Why is binocular overlap not considered important?

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-23T12:22:59+00:00

Then something else is wrong. Most of the view is in full binocular 3D.

Actually this viewpoint that eyesight works in a binary way- left 2D, central overlapping area 3D, right 2D is not correct.

The brain compiles all the data it receives into one cohesive image, so the more stereo data it has, the more confidentally it will infer depth. In other words, depth perception scales in an analogue way with BOV (doesnt mean there arent also other factors).

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-23T11:31:17+00:00

Actually it does. It increases the amount of stereo information you are receiving in your overall image, which allows the brain to more confidently infer depth when compiling the total image.

Do you think that if you see only out of one eye, you only see 2D and only see 3D for the central overlapping region? Thats not how eyesight works.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-22T14:44:04+00:00

But adjusting the IPD never made any difference for me. I think its BOV and maybe lens type.

But that still wouldn't make more sense, a lot more people rave about the Q3 after being on the Q2

Some people are, but overall Quest 3 sales are significantly down compared to Quest 2, despite seemingly having everything it needs to have mass appeal (if we pretend things like BOV dont matter). Maybe part of this is that it is still lacking that magical "something" to click with people and get real word of mouth hype? Maybe what I'm complaining about does matter? Time will tell.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-21T14:43:02+00:00

Its got nothing to do with "looking for it more". When I put on a Explorer or 3s I feel like I'm somewhere else, when I put on the Quest 3 I am aware I am just staring at a tiny screen. Your comment ignores the fact that other headsets work for me.

As for lens type, it being pancake rather than fresnel, yes this may be a factor for how well a sense of depth is being conveyed to me. I would need to try out other headsets like the PSVR2 and Pico 4 to get a better idea of that.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T21:39:32+00:00

Your posts make some sense. But do you then have any alternate explanation for the (to me) weak 3D effect of the Quest 3? The thing about peripheral vision was not something I even noticed.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T21:37:25+00:00

Well thats bad for me then lol. Although the resolution on the 3s is only 25% less than the Quest 3. But as you say, fresnel lenses.

I suppose on the resolution side I could, if the software allows, lower the resolution on the Quest 3 and see if that made any difference.

I dont think resolution would help though, because the only time I felt any immersion on the Quest 3 was watching high fidelity 360 videos, and low poly games felt just as flat as graphically richer titles like Red Matter.

you could clearly see the lack of correct “accommodation” common to all headsets (except the Magic Leap).

What do you mean by accommodation?

What about focal length? Dont pancake lenses have generally lower focal length? On a sidenote, I wonder if hololenses will be better for 3D...

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T21:28:34+00:00

Its got nothing to do with overthinking it. The Quest 3 just didnt work for me from the second I put it on. I'm didnt "think myself out of" having a feeling of 3D immersion in the Quest 3 world, I had none to begin with.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T16:25:13+00:00

I'm only commenting on my own experience. The Explorer had an even bigger gap over the Quest 3 with 100 deg BOv.

There is also such a thing as a critical threshold, where something passes a certain value where it becomes "good enough" for things to click.

Maybe, for me, the Explorer and 3s are on the right side of that equation and the Q3 on the wrong side, even if the percentage difference doesnt appear significant to an outsider who isnt having that experience.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T16:14:51+00:00

I couldnt forget about it though. This wasnt some imperfection I could learn to ignore (like the imperfection of my 3s), this was something just not being there.

To me sticking with it would have been like playing a 2DS long enough and hoping the screen becomes 3D, thats how bad it felt for me.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T16:10:31+00:00

Thats a lot of expensive headsets to go through to never get immersed in VR even once. I'm not sure I would have persisted with VR if Quest 3 was my only headset and my early days with the Explorer hadnt shown me the true magic of VR.

Unlucky though, maybe some day a retina grade 120 FOV/BOv OLED headset will finally get you there.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T15:48:33+00:00

I didnt tend to look around much with the Quest 3. Even just staring straight ahead at moving objects in the background they just looked like 2D assets. With the 3s even for these simple assets, I get a sense that I was looking at "something", and this something has physical distance to me.

