Other Gaming Forum

Topic: PS Vita TV announced. (Oyua am cry)

Showing 161 to 180 of 238

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

161. Posted:

This thing looks kinda pointless, IMO. The whole point of the Vita was to be portable.

It can stream games locally(PS4) and via Gaikai(PS4, PSP, PSOne).

Maybe they think people will buy this instead of the PS Vita, and make it look more like the OUYA.

I find thing pretty confusing. It looks like it won't do alot of stuff I would have expected it to, like play ALL Vita games, and stream anything(I don't even care about streaming, really).

I think Gaikai is part of a PS+ subscription anyway, so maybe they plan on pushing that service.

I don't see how anyone has been able to make an informed decision on whether they want this or not.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
shingi_70

shingi_70

162. Posted:

Scar buddy I think your overthinking it. IT's just a choice dude.

-PS4 the high end future game machine that's going to for Gamers first and foremost.
Untitled
-$400
-Can currently only play PS4 titles

[imghttp://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/09/newps3image01-1348044213.jpg[/img]
-$250
-PS3 is the mid range device that has a Huge install base but future support is a bit in question past next year.
-Plays PS3/PS Classics

Untitled
-Sony's handheld system
-Plays PSV/PSP/PS classic/Playstation minis
-For those on the Go

Untitled
-Sony's low price box for the expanded market comeptes with the likes of Oyua, Roku, and apple TV
-$100
-Plays everything the PS VIta can but can also stream PS4 games to a differnt TV.

PS VIta makes sense as there are rumors of an expanded OYua like device from both Apple and Google. But some people also don't like handhelds or just want some cheap to play games on.

Edited on by shingi_70

WAT!

Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.

Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
OptometristLime

OptometristLime

163. Posted:

ScroogeMcLz wrote:

I'm not exactly sure what Vita TV is competing with. It's not a handheld, so not the 3DS.

Sony_70 wrote:

Apple TV, Roku as well a s xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

Untitled

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

164. Posted:

@Sony_70
Ya, that's probably the case. I'm one of those people that tries to buy the best of everything, so PS Vita TV isn't even worth a thought for me.

Priority list for PS in order:
1. PS4
2. PS Vita
3. PS Vita TV

That's the way I see it. I'm just thinking of PS Vita TV as a COMPLETE alternative to PS Vita, and that's not really the case.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
CanisWolfred

CanisWolfred

165. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

I'm just thinking of PS Vita TV as a COMPLETE alternative to PS Vita, and that's not really the case.

Why isn't it the case? It's a Vita minus the portability and half the cost, and, for now, a few of the touch screen games. Sounds like a good alternative to me if you don't care for the portability or touch-focused games.

This Hand of Mine Glows With An Awesome POWER!!! It's Burning Grip Tells Me to Defeat You!!!

I am the Wolf...Red
Wolfrun

Arooo~

Kyoji!!!!!!

AuthorMessage
OptometristLime

OptometristLime

166. Posted:

CanisWolfred wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

I'm just thinking of PS Vita TV as a COMPLETE alternative to PS Vita, and that's not really the case.

Why isn't it the case? It's a Vita minus the portability and half the cost, and, for now, a few of the touch screen games. Sounds like a good alternative to me if you don't care for the portability or touch-focused games.

Semantics are to blame:

I think 'COMPLETE alternative' here means a substitute of equal (or greater) value, with nothing lost.
The fact that Vita is a portable means these two items are not perfect substitutes.

Edited on by OptometristLime

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
TingLzAdmin

TingLz

167. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

I don't see how anyone has been able to make an informed decision on whether they want this or not.

Wut? It's $100 and a PS device. What more is there?

Nintendo Life Community Administrator

Fire Emblem! Enough said! TINGLE_loggery

Nintendo Network ID: LzWinky

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

168. Posted:

ScroogeMcLz wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

I don't see how anyone has been able to make an informed decision on whether they want this or not.

Wut? It's $100 and a PS device. What more is there?

This device can technically do alot more than they are advertising it for. Firmware could allow this to stream from the PS3, Gaikai(including PS4 features), etc, yet it doesn't look like it will do that.
PS3 should be able to stream from PS4, too, but it doesn't look like Sony will make features that could happen a possibility.

We'll see what happens, but there's alot of potential features missing here, including, but not limited to this device.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

169. Posted:

OptometristLime wrote:

CanisWolfred wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

I'm just thinking of PS Vita TV as a COMPLETE alternative to PS Vita, and that's not really the case.

Why isn't it the case? It's a Vita minus the portability and half the cost, and, for now, a few of the touch screen games. Sounds like a good alternative to me if you don't care for the portability or touch-focused games.

Semantics are to blame:

I think 'COMPLETE alternative' here means a substitute of equal (or greater) value, with nothing lost.
The fact that Vita is a portable means these two items are not perfect substitutes.

