Support NeoGAF

[GhostTrick]

I think that's a much more sensible comment from Shawn Layden than the obnoxious and pretentious myriad of Americans who seem to proclaim themselves as experts and know-it-alls, yet they don't even substantize their claims with actual data. Making personal observations is not enough. You can't reduce everything to a few simplistic personal ovservations.

("Me and one of my friends thought the memory cards were too expensive!!!" [memory cards might actually have made SIE extra money, because we don't know if they would have reached an audience beyond core enthusiast handheld gamer audience with or without the memory cards that would have outweighed the profit generated from the memory cards]

No, it's pretty easy to see why Vita failed:

-Lackluster 1st party support: Save for a few Japan Studio gems, the platform was supported by B-tier teams to release games for the launch line-up.. then nothing after.

-Sony gave up 3 months after it's release: You should remember that infamous E3 2012, in which Vita had like 5 minutes in the Sony press conf for two games: 1 logo of Call of Duty and 4 screenshots of AC3 Liberation.

-The outrageous price of the device: While Sony made a nice hit when it was announced for 250 dollars (same price as 3DS while boasting more technology), it also need to be said that 250 dollars was expensive for a handheld... even more when it was a psychological price, considering the expensive memory cards.

 

[Oregano]

Why is he acting like Sony tried to support it with first party software? They bailed out years ago.

People have worked it out but it's doubtful anything was actually greenlight after the first few months.

They gave it pathetic support.

 

[NolbertoS]

Why is he acting like Sony tried to support it with first party software? They bailed out years ago.

People have worked it out but it's doubtful anything was actually greenlight after the first few months.

They gave it pathetic support.

Because he's paid by Sony. When is a company executive ever gonna diss his company's products. Thats career suicide. He'll keep pumping the Vita tires that Sony gave it all the love in the world to be successful.

 

[RM8]

I don't really believe this.

Switch has a ton of super expensive accesories and people waste their money on them like their lives depend on that

in all truth, softwarewise it had pretty awful first two years and by then it was over.

People keep saying the price was wrong, but launch dates aligned, underpowered 3DS was selling quite better at 250 USD. The market was never receptive to the Vita, it's really just that. People thought casual gamers going mobile would cast doom on 3DS, but actually, a big selling point of the PSP was being a nice portable media player - something no one needed in the age of smartphones.

 

[sixteen-bit]

I hope Gio is still #buildingthelist

 

[GhostTrick]

People keep saying the price was wrong, but launch dates aligned, underpowered 3DS was selling quite better at 250 USD. The market was never receptive to the Vita, it's really just that. People thought casual gamers going mobile would cast doom on 3DS, but actually, a big selling point of the PSP was being a nice portable media player - something no one needed in the age of smartphones.

It was selling quite better because it also had a better premise of games. As I said, it's also due to the fact that 250 dollars on Vita was a psychological price. The reality is you still needed a memory card to even boot a lot of games.

 

[CaviarMeths]

If by "still viable" he means selling like 10k per week and not having a hit game outside of Minecraft in the last few years, then sure.

 

[Kresnik258]

Gio Corsi single-handedly keeping the Sony exec love for the Vita alive on the main conference stages.

Looking forward to the 4th annual "Gio Corsi's the only one giving the Vita some love and announces a Yakuza title/indies" show happening in December.

I suspect this'll be the first year it doesn't happen. Gio doesn't have "bartender of #VitaIsland" or #buildingthelist on his profile anymore. Last PSX was just the announcements of Windjammers & Ys as far as I remember (alongside release dates of Garou & Lara Croft Go), which was the quietest showing yet.

I'd love to be wrong, although I don't see it happening.

(Although who knows if Banner Saga Vita will be out by next PSX, maybe that'll be his announcement lol).

 

[conpfreak]

The memory cards were not the reason the system failed in the West. A contributing factor, yes, but not the reason. The West just didn't have the appetite for the library of games, with it being filled with very Japanese centric waifu titles and console game "experiences". It was also more expensive than the 3DS, which had the better library. The Vita had no nolvelty factor either.

I think they should absolutely try a successor again, because with the Switch now being a runaway success, they have to be able to compete or willingly give up marketshare in both spaces.

 

[GhostTrick]

If by "still viable" he means selling like 10k per week and not having a hit game outside of Minecraft in the last few years, then sure.

