Quest 2 User Reviews and Impressions

[RuneSR2]

Maybe nice to have a thread to collect Quest 2 user experiences? 

I'll be happy to start with one from Oculus SubReddit:

First thing I noticed was the black levels are no where near as good as the Quest 1. But oh damn, that display is sharp.

SDE is NOT gone, but it is massively reduced. I notice it mostly looking at UI and reading text.

Thank God setting 2 fits my IPD best because the loss of FOV in setting 3 is really bad.

I was gutted the elite strap has been delayed for me but I was pleasantly surprised by the built in one, it feels more comfortable to me than the Quest 1 strap so far, let's see how I feel after extended use though.

This might be a placebo, but is the tracking more responsive? Just feels like a sliver of delay has been shaved off.

https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/jae2n4/quest_2_first_impressions/

[RuneSR2]

Luciferous said:

Some of this may have been my fault for mentioning the G2. I didn't mean to take anything away from the reviews.

I was just saying I have seen a lot of people who have recently bought new Oculus and non Oculus headsets saying its comparable with the CV1 for PCVR in balance (IE some things better some things worse, but essentially a close call). I will be very disappointed if my next headset works out to be the same, which it could well do. 

This has been one of the reasons I have kept the CV1 for so long.

After I made the comment though I immediately regretted it. Not particularly fair to take one comment and come to a conclusion as there are many people saying the opposite. 

I could be tempted though maybe Q3 now if the wireless range could be extended by repeaters or something like that. I have a fairly small VR room but if I could turn on the PC and go into my living room without having to lug all the equipment about that could be brilliant and a game changer. So I can see the potential attraction. 

In the UK we get fairly small houses for our money and being an island, space is at a premium. 

If anything the Quest 2 looks like a very interesting headset to play with for the money.

Due to the Quest 2 physical res, it would be natural to compare it to G2. Personally I'm looking forward to @pyroth309 getting his G2 and then being able to directly compare Quest 2 and G2. When adding proper headphones, Oculus Link cable and elite head strap Quest 2 might still be cheaper than G2, but maybe not a lot. 

[Luciferous]

I think what we have to get used to the fact it is no longer possible to compare apples for apples anymore. Quest 2 is a multi function device which is primary standalone with the ability to cater for PCVR. Also we cant really judge the PCVR yet as they are still refining that side of it.

[JohnnyDioxin]

One thing that I noticed - well it stood out rather clearly - in my No Man's Sky session in Quest 2 yesterday was the colours.

I've mentioned the seemingly high level of saturation before - though not as bad as the Quest can be, but this was just wrong. In No Man's Sky you have crystals that you can come across on the ground. They have mainly two different types - one is blue, the other is red.

In the Quest 2, the red one is pink and the blue one is purple. They are not even just light or dark shades, they are actually different colours. Makes me wonder how many other things are not appearing as the dev's intended. Saying that, though, if you didn't know the original colours it would probably not seem out of place.

[TomCgcmfc]

@JohnnyDioxin was that with Link, or wireless w/VD, or both?  Thanks mate.

[inovator]

pyroth309 said:

I took Quest 2 out for a spin this evening with the Wireless Virtual Desktop method and it looks pretty nice. I put all of the possible settings on max and maxed the stream rate bar past 150Mb and that gave me a pretty good image. That said, it's still a pretty soft image and I can see artifacts. The softness is impactful enough that I'm losing fine details on small textures and such. One thing I'm having a problem with is the Quest 2 onboard audio which I already find on the low side is really low for me with this method. I had to hook up some headphones which was annoying.

I next tried Quest Link with the public test build. I set the Pixels per display to 1.5, encode resolution width to 3664 (tried it against Zero and 3664 looked better) and Encode Bitrate to 500. Immediately noticed the image is crisper than the virtual desktop method. I briefly ran the headset through several games with these settings. Alyx, Freediver, Aircar, Dirt Rally 2, Stormland, IL-2, Elite Dangerous and for the most part it seems pretty comparable to my O+ with supersampling visually. I do feel like there's a loss of detail still in parts and in games where the screen is moving by fast (Dirt Rally/IL-2/Other sims) I still see quite a bit of artifacting but it's usable. All in all, pretty close to PCVR for sure. Would be really nice if you could get this 500 or at least 300 mbps over Virtual Desktop.

Were anything you tried at 90 htz? Some reviewers said at 90 htz in virtual desktop the games looked and played fantastic.

[nalex66]

Luciferous said:

...I could be tempted though maybe Q3 now if the wireless range could be extended by repeaters or something like that. I have a fairly small VR room but if I could turn on the PC and go into my living room without having to lug all the equipment about that could be brilliant and a game changer. So I can see the potential attraction. 

In the UK we get fairly small houses for our money as being an island, space is at a premium. 

If anything the Quest 2 looks like a very interesting headset to play with for the money.

I just got a new WiFi 6 router (TP-Link AX1500, about $100 CAD) to extend my WiFi range, and I can now get a strong 1200 Mbps 5GHz signal in Virtual Desktop in every room in my house (my modem gave me 866 Mbps, but only if I was in the same room). I was amazed that it worked so well.

[pyroth309]

inovator said:

pyroth309 said:

I took Quest 2 out for a spin this evening with the Wireless Virtual Desktop method and it looks pretty nice. I put all of the possible settings on max and maxed the stream rate bar past 150Mb and that gave me a pretty good image. That said, it's still a pretty soft image and I can see artifacts. The softness is impactful enough that I'm losing fine details on small textures and such. One thing I'm having a problem with is the Quest 2 onboard audio which I already find on the low side is really low for me with this method. I had to hook up some headphones which was annoying.