Yes. Portability and touch functions not being present is what this device has lost.
The PS4 remote feature seems somewhat pointless as well, unless you can play on the PS4 AND PS Vita TV simultaneously.
Otherwise, you could just move your PS4 to another room and have the same result. That's also why I was saying Sony's servers should be playing a larger role if they want this device to do well.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
CanisWolfred

CanisWolfred

170. Posted:

@SCAR - Even the trailer I'm pretty sure mentioned it's for playing the PS4 on another TV if that TV is taken up. And I can assure you, there are plenty of people who would find it an incredible hastle to hook up a console to a different TV, especially one as large as the PS4...

Also, to touch on a point you seem to be making: The point of the Vita is to play games. The Vita TV plays Vita games on the TV. Taking out the portability does not render the Vita TV useless.

This Hand of Mine Glows With An Awesome POWER!!! It's Burning Grip Tells Me to Defeat You!!!

I am the Wolf...Red
Wolfrun

Arooo~

Kyoji!!!!!!

AuthorMessage
Sleepingmudkip

Sleepingmudkip

171. Posted:

I see what sony doing there doing what capcom and square enix do. they spends lots of money it sells lots but in the end they lose money. they are doing alot of this i hope sony ok.(this happen this gen for sony and maybe next)

FIRE EMBLEM JUST FIRE EMBLEM.....GO BUY FIRE EMBLEM NOW!

Nintendo Network ID: lionel1 | Twitter:

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

172. Posted:

CanisWolfred wrote:

@SCAR - Even the trailer I'm pretty sure mentioned it's for playing the PS4 on another TV if that TV is taken up. And I can assure you, there are plenty of people who would find it an incredible hastle to hook up a console to a different TV, especially one as large as the PS4...

Also, to touch on a point you seem to be making: The point of the Vita is to play games. The Vita TV plays Vita games on the TV. Taking out the portability does not render the Vita TV useless.

Well, the PS4 should technically be able to stream to this while it's doing it's own thing, anyway, but it hasn't said whether it will or won't yet.
I could play a PS4 game in one room, and someone could be streaming another PS4 game to the PS Vita TV in another room.

The portability isn't that important I suppose, but not having touch is, and that derives from now resorting to DS3/4 controllers.

I could see this hooking up dual screen monitors side by side, but then they might as well have 2 HDMI outs on the PS4.

My point is that there are alot of different ways they could have done this, and I don't see why anyone would buy this unless it does what I mentiomed above.
Sony could just make PS Vita stream to the PS4, and your Vita games would be be on your TV.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
shingi_70

shingi_70

173. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

ScroogeMcLz wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

I don't see how anyone has been able to make an informed decision on whether they want this or not.

Wut? It's $100 and a PS device. What more is there?

This device can technically do alot more than they are advertising it for. Firmware could allow this to stream from the PS3, Gaikai(including PS4 features), etc, yet it doesn't look like it will do that.
PS3 should be able to stream from PS4, too, but it doesn't look like Sony will make features that could happen a possibility.

We'll see what happens, but there's alot of potential features missing here, including, but not limited to this device.

Vita TV will be able to stream PS4 games like the Portable Vita as long as there's a PS4 at your home. Vita TV will never be able o just Gaikai stream PS4 Games until the system is deeper into its life cycle. However Streaming PS2 (is there a PS2 Classics program) and PS3 will most likely be ready for the Vita TV next year. While the PS3 is making tons of money Gaikai will allow sony two things.

-Phase out the PS3 and have the PS4/Vita without a third system taking a ton of resoruces..
-Phasing out the PS3 will allow Vita TV to replace it, which will yield better profit margins out of the gate. (Being able to play PS1/PS2/PS3/PSP/PSVita games in one $100 box would push units.)

Vita TV is what Nintendo should have done with the WIi mini. (but a bit harder to do)

WAT!

Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.

Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

174. Posted:

I'm looking at this thing and what it can do for PS4.

Will you be able to play multiplayer on separate screens with your PS4 using this?

Will my PS3 do the PS4 streaming stuff without buying this?

My point is that I already know what this thing can do, but it probably won't. It looks like Sony is just throwing a ton of devices out here that can do bits and pieces of the same thing, yet only allow one thing to do what the others can do as well. They just don't allow it.

EDIT: Just like how PS3 could have played PS2 games via software emulation, yet it didn't.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
shingi_70

shingi_70

175. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

I'm looking at this thing and what it can do for PS4.

Will you be able to play multiplayer on separate screens with your PS4 using this?

Will my PS3 do the PS4 streaming stuff without buying this?

My point is that I already know what this thing can do, but it probably won't. It looks like Sony is just throwing a ton of devices out here that can do bits and pieces of the same thing, yet only allow one thing to do what the others can do as well. They just don't allow it.

EDIT: Just like how PS3 could have played PS2 games via software emulation, yet it didn't.

PS3 did play PS2 if you had the orginal model. If your talking about downloaded PS2 Games than the HD remasters probably threw a wrench into that.

WAT!

Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.

Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

176. Posted:

@Sony_70
I'm talking about the slim models with PS2 discs. They could have gotten it to work, but they didn't bother programming it.