Vita is viable in Japan, in the sense that, for games relying on multiplateforme engines, such as KT games, it's a good move to release a Vita SKU that may sell between 10k to 100k. The revenue outpace the cost.

 

[KormaChameleon]

Vita is dead in Japan though.

Is it? I thought mobile/handheld gaming was extremely popular in Japan? I've noticed most Vita games that are recently being released are made from Japanese devs or being published by limited run.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

The bolded is the core reason it failed, not memory card prices. Why would someone play the big Playstation games/franchises on Vita rather than PS3? Your Uncharteds, your Fifas, your CoDs, your Maddens? That question was never answered.

Pubs put 3rd string devs on Vita (because they needed the 1st and 2nd string teams on PS3/360) so it was no surprise when people declined to play those lesser quality games just because they were portable and instead stayed with the home console.

With Nintendo, on the other hand
-some games only appear on handhelds (Mainline Pokemon)
-some games were more suited to handheld (Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing)
-with Switch, handheld and home titles is no longer a choice of purchase (buying Uncharted Golden Abyss vs buying Uncharted 3, for example) rather a choice of where you want to play.
So there was always an actual appeal separate to the home console there.

People just didn't want lower-quality AAA gaming on the go, and I'm not sure they ever will.

I thought the old Edge Magazine review for Killzone: Mercenary summed it up well in its conclusion:

those who bought a Vita on that promise will be amply satisfied. Others will squint, line up their sights on a speck in the middle distance, squeeze the trigger and hope for the popup confirming their aim was true, and wonder if this is really what handheld gaming should be.

With the Switch Nintendo was in at the right time and with the right approach to software dev/publishing (support for Unity/Unreal 4 on day 1). I've been surprised by how people who go hands-on with my Switch mention how it doesn't feel like there's any major difference switching between handheld and console modes, mostly because the screen is large and high-resolution enough to display "console" game UIs and visuals well, and the buttons and sticks/inputs on the Joy-Con do a great job with those kinds of games. Switch can get away without needing bespoke games.

It'll be interesting seeing what happens with portable game systems next, 3DS is probably going to be the last system that was survived solely on the basis of its unique library of games. Its bespoke hardware made it terrible for ports, but it also arrived at a time where it could garner enough unique support to gain enough momentum for more 3DS-specific games from Square Enix, Atlus etc.

 

[shotgunbob04]

As cool as I think the Vita is/was, I've already played my Switch more in the two months I've had it than the Vita that I've had for five years.

Micro SDXC, multiple user accounts, much better graphics and better/bigger screen, play both on TV and on the go, much better ergonomics, and better controls—the Vita has almost zero chance in Japan anymore.

 

[Fury451]

It's my Persona and PSOne classics machine.

I like it, but yeah, it always seemed like a DOA concept in the West.

 

[Ambient80]

I think that's a much more sensible comment from Shawn Layden than the obnoxious and pretentious myriad of Americans who seem to proclaim themselves as experts and know-it-alls, yet they don't even substantize their claims with actual data.

God, my eyes just rolled out of their sockets.

 

[Skyzard]

Of course, the Vita hardware still rules. For now, still my favourite handheld by a wide margin.

Nothing beats it for 2D games with its perfect size, d-pad and screen. 3D games on the other hand...the time has probably passed.

Shame that it seems like we won't get too many more great western indies on it.

Though it's not like devs won't find an audience with the what 15-20 million Vitas out there, with few software titles releasing. There is over 10 million just in US and Japan and it still holds up very well, at least for 2D.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

Price(memory cards) and lack of unique, exclusive games with western appeal killed the Vita in the West.

PSP had a steady stream of huge, sometime exclusive titles of big IPs like GTA, NFS, Burnout, SSX, Monster Hunter, God Of War, Daxter, Final Fantasy MGS,Gran Turismo, Midnight Club and more...

PsVita failed to start such a stream.


I still think its a nice device to own. The game library is pretty niche but if it fits you there is a lot to play. The device itself is obviously great.
Although I wish Remote Play would work better. That feature would be amazing for me but because of a lack of buttons I just don't find myself enjoying it.

 

[GhostTrick]

Of course, the Vita hardware still rules. For now, still my favourite handheld by a wide margin.

