Oculus Rift graphics quality, any concerns?

Tons! Off the top of my head:

"Full" experiences -
Walking Dead Saints & Sinners
BONEWORKS
*Half Life Alyx (23rd of March)
Moss
SUPERHOT
Robo Recall
Lone Echo
Asgards Wrath
ARKTIKA.1
Stormland

VR modded full games -
DOOM 3
GTAV (Motion control mod in development)
Alien Isolation

There's a bunch of arcade/sandbox style games like Beat Saber and Hotdogs Horseshoes & Hand Grenades etc. (too many to remember) but I assume by "good games" you mean the big hitters.

 

The original post is years old, but I want to give my feedback. I got a Rift CV1 back in March 2020 and it was my first VR headset ever. The faint grid (screen-door effect/SDE) was noticeable at first, but it didn't detract from my experience at all. I probably racked up over 100 hours of VR play-time in the 7 months I had that headset.

I got a Quest 2 shortly after it launched though. The SDE on my CV1 was significantly more noticeable after using the Quest 2 for a bit though.

However, clarity overall was a bit better from the CV1. The Quest 2 for PCVR relies on your GPU for encoding video, and if your GPU's encoder is low-end, you're only going to be able to get a muddy image on the Quest 2. With a RX 580, the encode resolution being sent over was around 1600x900 according to Oculus's service log. This was only notable when looking for it though, but with that in-mind, even though the Quest 2 has significantly more pixels and clarity on-paper, it was barely a visible upgrade from a CV1, and even worse in some scenarios (like the first gold room in Asgard's Wrath; the ceiling is a muddy mess on the Q2 whereas it's clear on the CV1). Barely anyone talks about this being a potential problem, but to be fair, I believe this is only a problem for a few lower-end Pascal GPUs, and anything on AMD up until RDNA (NVIDIA GPUs are more popular overall with VR, and most people are probably using at least high-end Pascal cards with decent GPU encoders).

Considered returning the Quest 2 for a while, but ended up sticking with it. No idea when I'd be able to ever upgrade my GPU, but I figure the Q2 will be worth it once I do. Plus the other advantages are nice too; particularly being able to do wireless VR with consumer hardware (just an off-the-shelf 5GHz AC or AX router), and not having a proprietary tether cable (Rift CV1 owners know all about this, and soon Rift S owners as well; not being able to buy new cables at outlandish prices sucks; Q2 just needs any decent USB-C cable for Link).

With all of that said though, if I could still buy brand-new cables for a Rift CV1, I'd still be using it happily and would have returned the Quest 2, at least until a later time. That lingering fear of damaging my tether cable was my main issue with the CV1, as I would have likely had to pay about $150 for some used mangled cable off eBay to replace it, unless I got lucky. But outside of that, I was pretty happy with my CV1.

CV1 advantages:

• My CV1 was overall more comfortable with the headstrap, and was significantly lighter
• Tracking on the CV1 was more consistent; I can frequently get the Q2 to lose tracking with Beat Saber by dropping one or both controllers to my hips; never a problem with the CV1
• CV1 controllers felt more premium
• The overall latency with the CV1 was lower and I think helps it feel more immersive (I got an motion-to-photon latency of 15-25ms with the CV1, vs 40-55ms on the Q2)
• I feel the FOV is a tiny bit better on the CV1
• No encode-nonsense, so my RX 580 was actually pretty decent with the CV1, whereas it barely passes with the Q2
• Would be able to use OpenHMD to avoid needing official Oculus software (and thus avoid their update mess, Facebook requirements, and even run on Linux)

Q2 advantages:

• Don't have to worry about hardware availability for connecting to my PC (can use random USB-C cables or wireless routers; nothing proprietary/made by one company)
• Standalone games!
• Default facial interface leaks less light (especially around the nose area)
• Supported (it's the latest headset from Oculus currently; you get tech support, parts, and warranty)
• Can use regular 3rd-party headphones (over a standard 3.5mm connection)
• Higher graphics quality (along with higher hardware requirements on the PC-side for it)
• Easy room-scale (no external sensor placements)
• More apps (you get Rift PCVR games, native Quest games, unofficial VR games from SideQuest, and can even side-load some regular Android games to play in a VR space)

Edit: A year later, I sold the Quest 2 and went back to a Rift CV1 in 2022. Everything above is still true.

