
Sony Unveils ‘PlayStation Vita TV,’ a Tiny, Sub-$100 Game Console - Tiktaalik
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/09/playstation-vita-tv/
======
nicholassmith
This is quite a clever product from Sony, it's a good reuse of existing
technology and repackaged for a different market. There's plenty of casual
gamers who won't want to invest $400 into getting a PS4, but want something
they can play some games on their TV and get access to streaming services, so
it's great for their needs. It's great for gamers who may have to share one TV
with their PS4 on, but have access to another so they can continue gaming
without having to unplug and shift it.

Sony seems to be putting some really strong ideas forward at the moment, it's
interesting to see.

~~~
VLM
> want something they can play some games on their TV and get access to
> streaming services

Roku has been around for years and everyone that wants your list already
bought one (or a competitor). Other than a slightly fancier controller
cannibalizing higher end sales yet not being completely compatible with the
higher end, and a much larger ad budget, I'm not sure what if anything Sony
brings to the table better than the numerous established competitors in
exactly the same space.

Its the "memory stick" of streaming boxes.

If I was in the market, I'd probably be more likely to purchase one of those
generic android PCs with HDMI out, so I have the same apps my phone and tablet
have on my TV, or buy yet another Roku, which has worked well for many years
for me doing the exact same tasks being claimed as "new" by the sony device.

~~~
girvo
Game Quality. That's the key difference, at least compared to its direct
competitors. IMO that's a large difference, and not one that Roku and the like
can compete with. It's a serious value-add, and as long as the media services
are as seamless as it's competitors, it's a good choice.

~~~
VLM
Ah but its hardly the only "attach to a TV to play games" device out there.
You have an extremely narrow window between "don't care / angry birds is good
enough" and "Must have major title XYZ or its worthless". So you're J6P with
your $700 TV and $150/month cable subscription and there's a $100 device thats
not nearly as good as a mere $300 xbox, err...

Back in the industrial era there was this car called the Edsel which tried to
wedge itself into a ecological niche too small for it to fit in, and it became
a legend. Not a good legend BTW.

------
girvo
Ouya just got owned. At least, for me, anyway: I wanted to get one, I'll get
this instead due to vastly better game quality, and a great platform for
indies as well. Nice move, Sony.

~~~
Pxtl
Well, the Ouya still has some selling points over this device - we've got the
Apple/PC division going here, since Sony is notorious for being one of the
most hardcore we-control-your-device DRM fans while Ouya prides themselves on
openness. With ease of porting from Andriod and very low development overhead,
Ouya will still have some selling points for developers too.

I hope the marketplace has room for both devices. But yeah, Ouya will have to
take this as a serious challenge - they'll have to move _fast_ and get any
outstanding flaws in their devices and libraries locked down.

~~~
girvo
Okay, I'd agree with that; I do think however that Ouya's main issue right now
is actual game quality, which this device kills. Unlike mobile phones and the
like, I don't know if Worse is Better really works (yet, anyway, we will see
in the future!).

I hope this makes the microconsole guys sit up, take notice, and start pumping
money into some of these indie studios if they want to compete with this
device. One can dream, right? Hy

------
nazgulnarsil
Sony is betting that there are a huge number of people out there that just
want netflix + a few games. I think it's a smart bet.

~~~
bluedino
Don't most televisions come from the factory Netflix etc capable? My Sony
Bravia from like 4 years ago had it as a 'new' feature so I'm sure it's
standard by now.

~~~
icefox
I on purpose bought the best top of the line tv from a manufacturer that
didn't include the built in junk. I have never seen one that is implemented
decently. I would rather have a "dumb" tv that starts fast that I can use for
a decade while I swap the "computer" every year if I want. TV manufacture
companies have zero interest in keeping your Bravia software up to date. Think
of your TV like a first generation android. You knew there is better software
that could run on your TV (even when you bought the device), but the
manufacture just won't bother releasing an update, ever.

