The field of AR, VR, and MR is rapidly getting recognisiton and is projected to be a multi-billion dollar industry by 2025 – due to its untapped potential in many diverse areas. With an exciting future ahead, this has spurred many companies to produce and designed their own headsets. In this post, I will be reviewing some of my favourite VR and MR headsets.

VR Headset – Oculus Quest 2

Oculus Quest 2 is the successor of Oculus Quest. The newly upgraded Oculus Quest 2 is lighter, sturdier, and performs way better than its predecessor. It makes for a more accessible VR headset due to it being standalone – meaning you do not have to connect it to a PC to play – and boast a cheaper price compared to its predecessor Oculus Quest (with better specifications too!).

Oculus Quest 2 setup is far easier than most of its peers; having no need to set up additional tracking cameras and able to accept almost all type of cable. Oculus Quest 2 can be used wireless as well, so you no longer have to worry about stepping on the cable when you are fully immersed in your game. Admittedly, using it in wireless mode means you have to give up some of the screen resolution and refresh rate.

Below is the specification for Oculus Quest 2.

Comparison with Oculus Quest

Oculus Quest 2 feels like a direct upgrade on most aspects compared to its predecessor. We will now highlight problems that Oculus Quest 2 has resolved where its predecessor has stumbled – or the other way around!

In terms of hardware, Oculus Quest 2 is vastly superior to Oculus Quest. Oculus Quest 2 boast higher resolution, lighter weight, higher RAM, higher refresh rate, and higher computational power. There is no argument here; Oculus Quest 2’s hardware is simply better than Oculus Quest’s hardware.

Oculus Quest 2 being able to accept most cable type is a life quality improvement that Oculus has introduced in comparison to Oculus Quest that only accepts USB 3 cable. This is a sore point of Oculus Quest as there are complains about user not being able to find high quality USB 3 cable with suitable length.

Another subtle improvement is the battery on the controller of Oculus Quest 2. While both Oculus Quest and Oculus Quest 2 require the same type and number of battery, Oculus Quest 2 has a clear advantage of simply having a better battery container and longer battery life. Oculus Quest’s battery container often comes loose, in which it could lose contact with the battery during fast movement – thus resulting in the controller not tracking user movement momentarily. For movement intense game such as Beat Saber, this little lapse can cause us to lose! Oculus Quest 2 manages to resolve this issue by having a more sturdy battery container that holds the battery in place.

Notably, Oculus Quest 2 requires mandatory Facebook login whereas Oculus Quest treat Facebook login as optional. Facebook claims that this would allow them to create a more consistent experience for users as well as better data security. Some may treat it as a plus, some may treat it negatively – you decide.

One of Oculus Quest 2’s feature that I personally treat as a downgrade is the head strap. In contrast to the triangle style strap of Oculus Quest, Oculus Quest 2 supports a cross style strap. The triangle strap of Oculus Quest allows the strap to cup the back of the head, allowing for better strapping and counter balance the weight of VR headsets.

Fortunately, Oculus provides an alternative to the head strap, named Oculus Quest 2 Elite Strap. The Oculus Quest 2 Elite Strap provide more stability and better fitting to Oculus Quest 2, making it more comfortable and stable for prolonged use. Admittedly, equipping the Oculus Quest 2 Elite Strap increases the weight of Oculus Quest 2 past 600g. However, the additional weight is situated at the opposite end of the VR headset, allowing it actually counter balance the momentum of the VR headset. The Oculus Quest 2 Elite Strap (without battery) comes at USD $49. When combined with the starting price of Oculus Quest 2 of USD $299, it totals up to USD $348 – which is still below the starting price of Oculus Quest of USD $399.

MR Headset – Nreal Light

Nreal Light is the new contender for MR headsets with affordable price and being lightweight, designed to look like fashionable sunglasses. Nreal Light has two tracking cameras on the side and uses an RGB camera at the centre.

Due to its commitment being light, Nreal Light itself has the drawback of not having its own computational power or battery. Instead, it has USB-C plug that allows it to make use other computational unit such as your phone, laptop, or PC.

Below is the specification of Nreal Light.

Comparison with Microsoft Hololens 2

In terms of pricing, Nreal is a much cheaper alternative to Microsoft Hololens 2. In comparison to Microsoft Hololens 2 price at ~USD$3,500, Nreal Light is marketed to be the budget MR headset at ~USD$500. Nreal Light is targeted for public, everyday use instead for enterprise use that Microsoft Hololens 2 is designed for.

