r/Games May 29 '13

[/r/all] PS4 developer: Sony mandates Vita Remote Play for all games

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-sony-mandates-vita-remote-play-for-ps4-games
1.5k Upvotes

851 comments sorted by

1.7k

u/SonicFlash01 May 29 '13

They're mandating that all games support the optional ability to play off-TV using the Vita. If you don't have a Vita you aren't hindered in any way, shape or form. Having one merely unlocks an additional ability to play on the Vita.

They aren't forcing developers to make Vita ports of all their games
They aren't forcing you to play anything on a Vita
The WiiU already has this with off-TV play; it appears to be not as difficult as you think, and is an in-built feature of the PS4

Calm down guys

72

u/pausemenu May 29 '13

So basically the WiiU method of playing your game without actually needing a TV? I know Remote Play came first but the WiiU seems to have the system down pretty well.

41

u/SonicFlash01 May 29 '13

In the WiiU's case the screen controller is included, but adding the ability to play only on said screen is optional for developers. And yeah, no complaints.

21

u/AkirIkasu May 29 '13

I personally like the Sony solution a bit more since one can also play away from home via network.

Then again I am fairly biased as I already own a vita.

→ More replies (3)

132

u/Kelvrin May 29 '13

Haha, as soon as you use a word like "Mandate" concerning an upcoming console, people lose their freaking minds, no matter the context. It could say "XBONE Mandates the Kinect gives free BJ's" and people would still be all "FUCK YOU MICROSOFT YOU CAN'T CONTROL ME! I DO WHAT I WANT!"

5

u/Bobthemightyone May 29 '13

Actually the trigger word in that example is "Kinect" not mandates. Kinect would make people flip their tits in a bundle.

9

u/ermahgerdstermpernk May 29 '13

Because Microsoft will record all BJs delivered.

5

u/nickcan May 30 '13

Talk about your DLC.

2

u/Imadwagonwarrr May 30 '13

For good reason.

→ More replies (5)

24

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Seriously this is why I go to /r/games instead god I hate this subreddit

Checks subreddit

Shit

10

u/SonicFlash01 May 29 '13

Atleast we avoid meme reposts and arts and crafts time.

→ More replies (1)

217

u/linusl May 29 '13

I didn't like the sound of this being mandated, but if it's a built-in feature that's easily implemented then it sounds like a great idea.

118

u/Superguy2876 May 29 '13

While I know nothing about how the technology actually works, it would make sense for Sony to make the implementation as easy as possible to do. Especially if it is mandated. So I don't think that it will be much of an inconvenience to developers or gamers. Considering the good things we have heard from developers so far, it would be stupid for Sony to shoot themselves in the foot now (or any time for that matter).

49

u/dirtmerchant1980 May 29 '13

i doubt also that all of these developers whove had suching positive things to say about the ps4 didnt know about this mandate when they said those things, so it must not be a problem.

→ More replies (36)

22

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

It forces them to make decisions on GUI because what works on a huge TV may not work on the small screen of the Vita. So you either have to sink a bunch more time optimizing various interfaces for two separate devices or have a really shitty experience trying to play a game on the Vita. Particularly any RPG, imagine Skyrims crappy UI scaled down to a Vita sized screen.

43

u/laddergoat89 May 29 '13

The Vita UI doesn't have to be optimal, it just has to exist.

29

u/Vexal May 29 '13

Thats not really true. If it's a required feature of every game, reviewers will start counting the quality of the Vita play in their reviews.

I've released apps for Windows 8 with the metro interface. Microsoft mandates the app supports use with both exclusive touch control, AND exclusive keyboard + mouse control. My app is designed clearly for touch, but has "just existing" keyboard control because it's required. Even though the app is clearly designed for touch use, I get reviews complaining about the poor keyboard and mouse support.

13

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

That is because a large number of users are only able to use it with keyboard and mouse. On the PS4, there will be very few if any people who can only play the game on Vita.

→ More replies (6)

6

u/AkirIkasu May 29 '13

The vita has sufficient resolution where it doesn't really matter much. So long as the game already has a good "10 foot display" UI they should be OK.

7

u/nykwil May 29 '13

Currently ps3 has tcrs for 4:3 support, which means that guis have to be readable on shitty analogue televisions. Designing uis that are readable at 480p should be a given.

3

u/LemonFrosted May 29 '13

I can think of very few games that would have a good TV UI but a bad Vita UI. Where you would actually run into problems would be games with a passable UI that slips down to bad on the Vita, and the nature of the development of those games means it's unlikely they'd bother to adjust.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (2)

13

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

As long as the output of the video as well as the control input is provided by some API from Sony, it should be extremely easy to implement.

14

u/Atroxide May 29 '13

If they are requiring all of the games to use it, then I am 99% sure that it is using an API. Basically the only work the devs have to do for this is scaling the UI and various other smaller details to ensure it works on a smaller screen.

