VideoGame_Discussion

They have to know that it won't sell a ton. It's a niche product that will have an inconsistent experience that is dependent on a network connection.

It’s super weird to me how the new hardware Sony has been working on has (at least by official announcement or strong external confirmation) been this wifi streaming thing, earbuds (did anyone really need PlayStation branded earbuds?), and a PS5 with a detachable disc drive. Is this really what people want?

SwiftJAB wrote:

Yeah, weird/disappointing, but I'm still potentially interested. If it was $150 or less, I'd give it more consideration. A Backbone is $100 and is pretty similar.

I hope they are also working on something more like a Steam Deck (8" screen portable that plays ps4/5 games directly, at a lower resolution/fps perhaps). A system that could natively play most of the catalog games that I already own would be hard not to buy.

Streaming games just feels like something that's never going to be good enough. Streaming is already doable in various ways, but I don't think many of us are using it much.

I'm glad they seem to be moving away from PSP/Vita as a separate/incompatible console.

bill wrote:


Exactly. I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

bill wrote:

A portable Steam Deck-like device screws over PS5 owners who have physical games, unless they come up with a way to verify ownership through their PS5 and through use of their disc. Maybe a license check every week or something like that then allows you to download the digital copy and play it for up to 7 days.

Oh wow, I hadn't thought of physical. Hm yeah, that's tough.

Maybe a way to install an owned physical game on the portable from your ps4/5 using the disc. I pretty sure the PSP had something like this. I could sometimes download a PSP game to my ps3, then install it via usb to my PSP.

...* Googles *... finds, "72% of console games sold in 2022 were digital vs 28% physical".
I could see Sony just saying, "oh well, this portable isn't for physical game owners" too. But there will be player wrath if they do that. Steam never sold physical games so never had this problem.

It is an interesting trade-off. Physical games can be damaged, but digital games could potentially be revoked or no longer supported.

Then again, everything is archived nowadays and downloadable from the gray web.

I haven't owned an Xbox since the original. I know GamePass is pretty much "play it on whatever device you have" which is kinda where PS+ is headed in the next 5-10 years.

I can see that, and I have a bunch of physical games, but it just means that I would play the digital ones when I was on the portable device and the disc ones at home. I could still use the portable for everything on PS+ too, so that would be more than enough for me.

Sun wrote:

Stupid question but how good does the wifi have to be for this to work remotely well?

I mean I’m assuming people would use this mostly outside of their home, right? Unless the main use case is playing portable at home because TV isn’t available or something

Seems like public wifi wouldnt cut it, i’m surprised it doesn’t have a sim card to use 4g/5g or something

bill wrote:
That would be tempting. And even better if it can somehow load actual discs.

I'm satisfied with my , but there have been numerous instances of me missing out on some exclusives. And since I prefer handheld gaming anyway, a handheld PS5 that can play games offline would be very appealing. Very niche product though.

Between my PS5, Switch OLED and Steam Deck, I feel like I'm covered. I haven't owned an Xbox since the original. I don't have GamePass. I don't game on PC, but with the Steam Deck, that allows me to play all the games I've amassed over the years.

I still haven't played my Steam Deck much other than getting all the emulation setup to play some GBA, PS2 and Dreamcast games.

I wish it was a Vita 2

It’s basically remote play from your PS5 streaming over wifi, so you wouldn’t really be able to use it away from home (unless you logged into someone else’s PS5 when you left your place).

DrizzDrizzDrizz wrote:

Now that PlayStation is Californian and not Japanese, I have essentially no interest in their hardware. I'll cherry pick their games once they come to Steam.

Yoshi wrote:

???

Slickriven wrote:

PlayStation global HQ moved to California several years ago, and that's a bad cultural trade.

Yoshi wrote:

Ah, didn't realize that, thanks.

Bleed_DukeBlue wrote:
earbuds (did anyone really need PlayStation branded earbuds?)

Maybe? Most Bluetooth earbuds have a lot of audio lag. If Sony releases buds that use the low latency codec by default, that's a big win.

And not for nothing, but Sony makes some of the best premium earbuds on the market. The PS-branded ones will likely be less expensive with quality to match, but I trust them to make a decent set.

I'm mostly skeptical for the reason you stated--that Sony is capable of making good headphones, but these specifically PlayStation-branded ones are probably going to be lower in quality to make them less expensive, because most gamers aren't buying audiophile headphones for gaming. I'm not saying the earbuds won't be decent. It just seems like the need is already addressed by other headphones (including ones made by Sony), although I hadn't thought about the low latency codec angle. Fair point. I'm probably just the wrong audience for these, as I don't love earbuds and use my Focal Clears for pretty much everything.

Renaissance2K wrote:

I'm interested because my TV is constantly hogged be other people. However previous experiences with streaming any games to a portable device has been terrible, that being mostly trying to stream from PS3 and PS4. Either lots of lag or horrible graphics downgrade. I would only consider this if I wanted to play something that is only on PS5 because if I want mobile play I still love my Steam Deck. But if they have finally mastered it and made a quality product I would dive into it to get some of my PS5 backlog done.

Other people hogging the TV definitely makes sense. I also love my Steam deck.

sinnie wrote:

I’ll maybe buy it if it’s $100-150. I travel a lot and it would be nice to play in hotels. But I’m not spending the same as a switch lite for something with no storage.

I made a mistake here. (See my update lower down.)

beavis wrote:

Bleed_DukeBlue wrote:

Yeah, my friend got confused when I was telling her about this. She thought it's full remote play and she'd be able to play during downtime at work. In reality it's almost more like just turning your PS5 into a Wii U.

edit: so reading below I may be confused about this too.

Wait, I thought remote play worked as long as your PS5 and the other device are hooked to the internet? You’re saying you have to be around the PS5?

Yeah im also confused because ive “played” my ps5 via remote play app on iphone hundreds of miles away from the actual ps5 - surely the new portable system would work the same?

Looks like I was confused too. Polygon says this:

"Here’s what it’s not: a true handheld console, or a cloud gaming device. The games are run locally on your PS5, and with no cellular connection, Project Q won’t work on the move, unless the plane or train you’re on happens to have an extremely robust Wi-Fi connection or you invest in a 5G hub on a good network. (Sony says Project Q requires “at least 5 Mbps” to use, with “a better play experience” needing at least 15 Mbps.) The games must be installed on the PS5, too, which rules out using Project Q with the cloud gaming service that’s part of Sony’s PlayStation Plus subscription offering.

Really, Project Q is about giving you access to your PS5 games around the house — when the TV’s in use or when you’re in bed. Or it could potentially work well when staying with family, or vacationing at an Airbnb."

So, I guess you don't necessarily need your PS5 in the vicinity to be on the same Wi-Fi network as it, but it still doesn't seem like something that will necessarily work in a hotel (for different reasons than the ones I originally thought).

Dunno if this was already posted, but it's rumored the battery life is only 3-4 hours.
https://insider-gaming.com/project-q-battery-life/

PizzaTheHutt wrote:

Only 3-4? That seems reasonable to me

Yeah, I wasn't expecting much more than that tbh. That's about on par with the Wii U GamePad I think (that was only streaming from the console in 480p though). I said "only 3-4 hours" because the article said that's going to make it a hard sell.