personally, i can see the appeal of the device as someone who frequently shares a tv with others, but sony’s decision to limit its capabilities to streaming only places it squarely in a “niche product” category. this creates a few problems that will shape my decision to purchase depending on how sony addresses them.

1. the device’s capabilities are no different (at least as far as we know) from remote play apps paired with a dualsense controller. in this case, you have greater flexibility when it comes to screen size since these apps are available on phones as well as computers, allowing you to tailor your experience to suit your needs. the q, on the other hand, is extremely limited in its application. the degree to which the q is able to justify itself as far as the quality of the gaming experience is yet to be seen, but it needs to be compelling in order for me to consider it over alternatives. it’s very much a niche product.

2. wrapped up in the experience is the price. i can do one thing with the q: stream ps5 games at home over wifi. if my power goes out, it’s unusable. this would also render my ps5 unusable as well, but therein lies the issue. a nintendo switch lite costs $200 brand new, and is its own self-contained experience capable of playing games downloaded to the device independent of anything else. the q provides half the experience that a switch lite does, in my eyes, so the price should be reflected in its diminished capabilities. i would pay $100 (maybe up to $120) for it. anything more than that and i’m looking elsewhere for something more capable. given that the price of the dualsense edge is $200, though, i’m not optimistic that the q will be priced much lower than that. if i’m looking at spending $200 just to stream games tethered to a home console when i can already do that for free, then i’m not looking at the q anymore. i’m looking at a steam deck.

it feels like sony wanted a slice of the switch pie without trying to make something that could genuinely compete in that space. if the price matches the experience, i’ll bite. otherwise, i’ll consider picking it up at a discounted price years down the road, if at all.

If it’s dirt cheap I might pick one up. I love the portability of my switch, and have a ps5. If it’s the price of a switch and doesn’t run anything standalone it’s probably DOA.

It’s just for streaming games? That sounds uninspiring

I'm not sure who this device is for. It is very limited to PS5 owners or those wanting to use Sony's cloud streaming, which is behind Microsoft right now. It will have to be cheap for it to be worth it compared to just getting a controller mount or an attachable controller for your phone. Your phone will have the same ability to stream to it, on top of having the general increased usability of a phone.

In a certain way this feels like Sega of the 90s decided to make an add-on for the PS5 after playing a whole bunch of WiiU.

I just hope they don't use it as an excuse to kill off PS Remote Play.

I quite like being able to play PS5 games on my Retroid Pocket 3+.

It's not a deal-breaker for me, since I already own a PS5 and I was already looking to stream those games to my computer anyhow, but haven't got it set up well yet. There's some weird audio stuff going on, at least.

I am also not interested in buying handheld-only games for another underpowered system, so it's fine that it streams them from a powerful device instead. If they manage to get the battery life good enough, I'm going to seriously consider it... But not at launch.