VR Devices

I have compiled a table featuring 4 popular VR devices, as well as their respective specifications, for ease of comparison. These key specifications, including Degree of Freedom (DOF) and Field Of View (FOV), were chosen as basis of comparison due to their high relevance and importance in providing immersion in the VR experience.

Specs	Playstation VR	Valve Index	Nintendo Labo VR	Oculus Quest 2
Category	Tethered	Tethered	Standalone	Standalone
Degree of Freedom	6DOF	6DOF	3DOF	6DOF
Field of View	100°	130°	110°	90°
Resolution (pixels)	1920 x 1080	2880 x 1600	1280 x 720	3664 x 1920
Refresh Rate	120hz	144hz	60hz	90hz
Cost (USD)	299	999	79.90	299

Favourite VR Device: Oculus Quest 2

I ultimately favoured the Oculus Quest 2 over the other choices due to several reasons:

Firstly, it is a standalone VR headset and has a built-in display and audio processor, and using it is relatively hassle-free. This is opposed to the tethered playstation VR and Valve Index, which requires it to be connected to a PC to work.

Of course, I understand that tethered headsets are able to leverage on the powerful PCs to provide higher quality immersion. For example, the Valve Index is considered a higher-end headset of choice, and is able to take advantage of the PC’s computing power to push high refresh rates up to 144hz. It is also able to perform individual finger tracking with its controllers as well:

Despite the fact that tethered VR headset can supposedly provide more immersion, I identify as a casual VR user and do not see the need to invest in a high-end VR set at the moment. I believe that the Oculus Quest 2 is good enough for my needs in exploring the field of VR, and appreciate the fact that I can use the headset without much prior set up.

Secondly, I value the 6DOF that the Oculus Quest 2 provides. I’m not just young and dumb, I’m also broke. Hence, as I invest my money into Oculus Quest 2, I also expect a good level of immersion, which I believe can lead to a good level of presence. While VR headsets like the Nintendo Labo VR only provides 3DOF (tracking the rotation of your head), the Oculus Quest 2 also tracks your movement with inside-out tracking, a method that uses sensors on the device to scan the surroundings and determine your position. This is opposed to the Valve Index, which requires setting up external base station stands to track your surroundings.

Thirdly, the Oculus Quest 2 provides almost 4K resolution, beating the others in this area. Having a higher resolution can truly enhance the immersion, and make me temporarily forget about my sad, sad life. Hence, increasing the presence of the VR experience.

Lastly, I believe that at $299, the Oculus Quest 2 is worth it. While the cheapest on the list is the Nintendo Labo VR, it’s specs are (unsurprisingly) poorer than the rest, and undoubtedly would provide the least amount of immersion. It is more aimed at super-casual gamers or kids that want to have a taste of VR. The Oculus Quest 2 on the other hand, is reasonably priced given the amount of power it packs. Although the playstation VR is priced similarly to the Oculus Quest 2, I will still go with the Oculus Quest 2 because it is a standalone headset.

MR Devices

Below are 2 MR Devices that I think are great:

Specs	Microsoft Hololens 2	Magic Leap One
Category	Standalone	Standalone
Degree of Freedom	6DOF	6DOF
Field of View	52°	50°
Resolution (pixels per eye)	2048 x 1080	1280 x 960
Refresh Rate	120Hz	120Hz
Cost (USD)	$3500	$2295

Favourite MR device: Microsoft Hololens 2

I believe that both devices listed have their merits. However, I decided to go with Microsoft Hololens for these reasons:

Firstly, as a casual user of MR technologies, one of my main focuses is the ability to run interesting and fun programmes on the device. The Microsoft Hololens 2 is developed by Microsoft and the Magic Leap One is relatively new, developed by Magic Leap. The Microsoft Hololens 2 is able to run programmes that were developed for the original Hololens, while there is stark lack of content for the Magic Leap One. This is important to me because I like to keep things fresh and new and having few programs to choose from will cause the novelty to wear off.

