Review

VR-Headsets: 4–8 neue Modelle im Jahr 2026 erwartet

  • Updated December 4, 2025
  • Jennifer Daniels
  • 122 comments

Basierend auf aktuellen Informationen wird 2026 zu einem der aktivsten Jahre für VR-Hardware, mit geschätzten vier bis acht neuen Headsets, die erwartet werden. Diese Prognose berücksichtigt bestätigte Projekte, glaubwürdige Gerüchte und erwartete Revisionen, wobei die genaue Anzahl noch variieren kann.

Zu den auffälligsten Kandidaten gehören der Steam Frame, der Samsung Galaxy XR, der Pimax Dream Air, das 2026-Modell von Pico und der ASUS ROG Tarius. Obwohl der Meta Quest 4 ebenfalls in der Diskussion ist, scheint es wahrscheinlich, dass er bis 2027 verzögert wird. Es könnten auch weitere Varianten oder leichtere Modelle auftauchen, obwohl wie bei jedem Produktentwicklungsplan Verzögerungen oder Absagen immer möglich sind. Falls die meisten dieser Geräte den Markt erreichen, könnte 2026 ein bedeutender Meilenstein für VR-Fans und die Branche sein.

VR-Headsets: 4–8 neue Modelle im Jahr 2026 erwartet

VR-Headsets: 4–8 neue Modelle im Jahr 2026 erwartet

VR-Headsets: 4–8 neue Modelle im Jahr 2026 erwartet

VR-Headsets: 4–8 neue Modelle im Jahr 2026 erwartet

Choose a language:

122 Comments

  1. The problem is that more headsets with their own operating systems will further divide the market. Since VR already has a small user base, many of these devices won’t receive much developer support.

    1. The fragmentation is a real concern, especially when purchasing software across separate stores. Historically, it’s better to stick with the largest platform for long-term support.

      So far, the advice has been to buy games on Steam and use Oculus/Meta hardware. Other ecosystems, like Windows Mixed Reality, Viveport, and Pimax’s version, tend to become obsolete without truly competing.

        2. The PCVR platform is still active, with new games continuing to release for it. Many Quest games support cross-buy, so purchasing on either the Oculus or Quest platform grants you access to both versions. However, Meta has stopped developing in-house games for PCVR, so only third-party studios and developers are now releasing content for it.

    2. For developers, fragmentation shouldn’t be a major issue if they use OpenXR rather than proprietary frameworks. Most Android-based headsets—like Quest, Samsung XR, Pico, and the rumored Asus ROG on Horizon OS—should run similar games. The main challenge is publishing across different stores, which may require recompiling or submitting the same APK, but it’s manageable.

      SteamVR, Apple Vision, and PSVR are already established platforms, so the situation isn’t worsening. SteamVR has the added benefit of compatibility with many headsets.

      The real fragmentation problem affects users who can’t keep their games when switching headsets. I’ve bought Beat Saber three times: first on the Oculus Store for my CV1, then on Steam for my Reverb G2, and again on Oculus to play on Quest instead of Rift. If I bought a Samsung XR, I’d have to purchase it a fourth time for standalone play, and switching to Pico would mean buying it again. That’s unreasonable.

    3. It’s not as significant as it may appear. As long as these headsets run Android apps and support OpenXR, the impact should be minimal. While some apps may be exclusive, functionality will remain compatible, so developers will still only need to target two platforms: Android and PCVR.

      SteamFrame standalone has been confirmed to run Android apps via Waydroid, and both Meta and Pico headsets are Android-based, as is the Galaxy XR.

      I’m not familiar with the ROG headset, however.

      Edit: I completely forgot about PlayStation VR—though it seems Sony did too, so the two-platform target still stands.

      1. The Asus headset, if it ever releases, runs Horizon OS.

        The Android and OpenXR combination is quite cross-compatible. Several Quest games ran perfectly on Play for Dream after using ovrport to remove the Meta components. If a relatively obscure Chinese headset with limited Western sales can run Quest games, platform compatibility shouldn’t be a major concern.

