Support NeoGAF

[Mibu no ookami]

?

$250 in 2012 is $332 today

I thought this might confuse people.

The Vita isn't selling for 250 dollars today, it came out over 11 years ago. Would the Vita still be selling for 250 today (no in fact it dropped to 200 dollars just a year later). If they kept making that exact product through to today how much would it cost?

Over a decade later we're actually getting less tech for a lot more money.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Sigh. For the love of God this isn't a console. You can't compare a controller with a screen accessory to a full on console.

You're right, a controller with a screen shouldn't come close to the same price as a full console, yet here we are...

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I sometimes use remote play on my ipad with a controller and this just bundles that for me for $199?

I think the problem is that it's not enough of a solve or a convenience *for most* to justify the cost.

an Ipad and a controller cost significantly more money and is less convenient, but separately both items are significantly more useful.

I think Sony looks at Nintendo and Apple and got the assignment wrong in terms of convenience and synergy.

If remote play worked 100% on basically any wifi, then MAYBE this would have an audience, but we all know that it doesn't and to make matters worse I think is that Sony knows that to be the case, which is why this product doesn't support cloud gaming, which itself is a head-scratcher, because you'd have to assume this would be an ideal cloud product to push PS+

It's such a niche market for this that you have to question the ROI and opportunity cost and the potential brand damage and confusion.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I think it either should have been as it is for $149 or..

..$249-$279 with an OLED display and a really basic SoC capable of emulating PSP, PSVita, PS1 & PS2, with a dedicated storefront for that stuff as well as direct streaming of all PS titles; as well as both local and non-local remote play.

It'd also be nice if you could just use it as like extra general dualsense controller while the game is on your main display, could be handy as a backup or for local split screen.

It's a very nice looking piece of hardware, it'll have a market, the name is cool, but it's kind of a half-arsed middle ground for the wrong price. It'll do fine but it's just a bit...ehh...

Missed opportunity.

I agree with a lot of what you said. It after 10 years shouldn't have less functionality than a Vita. Cloud support should have been a no-brainer, but they haven't expanded cloud streaming beyond PC and PlayStation 4 and 5. At this point you have to wonder what they're even doing with the service that they haven't expanded this to Mac, Android or iPhone and now their remote play device also doesn't support it... Yet it is one of the defining features of PS+ Premium...

At this point I feel like PS+ Extra should have classic catalog and PS+ Premium should have crunchyroll and classic catalog and they should just forget about streaming until its ready for prime time.

Not sure it would make sense to game with this as an extra controller simply due to battery life. Clearly, this didn't work out for the Wii U.

I think it is a major missed opportunity and I would be stunned if it actually has a market.

 

[DrFigs]

I agree with a lot of what you said. It after 10 years shouldn't have less functionality than a Vita. Cloud support should have been a no-brainer, but they haven't expanded cloud streaming beyond PC and PlayStation 4 and 5. At this point you have to wonder what they're even doing with the service that they haven't expanded this to Mac, Android or iPhone and now their remote play device also doesn't support it... Yet it is one of the defining features of PS+ Premium...

At this point I feel like PS+ Extra should have classic catalog and PS+ Premium should have crunchyroll and classic catalog and they should just forget about streaming until its ready for prime time.

Not sure it would make sense to game with this as an extra controller simply due to battery life. Clearly, this didn't work out for the Wii U.

I think it is a major missed opportunity and I would be stunned if it actually has a market.

At 200 though it's significantly cheaper than the vita was in real and nominal terms! Okay it's doing less than the vita, but it's also cheaper.

 

[Audiophile]

I agree with a lot of what you said. It after 10 years shouldn't have less functionality than a Vita. Cloud support should have been a no-brainer, but they haven't expanded cloud streaming beyond PC and PlayStation 4 and 5. At this point you have to wonder what they're even doing with the service that they haven't expanded this to Mac, Android or iPhone and now their remote play device also doesn't support it... Yet it is one of the defining features of PS+ Premium...

At this point I feel like PS+ Extra should have classic catalog and PS+ Premium should have crunchyroll and classic catalog and they should just forget about streaming until its ready for prime time.

Not sure it would make sense to game with this as an extra controller simply due to battery life. Clearly, this didn't work out for the Wii U.

I think it is a major missed opportunity and I would be stunned if it actually has a market.

I'd always had the idea that rather than come out with a new handheld platform ('PSP3') with new titles, they could quite easily just do a PSP Classic that can play the entire PSP/PSVita back catalogue as well as PS1 & PS2 games and decent remote play. It may be true that general interest in the playstation back-catalogue isn't worth the financial investment, but once you translate those more rudimentary experiences to portable they become a lot more acceptable; and it could have been a trojan horse to get much of the back catalogue up and running on the entire ecosystem including PS5/Home Consoles. They could use an absolute bargain basement SoC at this point on a handheld and put out a cheap device that's still profitable in itself while also hooking more people into the PS Plus ecosystem.

They effectively could have just reengineered and rebuilt the PSVita for a fraction of the cost. Now, with the normalisation of the larger form factors by Nintendo & Valves it's basically given them license to do this on a whole other level with the form factor we see on the Portal, but they kinda half-arsed it. It's a shame as "PlayStation Portal" is a pretty cool branding that they could've capitalised on (who knows, maybe we see a Portal Pro)?

