Sadly no. The "jailbreak" that was previously announced turned out to be fake.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Krenum
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
- Messages
- 17,230
That sucks. As long as its tethered to Facebook I won't buy one. I want nothing to do with that company.
This will work for now but will go away in 2 years. From facebook: "Starting January 1, 2023, we will end support for Oculus accounts, including unmerged Oculus developer accounts, and you will need to log in with a Facebook account to access full functionality on the Oculus platform." But yeah its not a permanent "jailbreak" where you get root access. Its a temporary exception for developer accounts (which anyone can make if you give them your name, credit card info, and verify by phone).
2 years is a long time. You can buy the Quest 2, use it for two years and replace it with something better.
By then there will be more options on the Market and more than likely the Quest 3 will be out.
sharknice
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
- Messages
- 2,317
Well Facebook owns Oculus so if you want nothing to do with the company it doesn't matter if you have to login with their account or not, you would be paying them money for the headset.
I was turned off by the Facebook login thing but I bought one anyways. Quest 2 is by far the best value, and arguably the best headset. It's only $300, can be used standalone or with a PC, and even wirelessly with a PC. There aren't any other good standalone headsets, the only headset with better resolution is the G2 which has worse tracking and is PC only, can't do wireless, etc. The only other wireless solutions costs thousands of dollars.
I'm glad I got it. I just set all the privacy options on for the facebook stuff and don't get any weird things shared with friends or anything posted on my facebook account. I'm sure facebook still collect some data for themselves, but I don't really care. Anything I would want to keep private is done through my PC via virtual desktop streamer and they can't track that.
I can just put on my headset and play anywhere without any clunky setup process. And I can play PC VR anywhere in my house without any clunky setup process or wires. That's pretty awesome for any amount of money, and the Quest 2 does it for $300.
I mean I agree with you. I bought a Quest 2 and am using an unmerged account. But I feel that people should know that the unmerged account option is only good for 2 years so they can make an informed decision. It's not a permanent jailbreak and has a set expiration date. But overall, Quest 2 is still the best VR option short of an Index.
Having used the Quest 2 for a couple weeks pretty regularly I have to say that it's pretty good.
Things I enjoy about it over the Quest 1 are pretty major but it still need works. While the Quest 1 has a better FOV (pretty decently I might add) and better colors and black levels (OLED is being heavily missed..) that's about it as far as I can tell. My IPD being ~70mm means the Quest 1 had the advantage here though, to be honest, the widest setting for the Quest 2 is fine.
So yeah, other than the FOV, colors and contrast, and IPD adjustment I'd say the Quest 2 is better in every other way. It's WAY lighter, the Elite strap is far batter than the Quest 1's and makes the Quest 2 a more ridged headset which I prefer, feels more solid and less floppy. Built in sound is still lacking on the Quest 2 but it's definitely better than the first. The resolution is DEFINITELY a step up. I didn't think the Rift S was a dramatic jump from the CV1 resolution wise (especially considering it's other downsides), nor was the Quest 1...but the Quest 2 is noticeable. Nearly SDE-less and much closer to "real life". I don't find myself having to squint or zoom in on stuff like I did every headset before. Genuinely something I feel is a good step-up worthy of upgrade alone.
Add in the far better SoC and even stand alone games look great and play great.
The controllers are roughly the same...I was OK with the Quest 1's controllers...neither as good as the CV1's (upward ring is a pain in the ass).
So yeah, over all it's pretty good. I think the laziness/cheapness on the LCD panel and lack of adjustable IPD (and thus smaller FOV) is major but other than that I've really got no complaints!
Things I enjoy about it over the Quest 1 are pretty major but it still need works. While the Quest 1 has a better FOV (pretty decently I might add) and better colors and black levels (OLED is being heavily missed..) that's about it as far as I can tell. My IPD being ~70mm means the Quest 1 had the advantage here though, to be honest, the widest setting for the Quest 2 is fine.