With such price, this begs the question whether Nreal performance would pale in contrast to Microsoft Hololens 2. Surprisingly, Nreal Light display is able to solve the ‘rainbow’ artifact in Microsoft Hololens 2; where models texture would be seemingly overlaid with rainbow pattern. Nreal Light is able to do so using a completely different principle in their display pipeline.

Nreal Light, as the name suggests, comes at a much lighter weight than Microsoft Hololens 2; 106g to 566g. Nreal Light is the lightest MR headset in the market by far. This allows for far, prolonged usage without any discomfort.

Nreal Light provide the same 52 degrees FOV as Microsoft Hololens 2. The smaller FOV compared to other MR headsets (e.g. Dimension DXG Ajna Lens has 95 degrees FOV) means that clipping often occurs when models are viewed from short distance.

Admittedly, Nreal Light falls short in terms of extensive interaction capability and processing power that Microsoft Hololens 2 offer. Nreal Light also falls short in terms of resolution; having 1080x1080p/eye resolution in comparison to 2048x1080p/eye resolution of Microsoft Hololens 2. While this may seem to be a deal breaker, the fact that Nreal Light is priced at 1/7th of the price of its counterpart still makes a pretty good case for casual usage of MR headsets.

A few decades ago, people cannot imagine how they feel in a virtual world. With the development of virtual reality technology, VR, AR and MR are not strange to people. They are used in games, hospitals, education, and so on. More and more devices are invented to improve the experience of virtual reality. In this article, I will briefly introduce the latest VR, AR, and MR devices and their advantages.

VR headsets

HTC Vive:

• Price: $499 for the Vive, $599 for the Vive Focus Plus, and $799 for the Vive Pro headset
• Resolution: 1080*1200 per eye (1440*1600 for Vive pro)
• Base station: 5m*5m
• FOV: 110 degrees
• Pixel density: 455.63 PPI
• Refresh rate: 90 Hz
• Connection: wireless
• Load: heavy, require a powerful computer

Oculus:

• Price: $200 for Oculus Go and $400 for Oculus Rift
• Resolution: 1280*1440
• Refresh rate: 72 Hz for GO and 90 for Rift
• Base station: 2.5m*2.5m
• FOV: 110 degrees
• Pixel density: 455.63 PPI
• Load: Oculus Go doesn’t need a computer and Oculus Rift needs a powerful computer.

Hololens 2:

• Price: $3500
• Resolution: 2048*1080
• Refresh rate: 240Hz
• FOV: 52 degrees
• Pixel density: 47 pixels per degree of sight
• Connection: Wireless

Pimax 5 plus:

• Price: $699
• Resolution: 2560*1440
• FOV: 200 degrees
• Pixel density:
• Refresh rate: 90/120 Hz
• Connection: Wireless

MR headsets:

(Retrieved from https://www.threesixtycameras.com/windows-mixed-reality-comparison-table/)

I never used the VR/MR headsets before. However, the data above have shown that each headset has advantages. By comparing Oculus and HTC Vive, they both required a heavy computer to support their operation. HTC Vive is more expensive but with a twice larger base station and higher refresh rate. Pimax 5 has a similar price with these two, but with a higher resolution and field of view. Hololens 2 is the most expensive one. Although it has a high refresh rate, which reached 240 Hz, I think it is too expensive. Actually, people are not able to tell the difference between 120 Hz and 240 Hz of the refresh rate. Besides that, Hololens 2 has a smaller FOV than others. It may cause less immersive.

There are a lot of great headsets that I haven’t listed out. They are waiting for us to explore.

The latest hardwares for VR/AR/MR that I think are great are:

• Oculus Quest 2
• Valve Index
• Sony Playstation VR
• HoloLens 2
• Samsung Odyssey+

Most Preferred VR Headset: Oculus Quest 2

My most preferred VR device would be the Oculus Quest 2, as it is the most affordable and comfortable option currently on the market.

The Oculus Quest 2 is untethered, and can be conveniently used without having to create an elaborate set up. This wireless functionality not only brings convenience, but also allows for a more immersive experience, as having a cable banging against our back can distract us from the experience.

Moreover, the Oculus Quest 2 comes with improved screen resolution from its predecessor, decent controllers, and bundles all of these features into an affordable price point. As a student with a low budget, this makes the Oculus Quest 2 very attractive.

