Skip to content
You get what you pay for

Meta Quest 3S is a disappointing half-step to Carmack’s low-cost VR vision

Significant visual and comfort compromises make last year's Quest 3 a better VR investment.

Kyle Orland | 63
Look at all those dots. Credit: Kyle Orland
Look at all those dots. Credit: Kyle Orland
Story text

It's been just over two years now since soon-to-depart CTO John Carmack told a Meta Connect audience about his vision for a super low-end VR headset that came in at $250 and 250 grams. "We're not building that headset today, but I keep trying," Carmack said at the time with some exasperation.

On the pricing half of the equation, the recently released Quest 3S headset is nearly on target for Carmack's hopes and dreams. Meta's new $299 headset is a significant drop from the $499 Quest 3 and the cheapest price point for a Meta VR headset since the company raised the price of the aging Quest 2 to $400 back in the summer of 2022. When you account for a few years of inflation in there, the Quest 3S is close to the $250 headset Carmack envisioned.

A new button on the underside of the Quest 3S lets you transition to pass-through mode at any time.
A new button on the underside of the Quest 3S lets you transition to pass-through mode at any time. Credit: Kyle Orland

Unfortunately, Meta must still seriously tackle the "250 grams" part of Carmack's vision. The 514g Quest 3S feels at least as unwieldy on your face as the 515g Quest 3, and both are still quite far from the "super light comforts" Carmack envisioned. Add in all the compromises Meta made so the Quest 3S could hit that lower price point, and you have a cheap, half-measure headset that we can only really recommend to the most price-conscious of VR consumers.

Meta Quest 2 Plus

iFixit's recent teardown of the Quest 3S shows that the new headset is more than just a spiritual successor to the cheap and popular Quest 2. On the contrary, iFixit found the Quest 3S optical stack uses the exact same parts as the Quest 2, right down to the LCD panels and fresnel lenses.

The fresnel lens housing on the Meta Quest 3S.
The pancake lens housing on the Meta Quest 3.

In 2020, the 1832×1920 per-eye resolution offered by that visual stack represented a significant upgrade from what had come before, especially at such a low price point. Today, though, that dated display technology invites direct comparisons to the 2604×2208 per-eye display on last year's Quest 3. With the displays sitting just inches from your eyes, that difference represents a very noticeable 20 percent drop in apparent clarity, down from 25 pixels per degree to a mere 20.

Going back to the 3S after a year spent in the Quest 3 is a bit like walking around in glasses that suddenly have a thin layer of Vaseline smeared on them. Everything looks quite a bit fuzzier, especially near the borders of the display, and edges of objects look distinctly more jagged than on the Quest 3. The difference is especially noticeable when trying to read small text in VR or make out fine details in the real world through the headset's array of passthrough cameras.

It's not quite a retreat to the days of the infamous "screen door effect" that plagued early Oculus-era headsets, but the distinct visual downgrade makes virtual reality experiences that much less convincing and engrossing on the 3S.

It’s the little things

The visual downgrades on the Quest 3S extend to the field of view, which narrows from 110 horizontal degrees on the Quest 3 to a mere 97 degrees on the 3S (the vertical field of view sees a smaller reduction from 97 degrees to 93 degrees). This difference isn't as apparent as the drop in resolution between the two headsets, but it does lead to a few more "tunnel vision" moments at the margins. In a game like Beat Saber, for instance, I noticed many of my swings were rendered effectively invisible by the larger black void taking up much of my peripheral vision.

A comparative side view shows the reduced depth of the pancake lens housing on the Quest 3 (top) compared to the Quest 3S (bottom).
A comparative side view shows the reduced depth of the pancake lens housing on the Quest 3 (top) compared to the Quest 3S (bottom). Credit: Kyle Orland

Going back to the fresnel-lens-based Quest 2 visual stack also means doing without the thinner pancake lenses introduced on the Quest 3. The result is an eyebox on the 3S that extends about an inch farther from your face than on the Quest 3. That might not sound like much, but having the lens' center of gravity farther from your face makes the headset feel a bit heavier and the fit a bit less secure as you move your head around in VR.

Then there are the compromises when it comes to fine-tuning the distance between the Quest 3S' lenses. On the Quest 3, an adjustment wheel on the bottom of the headset lets you adjust this interpupillary distance (IPD) continuously, down to the millimeter precision. On the Quest 3S, you instead manually shift the lenses into three preset grooves that are a full 5 millimeters apart. If your face's actual IPD falls in the middle of those 5 mm windows, the result can be the kind of eye strain and trouble focusing that we complained about in our original Quest 2 review.

