IGN is very happy with the way Remote Play ended up working on PS4 and Vita. Here is the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TmlgVTMKgM&hd=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TmlgVTMKgM&hd=1
That moment when when Knack jumps from balcony to the road below. There is a instant camera change, and I think both TV and Vita switched at the exact same time.
I will try to GIF it...
It's not a bad screen...DAT OLE-.... i mean dat (yellow) LCD - UGH!
Do we know which model that TV is? We need to also add the TV input lag on to that figure to get the total.There's another gif that shows 2 frames difference so depending on the framerate like 67ms. Completely fine for all but probably fighting games.
There's another gif that shows 2 frames difference so depending on the framerate like 67ms. Completely fine for all but probably fighting games.
It's not a bad screen...
There's another gif that shows 2 frames difference so depending on the framerate like 67ms. Completely fine for all but probably fighting games.
If that's how it'll really work on my mediocre internet then I will be very satisfied that I kept my Vita. I'm just very reluctant to believe it will work like that.
Marty Sliva plays the upcoming, high octane, action video game Knack.
Do we know which model that TV is? We need to also add the TV input lag on to that figure to get the total.
I don't get it, why is PS4 remote play so much better then PS3 remote play.
Yeah I know. I can gif it with GifCam, but that can record only in 33fps, which is bad. GIF itself creates more identical frame by recording 30fps video. And for this kind of measurement, we don't want artificially created identical frames.
If that's how it'll really work on my mediocre internet then I will be very satisfied that I kept my Vita. I'm just very reluctant to believe it will work like that.
I don't get it, why is PS4 remote play so much better then PS3 remote play.
PS3 encoded video by taking some CPU power back from games. It was not fast, and developers did not want to give that power to feature that few would use. Also, PS3 had 802.11g WiFi module, which adds some latency.
On the other hand, both Vita and PS4 were built from the ground up for remote play. PS4 has dedicated hardware for fast video decoding, vita has dedicated hardware for fast video encoding, and both have fast 802.11n WiFi modules. For best performance, PS4 and Vita need to talk directly, without use of home router.
It's the other way around.PS3 encoded video by taking some CPU power back from games. It was not fast, and developers did not want to give that power to feature that few would use. Also, PS3 had 802.11g WiFi module, which adds some latency.
On the other hand, both Vita and PS4 were built from the ground up for remote play. PS4 has dedicated hardware for fast video decoding, vita has dedicated hardware for fast video encoding, and both have fast 802.11n WiFi modules. For best performance, PS4 and Vita need to talk directly, without use of home router.
If that's how it'll really work on my mediocre internet then I will be very satisfied that I kept my Vita. I'm just very reluctant to believe it will work like that.
I don't get it, why is PS4 remote play so much better then PS3 remote play.
I don't get it, why is PS4 remote play so much better then PS3 remote play.
Apparently it some very fast Sony TV, currently they go to as low as 14-16ms of display lag. This one says:
![]()
"低遅延 0.1フレーム" = "low lag 0.1 frame"
Is this confirmed? I would love this.You don't have to use the internet though. If you're close enough you can just connect directly to the PS4.
my TV has quite noticable input lag, so if i stream to vita = less input lag?
If that's how it'll really work on my mediocre internet then I will be very satisfied that I kept my Vita. I'm just very reluctant to believe it will work like that.
Yes, quite possibly. People noticed the same thing with the Wii U GamePad, so I expect remote play may have similar results. Obviously it depends on the TV, though.my TV has quite noticable input lag, so if i stream to vita = less input lag?
That's how it will work on your home router. It probably won't work like that over the internet no matter how good your internet is.
Doesn't YouTube cap at 30 fps anyway?
If that's how it'll really work on my mediocre internet then I will be very satisfied that I kept my Vita. I'm just very reluctant to believe it will work like that.
It's the other way around.
my TV has quite noticable input lag, so if i stream to vita = less input lag?
You don't have to use the internet though. If you're close enough you can just connect directly to the PS4.
PS3 encoded video by taking some CPU power back from games. It was not fast, and developers did not want to give that power to feature that few would use. Also, PS3 had 802.11g WiFi module, which adds some latency.
On the other hand, both Vita and PS4 were built from the ground up for remote play. PS4 has dedicated hardware for fast video encoding, vita has dedicated hardware for fast video decoding, and both have fast 802.11n WiFi modules. For best performance, PS4 and Vita need to talk directly, without use of home router.
If that's how it'll really work on my mediocre internet then I will be very satisfied that I kept my Vita. I'm just very reluctant to believe it will work like that.
.....like with magic or what?
.....like with magic or what?
There's another gif that shows 2 frames difference so depending on the framerate like 67ms. Completely fine for all but probably fighting games.
That moment when when Knack jumps from balcony to the road below. There is a instant camera change, and I think both TV and Vita switched at the exact same time.
I will try to GIF it...
Is this confirmed? I would love this.