I next tried Quest Link with the public test build. I set the Pixels per display to 1.5, encode resolution width to 3664 (tried it against Zero and 3664 looked better) and Encode Bitrate to 500. Immediately noticed the image is crisper than the virtual desktop method. I briefly ran the headset through several games with these settings. Alyx, Freediver, Aircar, Dirt Rally 2, Stormland, IL-2, Elite Dangerous and for the most part it seems pretty comparable to my O+ with supersampling visually. I do feel like there's a loss of detail still in parts and in games where the screen is moving by fast (Dirt Rally/IL-2/Other sims) I still see quite a bit of artifacting but it's usable. All in all, pretty close to PCVR for sure. Would be really nice if you could get this 500 or at least 300 mbps over Virtual Desktop.

Were anything you tried at 90 htz? Some reviewers said at 90 htz in virtual desktop the games looked and played fantastic.

No, all at 72. I don't think 90 works yet with the public test build. I didn't comment on smoothness for that reason. The refresh rate has no impact on image quality. It's just giving you more images per second resulting in smoother motion/gameplay. (Provided you're actually producing 90 fps anyway)

[oliver_jp]

nalex66 said:

Luciferous said:

...I could be tempted though maybe Q3 now if the wireless range could be extended by repeaters or something like that. I have a fairly small VR room but if I could turn on the PC and go into my living room without having to lug all the equipment about that could be brilliant and a game changer. So I can see the potential attraction. 

In the UK we get fairly small houses for our money as being an island, space is at a premium. 

If anything the Quest 2 looks like a very interesting headset to play with for the money.

I just got a new WiFi 6 router (TP-Link AX1500, about $100 CAD) to extend my WiFi range, and I can now get a strong 1200 Mbps 5GHz signal in Virtual Desktop in every room in my house (my modem gave me 866 Mbps, but only if I was in the same room). I was amazed that it worked so well.

@Luciferous
Uk here too.
Routers provided by ISPs are absolutely rubbish. Repeaters and extenders aren't a good solution in my opinion. You're much better off buying a better router.
I got a TP-Link Archer AX6000 and couldn't be happier. You don't have to spend that much, as @nalex said, an AX1500 is probably good enough. I mainly wanted the 8 ports on the back so I can wire more stuff in rather than using up WiFi bandwidth.

[pyroth309]

RuneSR2 said:

Luciferous said:

Some of this may have been my fault for mentioning the G2. I didn't mean to take anything away from the reviews.

I was just saying I have seen a lot of people who have recently bought new Oculus and non Oculus headsets saying its comparable with the CV1 for PCVR in balance (IE some things better some things worse, but essentially a close call). I will be very disappointed if my next headset works out to be the same, which it could well do. 

This has been one of the reasons I have kept the CV1 for so long.

After I made the comment though I immediately regretted it. Not particularly fair to take one comment and come to a conclusion as there are many people saying the opposite. 

I could be tempted though maybe Q3 now if the wireless range could be extended by repeaters or something like that. I have a fairly small VR room but if I could turn on the PC and go into my living room without having to lug all the equipment about that could be brilliant and a game changer. So I can see the potential attraction. 

In the UK we get fairly small houses for our money and being an island, space is at a premium. 

If anything the Quest 2 looks like a very interesting headset to play with for the money.

Due to the Quest 2 physical res, it would be natural to compare it to G2. Personally I'm looking forward to @pyroth309 getting his G2 and then being able to directly compare Quest 2 and G2. When adding proper headphones, Oculus Link cable and elite head strap Quest 2 might still be cheaper than G2, but maybe not a lot. 

Yea the physical res is really nice especially for text and it's appealing to look at images with the small SDE. Especially when you're looking at a high res image. It's hard for me to compare this headset to anything as I've not used a headset higher than 1440 x 1600 per eye until this. Never used Reverb G1. Will be interesting to directly compare it side by side with the Reverb with raw data to reveal what is actually being lost...but that also won't be an apples to apples test due to the Reverb being an additional megapixel per eye (3.5 vs 4.6).

Still, even with the compression the image with 500mbps seems to be near as good as the 1440x1600 tier of headsets and possibly a bit better but I don't have one to direct compare anymore. If that's accurate, that's pretty good value.

[pyroth309]

oliver.jp said:

nalex66 said:

Luciferous said:

...I could be tempted though maybe Q3 now if the wireless range could be extended by repeaters or something like that. I have a fairly small VR room but if I could turn on the PC and go into my living room without having to lug all the equipment about that could be brilliant and a game changer. So I can see the potential attraction. 

In the UK we get fairly small houses for our money as being an island, space is at a premium. 

If anything the Quest 2 looks like a very interesting headset to play with for the money.

I just got a new WiFi 6 router (TP-Link AX1500, about $100 CAD) to extend my WiFi range, and I can now get a strong 1200 Mbps 5GHz signal in Virtual Desktop in every room in my house (my modem gave me 866 Mbps, but only if I was in the same room). I was amazed that it worked so well.

@Luciferous
Uk here too.
Routers provided by ISPs are absolutely rubbish. Repeaters and extenders aren't a good solution in my opinion. You're much better off buying a better router.
I got a TP-Link Archer AX6000 and couldn't be happier. You don't have to spend that much, as @nalex said, an AX1500 is probably good enough. I mainly wanted the 8 ports on the back so I can wire more stuff in rather than using up WiFi bandwidth.

Very nice, Wifi 6 router is on my short list of things to upgrade.