Most Preferred MR Headset: HoloLens 2

My most preferred MR device would be the HoloLens 2, as it offers a mixed reality experience that is comfortable and intuitive to the user. The headset is lightweight and balanced, and the large knob at the back allows users to place the headset comfortably on ones head.

The virtual interaction can also be intuitive, as the HoloLens 2 tracks the user’s hands and is able to detect finger movement. This allows users to interact with the environment in a very natural way by pinching, pressing and dragging the user interface.

Many people would have heard of Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR) and Mixed Reality (MR) in the context of games and entertainment. While those use cases make up a large portion of the market, these technologies are also being applied in a huge variety of industries such as medicine and the military (among many others).

For example, Dr. Shafi Ahmed conducted the first surgery that was broadcasted live in VR. Traditionally, in order to view a surgery that is within such an intimate distance, observers would have to be on-site. However, fledgling surgeons and medical professionals could use this session as an effective training tool while not having to be physically present.

Evidently, VR, AR and MR present an exciting variety of use cases, some of which might not even be realized. In this post, I will share some of the most exciting hardware available for VR, AR and MR.

Virtual Reality (VR) Hardware

List of VR Headsets Considered

• Oculus Rift S
• HTC Vive
• Valve Index
• Pimax Vision 8K X

I have considered a total of 5 factors to determine which of these headsets I would favor.

The winner: Pimax Vision 8K X

This headset, while being the most costly out of the four, impressed me the most with its enthusiast-grade specs. It provides a whopping 200º field of view (a human’s field of view is 210 º ). It also provides the highest resolution of 3840 by 2160. This two factors would contribute to Pimax Vision 8K X providing a greater level of immersion to the user. This headset is also compatible with SteamVR and Oculus software, meaning that it will have an access to a large amount of VR content. The weight is also relatively low at 500g which means that extended usage will not cause as much physical strain as the Valve Index (the heaviest among those mentioned).

Unfortunately, a VR headset with such impressive specs would require an equally impressive computer to support it. According to the specifications, it requires an RTX 2080 to run at native mode, which would set the user back by a further US$699. However, a user buying an enthusiast-grade VR headset would likely already have an enthusiast-grade desktop to support it.

Honorable Mention: Google Cardboard

While not on the list, I think the Google Cardboard deserves a mention. Compared to the Pimax 8K X, it seemingly lies on the other end of the spectrum, completely relying on the attached phone’s hardware (as it does not have any on its own).

While it is a far-cry from the aforementioned headsets in terms of specs and UI/UX-wise, it can be a good starting point for users who want to try out VR without having to spend anything.

Augmented Reality (AR) and Mixed Reality (MR) Hardware

List of AR/MR Hardware Considered

• Microsoft HoloLens 2 – $3500
• Epson Moverio BT-350 – $1099
• Google Glass Enterprise Edition 2 – $999

The winner: Microsoft HoloLens 2

For this category, I had a hard time deciding which AR/MR headset was the best. Checking out each of their specifications, the headset with the higher price tag had a higher screen resolution, but not necessarily a higher field of view.

Most of these AR headsets are for commercial use, and one big advantage of the Microsoft HoloLens 2 is its powerful analytics tools which make use of AI and the excellent UI/UX. Furthermore, it uses Microsoft’s own Azure Cloud, which is an open-source network that will allow developers to come up with their own frameworks to suit their needs.

Honorable Mention: Apple AR

While Apple does not have a device specifically made for AR, it has pushed AR technologies onto its mobile devices, creating the biggest AR platform with hundreds of millions of devices. This is good news for people who already have an iPhone or an iPad as they need not splurge a thousand dollars just to experience AR.

For developers, Apple even provides frameworks which developers can use to create their own AR/MR applications easily.

List the latest HWs for VR/AR/MR

Here are some of the hardwares that I think are great:t

• Valve Index
• Sony Playstation VR
• Oculus Rift S
• HTC Vive Cosmos
• Oculus Quest 2
• Magic Leap One
• Microsoft Hololens

As a student deciding my most preferred device, I look out for the price. Since VR/MR technology still isn’t as mainstream as regular gaming consoles, their prices can be extremely high. For example, the Valve Index (full kit) costs more than $3,000 (see on Amazon).

I am also concerned about convenience. As someone who prefers wireless devices, I would avoid heavy devices that require a lot of cables as they may feel bulky and messy.

