Valve's new Steam Frame headset, priced at over £1,000, has reignited the debate about the cost of virtual reality technology. However, not everyone agrees that VR is inherently too expensive.
David Heaney, editor at UploadVR, believes the notion that VR is too costly is a significant misconception. He points to Meta's Quest 3S, a budget-friendly model that costs £320 and has been available for as low as £250. In comparison, Heaney notes that other gaming consoles such as the Nintendo Switch 2 (£420), Xbox Series S (£430), and PS5 (£470) are more expensive.
"Quest 3S, which is primarily used for gaming, is cheaper than other games consoles," Heaney stated. He suggests that the primary obstacle to wider VR adoption is that the technology is still in its nascent stages.
Heaney draws a parallel to the early days of personal computers in the 1980s. "Even if they had been cheap, which they weren't, they weren't yet good enough for mainstream adoption," he explained. "VR is only just getting started, a tech in its 1980s PC era, not something anywhere near maturity."
While high-end devices like the Steam Frame and Apple's Vision Pro (priced at around £4,000) represent the cutting edge, the availability of more affordable options suggests that the entry cost for VR gaming is becoming increasingly competitive with traditional entertainment platforms.