All that said, I still think it'll be profitable. I wouldn't be surprised if it hits 4-5 mil units by the end of the PS5 lifespan; and if they can make $20-30 bucks profit a piece that's a few small game studios or a few big budget games taken care of. I think their entire intention here is an expensive peripheral to collect cash, not to please the bulk of fans with any sort of loss-leading or use it to capture more new users.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

At 200 though it's significantly cheaper than the vita was in real and nominal terms! Okay it's doing less than the vita, but it's also cheaper.

Again, the Vita was released over 10 years ago. If it was on the market today, how much would it cost? Probably 100 dollars if not cheaper.

So this product is double that with LESS functionality... Literally, this thing won't work on a plane, train, or bus... won't work or work well in most hotels... The limited functionality of a portable unit that requires not only wifi but a pretty effective wifi connection is absolutely bonkers.

 

[Ozriel]

Surprised at all the ‘overpriced’ comments.

You can use it as a Dualsense controller for your PS5, and regular Dualsense controllers are what, $60?

Getting a really nice display + Dualsense for $199 doesn’t seem that bad. The only negative for me is really the No Bluetooth issue.

 

[L*][*N*K]

 

[Moses85]

$200 device with no fucking OLED. Unbelievable.

Sony really has fallen. Imagine making the vita 12 years ago with an OLED for $250 then shipping this $200 device without one. No shame.

Difference:

Sony, 12 years ago sold Hardware with high loss and the new Sony is interessted in making money.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I'd always had the idea that rather than come out with a new handheld platform ('PSP3') with new titles, they could quite easily just do a PSP Classic that can play the entire PSP/PSVita back catalogue as well as PS1 & PS2 games and decent remote play. It may be true that general interest in the playstation back-catalogue isn't worth the financial investment, but once you translate those more rudimentary experiences to portable they become a lot more acceptable; and it could have been a trojan horse to get much of the back catalogue up and running on the entire ecosystem including PS5/Home Consoles. They could use an absolute bargain basement SoC at this point on a handheld and put out a cheap device that's still profitable in itself while also hooking more people into the PS Plus ecosystem.

They effectively could have just reengineered and rebuilt the PSVita for a fraction of the cost. Now, with the normalisation of the larger form factors by Nintendo & Valves it's basically given them license to do this on a whole other level with the form factor we see on the Portal, but they kinda half-arsed it. It's a shame as "PlayStation Portal" is a pretty cool branding that they could've capitalised on (who knows, maybe we see a Portal Pro)?

All that said, I still think it'll be profitable. I wouldn't be surprised if it hits 4-5 mil units by the end of the PS5 lifespan; and if they can make $20-30 bucks profit a piece that's a few small game studios or a few big budget games taken care of. I think their entire intention here is an expensive peripheral to collect cash, not to please the bulk of fans with any sort of loss-leading or use it to capture more new users.

A PSP3 or PlayStation Portable Classic could have largely appeased a lot of people who wanted legacy games where the PS5 lacks this ability.

I still don't think you can sell this for 200+ dollars though, so a smaller screen was definitely warranted. The iPhone Pro Max is 6.69 inches. I'm not sure why this needed to be larger than that. It could have even been the same size as the iPhone Pro at 6.12 inches. The Switch is 6.2 inches. The Steam deck is 7 inches. Even for what this product is, it didn't need an 8 inch screen, all that has done is inflate the price and reduce the battery life.

I don't think you could just re-engineer the Vita, but having something in that $100-150 dollar price point would have made a lot more sense. I'm not sure anyone really needs dual sense functionality that is 1:1 on the go. I think most people would rather give up the full functionality for better battery life and offline gaming.

The biggest opportunity here was giving the full control layout.

When this product fails and I really think it will, I think Sony will learn the wrong lesson from it. Zero chance it sells 5 million units, while the PSVR2 is struggling to gain traction and offers way more than this.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Difference:

Sony, 12 years ago sold Hardware with high loss and the new Sony is interessted in making money.

I mean one factor to keep in mind is that this device isn't going to generate royalties for itself. It needs to make money on its own margin, hence the high price. You can't subsidize the price.

If it supported cloud gaming at least the barrier of entry would have been lower and it could have generated more revenue on its own.

Imagine you have 4 kids and you wanted to get them each a portal. Right now you'd have to buy them 4 PS5s in order for them to all play at the same time, whereas if there was cloud support at worst they'd need 4 cloud accounts and could play by themselves independently of each other. You could even create family plans to encourage the adoption.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Surprised at all the ‘overpriced’ comments.

You can use it as a Dualsense controller for your PS5, and regular Dualsense controllers are what, $60?

Getting a really nice display + Dualsense for $199 doesn’t seem that bad. The only negative for me is really the No Bluetooth issue.

They're 70 dollars, and I'd rather buy 3 dual sense controllers than 1 portal.

You can use the dual sense controller on a PC or a Raspberry Pi or anything you want for the most part. You can use it for remote play on other devices.

The Portal isn't going to let you do that.

So for 200 dollars, you're actually getting less useful functionality in most situations.

I just think this reflects Sony being out of touch with the market and a product team that has lost sight on what it should be focusing on.

If you had a feature request or product request list for PlayStation fans, this wouldn't crack the top 100.

 

[MisterXDTV]

They're 70 dollars, and I'd rather buy 3 dual sense controllers than 1 portal.

You can use the dual sense controller on a PC or a Raspberry Pi or anything you want for the most part. You can use it for remote play on other devices.

The Portal isn't going to let you do that.

So for 200 dollars, you're actually getting less useful functionality in most situations.

I just think this reflects Sony being out of touch with the market and a product team that has lost sight on what it should be focusing on.