Most Preferred VR Device

Oculus Quest 2

The Oculus Quest 2 product is a successor to the Oculus Quest. It is slimmer and cheaper, containing all the basic features of its predecessor. Some of the significant improvements include a more responsive experience with the improved RAM (4GB → 6GB) and resolution (1600 x 1440 → 1920 x 1832) (source).

Immediately, the price is a huge plus point to me as it is one of the cheapest VR headsets out there. Although the Playstation VR comes close, you will need a Playstation console to use the Playstation VR. As someone who just wants to experience VR, the Quest 2 (which is just a standalone unit) will suffice.

Another plus point for the Quest 2 would be its convenience. As mentioned earlier, it is a standalone device which means you only require the device itself to play. On the other hand, the HTC Vive Cosmos or Valve Index, for example, requires connection to a computer which means dealing with cables. The Quest 2 offers a tethered experience as well with a $100 cable. Moreover, the Quest 2 runs on AA batteries as opposed to charging, which means you simply have to replace the batteries when it gets low, as opposed to waiting for it to charge sufficiently. This is great for someone like myself who cannot keep track of charging my devices.

Although many reviewers list the requirement of a Facebook account as a con of using the Quest 2 (this article considers this a reason to avoid using), I am indifferent to it as I already have a Facebook account and I have any qualms using my Facebook account for games.

Most Preferred MR Device

Microsoft HoloLens 2

Regarding price, despite the HoloLens 2 is being expensive, it seems that it was priced with enterprise-use in mind. For example, airline mechanics could be shown how to carry out a certain repair, or have a handsfree manual with them (source). Hence, I was not too strict on judging the price of the HoloLens 2. Given the great features packed into the HoloLens 2, the price difference from the Magic Leap One is well justified.

In terms of convenience, the HoloLens 2 is completely wireless and allows users to experience MR handsfree with the help of its 4 head tracking and 2 eye tracking sensors. This is opposed to the Magic Leap One where users have to operate the device with a hand-held navigation controller attached to the headset with a cable.

Although I do not wear glasses, one con of the Magic Leap One agreed upon by many reviewers was that it would not fit well on users with glasses. Hence, users who wear glasses might want to opt for contact lenses when using the device. Alternatively, Magic Leap offers prescription inserts for their “shortsighted visionaries”.

Favorite VR headset: Oculus Quest 2

As I’ve had some experience with VR, I think that the Quest 2 is the best option for me. I’ve used VR primarily for games. There were several instances where I used the headset for watching movies or for surfing the web, but I still feel like that pales in comparison with what VR can bring for immersive gaming.

Tracking

Right off the bat, the Oculus Quest 2 falls short when it comes to tracking. Arguably, lighthouse tracking solutions are way more accurate as they are powered by external LiDARs and IR cameras. This ensures that hand movements are picked up even if they are behind the headset, unlike inside out tracking solutions which would rely on the IMUs to guesstimate the position of your hands when it is out of view of those tracking cameras.  Although this is a known limitation, I still find that tracking on the Oculus Quest 2 is adequate for most games.

Framerate and Screen

The Quest 2 also falls short in frame rate. However, a recent software update saw the bump of the device’s framerate to a whopping 90Hz. This puts it on par with most VR headsets in the market except the Valve Index. However, the Quest 2 does have a physical limitation when we compare the field of views among the other headsets. This reduced FOV is noticeable.

Games

It is true that the Oculus store can be somewhat lacking when we compare it against a bigger player like Steam VR. The Quest 2 is mostly a standalone VR headset with its own version of the Oculus store. Graphics for these are definitely toned down as they had to be optimized to run on the Snapdragon XR2 chipset. That being said, game graphics are still pretty decent especially for someone who is new to VR. For those who wish to play Steam VR/ PC VR games, fret not the Quest 2 can be linked to a PC via Oculus Link or Virtual Desktop streamer.

This opens more options for the headset as users can choose between using the Quest 2 in standalone mode or tethered to a PC. With these options available and a close similarity in terms of specs with the Oculus Rift S, I would say that it is better to get the Quest 2 if you’re deciding between the Quest 2 and the Rift S.

Portability

The things which appeal to me in a VR headset are its portability and flexibility. The Oculus Quest 1 was my first headset as I wanted to carry a headset wherever I go and play it anywhere (similar to the Nintendo Switch). It was also extremely affordable, and it became really worth it when Oculus Link was released sometime later.