So yeah, other than the FOV, colors and contrast, and IPD adjustment I'd say the Quest 2 is better in every other way. It's WAY lighter, the Elite strap is far batter than the Quest 1's and makes the Quest 2 a more ridged headset which I prefer, feels more solid and less floppy. Built in sound is still lacking on the Quest 2 but it's definitely better than the first. The resolution is DEFINITELY a step up. I didn't think the Rift S was a dramatic jump from the CV1 resolution wise (especially considering it's other downsides), nor was the Quest 1...but the Quest 2 is noticeable. Nearly SDE-less and much closer to "real life". I don't find myself having to squint or zoom in on stuff like I did every headset before. Genuinely something I feel is a good step-up worthy of upgrade alone.
Add in the far better SoC and even stand alone games look great and play great.
The controllers are roughly the same...I was OK with the Quest 1's controllers...neither as good as the CV1's (upward ring is a pain in the ass).
So yeah, over all it's pretty good. I think the laziness/cheapness on the LCD panel and lack of adjustable IPD (and thus smaller FOV) is major but other than that I've really got no complaints!
Last edited:
sharknice
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
- Messages
- 2,317
Quest 2 is the first headset with dense enough resolution not to bother me. For the most part it's easy to read text and I don't notice the screen door effect unless I look for it. That was the problem for me with lower resolution headsets, it felt like playing on a 640x480 CRT.
It definitely could be improved further though. Trying to snipe something far away, or look at something far way is hard because it just doesn't have the resolution, but I feel the same way trying to do flat gaming on a 1080p screen compared to 4k.
I also wish it was OLED, but I guess there just aren't any OLED panels as dense yet.
It's funny because, before the Quest 2, I really didn't have ANY issues with the resolution...even with the CV1 before the Quest (which while it has a higher resolution I couldn't tell). Now though? I put on the Quest 1 and everything is SUPER grainy and aliased. Still doesn't look horrible but the Quest 2 is my first headset where there resolution has really made a difference.
There were dense OLEDs but no longer. Up to 2012, Samsung used to make OLEDs with subpixels that were regular RGB. The less dense pentile OLEDs are just cheaper to manufacture and have longer lifespans so they eventually switched over as you can't tell the difference on phones. Its technically possible to have them custom manufacture screens with dense OLEDs again but that would cost wayyy too much compared with just slapping an LCD phone screen in a VR headset.
MaZa
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,196
Agreed. The image clarity (even streamed from PC) is fantastic. SDE is virtually invisible, as in you can still tell that the image is built on pixels but it is near impossible to see the grid pattern unless you are looking at a solid color and really look for it. More clarity is always better but it is not necessarily worth the performance hit for such small improvements. The performance is better put on expanding FOV which is way more pressing issue at this point. This is a part that Quest 3 NEEDS to improve on, otherwise what is the point of even making one. If it would have same sharpness as Quest 2 but with a FOV of an Index (no matter what your IPD is, BRING BACK DUAL SCREENS!) it would be amazing product.
I think this depends on the resolution jump though? Like, the Quest 1 was higher resolution than the CV1 by a good bit but it was still borderline low-resolution based on text legibility, using iron sights on guns that you could barely see, etc. In other words, it didn't seem to really matter, ya know?
I was telling my cousin last night that to me VR is all about immersion and for ME the resolution on the Quest 2 is actually so immersive that even things like contrast and colors, something I knew where most important in creating visually believable worlds, have taken a back seat in favor of actually being able to SEE what I'm looking at.
Seriously, playing a game like MSFS 2020 the other day and being able to just read the dashboard without having to squint and zoom in or move in closer etc was an eye opening mind blower! Like, I almost couldn't even believe it!
MaZa
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,196
But that was what I was saying, the Quest 2 has jumped over the threshold where clarity is no longer an issue for immersion. More is always better, but at this that performance penalty that comes from improving things in the future is better put on widening the FOV. Remember that for wider FOV you have to expand the horizontal resolution of the panels, that is if you want to do it without sacrificing clarity what we have now.