Support NeoGAF

[EmberMarkus]

I love mine, the wife is watching some Netflix shit and I am there killing demons on D4 + she does not complain about my gaming time anymore.

But there is place for improvement. We have to have the option to start the PlayStation directly on remote play without the need to put the console on sleep mode every time. As it's very good travel gadget but if by mistake you close your PlayStation then it's simply a fancy brick.

 

[cripterion]

So out of touch... they just need to take a look at their own country (Japan) to see everyone's playing on mobile...

 

[RetroGamingUK]

No issue whatsoever with Sony dipping their toe in the handheld market again.

What they can't afford to do is split the player and developer base and support two platforms again like when they had both PS3 and PSP on the market. Games take too long to make now and costs are too high.

So do they go with

A. PS4 Portable
B. PS5 Portable

If they go with A then there's a big existing catalogue, but development is starting to dry up.

If they go with B then that's some very pricey hardware capable of running PS5 games in small tablet form.

 

[Stu_Hart]

I would prefer sony to just focus on console gaming instead of chasing trends. Console gaming is where they shine the best. Forget handhelds and VR...

 

[Burger King]

In your opinion, how many years will it be technologically possible to have a PS5 portable?
4 years?

 

[Calverz]

I would prefer sony to just focus on console gaming instead of chasing trends. Console gaming is where they shine the best. Forget handhelds and VR...

They are chasing growth. Console sales are stagnating. Younger generations are buying less and less consoles. In order for PlayStation to continue to grow, they have to adapt and change. Like all businesses I'm afraid.

 

[Three]

It'll be dead on arrival.

Switch is a success because it works as both a portable and a home console due to the dock. Sony would be competing with themselves on the home front if they offered the latter functionality.

What made this different for the switch? Surely the Switch was Nintendo "competing with itself" too by cannibalising their separate handheld to get a foothold in the "home console" market. If anything 2 separate devices means they won't be competing with themselves. It would be 2 separate functions. One portable device one powerful at home. How many people currently have a switch plus some other console/PC?

 

[Kerotan]

A portal pro with full ps pro streaming support and a 5G connection would be big.

 

[MrAlwaysRight]

A portal pro with full ps pro streaming support and a 5G connection would be big.

a big load of shit, 5G still has way too high latency to support streaming a video game to any playable degree.

 

[MrAlwaysRight]

In your opinion, how many years will it be technologically possible to have a PS5 portable?
4 years?

Put the PS5 OS on a Rog Ally and it's a PS5 lite in optimal conditions and if it wasn't as limited by temps.

 

[Kerotan]

a big load of shit, 5G still has way too high latency to support streaming a video game to any playable degree.

6G? But at the very least Premium streaming over WiFi.

 

[th4tguy]

I still want one but I'd rather get it when it supports hdr and account switching so my kids can play on their accounts more easily.

 

[jm89]

A. PS4 Portable
B. PS5 Portable

Can be both.

If good enough hardware becomes available in the future, it can play ps4 games and ps5 games that aren't demanding work on it day one and ones that don't get scaled down by the dev. No mandate to scale down like steamdeck.

 

[Calverz]

In your opinion, how many years will it be technologically possible to have a PS5 portable?
4 years?

Probably less depending on how good their ai upscaler will be.

 

[Kumomeme]

it could go further if they reduce the price and fix the controller layout.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Well, I wish I'd share you optimism. I think it will either end up as a second Vita or as a down-specced PS5 that either has no games (because no platform parity mandate, as you suggested) or the new lowest common denominator. I really don't see any positives in getting a handheld out for Sony. I think the PS Portal is actually the best thing they can do here without fucking themselves over.

Why would it have no games when Sony will mandate 1st party support and 3rd parties build for Steam Deck?

Like you've literally created a position out of thin air and assumed you're right based on... checks notes... your previous assumptions, that checks notes again, aren't based on reality.

 

[Hudo]

Why would it have no games when Sony will mandate 1st party support and 3rd parties build for Steam Deck?

Like you've literally created a position out of thin air and assumed you're right based on... checks notes... your previous assumptions, that checks notes again, aren't based on reality.

