Meta VR Glasses: better for 3D movies, but less immersive for VR180?

Meta has announced Meta VR Glasses, arriving in spring 2027 for $1,299 in the US. For us at immerNews, the interesting question is what this new design could mean for enjoying immersive photos and videos. A lighter device and micro-OLED displays sound promising. However, the much smaller field of view might impact the media experience.

We watched the announcement during Meta’s Connect keynote. These are our initial thoughts based on the announcement and reported specifications; we have not tested the VR glasses ourselves.

Cinema comes first

Mark Zuckerberg introduced the new Meta VR Glasses with the slogan “Cinema. Computer. Console.” The order has of course been carefully chosen and diverges from what we have seen in other Meta VR headsets. While so far gaming and the metaverse were apparently the largest focus which could be categorized under console, now cinema indicates the focus on media consumption. We are not surprised at it as we mentioned this trend from following various rumors in our article “Spatial Cameras in VR: From Quest 3 to Steam Frame + Arcturus, with Project Phoenix on the Horizon“. Based on these and our reported Unity OpenXR Meta changes, we already suggested that the next Meta device could potentially also be used as a better resolution spatial camera for capturing 3D photos and videos. While a specific spec on camera API access and resolutions is not public yet, we have confirmation of higher angular resolution for color passthrough which likely points to an improvement in using it as a 3D camera.

In the following, we take a closer look at the specs, compare them to other current VR headsets and discuss what this could mean for personal 3D photos, spatial videos, VR180 and large local media libraries.

Specifications and Comparisons

We checked the comparison against manufacturer documentation and firsthand reporting.

Specification	Meta VR Glasses	Quest 3	Steam Frame	XREAL Aura
Form factor	Glasses + compute puck	All-in-one headset	All-in-one headset	Glasses + compute puck
Display type	Micro-OLED	LCD	LCD	Sony micro-OLED
Pixels per eye	2412 × 2288	2064 × 2208	2160 × 2160	1920 × 1200
Refresh rate	Up to 120 Hz	Up to 120 Hz	72–144 Hz; 144 experimental	Up to 120 Hz
Field of view, axes labelled	70° H × 66° V D: 88° reported	110° H × 96° V D: 113.3° rendered*	110° H reported; V unknown	70° D reported; H/V unknown
Display angular resolution	37 PPD	25 PPD	Unknown	Unknown
Chipset	Snapdragon Reality Elite (XR2 Gen 3)	Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2	Snapdragon 8 Gen 3	Snapdragon Reality Elite + XREAL X1S
RAM	12 GB	8 GB	16 GB	12 GB / 16 GB
Operating system	Meta Horizon OS	Meta Horizon OS	SteamOS 3	Android XR
View of the real world	Color camera passthrough, 26 PPD	Color camera passthrough, 18 PPD	Monochrome camera passthrough or add-on Arcturus Vision Camera	Optical see-through; camera PPD not applicable
Hand tracking	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Eye tracking	Yes; 4 cameras reported	No	Yes; 2 cameras	No, per hands-on reporting
Face tracking	Yes, reported by UploadVR	No	No	Unknown
Bundled tracked controllers	No; Touch Plus sold separately	Yes; Touch Plus	Yes; Steam Frame controllers	None announced; hands, voice and puck input
Internal storage	128 GB, reported	512 GB	256 GB / 1 TB	256 GB / 512 GB
microSD slot	Yes; up to 1 TB reported	No	Yes	Unknown
Weight worn on the head	About 100 g, excluding puck	515 g	440 g with head strap	About 95 g reported, excluding puck
Native DisplayPort input	Yes, on puck	No	Unknown	Yes, on puck
US price	$1,299; 128 GB	About $600; 512 GB	$1,059; 256 GB	Exact price unannounced; base model ≤$1,500 before tax

In terms of pixels on the display, what does that actually mean if we compare Meta VR glasses with Quest 3 and XREAL Aura?

