PS4 developer: Sony mandates Vita Remote Play for all games

[Greenguy81]

Hopefully a sign of more support for the Vita 

 

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

 

A trusted PlayStation 4 developer source with a proven track record for accuracy has told Digital Foundry that Sony has mandated Vita Remote Play for all upcoming PS4 games - except those that require the use of its bundled stereoscopic camera, the PS4 Eye.

The news is a shot in the arm for the beleaguered PlayStation Vita, which has failed to attract commercial success in line with Sony's hopes for the system, and sets the stage for the handheld to provide the same kind of off-TV play that makes the Wii U GamePad such a useful gadget for gaming around the home (and indeed elsewhere).

 

Remote Play works by downscaling the 1080p framebuffer to the Vita's native 960x544 resolution, using the PS4's in-built hardware h.264 video encoder to compress the image. This is then beamed out over WiFi to the Vita, which decodes the video and sends back controller inputs to the PlayStation 4. It's effectively OnLive cloud streaming technology relocated to the home - the difference being that image quality issues can be resolved through much higher-bandwidth video, while input latency is cut down considerably owing to the localised nature of the network.

 

Remote Play itself is nothing new of course - PSP and Vita had lacklustre, laggy support for a handful of PS3 games - but Vita itself has seen virtually no additional support, despite the introduction of a higher-quality 480p protocol. Indeed, those running hacked PS3 firmwareshave had access to the most games. The problem is that PS3 Remote Play is based around software video encoding via the Cell's SPUs, and developers are not keen on sacrificing that CPU time for Remote Play support, while the technology itself is slow to respond, with dodgy image quality.

 

It's all change for PlayStation 4, which features bespoke hardware video encoding for Remote Play, gameplay recording and screen-sharing support with all the benefits of the Gaikai streaming technology. It's a feature built into the operating system itself, incurring no performance penalty to developers. Up until now, the question has been to what extent publishers would want the feature enabled - conceivably, opening up a new library of software for Vita could steal sales from games designed for the system. The news that Sony is mandating support for all titles that don't require the camera takes the choice away from the publishers and ensures a level of consistency in the features that the majority of games offer.

 

The lack of support for titles using the PlayStation 4 Eye isn't particularly surprising. While the Vita has its own cameras, they lack the resolution of the bundled PS4 camera (not to mention the stereoscopic elements), plus of course any video data acquired would need to be beamed back to the PS4 for processing - not at all friendly from a platform perspective. It can't be easily supported at all, so games utilising the PS4 Eye - which we expect to be a minimal amount - are exempt from the new mandate.

 

We're particularly eager to get hands-on with PS4's Vita Remote Play features and to put image quality and latency to the test. The news that the vast majority of titles should support Remote Play means we'll have an enviable library of test games available on day one once Sony's next-gen console launches later in the year...

Edited May 29, 2013 by Greenguy81

[xVolloxx]

Thanks for the info  

[Memnoch]

makes it sound more like the vita is a controller, rather than a game unit in it's own right ...

[Piggie_Pie]

so now Sony will have their very own Wii-U... and from the sound of things Microsoft will also have a touch-pad with tablets being used for XBone.

 

So the Dual-Shock 4 is just for people who don't one Vitas then... I wonder if this will drive up Vita sales...

[Latikos]

makes it sound more like the vita is a controller, rather than a game unit in it's own right ...

A very expensive one...

 

Might not sound bad per se, but I would prefer more Vita-exclusive (full price; not minis or something) games.

[Artemisthemp]

I really hope Sony don't do that, since it will force Companies to spend time (that could be used on the game) on getting Remote Play Working

[Sly Ripper]

I really hope Sony don't do that, since it will force Companies to spend time (that could be used on the game) on getting Remote Play Working

 

It'll all be handled via APIs, it probably doesn't take much work.

[chibuki]

This is what they said to work with PS3 before the Vita came out but all I could do with it is browse XMB. Turns out no game support it and it ended an empty promise. The concept sounds cool yet it's a difficult risk or reward situation. I'm most concerned about delay time over the network and things like that more than anything. If it all work out well, then the Vita will finally have a major feature to boast.

Edited May 29, 2013 by chibuki

[Parker]

On one hand I think it is a really good thing and a cool feature that could potentially bring in a lot more Vita customers, but on the other hand I'm not fond of a parent company forcing a "gimmick" into someone else's game just because they can. I hope that this isn't too terribly difficult to implement as I'll surely take advantage of it.

 

 

Parker

[Wolvie_181]

I wish they would make games for the Vita instead of cross-play games.

 

Games sell consoles,and right now the Vita doesn't have the games to sell the handheld.

[Parker]

I wish they would make games for the Vita instead of cross-play games.

 

Games sell consoles,and right now the Vita doesn't have the games to sell the handheld.

 

I agree to an extent. I personally think the Vita has a great library right now and it is definitely worth a purchase, but the thing that bothers me is the lack of new games being released, or announced, for the Vita. The 3DS has quite a few games that we know are going to be released this year, and what does the Vita have? Killzone? I'm sure there is more but we haven't heard anything. I still use my Vita much more than my 3DS but I am looking forward to the Sonic games for my Nintendo handheld.

 

 

Parker

[Wolvie_181]

I agree to an extent. I personally think the Vita has a great library right now and it is definitely worth a purchase, but the thing that bothers me is the lack of new games being released, or announced, for the Vita. The 3DS has quite a few games that we know are going to be released this year, and what does the Vita have? Killzone? I'm sure there is more but we haven't heard anything. I still use my Vita much more than my 3DS but I am looking forward to the Sonic games for my Nintendo handheld.

 

 

Parker

I would buy the Vita if there was one game on the system that will get me to buy one.

The 3DS has tons of games I want to play (Virtual Console games are great too)

Maybe this year's E3 Sony will announce some new games for the Vita.

Edited May 30, 2013 by wolverinefangirl

[AnRoDr]

The VITA does have some great games comming it's way or already in the library, trouble is that most of them are either also available on the PS3 or are an "inferior" extra installment of an existing series. Personally I think that this streaming of PS4 games to the handheld will prove to be the gimmick that will lure more gamers to the VITA thus paving the way for exclusives for the handheld.

Maybe even a bundle that gives you a PS4 and a VITA at once ... although that might be a little budget unfriendly.

[BadWolf90]

I think its a brilliant idea personally. I dont think its going to attract a vast amount of new Vita Owners, but its an extra feature to help it sell nonetheless. 

Sony should be focusing on getting more titles developed for the Vita though, not ports as somebody else has already stated. 

[skinner49]

I think it's a great idea, especially when there are times when I wish I could be gaming but can't due to the TV not being available. I might actually get one after I get the PS4.