          1. If you own a Quest and purchase or rip the games yourself, I don’t consider that piracy. I realize that’s not common practice, and it may not be legal in the U.S. due to DMCA laws against bypassing DRM.

            My main point is that if developers want to release games on other platforms, it’s relatively straightforward. The platforms aren’t as fragmented as they seem. Unlike iOS and Android, which require significant porting effort, most content should run with minimal changes—mainly adapting platform-specific elements like payment APIs.

            Virtual Desktop is a good example; the developer regularly notes that the same APK is used across all devices, including Quest, Pico, Vive, Play for Dream, and Android XR.

          1. It’s becoming increasingly expected for Resident Evil games to include VR modes. I’m optimistic about this trend, as the series has proven to be a significant system seller for Sony. Resident Evil 7 alone drove 1 million PS VR unit sales through its VR mode. Sony is actively funding Capcom’s VR development.

            This aligns with Sony’s recent announcement that the PS5 is halfway through its lifecycle, with many major flat-screen and VR titles still to come.

    5. The early PC market was similar. The term “IBM compatible” became common because vendors adhered to a standard, even though IBM wasn’t making the systems. Systems like the Amiga, Amstrad, and Commodore 64, each unique in their own way, eventually faded out.

      The same will likely happen with VR over time. The most successful headset will be the one that’s easy to develop for and performs well in the market. Niche vendors trying to do something completely unique will need to adapt, as building on an established standard benefits the industry overall.

  2. Are any of these headsets expected to have a wide field of view, such as over 150 degrees? I’m looking to upgrade from my aging Pimax 8KX, as I’m tired of the limited FOV in most current models.

  4. It’s pretty much expected, though I don’t understand why Pimax is still around given their poor track record. They keep releasing headsets and then abandoning them.

  7. I’m also excited about the XReal Aura for productivity. While it’s not a VR headset, it appears to be the best option for better-than-pass-through quality in theory, suitable for media, flatscreen games, and especially as a portable workstation for a laptop. I’m unsure how the experience will be, but I hope it meets the need that the Frame won’t fulfill.

    I’m very excited about the Steam Frame as well.

  8. For gaming, the Steam Frame appears difficult to top.

    For productivity, the PiMax is likely the best option due to its higher resolution, though it requires a cable.

    For social and AR applications, the Quest 4 seems promising.

    There are also a few other contenders. It’s an exciting time for VR and AR.

    However, it’s unfortunate that as new headsets arrive, web browsers have largely abandoned WebXR support. YouTube also no longer allows direct switching to VR mode, removing one of the key early exploration methods.

      1. Valve’s history suggests their new headset may have limited availability, as they don’t ship worldwide. Meanwhile, the Quest 3 already offers most of the features this new device promises, even for those of us who can’t access Valve products.

          1. It’s remarkable how much the market has changed. When the Index first launched, ordering it here cost around $2200—$1000 for the headset, $500 to scalpers, $300 for shipping, and $400 in taxes, all without any warranty. That’s why I ended up getting a Quest 3 for about $700, including shipping and tax, from Amazon.

        2. Valve continues its long-standing approach of simplifying the user experience to build brand loyalty.

          While the Quest 3 is technically capable of everything Steam Frame can do, it demands more setup from users and lacks default support. This results in fewer users, more bugs, and greater frustration, especially for non-technical individuals trying to configure their specific setups.

          1. The Quest can’t handle proper computing tasks because it runs a locked-down version of Android rather than full Linux. This limits its use for hobbyist or enterprise applications like drone piloting or robotics teleoperation. It’s a shame, especially since some devices even offer accessible PCIe lanes through a port. Using the Quest 3 as a budget option has been frustrating due to its heavily restricted Android-based OS.