Nothing beats it for 2D games with its perfect size, d-pad and screen. 3D games on the other hand...the time has probably passed.

Shame that it seems like we won't get too many more great western indies on it.

Though it's not like devs won't find an audience with the what 15-20 million Vitas out there, with few software titles releasing. There is over 10 million just in US and Japan and it still holds up very well, at least for 2D.

That ship has sailed long ago

 

[EdwardTivrusky]

Actually, now i've thought about it the naysayers are right. It wasn't the cost of the memory sticks that killed the Vita it WAS the lack of compelling software that would make me buy one of the memory sticks to play the game. The games seemed fine but then i realised i'd have to spend and extra £40 and the lustre wore off.

Slightly attractive games = no compulsion to buy mem-stick required to play such games = A lack of sales

 

[GitarooMan]

I don't buy the proprietary memory stick killed the Vita at all. The vast majority of people looking into systems don't think in terms like that.

 

[ChaosZeroX]

Amongst other things, obv.

My thoughts exactly.

How can he say he has no idea why.

The fucking memory cards are expensive as fuck

 

[BadWolf]

The hardware itself is great but they screwed up on the pricing (with the hidden mem card cost) and the software support.

They basically did the same thing with the PSP, which was successful despite Sony. Stuff like MH made it take off while they were busy fixing their PS3 fuck ups.

Trying the same shit with the Vita didn't work out so well, especially when they let MH slip through their fingers (Yoshida basically admitted that they did). They created some interesting IPs that may have had potential like Soul Sacrifice and Freedom Wars but ditched them pretty quick. Their software support was basically a big fail, they were again too busy with their console side.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

That ship has sailed long ago

I think it's still good for 2D games so long as they aren't pixel doubled. Shiren The Wanderer (pixel tripled from DS) and PSP games are ugly as sin at 544p, and Shovel Knight undeniably looks better at native 1:1 pixel mapping on 3DS.

But yes, the ship has long sailed especially for things like its display (Vita-2000's screen is better than the 1000's, but the Switch's display blows Vita-2000's out the water). Since launch I found Vita's display too small and low-res for games designed with large TV screens in mind, the Switch has only emphasised this issue.

 

[sturgboski]

Hmm ok, then why did they re-release a handful of PSP titles on PS4 rather than doing a qHD release as well? I mean I would have bought a Patapon qHD Collection native for Vita, even LocoRoco.

Further, the whole "oh Asia is keeping it going" well that is great, except its slowing down and so is the localization process. Most studios are moving to either PS4 or Switch (or both) and most localization firms have slowed on Vita. But lets look at the economics: most of these titles are low cost affairs (I mean I doubt something like Demon Gaze or Drive Girls cost anywhere close to Killzone), why couldnt Sony get involved in the same sort of thing? If we learned that AAA wasnt going to work because of cost and userbase, why not move into something smaller? Does Sony own the rights/engine for Soul Sacrifice or Freedom Wars? Why not fund sequels to those OR use that engine to build a Tales like action RPG?

 

[Father_Brain]

It was a product fundamentally out of touch with the Western portable gaming market as it existed in 2011/2012. Better first-party support or lower memory card prices wouldn't have saved it, no matter how much people might want to blame SCEA for stabbing it in the back or whatever.

 

[firelogic]

It was a product fundamentally out of touch with the Western portable gaming market as it existed in 2011/2012. Better first-party support or lower memory card prices wouldn't have saved it, no matter how much people might want to blame SCEA for stabbing it in the back or whatever.

I agree. It was a powerful handheld that could play home console-like games but the market didn't want that. But now everyone's flipping over the Switch that can play console-like games on the go.

 

[Lupin the Third]

I agree. It was a powerful handheld that could play home console-like games but the market didn't want that. But now everyone's flipping over the Switch that can play console-like games on the go.

The big difference is that while Vita got console-like games, Switch gets console games and a bigger display to match. Vita's great for Japan's favorite portable IPs (and would've been a good match for MH) but Switch is just better enough at making the console experience portable that people dig it.

 

[Aters]

PSP had GTA and MH. Sony shouldn't even release Vita without securing one of them.

 

[Skyzard]

That ship has sailed long ago

Maybe in a few years with a switch revision for better portability, a great D-Pad and more games...but if the classics like Spelunky, Olli Olli etc etc aren't there then they'd have to be damn good titles to knock the vita down a notch for me, which could happen.

