Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sony PlayStation (Games)

PS Vita TV's Killer App: Remote Play 134

jfruh writes "When Sony announced the PS Vita TV yesterday, most observers saw it as competition for the Apple TV and Roku, or maybe the Ouya. But gaming writer Peter Smith views it differently; he thinks that remote play, including the ability to stream games from the upcoming PlayStation 4 console, will be the Vita TV's killer-app. In that sense, it isn't so much a low-cost replacement for casual gamers as an add-on to the high-end PS4. '[W]hen you're in the middle of a game and someone wants to watch TV, you can just grab a Vita and keep on playing. (This is similar to the popular "tablet play" feature of Nintendo's Wii U, without the Wii U's limitation of having to stay in close proximity to the base console.) ... For any Playstation 4 household with more than one TV I think the PS Vita TV will become a 'must-have' accessory; it's almost like getting a second PS4 for $100.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PS Vita TV's Killer App: Remote Play

Comments Filter:
  • Apple TV mirrors your desktop, so you can do on the TV what you can do on the mac. Macosx maverick will use use Apple TV as a second desktop, menu bar and all, so Sony get a PS4 extension, well done!

    • Re:Too late (Score:5, Informative)

      by negRo_slim ( 636783 ) <mils_orgen@hotmail.com> on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @01:35AM (#44816737) Homepage
      Mirroring a general purpose computing environment and being able to play your dedicated gaming device on a separate screen are not quite the same thing.
      • This thing is pretty much exactly like Chromecast and AppleTV with Sony specific features tacked on. The only thing surprising here is that Sony actually made it.
        • Re:Too late (Score:4, Informative)

          by obarthelemy ( 160321 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @02:11AM (#44816853)
          Not at all. ChromeCast is a very different beast than miracast/ariwhatever....: the content is *not* streamed from the master to the slave, but *pointed at and handed off*. The slave then directly connects to the server, the master then can even be switched off with no consequences.
          • The hand off functionality isnt the only way to get video to the device. Tab casting.
          • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            Not at all. ChromeCast is a very different beast than miracast/ariwhatever....: the content is *not* streamed from the master to the slave, but *pointed at and handed off*. The slave then directly connects to the server, the master then can even be switched off with no consequences.

            Only to the point of cloud-accessible content. For "tab mirroring", Chrome's actually rendering the image and sending it through WiFi. It's why you can watch unsupported videos on Chromecast - because your local PC is actually ta

            • The problem with Microsoft's solution is that all the advantages were for Microsoft. Every one saw that and said no. Sure they could do some cool things if they had been able to implement it, but first and foremost it was so they could exert unprecedented control over the device and the software. Keep the discs as the physical license is good for everyone, considering the alternatives.
      • by mcgrew ( 92797 ) *

        Mirroring a general purpose computing environment

        Until they remove the functionality. [wikipedia.org]

        I can't understand why anyone would give their hard-earned money to Sony. They're not the least bit trustworthy.

        • by Kartu ( 1490911 )

          I don't see OtherOS removal as a problem, sorry, call me selfish, but I'm way more concerned about attempt by its competitor, to enforce digital only games.

          There was hardly anyone who was affected by this. Those who bought device for Other OS didn't need to upgrade the firmware, those who bought it for games, couldn't care less about Other OS.

          • Re:Too late (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Vanderhoth ( 1582661 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @07:34AM (#44817981)

            Those who bought device for Other OS didn't need to upgrade the firmware

            Stop saying that, it wasn't an option. My PS3 was updated when my cousin put in a RENTED BluRay. I bought the PS3 for the Other OS along with the ability to play games AND watch BluRays. I paid more for it because of that and was later given the option to use Other OS exclusively XOR games and BluRays. I paid for all of the functionality. What was the PS3 slogan again? Oh yeah, "It only does everything!".

            Oh you only bought that V8 car to drive? Well it's been two years so I guess we can replace the engine with V2. Guess you won't need the radio, air conditioner, power seats, windows, locks, etc... here's your soap box racer have fun.

            In any case this isn't a which is better PS4 or XBone, this is a case of which isn't the worst and there is a third option. Just don't get either. Shows both companies we don't approve of any of their the anti-consumer behavior, whether it's removing features or DRM-lock-in-always-on-piece-of-shit.

            • by Anonymous Coward

              Those who bought device for Other OS didn't need to upgrade the firmware

              Stop saying that, it wasn't an option. My PS3 was updated when my cousin put in a RENTED BluRay.

