We really need to bump up the Quest avatar size limits. The 10 MB cap is way too small, especially when PC avatars can go up to 200 MB. I think we should raise the Quest limit to 50 MB, but keep the default block for anything over 10 MB. Also, it would be awesome if VRChat added an option for Quest users to see “very poor” avatars automatically, so we don’t have to click on everyone’s profile to turn them on. It’s just a hassle and makes the experience less fun
2 Likes
The Quest 3/3s isn’t that much more powerful than a higher end modern Android phone, VRChat can only do some much to optimize things. Very Poors being blocked by default is to prevent crashing from the HMDs being overloaded as well as encourage people to make more optimized avatars.
Also the userbase sure loves to use any headroom gained from optimization for even heavier avatars but that’s a completely different discussion.
The current limitations are fine, whenever I see a FPS widget in a world, my quest 2 friends get a slideshow and they sometimes don’t disclose this.
I think if they increased the download size a bit, but leave the uncompressed size alone that might encourage some avatar creators to use textures instead of relying on polygon count. Go from 10 to 15, but leave the 40 at 40
Quest users gotta think about their hardware, not what PC users have.
Quest 2 has 6gb of RAM, quest 3 has 8,
However still the option to allow it to not block anything would be nice
Then VRChat would get far more complaints about Quest crashing due to the RAM getting instantly filled up, not going to happen.
May i let you know that 3 avatars made by “Artica” made for quest and pc runs just fine on a quest, and just one of those avatars are 90mb, which means they used a modded sdk but not the point, the point is that if its done correctly its not bad at all.
That’s nice that you have niche anecdotal evidence to support your personal bias but it still falls far short of the amount of technical knowledge needed to actually give your argument anything more than paper thin standing.
Well im saying a 30 mb limit would be nice so we have more freedom or a dyanmic limit based off trust ranks like 10 mb for user and below, because we can make a great quest avatar at 90mb as artica shown which is why i think we should maybe consider raising the limit
That’s still completely based on anecdotal evidence with no actual technical backing.
Regardless it doesn’t matter when the Quest 2 is still only has 6GB of RAM, not VRAM. Also it doesn’t matter if the Quest 3 has 8GB or if the Quest 4 somehow has 16GB. The vast majority of Quest users will stick to their Quest 2 until Facebook forces VRChat to drop support like they did with the Quest 1, something that likely won’t happen any time soon. Until then VRChat has all the reason in the world to craft limits with that HMD in mind and only that HMD.
You’re free to make a Canny post about this on https://feedback.vrchat.com/ but know the chances are low of it changing that significantly any time soon.
1 Like
Put September 2nd 2027 in your calendar. That is around the time until meta plans on supporting the Quest 2. 2027-09-02 
I’m hoping that any changes VRChat plans in the mean time are well thought out.
1 Like
Quest world 100MB limit is also way too low. I really hope they increase file size allowed for Quest worlds to at least double that. Its so cruel to have this limitation. They should raise both, avatars and worlds for Quest
Still runs into the same issue as Avatars, the Quest 2 has only 6GB of RAM. Even slightly increasing the limit risks higher chances of that 6GB being maxed out and/or Quest 2 users being locked off completely from those worlds thus fracturing the community.
you obviously have not been building and properly optimizing for Quest devices. Quest 2 and specially Quest 3 can handle a lot more. Doubling world size would mean being able to use higher resolution texture maps. Ideally, VRChat should move to URP since its already pre-optimized. I notice a huge jump in performance when I build worlds in URP vs BiRP. Allowing 200MB worlds would allow the community to improve the experience considerably. We didnt have those limits in Altspace and it worked fine for Quest 2 devices. You can always add toggles for lightcookies, and just about anything. But keeping it at 100MB only means that we either stay with last gen graphics, or build only for PC, which is what a lot of users are doing as a result of the 100MB limitationm thus creating a sharp divide between Quest and PCVR players.
That’s nice but as long as the Quest 2 is still supported (and likely the HMD the vast majority of people use) the perf gains with the Quest 3 mean nothing.
[Shader Exploding Noises] This isn’t happening until Unity completely kills off BiRP support, too much effort and pain needed for not enough payoff.
Altspace and VRChat are two completely different platforms when you get down to technical details. Not to mention Altspace lacked the avatar customization that VRChat has, something that eats up a massive amount of that 6GB of RAM.
Yes and there’s not much that will change that. The Quest and every single mobile HMD isn’t much better than a mid-tier or higher end Smartphone. The only HMD out there that kinda pushes past that barrier is the Apple Vision Pro and that’s hamstrung by its extremely small userbase.
I totally understand the desire for Quest limits to be raised but Avatars and Worlds do not exist in a vacuum and VRChat would rather focus on giving people higher FPS and less crashes than promote something that would create the opposite.
1 Like
I can’t get past that, just a funny view, like VRChat has limits just to be mean.
If that’s the case I think they need to be meaner with avatars so that VRChat doesn’t crash so easily.
At the end of the day, everyone wants all the ram.
I do wonder if anyone would change into a smaller avatar if they could visit a 200mb world in it…
1 Like