If you’re feeling frustrated with the limited visual performance and capabilities of your Meta Quest 3 or Quest 3s, you’re not alone. Many users are seeking alternatives that don’t align with CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s controversial policies and the company’s significant workforce reductions. This drove me to explore other options for extended reality (XR) experiences that don’t come with a hefty price tag. Although Meta currently dominates the consumer VR market, it raises the question: are there viable alternatives that don’t require the investment of $1,000? One potential contender is the HTC Vive Focus Vision, which presents itself as a promising headset, provided that the PCVR experience justifies its steep price.

So, what can you realistically expect from a $1,000 VR experience? At present, Meta’s Quest series holds a commanding lead in the VR/AR landscape, with the Quest 3 priced at a more accessible $500. Other options like the Pico headsets and Sony’s PlayStation VR2 are available, but Apple’s $3,500 Vision Pro is not a practical choice for most users. A successful headset should offer intuitive controls for gaming, quick startup times, and seamless access to games without unnecessary delays. While the $1,000 HTC Vive Focus Vision achieves some of these aspects, it struggles with software that feels outdated.

The specifications of the HTC Vive Focus Vision are impressive on paper. It features dual 90 Hz lenses with a resolution of 2448 by 2448 each, totaling a stunning 5K resolution. With a field of view (FOV) of up to 120 degrees and integrated dual 2x driver directional speakers, it promises an immersive audio-visual experience. I found the headset visually appealing, and the audio performance was satisfactory enough that I didn’t feel the need for additional headphones. The expansive FOV enhances immersion, slightly surpassing the Quest 3’s 110-degree FOV. Additionally, the headset is equipped with two 16 MP passthrough cameras that provide reasonable passthrough functionality, along with two internal eye-tracking cameras. Based solely on specifications, it appears to strike a fair balance compared to lower-end models, although the PSVR2 may have OLED displays, I didn’t feel deprived of a quality experience while gaming with the HTC Vive Focus Vision.

Despite its strong specifications, the headset operates on the Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 CPU with 12 GB of RAM. It includes automatic PPD recognition, though I found this feature lacking in precision. Each time I put the headset back on, it would frequently readjust the PPD, which became quite cumbersome. However, putting aside this issue, the Vive Focus Vision boasts a sleek and well-crafted design. The battery pack is cleverly integrated into a padded case at the rear of the adjustable strap. Charging can be done externally or through the headset, and the adjustable back headrest ensures a snug fit without discomfort. Furthermore, the light seal effectively blocks out ambient light, enhancing the overall immersive experience.

However, the experience of using the Focus Vision can be quite different from what its specifications suggest. The weight distribution, particularly towards the back, creates an unusual feeling of momentum when you turn your head. Although the headset is designed for comfort, its weight can become a factor. After about two hours of continuous use, discomfort began to set in, which aligns with the battery life limitations typical of headsets like the Quest 3 or Vision Pro. While I found it to be more comfortable than its competitors, it still doesn’t encourage lengthy sessions of use and is better suited for shorter gaming stints.

After using the HTC Vive Focus Vision for several weeks, I struggled to justify its $1,000 price tag. I frequently encountered issues with losing my play area, despite the device prompting me to redraw the designated space in my small apartment. HTC’s hand-tracking capabilities proved to be unreliable as I often had to reset the floor level manually. There was even a moment when the software malfunctioned, resulting in a ground level that was slanted at a 20-degree angle. This glitch persisted into SteamVR, and I had to take the headset to my office for proper recalibration.

The experience was further diminished by the lack of distinctive offerings in HTC’s main app. The Vive Cosmos OS primarily serves as a gateway to PCVR or SteamVR, with only a handful of purchasable VR experiences available from HTC’s store. Unfortunately, it lacks many of the popular VR titles that are essential for an engaging experience, such as Asgard’s Wrath II, making it feel barren in comparison.

In terms of software accessibility, the Meta Quest benefits from a well-integrated Steam Link app, which generally performs reliably given a stable internet connection. Conversely, accessing your SteamVR library on the HTC Vive requires a more convoluted setup. Users may opt for the $150 Vive Wired Streaming Kit, which necessitates an available power outlet, or utilize the Vive Hub app. I chose the more economical $20 Virtual Desktop app, which simplifies setup and minimizes lag when used near my gaming laptop, although it still requires a wired internet connection and reasonably high internet speeds.

The Virtual Desktop app performs adequately for gaming with minimal lag, aside from occasional issues when stepping outside the headset’s designated boundaries. During my testing, I played titles like Half Life: Alyx, SuperHot VR, and Star Wars: Squadrons. The controllers are well-designed, featuring responsive joysticks and triggers. However, I couldn’t shake the feeling that I was missing out on several games available on Meta’s Horizon OS, which are not accessible on the Vive. While this is not HTC’s fault, it reflects a broader issue of them falling behind in the competitive VR landscape, which is unfortunate for anyone eager to experience VR without the Meta ecosystem.

Ultimately, the HTC Vive Focus Vision is primarily targeted towards developers, and while it does provide a solid platform for PCVR gaming, it comes with numerous limitations. Recently, Google made headlines by investing $250 million into acquiring HTC’s VR division as they collaborate with Samsung to create their own competitive device against the Vision Pro. Future devices may or may not feature controller support, and as the VR industry continues to evolve, Meta remains the most cost-effective option for VR enthusiasts. I am hopeful that we will see more devices powered by HorizonOS emerging this year. The VR industry is in dire need of innovation, and it shouldn’t be solely reliant on Meta to drive that change.