VaM 1.x Thoughts on Steam Frame from headset/VR experts?

[Stars&Garters]

So I've been waiting on the reveal of the "Deckard" for many years now, and today's (err, yesterday's) announcement of the Steam Frame is pretty much that. I'm an increasingly big fan of Valve's design philosophies and overall consumer-friendly product portfolio, and for all the Index's flaws I liked it as well and would like to jump to its successor if possible.

ALL THAT SAID, I'm not actually sure the Steam Frame is going to be the leap I want it to be, at least when it comes to my VaM experience. Aside from the comparatively dirt-cheap Quest 3, there are other high end options, like the Samsung Galaxy XR, Pimax line, and Bigscreen Beyond 2 (plus others I'm unaware of). It's also worth noting that people here constantly rag on SteamVR's performance drain, with non-Index users opting to launch through Virtual Desktop for major FPS gains (something the Index and likely the Frame can't do).

End of the day, VaM remains a unique beast in the VR landscape, so it can be difficult to peer past the various marketing/walkthrough videos and determine which of these headsets is the best for it.

Any thoughts?

 

[dennisfinch]

To the best of my understanding, Foveated Streaming which does not require any development effort on VAM (or any software/game in question) definitely might give some FPS gain and lower latency (if not bottlenecked on PC).

 

[techwoof]

If you have already a Quest 3 or a Pico 4 Ultra (or better) the SteamFrame is not appealing. But otherwise, i think it's totally worth it to upgrade from the Quest 2 or if you don't have any.

It's a 'mid-end' VR with the price probably more than the Pico 4 Ultra but less than 1k USD. It's important to remember that devices like the Quest are way cheaper and sold at a loss because you are the product. Meta wants to shove their own stuff on you, so you spend on them, and you don't own the headset. The Frame will be more expensive because of that alone, since it's a different business model (as there is no vendor lock-in), your own the hardware.

Since it's a very open system (SteamOS on arm64 with FEX for x86 emulation) i'm pretty sure you could run ALVR in there for example. Might be a great time for the VD team to support the Frame officially as well, since it's a popular application. I doubt you will be locked on SteamVR, maybe on the beginning yes, but that will surely change. If you have the money to buy a Pimax of BigScreen then you should, but it is exponentially more expensive as it needs lighthouses, separate controllers, etc. Also the controllers that comes with the Frame are amazing, it has the most buttons of any VR controller.

For VAM, specifically, i was disappointed by the lack of color passthrough. But the Frame has an PCIe expansion port (above the nose) that allows to connect external stuff, such as color cameras. Valve themselves said they understand that the customer's needs varies, and while they didn't had anything to show at the moment, they plan expansion addons. The price of hardware components has gone up in general in the last few years, not down, so it makes sense for them to release something like that. Otherwise it would be too expensive, and they want to target the masses to also play non-vr games.

I'm very excited for it, will try to buy as soon it gets available around here if my Quest 2 don't die on me.

 

[random_user_9000]

To me it is just slight upgrade to quest 3 but will probably be more expensive. Only benefits could be no Meta bullshit and eye tracking optimization. But overall I'm a bit disappointed they didnt go for a high end PCVR specs. FoV and OLED screen was a main area of improvement in quest 3 but Steam Frame is the same.
Regular users will maybe get proper wireless streaming setup out of box with Steam Frame and their solution. Quest 3 streaming has been shitty without Virtual Desktop.

 

[Electric E-Boy]

[...] But overall I'm a bit disappointed they didnt go for a high end PCVR specs. [...]

Same here, big disappointment for me after waiting for years. Steam has so much money and possibilities, they could advance VR tech easily if they want to. I wouldn't mind the Steam Frame if there would be also a high end version.

 

[techwoof]

Same here, big disappointment for me after waiting for years. Steam has so much money and possibilities, they could advance VR tech easily if they want to. I wouldn't mind the Steam Frame if there would be also a high end version.

Maybe there will be, just like the Steam Deck got an OLED version. If the sales of this version are good i imagine they will make a better one. Since their goal is to target the masses to play non-vr games in the headset, the move makes sense in a cost perspective, as hardware components are expensive right now and taxes around them are uncertain at best. But again, the meta quest 3 hardware is more expensive than what meta charges, as it is subsidized. On a apples to apples comparison with the Q3, you will be paying extra for eye tracking, better controllers, a lighter headset, better streaming technology and a open hardware, at the expense of color cameras. But of course, we will know more only when the real reviews come out.

 

[Stars&Garters]

Maybe there will be, just like the Steam Deck got an OLED version. If the sales of this version are good i imagine they will make a better one. Since their goal is to target the masses to play non-vr games in the headset, the move makes sense in a cost perspective, as hardware components are expensive right now and taxes around them are uncertain at best. But again, the meta quest 3 hardware is more expensive than what meta charges, as it is subsidized. On a apples to apples comparison with the Q3, you will be paying extra for eye tracking, better controllers, a lighter headset, better streaming technology and a open hardware, at the expense of color cameras. But of course, we will know more only when the real reviews come out.

Yeah, the whole argument around the Quest 3 has been echoed in various ways in the replies. As for me, I am pretty staunch about never touching Facebook/Meta again (fully deleted my FB account in 2017 and never looked back), and the idea of being forced back into the fold just for solid/subsidized VR hardware grates something fierce.

Now as someone possessing both an Index and a relative degree of VR-industry knowledge, I'm also painfully aware the Steam Frame (and the Steam Machine for that matter) are disappointments for performance junkies who simultaneously want to support Valve. My hardware might honestly be able to support a high-end Pimax model, even if my wallet will struggle to...I keep debating the option

Even so, perhaps supporting the current Valve initiative wouldn't be so bad to keep their ball rolling, depending on how penetrative the pricing is. I struggle not to sound like a blind fanboy with comments like this, but aside from the SteamVR performance losses I really would like to stick with their hardware. Just seems like there are serious tradeoffs for that path, unless the future Valve is planning is as bright as we're still hoping for.