Support NeoGAF

[Man]

the PS3 screen (you hdtv) basically switch off during remote play, you got message saying remote play is in progress. in Wii-U, the HDTV is still functioning and can display something different altogether than the Tablet screen. current Remote Play can't do that

Well obviously they would have to put out an API for PS3/PSVita. They wouldn't just use the existing PSP streaming.

 

[Callibretto]

Doesn't AdHoc Party require the PS3 to be hard-wired?

They could use the method that GoFreak keeps mentioning, and even if it were just pure streaming, it will use G instead of just B.

hey, Adhoc Party is actually a perfect example of how this can work. basically PSP run the game, PS3 run the adhoc party app, and they function together to let you play online and chat. it's totally example of dual screen console gaming like Wii-U.

you play the game on PSP screen, and your TV screen is your text chat interface.

 

[Deadly Joker]

So it's looking like next gen it will be,

Sony and Nintendo = Tablet controllers
Microsoft = Kinect

Which would you prefer?

 

[evolution]

Didn't they already show this tech back in 2006 with the rear view mirror on the psp?

 

[titiklabingapat]

Like the Move copycat, it will likely fall flat on it's face. It has to be there right from the start, not an add-on. Better to invest the money in integrating it in PS4 instead.

 

[Callibretto]

This is false, as posted above the current PS3 version of Singstar available now uses Remote Play to enable the PSP to act as a second display.

oh ok, didn't know that.

 

[onQ123]

I wholeheartedly disagree. The day after the announcement of the Wii U would be the absolute best time to announce this if it was possible--it would take all of the thunder away from Nintendo.

"Oh, yeah--that Wii U thing? Our stuff can already do it."

We haven't heard it and we won't hear it because it's not possible right now because of the PS3/Vita.

When the PS4 comes out, my guess is that will change.

you're wrong dead wrong in fact Wipeout for Vita is already showing you that most of this can be done.


stop & think about what's going on in fact think about Portal cross platform play between the PS3 & PC, all the PS3 & Vita has to do is stream the data between each other there is no need of compressing HD video & sending it to the Vita because the rendering can be done on the Vita from the graphic commands sent from the PS3.

 

[Kosmo]

Hmm. I think we're all getting a little tangled up.

Let's split what Nintendo's showed.

Full game streaming - you can do a somewhat improved version of this on Vita/PS3 than PSP/PS3 (e.g. if you use bluetooth to send commands rather than wifi for everything), but it won't be as good as Wii U.

Everything else - do this with local app running on Vita and co-ordinating with PS3 game. Perfectly doable and don't have to worry about latency.

That's how I see it.

Nintendo will ALWAYS sell on it's first party games, I was just surprised that the only thing they really showed was a side scrolling Super Mario game and their push seems to be 3rd part developers. Their problem this time around, unlike with their motion controls on the Wii, they won't have a first mover advantage. Their cards are already somewhat on the table with WiiU and with Sony releasing the Vita this fall they can try and lock up some of Nintendo's market.

I think the Wii was such a huge success, that WiiU is going to have a hard time cracking into that type of market again.

Time will tell, but I do like that they push the envelope - problem is Sony can be right there to match them.

 

[onQ123]

Like the Move copycat, it will likely fall flat on it's face. It has to be there right from the start, not an add-on. Better to invest the money in integrating it in PS4 instead.

8.8 million sold is falling flat on your face? didn't know that

 

[C.Dark.DN]

So, is it Ultra-wideband? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-wideband
I see some wireless surround systems use it and the wiki says "High data rate UWB can enable wireless monitors,"

 

[Callibretto]

So it's looking like next gen it will be,

Sony and Nintendo = Tablet controllers
Microsoft = Kinect

Which would you prefer?

I really like Wii-U concept, but limited to 1 Tablet per console is a big turnoff, they have to figure out something to fix that, also, I don't know how comfortable it is to play core games with tablet that big. Vita size seems a bit better, easier to hold, add some grip like dualshock underneath and it'd probably be comfortable.

 

[Interfectum]

So it's looking like next gen it will be,

Sony and Nintendo = Tablet controllers
Microsoft = Kinect

Which would you prefer?

Anything is better than Kinect.

 

[jaypah]

So it's looking like next gen it will be,

Sony and Nintendo = Tablet controllers
Microsoft = Kinect

Which would you prefer?