So now the mandate first-party support? Ok. Who's gonna do it? Their first-party are already struggling to supply one platform with video games. Their second platform, PSVR2, has essentially no support. Now they need to support yet another platform? Or do you mean they need to to make down-specced versions of their PS5 games (which also get "up-specced" versions for PS5 Pro) for that handheld? If so, then the down-specced versions have a potential to impact design decisions based on technical limitations. So now we're at Series S territory again.

 

[64gigabyteram]

Because the PS4 architecture is not 1:1 translatable to portable hardware which means getting PS4 games to run natively on a handheld is a serious....serious headache and probably not worth the investment.

5 months ago I would agree but with this ShadPS4 progress they could make it happen even if the hardware was not 1:1.

Just make a translation layer that converts the software into the PS handheld's architecture and it will run. You don't even need it to be exponentially more powerful like with traditional emulation, you just need it to be slightly more powerful than a PS4 pro

 

[Killer8]

What made this different for the switch? Surely the Switch was Nintendo "competing with itself" too by cannibalising their separate handheld to get a foothold in the "home console" market.

Nintendo didn't have a successful home console on the market to cannibalize. It had the Wii U.

The hybrid Switch was the compromise after half of their business already collapsed. The 3DS didn't exactly do amazingly compared to its predecessors either due to its rocky start. 2012-2017 was a fiscal black hole for Nintendo.

Sony are currently in a successful position and any branching out would be a potentially risky move into a position Nintendo were once in.

If anything 2 separate devices means they won't be competing with themselves. It would be 2 separate functions. One portable device one powerful at home.

Expecting people to buy a PS5 for $500 AND a portable for $400 is a big financial ask to only provide some extra utility - a three times larger ask than $300 to do it all. Hypothetically, if a PS portable could play PS5 games and had video out to the TV, then many people would just opt for that cheaper portable as it would effectively become a Series S-like tier. I wouldn't blame them in this economy.

I'll leave that up to the Sony bean counters to decide if that's worth sacrificing a full fat PS5 sale for, particularly if PS5 support is patchy. Sony make their money from software sales. Now bear in mind we are 4 years into the generation, likely 5 by the time a PS portable even comes out. Most of the library is already out. Now imagine not being able to sell those games like you can on a PS5 unless Sony convinced each developer to go back and implement support.

How many people currently have a switch plus some other console/PC?

Because when they buy a Switch they get access to Nintendo's unique library. People are viewing this topic as just an issue of "PORTABILITY!", as if when they buy a Switch it's just as a way to play an existing library on the go (like what a PS portable is proposing). In reality, they're getting a whole new, fully supported console with tons of content they cannot get anywhere else. Portable or not, a Switch is not much different from eg. buying a Wii alongside an Xbox 360.

The reason Switch is so successful is because it hits so many selling points. It has strong first party support. It has strong third party support, in its own way. It's a home console. It's also a portable. It works as an accessory console just as well as primary console. It's cheap.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

So now the mandate first-party support? Ok. Who's gonna do it? Their first-party are already struggling to supply one platform with video games. Their second platform, PSVR2, has essentially no support. Now they need to support yet another platform? Or do you mean they need to to make down-specced versions of their PS5 games (which also get "up-specced" versions for PS5 Pro) for that handheld? If so, then the down-specced versions have a potential to impact design decisions based on technical limitations. So now we're at Series S territory again.

I've said it many times, that it won't be dedicated games, but scaled down games.

This is already happening. You don't seem to inherently understand why the Series S is a problem.

Games are built for PC and compiled and optimized for PS5 specs. A pro and a handheld doesn't change that. They're already scaling down on PC. There are games on PC with specs below PS5.

You fundamentally don't understand what is going on here.

Design choices AND mandates are the reason why the Series S is in the trouble that it is in.

For example Baldur's Gate 3 doesn't have co-op on the Series S. This is a perfect example that wouldn't have applied to a ps handheld, because co-op doesn't work the same way, if you did have co-op it would have had to run on different platforms rather than split screen. And you're also ignoring the very reason why the Series S couldn't handle split screen co-op, which was due to memory constraints. The Series S very easily could have had the same memory as the Series X and this wouldn't have been a problem, but Microsoft really wanted to have the cheapest SKU possible.