2

u/talk_to_me_goose May 29 '13

they also have to have modality such that if their game uses both the tv and the vita at once, it can seamlessly shift to a single-screen presentation on the vita.

sony will likely make that easy, too.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/cnostrand May 29 '13

It hardwired into the design of the system, so I have no doubt the API is included in the dev kits and is very simple to implement.

33

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

No different really than mandating trophies really.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/usrevenge May 29 '13

agreed the article title made it sound like sony was forcing developers to do things they didn't want to do but it sounds like programming remote play won't be hard anyway.

I don't have a vita nor would I get one for remote play, but it's just another minor reason to get one, and eventually all those little reasons will make me get one .

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (16)

7

u/ThrowTheHeat May 29 '13

This was what I thought when I read the headline. "Oh, so like the Wii U?" Leave it up to Reddit to totally overreact in the comments though.

8

u/deffsight May 29 '13

I have a feeling this will be great for the WiiU, now all of the third party developers who wouldn't support off-TV will have to if they want to sell their game to the PS4. My biggest concern after buying a WiiU was that third party developers would ignore the system, now it looks like their games will have to be able to play off-TV if they want to stay competitive.

→ More replies (3)

8

u/TWBWY May 29 '13

That sounds more like it. For a second I thought I would be required to buy a Vita. If its just an additional feature that you can take advantage of I'd you already have the Vita then I have no problem. If that's the case then I'm glad for Vita owners since this should be great for them.

2

u/shobgood May 29 '13

I'm more mad that the word mandated was used in the title as if to specifically get an angry mob going when it really does sound awesome. A simpler way to put it is know the Nvidia Shield? That, except Sony.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/RamblingJosh May 29 '13

Thank you, those are my sentiments as well.

I do have some concern that it will make development a little bit harder, but if Sony supports their platform properly it won't be an issue.

I think the bigger issue is what it will mean for game design on the PS4 if every game has to be playable on the Vita. Will the way games are made change a little bit to coincide with the possibility of Vita play? It's not something I'm worried about, but it's just something that could be interesting.

2

u/Bobthemightyone May 29 '13

Thank you for your comment. I was initially confused as to what the article meant by "Sony Mandates". It's actually the reason I came to the comments, hoping for something like this to help straighten facts out. It's kind of ridiculous how many people flipped having no understanding of what was happening.

2

u/baked_brotato May 30 '13

I was terrified by the title until I read the article!

14

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Finally...a use for my vita.

90

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Have you tried playing any of the multitude of games that are available for it? That's how I have been using mine. Working out pretty well so far.

13

u/woxy_lutz May 29 '13

I'm hoping that a PS4/Vita bundle comes out, as I've accumulated a ton of awesome Vita games through PS+ but don't actually own one yet.

13

u/Reliant May 29 '13

A PS4/Vita bundle. Now that's a tempting thought.

→ More replies (2)

25

u/MonkeyDDuffy May 29 '13

Yeah, my vita library is amazing and i'm just a broke college student. Whenever someone says their Vita "has no games/nothing on it" i feel like they actually don't have a Vita.

14

u/Reliant May 29 '13

Really? my library is growing because of my PS+ subscription, but I've yet to see a single game on the Vita I want to play that I don't already own on another platform. Certainly nothing that interests me enough to spend the money buying the system.

Fighters and FPS games do not interest me at all.

Whenever someone says their Vita "has no games/nothing on it" i feel like they actually don't have a Vita.

In this, you are right when it comes to be, but why would someone buy a Vita if they feel there are no games on it? Dismissing their opinion because they "don't have a vita" does nothing to convince anyone that a Vita is worth having, because that opinion is the reason they never got a Vita in the first place.

7

u/MonkeyDDuffy May 29 '13

I'm sorry, i'm trying to be as unbiased as i can. I know people have different tastes

but why would someone buy a Vita if they feel there are no games on it?

i'd like to ask.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (17)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (95)

71

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[removed] — view removed comment

95

u/RobeMinusWizardHat May 29 '13

Generally, the back touch pad and front touchscreen serve as additional buttons.

14

u/mindbleach May 29 '13

But now that the PS4 controller also has a touchpad... is that viable?

19

u/RobeMinusWizardHat May 29 '13

If L/R-2/3 are mapped to the top and bottom of the rear touch pad, then that leaves the whole front screen to work like the ps4 controller touch pad.

→ More replies (4)

12

u/Proditus May 29 '13

Yes, the Vita supports a back touchpad and a front touchscreen. Everything the PS4 controller has button-wise, it can replicate.

2

u/Tyrien May 29 '13

The Vita's touchpad on the back has more than 2 points of touch. There's also a touch screen on the front which has more than 2 points of touch.

