It does not need to be big, it's not a main feature, and it's just convenience for people who want to play off TV - unlike WiiU's Gamepad integration, it does not do anything but bring your game to (currently) Vita. It is built into hardware, and all games support it by default without any extra work from devs. Will you be using it as a PS4 owner or not is completely up to your preferences and your pocket. Vita is current option for Remote Play, and only for that (if you don't want/need handheld) I agree it is too expensive - hence why I think Sony might introduce cheaper options down the line, or even let other manufacturers support Remote Play.

No. Nintendo didn't made some special magic to stream 30fps or 60fps to a second screen.

Thats not what Wii U is so good at.

Its Inputlag how fast the picture on screen reacts to the press of a button. Stuttering frames are not the point. A 60fps stream bandwith is already available with Wifi. Its how fast the picture arrives on the second screen send from the box not how much frames it has. Its Latency vs Bandwith again DDR3 vs GDDR5. 

I thought it looked questionable when I was streaming the conference, but lets wait till launch

Its said to built into the PS4's hardware (remote play, not cross controller). The PS4 will have hardware-based audio and video compression / decompression reducing overheads. It means that Remote Play can be supported on most PS4 titles with ”almost no overhead, without pain whatsoever.”

Ok for all Newcomers to this thread I will now explain why this thread is misleading :

OP states Remote Play is inferior to Wii U because Vita framerate (seemingly) sucks while Cerny played the game.

Implying that this has something to do with the Hardware of the Wii U being specially designed to show a smooth framerate on the Wii U pad.

Which Vita doesn't have. The video evidence seems to be right there in the OP.

So people start talking about frames and how its to early to tell and so on. I also was confused and stated the flickering can have various reasons.

Some people got it right and knew what the point was supposed to be and lead side discussions missing the simple fact OP has no clue what his point even is.

The Video is evidence of nothing. Framerate or how smooth the game is displayed is not what Wii U excells at. Its INPUTLAG.

A game can be 60 Frames per second and smooth as butter but be unplayable. 

Inputlag: You play Mario on your Wii U pad. You press A to jump with Mario: 

Good Inputlag: Mario jumps immediatly

Horrible Inputlag: Mario jumps 5 Minutes after you pressed the button.<- This can still happen with 60 individually rendered frames per second

The point is: Maybe Vita will take way longer to react than the Wii U pad but this is not visible on this video and has nothing to do with WII U or the point the OP was trying to make. The OP complained clearly about the framerate which will not be an issue, the bandwith to send the data to Vita in 60fps is there. 

And a possibly slowed reaction is only a split second, hard to spot on a video. People have to FEEL it to know it. 

Its way too early to tell and a Videoproof makes only sense if the delay is like half a second not 1/10th of a second. Wii U has 1/60th of a second.  

If there really is a framerate issue (Which can just look that way for reasons I explained earlier) its not a Hardware disadvantage of the Vita it has Wifi N and can recieve the amount of data necesssary for a high framerate.

To make it clear Remote play can have a higher Inputlag and not be on Wii Us level. But linking to a video and showing supposedly bad framerates on the Vita is misleading, the framerates will be ok.

Well, let's put it this way: On the PS3, when you stream a game to the Vita it doesn't drop frames it lags slightly ... So, doesn't it follow that the PS4 will be the same with frame rates but with the added bonus of reduced lag because of built in Gaikai tech? Analyse these videos all you like, that straw will disappear come launch.

Of course the advantage with the Vita is that you'll be able to use this even if you are the other side of the world AND it works with EVERY PS4 game.

wth.... Jesus Christ on this easter morning where did ddr3 v gddr5 come into a discussion about wii remote play

Read my previous post maybe it will clear some things up. The DDR3 vs GDDR5 discussion boiled down to Latency vs Bandwith. 

Framerate issue-> Bandwith problem

 Inputlag: -> Latency problem

Not that this has anything to do with Ram its just that it boils down to that too, this is why I mentioned it. Wii U is designed for low latency streaming and the framerate of remote play has nothing to with that. 

"after all nintendo made it exactly for that purpose."

No they didn't. There is no reason why Wii U should be superior to remote play on Vita in terms of frames.

Well, I will explaing for you as a SONY consumer, not a video game fanboy, wich I am not, cause I own a 3ds and a Xbox360 as well, so, give me the benefit of the doubt while I do it, ok?

Right now I own a VITA, also, a PSP and PS3. When Sony announced the stream play on Vita-PS4, I thought: "Cool, I can play next gen games before I go to sleep, that is neat".

And that stayed in my mind, telling me to get a PS4 at launch, wich I did not intend to, because I usually wait a year or two to get into a console (wich is why I don´t have a WIIU).

So, to some people, who already own a VITA, the stream-play is a bonus reason to dive in on PS4,  let us say that 10% of Vita owners do it BECAUSE of the stream-play, 500k plus consoles at launch, very nice.

Bear in mind that this people would not buy a WIIU anyways, because Sony and MS consumers  have played HD games for 7 years already, so the WiiU is nothing new for them. In that sense, is not a response, just a cool feature.

Well, that is all well and good, but, if VITA fanbase is really small, wich it is, WHAT IS THE POINT? Two point actually:

1 -Some, LISTEN, SOME, of the PS4 buyers, will feel compelled to buy a VITA, with the stream excuse, and, THEN, will enjoy the VITA library as well. I say that will happen to 10% of the ps4 new users, so, maybe 500k - 800k of the 5 - 8 million ps4 buyers (first year). A nice boost to the Vita.

2 - Some, I SAID SOME, consumers will be interest in the full next gen flavor that the VITA-PS4 combo offer, I mean the WIIU have nive PS3-XBOX360 like graphics, scale and physics, but we all know that the PS4 and Next box will be a whole another ball game, as the PS3 was in comparition with the WII, no disrespect, of course, the WiiU will sell just fine, but, SOME gamers will want the premium experience.I say this will be a very small chunk of the whole market, like another 500k.

After all is said and done, this stream-feature will atract 2 or 3 million more users to VITA, at worst, and 5-10 million, in a dream scenerio. iT WILL NOT KILL THE WIIU, as I explained above, so, no worries. But it will help the VITA and, in a smaller scale, the young PS4 as well.

Hey, don´t get me wrong, the WiiU will do just fine, and I want all of the big three to succeed, I really do, but that is my honest opinion on this subject.

It's not as if Sony woke up one day and decided to allow the vita to stream ps4 games, their acquisition of gaikai and development of both he vita and ps4 included ideas such as these from the start, this is a multi billion dollar corporation.  I swear some of you need to think before you speak