If you had a feature request or product request list for PlayStation fans, this wouldn't crack the top 100.

Yeah Sony is out of touch with the market...

Look at those PS5 sales...

LOL

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Yeah Sony is out of touch with the market...

Look at those PS5 sales...

LOL

The PS2 is the best-selling video game console of all time and the PS3 is Sony's worst-selling console... Yeah just because you've recently had success or currently have success, doesn't mean you can't be out of touch and make really big mistakes. Actually, the reverse is true, it's when success goes to your head and you think anything will sell that you're most likely out of touch.

Nintendo has had to continuously re-invest themselves in order to stay in touch.

Sony has largely just iterated on itself since 1994.

Like what are they going to do with the PS6? Faster SSD, maybe PCIE6, dedicated RTX, maybe lean more into AI when it comes to upscaling and decompression?

 

[vivftp]

Well - it is an add on. Good or bad, I think of this as optional device. Some will like it and some will find this entirely pointless. 199 at this day and age, don’t seem to be too outrageously expensive (I would have preferred 149 or even 160 or so,) and with preferably an OLED screen and capable of more than 120hz if they were selling it at 199 - but maybe technically difficult to achieve?

Either way, most add ons are just accessories. It is pretty much guaranteed not sell at 1 to 1 ratio to the install base, and one should just acknowledge it as just an optional device.

No one in their right mind would ever suggest that the Portal (or any optional accessory) would sell at a 1:1 ratio to the console. If this sells on par with the DualSense Edge then it will be a tremendous success .

The specs you desire would definitely push this device well above the $199 price range.

 

[nosoynadie22]

This is a device intended to improve the experience with remote play on Playstation 5. I don't know why people get so complicated.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

No one in their right mind would ever suggest that the Portal (or any optional accessory) would sell at a 1:1 ratio to the console. If this sells on par with the DualSense Edge then it will be a tremendous success .

The specs you desire would definitely push this device well above the $199 price range.

I think the point we're trying to make isn't that anyone expects 1:1 but that it should either be more expensive and have more functionality or be cheaper with a smaller screen with its current functionality, but that at its current price and offerings that it doesn't make much sense at all.

I'll reiterate that this thing is going to be completely useless outside of a home either yours or friends or family and that you're going to need a VERY good wifi connection at both ends. For 200 dollars more you could get a PS5 digital.. and put it into a different room. For 50 dollars more you could get an XSS and at least play games from a different platform.

I think Sony is playing a really fool hearty game in this price point. It costs the same as a Switch Lite and in terms of value in putting it in a bag, I think most people would rather drop more money and get a Steamdeck or something.

The Dual Sense Edge is 200 dollars but arguably fits a need people want to fill far more than this does.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

This is a device intended to improve the experience with remote play on Playstation 5. I don't know why people get so complicated.

But that doesn't answer the key questions.

- How many people even use remote play (Sony should have telemetry data on that)?
- Does the improve the experience with remote play AND is that improvement worth 200 dollars?

If I use remote play on work trips and I'm going to take my personal laptop or ipad with me anyways, is it easier to take this or take a dual sense with me? Since I already own these things that costs me nothing to invest in a feature that frankly isn't that consistent.

But if I'm going to drop 200 dollars that feature needs to be consistent regardless of the wifi quality that I might find myself in.

How many units of backbones sold? And did people who bought the backbone or think about buying the backbone feel like this is an advantage? You take your iPhone everywhere and it has its own data plan. The backbone isn't a huge hurdle to bring along with you. One could argue that the backbone is a superior product and more convenient than hauling a portal around with you and it is half the price.

What answer does this solve and how well does it solve it?

There are many people here who have said (and I probably count myself among them) that they wouldn't buy this for any amount of money and that they wouldn't use it if it was given to them for free. That's a really bad sign I think.

It seems to be wholly misguided.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

I think the point we're trying to make isn't that anyone expects 1:1 but that it should either be more expensive and have more functionality or be cheaper with a smaller screen with its current functionality, but that at its current price and offerings that it doesn't make much sense at all.

Maybe not much sense to you, but if I was satisfied with gaming on a smaller screen, I'd just use my cell phone for remote play. I have no desire to do that. If this has a better connection to my PS5 in-home with the bigger screen and controller built in, I am interested.

I'll reiterate that this thing is going to be completely useless outside of a home either yours or friends or family and that you're going to need a VERY good wifi connection at both ends. For 200 dollars more you could get a PS5 digital.. and put it into a different room. For 50 dollars more you could get an XSS and at least play games from a different platform.

Useless? I've tried remote play several times on my laptop at work and it was just fine. The "For 200 more you can get a PS5 digital" argument doesn't make much sense either since even in the home its not convenient to have a "extra" PS5 in every place you plan to play. That's no where near as convenient and walking with your device from room to room. And why in the world would I buy a XSS from PS5 content?

I think Sony is playing a really fool hearty game in this price point. It costs the same as a Switch Lite and in terms of value in putting it in a bag, I think most people would rather drop more money and get a Steamdeck or something.

Its an accessory man. An accessory that costs the same as a DS: Edge. And I'm not sure why you keep bringing up other platforms as if they offer they same value proposition and content. Sony is not marketing this in the same manner as Steamdeck or Nintendo Switch.

The Dual Sense Edge is 200 dollars but arguably fits a need people want to fill far more than this does.