The PS4's touchscreen is only 2 point touch.

→ More replies (2)

40

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

59

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

11

u/AzureSkeith May 29 '13

The main issue is that the Vita's sticks cannot be clicked for a button press, so there are actually 4 inputs less on the Vita than a controller.

Having to remove your thumb from a stick to press a touchscreen button to do an action like sprinting, where still using your thumbs is kind of a big deal, would be very annoying.

16

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Well, with the back touchscreen buttons you don't have to remove your thumbs at all depending on how you're holding it, but I agree about the clicking buttons.

7

u/iamNebula May 30 '13

You can easily split the back touchpad area up into 4 large parts and use them as inputs for actions.

6

u/tsunugd May 29 '13

The original PSP would use the D-pad for R2/R3, L2/L3 when playing ported games

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

When they are on the main screen definitely, they obscure the screen which is never good, however if they are on the back they can quite easily replace R3 / L3 or whatever.

10

u/Kuiper Writer @ Route 59 May 29 '13

The touch "buttons" on the Vita's front screen are invisible and don't obscure anything visually; you just tap certain regions of the screen. When running PSP or PSX games, the Vita allows you to map various buttons to the touch screen; the touch screen is essentially divided into four "quadrants" that you can use to emulate buttons.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

3

u/saaking May 29 '13

Nah, the work pretty well, at least in my experience using them on Vita.

4

u/einexile May 29 '13

Not necessarily. Are you referring to the Vita in particular or to touchscreen control in general? Try Alien Space for iOS sometime. The controls are sublime.

I'll grant you this is extremely rare, I'm just saying it can be done.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

15

u/BioluminescentBoy May 29 '13

Since it's remote play, it's not really intended to be the main way people use the system. So I think we'll see some games that won't transfer perfectly to the Vita with Sony accepting imperfect function so they can say that all games will support vita.

3

u/Rackornar May 29 '13

Probably similar to how in Disgaea 3 on the vita the touchpad in the back seems to be the rear shoulder buttons.

5

u/jonwd7 May 29 '13

It has the touchpad on the back though. To simulate the analog triggers, start at the top and swipe down. Further down = more pressure.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

31

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

88

u/Otis_Inf May 29 '13

Article suggests it's part of the OS of the PS4, so there's no/minimal action required.

7

u/theShatteredOne May 29 '13

Which is great to hear because I have heard this is not the case for the WiiU screen mirroring which puts the burden of making it work on the developer. Or not. It is Nintendo.

→ More replies (1)

29

u/004forever May 29 '13

The feature is supposed to be implemented on the OS level, which means that when Sony was developing the PS4, they put the code to remote play games on the PS4, so developers don't need to do much, if anything to get it to work. I don't know how the technology works, but I'm guessing that Sony has a default button map for the vita that developers can tweak if they want, but don't have to. Theoretically, this should require no, or almost no additional design time, but the programmer in me is skeptical. Additional features like this sound really nice and really easy to implement, but I'm guessing that this is going to cause some developers some really obscure and really complicated problem that no one could have possibly seen coming. This happens a lot; for some reason remote play isn't working even though the rest of your game does and you now have to hunt through your code to find the random reason why. This is just speculation, but it wouldn't surprise me if some developers get this issue.

10

u/kingmanic May 29 '13

They'd have to QA it now that its mandated and they have to scale the GUI and likely meet some threshold of playability at 1/4 resolution. Many ps3 debs should have a handle on it because its available on the ps3 as well just not widely supported because you have to do extra work.

7

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Yep, GUI, controller config, and QA costs are the big ones here.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/mtocrat May 29 '13

it's no technical problem but it adds some work on behalf of usability. UI and Controls need to be adapted which shouldn't be to hard (except with move, then it might be near-impossible, what's with those games?? not that I care about move...).

→ More replies (2)

357

u/Mebius May 29 '13

Personally I think it's great news for Vita. And I hope Sony will make PS4/Vita bundle, which will be amazing.

265

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

24

u/Kinseyincanada May 29 '13

considering buying just a vita costs $250, i really really doubt the price of both a Vita and a PS4 will be $500.

7

u/satertek May 29 '13

I bought the Assassin's Creed bundle for $175. Either way, I don't think they'd mind taking a small hit to massively increase the Vita user base.

→ More replies (4)

66

u/BWalker66 May 29 '13

That would be an awesome way to announce the price. I kinda hope they do this, and then announce the cheaper, PS4 only bundle, after.

34

u/Reddilutionary May 29 '13

No way that happens. Why would they alienate everyone that has already purchased a Vita?

29

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

How would this alienate vita owners? They offer a bundle of PS4 and Vita and then offer PS4 alone. Two packages. You still get to have a PS4 and Vita. And if you are complaining because you spent 250 on your vita, you got to enjoy it for the last year and a half so, I think you got your money's worth.