But the design of the Vita is just so good, it would be real tough to budge.

The size I might be able to get used to for quick pick up and play I guess...but the lack of a good d-pad is a fat nail in the coffin for 2D titles after playing the Vita for 5 years.

It's okay, I've got a lot of those and could do with more 3D handheld titles but it sucks less 2D indies are releasing on Vita. I don't really want them elsewhere, maybe the Switch if the game uses the analogue stick, which I quite like on the joycons, especially compared to the Vita's.

I expect the switch will be eventually be my multiplayer and 3D indie machine, with new, offline Nintendo games.
And the Vita being my 2D indie game machine, with emulation and regular playstation titles, for a looonng time yet.
90% of my vita library is heavily replayable. Even after completing them, I sometimes go back and year or two later and have the same fun I had to begin with. It landed some real good games (that were portable exclusives).

 

[Father_Brain]

I agree. It was a powerful handheld that could play home console-like games but the market didn't want that. But now everyone's flipping over the Switch that can play console-like games on the go.

Well, the key distinctions are (a) that Switch literally plays console games, as opposed to "console-like" games, and (b) it has Nintendo first-party IP.

 

[GhostTrick]

Maybe in a few years with a switch revision for better portability, a great D-Pad and more games...but if the classics like Spelunky, Olli Olli etc etc aren't there then they'd have to be damn good titles to knock the vita down a notch. But the design of the Vita is just so good, it would be real tough to budge.

The size I might be able to get used to for quick pick up and play I guess...but the lack of a good d-pad is a fat nail in the coffin for 2D titles after playing the Vita for 5 years.

It's okay, I've got a lot of those and could do with more 3D handheld titles but it sucks less 2D indies are releasing on Vita. I don't really want them elsewhere, maybe the Switch if the game uses the analogue stick, which I quite like on the joycons, especially compared to the Vita's.

I expect the switch will be eventually be my multiplayer and 3D indie machine, with new, offline Nintendo games.
And the Vita being my 2D indie game machine, with emulation and regular playstation titles, for a looonng time yet. 90% of my vita library is heavily replayable titles. Even after completing them, I can go back and year or two later and have the same fun I had to begin with. It landed some real good games (that were portable exclusives).

GPD Win happened, that's why.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

Well, the key distinctions are (a) that Switch literally plays console games, as opposed to "console-like" games, and (b) it has Nintendo first-party IP.

Yup. And the controller inputs are significantly better. Going back to the Vita sticks is like having your thumbs whittled down by sandpaper, they are tiny and imprecise.

Same goes for the screen - playing Trails of Cold Steel II after hours of Zelda was uncomfortable on the eyes. The UI and characters are tiny going from 6.2" to 5".

I've had a Vita since launch (two, actually, got the 2000 model in early 2014), and probably have around 100 games for it, but I'd been ready to move on from it for a while now for the games that just don't work so well on the platform.

 

[autoduelist]

My thoughts exactly.

How can he say he has no idea why.

The fucking memory cards are expensive as fuck

They are [I own an imported 64]. But while that's a meme now, I don't think it was 'the' reason back at launch. I bought into Vita when it went on sale [maybe a black friday?] for the white AC version, and I didn't even look at mem card prices before I bought one. It's not that I'm rich [I'm not], it's just that I sort of expect to spend money on a case, etc. I was actually sold on the Vita thanks to the 'instant game collection' back then. Getting Uncharted and a handful of other games for free [since I was already paying for ps+ anyway] practically negated the buy in price for me.

I think I started with a 16g? I upgraded to 32, then 64, because I love the device and ultimately can easily justify the price verses benefits offered. It doesn't bother me that another storage medium is cheaper, because while that may be true, it's not the one I need. And it doesn't piss me off that it was a proprietary card in the first place, because while I think that was a bad decision, I understand that it was almost certainly in answer to psp piracy.


Also consider that mem card prices were, in part, high because they were using that ancillary purchase to subsidize Vita prices. That is, if they dropped the card price by, say, 30% at launch, then Vita core cost would have been higher. It's hard to know which consumers would have embraced more.

And finally, I think the dream was that if Vita -did- take off, economy of scale would have allowed them to reduce the price of mem cards with high production. Sony has a solid track record of pushing new media... it just so happened this one failed, which kept the mem card as a niche, luxury product.

