People on GAF love to make sweeping generalizations though! Yes, touch controls suck on some genres but are amazing on others. It's up to developers to exploit what the platform's good at.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
(Reuters) Sony's Vita arrives just as market may be fading
- Thread starter Ripclawe
- Start date
People on GAF love to make sweeping generalizations though! Yes, touch controls suck on some genres but are amazing on others. It's up to developers to exploit what the platform's good at.
Yeah. Some people project the fantastic japanese sales to the West, but I don't think it's doing nearly as well considering that it has already reached a very affordable price with enough killer apps. Wasn't it reported sales similar to the Wii last month? Did Nintendo even release a press release about the sales (I really don't remember)? Either way, it seems to be doing okayish, but I wouldn't say it's selling like hot cakes.
MarshMellow96
Member
Call of Duty Zombies is on iOS, and some of the DS games are 'companion narratives', FWIW. They have online modes, but you're right insofar as they're not on the scale of the console versions. Stuff like Motorstorm RC shows that there is a persistent infrastructure in place. Putting COD on the Vita is moot at this anyway. I'd go so far as to say if they were happy to put it on the PSP, they'll be happy to put it on the Vita.
You don't have to buy two copies in the instance that the Vita and PS3 versions are cross-platform. I personally would buy it on the Vita if that were the case, probably anyway to be honest.
A YouTube tech review guy I subscribed to has been "reviewing" vita games and he plays them all with the touch and tilt controls and critiques the games as if they're the only input options. It makes my brain melt. Thankfully some people have torn him up in comments but he's still gleefully ignorant of button controls for things like the tennis game, where he demonstrated it for 5 minutes and declared the controls unresponsive.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
Comparing it to a smartphone is dumb, it is like Apples and space ships.
$250 is an excellent price compared to a $500 phone/tablet or $200 with a 2 year contract and $60/month.
It plays games, real games with real controls and great graphics. What else would a real gamer want?
$250 is an excellent price compared to a $500 phone/tablet or $200 with a 2 year contract and $60/month.
It plays games, real games with real controls and great graphics. What else would a real gamer want?
Don't see the problem; if the controls are offered as an option, they should work. Touch controls are a selling point of the system, and some people will be wanting to use them. Is this any more invalid than dismissing them out of hand?
I wish more people realised this, and not just the retail price.
The spiralling development costs of this gen have done so much damage to the industry. The blockbuster model isn't sustainable, or helpful when it comes to creativity and risk-taking. What is a considered a marketable game is being decided by production values, we're still a very immature industry in a lot of ways. What the industry needs is platforms where creativity can flourish, which is one of the strengths of iOS actually. Even though obviously interface dictates what works well and what doesn't.
The industry has never been so polarised.
Fighters and Racing games are perfectly playable without the best control options. Shooters are best played with mouse + keyboard, but a lot of people like to play them with controllers...
The point is: if the game was designed with buttons in mind, it'll be better to play them with buttons. Games designed around touchscreen work better with that (angry birds on PSP, for example, is pretty lame, even if playable).
I'm not saying that iOS/Android games are trash or anything like that.
About the point of big budget games on iOS, I doubt it would work at all. People want to pay .99 cents for everything there, even bigger budget games.
To this I say, so what? If buying habits are any indication, most people are not looking to reproduce their PS3 in the palm of their hands and don't really care for high budget portable gaming. That's why people own PS3s, 360s, and PCs. You guys really need to disabuse yourselves of the notion that people want the console experience on the small screen. Most people don't (again, if we are going by what people actually buy). I know I wanted something different. I loved my DS because it gave me things that I couldn't play anywhere else.
Amen brother
It's funny when people throw around the "but bigger productions" argument. While I don't think the iOS environment is ideal for big budget games, it's ironic how things like online leaderboards, achievements and online multiplayer are quickly becoming the norm on the AppStore. Features that even today are lacking in quite a few portable games with far bigger budgets.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
The Vita is the wrong platform to target if you want to talk about polarity. Here are the games I've purchased so far as well as some I'm interested in along with their price:
Tales From Space - $8
Motorstorm RC - $8
Super Stardust Delta - $10
Escape Plan - $15
WipEout 2048 - $30
Lumines and Rayman - $40
Uncharted - $50
There is tons of room for variability when it comes to developing and pricing games for the Vita. I agree that incredibly high budget/high-priced games have been damaging to the industry but do you consider a $20 game high-priced? Because I honestly don't think a game with that price would stand much of a chance on iOS (at least not in its current form).