Your opinion. I don't care about the DS: Edge but the Portal peaks my interest. Especially if the in-home remote play is a direct connection somehow. Being able to casually play my PS5 while my wife and family are watching a movie (and me passively watching too) is something I like. Having to open my laptop, connect a controller and get all setup to do the same is less convenient. That in itself it worth it for me. Playing outside my home is a nice bonus.

But that doesn't answer the key questions.

- How many people even use remote play (Sony should have telemetry data on that)?
- Does the improve the experience with remote play AND is that improvement worth 200 dollars?

If I use remote play on work trips and I'm going to take my personal laptop or ipad with me anyways, is it easier to take this or take a dual sense with me? Since I already own these things that costs me nothing to invest in a feature that frankly isn't that consistent.

But if I'm going to drop 200 dollars that feature needs to be consistent regardless of the wifi quality that I might find myself in.

How many units of backbones sold? And did people who bought the backbone or think about buying the backbone feel like this is an advantage? You take your iPhone everywhere and it has its own data plan. The backbone isn't a huge hurdle to bring along with you. One could argue that the backbone is a superior product and more convenient than hauling a portal around with you and it is half the price.

What answer does this solve and how well does it solve it?

There are many people here who have said (and I probably count myself among them) that they wouldn't buy this for any amount of money and that they wouldn't use it if it was given to them for free. That's a really bad sign I think.

It seems to be wholly misguided.

You're asking a bunch of questions that you and no one in this forum have the answer to. Obviously Sony has some data on this of else they wouldn't even try....
I think the bottom line is that even though you have no use for this device, it does not mean that it does not and will not find a place in the market.

There are many people here who have said (and I probably count myself among them) that they wouldn't buy this for any amount of money and that they wouldn't use it if it was given to them for free. That's a really bad sign I think.

It seems to be wholly misguided.

And I have heard many people who are interested. Your circle is not definitive.

 

[Sleepwalker]

Just tried remote play on my phone and it works surprisingly well.


I'd consider this product but my phone screen is vastly superior to what Sony have packaged in here so there's really no point. An OLED screen wouldve been ideal.

 

[vivftp]

I think the point we're trying to make isn't that anyone expects 1:1 but that it should either be more expensive and have more functionality or be cheaper with a smaller screen with its current functionality, but that at its current price and offerings that it doesn't make much sense at all.

I'll reiterate that this thing is going to be completely useless outside of a home either yours or friends or family and that you're going to need a VERY good wifi connection at both ends. For 200 dollars more you could get a PS5 digital.. and put it into a different room. For 50 dollars more you could get an XSS and at least play games from a different platform.

I think Sony is playing a really fool hearty game in this price point. It costs the same as a Switch Lite and in terms of value in putting it in a bag, I think most people would rather drop more money and get a Steamdeck or something.

The Dual Sense Edge is 200 dollars but arguably fits a need people want to fill far more than this does.

Remote play is not some secret mystery, it's existed for close to 2 decades and millions of people use it. There's no need for both ends to have "VERY" good wifi, just decent wifi will suffice if you're outside your home and there are plenty of people who do that. You can use a hot spot on your cell phone as well. The requirements for remote play are 15mbs download and 5mbs upload minimum / 30mbs download and 10mbs upload recommended.

This is a device with the specific purpose of streaming games and it's designed to do it very well with fewer compromises than using a phone or tablet to do remote play. Sony knows how many people use remote play and what sort of devices they use them on. They've had nearly 2 decades worth of data behind this feature and that data was sufficient for them to greenlight a dedicated handheld device.

Now it's easily possible that the functionality of this device will be further expanded if or when Sony develops an Android cloud streaming app. Even without it, there's a large enough pool of remote play users to cater to, and an even larger potential audience who might want to jump into remote play via this device. It's meant to be the, "it just works" poster child of remote play.

But that doesn't answer the key questions.

- How many people even use remote play (Sony should have telemetry data on that)?
- Does the improve the experience with remote play AND is that improvement worth 200 dollars?

If I use remote play on work trips and I'm going to take my personal laptop or ipad with me anyways, is it easier to take this or take a dual sense with me? Since I already own these things that costs me nothing to invest in a feature that frankly isn't that consistent.

But if I'm going to drop 200 dollars that feature needs to be consistent regardless of the wifi quality that I might find myself in.

How many units of backbones sold? And did people who bought the backbone or think about buying the backbone feel like this is an advantage? You take your iPhone everywhere and it has its own data plan. The backbone isn't a huge hurdle to bring along with you. One could argue that the backbone is a superior product and more convenient than hauling a portal around with you and it is half the price.

What answer does this solve and how well does it solve it?

There are many people here who have said (and I probably count myself among them) that they wouldn't buy this for any amount of money and that they wouldn't use it if it was given to them for free. That's a really bad sign I think.

It seems to be wholly misguided.

Here's a link to the fan-FAQ I created for the Portal. It should help answer some of your questions

PlayStation Portal - Unofficial Fan-Made FAQ Thread

If the last few days has taught me anything, it's that a lot of folks don't know who the PlayStation Portal device is aimed at, and there's a fair amount of confusion over how it can be used. While we await an official FAQ from Sony, I thought it might be nice to help clear up some things for...

www.resetera.com

 

[nosoynadie22]

But that doesn't answer the key questions.

- How many people even use remote play (Sony should have telemetry data on that)?
- Does the improve the experience with remote play AND is that improvement worth 200 dollars?