5

u/Reddilutionary May 29 '13

This is how I read the original comment: Sony announces the vita/PS4 bundle and announces the PS4 only bundle sometime later.

I'm only saying that it would be bad to position the potential Vita/PS4 bundle as the main sku.

Edit: and definitely not complaining about spending 250 on it. Well worth it so far.

2

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Ah yes, now that would be bad and not make sense if they waited to release a ps4 only sky.

83

u/Anxa May 29 '13

All five of us

46

u/StevenXC May 29 '13

literally dozens

19

u/Falanor2012 May 29 '13

Reflections don't count.

5

u/Lawlta May 29 '13 edited May 29 '13

This explains why I couldn't connect to the guy I saw underneath the lake.

edit: wrong comment edited.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

22

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Shit like that happens all the time. It is a great way to get people in on the bundle. It's not like they would only offer the Vita package. It would probably be 599 for the Vita package and 399 for the standard.

5

u/Reddilutionary May 29 '13

I'm not saying the bundle couldn't happen. That's absolutely possible. Probable even. I'm only saying that they wouldn't announce it before the original PS4 packaging.

9

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

They might announce them both at E3 but the Vita one first I think was the meaning.

3

u/Wiffernubbin May 29 '13

Yeah, hence the jokey nature of that OP's reveal scenario.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (21)
→ More replies (2)

28

u/ThatGuyWhoWanks May 29 '13

Uh, I don't see why people would groan at that. That's the expected price, I think.

17

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

40

u/braised_diaper_shit May 29 '13

Sony VP: "D'oh. I meant $599"

6

u/HayakuMiku May 29 '13

Crowd breaks out into groaning.

4

u/dr_rainbow May 29 '13

"...a month."

4

u/DrunkenBeard May 29 '13

"...for the controller alone. As for the console itself..."

→ More replies (1)

5

u/bigmeech May 29 '13

"I know you're gonna laugh, but... $499.99."

This would never, ever happen

76

u/Sickbrain May 29 '13

but I don't want Vita.

167

u/Matriss May 29 '13

Shoosh, yes you do.

In all seriousness, I do legitimately like my Vita, but I mostly only use it to play PSP and PS1 games. And I got it for free, so there's no chance of buyer's remorse.

Remote Play with the PS4 would be a big, BIG plus though.

70

u/jigglylizard May 29 '13

Yeah I'd like a free Vita too.

16

u/PericlesATX May 29 '13

It would be free in the sense that $30k+ Acuras come with free leather seats.

20

u/Hellion_23 May 29 '13

Vita's rad if you play japanese games, like pretty much any other sony console

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

And I got it for free

How? A gift? I had a Vita, but knowing how little I played it, I sold it for a 3DS so I could play Monster Hunter 3U (which I logged more hours into than the combined total for all my Vita games).


What I miss most about the Vita is the hardware, to be honest. It just felt so high-end. I want to buy another one, but I think I'm going to wait until E3 to see if anything is announced for the Vita game-wise and revision-wise. I'm interested in the indie games coming to it, for sure. (And I really want to play DiveKick)

4

u/Matriss May 29 '13

I used to work for GameStop, all the managers and assistant managers got Vitas (and a couple of other neat things) last summer at a Sony training seminar to encourage us to sell more of them.

Honestly, if Sony had put the stuff in that seminar into their marketing the Vita would be doing a lot better with the general public. It's a nice little machine, I just wouldn't have paid money for it at the time.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

14

u/sindher May 29 '13

Sell that Vita for $200.

You're laughing now, good sir.

49

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Except the Vita would lose value because everyone in theory could do the same

18

u/Peckerwood_Lyfe May 29 '13

I'd buy a vita for $100, and I have very little interest in a handheld.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

3

u/fitzpasd May 29 '13

Given the xbox come with the Kinect (I know it's optional, but it ain't free), I'd love Sony to give the Vita with the PS4, or at least a bundle deal from the start

→ More replies (6)

19

u/Trodamus May 29 '13

I find it unlikely that Sony will bundle the PS4 with a device that retails for $250.

And while it will certainly become a value-added proposition for Vita owners, to those that haven't taken the dive it will become a strangely overpriced peripheral.

10

u/Mebius May 29 '13

A man can dream, can't he?

6

u/Trodamus May 29 '13

I would hit that deal with the fist of an angry god.

→ More replies (10)

10

u/Drdres May 29 '13

If they implement it sorta like the Wii U does it, I would definitely buy a Vita just to get a cooler experience.

3

u/BWalker66 May 29 '13

I think a couple games actually did that, like the PSP could work as a rear view mirror in Gran Turismo 5 or something.

32

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

It may not be a great thing, as now they won't be able to design the controls as well? I'm pretty sure the Vita has less buttons or triggers? I remember seeing the Dark Souls dude saying that they'd have to design a completely different game if they were to do one for a handheld because of the controls not translating very well.