~~~
bluedino
They've actually released quite a few updates that add new channels/apps. But
the look and feel of the interface is basically the same. I just want to be
able to choose a service and browse selections and play them, and it works
fine for that.

There's always the option to connect it via HDMI to whatever TV streaming box
is out there. But I'd rather not connect another device and have another
remote, etc.

------
doomlaser
It's such a shame that Apple still hasn't added a gamepad and app marketplace
to the Apple TV, especially after the success of the iOS App Store and the
dominance of games on the platform. It seems so obvious, but such is Apple's
notoriously frustrating blind spot towards games.

~~~
14113
I'm willing to bet that the Apple TV has a very weak processor and a similarly
weak graphics card, or none at all. Without those, you're limited to
(essentially) angry birds, and other games that aren't really associated with
the big screen.

I think that Apples reluctance to add gampad/app support is because of the
_experience_. Apple knows that all its devices sell on the seamlesness
experience they provide. Assuming that the Apple TV has lower end hardware,
they're only going to be able to provide a sub-par experience, which will
essentially be a loss to them, brand wise.

EDIT: Ok, so the processor is the A5, with 512Mb of RAM. This (like I said) is
only really good enough for fairly simple games, or poor quality complex ones.
Definitely not what you'd expect to play on a "big" screen, so a degraded
experience, and not one able to compete with the other big players in the
market.

~~~
Millennium
Most of the best games ever made fit into systems with far fewer resources
than this. It's just a matter of focusing on the things that matter.

~~~
14113
Your point about choosing the things that matter is the pertinent sentence.
Apple doesn't want to put _any_ focus on game, as media streaming is the focus
of the device.

Consider the possibilities:

1) Apple implements _amazing_ support for games on the Apple TV. Consumers who
want to play AAA games on their TV won't buy it - they'll get a traditional
console instead. Consumers who play the kinds of games that the
iPhone/iPad/iPod support _also_ won't be drawn to it, as they've already got
their iPod/iPad/iPhone, so why would they want to play the game using a worse
interface, slower, and when they could be watching TV.

2) Apple implements _mediocre_ support for games on the Apple TV. This (like I
said) will muddy their brand, as well as possibly taking personnel away from
the core focus of the device - streaming, and again muddying their brand.

Either way, it's really not worth it for Apple. In the first case, the
fraction of consumers they attract is really so tiny that it's not worth it
for them to implement gaming. In the second case it's a net loss for them,
both in terms of effort/payoff, and in terms of damage to the brand.

~~~
Tloewald
What if Apple releases a $499 AppleTV / iOS game console / Mac Mini? Heck,
they could probably make it more expensive and still sell a buttload.

~~~
potatolicious
At $499 that's squarely in AAA-console pricing territory, and Apple is not
geared up to fight the PS4 and Xbox One... nor do they particularly want to.

I think there is a miscomprehension of the iOS gaming market, or casual gaming
on mobiles in general. People don't play Angry Birds or Temple Run because
they are fans of the games (in the same way you'd play Halo or Civilization),
they do it to kill time.

Mobile games are intentional time-wasters for when you're standing in line,
riding a bus, sitting in the doctor's office, etc. This is diametrically
opposite to AAA-console gaming where users actively seek it out as something
to do and dedicate time towards it. Platforms like the PS Vita straddle this
weird middle ground - and it's arguable that Apple could potentially capture
this middle ground also.

Either way, an AppleTV/Mac Mini fusion device wouldn't.

~~~
14113
Thanks for saying what I've been finding difficult to put into words.

------
phorese
Some more info from the official page that is not included in the wired
newsbite
([http://www.jp.playstation.com/psvitatv/hardware/](http://www.jp.playstation.com/psvitatv/hardware/)):

[Disclaimer: I don't speak Japanese]

Base package for 9,954 yen includes the console, 2m HDMI cable, AC adapter.
"Wireless Controller (DualShock 3) is necessary".