If I use remote play on work trips and I'm going to take my personal laptop or ipad with me anyways, is it easier to take this or take a dual sense with me? Since I already own these things that costs me nothing to invest in a feature that frankly isn't that consistent.

But if I'm going to drop 200 dollars that feature needs to be consistent regardless of the wifi quality that I might find myself in.

How many units of backbones sold? And did people who bought the backbone or think about buying the backbone feel like this is an advantage? You take your iPhone everywhere and it has its own data plan. The backbone isn't a huge hurdle to bring along with you. One could argue that the backbone is a superior product and more convenient than hauling a portal around with you and it is half the price.

What answer does this solve and how well does it solve it?

There are many people here who have said (and I probably count myself among them) that they wouldn't buy this for any amount of money and that they wouldn't use it if it was given to them for free. That's a really bad sign I think.

It seems to be wholly misguided.

You know that if you want to use remote play with your smartphone, tablet or PC, you are still free to do so, right?

Playstation Portal is an alternative for people who want to enjoy remote gaming with their PS5 and being a specialized device for this task has its advantages and disadvantages, but if this device does not convince you, you can simply ignore it because you have others. options.

but there are many people excited about this product because they feel that it can give you the best remote play experience and that is enough for them.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Maybe not much sense to you, but if I was satisfied with gaming on a smaller screen, I'd just use my cell phone for remote play. I have no desire to do that. If this has a better connection to my PS5 in-home with the bigger screen and controller built in, I am interested.



Useless? I've tried remote play several times on my laptop at work and it was just fine. The "For 200 more you can get a PS5 digital" argument doesn't make much sense either since even in the home its not convenient to have a "extra" PS5 in every place you plan to play. That's no where near as convenient and walking with your device from room to room. And why in the world would I buy a XSS from PS5 content?



Its an accessory man. An accessory that costs the same as a DS: Edge. And I'm not sure why you keep bringing up other platforms as if they offer they same value proposition and content. Sony is not marketing this in the same manner as Steamdeck or Nintendo Switch.



Your opinion. I don't care about the DS: Edge but the Portal peaks my interest. Especially if the in-home remote play is a direct connection somehow. Being able to casually play my PS5 while my wife and family are watching a movie (and me passively watching too) is something I like. Having to open my laptop, connect a controller and get all setup to do the same is less convenient. That in itself it worth it for me. Playing outside my home is a nice bonus.

Why do you think this is going to have a better connection to your PS5?

I have three rooms where I could potentially play PS5. I'd probably buy a 2nd PS5 and outfit an extra room rather than a PS5 Portal, that I'm going to need to constantly charge and headphones that I'm going to need to constantly charge with it as well. Just thinking about that sounds like a hassle. If they were smart they would have included some sort of mechanism to charge the earbuds directly with the Portal with one charging cable or dock.

You don't have to market it against other platforms, the price places it against other platforms. A 200 dollar accessory is a VERY expensive accessory and at that price point it needs to really perfect a major need and this is going to ultimately be VERY niche for a small number of people.

There is no direct connection to the PS5, it's just remote play, there's nothing special about this device. You're not going to play outside your home, you just aren't. Look up videos of remote play at hotels... it's not good. The further you are from home, the more hops you're dealing with and the worse the experience is going to be.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Remote play is not some secret mystery, it's existed for close to 2 decades and millions of people use it. There's no need for both ends to have "VERY" good wifi, just decent wifi will suffice if you're outside your home and there are plenty of people who do that. You can use a hot spot on your cell phone as well. The requirements for remote play are 15mbs download and 5mbs upload minimum / 30mbs download and 10mbs upload recommended.

This is a device with the specific purpose of streaming games and it's designed to do it very well with fewer compromises than using a phone or tablet to do remote play. Sony knows how many people use remote play and what sort of devices they use them on. They've had nearly 2 decades worth of data behind this feature and that data was sufficient for them to greenlight a dedicated handheld device.

Now it's easily possible that the functionality of this device will be further expanded if or when Sony develops an Android cloud streaming app. Even without it, there's a large enough pool of remote play users to cater to, and an even larger potential audience who might want to jump into remote play via this device. It's meant to be the, "it just works" poster child of remote play.



Here's a link to the fan-FAQ I created for the Portal. It should help answer some of your questions

PlayStation Portal - Unofficial Fan-Made FAQ Thread

If the last few days has taught me anything, it's that a lot of folks don't know who the PlayStation Portal device is aimed at, and there's a fair amount of confusion over how it can be used. While we await an official FAQ from Sony, I thought it might be nice to help clear up some things for...

www.resetera.com

You clearly didn't read my questions...

Not all decisions are made based on data and this looks like one made in the face of data.

This needed to support cloud streaming BEFORE launching. This had bad product management written all over it.

 

[nosoynadie22]

Why do you think this is going to have a better connection to your PS5?

I have three rooms where I could potentially play PS5. I'd probably buy a 2nd PS5 and outfit an extra room rather than a PS5 Portal, that I'm going to need to constantly charge and headphones that I'm going to need to constantly charge with it as well. Just thinking about that sounds like a hassle. If they were smart they would have included some sort of mechanism to charge the earbuds directly with the Portal with one charging cable or dock.

You don't have to market it against other platforms, the price places it against other platforms. A 200 dollar accessory is a VERY expensive accessory and at that price point it needs to really perfect a major need and this is going to ultimately be VERY niche for a small number of people.