Next, while the Magic Leap One has hand-tracking, it also provides a controller for the user to use, which is great in itself. But I’ve also read that the Microsoft Hololens 2 doesn’t even need controllers, and relies solely on hand-tracking via cameras on the device, and has significantly better hand tracking, even being able to “identify [the user’s] ten fingers with ease”. This provides the user with more immersion as it can better simulate real life, most likely leading to higher presence.

Also, just by looking at the specifications, we can see that the Hololens 2 beats the Magic Leap One on two important factors: Field of View and Resolution. This is what makes the Hololens 2 a better quality MR device, increasing the immersion.

While the Microsoft Hololens 2 would naturally cost more ($3500) compared to the Magic Leap One ($2295), I feel safer investing in a product developed by a well-known brand in Microsoft. Furthermore, the Hololens 2 is already their second edition of the Hololens series, which shows how Microsoft already has much more experience in building, giving them an added advantage in enhancing their MR device as compared to Magic Leap.

Disclaimer: I haven’t had the opportunity to try any headsets at all 🙁 So take all I say with a huge sprinkle of salt.

Practicality/Affordability – I think it is important

I like practical stuff. I would like VR tech that is able to be adopted in some form by the masses. So TLDR: cheap.

VR headsets have come a long way. I remember being amazed at the Kickstarter of the Oculus Rift quite some years ago. It was kewl tech, and they promised it would go mainstream soon. Heck, even John Carmack (The Doom guy, but not the Doomguy) was in on it.

But since that time I have never even gotten the chance to touch a Headset before lol. High cost of entry (expensive) and not useful enough for what it does, given the high cost. Also perhaps I’m just poor.

There is also an issue where buying a VR headset is more of buying a service /experience as opposed to buying a tech. Perhaps VR headsets should be rented instead of sold. Otherwise it is a financial risk to the curious individual who may wish to try it out but is not sure about long term viability.

Grading Criteria for the headsets:

1. Practicality: Is the gear practical to use? Is it clunky? Does it solve a problem? Comfort?
2. price point: Consumer products should have low price point to be sufficiently affordable. Enterprise products should have appropriate price point for their target market.
3. Tech: Is the tech significantly better than the last generation/competitor? Is it innovative? We aren’t just talking graphical fidelity or resolution here; we are interested in things like latency and framerate and subjective matters like nausea too.
4. Compatibility: Can play the gamessssssss

Favorite VR Headsets

Winner: Valve Index

Pros: Apparently the best VR headset money can buy right now. With tech like this it might be wise to get the best, due to better support and everything… You pay for what you get, probably. One might use the Iphone vs budget Android in 2012 analogy here. If you can afford a PC for VR you should probably get a decent headset. Also, came out with Halflife Alyx.

Cons: Why is it so expensive 🙁

Budget runnerup: HP Reverb G2.

If you can’t quite afford the top tier HMD you should get this. It does not have significant problems except for “disappointing” tracking performance. But I’m sure you would learn to live with it, given its not exactly deal-breaking.

Favorite MR Headsets

Winner: Hololens

Pros: Microsoft invested in this tech a lot, and you can see many demos of this tech, from game demo to Medical tech. If you are buying this, you are probably an enterprise customer or a partner of Microsoft, in which case, a ecosystem and support from Microsoft would be very beneficial to your development and research work.

Cons: Wow many expensive, much dollars. If it is anything like some Microsoft products you know it possibly could be dead after a few years x.x

ETC

Can we have an opensource standard for HMD plz. New tech keeps getting centralized/consolidated and its very sad.

-Alexis

The world of VR & MR hardware can be intimidating, and it doesn’t help that manufacturers use complex technical marketing jargon for the purpose of product differentiation. Jargon aside, it is ultimately the immersion and presence that the hardware can provide that triumphs over all.

This article will therefore utilize the 2 main criterion of immersion and presence, to evaluate the latest VR & MR headsets that offer the best user experience.

Immersion

Immersion entails the ability of the headset to engage with the human experiential senses, i.e. vision, auditory engagement, touch etc.

Presence

Presence entails invoking the emotions of the user through putting the user through illusions, illusions that they exist within the virtual space projected by the headset, illusions that the user is really interacting with the entities in the virtual world, etc.

