Meta Quest 3S Review: At $300, It’s All You Need for VR

If all you wanted was a Meta Quest 2 with the added passthrough and software upgrades of the Meta Quest 3, then the Quest 3S is easily the most accessible and affordable you can get. What’s more, it proves there’s no such thing as “entry level” VR anymore. This is it. It doesn’t have the best displays, but for playing games—still the reason you’ll buy one of these headsets—you don’t need more than this, especially if you have a fairly powerful PC on hand.

I’ve used enough of the $500 Meta Quest 3 to know that VR is still limited. Most people getting into it won’t care about Horizon Worlds or any of the supposed metaverse features. Passthrough is neat for certain applications, but I know many are like me and won’t feel comfortable watching hours of YouTube through its still-glitchy app or Prime Video with a headset strapped to your noggin. That’s true for every VR headset you can get, from Meta’s latest devices all the way up to the $3,500 Apple Vision Pro. So if you’ve wanted to try VR, why not try it at its cheapest?

The Quest 3S is easily the best deal you’re going to get for VR. It’s hand tracking is equivalent to the Quest 3, and it’s just as powerful. The passthrough doesn’t look as clean as the Quest 3, but it truly doesn’t look worse when you’re in a game. The 3S comes with a copy of Batman: Arkham Shadows and three months of the Quest+ subscription. I don’t know if two free games per month are worth it, but it’s a great way to expand your library quickly and finally play the excellent Asgard’s Wrath 2.

Then, if you have a computer capable of running some VR games, you can grab the Steam Link app and dive into all the more demanding games you can’t get on Quest, like Half Life: Alyx. If you have a Game Pass Ultimate subscription, you can stream a few of those games on a slightly larger screen. After that, you can use the HDMI link capability to bring your PC or MacBook onto a large screen.

The big question for anybody looking at the 3S is whether to go for the 128 GB versus 256 GB at $400. A game like Asgard’s Wrath 2 takes up about 33 GB, and that’s one of the largest games you can get. Unless you’re planning on playing many games at once, you’ll probably be fine sticking with the smaller version, especially if you’re just a dabbler. The Quest 3 now starts at $500 for 512 GB of base storage, which is more than was on offer last year for the same price. If you think you’ll need more, I’d advise paying a little extra for the Quest 3 anyway.

Any of those capabilities might bore you. You may eventually run out of games to play or things to do on your Quest. After that, it it goes back on the shelf until Meta adds a new enticing feature or somebody else finally makes a VR game you’re interested in, but at the very least it’s worth $300 to finally try VR. For that, Meta’s latest headset is easily the best value in headsets you can buy right now, so long as you don’t demand the prettiest or the most capable headset.

Quest 3S Review: Design and Comfort

© Photo: Adriano Contreras / Gizmodo

The Quest 3S looks like a Quest 3 except for the arrangement of its exterior sensors. While the Quest 3 has a depth sensor—which ostensibly makes it more future proof for the sake of hand tracking—the 3S has a low-light sensor that picks up the slack. Technically, the 3S is better for hand tracking in low light, as first demonstrated by UploadVR, though you probably shouldn’t use a Quest in the dark anyway. The point is, I didn’t notice any real difference in hand-tracking accuracy compared to the Quest 3.

There are some interesting distinctions between the $500 and $300 headsets. The 3S has a dedicated power button and it lacks the 3.5 mm headphone jack. Otherwise, it’s using the same default face shield and three-point head strap. It’s very basic, but I found its just comfortable enough for a few hours of use. We bald folks might start to feel a pinch on the back of our skull after a while, but at least it’s light enough to last without too much discomfort for its max two and a half-hour battery life.

The 3S is missing the slider that lets you set spacing between your eyes and the headset. Instead, like the Quest 2, you need to select between three IPD settings to make the display look its best. It’s jankier and less reliable than the Quest 3’s setup, though I did manage to find my personal sweet spot.

The cheaper Quest is compatible with all the accessories of the one from last year, though my review unit did not include anything like the Elite Strap or even the carrying case. The Quest 3S does come with an extender if you wear glasses, and Gizmodo had an extra breathable face shield (not my cup of tea due to the excess light bleed). To transport it, I stuck it in my backpack and hoped for the best. After several trips, I didn’t notice any issues with lenses or sensors or the plastic breaking, but if you plan on taking it on the road it’s best to source some kind of case.

