomfort, limited capacities and interaction, obnoxious strap and tethered design, unnatural limited FOV and resolution…and you’ll that VR is not a ready device and that’s why in it’s current state it’ll never take-of, except there’s only so much momentum timeframe during which people will wait for it to happen until everyone eventually get bored, unimpressed and mark VR as yes another dead fad (until it comes back at the soonest in 10 years from now in a form that is sufficiently acceptable, well made and complete as an everyday device).

          • Get Schwifty!

            Funny, an awful lot of people are thoroughly enjoying hours of VR entertainment and we have at least one company pushing VR on multiple fronts at the same time. What comes through in your posts is a sort of mixture of fear that VR won’t take off and frustration that it’s not as refined as you would like, and the solution is a “man to the moon” approach to drive the very highest possible VR experience at the lowest cost approach.

            The problem is the tech for cost just isn’t a reality yet, and it will take time for general adoption (to create more demand) to drive the tech. Hate them or not, at least FB/Oculus understands this and is pressing on with a very long (decades by their words) commitment to VR.

          • OgreTactics

            Yes. You got me. I DO fear VR won’t take-off until another 10-15 years, I do think that a “man to the moon” should be only approach to release a paradigm changing technology (again, the best and most recent example is the iPhone), but I’m not frustrated that it’s not as refined as I would like it goes further than that: I’m pissed of that multi-billions thousands-employee companies don’t even have a fucking grasp at least on serious audit or prospective, nor the conception understanding that follows it’s statement (which I described in my other response).

            And it’s funny you are referencing FB/Oculus because let me quote Zuckerberg: “it might take 10 years for VR to reach mass market”. Except if it does it means that current VR has fallen in oblivion, the market is dead, until a new better and hopefully complete iteration comes up again, like it happened for VR in the 90s (but took 20 years as tech was being developed until Palmer Luckey had an idea), like it happened for 3D TVs, and many other techs.

          • victor

            I too sometimes feel your frustration, but I for one have been using my Dk2 almost 2 years now exclusively playing warthunder and Elite dangerous,and those have been taking up most of my free time, and happy for the time being. As far as other non full fledged games or demos I have no time nor interest for now.
            And for your prediction of 10years for the VR to get up to speed I find it extremely exageratted. I think more like 2-3years from my experience working in high tech field career.

  • WyrdestGeek

    Finally some breaking news that’s actually breaking news. Except it’s still totally vapor ware for now. Oh well.

  • Paul Dimino

    impression pi vr headset is coming out this december and does that and more,hand tracking,hand jester control,AR,VR and its wireless

  • Adrian Meredith

    For those of you who are expecting this to be better than gear vr expect disappointment. The prototype tgey showed was an android phone https://gfxbench.com/custom.jsp?benchmark=gfx40&D=unknown%20Oculus%20Dawn%20Proto%200&id=U3BZxC6ZUhEDZ_LAi5QdZg

  • OgreTactics

    too little, too late