          2. Quest is a PCVR-capable headset, not a PCVR headset. This distinction could make the process of using Steam easier.

          3. Steam was originally created to address PC game piracy. Gabe Newell famously stated that piracy is typically a service issue rather than a pricing problem. Valve has never enforced vendor lock-in with their platforms or products.

            The Steam Frame and Quest 3 offer capabilities far beyond PCVR. They can run Android apps, play flat screen games natively or via streaming, and support external accessories like SlimeVR trackers. These headsets are quite versatile.

            Many people overlook these features because they’re not easily accessible on the Quest 3. If the Steam Deck is any indication, the Steam Frame will likely make these functions much more user-friendly.

          1. It’s surprising to see so many new VR headsets planned for 2026. On the gaming front, the main difference seems to be the standalone capability from the newer Qualcomm chip, which many VR enthusiasts may not prioritize. With a powerful PC, Virtual Desktop, and a dedicated router, latency isn’t a concern for me.

            It’s useful if you’re frequently away from home and want to play games natively, though cloud computing already offers that, and many VR users tend to stay indoors.

            Currently, the Quest 3 can handle any emulator up to the Switch 1, running games like Hades natively with playable performance, even if it’s not exceptional.

            For me, the Frame’s non-stereoscopic black and white passthrough is a significant drawback, and I’m questioning whether it’s worth getting the same LCD panels as the two-year-old Quest 3.

          2. While this might be controversial in this Meta-focused community, native PCVR capability is significant. The additional costs of getting a Quest running properly—whether for good streaming, balancing the headset, or other adjustments—aren’t negligible either.

            The attention to overall responsiveness, including LCD panels, eye tracking for foveated streaming, and dedicated USB WiFi, should also make a noticeable difference.

            It likely performs better in darker environments too.

            There’s also potential with the MicroSD and PCIe ports.

            Regarding emulation, can the Quest 3 run FEX, considering it’s open source?

            So no, the Quest 3 can’t do nearly everything that Frame does or promises, and the reverse is also true.

          3. A Snapdragon chip still limits PCVR graphics, even if it’s not from the Meta store or running on Android. I’m not dismissing the Frame’s importance for VR progress overall.

            For current PCVR users, the experience will likely be the same at a higher cost—a dedicated router is only about $60. It also lacks color/stereo passthrough, which I’m actually using right now to type this message.

            I’m not pro-Meta. It’s reassuring that they sell Quests at a significant loss, and I bought mine secondhand while removing nearly all of their software and services from the device.

          4. What you’re describing as native PCVR with a Snapdragon chip is essentially limited VR, just not through the Meta store.

            That’s not what I consider PCVR. I mean you wouldn’t need to purchase and use sometimes-unreliable software like Virtual Desktop to play Steam games, or buy a dedicated router for it.

          5. I expect it will cost around $800. If you already have a capable PC, you can get a Quest 3, Virtual Desktop, and a router for $600 or less and have a nearly identical experience with minimal latency—mine is under 30ms.

            For those without a good PC, it should still be an excellent headset, but it will cost about as much as a decent computer. The Steam Machine is likely to be priced similarly.

        1. The main improvements are foveated streaming and rendering, along with a dedicated Wi-Fi 6 receiver, which significantly enhance wireless PC gaming performance.

          Otherwise, it appears fairly similar—slightly lighter, but without color pass-through and with some minor differences.

          It’s better for PC gaming because it was designed specifically for that purpose, whereas the Quest 3 prioritizes standalone use.

        2. It likely refers to broad compatibility, allowing it to play Android VR games, Windows VR games, and even regular Windows and Android games thanks to its controllers.

          1. Valve has already confirmed it will cost less than the Index. Many assume that means the full kit, which was $1,000, but it could be significantly cheaper since the headset alone was only $500.

    3. The main drawback is that the Quest 4 likely won’t launch next year. Still, it’s almost certain to offer better value than the Frame, even for PCVR gaming. The Frame is competing with the Quest 3, and Meta won’t release a new generation headset with only a marginal spec improvement.

