this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
650 points (100.0% liked)

196

16504 readers
12 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 70 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I got legit angry at it, but it makes sense, there is a very slight but noticeable delay in almost all bluetooth audio. Sony certainly wouldn't want to taint their brand by something that small

[–] Fitzsimmons@lemmy.blahaj.zone 61 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Boost this one to the top, it's the official reason given by sony. You can disparage it if you want, but it has technical merit. The audio codecs supported by mainstream bluetooth devices are meant for music, where you want the highest possible quality and can tolerate a slight delay between when you press play and when the music actually starts.

In video games this means you get a noticable delay on the audio. With classic video file playback like a movie, this can be compensated for by delaying the visuals so thay match up with the audio, but delaying the visuals in a video game is an even worse experience for the player.

Sony's use of a proprietary audio codec via their wireless controllers is pretty justified. They're able to optimize for latency and it shows (or rather, it doesn't, since you probably would never notice it).

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 26 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That's a very high fucking horse to be standing on top off when their device is specifically made to be plugged into a television. Y'know, the thing that almost never can display an image with less than 100 ms of latency even in "game mode". Any decent bluetooth codec has less latency than a standard TV so that's a bullshit excuse.

Also there are low latency bouetooth codecs like AptX-LL with less than 40ms of E2E delay. Sony could enable bluetooth for those devices if it can negociate a low latency codec. They could show a warning about how they can't guarantee the user experience. But they won't.

The real reason is that they want to lock their users into a walled garden where they have an effective oligopoly. It's a very old and scummy business tactict. It's that simple and there's no need to regurgitate their pathetic excuses.

[–] tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 10 months ago

Thank you, I was almost feeling a tinge of sympathy for Sony then I remembered, these businesses have centuries of practice in deceit and any actual benefit that comes to users is incidental to their only actual goal of maximizing profit.

[–] Dempf@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 months ago

Nowadays many TVs have very low latency.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 7 points 10 months ago

It has hypercapitalistic anti consumer merit

It's not okay to make excuses for it

It is purely to make profit of a customer seen as incompetent

Just because it's a valid business case for making money

Even if to prevent bad experiences on their premium product

Nothing other than a failure of the capitalist system

No need to excuse it

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 28 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You know what's worse than audio with a 0.04 ms delay? No audio. Guarantee anyone who hooks up a pair of $20 Bluetooth headphones instead of their officially licensed $150 PS5 headset isn't gonna notice.

[–] aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago

Bluetooth audio latency is measured in tens of milliseconds, but I get your point.

[–] Welt@lazysoci.al 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

But we'd certainly want to brand their taint for doing this to us

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

It's pretty infuriating how they don't allow to make that choice yourself. Put up a text prompt for god's sake!