              Whoa whoa whoa. Your cousin rented a BluRay disc of some kind and it had PS3 firmware on it? Firmware that automatically installed and updated your console? I think you might be leaving out a couple of steps, here.

              • I've told the story so many times now, I decided to shorten it. I was making snacks and hadn't realized he rented a BluRay. He put it in and there was a firmware update. I don't know if it was automatic or he clicked yes, I wasn't in the room, but the result was my console was updated.

                YES, newer blurays require updated firmware on older model the PS3 in order to play. It's a dirty trick in my opinion. Right along with saying they wouldn't remove the other os, then removing it in an April 1st update.
                But
                • You're blaming Sony for your inability to adequately police your guests and what they do.

                • by Kartu ( 1490911 )

                  Why did they remove Other OS? Because:
                  a) IBM was pissed about US Defence buying PS3's instead of its servers
                  b) OtherOS was the main reason console was hacked into oblivion (which, one could argue, also degrades legit user experience due to cheaters, console becoming less attractive to the developers etc)

                  Compare that to competitor's actions and reasons behind them. The reason that you'd need XBox Live Gold to USE A FREAKING BROWSER or watch youtube movies.
                  Sony's competitor tried to fruck us, the customers in

                  • While I don't doubt IBM would have preferred to sell cell processors to the air force without them being purchased on discount through Sony, there's nothing to indicate IBM in anyway influenced the Other OS removal.

                    The Other OS allowed GeoHotz (or whatever his name was) to print "Hello world!" on his screen after ripping they system apart and soldering stuff to the motherboard, it wasn't something anyone with a PS3 could do, there was a lot of technical knowledge involved, and he ultimately failed to do a
                • by Jmc23 ( 2353706 )
                  Let's be honest. Admit it. You shortened it because everytime you trot out your story, people call you out on the fact that it isn't automatic and your friends suck.
                  • No I shortened it because it's a long story with details people don't care about and many have already read dozens of times.

                    I didn't say the update was automatic, just that I wasn't in the room so I couldn't confirm it one way or the other.

                    In either case it doesn't matter because the argument is in one situation I get to keep using the Other Os, in the other situation I get to play games and use the BluRay player. I bought the system to do both, not one or the other.

                    My friends (cousin in this case) h
                    • by Jmc23 ( 2353706 )
                      Perhaps some reading comprehension courses are in order. I stated what happens when you post your story. I did not state that 'I' thought your friends/cousin suck.
          • call me selfish, but I'm way more concerned about attempt by its competitor, to enforce digital only games.

            Bastards, I want my analogue games!!!

          • by mcgrew ( 92797 ) *

            I don't see OtherOS removal as a problem, sorry, call me selfish, but I'm way more concerned about attempt by its competitor, to enforce digital only games.

            I wouldn't buy a XBone, either. My daughter was going to buy a gaming rig for me last xmas (she works at GameStop) and I told her "no thanks" since all the console manufacturers fuck over their customers. Like Mr. Ball said when switching to all non-Microsoft (mostly FOSS) after a BSA raid (google "ernie ball linux), I refuse to do business with someone

        • by mcgrew ( 92797 ) *

          Flamebait? What's the matter, mod, did I offend your employer?

          Here's a hint, folks: dissing an evil company isn't flamebait unless you, yourself are evil as well. Rather than downmodding why not simply answer the question: why would you give money to a company with a history of removing features the customer has already paid for?

    • by Dahamma ( 304068 )

      How does that in ANY way relate to playing a PS4 game on other TVs by using one console (with all installed games, saves, account logins, etc) and cheap remote devices. It doesn't. But fanboys gotta be fanboys...

    • by Seumas ( 6865 )

      This will allow you to play video games, which OSX and Apple TV will not (at least, not with the same selection and capacity).

      Also, the only benefit of this device is that it will let you play them remotely (meaning elsewhere in the same house, I believe) on another TV. The regular PS VITA will also stream games from your PS4 like the Wii U does.

    • Apple TV mirrors your desktop, so you can do on the TV what you can do on the mac.

      Does it work for non-Mac OSes?

      I'd like to mirror my display onto my bigscreen TV -- that would be awesome.

  • Great idea, but... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dahamma ( 304068 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @02:10AM (#44816849)

    I'm wondering a bit about the "playing PS4 games" part in regards to the controller. The PS4 controller has a touchpad that the Dualshock 3 doesn't have - I suppose as long as games don't make it integral to the gameplay it will work, otherwise, not so much unless/until the Vita TV supports the new controller...