Device	Resolution per eye	Total pixels per eye	Meta VR Glasses have…
Meta VR Glasses	2412 × 2288	5,518,656	Reference
Quest 3	2064 × 2208	4,557,312	1.21× as many pixels
XREAL Aura	1920 × 1200	2,304,000	2.40× as many pixels

Micro-OLED for media consumption

Early VR users had the pleasure of OLED on VR headsets such as HTC Vive or the first Meta Quest. The next generations of Meta’s headsets used LCD panels, which are usually cheaper and brighter. Some OLED headsets can show issues such as smearing during motion and mura (uneven brightness or color across the display). I noticed mura on HTC Vive and PSVR 2. Mura is not exclusive to OLED, though. However, the black levels are often shown in darker gray and the colors appear not as saturated on LCDs. For media fans, OLED and micro-OLED (the difference is in short: micro-OLED uses a silicon backplane, allowing very small, densely packed pixels in a compact display) are often desired. Now, with Meta VR Glasses, we are getting a new device with micro-OLED displays, possibly leading to deeper blacks and richer-looking colors. This can matter a lot in dark film scenes and also in dark virtual cinema environments.

The increased display resolution we showed in the table above also helps a lot. With 2412 × 2288 pixels per eye, we have 21.1% more panel pixels than Quest 3 and 139.5% more than XREAL Aura. However, the field of view is also different, which we discuss next.

How a smaller field of view affects immersive media

Moving on from Quest 3 with a horizontal field of view of 110° to 70° in the Meta VR glasses will affect different kinds of media differently. It shall be noted that the real field of view might change slightly with the eye relief distance, different covers, wearing glasses and human eye shape. The following preferred values are from my subjective experience in immerGallery where e.g. for 3D cylindrically curved images, I can read from the menu the number of degrees the virtual display screen covers.

• Regular 2D or 3D movies such as cinema 3D movies: Curved screen size values going from 50 to 70° are usually fine. During a longer movie, as a spectator, it can be exhausting rotating the head too much, e.g. watching the faces in a dialogue of a person on the left with a person on the right. So a smaller size downwards to 50° is fine while I personally prefer something closer to 70°. According to my experience with immerGallery on Quest 3, I expect the increased angular display resolution will help make watching 4K movies look sharper. For 1080p movies at these virtual screen sizes, I do not expect any visible sharpness benefit from the higher display resolution. In my experience, Quest 3’s displays are already sufficient for this content.
• 3D photos: For some 3D photos like images from the XREAL Beam Pro camera, I prefer watching these on an 80° curved stereoscopic cinema screen. That way, the image covers a large amount from the leftmost to rightmost area in the image when I look into the center. This also helps as various 3D cameras do not automatically crop 3D images regarding their side-border areas: Because the left lens and right lens of a 3D camera are physically differently located, in the left eye view, some content to the rightmost part of that image will be missing and vice-versa for the other view. Free tools such as Stereo Photo Maker Pro can to some degree fix that with their auto-align feature, but not everyone uses this and sometimes there might be a reason to preserve the original content. Having such content displayed very wide, the potential issues at the leftmost and rightmost part of the image are barely an issue when mostly looking into the inner regions of the image. This applies to some degree to self-captured 3D videos as well.
• Wide-angle panoramas: Finally with VR, a great opportunity came up on how to watch the wide-angle panoramas that can be created by sliding the phone in one direction and it continues to capture that in a high-resolution image. Seeing this in a wide field of view with high detail gives great immersion. A limited 70° FoV will likely reduce that impressive view and immersion. However, the higher angular display resolution, depending on the content, could provide more sharpness.
• Spherical media (VR180, 360°): This will be the most impacted area by a lower field of view. As I have been showing such spherical media to various people on Quest 3, some of the feedback includes that it still feels like looking through binoculars. The statement makes sense when looking at the human’s full field of view, e.g. mentioned in my paper “Concept for Rendering Optimizations for Full Human Field of View HMDs“: The full human field of view for both eyes together has been measured to be between 200 and 220 degrees. Without trying the new Meta device and seeing the difference ourselves, it is hard to judge the difference. However, it could fall beyond a threshold where VR180-3D, in my opinion the most immersive media format making you feel like being transported into the scene, might not unfold its magic anymore or to a lesser degree. With my experience in immerGallery on Quest 3, I expect the increased angular display resolution to not make 8K spherical content look sharper. However, VR180 photos with sensitive AI upscaling keeping stereoscopic details correct might benefit from more perceived sharpness. We will have a separate article about upscaling VR180 photos in the future.