      You may need to use Virtual Desktop due to Meta’s subpar linking software, but that’s a minor issue.

      Google’s strong involvement with the Galaxy XR line suggests YouTube could see improved VR integrations in the future, assuming the product justifies further investment.

      Overall, it will be interesting to see what next year brings.

  10. Are any of these new headsets focusing on lighthouse tracking? I want to upgrade from my Index and continue using my existing setup, but I’m not willing to pay $3,000 for a Somnium. Pimax also hasn’t provided clear information on when they’ll release new faceplates.

    1. It’s unlikely. I had hoped Steam would develop a headset compatible with both lighthouse tracking and inside-out tracking for users without base stations, but that seems improbable now.

      The Bigscreen headsets are the only notable upgrade available. However, I’m concerned about the longevity of lighthouse-tracked headsets since Valve will discontinue the Knuckles controllers.

      1. The Index controllers are excellent—I even bought two extra sets.

        I considered the BSB2, but it only runs at 90Hz, and I prefer a higher frame rate like the Index’s 144Hz. There aren’t many good options right now, just expensive minor upgrades.

      2. I was considering buying Lighthouse tracking for my Pimax Crystal Light to improve motion controller games, but it appears I’d be better off getting a second headset for better motion controls.

  12. It’s a shame that only the Dream Air is wired, so it avoids being heavy like a brick and doesn’t depend on laggy, lossy compression.

    Even with Steam Link 2.0, it still has noticeably lower quality and higher latency compared to DisplayPort.

  17. It’s great that the hardware is becoming more versatile, but I’m still waiting for more compelling games. Beyond a few standout titles, there isn’t much keeping me engaged.

  19. I hope to see a purpose-built VR rifle and pistol with realistic weighted recoil, bolt actions, and reload mechanisms, rather than flimsy plastic attachments for controllers. One can dream.

  20. The Quest 4 has been delayed until 2027 because the XR2 Gen3 chip is also delayed. Meta will instead release a lightweight prototype called “Puffin,” which uses a tethered compute puck. It’s intended to function like a Quest 3 but with much of the weight removed for comfort. However, no leaked details have confirmed the actual specs.

    I also hope we see a lot of strong software and experiences released alongside these headsets. That’s the area where we’re currently lacking the most.

    1. By 2026, most VR headsets will likely use the same Snapdragon chip as the current Galaxy XR. It might be worth waiting until 2027 for the Galaxy XR 2, which is expected to feature the new Snapdragon chip.

  21. It’s exciting to see some momentum building for VR. Even just Valve releasing a headset will generate significant buzz and hopefully encourage more developers to explore the platform.

  22. The issue is that most of these companies are hardware-focused and don’t prioritize games, while Valve, though a game company, doesn’t actively fund game development. We need another gaming platform holder besides Meta to enter the VR market and support game creation.

    1. Not only do we need more games, but we also need games with better movement systems. I may have been spoiled by the armswinger mechanics in Blade & Sorcery and H3VR for shooters, but any game that uses a simple button press to sprint just feels terrible.

    2. We need VR support from developers for games that are already great. I’d love to see proper VR implementation in titles like Resident Evil on PC, Bioshock, Borderlands, Cyberpunk, Age of Empires, Alan Wake, Spider-Man, the Arkham series, and Path of Exile 2. If more games were VR-compatible, the platform would gain more traction.

      Additionally, one-button mod support through workshops would help solve accessibility issues.

    3. We need more hardware in the market to build up the install base. Until then, there isn’t much profit to be made from games—it’s a chicken and egg situation. More games will follow, but the hardware has to come first.

      1. I don’t think we’re in a chicken-and-egg situation with VR. Headsets aren’t selling just a few thousand per year anymore. According to Amazon’s data, Quest devices alone sell over 50,000 units monthly, and that’s not counting major retailers like Walmart. The Quest 2 sold 20 million units in three years.