Value Pack for 14,994 yen additionally includes one DualShock3 "PlayStation
Vita TV edition (white)" plus USB connector and an 8GB PSVita memory card.

The controller is also available separately for 5,500 yen.

The system features a 1 GB "Built-in memory card" and "maximum power usage"(?)
of 2.8W.

In the video an ethernet port is visible, but the site does not specify
whether the system actually has builtin WiFi (though I'd guess so, considering
the PS4 streaming).

~~~
papercrane
> Value Pack for 14,994 yen additionally includes one DualShock3 "PlayStation
> Vita TV edition (white)" plus USB connector and an 8GB PSVita memory card.

Looks like it's still going to use proprietary memory cards then. It's too
bad, if it took an SD card or supports a USB mass storage device it would have
been an easy sell for me (assuming it comes to the NA market.) Having to
factor in the cost of an overpriced memory card makes it a harder sell.

------
willwagner
I wonder if this originally got greenlighted as a "gaikai" player, gaikai
being a competitor to onlive which sony bought and has promoting as part of
the playstation 4.

As the article mentioned, ps4 games are supposed to allow remote play on a
vita device, so this will actually be useful in my household where the tv with
the ps4 is being occupied, but that seems like niche problem to solve.

Being able to add to the installed base of the Vita is a good thing for sony
which will drive more game development, and if they can work out how not to
cannibalize ps4 sales by offering gaikai direct (assuming it really works;
color me skeptical that it will be a lag free experience), plus the video
services like netflix, this may turn out to be a nice device for Sony.

~~~
georgemcbay
It would be really cool if you could use a PS4 plus one of these boxes to do
dual screen co-op as an alternative to the usual split-screen local co-op.

This is certainly a niche use (and Sony may not see it as being in its
interest since it might cost them a small number of full PS4 sales), but it
would be pretty cool and Sony has done plenty of nichey things in the past
like using 3D tvs to do full screen co-op where each user sees a different
image on the same tv.

------
robmcm
This is clever, you often see them release a scaled down previous gen, but
never a handheld designed to plug into a TV.

I can see this as a pre-emptive strike on Apple and some kind of controller
for the apple tv.

The back catalogue of PSOne games and vita games is a great idea, Sony just
need to make sure their online services are up to scratch.

------
phorese
Interesting, but I wonder why they explicitly mention only the DualShock 3
controller. Would not the DS4 be the better option, considering the PS4
connectivity and the launch date?

~~~
luckyno13
Seems like they could have used some of the DS4's new functionality to retain
some of the touchscreen capabilities from the Vita as well.

~~~
phorese
I thought about that too, but then you'd have _three_ game tiers: No touch
(VitaTV + DS3), single non-video touchpanel (VitaTV + DS4), and the Vita
handheld :/

------
adcoelho
I never could adapt to the shape of the Vita. I had to hold it in a very
awkward position to avoid touching accidentally the touch sensitive back
panel. This seems like a viable option for me to play games released in the
console and with a good price since I already own a ps3 with controllers.

Very nice move from Sony, the low price makes their games available to those
not wanting to spend the extra money in their 'big' consoles.

------
martijn_himself
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know why this will support PSP and PS1
games but not PS2? Surely it will have more than enough power to handle those?

~~~
Narishma
It's not powerful enough to handle PS2 emulation. Even the PS3 can barely do
it for a handful of games.

~~~
9999
I didn't know the PS3 did complete emulation of the PS2 at all. The earlier
PS3s that supported backwards compatibility actually contained the PS2
hardware (the first gen had both the cpu and gpu, and the second gen PS3 had
the GPU and used emulation for the cpu).