 

Quest 2 is a piece of crap. 1 LCD tiny fov mandatory Facebook login lol

 

Good thing there's other headsets that match it in-terms of specs, features, and price! Oh wait

 

There are MANY. Prepare to be disappointed if you have tried any other decent headset.

PS: The thing is really locked down tight, and way to defend something that literally takes a high resolution 3D panoramic video every second its on. Gee, I wonder why Facebook bought Oculus derrrrr...

 

Price was the most significant point

I can pay twice the price of a Quest 2 and get a HP G2, and have worse controller tracking. Or I can pay over 3 times that amount for an Index and have notable SDE and deal with fragile controllers that need RMA'd frequently. Or maybe pay about as much for an OG Vive and get the most outdated graphics and horrible controllers (imo; I absolutely hated the trackpad), and then go and pay the same amount for Index controllers to go along with it (about 2 months ago, both an OG Vive kit and Index controllers were $400 each), along with dealing with the fun RMAs for the controllers, and fear of if a base station goes awry. Every other VR headset that exists currently has notable disadvantages compared to the Quest 2, whereas the Quest 2's loudest disadvantage is a social network log-in that most people already have.

No current headset compares to the Quest 2 when it comes to specs and price, and I don't see this changing any time soon. And imo, the G2 and Index don't have any notable advantages to make the 2-3x cost entertainable. Oculus is on-top when it comes to inside-out tracking, and are the only ones with wireless PCVR with consumer off-the-shelf equipment (no proprietary TPCast thing). And then to have the ability to switch from PCVR-only to standalone is definitely unmatched (aside from the Quest 1 of course).

 

Looks like VR is sunk.
What a waste.

 

The QII is ok for some stuff, but give me the OG vive with the Knuckles for the best roomscale tracking you can get to this day, regardless if you are playing in a total darkness or day light, plus the Vive has oled and once you have used Oled it is damn hard to look at the grey haze that LCD bring to deep blacks, i hate it, LCD panels in Vr should be against the law, i can take the screen door effect of the Vive any day of the week over the grey haze of the LCD QII, just fire up a game like Elite on the Vive/CV1/Quest 1, then fire it up on the QII and see what it's like to have the beginning stages of glaucoma. lol

 

VR is niche. Its ultimately for the users who like to tinker, regardless of vendor etc...

To me, VR will NEVER be sunk because of things like DolphinVR. The experience of being inside a prime AAA Nintendo game like SMG is undeniably incredible... Metroid Prime in full VR is like... literally one of the best VR games.

And then there is MSFS which really isn't a novelty that wears off.

 

Which VR headset has 120hz, wireless, that high a resolution and all for £300?

 

never knew alien isolation got modded to VR
I hope it comes with a box of adult diapers

 

+1

Dont' forget WIDE FOV or it gets claustrophobic!

I don't care about motion controllers.
Optional headtracker

I just want it for FPS gaming with KB+M and Surround headphones (already have it).

 

Yes, the FoV is narrow on the Q2. That's the major downside of it. But it's not dissimilar to all the other Oculus headsets. I'll say this again, Quest 2 is about as good as it gets for £300.

 

120hz used with streaming video for PCVR isn't the same as a true PCVR headset with 120hz. Try any 90hz or greater wired set and you will see that "120hz" is meaningless, as the 90hz native PCVR headset is smoother.

Same goes for the high resolution and streaming, which isnt even that high... Its just a single 4k screen. Divide that by 2 (real sets have 2 screens) and you have a slightly higher resolution that average. G2 has a higher resolution and it is only a tiny bit more expensive now that its on sale.

The FoV is the killer though. Sure, if you havent used vr before its fine... But any respectable VR user\simmer would be crushed by that FoV... almost literally because it has "no" verticality. I dont see black on the top and bottom of my set, and my horizontal Fov is at least the same size.