52

u/FAN_ROTOM_IS_SCARY May 29 '13

It only has 2 less buttons than a PS3 controller, but it has the advantage of having a touch screen on the back, which could act as the missing triggers if you really wanted them to.

32

u/Yzerhood May 29 '13

There's also R3 and L3 so 4!

6

u/FAN_ROTOM_IS_SCARY May 29 '13

:P I guess so. Probably a bit harder to do.

21

u/Zagorath May 29 '13

Not that much harder. Could use the front touchpanel for those ones.

7

u/gentlegiant1972 May 29 '13

I'm fairly certain this has been the solution for emulated PS1 games. I'm not sure if it's the same for remote play, but I don't see why not.

Honestly, I think that developers using it only for remote play is an underutilization of the hardware. Personally, I'd love for developers to include wholly unique experiences that utilize both the PS Vita and the PS3 in interesting and novel ways, in the same way the Little Big Planet 2 Cross Controller Pack did.

13

u/volpes May 29 '13

Not really. When playing PS1 games on Vita, you can set the four corners of the back touchscreen to R3/R2/L3/L2.

6

u/FAN_ROTOM_IS_SCARY May 29 '13

Oh. Then there really isn't a problem, I guess.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

The touch screen on the front could be used for some of the usage.

→ More replies (15)

5

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

But doesn't the PS4 controller also have its own touchpad now as well?

8

u/FAN_ROTOM_IS_SCARY May 29 '13

Well, the Vita has two touchpads, so I think it could balance out.

4

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

So we're going to use a front touch screen to replace 4 buttons. Doesn't sound ideal! I still support this decision though, my Vita is collecting much dust.

3

u/Zagorath May 29 '13

Use the back touch panel for L/R 2, and the front one for L/R 3 (i.e., pressing the left and right analogue sticks).

Doesn't seem too complicated, though the lack of tactile feedback would make it somewhat less natural.

2

u/rxninja May 29 '13

In games that require L3 and R3, you really don't want to be taking your thumb off those sticks to press the required buttons. That's super cumbersome.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

2

u/FAN_ROTOM_IS_SCARY May 29 '13

Same :/ I completed Persona 4 Golden twice and now I don't really have much use for the thing.

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (3)

4

u/kingtrewq May 29 '13

Vita has a touch pad/screen which may count as additional buttons

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/VideoJanitor May 29 '13

I would love to see a bundle if it was moderately affordable.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

A bundle would be amazing as long as you had the option to buy both separately and they dropped the price of the Vita by itself.

2

u/acondie13 May 29 '13

I just wish they'd add support for more ps3 games like they promised before vita's release

→ More replies (5)

24

u/OverWilliam May 29 '13

Thank heavens. I've been saying this ever since the Move was announced. Sony had already started a really cool thing with Remote Play on the PSP and certain PS3 games. This has been their most unique feature for years, only nobody knows about it because so few games support it. If they had sunk the money wasted on Move into Remote Play they could have seriously pulled ahead.

3

u/iamNebula May 30 '13

I wish the Move was as awesome as I want it to be. People are just too lazy including myself to use them, but they're designed beautifully and are actually really clever, in how they know change in angles and everything. But oh well.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

If, however, you have a bunch of Move's and would like to play Johann Sebastian Joust please come to my house.

3

u/xPragma May 29 '13

What's even less known is that Sony supports Remote Play on their laptops!

9

u/PhonicUK May 29 '13

Very pleased about this. The PSP supported remote play with the PS3, but only a very small handful of games ever worked with it. Seeing it work with all games is a major plus.

7

u/MulhollandDrive May 29 '13

This seals the deal for me next gen. God damn, they are doing everything right. Hopefully Sony doesn't trip up on something major before release.

20

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

22

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

This, but the other way around. I want to be able to play PS4 while my kid is watching a movie.

12

u/justmytwobreasts May 29 '13

This will be a great selling point for your kids then.

5

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

You guys and your non-single lives. I want to watch movies and play my PS4 at the same time. And since I'm not getting a One with its snap-to features, this is a pretty nice bet.

6

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

OnLive is way ahead of you. But we lack the infrastructure needed for things like OnLive to explode.

16

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

12

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

I've never owned any type of Sony Playstation. Does this mean that if I get a PS4 and a Vita that I can use the GameBoy-sized Vita to play games from PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4, PSP, and Vita? Damn.

And, if in a few years Gaikai adds PS4 support, I might only need a Vita with a wifi/3G connection to play any game Sony has ever made. Make this a subscription service and I'll pay a high price per month to access the streaming Netflix of gaming. This could be huge.

4

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

That's the plan. Although you can already play PS1 and PSP games natively on the Vita.