Both. I'm going to buy all 3 so a little differentiation between them would be nice. Also I like kinect but would be interested in what an upgraded (or controller assisted) kinect would bring.

 

[gamergirly]

I'm sure Wii U is going to inspire everything. But it gets to the point of how many Addons will the 360 and PS3 have? Wii U is also a "new console" and that word "New" has alot of tracking

 

[Lonely1]

Everything else - do this with local app running on Vita and co-ordinating with PS3 game. Perfectly doable and don't have to worry about latency. I think these are the use cases Yoshida is thinking about - using it as a controller-with-screen, a second screen in addition to the TV while playing games.

That's how I see it.

So, like GC to GBA connectivity?

 

[iceatcs]

So, like GC to GBA connectivity?

Yeah like that. Nothing wrong with it.

 

[syoaran]

Sony can probably do this

Sony will probably do this

Sony are not banking on this at all. They want to drive 3D TV's (with glasses) and 3D experiences. Their entire company has been driving towards a gamble that 3D will become a replacement for HD. if the Vita screen showed a 3D image, I'd say that the two could be very similar in the future.

So maybe version 2 of the vita

 

[mentalfloss]

So it's looking like next gen it will be,

Sony and Nintendo = Tablet controllers
Microsoft = Kinect

Which would you prefer?

I might be picking up a PSV, but already have a 360, so that rules out the Faux Wii U. Kinect still looks too imprecise and inaccurate to take seriously.

So, looks like I'll just stick with the Wii U "tablet" solution.

 

[Callibretto]

So, like GC to GBA connectivity?

yup. theoritically it's possible, although perhaps not viable enough for third party to invest in this stuff. and if they do it, it'll be just an extra since their main target may not have Vita.

 

[gofreak]

So, like GC to GBA connectivity?

Precisely. Which is conceptually, basically, what Nintendo's other use cases have shown in terms of end result (an alternative perspective or aspect of the game running on the controller) - but the 'GBA bit' runs on the Wii U, and thus with a lot more horsepower at its disposal. Vita's 'GBA bit' would have the extent of Vita's horsepower at its disposal.

 

[SSJ1Goku]

Sony already has a patent for a LCD touch screen controller

I completely forgot about that thing.

 

[NeoUltima]

Sony kinda already experimented with this stuff with ps3 + psp. And I'm sure they already had plans for more connectivity. So they aren't necessarily being inspired by WU.

But then again, Nintendo started all this console connectivity with GBA/GC.

Now if Sony made a standalone controller with all the features of the WU, that would be another story.

 

[Plinko]

you're wrong dead wrong in fact Wipeout for Vita is already showing you that most of this can be done.


stop & think about what's going on in fact think about Portal cross platform play between the PS3 & PC, all the PS3 & Vita has to do is stream the data between each other there is no need of compressing HD video & sending it to the Vita because the rendering can be done on the Vita from the graphic commands sent from the PS3.

I don't think you understand what "Crossplay" means.

We've already covered in this thread why the PS3/Vita can't do lag-free streaming like the Wii U.

 

[Callibretto]

if Sony want to be super shameless about it, can't they use PSVita's multi purpose port to add whatever accessories needed to make it happen? earlier we talk about how Wii-U know the positioning of the tablet in relation to the tv. it's the same as wiimote, it use sensor bar on the TV and infrared sensor on top of the tablet.

Can't Sony just add infrared attachment under PSvita and have sensor bar connected to PS3 via USB. sure it's gonna be super shameless if they do that but it's technically possible right?

 

[onQ123]

Sony kinda already experimented with this stuff with ps3 + psp. And I'm sure they already had plans for more connectivity. So they aren't necessarily being inspired by WU.

But then again, Nintendo started all this console connectivity with GBA/GC.

 

[tycoonheart]

2 reasons -

1, the one everyone keeps ignoring, which is that it would not use Remote Play, it would be a client app, like they've demo'd in the past, and

2, because we know the spec. It has 802.11n and a 4-core mobile proc. The PS3 has no issue streaming and encoding this stuff, believe me, that's an area where the Cell shines, and it has 802.11g, so there's no reason to believe it can't.

If you believe that you can do any sort of LAN gaming over WiFi G at all then you have to believe this is possible.

If someone is streaming an HD movie off of Netflix on the same network, could you potentially see latency issues?