I think that's exactly why he does it. But it also reminds me of how much the public's gaming habits have changed. Many people who pick up a Vita will have MORE experience with touch gaming than traditional controls, and gravitate towards it. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, just an interesting observation. It seems to go against the ideas of those who champion tactile controls.
How's Ghost Trick doing? That's rather more pricey than 99cents, right?
I'm curious if a title of Ghost Trick's scale - more than a 'glorified flash game', less than Skyrim - would be a lucrative prospect if iOS was the *only* venue for the game, or if iOS is only really viable as a source of extra income after the DS had its sales (which weren't exactly spectacular anyway).
That's the next stage I'd like to see the App store heading towards; selling games at that sort of budgetary level at a $10/$15 pricepoint and having those games turn a profit. I have no idea if it could work in the general case (I'm sure the occasional blockbuster would do so), but that'd help immensely to make iOS regarded as a credible competitor in my eyes.
FFT for the ipad is $18, released today; we'll see how well it does.
flyinpiranha
Member
A cheaper gaming machine.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
FFT is a port of a 15 year old game, not a new game developed with a substantial budget that needs to be made back.
When I say a game wouldn't stand a chance I'm talking about a completely new game developed only for iOS. And even if there is an exception or two it hardly means that the iOS market is suddenly capable of supporting dozens or hundreds of new games with a price of > $10.
XOMTOR
Member
That's quite true, at least in my case. When I bought my PSP, I was convinced I wanted the console experience on the go; however after a while, I realized that it wasn't all I thought it would be.
The fact that it's a 15 year old makes it a bigger challenge at that price point. If a 15 year old game that everyone already owns anyway can sell at $18, I think a new IP can sell at $20.
consoles don't have arcade sticks either, but I suppose you can at least buy them as an accessory.
Vita sits above smartphones in terms of control options, and kind of sideways to consoles - no analogue triggers is about it, but then neither do consoles have touch screens.
Vita can do anything a smartphone can - front multitouch, tilt, camera etc. But it also has rear touch and of course sticks. A smartphone can't do everything a vita can. Purely talking about inputs and tech, not about the value of one game above another.
TBH, if Apple announced official analogue pad support via BT in ios6, this argument would get a whole lot more interesting
They work on games that involve you touching a point on the screen to tell your character where to go.
Beyond that they are complete and utter dogshit.
It's not. Does that mean it can't have great games though? There are quite a few polished, content rich and well produced games made with very little money. Lots of talented, passionate people can do that in a model that lets you easily release your own stuff.
I only like portable consoles when they have enough battery autonomy, I don't want to be carrying the ac adapter everywhere. i don't really care about smartphone gaming.
So i would buy vita only after they release a better battery or any hardware revision that improves greatly the battery life, the sames goes for the 3ds.
Don't bring the "You guys travel from LA to Australia everyday" argument again gaf.
So i would buy vita only after they release a better battery or any hardware revision that improves greatly the battery life, the sames goes for the 3ds.
Don't bring the "You guys travel from LA to Australia everyday" argument again gaf.
Just as much (nah... more even) as some people want it to die because they don't like it. Bizarre, indeed.
Show me a single person who wants it to die.
darkside31337
Tomodachi wa Mahou
On the basis that the Vita is the perfect mix of actually recent technology + the use of buttons I could see why people would want the Vita to do well. I don't care "who wins" (because its totally juvenile), but I would like the Vita to do well enough to garner significant third party support. I don't see what's wrong with that at all.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Well I guess the question I'm asking is what does "if it can sell" mean? If it means selling enough copies to cover the cost of porting a 15 year old game that is one thing. Selling enough copies to cover the cost of an entirely new game developed with an appropriate budget for the selling price is a completely different challenge.
It certainly doesn't mean it can't have great games. At some point you have to admit that a higher budget allows for potentially better games, though.
The relationship between budget of a game and quality, polish, and amount of features found in the game has to be somewhat directly proportional, doesn't it?
I'm not arguing that iOS is terrible and doesn't have any good games, by the way. That's not the type of comment I was initially responding to.
Pureauthor
Member
The 3DS has battery packs that increase it's lifespan. The Vira might not be able to support that, though.
darkside31337
Tomodachi wa Mahou
People like this guy. There are plenty of people who want it to fail because of silly attitudes like this.
It supports, though. Vita already has something similar.
You should play games designed for touchscreen then. Plenty of those out there.
TheNatural
My Member!