        It seems more like we have a barn full of chickens but not enough feed to get them laying.

    4. It’s true that we have a lot to look forward to. Between my wishlist, the many games I’ve bought but haven’t played yet, Boneworks 1.7 coming soon, ForeVR and Into The Radius 2 in early access, and UEVR, I personally feel spoiled for choice.

      If you’re looking for something similar to Half-Life: Alyx, consider Irreversible, Of Lies and Rain, and Thief VR—which I just realized is already out.

        1. It’s surprising to see this reaction when I mentioned two recent releases—Irreversible and Of Lies and Rain—along with four newer titles like Into the Radius 2 and Forefront, which are still in early access. Forefront just entered early access a few weeks ago, and while Into the Radius 2 has been in early access for about a year, it has evolved significantly, especially with a major recent update. I’m feeling frustrated because it seems like my examples are being overlooked or misrepresented, as if I only referenced older games like Alyx and Boneworks. Why respond this way?

          1. There’s an odd assumption in the “we need more games” argument that a game must be a lengthy solo campaign to count. I’ve played Underdogs daily for a year, and while I love Half-Life: Alyx, I haven’t finished it—and Steam data shows most players haven’t either. Personally, I have more VR games than I can keep up with, and mixed reality has expanded my options even further. There’s more entertainment available than I have time for, even without considering basic needs like eating.

          3. The main issue is that most VR games are only a few hours long and lack the replay value to keep players engaged. Many are just derivative PvP shooters or zombie games. Truly memorable titles that make you want to keep playing are rare by comparison. For instance, Of Lies and Rain was completed over a month ago, and Into the Radius 2 offers little innovation if you’ve already played the first. Similarly, Forefront is essentially War Dust with improved graphics and marketing, which has attracted a larger player base.

            When people say we need more content, they aren’t suggesting there’s a shortage. They mean we need more outstanding games that motivate users to put on their headsets. VR desperately requires more experiences that are so compelling and unique they can’t be had elsewhere, making you eager to dive back in.

        2. It’s exciting to see so many new VR headsets on the horizon, but we also need more games to go with them. Into the Radius 2 isn’t old—it’s a recent release that’s still in early access and not yet complete.

      2. Do we?

        If the general consensus is that we need more games, it doesn’t matter whether there are already enough good ones. It also doesn’t matter if that belief is incorrect.

        The fact that this is the prevailing opinion makes it true in effect. It doesn’t matter if good games exist if people don’t know about them, and it doesn’t matter if a game is good if no one feels compelled to play it.

        We need more games, better games, and must-have titles—experiences so compelling that people will eagerly buy a VR headset, make space for it, and want to spend hours immersed in it day after day.

      1. USB-C DisplayPort Alt Mode would be just as effective.

        Wireless isn’t suitable for competitive sim racing or Beat Saber, as end-to-end latency typically measures around 45 ms, with the best case being about 30 ms. In comparison, many DisplayPort headsets achieve under 15 ms latency.

        1. I can’t speak for Beat Saber, but 20–30ms of added latency isn’t a problem for sim racing with a stable connection. I’ve been competitively racing on the Pico 4 and now Quest 3 since Virtual Desktop launched for each.

          DisplayPort is always preferable, but latency is the least of my concerns. I also own a Bigscreen Beyond and haven’t noticed any latency advantage. The main differences between wired and wireless are clarity and reduced shimmering.

          1. It depends on your purpose for sim racing. If you’re focused on competing online, you can adapt to some latency and still perform well. However, if you want skills to transfer effectively to real-world driving, you need latency as close to zero as possible. That’s why high-end simulators like the Dynisma DMG-1, used in Formula 1, aim for 3–5 ms latency rather than settling for 10 ms.

