By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Project Q - Destined to fail?

 

What do you think will happen to Project Q?

It will be a success 1 1.69%
 
It will do well 11 18.64%
 
Not sure 11 18.64%
 
It will fail 28 47.46%
 
This is the worst idea ever 8 13.56%
 
Total:59

Considering it being sold out in several markets Sony seems to be hitting forecast so far, so it can't be called a fail I guess.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network

Portal is great with families. My kids can play ps5 while I game on the TV via my computer. Steaming works great thus far.



i7-13700k

Vengeance 32 gb

RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC

Switch OLED

If they can get remote play to be convincing. Or just people that are brand loyal/don't know any different about a handheld. Sold out is one thing but low production runs/what stores receive is another thing besides through Sony directly. It's niche.

If Sony gave people Dualsense grips for tablets besides the backbone I think it would have been fine.

Sony does niche well with still MP3 players that are more Android smartphone like, smartphones with particular camera tech, among other things if were just gaming only overlook compared to their other tech focused parts of their business.

Then again the Sony Q dual screen phones were too early as well (PS Home on PS3 alongside Second Life and others on PC and well Second Life lives on).

Pocket PCs they, Samsung and more made disappeared because of the iPhone/not being suitable form factors. But Steam Deck comes out then the business focus of Pocket PCs/PDAs of the past (GPD and other small companies making pocket PCs still for years as handheld PCs with buttons for games after in a niche space).

They kept the Vita alive for 10+ years production they didn't kill it off like Sega did the Dreamcast. Remember the remote play/second screen apps were still Vita exclusive up until the Android support in 2019. It was only unofficial apps prior. That's like keeping Stadia around for Pixel phones only levels of keeping something exclusive for years than to other Android phones (if Stadia still existed that is to make a scenario comparison regardless of the reality).

So while Dreamcast games went until 2007, Vita still did and Vita production still did in those 10 years. They could have but they didn't did they. Sure no first party support but that's just downscaling, it's not fully ignoring it is it as much as people like to say something is dead because they don't like it.

If people want the PS5 and anything orbiting it like Sony does by all means even though other options exist of PS4, phones/tablets and PC. If Sony gave people Dualsense grips for tablets besides the backbone I think it would have been fine. (repeat on purpose started here moved it up).

If cloud comes later not surprised they are still working on their cloud services with Azure I assume besides PS Now level ones of PS+ still they have had for many years now.

A niche product isn't a bad thing but no dual screens? What was the point in inside and outside asymmetrical multiplayer with the PSVR, split screen with TV/PSVR, Playlink (PS4 smartphone connected party games), or Vita support for dual screen in Playroom or if Deux Ex used it like Wii U did.

Remote play has always been there since PSP but how they market it/how the future is who knows (even crossave with PS2/PSP thanks Sega with Outrun 2006, and likely other companies maybe did too I don't know but still worth noting).

Lacking dual screen or android is enough for me to say I don't care about it. Android I can let go of but dual screen seriously. I mean let Indies do something with the device at least come on. Not a casting screen that's useless. I don't care if wifi and good connection is involved wifi 5 or 6 and whatever distance you can get with your PS5 on to play on the go and if Vita could do it as well 10 years prior (let alone Wii U with a power bank/second screen for some games and your good to go locally on the road no need for internet at all for singleplayer games) and better probably. XD

They need more convincing aspects to it.

I can take no game support for it/an eshop but no dual screen, split-screen marketing or anything exciting just casting. I can cast my phone to the tv and have more fun. I can cast my phone playing PS5 games back to the TV if I wanted to be stupid just to prove a point.

Last edited by SuntannedDuck2 - on 04 January 2024

SuntannedDuck2 said:

If they can get remote play to be convincing. Or just people that are brand loyal/don't know any different about a handheld. Sold out is one thing but low production runs/what stores receive is another thing besides through Sony directly. It's niche.

If Sony gave people Dualsense grips for tablets besides the backbone I think it would have been fine.

Sony does niche well with still MP3 players that are more Android smartphone like, smartphones with particular camera tech, among other things if were just gaming only overlook compared to their other tech focused parts of their business.

Then again the Sony Q dual screen phones were too early as well (PS Home on PS3 alongside Second Life and others on PC and well Second Life lives on).