    • by aiadot ( 3055455 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @02:16AM (#44816865)
      It was hinted in some interviews that the PS4 controller will also be supported. The only reason it only supports the DS3 for now is because it's getting released before the PS4.
  • Confusing summary (Score:5, Informative)

    by wonkey_monkey ( 2592601 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @02:26AM (#44816897) Homepage

    [W]hen you're in the middle of a game and someone wants to watch TV, you can just grab a Vita and keep on playing.

    The way the summary is written implies that you need a Vita TV to stream to a Vita, but you don't. What the article actually says is that, instead of streaming direct to a Vita, you could instead stream to a Vita TV connected to another TV.

    I can see "Vita" and "Vita TV" causing a lot of customer confusion.

    • by Seumas ( 6865 )

      Correct. You can stream to your PS Vita from the PS4 the same way the NVIDIA Shield streams from your PC.

      The PS Vita TV does the same thing, but with TV-OUTs so you play it on another television.

      This may have limited appeal, but for those who want it, it'll be terrific.

  • Killer App? Really? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Khyber ( 864651 ) <techkitsune@gmail.com> on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @02:27AM (#44816901) Homepage Journal

    Uhh, my PSP was able to do this with my PS3. What's new, here?

    • Your PSP has no screen, plays output on the TV, uses a separate controller and cost $100 when released?

      I think that's really part of the point, the remote play in and of itself may not be new, but the way it'll work and enable the Vita TV to be used to play PS4 games on any TV in your house, is the new twist. The article sees that as the more compelling use than playing Vita games on the TV.

    • by PKFC ( 580410 )

      They say that it will work with every game and work better. I thought it was a pretty lousy feature on the PSP as it seemed to need too much bandwidth to be worthwhile. It's neat for about ten minutes to play a PS1 game from a disc in the PS3, but the lag...

      • by Guppy06 ( 410832 )

        They say that it will work with every game and work better.

        That's still "evolutionary" versus "revolutionary," though. At the very least, it still doesn't seem to justify the author's apparent assertion that "This Changes Everything!"

      • The PS4 has a dedicated encoder chip to compress the streams. It's been rumored that it will take about 5Mbps for this to work.

        The Vita TV supports an wired Ethernet connection as well as 802.11N so bandwidth shouldn't be an issue. If the connection does require 5Mbps, it might work decently when streaming outside your home to a Vita, or maybe a Vita TV in a hotel room.

  • by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @03:18AM (#44817057)
    The Vita TV controller comes with a PS3 dual shock controller. Why didn't they use a variant of the PS4 controller with a touch sensitive pad?

    It seems pretty dumb to release a box to play Vita or PS4 games that has a controller that can't even replicate most or all of the control surfaces. The Vita even has a rear touch pad though it's probably the front one that matters most. The Vita TV could draw a little circle to indicate where the user is touching on the screen.

    • It comes with a DS3 because it will be released before the PS4. Once the PS4 is out, a firmware update will be released to make it compatible with a DS4.

      • by DrXym ( 126579 )
        That really doesn't make much sense. The Vita has a touch screen. The PS4's controller with its touch pad could act as a substitute. Without it the system from the UI through to the compatible games it can play are seriously gimped. Besides, the Vita TV releases on November 14 - exactly one day before the Playstation 4 does, albeit in Japan while the PS4 launches first in the US. They could have shared the same controller.

        I hope that if this thing launches in other territories it ships with the proper con

        • So far, the PS Vita TV has only been announced for a Japanese release. If it were to be released with a DS4, it would have to be delayed for 3 months. Even then, the touchpad on the DS4 isn't a replacement for the touchscreen on the Vita for all games that make use of it, nor does it have an equivalent to the back touchpad or the cameras, so plenty of Vita games still wouldn't work on it.

          • by DrXym ( 126579 )
            Why would it have delayed the Vita by 3 months? The PS4 controllers would be rolling off assembly lines in the far East regardless of where the PS4 is launched. Providing they had sufficient supply then the same controller could be used in one system.

            I think the touch pad could be used as a substitute for the touchscreen in almost all cases. The Vita TV could just draw a dot or something where somebody was touching and they'd get used to it. The backpad isn't used as much so it's loss wouldn't be so felt

  • by gagol ( 583737 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @03:41AM (#44817103)
    'it's almost like getting a second hdmi cable for $100.'
  • The PS3 is well known for crippled DLNA that does not even accept push as a client, typical Sony crippleware device. So if I take my cell and try to push a pic or a vid to it, it is essentially useless. Sure I can pick up the controller and browse to a DLNA server and then just maybe if the server is written by the Google summer of code guys [ps3mediaserver.org] I just might be able to view my videos and picks but only by browsing to them on the device which sucks big time

    Sorry but the crippled DLNA of both the Xbox and the

    • So.... You are taking the wait and see approach?