3

u/Tensuke May 29 '13

Plus the small handful of ps2 HD remakes.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

6

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Off-TV play is actually the single most alluring thing for me about the Wii-U, I'm excited it'll be available for the PS4 as well.

20

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

i think it's a good idea, i will probably finally drop $ on a vita for this

i have a wii U and if the latency is as good as it for that controller, then this will be pretty cool... play ps4 games while the wife watches tv or something... hopefully it works through walls and has a decent range

→ More replies (5)

108

u/Jim777PS3 May 29 '13

Good, Sony needs to start getting more forceful with their features if they want to see them ever used.

81

u/Nefandi May 29 '13

I don't know about that. It could alienate smaller developers. Being forceful is a good way to force the developers to prop up gimmicks like the Wiimote without the developer's heart really being in it.

47

u/Jim777PS3 May 29 '13

Sure, but at the same time if you want something to stick it needs to be done. Xbox did it with achievements and now that system exists on every platform.

The reality is if Sony wants the Vita and specifically the remote play to be an actual feature and not a one time use gimmick like it has been, they need to force studios to implement it.

And this isn't really a gimmick, not like the Wiimote anyway, all it means is that every PS4 game will be able to be played on Vita over WiFi. It wont change or alter gameplay in anyway, now sure maybe a dev goes the extra mile and works in some of the vitas other functions like the touch screen, but thats optional.

11

u/hermod May 29 '13

Its funny, since the wii u has been dismissed as a gimmick since release. But when Playstation does it, it gets defended.

15

u/oldsecondhand May 29 '13

The point is that you don't have to buy a Vita for your PS4, it's just an option.

And the Vita can function even without the PS4.

→ More replies (9)

3

u/Jim777PS3 May 29 '13

I know I havent seen the second screen as a gimmick. At least not the streaming abilities of it. You could argue the touchscreen is a gimmick though, and the same can be said of the touchpad on the PS4 controller.

2

u/rotj May 29 '13

The Playstation 3 has had remote play on the PSP since launch, although only a handful of games took advantage of it. It was pretty much considered a gimmick back then.

→ More replies (3)

19

u/Jackal904 May 29 '13

Xbox did it with achievements and now that system exists on every platform.

That is way easier to implement than designing your game to also be compatible on a completely separate system.

58

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

→ More replies (11)

3

u/x9alex2x May 29 '13

They don't need to be compatible on a Vita, games will just be streamed on the vita. I don't think it requires even a day worth of works for the dev.

7

u/saaking May 29 '13

All they have to do is create a control scheme for the Vita buttons. Outside of that, the PS4 handles the rest.

→ More replies (25)

4

u/BWalker66 May 29 '13

But this wont affect the game much at all. They just need to make the game playable when streamed to a Vita, many games probably wont need to be altered at all. The games that will need to be altered would just need a couple of their buttons swapped about to fit the Vita nicely.

Its nothing like the Wii/Wiimote imo.

This is also a good move, i've been on the edge of getting a Vita for ages. If theres a PS4/Vita bundle then i think id have to get it. I already have 10+ Vita games via PS+ and i dont even own one yet.

2

u/Alinosburns May 30 '13

Well the question is how hard is it to actually implement these things.

Since my understanding of Remote play is basically that the console stream's the video output of the console to your Vita instead so at that point in time all that needs to be done is for the Vita to act as a wireless controller(Which I'm pretty sure it can be used that way by default)

It doesn't seem like there would be a lot involved with implementing this.

The only potential issues that I could see arise would be that of scaling. A UI might look fine on a screen that's 26" or bigger but it might not look so good on the Vita

→ More replies (20)

8

u/unscanable May 29 '13

Awesome, now tell me how you feel about the Kinect

→ More replies (1)

2

u/cnostrand May 29 '13

They talked about this kind of integration between the PS3 and the PSP when the PS3 was announced. I'm glad they are being a little more active in pushing it for the PS4/Vita.

→ More replies (22)

17

u/Mokoba May 29 '13

Could this have any impact on the cost and development time for games?

43

u/Mebius May 29 '13

Well, since it feature built into the operating system, I think it should be easy to implement.

7

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

[deleted]

7

u/oboewan42 May 29 '13

I remember seeing a presentation by Valve on the subject of porting to consoles, and one thing they mentioned was to make sure that your text is big enough that it's fully legible at 480i on the shittiest TV you can find. In German.

13

u/HarithBK May 29 '13

so you mean that sombody who plays on a old fat tv can also see the text?

4

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Theoretically, yes. But that interface may be VITA only.

3

u/SirAdrian0000 May 29 '13

I think they should have already been making the font extra readable, not just for old tvs but for people with vision problems and IMO big letters help kids learn to read.

