Wait so it costs like a PSP but it can't do anything without WiFi and another ps5 active on the network?
Seems insanely expensive for what this is
PSP and PS Vita allowed remote play but also could work standalone
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
66 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
30231 readers
49 users here now
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It sounds mental, and I suspect there's a key piece of the puzzle missing for now which is cloud play.
I mean, that has to be the plan, right? They can't possibly be releasing a £200 remote play solution just for people who want to play in bed or on the toilet... The market for IBS sufferers with a PS5 can't be that big.
the article not only says
games that are streamed through PlayStation Plus Premium’s cloud streaming, are not supported
but also says
Games that must be streamed on PS5 using a PS Plus Premium membership are not compatible
hopefully it can be hacked and reconfigured to be used with a PC, so i can get it for $50 when they will do the fire sale (i still regret not having bought the ps tv when they got rid for all the stock at 20 euro)
Yes, that's what it says.
But PS5 streaming is in beta, PS3 and 4 streaming have been a thing for ages, and I can't think for a minute that Sony are dumb enough to release a streaming only handheld that they don't plan to connect to their cloud streaming services in the future.
Especially since the PS5 is unlikely to come down in price any time soon. Could be a decent way to get poor/casual gamers paying for a gaming subscription they'll barely use.
I'm a dad. This is pretty much perfect for when my kids are watching TV. But $200 is a bit steep.
"let's see, we've sold one to a Mr. Griffin McElroy"
"Anyone else?"
"No"
Yes it has about the same components as a PSP, so of course it cost the same. ~~It's such a big insult to a PSP having the same name.~~
Waste of money. Why not compete with the switch/steamdeck? Make the remote play an option like you've done in the past. A digital ps5 is $400 and the portal is $200. I'm paying $600 and can't take the device anywhere. Steamdeck starts at $400 and the switch is $300. Hell, I can install remote play on the steam deck and do the same thing the portal does. Sucks this is how sony is getting back into "portable" gaming.
A handheld digital only PS4 could move some units at $200 pretty easily IMO.
if it was that easy, we'd have a Switch 2 by this point. The Steam Deck is basically a mini-PS4, and that starts at $400.
The steam deck is significantly more capable than the PS4. Jaguar's CPUs were absolute dogshit when they launched, let along compared to anything Ryzen.
The problem with a switch 2 is nvidia can't make competent CPUs.
The steam deck is significantly more capable than the PS4.
Not according to Digital Foundry. In real gaming performance and tuned to PS4-level settings, you'll see framerates slightly higher than the PS4. Tuned to Xbox Series S settings, you'll see framerates slightly below the Series S. And all of this is mostly only possible because the Steam Deck only needs to output 720p, which is easier for a GPU than the 900p-1080p that those comparable consoles are usually targeting.
The PS4 CPU was garbage, yes, but that usually didn't matter because most console games are not very CPU-intensive.
They're only not CPU intensive because the hardware was fucking pathetic and they had no choice. AMD held the entire gaming space back for a decade.
If you're OK with a dumpster fire CPU the cost of chips goes way down.
also worth going further on library size. There's twice as many steam deck verified games, than there are ps4 titles. Not counting any titles that work in steam deck but haven't bothered to be verified.
With the price being $200 you might as well spend 120 more to get a refurbished steam deck, install ps remote play on that then you have a handheld that can play ps, Xbox, and pc games on the go without an internet connection.
Personally, I don't see any draw over just using a Kishi style controller with your phone.
Even if you wanted a standalone device. It would be cheaper to buy a cheap phone to go with the controller, and then you could use it for local emulation.
I wish it had the WiiU style connection (instead of going through WiFi), since at least then it could be used for interesting asymmetric multiplayer games, or multiplayer games without screen splitting. Maybe they'll add that down the line, though...
This thing has the haptics. Your phone will at most have rumble. Not saying that's a $200 issue worth solving lol but it is all the haptics of the controller as well as a remote player. If it also has virtually no latency then maybe I'd consider it. But I have never seen a device besides the Wii-U tablet pull that off.