 

[Phonomezer]

Microsoft did this with Xbox 360 - Kinect - Windows Phone 7 integration:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHJOeqir56I

I expect to see more of this next-gen.

 

[tycoonheart]

Completely disagree.

All the PS3+Vita stuff can be optional.

For example say GT5....

If people have just dual shocks - they have to take it in turns to select the cars, and colours and options and tuning.

If each player had a vita then you can select your car and options on the Vita screen... all at the same time... you would get a mini track on your screen.... hell if you plug in a set of earphones... you can get instructions or lap times or something relating to your race and who's behind u, how far, all the telemetry stuff etc.

regardless - the GT5 game would only send over a small program file of say 1 gig to do these things and link with the main game.

having your own screen would be huge for multiplayer gaming to 'do your own thing' while everyone still plays the main game. thats what its all about... im surprised and a little curious this is not really the route Nintendo is thinking for the Wii U - so we'll have to wait and see.

How many developers will go for that?

Creating something optional means having to use more resource.

Plus, what % of PS3 owners will even use this connectivity feature? If it is small, is it worth it to spend the extra resource developing this option?

 

[Callibretto]

I don't think you understand what "Crossplay" means.

We've already covered in this thread why the PS3/Vita can't do lag-free streaming like the Wii U.

if you read this thread, you'll know that we already ditch the idea of streaming entirely. Wii-U use streaming because the tablet controller don't have it's own CPU/GPU to render the game, so it let the console render it and stream it to the tablet.

we've been talking about another approach, which basically let PSVita render it's own visual totally separate from PS3, and have PSVita communicate with PS3 using bluetooth or Wifi. if it lag or not depend on their netcode, just like any online games are basically multiple PS3 communicating with each other.

 

[Dead Man Typing]

I'm happy, I've been wanting a next gen VMU for years.

What took so long?

They even showed a Silent Scope-esque Mii game on the demo reel, just to show that we can finally get a proper home port of that game. (Silent Scope on Dreamcast's VMU version of the on screen action was very impressive given the limitations of the screen, but still impossible to use for gameplay. The auto zooming sniper rifle for Xbox and PS2 was also kind of cool, but not consistent)

 

[onQ123]

I don't think you understand what "Crossplay" means.

We've already covered in this thread why the PS3/Vita can't do lag-free streaming like the Wii U.

that's the point it doesn't need to stream video because Vita has a GPU that can render the graphic commands streamed from the PS3.

why is it so hard for you to understand that?


why waste resource encoding the game into a video file & screaming it to the Vita when they can just send the graphic commands to the Vita & let it render the game on it's screen the same way it's rendering the other players in Wipeout & how the PS3 & PC render the other players from the other platform.

 

[gofreak]

if Sony want to be super shameless about it, can't they use PSVita's multi purpose port to add whatever accessories needed to make it happen? earlier we talk about how Wii-U know the positioning of the tablet in relation to the tv. it's the same as wiimote, it use sensor bar on the TV and infrared sensor on top of the tablet.

Can't Sony just add infrared attachment under PSvita and have sensor bar connected to PS3 via USB. sure it's gonna be super shameless if they do that but it's technically possible right?

Pretty sure that port is not used for finding the TV. That side of the controller is pointed at the ceiling in most use cases. It wouldn't have a clue where the TV was.

I am quite sure now, after watching the shield demos, that it just asks you to hold the controller toward the screen, and then uses internal sensors. It doesn't really know where the TV is per se, except an estimate based on your initial position and motion.

PSVita is actually already, potentially, better equipped to actually know where the TV is, with the camera on the back.

 

[Phonomezer]

I'm happy, I've been wanting a next gen VMU for years.

Yeah.. buuut part of the VMU's charm was that it was portable.

 

[KingDizzi]

People have already explained why there will not be a Wii U like experience between Vita-PS3 but fully expect it to happen with PS4. PS4 will have improved move or whatever but you can get Vita to play PS4 games on the go, use it as a PS4 controller etc. Remote play was so long ago now one would expect Sony to have moved on from that.

 

[Plinko]

if you read this thread, you'll know that we already ditch the idea of streaming entirely. Wii-U use streaming because the tablet controller don't have it's own CPU/GPU to render the game, so it let the console render it and stream it to the tablet.

And I don't think you read the post I was responding to. I realize we've moved on. That's what I was trying to tell him. He's insisting lag free streaming is possible when it's not.