 

I've used a CV1 and OG Vive; the Quest 2 has a slightly smaller FoV, but nothing significant, or even noticeable outside of side-by-side comparisons/testing. But those two headsets are old, so it is likely true that newer headsets have notably higher FoV.

The Quest 2 has 10-25ms higher latency in all situations with PCVR because of the encode/decode process, but that's (imo) on-paper. Motion-to-photon latency with my CV1 at its lowest was 15ms, whereas a Quest 2 reports 38ms at 90Hz (wired Link), but with Beat Saber, controller tracking felt better for some reason with the Quest 2 (wasn't bad with the CV1 at all, but it felt more connected with the Q2). Can still pass the same songs on both headsets. I can sim race and play other PCVR games fine too from the Q2.

Q2 may not be the best compared to a few (2?) native PCVR headsets when it comes to latency and graphics, but nothing else comes close feature-wise for $300-400.

Slightly-related, but it's kind of like racing wheels for sim racing. You got your cheap bargain-store 270-degree spring-loaded wheels, you have entry-level force-feedback wheels like Logitech G920/G29 for about $250, and then you have full-on direct-drive wheels towards $1000. The cheap wheels are good for gauging interest, and I'd put the CV1 and OG Vive in this category (albeit both are still decent nowadays). The entry-level force-feedback wheels are in a whole different category compared to non-force-feedback ones, and this is where I'd put the Quest 2. Direct-drive wheels have the strongest FFB, but feature-wise aren't notably different than the entry-level FFB wheels, and this is where I'd put the G2 (barely) and Index at.

Overall, I'm fine with my Quest 2 for now, but if I wanted a native PCVR headset, I'd go back to a Rift CV1 and likely only use it for seated PCVR. Newer headsets have to be standalone with wireless PCVR and have inside-out tracking on-par or better than Oculus Insight, or offer native Linux support for me to really consider it, along with being affordable ($600 or lower). Index is close, but the price is too high for my casual PCVR use.

 

Dude, the G2 costs over twice of what the Quest 2 is. Also, comes with it's own issues with poor tracking and trash controllers just to name a couple.

 

It was just on sale for 399.99 it must've ended recently. Yeah I agree the controllers have problems considering they are 3rd gen and the 2nd gens were better on the best all around VR headset "on the market:" Samsung Odyssey Plus.

 

I finally got tired of the Quest 2 and sold it. Even with a RTX 3060, it still had noticeable compression, and latency was too-high for me to get immersed with it even at 90Hz and 120Hz. Ended up getting a Rift CV1 again, and can confidently say it was worth it and is notably better!

I can't rule-out if the IPD mismatch was my main issue with the Quest 2, but everything else about it is better. I can hold the controllers easier, the headset isn't heavy, audio is top-notch, and both head movement and controller movement actually feel 1:1. Color saturation and blacks are also significantly better; the Quest 2 looks washed-out by comparison, especially with the color blue. The headset overall is more comfortable, and I can keep it on more than 40 minutes without eye-strain.

The only downside is the resolution somewhat. It's fine in most games without fine text, but I find it hard to read signs in City Car Driving and American Truck Simulator. It's not bad enough to break the experience and the other CV1 benefits outweight the resolution heavily, but I did like the higher resolution the Quest 2 had.

Overall, the Quest 2 makes an ok entry-level PCVR headset, but it still doesn't compare to an actual PCVR headset, even a 5-year old one. The added latency for Quest headsets is no-joke, and Oculus needs to offer a direct-display connection for future headsets.

 

^^^On ETS you can add mods to your game that make the in game signs, truck dashboard and fonts eaiser to read, i also still have the Cv1 and the Vive and this helped to solve that issue, although on the Vive the screen door effect actually makes everything sharper, so on that hmd i don't need to wear my glasses. ha

But yeah i just recently got rid of my QII, it simply was no good to me as my IPD was not catered for and all i ever saw was a blurry image, and i could also see the edges of the LCD panel, and it was LCD so that was always a issue after going from this Cv1/Vive.

 

Due to the GPU shortage, I am still waiting to get a good VR headset. Guess we will see how the PSVR 2 and Apple VR headsets will compare.