The controllers are the exact same TruTouch design from the Quest 3. They’re light, comfortable, and do the job. I wish the sticks had a little more weight to them, but they fit into the hands and lack the bulk of those rings you find on the controllers for the PlayStation VR2.

Quest 3S Review: Performance and Playability

© Photo: Adriano Contreras / Gizmodo

The main differences between the Quest 3 and 3S are the lenses and FOV. The Quest 3 uses fresnel lenses compared to the 3’s pancake lenses. The 3 boasts 2065 by 2208 resolution per eye, which Meta is keen to say is equivalent to 4K, plus 25 ppd. On the 3S, the resolution is limited to 1832 by 1920 per lens with 20 ppd. In every way that matters, its the same display found in the Quest 2, just translated over to the Quest 3’s chassis.

You get 97 degrees of horizontal front view compared to the Quest 3’s 110 degrees. If you use both in quick succession, you can tell there’s a visual difference between the devices. Text might be slightly less detailed depending on where you’re directly looking. You’ll start to see warping at a closer angle at the edge of the Quest 3S view than on the 3. It makes it harder to read large banks of text, especially anything on the edge of your vision.

The biggest difference between the headsets is the time it takes to get the best view. It takes a little bit of fiddling with the faceshield and straps before everything looks right. The lower resolution is especially apparent in passthrough. Watching YouTube videos might look more muddy than they would if you were watching them on your basic, flat LCD screen, though they do look better on Quest 3. Quest passthrough always seems a little too warm in tone no matter which Meta headset you use, but on the 3S I noticed more jagged corners on windows, especially if you spot them out of the corner of your eye.

All that being said, once I actually got into a game, the difference in lenses became irrelevant. The Quest 3S uses the same Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 Gen2 chip as the Quest 3. Games built for Quest may have muddier textures than what you’re used to on more powerful platforms, but on the $300 headset they look good, essentially equivalent when you play them on the 3S’ $500 big brother.

The best games on Quest already make use of good art style over pixel counts. As mentioned before, if you accept the three-month Quest+ trial you can play Asgard’s Wrath 2, a fun and engaging open world RPG that makes use of outlandish character design and awesome VR fidelity in equal measure. While I can’t speak to how much you’ll get out of the free games on Meta’s subscription, one of this month’s free games is Down the Rabbit Hole. It’s a creative puzzle game that lets you manipulate the environment in very interesting ways through VR.

It’s the same when playing games through Steam Link. I played my lingering copy of SUPERHOT VR, and didn’t have any real issues with the slightly more limited FOV as I tried and failed to dodge bullets while capping hoards of red people.

I have not yet been able to play Batman: Arkham Shadow beyond a short demo, but even though I don’t know what I’d rate the game, I didn’t notice any visual flaws from the 3S version that would spoil the experience. Games that work on the Quest 3 work just as well on the 3S. If you’re trying to save money and still play these games, feel safe in getting the cheaper headset. If you think you may want to watch movies in VR (it’s not as fun as it sounds, no matter how much you spend) then you may want to look to the $500 Quest.

Quest 3S Review: Verdict

© Photo: Adriano Contreras / Gizmodo

Back when Sony introduced its VR2 to PC adapter, I had several friends messaging me asking whether it was worth buying it just to try some of the PC VR games they’ve been dying to play. Sales for the $550 VR2 surged, only for many players to hit a brick wall of software compatibility issues. Players also had to source their own DisplayPort cable and compatible Bluetooth adapter. It was a SNAFU, but it proved that there are people out there looking for a cheap way to finally play those virtual reality games they bought on a whim from a Steam sale three years ago.

I understand why some players would hesitate to give Meta any money. Then again, the 3S is the quickest, cheapest way to play Half Life: Alyx (so long as you have a capable PC). Funnily, that’s exactly what my brother said… until he saw me playing SUPERHOT VR with the Quest 3S. He watched long enough that I took the hint and let him play. Of course, he had a great time. SUPERHOT is super fun; it’s a blast that you can finish in a bare few hours. It’s the type of game you saw your friend playing a while ago, then resigned yourself to the idea it was beyond your reach.

I don’t know if the cheap Quest 3S will entice more people to get into VR, as Meta obviously hopes it will. Still, the $300 headset takes all the improvements to Quest 3 over the last year and puts them in a cheaper package that’s sacrificing little for the $200 price difference. Is it the best introductory device for VR? Absolutely. More than that, unless you really want the best screen quality it might be the best headset you can buy for its price, period. Whether or not that’s a hit against the waffling state of the altered reality market is another question entirely.