Meta also announced plans for immersive sports content with ESPN, offering 8K streaming and 180-degree views. This starts with college football on Meta Quest in 2026, with more sports coming in 2027. This makes the field-of-view discussion relevant to Meta’s own content plans as well.

The other impact on immersion besides the direct field of view is distraction in the periphery. The open sides of the Meta VR Glasses could contribute to that. However, we learned that light blockers will be sold as accessories which would mitigate this.

It shall also be noted that sometimes less immersion can also be better. Specifically for beginners in VR, fully immersive experiences, including VR180/360 movies in which the camera is moving, can quickly lead to motion sickness. If this happens to people trying VR, they might be more inclined to fully abandon VR to not repeat the unpleasant experience.

Video decoding is still specified at 8K60

Despite the new processor, Qualcomm’s official product brief still lists 8K video decoding at 60 fps for Snapdragon Reality Elite (XR2 Gen 3). This matches the published specification for the Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 used in Quest 3. Decoding 8K video at 90 or 120 fps is not specified.

Apple Immersive Video provides an interesting comparison: Apple’s recommended delivery format uses 4320 × 4320 pixels per eye at 90 fps, encoded using MV-HEVC. Based on the published specifications of the Qualcomm chip, we would therefore not expect smooth playback of such Apple Immersive videos at their full resolution and 90 fps on Meta VR Glasses, even if the files could be transferred there.

Around 100 grams on your face, with the rest in a puck

With the design that offloads battery, compute and storage to a cable-connected puck, fast moving in games might become a bit more tedious. However, for media consumption mostly done on the couch, this should not present a bigger issue. Lighter weight on the head and face should benefit and enable a better experience that can be done for a longer time. But it should be noted that the pure number of weight is not the only factor impacting the comfort. Weight balance, whether it presses on the nose and if the cable pulls when turning your head or reclining on a couch need to be considered as well.

microSD is welcome, but 128 GB internal storage is tight

The reported 128 GB of internal storage is tight. Some of this space is already consumed by the operating system and some pre-installed apps. In the past, Meta Horizon OS has also included apps which could not be uninstalled and continued to consume space. For operating systems, it is also not surprising if over the years with more updates they increase in size. While movies and photo collections can be offloaded to a microSD which is supported with up to 1 TB on Meta VR Glasses, it is still not ideal. Depending on which microSD card is used, the speed can be noticeably slower compared to fast built-in storage. For movie playback and image watching this will very likely be fine. But apps should for fast startup ideally stay on built-in storage. It is also not clear yet whether apps could even be transferred to the microSD card or if it can only be used for data storage. Offering models with more internal storage, at least 256 GB, would have been desirable from a user’s perspective.

Better passthrough does not yet tell us the camera resolution

As mentioned above, passthrough angular resolution increases from 18 PPD on Quest 3 to 26 PPD on Meta VR Glasses. This is about 44% higher angular pixel density. As discussed in our earlier article on spatial cameras in VR, based on our own capture tests, Quest 3 can provide camera imagery at 1920 × 1920 pixels per eye. But when using it as a 3D camera through the Meta Passthrough Camera API, the maximum resolution of 1280 × 1280 pixels was exposed. The higher passthrough PPD figure does not yet tell us the native camera resolution or which resolutions will be exposed to developers through the APIs. This is also dependent on the camera field of view, cropping and processing. However, we are of course hoping and somewhat expecting that the resolution available to apps will be higher than on Quest 3.

Three hours of media playback sounds promising

As for the battery life, Meta claims up to three hours of continuous high-resolution media playback. That is a great value and allows watching 1-2 full movies at usual movie length. We will need to see if these numbers will only come true for certain types of videos, codecs, brightness settings and media player viewing apps. Generally, this sounds like a very good value, specifically compared to the recently released Steam Frame which in our media test was only able to go a bit longer than one hour, starting with a full battery. It shall be noted that in the current Steam Frame setup with the used Android/Lepton layer, video hardware decoding was not available. If it becomes available in a future update, the battery time would likely be longer. However, the longest usage we got reported there from streaming games from a PC to the headset was around 1:30h. Valve also works on a strap with hot-swappable batteries which would likely help.

