Microsoft has the Edge here (see what I did?) when it comes to handheld, because they already have a weaker hardware that games on Xbox must be able to run, the Series S. This baseline could be used as a handheld compatibility (at least from performance perspective). Sony on the other hand has a monster console and no weaker version of it. So there is much more and longer to developer. For the coming years, I’m not convinced Sony would be capable of doing that. Also imagine the price it would have.
I don’t think Sony wants a PS4 handheld while Microsoft has the newer generation Series S based handheld. Sony wants to sell new games, not the old one.
Eh. They’ve been great at that but I dont see this as it. Handheld stuff is cool and popular right now. Don’t get me wrong, they definitely could self sabotage here. They 100% did with the vita and their egregiously expensive memory cards…
But the PSP and Vita were great devices aside from that. I could see this working
Vita was technically impressive, far more capable than the DS. I’ve got an OLED Vita and I’m amazed how nice it still looks.
But the Vita inevietably lost to Nintendo because it struggled with popularity, and therefore struggled with number of games made for it. It’s a catch 22.
If Sony can make a portable that plays all your PS5 library (without needing to buy any of it again) then they might actually be on a winner.
The Vita was a 3DS competitor, not a DS competitor. They kind of tried to outgimmick Nintendo with this one, unsuccessfully, I might add, because they didn’t build the system around these features, but slapped them on in such a way that developers and players could just ignore them.
The PS5 controller is somewhat of a descendant of this device, although its features are a bit better supported - and it would be trivially easy to integrate them into a handheld.
As for processing power, they need to find a way to get the same CPU power as a base PS5 and enough GPU power for somewhere around 1080p (since going any lower would render many games designed for the home console unplayable) into a cost-, heat, space- and power-efficient package. Most of this work is on AMD, Sony just has to package it. Maybe they can get away with a system that simply forces a lower output resolution for existing games so that less GPU power is needed - or they wait long enough for it to be possible to miniaturize a full-fat PS5 into a portable device. I think the latter is unlikely though, at least within a time frame that would allow for a PS5P to coexist with the PS5 instead of the PS6.
I genuinely think it’s already possible. The PS5 doesn’t exactly have a very new processor, it’s a 4000-series (desktop) Renoir, 7nm, Zen 2 architecture. The Z1E (the chip in the Lenovo Legion Go & ROG Ally X) is a 7040-series (mobile) Phoenix, 4nm, Zen 4/RDNA3 architecture.
The Z1E is basically 10% less performant for about 1/4 the juice. You could easily keep the same resolution, whilst dropping things like particles, shadow effects, etc that aren’t going to be as missed on a much smaller display. I’ve got a Legion but I believe the Ally X has a docked higher TDP mode that would push it to being competitive with the PS5, or at least it would certainly be possible with an active cooling dock.
AMD literally designed the Z1E for handhelds, so Sony would be remiss not to use it. That or a potential “Z2E” successor chip seen as this one is pushing over 18 months since it was announced.
You could easily keep the same resolution, whilst dropping things like particles, shadow effects, etc
This would require per-game adjustments, which is not something you can ask of devs mid-gen, especially not retroactively. Developers already hate that they have to optimize for Xbox Series S - and that console was available from the start. This portable PS5 can only be a success if it “just works” and the only way to do that is by having the exact amount of CPU power as the home console and reducing the output resolution automatically, perhaps with the help of PSSR. Until there is an efficient APU that can pull this off, the console can’t be released.
PS5, kinda famously, has no exclusive games. I doubt it would be that taxing on devs to essentially create a build that changes it from Ultra settings to High equivalent to the PC versions when they’re all running on an x86 platform. The Series S is just garbage hardware that Microsoft should have never released, the Z1E already outperforms it handily.
This chip would be more than capable of matching the PS5’s APU. But the Z2 they’re releasing alongside it will be decently cheaper while matching the Z1E’s performance. So it’ll come down to whether Sony prioritises cost or performance. My money’s on cost though, they’re going to want this thing to be cheaper than a Steam Deck, and the Z2E will put it in Legion Go/Ally X price territory.