 

[jump_button]

I can see this but the point is like the Wii came with a Wii mote, the Wii U it come with the pad and it going to cost alot just for a Vita and PS3

I always wanted to use my handhold as a pad I like the idea back with GC and GBA days, too bad it never worked out

<3 FFCC

 

[Shai-Tan]

http://www.mathpirate.net/GameSystems/AtariJaguar/Images/AtariJaguar_Controller_WithOverlay.jpg

 

[Oppo]

I don't think you understand what "Crossplay" means.
We've already covered in this thread why the PS3/Vita can't do lag-free streaming like the Wii U.

No we haven't, we've done the opposite – you just keep saying "nuh-uh". It's absolutely possible and not even exotic.

Can't Sony just add infrared attachment under PSvita and have sensor bar connected to PS3 via USB. sure it's gonna be super shameless if they do that but it's technically possible right?

They may not need to for tracking, it does have a camera back there, and I imagine the rectangle of the tv screen shows up pretty good, even at 640x480. But yeah they could.

If someone is streaming an HD movie off of Netflix on the same network, could you potentially see latency issues?

Here's a difference in the one category that gofreak defined at the top of the page that I would further elaborate on.

There are 2 kinds of "streaming" we are talking about here.

1 kind, the network/IP kind, you do over your network, ala Netflix. That's handled by your router, that's local internet traffic.

2nd kind, a proprietary wireless RF video-mirroring solution. This is what Nintendo is using, some kind of UWB thing - this does not run on your network. It's like a cordless phone base, it's its own thing, and won't impact the traffic on your local network.

The only real issue is potential interference but I imagine they have that sorted with frequencies and channel hopping.

The Wii U method is #2, it is going to be extremely solid and not prone to dropping out, in all likelihood. Sony would have to employ method #1 for video streaming, which they do NOT need to do to support 2-screen gaming. The PS3 game on disc would come with a little Vita app that would install once and handle very light communication via WiFi or BT, obviating the need for compressing and throwing around a big laggy video stream.

Remote Play is primarily for watching videos that are on your PS3, via your PSP. It works super well for that. But the gaming thing is an artifact, and no dev would go that route, it costs too much in CPU time and memory, when you can just adjust a tiny handful of numbers and throw those back and forth instead. It's like juggling with ping pong balls (client method) vs bowling balls (network streaming).

 

[Plinko]

No we haven't, we've done the opposite – you just keep saying "nuh-uh". It's absolutely possible and not even exotic.

Others in the thread have agreed it's not feasible as well. What are you talking about when you say "we?"

I see what you're saying with your last post and it will be interesting to see if Sony does anything with it.

As I stated earlier, though, it makes absolutely no business sense for Sony not to mention it now if they've done it. None. Now is the perfect time to steal the thunder away, and all we got from Sony is, "Well, that would be interesting."

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

I don't think you understand what "Crossplay" means.

We've already covered in this thread why the PS3/Vita can't do lag-free streaming like the Wii U.

Since I am sick of hearing it being used...

There is no such thing as zero latency transport. It does not, and cannot exist.

Edit: The actual issue is whether or not PS3/Vita can do it and minimize latency enough that it doesn't matter. And that is FAR from out of the question.

 

[Oppo]

Others in the thread have agreed it's not feasible as well. What are you talking about when you say "we?"

Ok humour me and tell me why again?

 

[tycoonheart]

No we haven't, we've done the opposite – you just keep saying "nuh-uh". It's absolutely possible and not even exotic.



They may not need to for tracking, it does have a camera back there, and I imagine the rectangle of the tv screen shows up pretty good, even at 640x480. But yeah they could.


Here's a difference in the one category that gofreak defined at the top of the page that I would further elaborate on.

There are 2 kinds of "streaming" we are talking about here.

1 kind, the network/IP kind, you do over your network, ala Netflix. That's handled by your router, that's local internet traffic.

2nd kind, a proprietary wireless RF video-mirroring solution. This is what Nintendo is using, some kind of UWB thing - this does not run on your network. It's like a cordless phone base, it's its own thing, and won't impact the traffic on your local network.

The only real issue is potential interference but I imagine they have that sorted with frequencies and channel hopping.

The Wii U method is #2, it is going to be extremely solid and not prone to dropping out, in all likelihood. Sony would have to employ method #1 for video streaming, which they do NOT need to do to support 2-screen gaming. The PS3 game on disc would come with a little Vita app that would install once and handle very light communication via WiFi or BT, obviating the need for compressing and throwing around a big laggy video stream.

