By comparison, I feel like Xbox’s mobile offerings are a lot better. Takes some quick setup on an iPhone, especially finding a good controller, but having cloud access anywhere to Game Pass games is tremendous.
Granted, the whole subject is something I imagine only a limited set of people care about.
Still, not entirely sure who this is supposed to be for. The poor battery life, lack of Bluetooth, and the inability to play media is just disappointing, even at 200 dollars. Just feels like there are better ways to play PS5 games on the go than this.
Another true IGN moment. 8/10? Man this thing looks ugly. And it can only stream your local Playstation 5 on the local network, otherwise it's useless. Battery life is a joke for a streaming only device. Does not have Bluetooth. And the price is expensive for what it does. Yet IGN praises this. Imagine Microsoft did the same thing for XBox. I really don't want to come off as a Console War guy (I'm a PC Gamer), but imagine that for a moment. And no, I do not hate Sony, I just hate this device.
I don't think this is a console war thing. I just think IGN is a sellout rag that rates games however game companies tell them to. Their ratings are consistently unexplainable by anyone with sense.
But I think it does not support streaming over the internet. Its only limited to the same network you are with your PS5. Or am I wrong? Edit: Apparently I can't read. At least it is possible to stream your PS5 to other wifi networks.
Thanks for confirmation. One can't even stream the online streaming games with the PS Plus subscription. Its really only about the local games you have... I'm totally baffled.
“This was the turning point for me, where I went from “well this is kind of neat,” to “this is actually rad.” There I was, playing FF7R from the PS5 in my house in a cafe across town and it was nearly indistinguishable from the experience at home. Again, that’s something that can certainly be done on your phone or tablet (and those are able to get past that login screen) but none of them feels as good to hold and play on as the Portal.”
It does play via remote wifi but only games from your local ps5.
Hmm, okay. So I got most of the stuff correct then (no internet streaming), but didn't got the part it would stream on other wifi networks. I skipped parts of the review, because I didn't expect that functionality would have changed. Shame on me and this should be a lesson! So then that went from useless (in my opinion) to useful at times.
But the PS5 has to run for that, right? Can you remote control to run and sleep the PS5?
So the remote play functionality from before remains intact. So once paired with the PS5 the device can remotely turn the device on or the device is always listening for the connection.
This is a dedicated device for that though. If you read my initial post I’m not a fan of the device and even less of the manner by which IGN reviewed it. They’re looking at it in a complete vacuum and comparing it to a device that basically already failed (The Backbone).
"…so it’s not like you can play it on the go (there’s no version with a cellular connection) or without also owning a PlayStation 5. There is literally nothing else it can do. That seems like a bit of a bummer given the $200 price tag – I’d have liked to be able to watch Netflix or YouTube on the Portal, but all media functions are disabled on Sony Remote Play. The PlayStation Portal will only play games and let you navigate the PS5’s menus, so without a PS5 at the ready, the Portal is a paperweight. "
They try to say that the screen is bigger, but at that point they could just play on a TV, since they need to be with their PS5 at home.
Also mystifying that they say a tablet with a bigger screen would be inconvenient because you couldn't play it on the bus. You can't play this thing on the bus either.
Add comment