There is no direct connection to the PS5, it's just remote play, there's nothing special about this device. You're not going to play outside your home, you just aren't. Look up videos of remote play at hotels... it's not good. The further you are from home, the more hops you're dealing with and the worse the experience is going to be.

you can take the portal to every corner of your house easily.. but I wonder how many PS5s you need to be able to play in every corner of your house..

Does the fact that Playstation portal is a niche product mean that it has no right to exist?

 

[MisterXDTV]

You know that if you want to use remote play with your smartphone, tablet or PC, you are still free to do so, right?

Playstation Portal is an alternative for people who want to enjoy remote gaming with their PS5 and being a specialized device for this task has its advantages and disadvantages, but if this device does not convince you, you can simply ignore it because you have others. options.

but there are many people excited about this product because they feel that it can give you the best remote play experience and that is enough for them.

I just don't get why people are getting salty about a damn accessory that they are NOT required to buy in any way...

I mean what's the downside of this device for PS5 users???

They are not replacing the console with this thing

You don't care about it? Great, DON'T BUY IT!

 

[vivftp]

Just tried remote play on my phone and it works surprisingly well.


I'd consider this product but my phone screen is vastly superior to what Sony have packaged in here so there's really no point. An OLED screen wouldve been ideal here.

Screen size is a massive factor for some. OLED is nice, but the Portal is offering you an 8" 16:9 display. Even if your phone has a massive screen, any modern phone would have a far wider aspect ratio which means you're getting a smaller overall image on your phone when it's reduced to a 16:9 stream. My phone has a wonderful 4K OLED display, but it's a 21:9 aspect ratio. Once that's converted over to 16:9, it would be under 5". For me, that's borderline for an enjoyable experience. Since I'd be playing console games designed for a TV rather than a handheld, the smaller screen wouldn't be ideal for my use case. The 8" display should hopefully give me enough real estate to emulate the experience of playing on a TV, since it'll be much closer to my face.

 

[Aaron Olive]

A controller, a screen, and a bigger battery aren’t exactly cheap and Sony needs to make margin on this product since it’s not a loss leader or zero net profit like the console is

If profits were what they were after make a better product that people would actually want not some bare minimum Ali Express | Temu knockoff android device to sell Audio accessories.

This thing should have had OLED, Bluetooth, and a minimum resolution of 2560x1440 if not 4K for $249 or $279. I wouldn’t be surprised when it’s firmware is broken it actually has Bluetooth.

Somebody in marketing about to get fired or a demotion.

 

[MisterXDTV]

Screen size is a massive factor for some. OLED is nice, but the Portal is offering you an 8" 16:9 display. Even if your phone has a massive screen, any modern phone would have a far wider aspect ratio which means you're getting a smaller overall image on your phone when it's reduced to a 16:9 stream. My phone has a wonderful 4K OLED display, but it's a 21:9 aspect ratio. Once that's converted over to 16:9, it would be under 5". For me, that's borderline for an enjoyable experience. Since I'd be playing console games designed for a TV rather than a handheld, the smaller screen wouldn't be ideal for me use case. The 8" display should hopefully give me enough real estate to emulate the experience of playing on a TV, since it'll be much closer to my face.

Exactly, the aspect ratio factor is very underrated: Games are made for 16:9 screens since the PS3 era

 

[Mibu no ookami]

you can take the portal to every corner of your house easily.. but I wonder how many PS5s you need to be able to play in every corner of your house..

Does the fact that Playstation portal is a niche product mean that it has no right to exist?

I'm not saying that it has no right to exist, but it may be more than just a niche product, it could be a failed product as well.

More importantly the resources spent producing this could have gone into producing something with more wide-ranging appeal.

 

[vivftp]

You clearly didn't read my questions...

Not all decisions are made based on data and this looks like one made in the face of data.

This needed to support cloud streaming BEFORE launching. This had bad product management written all over it.

In your opinion. My opinion disagrees with yours.

They're supporting the existing streaming service they have on Android with this device. There is no cloud streaming app for Android yet, so there can be no cloud streaming app for the Portal yet. That could change in the near future once they discuss their new cloud plans, but in the here and now, that's not an option.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

If profits were what they were after make a better product that people would actually want not some bare minimum Ali Express | Temu knockoff android device to sell Audio accessories.

This thing should have had OLED, Bluetooth, and a minimum resolution of 2560x1440 if not 4K. For $249 or $279. I wouldn’t be surprised when it’s firmware is broken it actually has Bluetooth.

Somebody in marketing about to get fired or a demotion.

Marketing doesn't decide this, product would have. I think and obviously I have no evidence of this, is that someone had a pet project and they were able to advance it without much data as a market test.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

In your opinion. My opinion disagrees with yours.

They're supporting the existing streaming service they have on Android with this device. There is no cloud streaming app for Android yet, so there can be no cloud streaming app for the Portal yet. That could change in the near future once they discuss their new cloud plans, but in the here and now, that's not an option.

If I'm deciding how to spend my resources, I'm going to dedicate more resources to getting cloud working on Mac, Android, and iOS rather than putting out a remote play hardware device that not many people are going to buy.

If this was a cloud streaming device it still wouldn't make much sense, but it would have made MORE sense than a pure remote play device and would have had in theory a significantly larger consumer base.

 

[Sleepwalker]

Screen size is a massive factor for some. OLED is nice, but the Portal is offering you an 8" 16:9 display. Even if your phone has a massive screen, any modern phone would have a far wider aspect ratio which means you're getting a smaller overall image on your phone when it's reduced to a 16:9 stream. My phone has a wonderful 4K OLED display, but it's a 21:9 aspect ratio. Once that's converted over to 16:9, it would be under 5". For me, that's borderline for an enjoyable experience. Since I'd be playing console games designed for a TV rather than a handheld, the smaller screen wouldn't be ideal for me use case. The 8" display should hopefully give me enough real estate to emulate the experience of playing on a TV, since it'll be much closer to my face.