Pocket PCs they, Samsung and more made disappeared because of the iPhone/not being suitable form factors. But Steam Deck comes out then the business focus of Pocket PCs/PDAs of the past (GPD and other small companies making pocket PCs still for years as handheld PCs with buttons for games after in a niche space).

They kept the Vita alive for 10+ years production they didn't kill it off like Sega did the Dreamcast. Remember the remote play/second screen apps were still Vita exclusive up until the Android support in 2019. It was only unofficial apps prior. That's like keeping Stadia around for Pixel phones only levels of keeping something exclusive for years than to other Android phones (if Stadia still existed that is to make a scenario comparison regardless of the reality).

So while Dreamcast games went until 2007, Vita still did and Vita production still did in those 10 years. They could have but they didn't did they. Sure no first party support but that's just downscaling, it's not fully ignoring it is it as much as people like to say something is dead because they don't like it.

If people want the PS5 and anything orbiting it like Sony does by all means even though other options exist of PS4, phones/tablets and PC. If Sony gave people Dualsense grips for tablets besides the backbone I think it would have been fine. (repeat on purpose started here moved it up).

If cloud comes later not surprised they are still working on their cloud services with Azure I assume besides PS Now level ones of PS+ still they have had for many years now.

A niche product isn't a bad thing but no dual screens? What was the point in inside and outside asymmetrical multiplayer with the PSVR, split screen with TV/PSVR, Playlink (PS4 smartphone connected party games), or Vita support for dual screen in Playroom or if Deux Ex used it like Wii U did.

Remote play has always been there since PSP but how they market it/how the future is who knows (even crossave with PS2/PSP thanks Sega with Outrun 2006, and likely other companies maybe did too I don't know but still worth noting).

Lacking dual screen or android is enough for me to say I don't care about it. Android I can let go of but dual screen seriously. I mean let Indies do something with the device at least come on. Not a casting screen that's useless. I don't care if wifi and good connection is involved wifi 5 or 6 and whatever distance you can get with your PS5 on to play on the go and if Vita could do it as well 10 years prior (let alone Wii U with a power bank/second screen for some games and your good to go locally on the road no need for internet at all for singleplayer games) and better probably. XD

They need more convincing aspects to it.

I can take no game support for it/an eshop but no dual screen, split-screen marketing or anything exciting just casting. I can cast my phone to the tv and have more fun. I can cast my phone playing PS5 games back to the TV if I wanted to be stupid just to prove a point.

People keep bringing up the phone use. Everyone knows you can use your phone we just don't want to. Using your phone to remote play is so damn annoying. I don't know about you but people call me, I get emails from work that I have to look at and people text me. I'm supposed to have all this going on, on the same screen I'm playing games on? How is that fun? Could you imagine playing your PS5 and having text, emails, and call notifications popping up while you're playing? 

Now I get it kids these days love playing on their phone but honestly this device wasn't meant for them. This device was made for people 30+ who have expendable income and just want to play games without constant popups. I just returned mine to best buy because I'm just going to use my deck and the employees were in awe of it. I saw the guy signing in with his PSN account as he was doing my return.

I just think no one realized how many people simply don't want to play on a small screen like your phone and actually have to use their phone for real life purposes.



method114 said:
SuntannedDuck2 said:

If they can get remote play to be convincing. Or just people that are brand loyal/don't know any different about a handheld. Sold out is one thing but low production runs/what stores receive is another thing besides through Sony directly. It's niche.

If Sony gave people Dualsense grips for tablets besides the backbone I think it would have been fine.

Sony does niche well with still MP3 players that are more Android smartphone like, smartphones with particular camera tech, among other things if were just gaming only overlook compared to their other tech focused parts of their business.

Then again the Sony Q dual screen phones were too early as well (PS Home on PS3 alongside Second Life and others on PC and well Second Life lives on).

Pocket PCs they, Samsung and more made disappeared because of the iPhone/not being suitable form factors. But Steam Deck comes out then the business focus of Pocket PCs/PDAs of the past (GPD and other small companies making pocket PCs still for years as handheld PCs with buttons for games after in a niche space).

They kept the Vita alive for 10+ years production they didn't kill it off like Sega did the Dreamcast. Remember the remote play/second screen apps were still Vita exclusive up until the Android support in 2019. It was only unofficial apps prior. That's like keeping Stadia around for Pixel phones only levels of keeping something exclusive for years than to other Android phones (if Stadia still existed that is to make a scenario comparison regardless of the reality).