Favorite AR headset: Magic Leap 1

I would not be able to throw my personal experience into the mix as I have never tried any of these headsets before. My preferred headset would be the Magic Leap 1 after comparing between the Avegant Lightfield and Microsoft Hololens 2 (mostly based on the specs and online experience).

Lenses/ Field of view

One of the biggest limiting factors about AR headsets is the field of view due to limitations in waveguide technology. Light emitted from tiny projectors in the headset reflect off of tiny wave guides on the lenses so that the user can still see past the lenses into the real world. This technology is implemented in both Hololens 2 and the Magic Leap 1 and they share similar field of views of about 40 degrees. However, the Avegant Lightfield seems to have achieved a better FOV performance. This is due to the bird path optics they’ve implemented instead of relying on waveguide.

Comfort

Since AR headsets are still in a developmental phase, I wouldn’t expect them to be extra comfortable or easy to set up. They are probably not made to target the consumer market yet and still require quite an extensive support from the company responsible to ensure that the headset functions properly. With that being said, the Magic Leap 1 certainly takes the cake when it comes to headset comfort. It is easy to put on by simply stretching the headband and fitting it on your head. The headset is also the lightest among the three and that’s also partly because the miniature computer is detached and can be mounted elsewhere instead. This means that the headset will be wired but it’s a reasonable sacrifice.

Developer support

As AR is still in its infancy, it is extremely important for the headsets to have good developer support. That means being available on well-known developer tools such as Unity, WebGL and Android SDK. The Magic Leap 1 and Hololens 2 have really well documented API references and they’re also both available on Unity. This creates equal opportunities to develop apps for it. Having a strong base of applications is important before hitting the consumer market as apps help AR headsets realize their use cases.

I will be explaining my choices with respect to the following factors ranked from highest to lowest. These are based on my experience and preferences.

1. Ecosystem/Support – This is very important. Without the proper games/software/applications to accompany the product, the AR/VR headset is little more than an expensive paperweight
2. Hardware/Performance (Graphics, Resolution, Latency) – I value resolution and frame-rate a lot because it really adds to the user’s experience.
3. Price – VR/AR is currently expensive tech, there’s no avoiding it. If I had the option, I would pay more for a more complete/legitimate experience. It’s that, or just wait until the price/performance ratio evens out.

VR Devices

I’ve picked out 3 VR headsets from all price points (Expensive, Affordable, and Budget). 

Winner: Valve Index

The Nintendo Labo is a very unique VR headset, it is essentially Google Cardboard on steroids. The entire VR set is made of DIY, foldable cardboard objects such as a camera, a giant blaster, animals, a wind-blowing foot pedal, and the goggles themselves. It has very niche and unconventional approach to VR, and provides very casual, simple fun for people looking for that kind of experience. It doesn’t remotely match the performance level of the other 2 headsets, with only 3DOF, and a 60Hz display on a much lower resolution of 1280×720 pixels, which strips away much of the immersion. As it uses the Nintendo Switch for hardware, the VR set itself is cheap, and the games are limited to what is on the Nintendo Store. This ranks last as I prefer greater immersion, performance, as well as a wider library of games to choose from.

The Valve Index and the Oculus Quest 2 compete in the same category of VR, offering both 6DOF and similar game libraries to choose from. However, the Valve Index offers something very unique that isn’t found on other VR devices – its ability to track individual finger movement and grip strength. This allows for a much higher level of immersion in the VR experience, it allows users to pick up objects by gripping the controller  instead of pressing a button, allowing for greater immersion, and pushing the boundaries of user agency in the simulated environment. Unfortunately the Valve Index is a tethered device, which means less freedom of movement. 

In terms of performance, the Valve Index offers 130° compared to 100° FOV in the Oculus Quest, it also boasts higher refresh rates than the Quest. The only shortfall would be resolution, with the Oculus Quest sitting at a whopping 1832 x 1920pixels per eye (Nearly 4K resolution!) vs 1440 x 1600pixels per eye for the Valve Index. However, there is smaller perceivable difference the higher you go, so that’s not as important.

Overall, the Valve Index wins. It is pricey, but the most impressive amongst the lineup of VR headsets.

MR Devices

There weren’t many well-known options in the MR space, so I chose to compare these two.

