Skip to main content
New Participant
August 27, 2025
Question

What features should Meta Quest 4 have for the upgrade from Meta Quest 3 to make sense?

  • August 27, 2025
  • 8 replies
  • 506 views

Meta Quest 3 is undoubtedly a high-quality device, but it has its limitations. I’ve been analyzing for a long time what really needs improvement for us to experience a truly immersive sense of presence in the virtual world.

A 110° horizontal FOV is already good enough that we don’t feel like we’re looking through a tunnel. 25 PPD is also sharp enough, at least at closer distances. 90 FPS is perfectly sufficient for smooth and comfortable gameplay. The pancake optics are very sharp, and aside from occasional lens flares, I’m satisfied with the quality. That’s not to say these parameters shouldn’t improve, but they’re no longer the critical factors for a high-quality VR experience.

What truly degrades presence, however, are the LCD panels. Blacks appear more like dark gray, and brightness is rather weak. This obviously also affects color richness and accuracy, dramatically reducing the sense of immersion. Even a flagship title like Half-Life: Alyx cannot truly shine. Meta Quest 3 allows software contrast adjustment, but this comes at the cost of losing detail in dark areas, which is also very painful. However, when I set the contrast to around 33% and started the game from the beginning, in those parts of the scene without dark areas, I had a strong sense that the space in front of me really existed and even experienced a “wow” moment. It was at that point I realized that no amount of higher PPD or other improvements could solve this.

The SDE is practically invisible now, at least in games, and no longer interferes. The human eye is extremely sensitive to contrast and light, so the only solution is micro-OLED displays. In my opinion, if Meta Quest 4 doesn’t have well-calibrated micro-OLED panels, upgrading from Meta Quest 3 isn’t worth it.

We all want a super-powerful headset, but I also realize how crucial high-quality content is, and that’s the stumbling block for today’s headsets. There’s no point in increasing parameters that are already considered good. It’s better to invest in a more powerful chip and better content. Most native games on Meta Quest 3 aren’t even rendered at full resolution, and the higher-quality titles still dynamically reduce resolution in other parts of the scene to maintain performance.

The most painful part is that to completely eliminate aliasing and other visual artifacts, strong TAA combined with sharpening filters and FSR must be used. This results in a soft, low-detail image. To get as close to the original as possible, pixel density must be set to 2, meaning rendering four times more pixels—absolutely insane in real time. Fortunately, eye-tracking gives us hope, allowing high-quality rendering only in the small area where we’re looking, while the rest of the image is displayed at much lower quality, dramatically saving performance. To fully utilize the 25 PPD that Meta Quest offers, this is absolutely necessary. There’s no point in increasing PPD; the only thing that matters is improving display and content quality. Eye-tracking is, therefore, for me, another necessity for the Meta Quest 4 upgrade to make sense.

What are your thoughts on this?

8 replies

HiroProtag0nist
Honored Contributor
August 30, 2025

Wow, I couldn't agree more.  OLED panels and eye tracking should be standard on all headsets going forward.  

Headstrap with battery too - included.  Get it mass produced to keep the price down.

Big PC, all the headsets, now using Quest 3
Honored Contributor
September 4, 2025

For me the number one annoyance with the Quest 3 is the misaligned controllers. I hope they return to the Rift CV1, Rift-S, Quest 1 and Quest 2 style of controllers where forwards is forwards. The Quest 3, 3S and Pro have the forward aim go 15 degrees off to the side and down.

Author: Oculus Monitor , Auto Oculus Touch , Forum Dark Mode , Phantom Touch Remover , X-Plane Fixer Hardware: Threadripper 1950x, MSI Gaming Trio 2080TI, Asrock X399 Taich Headsets: Wrap 1200VR, DK1, DK2, CV1, Rift-S, GearVR, Go, Quest, Quest 2, Reverb G2, Quest 3
September 4, 2025

reddit copy/paste

New Participant
October 15, 2025

I agree with the optics and the controller suggestions,  however I believe that in order for this technology to make the next leap whats needed is for the battery and storage to be in another spot besides the headset. Placing the battery and memory on a belt or vest would free up weight and allow larger more powerful prossesors to be placed in the headset and be able to rival all of the connected headsets from the different companies while still being free to spin duck and roll as the game play dictates...just one man's opinion.

steve40
Honored Contributor
July 18, 2026

Our opinions don't matter. We don't have any say whatsoever in the development of the Quest 4.

Watermelonwatermelon
New Participant
September 26, 2026

Eye-tracking is definitely needed for the Quest 4.

steve40
Honored Contributor
September 26, 2026

The community forum is basically a suggestion box taped to the side of a skyscraper. People toss in their ideas, and the wind carries them off into the void.ðŸĪŠ

Honored Contributor
September 26, 2026

I'd like more FOV, but I'm very happy with what the Quest 3 has overall for FOV, image quality and especially lenses. I don't NEED any improvements there.

Hardware wise, the biggest thing I'd want is better controllers. In particular fixing the misaligned forward axis on Touch Plus (Quest 3 and 3S) and Touch Pro. They should go back to how CV1, Rift-S/Quest 1 and Quest 2 controllers aimed. Valve did it correctly with the Frame controllers, the aim is based on the handle, not the sloped top.

Software wise, get rid of the mobile app requirement. It made sense on the Oculus Go and maybe Quest 1. But why need an android mobile app to set up a headset that is already running android? Pico and Valve don't need one.
I'd love to get rid of Android too. We've seen Google interfere, like the locking down of Quest game modding that happened when Google pushed new security restrictions. They are going for even more restrictions on developers in 2027. It's time to bail on that. Meta was making their own OS for VR, but they abandoned it. 

Have some actual interaction with the community. Our last VR using community managers Ryan and Casey would pass stuff on to the developers and try to improve things here.

What I'd really love (I bring this up every time there's new headset wishlists) is a return of the outside in Oculus Constellation cameras. Keep the inside out cameras on the headset as the default. But have optional external cameras to improve tracking consistency and reduce body occlusion. Add a SOC to each camera so they do tracking processing locally then send by wireless the poses. That means no long USB cables and tiny bandwidth. The processing on the SOC is minimal, they don't need to do full SLAM tracking, just the IR markers (need to add them back to the headset too). Even Wiimotes have CPUs powerful enough to track 4 IR dots and send that wirelessly.

Author: Oculus Monitor , Auto Oculus Touch , Forum Dark Mode , Phantom Touch Remover , X-Plane Fixer Hardware: Threadripper 1950x, MSI Gaming Trio 2080TI, Asrock X399 Taich Headsets: Wrap 1200VR, DK1, DK2, CV1, Rift-S, GearVR, Go, Quest, Quest 2, Reverb G2, Quest 3