You are right, the description on the product page is only talking about Home Wifi and playing at home. Which led me to believe it cannot be used remotely. Only when looking at the FAQ they clarify it can be used anywhere.
A lot of the initial criticisms have been fixed in further updates. Now the connection is very stable, works with outside networks. They just implemented PS Plus PS5 streaming (so without connecting to a console).
Are you really cherry picking some big media outlets like IGN? It was another IGN moment where most peoples opinion did not match what IGN rated. They gave the Steam Deck 7/10…
At launch it was not well received, with many issues, being overpriced and the only compatible earphones being very expensive and not available too. It was an embarrassment through and through at launch across almost all media and users. I’ve read and watched reviews and opinions. You are not being honest here, as some of the biggest issues are fixed just recently and some over the course of 1 year since it launched.
I agree with the other user who said it’s a writing problem e.g. choosing the immediacy of end of the world plot device. Unless it’s done with very specific circumstances, like Overcooked 1 where the first level is the Spaghetti Monster Apocalypse and then you jump back in time through a portal. I think Dragon’s Dogma 2 is a good example of this exact problem the article raises though. It’s a relatively short game, but there is no end of the world. There are 2 major events, your destiny as the Arisen to fight the dragon that killed you, and the in-world politics of a government and some corrupt individuals working to prevent this event for their own plan.
I mention this game primarily because it uses a mechanic that many completionists tend to dislike - there are “timed” quests. Not all of them, usually ones that make sense to run out of time on (but again, not all of them.) So for example, at one point there is a quest to attend a masquerade ball, which is a permanent main story quest until you choose to attend. This is the exact issue the premise of the article brings up, where time is infinite until you decide to continue.
And yet, at the same time, there are a few quests where you may encounter a random NPC who is asking for help for someone who goes missing, and if too many in game days pass by, well… They die.
Ultimately I had other pacing issues with the story, but I did really enjoy how it goes about “solving” urgency when an in-game world timer exists. I’ve never been the biggest fan of time-managed items, (for example, raw potato, ripened potato, rotten potato over the course of 1-3 days), but Dragon’s Dogma 1 and 2 both did it fairly well since the items that do expire 1) make sense, it’s food, and 2) are in fair abundance. It helps solve the hoarding of your items, gives you a little extra money if you sell it as the right phase, and allows for varied item combinations as well (raw+item = curative, ripe+item = stamina, rotten+rotten = oil for lantern or status effect combinations).
I think really the issue just comes down to what is fun gameplay mechanics? Batman: Rise of Sin Tzu for PS2/Gamecube had timed levels, a mechanic that makes sense for a game centered around saving people before they kill hostages. Star Ocean had an in game timer matched to clocks, so the only way to stop the timer was to turn off the game. After (24?) hours, it’s game over. Quite frankly… timed mechanics are usually seen as gimmicky and are not very popular - they may have moments of appreciation, but I’m not sure if it’s a beloved mechanic.
Which in turn results in, “I have you now Spider-Man! In just 8 hours my bomb will blow New York to high heavens!” And then the player goes to help every child get their balloon back before the main story progresses.
This approach is so common in RPGs it’s like dwarves with Scottish accents; a better question to ask would be whether there’s an RPG that doesn’t do it - one that hurries you up instead?
I mean…Dark Souls is the obvious answer, but that’s almost a different subgenre of RPG. Dark Souls does have side quests, but they are obscure and often incidental to the main quest. They also skirt this problem by having “time” be a loose concept in the lore - in every game, the world is in the process of slowly ending, in a literal way that fucks up the flow of time.
I don’t really think it’s a problem at all. It’s on the level of game mechanics being taken too seriously like “why does a sword in my backpack weigh enough to slow me down but not a sword in my belt?” or “how come these vegetable merchants are willing to buy random crap I found in a cave?”