I know that there are a lot of PS2 games in the PSN store, but I was under the
impression that those were actually recompiled for the PS3 and did not use
emulation. Are those actually emulated?

~~~
Narishma
The early ones were ports, they were recompiled and enhanced with higher
resolutions and/or framerate, trophy support, etc... They're titled "HD
Collection" or "HD Remastered".

Many of the later ones are actually emulated. I think they're called "PS2
Classics" or some such.

------
bcRIPster
Tell me this supports the Vita as a controller and I'd be sold. I really miss
being able to plug my system to my TV like I could with the PSP. (Honestly, if
they could just release a cable for the Vita that connected to my TV, I would
be ecstatic!)

While we're on the subject, when the heck is Nintendo going to release 3DS
support for the Wii U?!? I'd like to finally retire my GameCube w/GameBoy
player.

------
edandersen
There are a few games (including the flagship Uncharted) on Vita that are
going to need patches to remove touchscreen/backpanel/camera requirements to
play or finish the game. The [edit: accelerometer] can be replaced with the
one built into the SixAxis controller.

A shame they didn't have the forsight to demand that all Vita games should be
completable solely with the buttons.

~~~
robin_reala
I think the SixAxis’s motion control is just an accelerator, not a gyro.

~~~
edandersen
Thanks, edited.

------
adventured
Sony should have switched to Android for the PS4 and this $100 console. They
could have completely hijacked the Ouya market / the lower cost Android game
market. It would have given the PS4 a substantial built-in leg up over the
XBox One on launch as well: it'd come out of the gate with a marketplace of
tens of thousands of games.

------
scrabble
This is a great idea, but personally I'd have preferred it if the product was
a docking station that came with a Vita. And had an option of getting just the
docking station if you already have a Vita.

One of the things I really like about my PSP Go is the docking station that
allows for easy TV play.

~~~
gurumeditation
The Go is underrated. Solid state 32gb PSX that looks decent on a HD TV and
has a wireless controller?

Yes please.

~~~
scrabble
I love it. It's also very small and portable. Available homebrew and ease of
using custom firmware also adds a large hook for me.

------
Skoofoo
This is great. The PS Vita really has more than enough power to express a
modern video game. I hope that this becomes popular and makes it more viable
for large game companies to spend less time on graphical detail and more time
on pursuing original ideas.

------
benologist
Bold move by Sony but the PS Vita is fundamentally borked by ignoring /
excluding the Android ecosystem. Having owned 3 PSPs and dozens of UMDs I
would rush to buy a Vita _and_ the TV version, the hardware quality was always
fantastic and the PS Vita looks a lot better than any sub-7" android/ios
device for gaming, but being deliberately incompatible with everything I've
bought in the last couple of years is just silly.

~~~
shinratdr
They deliberately ignored it because Android at the time would have been a
horrible choice. The PS Vita was released in late 2011. About a month after
ICS was unveiled. This means it would have ran either 2.3 or 3.2, either of
which would have been terrible choices.

Not to mention the overhead of Android and maintenance burden of using an OS
that has to support so many other devices and functions. This might be your
reason for not liking the Vita but I doubt it applies to many others. There
are countless Android console style devices and judging by their lack of
mainstream success, I seriously doubt this would have caused the Vita to fare
much better than it has.

~~~
benologist
Sony's been making android devices for a long time including this little gem
back in the 2.x days:

[http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/sony...](http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/sony-psp-phone.jpg)

~~~
speeder
I am typing this comment one of these, and I find quite sad that when it dies,
no-one made a continuation or substitute of it :(

------
sfjailbird
Looks like a flop to me. We need less devices hanging off the back of the TV,
not more, and anything this does the PS4 should be able to. It will probably
cannibalize PS4 sales too with these low-margin devices, as well as cheapen
the Sony brand by running low-grade games, which will look even worse blown up
on an HDTV.

~~~
cjoh
I thought so too until I read the article. Buried at the bottom is the ability
to stream my Playstation 4 content within my house to this box. That's
awesome. I hope it works.

My wife does not want all that stuff dangling from my television, but what she
really hates is a game console hanging from my television. If my game console
can be in my basement, and I can duct tape this to the back of my TV upstairs,
then we both get what we want.