Everything I'm bringing up as a "let down" is completely programming related, but that doesn't change the fact that features I would think should be there, aren't.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
kkslider5552000

kkslider5552000

177. Posted:

I think most of my annoyance with this (if not all of it) is people pretending it is some salvation for the game system with games mostly only indie as heck gamers care about. Vita's current and upcoming game library still confirms that Vita will never be that big over here, unfair or otherwise. I don't know why people are so immediately interested to treat every new interesting piece of technology as the next big thing, it is so dumb. Even Wii U's initial look (which still has some stuff more interesting than anything in the current games from a gimmick perspective, for the record) I thought was cool but still overrated way too much. I think that's why this annoys me beyond actual logical reasons for why it's bad (though I'm still certain it's gonna be flawed).

Because really thinking about it again, despite being harsh on it, I wouldn't mind getting one. IIRC, Vita PSN is inferior to PS3 PSN for PS1/2 games so my ability to get all the old games I want is limited (though Capcom not putting the Legends games on it is what's truly limiting it), but beyond that, I'd be glad to get it. 100 bucks for some more cool games...and as one of the 10 people who still doesn't use Steam, a 2nd indie box! Some Gravity Rush and some obscure japanese stuff...all sounds like fun.

Edited on by kkslider5552000

3DS friend code: 2878 - 9709 - 5054
Nintendo Network ID: SliderGamer55

I have a Let's Play channel? How?!

AuthorMessage
OptometristLime

OptometristLime

178. Posted:

Glad you were able to articulate your point @kkslider5552000

My disdain for this console stems from its awkward positioning in the marketplace. The price of the machine is nigh irrelevant against the broader issue of advertising an identity, so it can reach a mainstream audience. Sadly the more I read about it the less convinced I am that this is a console for the masses. For starters its intimate tie-in with the PS4 immediately places it in Sony territory, where the affluent console owner who can afford a PS4 will snap this up without another thought. Yet there is an issue here for uninformed consumers, who will see this product and assume it's the next Sony console. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some people to misinterpret certain features, or even believe it to be a mini PS4.

As kkslider alluded to, the fledgling gamer may only have access to what they see on a store shelf. The 'welcome to the future' message, where you are supposed to know that you can download a much broader selection, may be lost on this crowd (as it was with the PSP GO). While the entry-level price is all well and good, a person choosing this system on cost alone more or less, may find only a woeful collection of games.

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
CanisWolfred

CanisWolfred

179. Posted:

OptometristLime wrote:

Glad you were able to articulate your point @kkslider5552000

My disdain for this console stems from its awkward positioning in the marketplace. The price of the machine is nigh irrelevant against the broader issue of advertising an identity, so it can reach a mainstream audience. Sadly the more I read about it the less convinced I am that this is a console for the masses. For starters its intimate tie-in with the PS4 immediately places it in Sony territory, where the affluent console owner who can afford a PS4 will snap this up without another thought. Yet there is an issue here for uninformed consumers, who will see this product and assume it's the next Sony console. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some people to misinterpret certain features, or even believe it to be a mini PS4.

As kkslider alluded to, the fledgling gamer may only have access to what they see on a store shelf. The 'welcome to the future' message, where you are supposed to know that you can download a much broader selection, may be lost on this crowd (as it was with the PSP GO). While the entry-level price is all well and good, a person choosing this system on cost alone more or less, may find only a woeful collection of games.

But why in this day and age would consumers not know they can download games? Surely they'd be used to the idea from phones and tablets, yes? Even the Roku 3, a streaming device, has a (very limited) selection of games. If they can find the store, which the Playstation Vita so willingly takes you to when you start it up for the first time, they won't be short on games. Besides full Vita titles, PSOne games, and smaller PSN titles, there are also Playstation Mobile games and Playstation Minis that don't always use the touch features, so they'll have plenty of options right out the gate.

And it's Sony's job to advertise the Vita TV correctly. Uninformed consumers shouldn't be a problem if they put out the right information correctly. If they can't do that, then I have no remorse for them. IIRC, they got a new advertising firm a few years back. Hopefully they'll earn their pay for both the PS4 and the Vita TV once they're out.

This Hand of Mine Glows With An Awesome POWER!!! It's Burning Grip Tells Me to Defeat You!!!

I am the Wolf...Red
Wolfrun

Arooo~

Kyoji!!!!!!

AuthorMessage
SCAR392

SCAR392

180. Posted:

@CanisWolfred
There's already not enough info for this device as it is. I already have tons of questions that haven't been answered in regarda to PS Vita TV.
This entire thing should clarify why I don't care to follow Sony at all.

They didn't explain the capabilities of remote play, Gaikai, or if I even need to buy this if I already have a PS3. Besides the Vita games/features, I should be able to use my PS3, as-is, as a remote play device from the PS4.

This is aside the fact that you can only have 2 systems tied to your account for Sony systems for gaming, unless they're counting Gaikai streaming as a video file(which is allowed on up to 1 home/3 portable devices for Sony accounts).

This whole situation looks like a home project for the Sony after market, IMO.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²