The mem card certainly didn't help vita -- in fact, it certainly hurt it. But I don't think it was 'the' cause of Vita's failure in the West.

 

[Ravic]

I've been playing my Trials of Cold Steel on my Vita.

 

[Skyzard]

GPD Win happened, that's why.

Ehh. Maybe a couple models down the line in the future.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

They are [I own an imported 64]. But while that's a meme now, I don't think it was 'the' reason back at launch. I bought into Vita when it went on sale [maybe a black friday?] for the white AC version, and I didn't even look at mem card prices before I bought one.

Also consider that mem card prices were, in part, high because they were using that ancillary purchase to subsidize Vita prices. That is, if they dropped the card price by, say, 30% at launch, then Vita core cost would have been higher. It's hard to know which consumers would have embraced more.

And finally, I think the dream was that if Vita -did- take off, economy of scale would have allowed them to reduce the price of mem cards with high production. Sony has a solid track record of pushing new media... it just so happened this one failed, which kept the mem card as a niche, luxury product.

The mem card certainly didn't help vita -- in fact, it certainly hurt it. But I don't think it was 'the' cause of Vita's failure in the West.

Yeah, I don't think memory cards were the issue either. When the system was announced as NGP, with 16GB of internal memory, most of the worries weren't around memory cards, which didn't exist yet. They were around the games lineup, and how the first party titles seemed like have-been versions of PS3 games, and how Sony's own IP don't have mass appeal to give the system traction. The other issue was Sony pitching it as a PS3 in your pocket, and games with PS3-style dev budgets either 1) cost a lot to make or 2) would need to be published on a 4GB game card, the numbers didn't really stack up in favour of a healthy software sales environment to ensure the platform received lots of unique games.

As for the memory card prices, I remember Amazon UK doing a deal where you got a Vita, an 8GB memory card and a game like Rayman Origins for the same price as a Vita sans-memory card, so I doubt it had an impact early on either. And that didn't stop Vita from debuting at 1/4 of PSP in the UK.

 

[GhostTrick]

Ehh. Maybe a couple models down the line in the future.

Nah, it is already. Far better support, bigger screen and res. That's basically my device for indie titles. But that's off-topic though.

The thing is, Vita as a hardware isn't as appealing as it was, obviously, 5 years ago.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

Ehh. Maybe a couple models down the line in the future.

I don't even think that'll happen anyway, Intel Atom development died (Surface 3 and GPD Win using the last Atom CPUs from 2015) and its closest alternative, Core M, is as pricey as a GPD Win itself while running much hotter under load.

Vita definitely now has its place like the PSP and DS did, even though it wasn't survived by a library of unique games I can't see many of its ports (like Spelunky) being ported again to modern systems.

 

[Hamster Plugin]

I don't really believe this.

Switch has a ton of super expensive accesories and people waste their money on them like their lives depend on that

in all truth, softwarewise it had pretty awful first two years and by then it was over.

You don't need any of the accessories to play on Switch. I'd imagine that most accessories are sold after they started playing and liking the machine.

You needed a memory card to even play half of the launch games for the Vita.

 

[antibolo]

As cool as I think the Vita is/was, I've already played my Switch more in the two months I've had it than the Vita that I've had for five years.

That's on you for deliberately ignoring the Vita library then.

 

[Father_Brain]

Yeah, I don't think memory cards were the issue either. When the system was announced as NGP, with 16GB of internal memory, most of the worries weren't around memory cards, which didn't exist yet. They were around the games lineup, and how the first party titles seemed like have-been versions of PS3 games, and how Sony's own IP don't have mass appeal to give the system traction. The other issue was Sony pitching it as a PS3 in your pocket, and games with PS3-style dev budgets either 1) cost a lot to make or 2) would need to be published on a 4GB game card, the numbers didn't really stack up in favour of a healthy software sales environment to ensure the platform received lots of unique games.

Yup.

The platform was in a very weird, awkward position when it came to the sorts of quasi-AAA games Sony tried to sell it on from January 2011 through the end of 2012: it was far enough from PS3/360 in performance that it couldn't easily handle direct ports from those platforms, yet close enough that it was extremely difficult for third parties to justify the cost of making exclusive games that took full advantage of the hardware.