Meta has also done away with quite a few Quest 3 creature comforts in an apparent effort to keep the Quest 3S price down. The lack of an external depth sensor, for instance, can make things like pass-through video and hand tracking feel a bit more wonky than on the Quest 3. The Quest 3S is missing a standard headphone jack, too, for those still using wired headphones. And the new headset also lacks any automatic face detection, adding the small annoyance of physically tapping the power button to return from sleep mode when you put it back on.

Spend the extra money

From the front, the external cameras are the easiest way to tell the difference between the Quest 3S (left) and the Quest 3.
From the front, the external cameras are the easiest way to tell the difference between the Quest 3S (left) and the Quest 3.

I've been comparing the Quest 3S to the Quest 3 because that's the decision consumers considering a Meta headset will face today (if they can get over the need for a Meta account to use the headset in the first place). But Meta's discontinuation of the aging Quest 2 means millions of current Quest 2 owners will soon be faced with the prospect of upgrading or abandoning Meta's VR ecosystem for good, just as original Quest owners did last year.

For those current Quest 2 owners, the Quest 3S represents the cheapest way to maintain continued access to Meta's library of VR games and apps. And that library continues to expand with everything from mind-bending indie games to quirky multiplayer arenas to single-player adventures like Batman: Arkham Shadow, which now comes free with every Quest 3 or 3S headset.

But the move from a Quest 2 to a Quest 3S is relatively small, considering the four-year gap between the similarly priced headsets. Yes, you'll notice some significant improvements in the newer headset's full-color pass-through cameras and the headset's maximum frame rate (up from 90 Hz to 120 Hz). The 3S also offers a slightly more future-proofed Qualcomm XR Gen 2 processor (over the Quest 2's original XR processor) and slightly more precise Touch Plus controllers (which are missing the annoying tracking ring on the original Quest 2 controllers).

All told, though, the Quest 3S is far from the generational upgrade from the Quest 2 you might hope for. For that kind of apparent jump, you're much better off shelling out a bit more money for the full-fledged Quest 3. The improvements in form factor, field of view, IPD adjustment, and especially resolution make the higher-end set well worth the extra money. That's especially true if you can manage to track down the now-discontinued 128GB Quest 3, which is currently being closed out for just $430 (compared to $500 for the new 528GB version).

If you simply want the cheapest way to access Meta's library of virtual reality games, the Quest 3S certainly fills that hole in the market. If you want a more robust VR experience that's likely to suffice further into the future, though, the extra investment in a Quest 3 headset is probably worth it.

Photo of Kyle Orland
Kyle Orland Senior Gaming Editor
Kyle Orland has been the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica since 2012, writing primarily about the business, tech, and culture behind video games. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He once wrote a whole book about Minesweeper.
63 Comments
Staff Picks
t
The Quest 3 hasn’t managed to spark the same excitement as the Quest 2 for a variety of reasons.

The price is definitely one of those reasons. Which would make sense why Meta wanted to put out a cheaper version.

The problem is that price isn’t the only factor. The Quest 2 offered something new and exciting for the pandemic era and at a price people could afford. Now that the fad is over, there’s not much that the Quest 3 or 3S is offering to draw people in.

AR experiences haven’t proven to hold interest and there aren’t many games or experiences getting hype from the socials.

So the 3S may get a few people to buy in where their biggest gripe was price, but that could also lead to disappointment and future lost customers if the hardware and software doesn’t show off what makes it better than the Quest 2.

The dedicated VR fans aren’t likely to buy a Quest 3S unless money really is an issue and it’s the best they can afford.
a
My thoughts come from someone who has owned a DK2, Rift CV 1, Quest 1, Quest 2, Quest 3, HTC Vive, and a Valve Index. I have extensive VR experience going back to the Virtuality systems of the 90s. That makes me an enthusiast for VR tech I suppose.

The Quest 3 is overall the best VR headset I have owned. I borrowed a friend's 3S and pretty much agree with the review in all major points. If you are a 14 year old and spending Christmas money or birthday funds or whatever, the 3S may be the price point you are looking for. Though, really kid, mow some lawns or something to make the extra bucks to buy a 3 and skip the 3S.

Also, I have a separate account with Meta for all my VR stuff. Complaining about Meta at this point in VR discussions is old and often disingenuous. You don't want to buy from Meta, cool. You don't like their history, or policies, or corporate governance, or Zuckerberg, or whatever, cool - you do you, but please stop telling me about how you feel every time VR comes up in discussion.

Finally, the library of experiences, activities, and options continues to grow with a lot of great content. If that library needs to rival Steam for you, okay, this isn't for you and probably never will be. Otherwise, I'd tell you it is a great time with a lot to enjoy. Between VR videos, watching movies, playing games, Horizon Worlds experiences, hanging with friends and building my own stuff - I never run out of things to do.