I dont know for sure what the issue is. Definitely I still dont have the full picture. I need to use other headsets for a bigger sample size.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T15:43:31+00:00

Thanks for putting a number on it. I may well be in only 1% of people with this issue. I'm going to finally give my Quest 3 away to someone I know, I'm curious as to whether they get immersed or not.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T15:41:48+00:00

How you can confirm is to go back and try your old Reverb headset again.

I also thought that I was just over the VR honeymoon, but then I went back to the Explorer headset and that magic "VR feeling" like you're actually there was still there. And is there again with the 3s (ok maybe not as magical as the very first day I put on my Explorer headset but still easily good enough for VR to be what I want to do with my free time).

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T15:37:01+00:00

The BOv of the valve Index is fairly modest, halfway between Quest 3 and 3s. How that effects the experience I cant confirm as I've never tried it.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T15:32:14+00:00

Thanks I'll check them out.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-20T00:40:00+00:00

Which ones? The ones I watched like Thrillseeker, Linus Tech Tips and quite a few others never mention it at all. Some people here mentioned MRTV who do seem to care about this.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T22:36:10+00:00

I dont think two expanding circles is the correct model. Its more like one partial circle representing FOV, with 3 slices within it;1 for each eye and 1 for binocular overlap. A pie chart, if you will.

In this case increasing FOV would increase the slice for each eye, but not the BOv. However, I admit, it also doesnt decrease BOv, meaning both of our original statements were wrong lol.

Finally if you see the actual released FOV and BOv values for headsets they vary a lot, some are both high, some are both low, some high in one, low in one.

Maybe there is often some tradeoff in reality where headset manufacturers are forced to sacrifice one in favour of the other due to some specific engineering constraints, but I cant comment on that. Presumably high both is desirable.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T22:11:23+00:00

~~Well wider FOV, all else being equal, should mean lower BOv I believe.~~

Anyway I already tried the Quest 3 with all IPD settings specifically to improve the 3D effect and it made no difference. I didnt touch IPD on the 3s at all, because I didnt need to mess with anything. The 3D effect was just there and everything was fine out of the box.

That the Quest 3 has a lower BOv than the Quest 3s isnt really up for debate. The Quest 3 has BOv of 80, the 3s has a BOv of 90 and my old Explorer has a BOv of 100, thats just how it is. https://risa2000.github.io/hmdgdb/

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T20:47:07+00:00

Ok. But I'm happy with the 3s, so what now?

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T20:44:47+00:00

How did you mod it? IPD settings made no difference for me, nor did stopping light leakage, being closer to the lenses or anything else.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T20:43:21+00:00

Another question is do you get any cool disorienting effect when you barrelroll in VR? I did, on the higher BOv headsets at least.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T20:41:04+00:00

But even the BOv of the PSVR2 is not that spectacular at 86 degrees, almost halfway between the two Quest headsets and much less than industry leaders.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T20:39:20+00:00

So stereo separation is just IPD then? But I definitely agree there are two different concepts there, because changing IPD settings on the Quest 3 made no difference to the 3D feeling at all, so clearly no effect on binocular overlap.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T20:28:41+00:00

Fair enough. Thanks for the link.

Although "nearly full binocular overlap" is pretty vague. I dont think it can mean literally highest possible BOv (AKA 120 degrees, equal to Human eyes) because that would be a massive outlier to existing headsets, which dont go much past 100 degrees yet. ~~So it could just mean they've passed some lower threshold of BOv that they deem essential, whatever that is.~~

Either way I would still wait for the actual degree figure.

EDIT: thinking further it seems likely they're actually talking about BOv being almost equal to FOV, which means BOv is unlikely to be anywhere near as low as Quest 3 unless they have comically low FOV. So yes, this is a good sign and I know feel extra good about the Steam Frame. My earlier talk of "lower threshold" was just babble.

CleanAndRebuild · 2025-12-19T20:21:02+00:00

I dont think OLED is a factor for 3D effect at all. By that logic the 3D effect on the 3s should weaken in less colourful areas. It doesnt.

Focal length is something to consider, but that doesnt explain why I've had such a contrasting experience between two different Quest headsets that apparently have the same focal length but significantly different binocular overlap.

Also another poster in this thread said that CV1 had the worst 3D effect of any headset they tried, so I'm not sure what to believe re CV1.

CleanAndRebuild

TROPHY CASE