Column speaks the truth outside of some silly comparisons. It's the same as been said by many all along - they've narrowed their audience to a point where they can't or don't want to compete with Nintendo on their ground, so now they're trying to compete with the same demographic that has smartphones and consoles with very homogenous games and are asking them to drop a lot of money for a supplemental machine. Not going to work.
Also funny is people saying "what more could you want" as if their lifestyle as a consumer applies to everyone in the world. Sorry, I don't think a person who up and drops $300 plus (maybe way north of that) for this is exactly the type of person to gauge what other people's priorities are going to be on making this a successful system.
Also funny is people saying "what more could you want" as if their lifestyle as a consumer applies to everyone in the world. Sorry, I don't think a person who up and drops $300 plus (maybe way north of that) for this is exactly the type of person to gauge what other people's priorities are going to be on making this a successful system.
SuperDowns
Banned
"Gartner's Gartenberg said Sony might want to consider a price cut. Vitas would be flying off the shelves at $79 or $99 each, he added."
LOL.
So would Chevy Volts or Apple Ipads or Roombas.
That is a ridiculously moronic statement. OFC it would be flying off the shelf at $99. But that isn't how product cycles work, clown.
Besides it costs about $160 to make.
Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-01-20-is-the-playstation-vita-worth-230
http://www.ubmtechinsights.com/teardowns/sony-playstation-vita-teardown/?pi_campaign_id=13825
LOL.
So would Chevy Volts or Apple Ipads or Roombas.
That is a ridiculously moronic statement. OFC it would be flying off the shelf at $99. But that isn't how product cycles work, clown.
Besides it costs about $160 to make.
Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-01-20-is-the-playstation-vita-worth-230
http://www.ubmtechinsights.com/teardowns/sony-playstation-vita-teardown/?pi_campaign_id=13825
RukusProvider
Banned
It's not as much wanting but looking at things logically.
I can't speak for other countries but the chances of the vita even pulling PSP like numbers are extremely low.
Come on, you can pick out an extremist (who is banned for being a jackass) and make these kinds of comments. No one is calling for Vita's death.
Byakuya769
Member
Good, hopefully they can get it below $200 before the developers dry up.
Touch controls suck in general though, regardless of the hardware. The Vita screen is no more or less responsive than say an iPhone or S2.
TheNatural
My Member!
Tell that to HP and Touchpad. Market dictates prices, not the other way around. If sales drop low enough it could hit $99, but it would have to be on such a level of disaster to the point that retailers won't stock the system and I don't think that is possible for any videogame system. I remember getting a Dreamcast for $50 new back in the day, some good consumer times.
There are machines that are more simple and portable, why the fuck does EVERY machine have to be how you want it?
Byakuya769
Member
What? You're using discontinued hardware to prove that the $79-$99 pricepoint isn't ridiculous?
TheNatural
My Member!
What point in anything I said was saying $79-$99 was NOT ridiculous?
Read what I said again.
You're wrong. That really is all there is to it.
Go and play a Cave shmup and come back to me. If you still think they're totally shit, I have to question your manual dexterity and your ability to adapt to new control schemes.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Stop cherry picking, Dave. Answer some of the tough questions for us.
Byakuya769
Member
I honestly cannot read your post in any other way, save for making it pointless, vague, or needlessly contrarian. And that's not an attempt to insult you, can you explain more what you meant?
Stop cherry picking, Dave. Answer some of the tough questions for us.
Sorry, I'm on my phone which makes multiquoting a nightmare. I just had to respond to yet another insistence that all touch screen controls are always bad. Flat out wrong.
What did you want me to answer? Was it the iOS budget thing because I already said I feel the market has room for higher budgets and prices.
Dr. Acid Avatar
Member
This reads like a Fox News article.
Duane Cunningham
Member
why does the author mention the Lynx, of all things, in the first sentence
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Yeah I was basically just curious about your opinion on the budget question. Is there any reason why you feel that way other than intuition?
Do you think a completely new game developed at a reasonable budget could be successful on iOS at $20 or $30? Beyond that, do you think it could become common enough to say that the market generally supports it?
TheNatural
My Member!
I thought it was clear I was saying the only way a price gets to $79-$99 is if it's such a failure that retailers won't carry it, like the Touchpad (or Dreamcast, when Sega couldn't go on.) I said it's not possible for that to happen to a major videogame console nowadays, so I don't think it's possible to happen to Vita unless it's a complete disaster along those lines.
But I was replying ot it costing $160 to make, and whatever it costs to make doesn't matter, what it's price is is going to be decided by the market, whether it costs $60 to make or $160 to make. If no one buys it at $250, $200, or lower what the cost of the system is, is not going to matter a bit.