• sitzathlet@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    As one of those gamers, the answer imho is quite simple: Ignoring the awful data practices of Meta, the Quest 2/3 as a product is great. Over the years, my Q2 kept improving, with constant updates, new features and general performance improvements. I just got a Q3, and the technological jump is enormous. Add to that the absolute lack of (affordable) alternatives, and you have an easy choice: recognize that Meta has done more for the VR space than anyone else, or don’t do VR.

    • Vash63@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I mean they’re a mega corp willing to lose billions upon billions to own the market. That none of their competitors are willing to bleed money like that isn’t surprising, and buying into such an obviously poisoned platform is not a good idea for the future of the industry unless you want it to be owned by Meta.

      • sitzathlet@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I fully agree with you that Meta should not have the quasi monopoly that they have. But what’s the alternative?

          • sitzathlet@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            I’m sorry, but it’s not. Same as the alternative to a meat-based diet isn’t “have you tried starving?”. Only other inside-out tracking headsets are made by Apple and Pico (Bytedance). Both companies that are as bad as Meta. You can debate whether humanity needs VR/AR, but that’s a different topic. VR in it’s current state is driven by Meta.