          2. The cost is likely a major factor.

            To clarify, motion latency of 3-5ms is separate from display latency. In wireless VR, network latency is added on top of the existing GPU render and display latency, which are always present regardless of the setup.

            Whether using wired VR, monitors, projectors, or TVs, some latency is inevitable. Additionally, current VR typically runs at 90fps with high resolutions, not at extremely high refresh rates with low resolutions.

        2. For competitive sim racing or Beat Saber, wireless isn’t ideal yet. Current end-to-end latency is typically around 45ms, with the best case being about 30ms.

          In contrast, the Steam Deck’s wireless performance was reported to be 5-15ms in Linus’s announcement video, based on encoding time comparisons across different hardware tiers.

          1. Steam Frame’s latency will likely be around 20 ms at best, and I expect it to be closer to 25 ms.

            Achieving an average end-to-end wireless latency of 5–10 ms isn’t feasible with the technology Frame will use. They may have been referring to encoding latency rather than true motion-to-photon latency.

          2. Steam Frame will likely have around 20 ms latency in the best-case scenario, and I expect it to be closer to 25 ms.

            I don’t see how you can dispute that when someone who has spoken directly with the engineers and handled the device firsthand says otherwise.

            An average end-to-end latency of 5–10 ms wirelessly isn’t feasible with the current technology Frame uses. Perhaps they were referring to encoding latency rather than true motion-to-photon latency.

            They claim it is possible, so take it up with Valve.

          3. Gamers Nexus reported that the encode, transmission, and decode process takes about 10–20 ms in a good use case, as mentioned around the 31-minute mark of their Steam reveal coverage.

            When you include the head position data being sent to the PC—which is part of the motion-to-photon latency—the numbers are comparable. The only difference is that you’re being overly critical and unwilling to consider that you might have misremembered the figures.

          4. Gamers Nexus reported encode, transmission, and decode latency at 10–20 ms in a good use case (around the 31-minute mark of their Steam reveal coverage). Note that both 5–15 ms and 10–20 ms fall within a similar range and are significantly lower than the 30 ms you initially stated.

            According to multiple sources on human perception limits, differences this far below 100 ms are generally imperceptible in terms of physical input.

            Regarding head position data being sent to the PC—which is included in motion-to-photon latency—both scenarios involve comparable numbers, and compensation for this is already in place.

            I’m simply sharing the numbers I’ve heard from what are currently considered the most reliable sources. If these figures turn out to be inaccurate in practice, that’s fine—I’m being transparent and consistent in my reporting.

          5. My initial statement was to check the usernames. Your numbers were incorrect, and the other person’s estimate was closer. Saying “take it up with Valve” isn’t a respectful way to engage in conversation.

  27. It’s surprising that we might see four to eight new VR headsets in 2026, yet we’re still playing the same games like Beat Saber. The issue isn’t a lack of good hardware; it’s the challenge for developers to fund new games, apps, and experiences when the market remains small.

    I think VR and AR headsets will only become mainstream if the industry significantly improves the form factor—making them smaller, lighter, and more comfortable. Until then, they’ll likely stay a niche product for enthusiasts.

    1. The market isn’t small; developers just aren’t creating products people want to buy. Even ten percent of active VR users represents a larger market share than the concurrent user base of most major flat games. The issue is that no company has meaningfully tried to develop compelling, long-term VR titles. While Alyx remains one of the best VR games in recent years, it doesn’t keep players engaged beyond a weekend. What we need are games that can be played for weeks or months, and currently, nothing like that exists.

  28. It’s disappointing that most of these headsets appear to be Quest clones, especially since they all share the same controller design. I’m particularly let down that Valve has moved to Quest-style controllers after the Index knuckles received so much praise.

  30. For VR to thrive, both for headset makers and game developers, it needs broader adoption by the general public. More users mean more consumers. To achieve that, VR must be affordably priced to attract a wider audience. If these new headsets cost $1,000 or more, that simply won’t happen.

Antwort hinterlassen