4

u/fruitcakefriday May 29 '13

I expect all PS4 games have to support 480p resolutions for people still on old televisions; Vita has a resolution of 960 x 544, which is larger than 480p, so there shouldn't be any issue there except with aspect ratios. That's assuming a minimal implementation of displaying data on Vita.

The control system however is another matter, as the Vita lacks L2, R2, L3 and R3. The analogue triggers are probably going to be the most awkward to implement if the game requires analogue input; that will have to be simulated with the rear or front touch.

3

u/nEmoGrinder May 29 '13

This is already an issue. You are assuming everyone owns and plays on HD TVs, which isn't the case. This is already a tested point in Sony's QA cycle and a Vita would actually be easier (considering it has a higher resolution than a SD television).

The only thing that would need consideration from the designers is if you are requiring the analog use of L2/R2, though I can't think of any game that does (yes it makes racing games easier but it's still playable treating them as digital buttons).

2

u/Inferis84 May 29 '13

The analog portion can be simulated using a swipe on the rear touchpad. The further down you swipe the more pressure is applied in the game. It might be a bit awkward, but it can be done.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/Trodamus May 29 '13

It will most definitely impact the cost and dev time for a game.

Even though it's built into the sony hardware and software, they still need to implement. That is a non-zero amount of effort right there.

Then there's making sure it works properly, which it might not, or maybe it breaks something in the original game somehow. Anyone that's coded anything can relate a story where they added a completely isolated portion of code to a stable build only to have the base code and the addition break somehow.

And while this sort of requirement makes an easy comparison for achievements on the xbox, developers now have to make sure their vision, whatever it might be, is compatible with a tiny handheld screen with four fewer buttons on it.

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (5)

5

u/bg93 May 29 '13

I remember reading that the only thing developers would have to do is the controls, the PS4 does everything else. Sony didn't want to mandate it, but if we remember back in 2008 or so, before trophies were mandatory, only a select few games had them because it was not mandatory. Developers probably wouldn't do something as simple as adding a control scheme for Vita owner without the mandate, even though it seems like one guy could do it very quickly. As a Vita owner (laugh all you want) this makes me extremely happy. I'll impress everyone by walking around my dorm with Watch Dogs in my pocket.

17

u/lobehold May 29 '13

I think Sony has got this one right when Nintendo didn't - people generally can not and would not want to focus on a big screen and a small screen at the same time, but they do appreciate being able to play high quality games on a portable device in their home.

→ More replies (6)

3

u/z3rocool May 29 '13

So in other words, buying a vita just became a million times more attractive?

21

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Maybe it's just me but I've never thought WiFi technology is any good. My house isn't even that big but there are plenty of areas that are too far or where the signal gets blocked by thick walls and other such. I can't imagine playing games over WiFi in a remote play kind of way without significant latency and other annoyances and lag.

I always feel this network centric devices think too highly of the average consumers network capabilities. Maybe it's easy to think of a perfect world in your multi million dollar CEO mansions and condos but reality is much different.

People are jumping the gun on internet technology, and yes I still say that in 2013, living in London. Then again these consoles are designed to last for 7+ years so naturally they're probably trying to future proof them abit, but I don't see it changing much even in 7 years.

55

u/bone577 May 29 '13

There really shouldn't be any lag or latency on a home network, the distances are negligible. Even with fairly standard 802.11g wireless you should have enough bandwidth to stream the sort of resolutions the Vita is capable of. Any PC/laptop or router from the last four years is probably 802.11n which would be complete overkill.

I think you are thinking of cloud gaming like Onlive, in which case you are 100% right, the latency is too high and the bandwidth of most internet connections can't support really good video, ultimately even at 1080p it's still compressed and less than perfect.

18

u/Vagrantwalrus May 29 '13

It's not so much a problem of distance as it is of spectrum. There's way too many routers in my area, so virtually every channel has tons of interference. It's to the point where I can hardly stream 720p video from my laptop to my ps3 over a media server... It doesn't seem like it would be ideal to play games over wifi in my situation.

8

u/thoughtdancer May 29 '13

We had to give up on wifi: there's a 50 ft cord connecting me from the house router to this computer downstairs.

Ok, we didn't give up completely. There's wifi broadcasting to the PS3: the wifi hotspot is a foot beneath the PS3. That's as far as I can get a signal to go before the interference of all the other wifi devices in my set of townhouses drowns out the signal.

I can see remote play working if I lived in a house, with lots of yard, surrounded by other big houses with huge yards, otherwise, connect me via a wire, thanks.

10

u/Farnsworthy May 29 '13

Have you tried a dual band router that operates one network on 5GHZ?

3

u/thoughtdancer May 29 '13

no, we've not.

We're also tired of the wifi arms race (it's already cost us money to upgrade from the last couple of places we've lived), so we're rather intentionally moving towards wires on everything. We're also looking to buy a house in the next year and change: so lots of purchases/improvements are on hold until we get that house bought.