List of Hardware for VR/AR/MR that I think are GREAT

HTC Vive Cosmos

Type – Head Mounted Display for VR

Specs

• FOV – 110 degrees
• Resolution – 2880 * 1600 combined
• Refresh Rate – 90Hz
• Display – LCD
• Audio – Built-in speakers + option to use own headphones
• Tracking – Inside-out

The HTC Vive Cosmos’s most attractive feature is perhaps its ability to add on additional external (outside-in) tracking devices such as its optional HTC Base Stations to enhance and improve the performance of its pre-existing integrated inside-out tracking capabilities. This provides an extremely holistic and customizable tracking experience for consumers.

Magic Leap One

Type – Head Mounted Display for MR

Specs

• FOV – 50 degrees
• Resolution – 2560*1920 combined
• Refresh Rate – 60Hz
• Display – Waveguide
• Audio – Built-in speakers + options for own headphones
• Tracking – Inside-out + controllers

The Magic Leap One aims to differentiate itself from other competitors such as the Hololens 2 by isolating and separating the computing unit, which reduces the weight of the head-mounted unit and reduces fatigue for the user. Furthermore, the Magic Leap One’s was designed with its intended audience to be consumers, which is corroborated by its numerous partnerships with entertainment companies.

Microsoft Hololens 2

Type – Head Mounted Display for MR

Specs

• FOV – 30 degrees
• Resolution – 2536*1440 combined
• Refresh Rate – 240hz (60hz content rate with 4 individual sequential colors)
• Display – Waveguide
• Audio – Built-in speakers + options for own headphones
• Tracking – Inside-out + controllers

The Microsoft Hololens 2 features see-through holographic lenses with light engines. For haptics, it has 4 light cameras for head tracking, IR cameras for real-time eye tracking. Controllers are not needed for this HMD, as the hololens is able to sense and track the user’s hand gestures. This makes for a more intuitive user experience as users are seemingly able to interact with entities projected by the HMD without the use of any additional hardware.

Samsung HMD Odyssey+

Type – Head Mounted Display for VR

Specs

• FOV – 110 degrees
• Resolution – 2880 * 1600 combined
• Refresh Rate – 60Hz, 90Hz
• Display – AMOLED
• Audio – Built-in speakers
• Tracking – Inside-out

Perhaps the most attractive feature of the Samsung Odyssey+ is its AMOLED display, which sets itself apart from its competitors and their generic LCD screens. In theory, AMOLED offers higher peak brightness and color vibrancy as compared to LCD, which may provide a better visual immersion for its users.

The Valve Index

Type – Head Mounted Display for VR

Specs

• FOV – 130 degrees
• Resolution – 2880 * 1600 combined
• Refresh Rate – 80, 90, 120Hz (Has experimental 144Hz)
• Display – LCD
• Audio – Built-in speakers + option for using your own headphones
• Tracking – Relies on external (outside-in) tracking system (base stations), while it is sold with the Valve Base Station 2.0, this HMD is also backwards compatible with previous HTC Vive base stations

Valve Base Station 2.0

Type – External Tracking Device

The Valve Base Station 2.0 is compatible with the VIVE Pro, VIVE Pro Eye or Cosmos Elite. as well as the Valve Index.

Each base station has a range of 7 meters, each with a FOV of 160 x 115 degrees. Up to 4 base stations can be used at once, for an up to 10m x 10m play space.

My Most Preferred Devices

VR – The Valve Index + Base Station 2.0

The Valve Index boasts a wide range of refresh rates, from 80Hz up to an experimental 144Hz. This creates a smooth and realistic visual experience. This is important for the visual immersion aspect of the user’s experience as higher refresh rates offer lesser ghosting, less screen tearing. For fast paced games such as FPS games, higher refresh rates can offer a competitive edge as a result of this smoother experience

The Valve Index also has the widest FOV (130 degrees) amongst all the the other latest VR headsets in the market today, such as the Oculus Quest 2, and the HTC Vive Cosmos. This offers the closest experience to the FOV of the human eye (210 degrees). Although there is still much to be desired, this is the best we have. With a wider FOV, entails a smaller size of black borders that are endemic with VR headsets with smaller FOVs, which contributes to a greater illusion of being in a stable spatial space and physical interaction. These features reduces the chances of a fourth-wall-breaking experience.