I just checked the aspect ratio stuff online and my phone's is more or less around the 7 inch mark at 16:9 (tad less) which is consistent with my experience. I understand how this stuff would be unplayable on most phones with the aspect ratio but it doesn't seem a big issue for my Z fold. I'll take a little less real estate for the OLED 120hz screen on it.

It's just not for me, but maybe itll get my wife to actually drop the switch and play some of the ps5 games she's made me buy for her to never play

 

[MisterXDTV]

Exactly, the aspect ratio factor is very underrated: Games are made for 16:9 screens since the PS3 era

Basically smartphones are too wide and tablets are not wide enough... iPads are still using 4:3 aspect ratio and smartphones are like "70mm film": around 2.20:1

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

 

[vivftp]

If profits were what they were after make a better product that people would actually want not some bare minimum Ali Express | Temu knockoff android device to sell Audio accessories.

This thing should have had OLED, Bluetooth, and a minimum resolution of 2560x1440 if not 4K. For $249 or $279. I wouldn’t be surprised when it’s firmware is broken it actually has Bluetooth.

Somebody in marketing about to get fired or a demotion.

The lack of Bluetooth audio support is a choice, not some sort of limitation. It's the same reason the PS5 doesn't support Bluetooth audio - because it's laggy dog shit. No one should want to use that crap when gaming, and that's why they've developed the PS Link protocol, and are still offering the option of wired headphones. As for the rest of your specs at those prices, lol, yeah good luck with that. This is not a platform, this is an accessory. A platform can be sold as a loss leader because the company can pull in additional revenue via the sale of games, accessories and whatnot. An accessory does not directly pull in any additional revenue stream, meaning it has to be sold at a decent profit, otherwise why bother?

Plus $199 is the magic sweet spot. It's the price of the DualSense Edge and that thing's been flying off the shelves. Going higher for an accessory like this would be a hinderance to its adoption rate.

 

[TrebleShot]

When are pre orders live i was watching the Cnet. coverage and I need it.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

The lack of Bluetooth audio support is a choice, not some sort of limitation. It's the same reason the PS5 doesn't support Bluetooth audio - because it's laggy dog shit. No one should want to use that crap when gaming, and that's why they've developed the PS Link protocol, and are still offering the option of wired headphones. As for the rest of your specs at those prices, lol, yeah good luck with that. This is not a platform, this is an accessory. A platform can be sold as a loss leader because the company can pull in additional revenue via the sale of games, accessories and whatnot. An accessory does not directly pull in any additional revenue stream, meaning it has to be sold at a decent profit, otherwise why bother?

Plus $199 is the magic sweet spot. It's the price of the DualSense Edge and that thing's been flying off the shelves. Going higher for an accessory like this would be a hinderance to its adoption rate.

You sound like Phil Spencer.

Yeah, it was a choice, and yeah it's a limitation.

The Steamdeck and the Switch both support bluetooth headphones and that is how most people choose to play. Same with an iphone using a backbone.

You're increasing the cost of an already niche item significantly by forcing someone to buy a new headset and alienating them if the headset they already have is pricey, i.e. people who travel and buy 300-400 dollar ANC bluetooth headphones... Who certainly don't want to pack TWO headphones when they travel... so you're once again limited where and when you're going to use this thing.

200 might be the sweetspot for the dual sense edge, but it won't be for this.

Happy to be proven wrong, but I don't see that happening.

 

[mrcroket]

I just checked the aspect ratio stuff online and my phone's is more or less around the 7 inch mark at 16:9 (tad less) which is consistent with my experience. I understand how this stuff would be unplayable on most phones with the aspect ratio but it doesn't seem a big issue for my Z fold. I'll take a little less real estate for the OLED 120hz screen on it.

It's just not for me, but maybe itll get my wife to actually drop the switch and play some of the ps5 games she's made me buy for her to never play

7inch at 16:9 your phone is a tablet

 

[Sleepwalker]

7inch at 16:9 your phone is a tablet

Well yes its a foldable, duh

 

[mrcroket]

Well yes its a foldable, duh

Yes it is... clearly I did not overlook "z fold"

 

[Aaron Olive]

The lack of Bluetooth audio support is a choice, not some sort of limitation. It's the same reason the PS5 doesn't support Bluetooth audio - because it's laggy dog shit. No one should want to use that crap when gaming, and that's why they've developed the PS Link protocol, and are still offering the option of wired headphones. As for the rest of your specs at those prices, lol, yeah good luck with that. This is not a platform, this is an accessory. A platform can be sold as a loss leader because the company can pull in additional revenue via the sale of games, accessories and whatnot. An accessory does not directly pull in any additional revenue stream, meaning it has to be sold at a decent profit, otherwise why bother?

Plus $199 is the magic sweet spot. It's the price of the DualSense Edge and that thing's been flying off the shelves. Going higher for an accessory like this would be a hinderance to its adoption rate.

The PS5 has Bluetooth connectivity but is disabled for audio devices to sell accessories and reduce the chance for exploitation not lag.

Selling a portable device without it isn’t doing them any favors despite similar reasons because the OS isn’t as secure and well it’s portable.