With ACIII:L, Ubisoft ended up being the only third party that really attempted (however half-assedly) to make the sort of bespoke, AAA-style experience that Sony initially sold the platform on, and while Ubisoft claimed to be happy with its sales, it clearly didn't perform well enough to justify more than ports from them going forward.

 

[2+2=5]

What a bunch of bullshit.

"But just because the Vita won't have much of a presence at gaming's biggest spectacle, that doesn't necessarily mean the platform is dead — especially if you ask Sony Interactive Entertainment America president and CEO Shawn Layden."

I know that gaf thinks that memory cards prices killed Vita but it's not the true imo, it was the "no gaemz" stigma that killed it, and the lack of presence at EVERY single E3 not only didn't help, but it strengthen that stigma.

To me SCEA is the major culprit of Vita's destiny and SCEA definitively NEVER loved Vita.

 

[Mael]

You don't need any of the accessories to play on Switch. I'd imagine that most accessories are sold after they started playing and liking the machine.

You needed a memory card to even play half of the launch games for the Vita.

The market would have swallowed that if there was compelling software to play.
They're literally gouging customers with Switch accessories and no one really minds.
Heck at this point if I get my hand on some Switch color controller for less than 100 bucks at retail I'm half of a mind in getting it right now.
The problem was that it had close to no compelling software and on top of that you couldn't even do anything with the library of software you bought on the previous successful hardware.
I bought a 3DS when the price wasn't insane and mostly played DS games at the time, same for WiiU when it was mostly a Wii machine for me.
No 1 single factor killed the Vita but the sum of all of it certainly killed it good.

 

[Q8D3vil]

Its viable when you do it right.
Making a portable version of your AAA wasnt the way to go, even though some of them were pretty decent.

Spoiler

Also. those fucking memory cards that cost an arm and a leg

 

[Piers]

These responses to "It's hard to know exactly why" are making my day.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

What a bunch of bullshit.

"But just because the Vita won’t have much of a presence at gaming’s biggest spectacle, that doesn’t necessarily mean the platform is dead — especially if you ask Sony Interactive Entertainment America president and CEO Shawn Layden."

I know that gaf thinks that memory cards prices killed Vita but it's not the true imo, it was the "no gaemz" stigma that killed it, and the lack of presence at EVERY single E3 not only didn't help, but it strengthen that stigma.

To me SCEA is the major culprit of Vita's destiny and SCEA definitively NEVER loved Vita.

That reminds me: wasn't there a rumour that Sony got the short end of the stick with the CoD deal with Activision, and that was SCEA's budget for the Vita spent?

As an aside, many platforms suffer from the "no games" stigma, including the PS3, which ultimately got turned around and had momentum in 2013 (The Last of Us! Instant Game Collection!) to ensure people gave Sony the benefit of the doubt with PS4.

 

[Mael]

That reminds me: wasn't there a rumour that Sony got the short end of the stick with the CoD deal with Activision, and that was SCEA's budget for the Vita spent?

Nah the ones that got the shortest end of the stick was the dev house who churned the game in record time for peanuts because ATVI was too cheap to provide basically anything.
Pretty surprising when you see that they paid nspace for years to make portable CoD on DS (last one being in 2011!).

 

[casiopao]

It is not even that alive in Japan anymore lol.^^

 

[Father_Brain]

I see the Declassified debacle as largely Sony's fault for drafting a moneyhat contract that apparently made no stipulations as to product content or quality.

 

[Unknown?]

No, it's pretty easy to see why Vita failed:

-Lackluster 1st party support: Save for a few Japan Studio gems, the platform was supported by B-tier teams to release games for the launch line-up.. then nothing after.

-Sony gave up 3 months after it's release: You should remember that infamous E3 2012, in which Vita had like 5 minutes in the Sony press conf for two games: 1 logo of Call of Duty and 4 screenshots of AC3 Liberation.

-The outrageous price of the device: While Sony made a nice hit when it was announced for 250 dollars (same price as 3DS while boasting more technology), it also need to be said that 250 dollars was expensive for a handheld... even more when it was a psychological price, considering the expensive memory cards.

lol you're so full of crap! The Vita was Sony's best platform launch ever in terms of quantity and quality software. Vita had strong support out the gate and for the first year. You actually think that same level of support would have made it take off? At most it'd have a few more million units sold.