> Those would be the gamers. But I am targeting students. And not many students can afford high-end devices. I am more interested in devices such as Google Cardboard, Zapbox and AR4E. High cost of devices should not become a roadblock for educational content distribution.
> Some applications that I have in mind will require interaction and collaboration
I think this would be a much easier decision if there weren't the fundamental UI differences between the two categories. As I'm sure you know already, the lowest-end devices lack positional tracking for both the headset and the controllers, putting them in basically a different category experience and software-design wise than the $300 Quest and all the more expensive systems.
As far as I know the most successful product of that type was the Oculus Go which has been discontinued. The similar GearVR phone-based system people often bought but didn't use despite owning, which itself was a huge jump in quality over what Cardboard offers.
So as far as I can tell the category seems like a dead-end at this point, it doesn't seem to be receiving substantial software or hardware investment and will likely disappear altogether as positional tracking gets cheaper.
In contrast FB is launching a $150M fund specifically for VR educational content - I expect basically none of that will go towards pre-positional-tracking systems and software.
So I guess it depends on what your time horizon is - I'd just be aware that any investments into designing software for 3DOF systems are likely to depreciate pretty quickly.
> BTW, what are you working on?
I added a link to it in my profile, it's a little out of date but there's a video there (and a sign up to get a free copy when the beta launches!).