The Valve Index also allows for external headphones to be used in lieu of the in-built speakers provided by the headset. This allows the user to fine-tune their auditory experience to their liking and comfort level. For example, using noise-cancelling headphones to create greater isolation from external noise, which improves auditory immersion.

The Valve Index relies on external tracking via base stations. The external tracking system allows for more precise tracking of the user within the play space, being able to triangulate the user’s location within the space in ways that an internal tracking system can’t. The precision to which each gesture is captured adds to the illusion of self-embodiment of the user in the virtual world.

MR – Microsoft Hololens 2

Comparing the Magic Leap One vs Microsoft’s Hololens 2, the Hololens 2 provides an overall more intuitive experience due to its hand-tracking technology. Unlike the Magic Leap One, the Hololens 2 offers a controller-less and hands-free tracking experience which significantly improves the sensory immersion aspect of touch.

Furthermore, since the Magic Leap One’s headset is separated from the computing unit, it requires a cable to be connected to it which introduces fourth-wall breaking inconveniences such as cable drag and microphonic noises.

Lastly, the Hololens 2 boasts a blazing-fast refresh rate of 240hz over the Magic Leap One’s 60hz, which offers an unparalleled visual experience that is smooth and lag-free.

However, we also have to bear in mind that the Magic Leap One’s intended users are everyday consumers, and its $1000 USD price difference as compared to the Hololens 2 is testament to that. As such, although it is easy to chalk up these discrepancies in technical features as cost-cutting measures, the Magic Leap One provides an accessible entry point for the everyday consumer looking to dive into the world of MR.

I will be picking my preferred virtual reality (VR) and mixed reality (MR) devices by doing research on some devices out in the market and making comparisons between them.

Virtual Reality

For VR devices, I will be looking at HTC Vive Cosmos, Oculus Quest 2, and Valve Index.

For the HTC Vive Cosmos, what attracted me is that the faceplate of the device can be changed to use different tracking options. This is great as for some users, they may not be keen to set up base stations. However, since the faceplate is a separate purchase, switching between tracking options comes at a cost, and the other faceplate that is not in use will essentially be e-waste. The device is not exactly cheap as well coming in at USD$699.

Next is the Oculus Quest 2. This device is interesting as it can be used as a standalone device. This is great for people who do not want to purchase a computer just to experience VR. But if the user does have a decent computer, they can choose to connect it to the PC. The price is also very competitive compared to other options, with cost starting from only USD$300. One downside is that the device requires the use of your Facebook account. As we know recently there have been many concerns about privacy, and I know people who do not even have an account anymore due to this reason.

Finally, we will look at the Valve Index. This is the most expensive of the bunch coming in at USD$999. Features wise, the specified numbers are quite impressive. While the resolution per eye is not the best, it has the highest adjustable FOV of up to 130° and the highest refresh rate of up to 144 Hz. Having a high refresh rate is very beneficial as it will be less disorienting, and it will be harder for the user to perceive frame updates/tearing. This allows more users to experience presence easily.

To conclude, I will say that Oculus Quest 2 is my preferred device due to the low cost of entry, especially with the fact that a strong enough PC is usually needed for a pleasant VR experience. Having a low cost of entry will also allow more VR devices to be in use, allowing for more reasons to invest in VR development. However, I do hope that the requirement of a Facebook account will be removed in the future.

Mixed Reality

For MR devices, I will be looking at 2 very prominent device out there, the Microsoft Hololens 2 and the Magic Leap 1.

For Microsoft Hololens 2, what struck me immediately was the cost, being at USD$3500. But the features are definitely not lacking. It has an incredible resolution of 2048 x 1080 per eye which is important as having a sharp image of a virtual object being displayed in the world will not only make it easier to make out the smaller details, but also provides a truer to life experience as it is harder to discern the pixels. Moreover, users that require prescription glasses can simply wear the headset over it. However, the device can be quite heavy, weighing in at 566g.