 

[Schmendrick]

5 months ago I would agree but with this ShadPS4 progress they could make it happen even if the hardware was not 1:1.

Just make a translation layer that converts the software into the PS handheld's architecture and it will run. You don't even need it to be exponentially more powerful like with traditional emulation, you just need it to be slightly more powerful than a PS4 pro

you`re seriously underestimating the pain that emulation is as well as the necessary power overhead. A handheld that could handle this would be very expensive and bulky as hell. That´s not gonna happen anytime soon, at least not in an official way.

 

[SilentUser]

PS4 portable and will 100% be there.

I'm in! Plus, PS5 remote play to add value.

 

[RoboFu]

They would have to make it 100% compatible with their current console at release time. its possible.. but it would be a series - s situation but better because sony isnt as stupid as MS.

 

[64gigabyteram]

you`re seriously underestimating the pain that emulation is as well as the necessary power overhead. A handheld that could handle this would be very expensive and bulky as hell. That´s not gonna happen anytime soon, at least not in an official way.

I am underestimating the overhead because the overhead that translation has compared to emulation is negligible

If the handheld uses ARM then maybe they will need to emulate, and that will be difficult. But if it's X86 like PS4 and PS5 they can afford to just translate the games. Game compat will depend on how accurate the translation software is.

A handheld that could rival the PS4 in hardware wouldn't need to be any bigger than say, a ayaneo air- because that is using hardware STRONGER than the ps4. It is doable to make hardware that small and with sonys wealth they can take some of the cost and bring it down to the price of a PS5 digital

 

[Schmendrick]

I am underestimating the overhead because the overhead that translation has compared to emulation is negligible

If the handheld uses ARM then maybe they will need to emulate, and that will be difficult. But if it's X86 like PS4 and PS5 they can afford to just translate the games. Game compat will depend on how accurate the translation software is.

you cannot "translate" between different architectures and the PS4`s architecture is not fit for mobile just by node shrinking or similar.
It would have to be a completely different chip design at which point you can forget about a simple translation layer....especially for anything and everything using the system hints from the PS4. No sorry, this is by far not as easy as some of you make it sound.

 

[64gigabyteram]

you cannot "translate" between different architectures and the PS4`s architecture is not fit for mobile.

So? I am not suggesting either of those. They make what is essentially a Steam Deck, and give it a translation software. They don't need to use PS4 hardware, they don't need to emulate anything. Essentially make a portable PC running on X86 and use a translation layer similar to ShadPS4 to get the game running.

Have you see those videos of Bloodborne running on Steam Deck? It's plausible.

 

[Schmendrick]

So? I am not suggesting either of those. They make what is essentially a Steam Deck, and give it a translation software. They don't need to use PS4 hardware, they don't need to emulate anything. Essentially make a portable PC running on X86 and use a translation layer similar to ShadPS4 to get the game running.

Have you see those videos of Bloodborne running on Steam Deck? It's plausible.

I have no insight into the specific intricacies of the PS4 API. But I´ve worked on hardware translation projects in the past and there always came a point where a simple translation did not cut it anymore and we had to use emulation at which point the hardware overhead always became an issue.
A few half broken games on an indipendent tranlator/emulator are absolutely no indication as to how well you can run a whole catalogue of games.
The crux with these sorts of things is always the jump from getting something to run to getting something to run well.

Considering the current bang for buck in the mobile space I simply doubt that such a machine would be mainstream affordable at the moment and I doubt Sony wants to repeat their PS3 plunder.

 

[Hudo]

I've said it many times, that it won't be dedicated games, but scaled down games.

This is already happening. You don't seem to inherently understand why the Series S is a problem.

Games are built for PC and compiled and optimized for PS5 specs. A pro and a handheld doesn't change that. They're already scaling down on PC. There are games on PC with specs below PS5.

You fundamentally don't understand what is going on here.

Design choices AND mandates are the reason why the Series S is in the trouble that it is in.

