Nearly a year following its launch, the PlayStation Portal has seen little marketing but is selling remarkably well. To understand its appeal, I spent a month testing Sony’s latest handheld to discover its strengths and weaknesses.
First, let’s revisit the PlayStation Portable (PSP), which Sony introduced in 2005 and became a classic for offering console-quality 3D gaming on the go. Although it had a celebrated library and was easily hackable, it fell short of its ambitious promises. Now, after 12 years since the PlayStation Vita, Sony has returned to the handheld market—but not in the way you might expect.
Pros of the PlayStation Portal include a comfortable controller, an LCD screen that supports 60 frames per second, and better battery life compared to other handhelds. However, it does have drawbacks, such as a requirement for a fast, stable internet connection, no Bluetooth audio support, unreliable touch controls rendering some games unplayable, and a lack of support for streaming applications.
The PlayStation Portal was released at a time when the dream of portable gaming is a reality, thanks to devices like the Steam Deck and ROG Ally. Yet, Sony’s offering does not directly compete, as it is designed primarily as a remote play device for PS5 owners, allowing users to stream games from their console to the handheld, provided they are on the same Wi-Fi network.
Priced at SGD295.90, the Portal is seen as good value for its technology, but its functionality is notably limited. Those considering a purchase might want to do so only if they possess a significant PS5 game library and have high-speed home internet.
In terms of hardware, the Portal resembles a DualSense controller with an integrated 8-inch touchscreen that offers 1080p gameplay at up to 60 frames per second. It retains many of the DualSense’s impressive features like haptic feedback and adaptive triggers, but lacks built-in speakers and a touchpad. The absence of a functioning touchpad often hampers gameplay, as the touch interface does not effectively replace physical controls.
Streaming performance is a critical aspect of the PlayStation Portal, relying heavily on internet bandwidth. My own internet, good enough for standard gaming and work tasks but not exceptionally fast or stable, posed significant limitations. During my tests with various PS5 and PS4 games, I frequently encountered pixelated and laggy streaming, which often required reconnection. Interestingly, lower-intensity games streamed much better than titles demanding higher graphics.
Moreover, the Portal cannot stream content from platforms like Netflix or YouTube, nor can it access cloud-streamed games available through PlayStation Plus. These restrictions are disappointing for a device aiming to capitalize on convenient, portable gaming.
In conclusion, while the PlayStation Portal offers good value for specific users—particularly those with a single household TV—it feels restricted and tethered. It lacks some essential features and cannot compete with other portable gaming devices from Nintendo and Valve. Many of the issues observed are typical for a first-generation product, yet no enhancements to national internet infrastructure may limit the Portal’s overall effectiveness. Users’ experiences will heavily depend on their broadband availability.