www.gamesindustry.biz
Bluetooth is fine for gaming latency. There also low latency Bluetooth protocols that can help minimize it. Choice should be up to the owners.
Yeah it's a bit wierd to mix it in with the rest - I'll just assume the author doesn't really know what benefits Playstation Link brings over Bluetooth.
My openrun pro shokz have no noticeable lag for audio and voice playback, so not sure what it is you may be experiencing. Obviously anecdotal, however Bluetooth is definitely perfectly viable for gaming audio.
Spitting fire on a 33% price hike for literally nothing isn't a hate boner - it's calling out pure, undiluted greed. If it was a baseless attack, I'd like your post and move on, but it seems Sony's almost deliberately eroding the goodwill of the PS4 era. If PS4 was Sony earning back what it lost during the PS3 generation (and then some) then PS5 is Sony deciding it's time to get paid.
yeah it's funny, and at the same time they will praise subscriptions and say it's the future
I'd say it's more than just latency, Playstation Link ticks both the lossless and latency boxes. It may not be necessary for everyone though.
Na, that's actually horseshit. Pretty much most of the classic games that made playstation what it is are there.
RagnarokIV
Instead of laughing can you say what resembles "a second hand bargin bin in 2000" for a classics collection? It's horseshit. 
Most people have already talked this to death, but I'll just mention that locking cloud saves behind a now $80 yearly sub is anti-consumer as fuck, especially when the main competitor, Xbox, offers this feature for free to all users. Even Steam offers free cloud saves!
I think essential is getting shafted the most. The others you can at least argue that they need to remain competitive for securing content but the other is just hiking it for those who might not even care for content in the sub and just want online play or saves.
My issue is that the ps5 and xbox one don't support bluetooth either. Like right now it's not supported... so why would this ps5 accessory support it. And the switch didn't support bluetooth until last year - so apparently people were fine with this for many years even w/ handheld consoles. It just seemed like people are complaining about this thing which is like a super common design choice and acting like it's insane. Plus it has a headphone jack - you can use any pair of headphones with it.
We are in 2023, soon to be 2024 (this releases in November). I couldn't give a flying f what was supported before. Even $100 mobile phones support Bluetooth. It's inconsequential cost.
Yes, I know I have a headphone DAC hooked up to PS5. But much as with PS5, I wouof have liked to be able to choose between that and Bluetooth.
A lot of those 100 dollar phones are not releasing with headphone jacks in the current year either. Maybe down the line they'll add bluetooth, but if the concern is just not being restricted to sony headphones. it's an already an option. it doesn't seem likely that the reason why xbox and playstation don't support bluetooth is because they're selling their own wireless headsets.
No idea, would love somebody to ask Jimbo or Phil that. It's annoying AF on physical consoles and doubly so on handhelds. And yes, removing physical jacks from phones also sucks.
I think it is. The PS3 had bluetooth headsets and I don't remember it being much of a problem.
Sony is raising the price of online by 33%. Why would they make it free?
Dunno, Sony's latest numbers showed that their Playstation business makes the most money out of service-related things and suggested that the people actually buying games is comparatively low (which would explain why Ryan is pushing the service-based games strategy on his studios). So I dunno if they would then go and deliberately "pollute" their biggest cash cow.
That is kinda unrelated to what I was saying but ok. I think if you are against cloud saves behind a subscription it shouldn't really matter how much that subscription is.
Well it's somewhat related because you're justifying this hike while a basic feature like cloud saves is locked behind the essential tier which has received a $20 increase... Also, let me know how Steam is able to provide free cloud saves, but poor Sony can't?
"Even Steam" is a bit funny considering that Steam has been the least worst out of all these shitty platforms. Get this: They also let you play online free of charge. Gabe seems to hate money*.
I'm not sure if we can read it as Sony going all in on subscriptions, like xbox is either. I don't think raising the price means that they'll be adding day one games, for example. Honestly i'm not sure if that's better or worse. I'm definitely against the all subscription future, but it is also insane to be charging so much for this little in return.
Its my issue with this as well, show me why I should be paying more for an already weak service
I don't care for a bunch of the classics offering so buying à la carte is the best option for me. Premium is the most underwhelming upper tier subscription service I've ever seen.
I would read it as them doing exactly that. Their batch of games that relied on the old model of selling games on PS5 all released and most went into the subscription service already. Their new games likely won't follow the same model.
Holding classics hostage behind a paid subscription is awful. They really should make them available for purchase.
Jim Ryan himself said last year that two thirds of people are subscribing through the yearly plan which has now received a huge %30 hike. They didn't touch those monthly plans which are priced badly imo for what they're offering vs the main competition, as they have the data where it shows that the majority of people are picking the annual plans anyway.