      There is very little reason to believe PS4 and Xbone will be shipping with 'crippled' DNLA servers. You have to remember PS3 was one of the first widely available consumer devices to deploy DNLA.

      • So.... You are taking the wait and see approach?

        There is very little reason to believe PS4 and Xbone will be shipping with 'crippled' DNLA servers. You have to remember PS3 was one of the first widely available consumer devices to deploy DNLA.

        Not that they cannot be a server but that they are not capable of receiving DLNA STANDARD push by design. If they will not even accept push from Sony's crippleware Android devices they just plain suck. Accepting push or play-to is a standard and they deliberately change the device DLNA to not accept Universal PNP. Same as Xbone except Microshaft deliberately obfuscates the protocol to only work with a heavily modified WMP interface , (so what's GNU).

        At least Samsung is trying to make their devices in the s

  • by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @05:42AM (#44817487)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Such a shame that Nintendo didn't learn from how quickly the Wiimote was copied by their competitors [...]

      Uh, you're kinda rewriting history a bit there.

      Wii release: November 2006
      Kinect release: November 2010
      Move release: September 2010

      I'd hardly refer to them taking four years to catch up as "quick". That was over halfway through the product cycle, and while the Wiimote shipped with every Wii sold, the Kinect only made it to about 1/3 of 360 owners, while the Move only got picked up by about 1/5 of PS3 owners. And dismissing the Wiimote as a gimmick demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding about the role th

  • How is it like getting a second PS4 for $100? The PS4 is single session, meaning that the best this adds is a sense of portability to the PS4. It's comparable to those devices that allowed the user to transmit a VCR output over RF that could be picked-up by other TVs in the house. Great, if only person in the house wants to watch a video.

  • >'[W]hen you're in the middle of a game and someone wants to watch TV, you can just grab a Vita and keep on playing.

    Because we're still living in the '50s where every household has only one tv.
    • Because we're still living in the '50s where every household has only one tv.

      So many parents force the consoles to be in the main room, because "it's for the family" or "we don't allow the children to have TVs of their own". I consider it a form of child abuse, but it's common.

    • It's not uncommon for the big TV (and nice sound system) to be in the living room, while in other rooms there would be smaller and cheaper boxes.

  • Just reminding folks that Sony uses your money to do things you hate. Don't give Sony your money.

  • '[W]hen you're in the middle of a game and someone wants to watch TV, you can just grab a Vita and keep on playing.

    Who the fuck cares about that? Anybody with enough disposable cash to buy gaming systems likely makes the kids play the damn games on the old TV sitting in the other room. I sure as shit don't let the teenagers play games on my living room TV. To the basement, you snot-nosers!

    • by captjc ( 453680 )

      Kids maybe, but what if you are the one playing games and your wife comes in because her show is on. Oh, you could tell her to pound sand, but good luck playing your other favorite "game" anytime soon, if you catch my meaning.

      Video gaming isn't just for kids any more.

      • Kids maybe, but what if you are the one playing games and your wife comes in because her show is on. Oh, you could tell her to pound sand, but good luck playing your other favorite "game" anytime soon, if you catch my meaning.

        Video gaming isn't just for kids any more.

        Yes it is. And get off my lawn.

        • by captjc ( 453680 )

          My ID is older than your ID, you can get off my lawn, son.

          • My ID is older than your ID, you can get off my lawn, son.

            Pro-tip: ID is not necessarily related to age. Some of us are so old that we forgot our password and had to start over.

  • For any Playstation 4 household with more than one TV I think the PS Vita TV will become a 'must-have' accessory; it's almost like getting a second PS4 for $100.'"

    Can you still call it a killer app if it could only fill the intersection of three niches?

    • by captjc ( 453680 )

      It's almost 2014, I'm pretty sure that people with multiple TVs is not a "niche". I'm fairly certain that there is a major overlap between people with game consoles and people who own multiple televisions. The ability to stream games and probably media from a PS4 to a different TV for only a $100 extra (on a $500 console) is a pretty sweet deal that could swing some on-the-fence sales from the XBone.

      I mean think about it, if Wife / Hubby / Roommate / Parents want to watch TV on the big screen downstairs, y

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Working...