Next is the Magic Leap 1. It cost a little lesser at USD$2295. What is interesting about this is that the company decided to separate the computation hardware from the headset and allow the user to wear it at waist level. This makes the headset weigh only 316g. For users wearing glasses, prescription inserts must be purchased. This also means that the user must carry their own glasses around so that they can put them on when not using the headset. The prescription inserts also have a limit to the amount of correction and some people may not be able to use the device.

Overall, my preferred device is the Microsoft Hololens 2. As someone who suffers from a very serious case of myopia, having the ability to use my glasses along with the device is extremely valuable to me. I also believe that the higher resolution display will allow a better experience overall.

List of VR HWs

Some of the latest Virtual Reality HWs include:

• Oculus Quest 2
• Sony PlayStation VR
• HTC Vive Cosmos
• Valve Index

Most Preferred VR HW

After reading some reviews to gain a better understanding of the VR HWs, my most preferred VR HW would be the Oculus Quest 2.

In terms of pricing, the Oculus Quest 2 stands at about US$299, which is considered to be one of the lowest in the market. This is true when compared to the HTC Vive Cosmos and Valve Index, although the Sony PlayStation VR comes close to it.

In terms of resolution quality, the Oculus Quest 2 boasts one of the highest resolution out of any VR consumer headset, at 1920 x 1832 pixels per eye. This is compared to the other listed VR HWs at around 1000 x 900 pixels per eye, which barely comes close.

There are also other relatively smaller features or benefits that are either are at least matched by the Oculus Quest 2, or they are not present in the other VR HWs. For example, the Sony PlayStation VR has a latency value of 18ms, which is of an acceptable standard for most users to avoid facing any lag issues. However, the HTC Vive and Oculus Quest are able to match that value as well. In terms of movement tracking, the Valve Index has relatively worse tracking using the Base Stations compared to the Oculus series.

Even when you may potentially consider the HTC Vive Cosmos to be one of the better VR HWs, due to the fact that it is rated equally or potentially even better than the Oculus Quest 2, the price was the deciding factor in me deciding that Oculus Quest 2 is my most preferred VR HW.

List of MR HWs

Some of the latest Mixed Reality HWs include:

• Microsoft Hololens 2
• Magic Leap One
• Various Windows Mixed Reality Headsets (Acer Windows Mixed Reality HMD, Dell Visor, HP Windows Mixed Reality Headset Developer Edition, Samsung HMD Odyssey)

Most Preferred MR HW

After reading some reviews regarding the MR HWs that are listed above, my most preferred MR HW is the Dell Visor.

It is most important to note that comparing the 3 main listed VR HWs, the Windows Mixed Reality Headsets are vastly cheaper compared to the Microsoft Hololens 2 and the Magic Leap One. The former has HWs that are in the 3 digit range, while the latter 2 products are upwards of US$2000. Just based on price alone, it is quite unrealistic to attain the latter 2 mentioned HW. Furthermore, even though they may provide excellent quality comfort wise, some of the Windows Mixed Reality Headsets levels that are almost up to par as well.

In terms of the Windows Mixed Reality Headset themselves, the Dell Visor has the same resolution (1440 x 1440 pixels per eye) as most of the other headsets, such as the Acer Windows Mixed Reality Headset and HP Windows Mixed Reality Headset Developer Edition.

With regards to the overall quality of comfort, the Samung HMD Odyssey and Dell Visor rank pretty similiarly, with the Dell Visor having extra comfort features through removable foam inserts for example, while the Odyssey has a built in headphone that provides 360 degree spatial sound. Both have its perks, but in terms of price, the Odyssey stands at US$499, which is slightly more expensive than the Dell Visor, which comes at US$450 for a set.

Hence, mostly due to price reasons, the Dell Visor is my most preferred MR HW.

