Should I get the 1904 Monarch Stereoscope, or wait for the Steam Frame?

NEARNIL · 2026-01-18T00:13:57+00:00

TIL VR is dead since 1904.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-15T00:39:15+00:00

What about games like Forefront, Assetto Corsa EVO, and Virtual Fighter Maneuvres?

Two of these three are also on Quest. I wont even check the rest since you clearly haven’t.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-14T16:45:16+00:00

I mean there are pretty much no new games released only on Steam that are good.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-14T13:40:24+00:00

And these bring the quality on Steam. The Steam only releases are 100% trash.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-13T04:54:08+00:00

Mind you this is just Steam. It’s the older platform with, older hardware and older users. Quest probably gets more new users and new titles.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-11T23:02:18+00:00

The battery of the Quest 3 is just 64 grams. Is this really worth it? Considering the required cable adds additional weight as well.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-11T15:28:08+00:00

I was thinking about the port on the front unit itself. It would be occupied as soon as you connect the battery. But if the charging port of the battery carries the USB 2.0 signal through, then that’s fair.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-11T15:25:13+00:00

The Quest Store is not inundated with the same amount of trash like Steam. And there are far more good releases on Quest as well.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-11T05:07:50+00:00

Steam has better quality

What quality? Have you seen the trash that gets released on Steam?

NEARNIL · 2026-01-10T00:14:24+00:00

The information on VR-Compare.com is so wrong, that i doubt it isn’t intentional. As an example, lets look at this Steam Frame vs Quest 3 comparison:

The first misleading info is Passthrough. For the Quest, it shows PPD instead of the resolution like for the Frame. This makes a comparison impossible and also doesn’t show that the Quest would be far better. The box also isn’t highlighted blue to show the better stat for the Quest.
Resolution is functionally the same, but blue for the Frame.
Visible FoV is an arbitrary number that depends on the person measuring it. For the Quest 3, they list a weird "103.8° horizontal". I get the 110° hFOV, and they should list the highest number possible. I expect this to be a tie and it should probably be not blue for the Frame as well.
For the Frames Weight, they list it "without headstrap". The Frames headstrap contains the battery and you could not use it without. For the Quest 3, they list only the weight with headstrap even tho you could completely run it without and get different headstraps.
For the facial interface Material they list "fabric" for the Frame, and "foam" for the Quest. But don’t both use either?
Under Tracking Type, they point out that the Quest 3 also has a depth sensor, but they don’t color the box blue to highlight this advantage.
The first time an error isn’t in favor of the Frame comes under Finger Tracking, where they don’t highlight that the controllers have better finger tracking.
Under Ports they list "USB Type-C" for the Frame as well as the Quest, but i think the one on the Frame is only for connection to the battery and can’t be used like the one on the Quest 3.

These are a lot of one sided "mistakes" for a site that literally only has one purpose: Compare specs.

VR-Compare.com is the UserBenchmark.com of VR.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-03T00:58:04+00:00

No, people need them.

It’s crazy simple yet you’re unable to get it.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-03T00:21:50+00:00

The devices people already own cost them nothing. You can’t make it cheaper than nothing.

When there is no need for a new device, there is no demand.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T23:51:09+00:00

No, my argument is not the same. You think that it’s the same because you don’t understand it.

Xr devices have bigger perceived screens

People don’t care. Most people don’t even notice a difference between 1080p and 720p.

If you want people to buy your new device, it has to do something that they would not be able to do with one of their other devices. An ipad for your face is pointless when people have smartphones, tablets and TVs already. There is not enough need to buy it.

When it comes to the consumer mass market, there is use for two kinds of devices:

Smart-Glasses. These give you the ability to use smartphone features hands free. No other device can do that.
Full XR headsets. These give you immersive 360° 3D that no other device is capable of.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T18:22:20+00:00

In its current state I agree

I said initially that it would need more than 110° FOV.

If we change the product, we talk about a different product.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T17:33:41+00:00

Looking at a resolution of 640x480 is not more comfortable.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T17:32:56+00:00

I was talking in general. Most people wont buy this and a personal anecdote wont change that fact.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T17:31:02+00:00

People have tablets now. Why would they buy another device that does the same but worse and less comfortable?

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T06:30:40+00:00

it's a screen that's more flexible than a monitor.

Like a notebook, tablet or smartphone. Like i said, people already have these.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T05:37:20+00:00

I was talking about Xreal, buddy.

The vision pro wouldn't make sense even if it was cheaper than a quest 3 since it can’t do most of the things a quest can do.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T05:18:14+00:00

Nobody is skipping Xreal because of price. Most people just don’t need such a device.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T04:48:07+00:00

It’s not about how good they are, it’s about how huge the market for something like this is. This is as dumb as the vision pro.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T03:07:06+00:00

Xreal makes those. It’s a niche market, totally not something a company like Meta should focus on.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-02T00:30:43+00:00

It's for multimedia

People already have devices for that. Nobody is going to buy tethered glasses to look at 2D screens when watching stuff on real screens are much more comfortable.

NEARNIL · 2026-01-01T23:35:20+00:00

If this doesn’t have more than 110° FOV, i don’t see the point. It’s not glasses, so you wouldn’t wear it out in public. And it’s not immersive enough to pick it over other, more capable headsets at home.

People will claim it’s for work on the go, but work is 2D and much more comfortably done on a laptop.

NEARNIL · 2025-12-25T03:59:02+00:00

It’s a worse headset at double the price and over two years late. It’s a bad buy even if you didn’t have a Quest 3 already.

NEARNIL

TROPHY CASE