Optional controllers: will immerGallery work on Meta VR Glasses?

As we said before, “console”, which hints at games, was mentioned last in Meta’s slogan for Meta VR Glasses: Cinema. Computer. Console.

As part of this, VR controllers are fully supported by this headset, but need to be purchased separately or reused from Quest 3 / 3S. Besides trying to make the price of the headset cheaper, this might come also from a perception in which VR controllers are sometimes framed as being inconvenient. However, 6-DoF controllers are efficient input devices allowing a lot of complex actions such as selecting multiple objects, grabbing, quickly clicking various buttons and executing special functions. Thanks to their vibration motors, haptic effects and feedback can be given. Compared to that, hand tracking input can sometimes feel slow, can have a higher rate of incorrectly interpreted inputs and has no haptic feedback.

For choosing a movie, pausing playback or browsing photos, leaving controllers aside can be convenient. That is why in immerGallery 1.4.5, we introduced hand tracking support. All features can be used without controllers on Quest 3 and Quest 3S.

Hand tracking in immerGallery 1.4.5. All features can be used without controllers on Quest 3 and Quest 3S. Video: immerVR.

However, more complex interactions like quickly marking images to be cut and pasted into another folder, clicking through various folder hierarchies, typing a message in our Help menu with the virtual keyboard, these all work faster and more reliably with VR controllers.

Now for developers, and specifically games, the impact of not bundling controllers is large. They cannot rely on the user owning a VR controller for their software. If they release an app with controller-only support, the potential target audience on Meta VR Glasses will be much smaller. Some games also just cannot be ported to a hand input scheme. That limits for developers the possible audience and market. Possibly a reason why many existing VR apps and games using VR controllers have not been ported from Quest to Apple Vision Pro or Samsung Galaxy XR, both shipping without controllers.

It is still great that Meta fully supports the VR controllers, but it might have been nice to force a bundle of this for the app/game ecosystem. In any case, because controllers are supported, Meta was able to announce on stage that all apps and games from Quest will also run on the Meta VR Glasses: “We also support the entire Quest library with optionally attached controllers”.

This also means of course that our immerGallery app will work as well, with and without VR controllers. We will likely make after release a few tweaks to optimize for the device, but generally everything should work pretty well from the moment the new device reaches its first users.

A premium price could bring a different audience

Meta already stated that the new device is a new category and it will co-exist with the existing Quest 3 with the larger field of view. Meta VR Glasses also sit in a different price category from Quest 3: $1,299 compared to about $599. Business Insider previously reported that Meta was planning higher prices for future VR devices. From our perspective as the team behind immerGallery, the interesting possibility is an audience that regularly uses immersive media and values software built for it. A premium device could help reach that audience, but a higher entry price can also mean fewer customers.

Conclusion

The new Meta VR Glasses are from what we have seen in the keynote a possible disruption in the market. The device offers at least a reasonably wide field-of-view, even though not as large as Quest 3, at a very light weight and without looking like a brick mounted to the face. That nicer form factor might spark the interest of many more customers for VR – even though many might be held back by the price. Having optional VR controller support and the ability to run all Quest 3 apps is a great start for users to find a variety of apps and games on day 1.

For regular 2D and 3D media, the new light form factor and OLED displays may deliver a superior experience even at the narrower field of view compared to Quest 3. For spherical media (VR180, 360°), it remains to be seen how intense the immersion will be with the smaller field of view.

As Quest 3 will still co-exist as a larger field-of-view headset, this is overall great progress in the VR space, giving users more options to choose from.

A question for discussions in the comments:
Would it have been better if Meta released only Meta VR Glasses with 256 GB (instead of 128 GB) and force-bundled controllers for $1,399 instead of $1,299, a 7.7% higher price?