So while Dreamcast games went until 2007, Vita still did and Vita production still did in those 10 years. They could have but they didn't did they. Sure no first party support but that's just downscaling, it's not fully ignoring it is it as much as people like to say something is dead because they don't like it.

If people want the PS5 and anything orbiting it like Sony does by all means even though other options exist of PS4, phones/tablets and PC. If Sony gave people Dualsense grips for tablets besides the backbone I think it would have been fine. (repeat on purpose started here moved it up).

If cloud comes later not surprised they are still working on their cloud services with Azure I assume besides PS Now level ones of PS+ still they have had for many years now.

A niche product isn't a bad thing but no dual screens? What was the point in inside and outside asymmetrical multiplayer with the PSVR, split screen with TV/PSVR, Playlink (PS4 smartphone connected party games), or Vita support for dual screen in Playroom or if Deux Ex used it like Wii U did.

Remote play has always been there since PSP but how they market it/how the future is who knows (even crossave with PS2/PSP thanks Sega with Outrun 2006, and likely other companies maybe did too I don't know but still worth noting).

Lacking dual screen or android is enough for me to say I don't care about it. Android I can let go of but dual screen seriously. I mean let Indies do something with the device at least come on. Not a casting screen that's useless. I don't care if wifi and good connection is involved wifi 5 or 6 and whatever distance you can get with your PS5 on to play on the go and if Vita could do it as well 10 years prior (let alone Wii U with a power bank/second screen for some games and your good to go locally on the road no need for internet at all for singleplayer games) and better probably. XD

They need more convincing aspects to it.

I can take no game support for it/an eshop but no dual screen, split-screen marketing or anything exciting just casting. I can cast my phone to the tv and have more fun. I can cast my phone playing PS5 games back to the TV if I wanted to be stupid just to prove a point.

People keep bringing up the phone use. Everyone knows you can use your phone we just don't want to. Using your phone to remote play is so damn annoying. I don't know about you but people call me, I get emails from work that I have to look at and people text me. I'm supposed to have all this going on, on the same screen I'm playing games on? How is that fun? Could you imagine playing your PS5 and having text, emails, and call notifications popping up while you're playing? 

Now I get it kids these days love playing on their phone but honestly this device wasn't meant for them. This device was made for people 30+ who have expendable income and just want to play games without constant popups. I just returned mine to best buy because I'm just going to use my deck and the employees were in awe of it. I saw the guy signing in with his PSN account as he was doing my return.

I just think no one realized how many people simply don't want to play on a small screen like your phone and actually have to use their phone for real life purposes.

For me even the portal screen is small for serious play, but for some grinding efforts and small play it can be useful.

I guess you got the right focus group, family man/woman that have the income to buy a 200 USD device to compliment their play because their main TV is used often by other family members and they either don't have more than 1 console, don't want to move the console around and/or want to play while chatting with family. Plus it can be use during commute if you don't drive if you have a decent 5G connection and plan.

Maybe that is 1 or 5% of the PS5 userbase, I dunno but 1 to 10M of those devices sold is 200M to 2B in revenue at a likely very high profit margin and possibly R&D is something they will match with as little as 100k sales.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network

I think I might be the onely one with this opinion. But I think the project q came out to early.



BiON!@ 

hellobion2 said:

I think I might be the onely one with this opinion. But I think the project q came out to early.

If I had to guess Sony has all the data on remote play and how often it's being used. They probably saw the usage was pretty decent and with a respectable market push and a cheap ready to go device they could increase that.



hellobion2 said:

I think I might be the onely one with this opinion. But I think the project q came out to early.

Well, maybe, but people seems to be enjoying it. Sales seems to be good enough too.



hellobion2 said:

I think I might be the onely one with this opinion. But I think the project q came out to early.

Why?

Ability to play remote through cloud or even emulation of up to PSP/PSVita could be done on this unit if they had designed for that for probably the same price. I don't think we would see anything majorly different if it took additional 1 or 2 years to launch.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

I sort of want one to be able to play my PS5 games in bed. But at current price point it is to expensive. I have all the gaming devices I need for a lifetime, even if I want something like this I definitely do not need it.

Still hope it does well. Providing people with new ways to enjoy their games is never a bad thing.