The WiiU tablet wasnt very portable. Once you left the room where your WiiU Base was plugged into a TV it started acting up. You basically had to be in the same room but not he allowed to use the TV. I'm afraid that type of technology probably hasn't moved forward fast enough to try anything else but wifi. It's a sad day.
At least you can use these as a more expensive controller as well, right? To play with your friends on the tv. Surely? Right?
Oh i know the range isn't great but it's easily good enough for you to play, for instance, in your bed or somewhere comfy. I was just speaking to latency.
I actually couldn't. Oh well, it's in the past anyways :)
I think it has the reactive triggers too, but as you said, that doesn't feel like a 200USD feature.
I am hopeful they might introduce a WiiU style connection down the line, since if I recall correctly it just needed a 5GHz WiFi connection and I am fairly positive both devices have the appropriate antenna for that (though it would limit their 5G WiFi connectivity while in use). Maybe they could implement it through a wired connection, too. This would be less convenient than wireless, but would certainly have lower latency. Having said that, until they announce a low latency connection, I wouldn't count on it.
They really missed the mark not supporting cloud streaming. I was considering getting one if it could do that, as it would be pretty handy while away from home. But £200 for a remote play device is way too much. Playstation just can't seem to do portables very well
Am I reading it right that it has to be on the same wifi network as a PS5? So it isn't even portable beyond your house?
load more comments
(1 replies)
So I could pay $200 for a 1080p streaming device, which I can do on my phone for free, instead of just buying another 1080p TV which I can use for general use? And it's only in my own household, over wifi assuming the wifi isn't congested?
Sign me up, sounds like a fantastic deal! /s
You don't have to use it "only in my own household", just need a Wi-Fi connection (though it would probably be more laggy anywhere else). And not every phone supports PS5/DualSense -- Android 12 is required for full support; mine is version 10 and isn't getting any more updates.
A moment of silence for your phones security... There is nothing worse than outdated mobile devices. Maybe start thinking about using a costume ROM.
So its as capable as a WiiU screen?
When faced with the success of the Switch they decided to make a Wii U. Who can understand what's going on in their heads...
Oh, no. The Wii U connection was far, far more responsive.
PlayStation Portal remote player
That's a really long name. PSPRP
cats ears stand up because it thought you went pspspspsps
So it only works if you have a console? On local wifi? I'll stick to my phone streaming from my PC anywhere there's decent cell service
No you can use it to play anywhere as long as you have an internet connection.
Man the US price is so much cheaper than everywhere else. And even at the US price it seems way too expensive.
Literally Wii U gamepad.
For the low price of an entire wii u (at its time of release).
At least the WiiU came with a console.
Quite the jump from 199 but add another 140 dollars and you get a machine that handles Ps5 remote play, emulation, playing games locally and streaming from your PC. Sure the screen is worse but a Steam Deck is so much more value for money. This seems like a small return for quite a lot of money.
Edit: I forgot about Game Pass. Beep.
It's really ridiculous. It costs $273 (without VAT) in Germany. And for what? You can't even play Playstation games from their cloud service.
273!? Oh crap. I didn't even realise pricing will be off for us in europe. I'd be surprised if they sold more than 1000 units to Sweden.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Better than the original thinking of $299 which would have been a non-starter for a device that doesn't even have it's own games...
But still, $200 for a device that does what I can already do on my phone/tablet/Steam Deck is too high. It's like they don't know who their customers are.
Bundle this + the ear buds for $200 and then you have something.
Have they forgotten about the PlayStation TV?
I haven't. I had one. Too much lag. Maybe this will be better but I'm skeptical.
Is this that silly Q thing I heard about earlier? (Fun fact: the Vita provides similar functionality with actual portability!)
- How's the battery life though? If it only lasts for like 3 - 4 hours, then it's quite a bummer
- Can the PS5 still output to the TV while using this?
view more: next ›