For example Baldur's Gate 3 doesn't have co-op on the Series S. This is a perfect example that wouldn't have applied to a ps handheld, because co-op doesn't work the same way, if you did have co-op it would have had to run on different platforms rather than split screen. And you're also ignoring the very reason why the Series S couldn't handle split screen co-op, which was due to memory constraints. The Series S very easily could have had the same memory as the Series X and this wouldn't have been a problem, but Microsoft really wanted to have the cheapest SKU possible.

And my only point was that there are problems with every approach and my opinion was just that the best thing they could've done they already did: The Playstation Portal.

I still think that there's no benefit for a handheld for Sony. Unless they invest heavily in their fist-party. Which they should do anyway.

 

[kingpotato]

Would have had another sale to me if the Portal could be played over LAN instead of requiring the Internet.

 

[Three]

Nintendo didn't have a successful home console on the market to cannibalize. It had the Wii U.

The hybrid Switch was the compromise after half of their business already collapsed. The 3DS didn't exactly do amazingly compared to its predecessors either due to its rocky start. 2012-2017 was a fiscal black hole for Nintendo.

Sony are currently in a successful position and any branching out would be a potentially risky move into a position Nintendo were once in.



Expecting people to buy a PS5 for $500 AND a portable for $400 is a big financial ask to only provide some extra utility - a three times larger ask than $300 to do it all. Hypothetically, if a PS portable could play PS5 games and had video out to the TV, then many people would just opt for that cheaper portable as it would effectively become a Series S-like tier. I wouldn't blame them in this economy.

I'll leave that up to the Sony bean counters to decide if that's worth sacrificing a full fat PS5 sale for, particularly if PS5 support is patchy. Sony make their money from software sales. Now bear in mind we are 4 years into the generation, likely 5 by the time a PS portable even comes out. Most of the library is already out. Now imagine not being able to sell those games like you can on a PS5 unless Sony convinced each developer to go back and implement support.



Because when they buy a Switch they get access to Nintendo's unique library. People are viewing this topic as just an issue of "PORTABILITY!", as if when they buy a Switch it's just as a way to play an existing library on the go (like what a PS portable is proposing). In reality, they're getting a whole new, fully supported console with tons of content they cannot get anywhere else. Portable or not, a Switch is not much different from eg. buying a Wii alongside an Xbox 360.

The reason Switch is so successful is because it hits so many selling points. It has strong first party support. It has strong third party support, in its own way. It's a home console. It's also a portable. It works as an accessory console just as well as primary console. It's cheap.

I don't think it's sacrificing a full fat PS5 for a handheld though in the same way that a steamdeck isn't exactly sacrificing GPU/PC sales. It's adding a portable method to play your games.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

If I were Sony, I would just not make a handheld. What the portal has shown, is that there is room in the market for a streaming handheld. And I feel that is what they should focus on.

Allow the portal, or its successor, to not just stream games from a user console, but stream everything on the PS store. Allow people buy the PS portal without needing to buy or own a PS5/PS6.

The only thing better the portal needs is a better streaming framework.

A $200 Portal that has access to the entire PS library even if you do not have a console, is what Sony needs to do as far as handhelds go. Imagine having Console-like experiences on a handheld, as long as you have a decent internet and can stomach the streaming lag.

The amount of cloud infrastructure Sony'd need to pull that off at scale would be absolutely massive. And I'm not convinced the infrastructure at that scale would be any cheaper than making tons of locally-powered boxes to run the games natively. In fact, it might end up being more expensive.

There's also the issue of how would they handle access to games. Do PS Portal owners pay the retail price per copy B2P like console owners do? Do they pay a cheaper license for a cloud-only version? If they buy via cloud does that copy enable them or pay towards a license to run a native version on a PlayStation console so should they end up buying one?

Just a ton of things to consider there.

Also Mibu no ookami why wouldn't a PS handheld coming out in the next 3-4 years be based on PS6 technology? We're not talking about it having the PS6's processing power, but sharing similar hardware features like PSSR. It'd be very stupid of Sony to have that in PS5 Pro & PS6, but not a PS handheld releasing between or after them.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

The amount of cloud infrastructure Sony'd need to pull that off at scale would be absolutely massive. And I'm not convinced the infrastructure at that scale would be any cheaper than making tons of locally-powered boxes to run the games natively. In fact, it might end up being more expensive.