 

[vivftp]

If I'm deciding how to spend my resources, I'm going to dedicate more resources to getting cloud working on Mac, Android, and iOS rather than putting out a remote play hardware device that not many people are going to buy.

If this was a cloud streaming device it still wouldn't make much sense, but it would have made MORE sense than a pure remote play device and would have had in theory a significantly larger consumer base.

Do you have any tangible evidence that many people are not going to buy this, or is it a gut feeling? I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum in that this will take the crown from the DualSense Edge to become the best selling accessory (by dollar) in the US, but that's based on my gut feeling.

We know as of 5 years ago that there were over 5 million people using remote play, and that number should have only grown since then with the introduction of more compatible devices that support the feature. The introduction of this device does not mean they aren't also working to expand cloud to more devices, those things are not mutually exclusive. We know that an "aggressive cloud initiative" is planned to be revealed in the coming months, this was said by Jim Ryan earlier this year. We can see what precisely that will entail.

I just checked the aspect ratio stuff online and my phone's is more or less around the 7 inch mark at 16:9 (tad less) which is consistent with my experience. I understand how this stuff would be unplayable on most phones with the aspect ratio but it doesn't seem a big issue for my Z fold. I'll take a little less real estate for the OLED 120hz screen on it.

It's just not for me, but maybe itll get my wife to actually drop the switch and play some of the ps5 games she's made me buy for her to never play

Nice. Yeah, the Z Fold is definitely an exception to the rule in this case in terms of how much usable space you'd have when streaming. 7" should suffice quite nicely.

Of course there are other reasons to get the Portal, like full DualSense capabilities and ergonomics in a handheld form factor. Based on what Sony has told previewers, there should also be a bit less latency when streaming because you'd eliminating the part about the phone/tablet having to communicate with the controller, since it's all built into the Portal. We'll of course have to wait and see just how well it performs once reviewers and the public get their hands on it.

The PS5 has Bluetooth connectivity but is disabled for audio devices to sell accessories and reduce the chance for exploitation not lag.

Selling a portable device without it isn’t doing them any favors despite similar reasons because the OS isn’t as secure and well it’s portable.

Oh I'm sure part of the reason is also that they want to sell accessories, but that doesn't negate the fact that Bluetooth is laggy dog shit for gaming audio. That's a whole can of worms not worth opening so it's best that they leave it out on the console and its accessories.

 

[Aaron Olive]

Do you have any tangible evidence that many people are not going to buy this, or is it a gut feeling? I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum in that this will take the crown from the DualSense Edge to become the best selling accessory (by dollar) in the US, but that's based on my gut feeling.

We know as of 5 years ago that there were over 5 million people using remote play, and that number should have only grown since then with the introduction of more compatible devices that support the feature. The introduction of this device does not mean they aren't also working to expand cloud to more devices, those things are not mutually exclusive. We know that an "aggressive cloud initiative" is planned to be revealed in the coming months, this was said by Jim Ryan earlier this year. We can see what precisely that will entail.




Nice. Yeah, the Z Fold is definitely an exception to the rule in this case in terms of how much usable space you'd have when streaming. 7" should suffice quite nicely.

Of course there are other reasons to get the Portal, like full DualSense capabilities and ergonomics in a handheld form factor. Based on what Sony has told previewers, there should also be a bit less latency when streaming because you'd eliminating the part about the phone/tablet having to communicate with the controller, since it's all built into the Portal. We'll of course have to wait and see just how well it performs once reviewers and the public get their hands on it.




Oh I'm sure part of the reason is also that they want to sell accessories, but that doesn't negate the fact that Bluetooth is laggy dog shit for gaming audio. That's a whole can of worms not worth opening so it's best that they leave it out on the console and its accessories.

You are aware that the DualSense connection to the PS5 uses Bluetooth and the audio from the controller comes through that protocol right?

 

[RyanEvans21]

you can take the portal to every corner of your house easily.. but I wonder how many PS5s you need to be able to play in every corner of your house..

Does the fact that Playstation portal is a niche product mean that it has no right to exist?

Imagine you have to buy another PS5 or Extra tv to play to another room.

 

[RCU005]

Where did Sony said that? They said it does support the new protocol, which doesn't implies that it doesn't support Bluetooth.

It’s in the official blog post from Sony. It doesn’t have Bluetooth at all. The only way to connect wireless headphones is by using their new protocol PlayStation Link.


What I want to know is if this device can connect directly to the PS5 without using wifi (or maybe wifi Direct) when being near the console. I believe the PS Vita was able to connect that way to the PS4 (and/or PS3)?

 

[ReBurn]

OK this isn't for the business traveler. I keep seeing this hotel wifi brought up and wonder who is living out of hotels.

It's a cheap, pick up and play PS5 anywhere. Day 1.

I spend a ton of time living out of hotels due to work travel. I use a travel router to avoid putting my devices directly on the open network, plus it makes it super simple to use a console in a hotel. Hotel wifi is almost always too bad for remote play to a console at home. A cellular connection usually sucks for remote play, too. Even on 5G networks. I get the feeling that this would be pretty much unusable from most hotels and most public networks.

I want to use this to play PS5 games while sitting on my porch. I think it would work pretty well for that.

 

[vivftp]

You are aware that the DualSense connection to the PS5 uses Bluetooth and the audio from the controller comes through that protocol right?

Yes, and it's not a standard Bluetooth connection. It's a proprietary connection designed for low latency. In other words, not something you're going to find on normal Bluetooth devices out there.