Remote Play is primarily for watching videos that are on your PS3, via your PSP. It works super well for that. But the gaming thing is an artifact, and no dev would go that route, it costs too much in CPU time and memory, when you can just adjust a tiny handful of numbers and throw those back and forth instead. It's like juggling with ping pong balls (client method) vs bowling balls (network streaming).

So in your PS3/Vita 2 screen-gaming scenario, you'd have to install a pretty big client on the Vita too, right? For example, Game A will need to have a version for the PS3 and a version on the Vita. Only then could they connect with each other using "tiny handful of numbers".

 

[AranhaHunter]

Like the Move copycat, it will likely fall flat on it's face. It has to be there right from the start, not an add-on. Better to invest the money in integrating it in PS4 instead.

I love how people often say a handheld that sells 70 million or an accessory that sells 8.8 million are failures.

Anyways, I'm curious what the technology is that WiiU controller is using. Obviously not blue tooth or 802.11n since those two could be done on PS3/Vita (PS3 wired on an n router).

 

[gofreak]

So in your PS3/Vita 2 screen-gaming scenario, you'd have to install a pretty big client on the Vita too, right? For example, Game A will need to have a version for the PS3 and a version on the Vita.

They'd need a app for whatever role they want Vita to play.

I mean if it's just an inventory thing, it'd be very small, for example. So it would depend.

The one thing I'd like to see someone do, even just as a tech demo, would be 'burst out of the TV' AR. I think Nintendo's completely missing a beat by not putting a camera on the back of the Wii U controller, so that looking through it could more directly augment what's on the TV and the real world around it. Vita's not ideally equipped - I'd prefer higher resolution to maintain a clearer view of the TV image - but for some visual styles it could work OK. I had a go with my 3DS's AR with a AR card on my monitor and it gives a neat little taste of something 'popping out' of the TV.

 

[Oppo]

So in your PS3/Vita 2 screen-gaming scenario, you'd have to install a pretty big client on the Vita too, right? For example, Game A will need to have a version for the PS3 and a version on the Vita. Only then could they connect with each other using "tiny handful of numbers".

It really depends quite a lot on the game, and the nature of the 2nd screen. If it were a full-on independent camera view of a 3D game then yeah, definitely. If it were map/inventory type stuff it would be very small, just a few assets in a small client.

I really want to be clear that I don't think Sony is going to run out and do this tomorrow, I started the notion thinking that it's good for both platforms, since 3rd party devs have more incentive to do dual-screen games, even if it's just a small amount more on the Sony side, may as well use the work.

 

[majortom1981]

Keep in mind nintendo has also been doing screen on the controller since the gamecube with the gameboy advance - gamecube link.

also the ds and the wii currently link together also.

The problem sony has is they are followers. If yo uread nintendos dev talks they flesh out a concept pretty far before deciding if its something they should do. They do tons of testing , tons of what if scenarios.

Sony seems to be like look at what nitnendo is doing lets tack it onto our console.

Keep in mind the wii u is built with this in mind . So I would think nintendo designed the system to do this without too much cpu time being used up. If you do this on the ps3 cpu time would have to be used to keep the vita and ps3 in sync.

 

[onQ123]

Remote rendering crossplatform, multiplatform and multi-user

 

[Maleficence]

Why has someone pasted an ipod nano screen on that? lol

 

[tycoonheart]

It really depends quite a lot on the game, and the nature of the 2nd screen. If it were a full-on independent camera view of a 3D game then yeah, definitely. If it were map/inventory type stuff it would be very small, just a few assets in a small client.

I really want to be clear that I don't think Sony is going to run out and do this tomorrow, I started the notion thinking that it's good for both platforms, since 3rd party devs have more incentive to do dual-screen games, even if it's just a small amount more on the Sony side, may as well use the work.

Right, that was my point. There isn't any feasible way for Sony right now to do video mirroring like WiiU can, unless of course they go the route of installing an entire game on the Vita.

It can definitely handle dashboard type screen on the Vita 'coz the install size would possibly be relatively small.

So people who think PS3/Vita can do what the WiiU can, they're technically in the right, I suppose, but not feasible at all.

 

[Zee-Row]

I'd imagine these ideas will be as successful as 4 Swords was on the Gamecube , not very much so.