Because you still don't understand that you don't need 1:1 infrastructure.

The number of active players at any given time in any given region is significantly fewer than the number of players who own devices. Cloud is considerably cheaper than local hardware and its why the vast majority of industry is moving in that direction.

You can save considerably on server blades that are cheaper than consoles as they have fewer parts and you need far fewer blades than you need consoles. You could probably get away with 25% of the capacity. The peak times are where you have to be worried about where you have the release of new games, but they would have all the data on that as well.

There's also the issue of how would they handle access to games. Do PS Portal owners pay the retail price per copy B2P like console owners do? Do they pay a cheaper license for a cloud-only version? If they buy via cloud does that copy enable them or pay towards a license to run a native version on a PlayStation console so should they end up buying one?

Just a ton of things to consider there.

There is already a model here.

You can already cloud stream PS5 games from the PS Store on PS5. Only a matter of time until that comes to other devices. The cloud games would cost the same amount, but it would require PS+. It's not a difference license at all. It's just a digital license just like you would buy if you owned a console. They're the exact same entitlements.

Also Mibu no ookami why wouldn't a PS handheld coming out in the next 3-4 years be based on PS6 technology? We're not talking about it having the PS6's processing power, but sharing similar hardware features like PSSR. It'd be very stupid of Sony to have that in PS5 Pro & PS6, but not a PS handheld releasing between or after them.

You inherently miss the point of these handhelds. They don't need to be as powerful as consoles. And you're not going to build a PS6 architecture into a handheld within the next 3-4 years. Within the next 3-4 years, you're barely going to see a handheld reach PS5 level.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

The amount of cloud infrastructure Sony'd need to pull that off at scale would be absolutely massive. And I'm not convinced the infrastructure at that scale would be any cheaper than making tons of locally-powered boxes to run the games natively. In fact, it might end up being more expensive.

There's also the issue of how would they handle access to games. Do PS Portal owners pay the retail price per copy B2P like console owners do? Do they pay a cheaper license for a cloud-only version? If they buy via cloud does that copy enable them or pay towards a license to run a native version on a PlayStation console so should they end up buying one?

Just a ton of things to consider there.

Also Mibu no ookami why wouldn't a PS handheld coming out in the next 3-4 years be based on PS6 technology? We're not talking about it having the PS6's processing power, but sharing similar hardware features like PSSR. It'd be very stupid of Sony to have that in PS5 Pro & PS6, but not a PS handheld releasing between or after them.

Yeah I didn't think of the cloud infrastructure. However, having PS5 servers ought to be cheaper than having dedicated handhelds. And doing it this way would mean they don't have to bifurcate their development manpower. Basically, they are only ever just making PS5 games.

As for the end user, I would say they just buy games as if they had a PS console, it would be no different than buying games on a native console. And whatever they buy can be installed on the native console.

 

[Parazels]

They should add to PS6 a dedicated WiFi module and release PS Portal 2, which would have a direct connection with the PS6 and could replace Dual Sense, if necessary, or work as a second gamepad.

PS Portal 2 should work perfectly at least at home, like Wii U did.

 

[Three]

PS Portal 2 should work perfectly at least at home, like Wii U did.

Portal already does. Even better than the Wii U depending on your home.

 

[Parazels]

Portal already does. Even better than the Wii U depending on your home.

Really? I read mixed reviews. Some people need to change settings in their routers and still have no guarantee it works perfectly.

Also as far as I know it takes several minutes to connect. I think it should connect instantly for better experience.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

the post is the worst idea I have ever had, its a piece of shit.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Three]

Really? I read mixed reviews. Some people need to change settings in their routers and still have no guarantee it works perfectly.

Sure if your network is unreliable or has issues itself then I can see no guarantee but take a Wii U 2 rooms down and see it fail to connect entirely.

Also as far as I know it takes several minutes to connect. I think it should connect instantly for better experience.

Doesn't take several minutes, even taking 60 seconds would be considered slow. It boots up the PS5 and connects in about 30 seconds or less.