Fallout 1 has a hard timer you have to obey before it is too late to do your main objective and you lose the game. That shit stressed me out so much I just didn’t continue playing.
For me it becomes an issue when I try to make decisions from my character’s perspective. If I try to lean into the RP part of RPG then I often feel like I have to leave a load of content behind because it just wouldn’t be a high priority.
I agree with the FO1 timer though. I ended up beelining to the necropolis and got trapped in an endgame bunker because I didn’t want that timer hanging over me.
!To be honest, I kind of wish they just hadn’t bothered with portraying the ending. They set up such cool lore, and I didn’t really need the avant-garde film at the end. A cut to credits would’ve been fine.!<
It kind of works in Elder Scrolls games. You’re typically just some random dude getting roped into stuff you barely understand so it makes sense that you don’t have much of a sense of urgency. And the main quest usually has parts where you’re encouraged to go do other stuff to build up skills and join factions.
It works in Morrowind. When you go to do the main quest, the guy in Balmora says you look like a scrub and to come back when you’re not so green. Oblivion immediately tells you to take the amulet somewhere. Skyrim requires main quest progression for a few things like the civil war.
In Skyrim the main quest constantly tells you about how urgent it is for you to do the next steps. You must heed the summoning of the greybeards, you must hurry along to the dragon graveyard. Time is constantly of the essence.
And then every other part of the game encourages you to goof around.
Oblivion is the same with this. Morrowind went the opposite direction with the story at times pretty much telling you to goof around for a bit before continuing the main quest (probably because people were less used to open world games maybe?).
I think daggerfall had you on actual timers so if you weren’t at the correct locations in time the game would be impossible to complete. Which sure is a way to resolve the false sense of urgency lmao.
In Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII, the world is ending, and the 13-day timer is very real. You basically get told “do as much as you can before the world ends” and let loose. So there’s urgency AND side questing.
And of course you have the opportunity to spend that time doing things that are completely irrelevant to making progress, like collecting silly outfits and forcing Lightning to wear them so that Hope can laugh at her.
I can’t help but read this headline as, “with climate change and the rise of fascism, the real world is ending, but how is this for a distraction: why can’t RPGs get the sense of urgency right?”
And like, this is genuinely an article and discussion I’m interested in, so this is not a criticism of anyone or anything other than the ambiguity of language.
Because the world isn’t “ending”. Yes climate change might bring famine, destructive weather events, or plague but in the meantime we are living in the safest, healthiest, and most technologically advanced era of humanity up until now, especially for those of us living in democracies. Most diseases that would have killed you a few hundred years ago have been solved, in general there are very few wars (compared to the constant on and off warfare in history anyway), and in most of the world slavery has been eradicated.
Yes, there is societal divide (mostly due to economic difficulties and how social media influences people), yes there is bigotry and a rise in nationalism but much of this is only noticeable because of the media and the 24 hour news cycle. There has to be a constant issue hanging over our heads to make sure we are glued to our screens 24/7 improving shareholder value of the companies supplying the news on the current crisis.
So in conclusion, there are some global issues, but there is no reason not to go on an adventure, pursue that girl/boy you like, build a shed, or do whatever “side quest” you are up to at the moment. It’s not like you’re gonna solve climate change alone but you’ll be completely miserable if that is all your life is about. The world is not ending for now, go do your side quests.
Most diseases that would have killed you a few hundred years ago have been solved
RFK wants to ban vaccines entirely in the US. They’ll come back frighteningly fast if he does that. They’re only “solved” as long as we keep up our vigilance.
in most of the world slavery has been eradicated.
There are more slaves alive today than at any point in history.
I don’t want to diminish slavery in any way, but the indebted servitude of now is very different to the, for example, Roman concept of slaves as property that you walk through the street with.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
The 13th amendment specifically allows it, my friend.
USA has one of the highest prison populations per capita in the world. Further, the only countries that outpace it are small, smaller than most US states. Cuba, Rwanda, El Salvador, Turkmenistan, and American Somoa are the only countries with higher prison populations per capita, and those are all much smaller counties than USA.