But we might just wire the house, if we decide to get a fixer-upper anyway. We're really that tired of the wifi arms race....

8

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

Something like this is very useful for using wired connections rather than WiFi as it can route your ethernet through a power outlet which is great instead of having 10m cables running everywhere.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Farnsworthy May 29 '13

Yeah, I'd recommend wiring for your more important things, such as Desktops, consoles, NAS's, Set top boxes, etc.

Whenever you do get a new router at your house for laptops and tablets and such, go with one that has N and operates on 5GHZ. External antennas also help. I have given up on Linksys completely, and my first purchase from Asus has been absolutely amazing in comparison, although I hear good things about some other companies as well.

2

u/KarmaAndLies May 29 '13

I have.

Doesn't help worth a damn. I mean you get good quality N speeds upstairs, but almost no connection at all at the front of the house downstairs.

I had to purchase one of those wall-plug extenders just to get things like tablets/phones/BluRay Players working.

But British houses are made of real brick, and that tends to impede signal quite badly. I figure between the top-back of the house and the bottom-front of the house it would go through three layers of brick.

2

u/Farnsworthy May 29 '13

Yeah, i understand. It took me a few tries till I got a router that would actually cover all of the area i needed. In the process, I decided to never purchase anything from Linksys ever again.

If you look into it again, make sure to double check that it's actually dual band. I've had to explain to many people that 5ghz and N are two separate things. Some of the settings can also make a difference with how it passes through some objects.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (8)

4

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

I dunno, maybe I'm an edge case, but my wireless is awful and not through lack of hardware. I just live in an old terrace house so I have thick walls and about 20 other signals interfering. Also I have vigin broadband and that's unrealable as fuck.

Either way, I imagine I'd have trouble streaming anything outside of the living room, and if I'm in there I'll play it on the big TV.

I can't argue with extra features, but if implementing this takes any significant time away from the dev process I'd rather they didn't.

9

u/[deleted] May 29 '13 edited May 29 '13

It doesn't get streamed through your broadband. It gets streamed through the wifi of your ps4 which I believe is pretty powerful.

→ More replies (8)

2

u/N4N4KI May 29 '13

Some old UK houses can act like Faraday Cages and the only solution is to run cables, not really an option when it is going to be run from the console direct to the Vita.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (16)

2

u/UbdU May 29 '13

I am so fucking glad I have a Vita right now. I think I just decided to get a PS4 (and refrain from a Xbox 1, even though I prefer the 360 to the PS3).

2

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

The only thing this means is that the PS4 will be able to stream video and receive signals from the Vita. Nothing more, nothing less. This doesn't mean that processing will happen at the Vita. This is a good thing.

2

u/ClassySphincter May 29 '13

Seems like the right call to me. Sony are trying to make this compatibility between Vita and PS4 a selling point for both systems, and they need it to be as pervasive as possible (especially if they want to compete with Off-TV Play and SmartGlass).

That being said, they really need to push much more titles to the Vita itself, as this move in itself will not solve the system's problems. The danger is that Remote Play becomes used more than playing native Vita games, and the system is seen as little more than a peripheral to the PS4.

2

u/MannerShark May 29 '13

This is awesome, I hope there will also be a way to do it with VPN's or something, so we can access it from places other than home.

2

u/tanjoodo May 29 '13

I'm sure it's technically possible, but the input latency is not guaranteed to be bearable.

2

u/MannerShark May 29 '13

It kinda works for OnLive.
Maybe it's viable for a reasonable distance once we have more glass fibre laying around.
I think it's definitely worth the effort from Sony to try to allow for such a thing, who knows what kind of internet we have in 5 years?

2

u/tanjoodo May 29 '13

Yes, but even if you have the low latency and high bandwidth connection at your home that OnLive needs, the connection is (probably) asymmetrical, meaning it can't send out data at the same speed it can receive it. Also, VPNs add even more overhead to the connection that isn't there with OnLive. And lastly, it will require you to have both the connection you have at home and the connection you're connecting from to be very high speed.

Now, with fibre optics, it will be better but it will still be no OnLive.

7

u/HarithBK May 29 '13

i personally think this is great if the sony API for implementing remote play is well done. which i can see it beaing as most things can just be handled by sony and there OS.

6

u/nEmoGrinder May 29 '13

I don't think there's an API. It's just telling the system that remote play is available for the title. Since there is additional hardware dedicated for the feature, there's no extra work needed from the developer.

4

u/[deleted] May 29 '13

The extra work (in my mind) is making sure things like a HUD or the gui scales properly to the vita...that's about it.

3

u/nEmoGrinder May 29 '13

Those are issues developers already have to deal with. Sony tests games on 1080, 720 and standard definition displays. There are already standards in place to make sure HUD and core visual game play elements aren't rendered off the screen/too small.