VR Headset review:

I have listed down the top VR headsets in the market today, based on their hardware specifications (i.e. graphics and tracking functions) as well as their price points. In my opinion, I think one of the most important considerations when it comes to choosing a VR headset is affordability. The sharpness and clarity of the image produced by the headset is also one of the important aspects that I will look out for as it will influence the gameplay experience. In addition, it should provide users with accessibility to a wide range of games and ideally provide a good amount of eye comfort for long hours of gameplay.

	Valve Index	Oculus Quest 2	Oculus Rift S	Sony Playstation VR	HTC VIVE Cosmos	HP Reverb G2
Type	Tethered	Standalone	Tethered	Tethered	Tethered	Tethered
Field of View(Degree)	130	100	115	100	110	114
Resolution(pixels – per eye)	1440 x 1600	1832 x 1920	1440 x 1280	960 x 1080	1700 x 1440	2160 x 2160
Refresh Rate(Hz)	120 (up to 144 in experimental tests)	90	80	90-120	90	90
Hardware Platform	SteamVR/PC	SteamVR/PC/Oculus Store	SteamVR/PC/Oculus Store	PS4/PS5	SteamVR/PC	SteamVR/PC/Windows MR
Motion Detection	6DOF	6DOF	6DOF	6DOF	6DOF	6DOF
Price (in USD)	999	299	399	399	699	599

Preferred VR headset:

As an owner of a PS4 and habitual console player, Sony Playstation VR is definitely on the top of my list. Even though its specifications pales in comparison with some of the other headsets in the market, it is still one of the more affordable ones.

The Playstation VR also has an extensive library of exciting games like Until Dawn: Rush of Blood, Five Nights at Freddie’s: Help Wanted, and Beat Saber. Many PlayStation VR games also work with the DualShock 4 controllers, so I don’t even have to purchase any add-on motion control accessories.

Besides its affordability and accessibility to games, the headset incorporates a lot of simple physical measurements so that it can accommodate and be worn comfortably by all the different head sizes of the users. The headset offers competitive gyroscope, tracking, and movement technology that keeps the gameplay smooth, holding its own against VR-centric companies like Oculus and HTC Vive. The setting up of the device is also relatively easy, making it user-friendly.

Although Valve Index seems like one of the strongest contenders in the VR market, offering the widest FOV and the highest refresh rate, and not to mention the Index controllers that feature an advanced grip system for more natural, precise interaction, its price point, however, is hard to swallow. A gaming PC is also needed to pair with the headset and that would be another additional cost. As mentioned in a blog review by theverge, setting up the laser-emitting base stations (i.e. mounted in opposite corners of your play space) and troubleshooting the headset also poses a challenge for amateur players like myself.

As someone who is unlikely to find a lot of time and money to invest in VR, I would likely give Valve Index a pass.

MR Headset review:

Similarly, I have listed down some of the MR headsets in the market today with their hardware specifications. Unlike my preference in the VR headsets, I believe that the importance of the functionality of the MR headsets outweighs their affordability here. As MR headsets can do much more than just gaming, I would choose one that is worth the price. It is a state-of-the-art tool that can significantly improve work productivity and I wouldn’t mind spending the extra money to purchase a good MR headset – especially if it is a bang for the buck.

Headset Name	Microsoft HoloLens 2	Magic Leap One	ASUS HC102	Samsung Odyssey+
Type	Standalone	Standalone(Connected to lightpack)	Tethered	Tethered
Resolution(Pixels – per eye)	2048 x 1080	1280 x 960	1440 x 1440	1440×1600
Field of view (degrees)	52	50	95	110
Refresh Rate (Hz)	120	120	90	90
Price(USD)	3500	2300	399	500

Preferred MR headset

Therefore, the headset that I would prefer most is Microsoft Hololens 2 even though it costs a whopping USD$3,500, they offer a much higher resolution and refresh rate than the other headsets. Furthermore, it is a standalone headset where I don’t have to connect to a laptop or any other devices. I am able to simply don the headset, move freely, and be able to pull up a holographic projection of my emails instantly. There are no wires or external packs to get in my way as the headset is basically a self-contained computer with Wi-Fi connectivity. And that is one aspect that I really like about the headset.