Why do you think the right wing wants to criminalize everything? Because the more people are in prison, the more free labor you have.
I think I disagree about the severity and urgency of some of the things you’re talking about, but I do agree with your sentiment. I restate: the only thing I am criticizing here is the ambiguity of language. It’s the “side quests” that give life flavour, and to give them up to deal with the “real problems” would be choosing to stop living because you’re too worried about surviving.
Yes climate change might bring famine, destructive weather events, or plague but in the meantime we are living in the safest, healthiest, and most technologically advanced era of humanity up until now, especially for those of us living in democracies.
Don’t take your democracies for granted. If people aren’t around to fight to keep them that way, they don’t last.
Some games fix this issue by making the player trigger the change they want and bring the fight to the big powerful threat themselves, on their terms.
In fact one of my favorite RPG has the player characters being the ones trying to end the world as they know it.
I do think the extreme example, the old RPG trope of the big bad looming over in the red-tinted sky and being just minutes from firing the world busting laser while you finish your quest list, is rather cringe. Maybe don’t invoke this in a game where time is basically irrelevent.
It’s not an RPG, but I think Owlboy handled it expertly.
Each level, Owlboy is out to handle some dangerous issue that is happening. By the end of the level, he succeeds.
The thing is, in the background, other things are happening. Almost every time you “succeed” the story moves forward to tell you, “oh, while you were doing that, THIS was happening that made all you just did basically pointless and we’re all even more screwed than before you started this level.”
So, it keenly points out the enemies aren’t waiting around, in fact, they’re doing dastardly things while you’re busy trying to save the day, so much so that your character continues to feel like a failure despite many successes. I think it’s a great way to present and write a story, to show that your character isn’t the only one in the wider world that things are happening to and can’t handle all problems at once. Things happen outside of their control and outside of their vision, just like in our real lives.
I feel like FromSoft's games have a nice solution to this in that generally speaking, the world has basically already ended and you're fighting through the wreckage to try to pick it up again. Not a viable option for every story, though, of course
I would quite like to see a game in which the events play out both without a completely fixed schedule and without being within the player's control. If we take Skyrim as an example, since everyone already knows how that one works, imagine if:
Civil war battles happen whether you are there or not. You get some notice about them or can maybe even ride in at the last moment to turn the tide, but they're happening with or without you.
Your sidequests to win over jarls and find powerful artifacts stack the odds in your chosen side's favour. Intercepting the messenger on that one mission allows you to avert an otherwise guaranteed loss for your side.
Alduin is also doing stuff on his own schedule. If you leave him unchecked, one of your allied jarls might have their army decimated trying to hold off a dragon attack without you.
If you leave Alduin unchallenged long enough, jarls start defecting to the Dragon Cult and directing dragons with armies as backup towards your side, knowing that you are fighting for them and are the biggest threat on the board.
Leaving your civil war side unsupported means that Balgruuf won't agree to help trap Odahving. You then have to track down info about the portal to Sovngarde in an ancient scroll and take the long and arduous journey up the mountainside yourself on foot, leaving your civil war side without you for days on end
You'd need to make sure that the player has control over when these events start, but it already does gate dragons behind that first quest to defend Whiterun. You want to just mess about in caves for the first twenty hours, sure, go ahead.
Obviously Skyrim was never going to do this because it isn't trying to be that kind of game. It wanted to be a do anything go anywhere power fantasy, and that's fine. But I would like more games to do this sort of thing. I think some of Paradox's strategy games actually do quite a good job of creating this feeling, but the gameplay is completely different (and it only works until you get good enough to just break the mechanics in half for most of them)
I feel like FromSoft’s games have a nice solution to this in that generally speaking, the world has basically already ended and you’re fighting through the wreckage to try to pick it up again. Not a viable option for every story, though, of course
eurogamer.net
Gorące