Sony has detailed plans for the evolution of PlayStation Suite, as well as announcing a Vita update that'll see the handheld become a PS3 controller. The PlayStation Suite, which has been renamed PlayStation Mobile is heading towards various Sony-certified handsets, among them Acer tablets, the forthcoming WikiPad and, of course …
ps vita as a screen....yada yada
you missed the best news: psone games on the vita! woooooooooooooooo!
sorry, quite excited about this. MGS 1 here i come. then the HD remastered 2 and 3!
Cross-play was shown for one title, ONE, LittleBigPlanet 2.
And that is in the form of a mini-game that is downloaded and ran on the Vita itself, there is no WiiU second screen type of use possible, technically, ever, without shitloads of lag.
This is hardly a WiiU killer.
Re: What nonsense
Your lag comment is utter nonsense. The Vita is a full handheld console on it's own, unlike the Wii U controller that has little local processing power. On the Wii U the remote screens are rendered by the Wii U and sent to the controller. With the PS3+Vita the remote screen can be rendered by code running directly on the Vita itself. There is nothing in the architecture that would make the lag any worse than the Wii U and in fact it should be much better since there is far less info being transferred between the two systems.
Re: What nonsense
PS3 uses an ancient Bluetooth level and G-standard wifi, there will never be a decent second-screen solution like the WiiU has at the hardware level. Anyone who has tried remoteplay knows this.
What you propose is software based, which has to be supported in-game, on BOTH games for each console, and right now there is only LBP2 to get excited about.
My point about this articles comparison to the WiiU stands.
Re: What nonsense
"PS3 uses an ancient Bluetooth level and G-standard wifi, there will never be a decent second-screen solution like the WiiU has at the hardware level. Anyone who has tried remoteplay knows this."
Well that's nonsense. The PSP's remote play was perfectly capable of playing movies and video content over the screen and wifi.
It's also not beyond the bounds of possibility that the Vita could act as a smart controller for certain titles. e.g. to show a map on the screen, or inventory, or current objective, or provide shortcuts for some functions, or act as the video / voice chat link while playing. etc. It might require the Vita be running some kind of client app but it's technically possible.
It's quite clear that the possibilities of this arrangement are far richer than anything a Wii U device could offer.
Personally however I think the idea is probably a gimmick and will be something of a niche. Not everyone has a Vita so it does not seem likely it will be put it to much use outside of 1st party titles.
Re: What nonsense
What you describe sounds an awful lot like what Nintendo tried to do with the Gamecube and the GBA connector cable. It seemed like a fairly rubbish idea back then, so I'm not sure it's going to turn into something compelling now unless they've got a clever plan like "throw money at developers to encourage them to incorporate this function" - but given Sony's current financial state I don't imagine that's likely.
I do think it's important to retain awareness of the difference in developer mentality when it comes to these things: in the case of the WiiU, the know the controller ships with the console. In the case of the PS3, it's an optional extra. Smart developers treat those two scenarios as completely different things - you don't want to limit your potential audience to only those PS3 owners who also own Vitas (1.8 million units sold worldwide as of the end of March, though they expect PSP and PS Vita combined sales by end of March 2013 to be 12M). Requiring possession of a Vita to properly enjoy a game means that you can only really target a few million users, rather than the ~64M people who have a PS3.
Games on the go.
Something the Wii-U can't do, is start playing a PS3 game with the vita as a controller, and then carry on the game on the Vita on the move, and then move the gaming back to the PS3 later on.
However this clearly needs the dual-play games that come with a Vita and a PS3 version in the box at a slightly increased price. Other games just work in the Wii-U mode of using the mobile console as a controller.
Still it's nice to have both options...
Re: Games on the go.
PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale will do just that, include both platforms version in a single package and offer them at the normal price!
I don't know if this will continue to other future titles or not, but if they give you a 'one off' code in future PS3 titles that will allow you to download a free PS Vita copy. Then I believe that this will move many PS Vitas.
I'm not convinced, considering the abuse my PS3 controllers get sometimes; it's a bit pricey to use just as a controller. I like the idea AC "Games on the go." suggested, that we could switch between mobile/ps3 gaming seamlessly, but, I wonder how often anyone would use it. Beyond the novelty phase, will it still get some use? Toilet breaks for Black Ops zombies?
I like the idea AC "Games on the go." suggested, that we could switch between mobile/ps3 gaming seamlessly, but, I wonder how often anyone would use it.
Me, me, all the time, me. Sony call it "continuation play", and the complete lack of games currently supporting it is why I don't currently have a Vita. If I could play inFamous 2 at home, then continue it in my lunch break on my Vita, and pick up where I left off after work, that would be utterly bitchin'. It's the best touted feature of the Vita IMO, and no-one's bloody well implemented it!
EA just announced today that FIFA 13 will not support cross-saves. Which is both infuriating, and baffling.
So, having finally gotten around to copying the GameCube/GBA control set-up
They only have a little longer to wait for the Wii-U to see what in-game implementations they can copy too...
Truth is, the only things that work like this are multi-player games, where your local map/inventory etc. can be hidden from other players. But with no studios interested in multiplayer now online play is the norm (where hiding the view from other players is not an issue), and the unlikeliness of enough people with portables gathering around one console to play, these features are going to see about as much use as the Tingle Tuner. About the closest you're going to get to a 'killer app' is a Blu-Ray remote.
So Sony hasn't learned that $600+ for a console solution is a fail. Isn't that what it would cost for 2 vitas and a PS3? Not to mention the fact that optional peripherals very quickly lose dev interest. Why spend extra money to develop features a small subset of your audience will ever have access to? As said above only the Sony titles will have these features.
I stand corrected it would be close to $500 just for the 2 vita "controls" alone. I guess the PS3 does sell more to the solo gamers than say the Wii U but still.
Like the Xbox HDD and HD-DVD addons....
Re: optional peripherals
And how much did Microsoft and Sony bribe (sorry give subsidies) 3rd party devs to add any features for it?
Moving away from the WiiU banter. I'd kinda love to see the Ouya get Playstation Certified. Wonder what the barriers for it are. If anything it'd be another revenue stream for sony.
Have any of you actually played on a Wii U? how do you know that doesn’t have similar (fabricated) lag issues?
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series
- Kaspersky backpedals on 'done nothing wrong, nothing to fear' blather
- Episode 9 BOFH: The current value of our IT ASSets? Minus eleventy-seven...
- Too slow with that iPhone refresh, Apple: Android is GOBBLING up US mobile market