Winner: You guessed it – Hololens 2

The Magic Leap One is no doubt an impressive MR device that offers a respectable resolution of 1280 x 960pixels per eye, a standalone device, and hardware that is able to handle most graphical tasks seamlessly. It also allows for 6DOF, and hand-tracking via the in-built cameras. Furthermore, Magic Leap has numerous entertainment partnerships which are clearly directed at consumers rather than enterprise users, and therefore seems more appealing for the casual user.

In terms of raw performance, power, and features however, whatever the Magic Leap 1 can do, the Hololens 2 can do better. It has the best resolution out of all MR devices, at 2048×1080pixels per eye. Not only does the Hololens 2 have more powerful hardware, the Remote Rendering feature allows the device to utilise cloud computing to overcome hardware restrictions.

While Magic Leap can only recognise a limited number of fixed gestures and utilises a controller. The Hololens 2 does away with a need for controllers entirely, as the on-board cameras are capable of tracking up to 25 points of articulation with both hands in space, allowing natural touch and grasping to move holograms without the use of any additional hardware, which makes for a more intuitive and immersive user experience. 

The HoloLens 2 also has more advanced eye-tracking technology and voice recognition, which greatly increases the range of control a user can have in a Mixed Reality environment.

To top it all off. Hololens is backed by Microsoft, one of the world’s largest tech companies. With all the talent, money, and enterprise partners that a tech company can afford, there’s a lot more potential in the growth and development of Hololens compared to the Magic Leap.

Latest in VR

1. Oculus Quest 2
2. Sony PlayStation VR
3. HTC Vive Cosmos
4. Valve Index
5. Windows Mixed Reality

Latest in AR

1. Microsoft HoloLens 2
2. Magic Leap One
3. Epson Moverio
4. Google Glass Enterprise Edition
5. Vuzix Blade AR

Latest in MR

1. Samsung HMD Odyssey+
2. HP Reverb
3. Windows Mixed Reality
4. Microsoft HoloLens 2
5. Avegant Lightfield

Best in VR: Oculus Quest 2

Design
⁃ Self-contained VR headset. No wires that may cause tripping
⁃ Thumb rest on motion controllers. So it is easier for users to hold. during longer sessions.

Set-up
⁃ Intuitive set-up and safety system. It is self-contained, with no external wires, hence setting up takes only 5-10 minutes. Users can also highlight safe playing areas that makes external environment visible when users step out of playing areas.

Experience
⁃ Facebook account requirement and Google Cast headset Display sharing function. These functions allow for better social experience of playing with peers as they can be immersed in the same gaming experience.

⁃ Access to PC VR Experience (with Oculus Link). This provides higher quality gaming experience as users can link to gaming PC with good specifications. The titles available to users are also increased.

⁃ Easily navigable. Menu system resembles a floating panel on. Virtual environment, navigation motion is smooth and comfortable.

Hardware Specifications
⁃ Single LCD panel, split to display an 1832 x 1920 pixel per eye. High-resolution display.
⁃ Built-in speakers. Speakers are built in headset’s strap support to offer directional left and right stereo sounds. This feature provides a greater and a more precise stimulation of auditory senses.

⁃ Battery-powered, standalone headset. Proves greater ease of movement.
⁃ Option to run games at 90Hz (reforest rate of 90 times per second). This is slower than the usual 120Hz speed, reducing motion sickness and thus greater comfort and realism .

Best in MR: Samsung HMD Odyssey+

Hardware Specifications
⁃ High resolution: 1440×1660 resolution in each eye with 3.5-inch AMOLED displays
⁃ Refresh Rate: 90Hz refresh rate

⁃ FOV: 110-degree field-of-view. The degree is close to our natural FOV of 200 degree, which cuts down the crammed feeling of looking into a tunnel, thereby ensuring a more immersive experience
⁃ Sound Quality: built-in AKG headphones on the headband which allows for greater stimulation of the auditory senses.

Design
⁃ Wider nose guard and eye box. Easier for those with prescription glasses to wear. Additionally, this means there is ample cushion and comfortable fit for long sessions.
⁃ Manual Inter-Pupilliary Distance (IPD) adjustments are possible. This caters to a greater audiences and provide more comfort when wearing.

Experience
⁃ Greater range of games. The headset is compatible with Oculus Rift and HTC Vive games. Additionally, its controllers contains the buttons and trackpads needs to navigate these games
⁃ Flexible tracking mechanisms. Tracking works on low-end VR laptops too.