The PlayStation Portal Remote Player
The PlayStation Portal remote player is set to launch later this year, but the high price point is drawing some flak from some quarters, as is the assumption that it’ll pair well with the existing PS5. Others raise more practical concerns about strain on home electricity and console longevity. The device’s design and functionality also draw some pointed criticism, with some similarities to the Wii U GamePad mentioned and comparisons made to the Nintendo Switch Lite.
Main Thoughts on the PlayStation Portal Remote Player
“$200? Really?” is one of the most common responses to the price tag, with many expressing concern that the device can only be used within the home and relies on the power of the PS5 console. “Who actually uses it outside the home? Because that would be a dealbreaker,” another user replies.
Some go further, speculating that using the device abroad with good Wi-Fi connectivity may work, but that seems to go against the official specs. Others raise concerns about the potential strain on home electricity (and your console’s lifespan) and suggest the device would be more appealing at a lower price point.
Others express more pointed criticism about the device’s design, with comparisons made to the Wii U GamePad and the Nintendo Switch Lite. “Just looks like a bad ripoff of the Switch Lite,” one user replies to a tweet from PlayStation highlighting the device’s D-pad and ABXY buttons. “The Wii U GamePad said hi,” another replies to a tweet of the Portal remote player in action.
Many users also express confusion over who exactly this device is for. “I’m really struggling to see the target audience here,” one replies to the above tweet. “Who is this product for? I don’t understand,” another replies, with many suggesting a lower price point would be more appealing.
“I’m also really curious who would spend $200 on a device that can only play games on the PlayStation,” another replies. “I would spend money on a handheld if it could play games on its own,” another user replies to a GIF showing the Portal running PlayStation Classic Shadow Moon. “Like on a plane with a battery,” they follow up. “But no, you need a separate screen for that,” another replies. “Games on the bathroom,” another replies. “$200 for that?”
Some users express mild interest, citing the need for a separate screen for mature content (such as The Last of Us 2) and the assumption of better screen quality compared to phone-based remote play. “I’ve always wanted a device that could play PS5 games on the go,” another replies, “but I’m not paying $200 for a glorified controller and a portable screen.”
There’s also some criticism around the lack of Bluetooth connectivity, along with the proprietary connection required for wireless headphones. “I think I’d actually be interested if it had Bluetooth,” another replies. The reported lack of battery life is also noted, along with the fact that it doesn’t compete directly with other handheld gaming devices.
“I think their real target market is people who are heavily invested in the PlayStation ecosystem,” another replies. “I remember reading an article a couple years back about the sales figures for related products like the PSVR2 and they were something like 1.7m sold at a ratio of around 4-5% of users owning all of the devices.”
“Not interested,” another replies. “Why not make a device that can run games locally but at reduced settings?” they follow up. “‘For gamers who can’t wait to play on the go,’” another replies, “this is for people who want to play in the bathroom.” We also get a mention of Nvidia Shield, which leads to a discussion about game streaming from PC to other devices.
For many, the main takeaway seems to be disappointment in Sony’s lack of innovation and missed opportunities. “I don’t understand why Sony has never created a portable console,” one replies to the above thread. “What about a Vita 2?” another replies. “Or how about PlayStation Plus expands to other devices?” another replies, “and it could be a subscription for other devices like the Portal.”
“I’d pay $200 for a Vita 2,” another replies. “I’d also pay $200 for a Vita 2,” another replies.