Also, the headset allows you to interact with the holograms very much like real objects due to its advanced hand movement tracking ability. It allows you to touch, grasp, and move holograms in ways that feel natural. You are also able to instantly access the HoloLens 2 securely using just your eyes with voice commands. This even works in a noisy setting through the use of smart microphones and natural language speech processing.

Besides Microsoft Hololens 2, Magic Leap one is also one of the better options in my opinion. The specifications are also a notch better than the other headsets, with better graphics and refresh rates. It is also on the pricier end. Similar to the Microsoft Hololens 2, it is a standalone device, the only difference is that it still needs to be connected to a small device also known as the lightpack, which is basically a wearable computer.

VR Technologies

I personally have not experienced many VR/MR devices firsthand, hence I will be taking a look at some of their specifications and making a comparison across some of the interesting technologies I found.

My personal choice would be the Occulus Quest 2 as it is one of the most affordable models out there starting at $299 for the 64GB Model. Apart from the reasonable pricing, there are several interesting specifications to take note of. Oculus improved the frame rate of the Quest 2 from 72Hz to 90Hz, which provides an even more immersive experience as games and content can take advantage of a higher refresh rate to deliver better quality. The battery live is rather significant at about 2 hours of gameplay (or 3 hours video), and the screen resolution reaches up to 1832 x 1920 per eye which is rather impressive for a VR headset. Furthermore, the Quest 2 rather light weighing about 503g, a great improvement from the original Oculus Quest weighing about 571g.

The design and user experience are also important, since a headset may not necessarily be the most comfortable experience for all. The Quest 2 uses fabric strips that are more comfortable and easier to adjust. Additionally, the Quest 2 does offer an extra battery pack that attaches to the Pro Strap, which doubles the battery life of the Quest 2 for longer and better experiences.

More practically, the lower starting price of the Quest 2 compared to other headsets seem to be the strongest attraction in onboarding newer users (like myself) into VR with a reasonably lower investment. Games that are more tech-savvy would definitely note the Facebook-centric platform of the Oculus environment. The Quest 2 is a great personal choice as it has a lower barrier to entry, along with the comfort and performance it provides to the everyday user.

MR Technologies

Although I haven’t tried this physically, the Microsoft Hololens seems to be the industry-leading and most popular choice for many B2B companies. Their expansion and development into their product are well thought and well-integrated amongst various use cases.

Let’s begin with some ergonomics analysis. Fit and comfort is key for the Hololens 2. Although the initial Hololens already came a long way from the early prototypes, it was clearly highlighted by many that comfort wasn’t the best for extended periods of use. One needs to make adjustments to ensure that the best field of view is obtained while maximizing comfort in wearing. In the Hololens 2, there is a more comfortable fit with a dial-in system specifically designed for extended use. The built is designed in a way that the main processor and battery are located modularly at the back of the headset, with the wires running towards the front, improving the weight distribution of the Hololens 2.

The Hololens 2 is capable of tracking up to 25 points of articulation with both hands in space, allowing natural touch and grasping to move holograms. Their impressive eye-tracking technology also finetunes the interaction with holograms. It can detect what you’re looking at and use that data to further improve the user interface which ultimately results in a better field of view. The Hololens 2 has a field of view to about 52 degrees diagonally, which Microsoft claims to have doubled the effective viewing area. There is also an increase in the vertical viewing area, making it taller when looking at tabletop holograms. This impressive improvement in the field of view is a large differentiator across many MR headsets, which puts the Hololens 2 as one of the pioneers in ensuring a better experience. Unfortunately, the Hololens 2 is priced very high, possibly because of the intricate and complex technologies that it incorporates and may not be ready for the everyday user today. A more expensive price point does limit the audience that is able to use it, hence more applications are centred around businesses currently.

Ultimately, the Hololens 2 is successful in maximizing both performance and comfort, while optimizing current technologies such as having more cameras and better sensors around the headset. This is particularly important for headset wearables as it hopefully seeps into the near future where everyday users can harness MR in their daily lives without the hassle of discomfort or performance-related issues.