Support NeoGAF

[darkside31337]

I agree with this as well. "Playstation TV" would be a better fit.

I really wonder why they didn't brand it with that. Vita TV just gives it the impression that it only plays Vita games when in reality it also plays PS1 and PSP games and perhaps eventually PS3 games. Also works great for whenever they get their internet TV stuff off the ground.

 

[frankie_baby]

if you are already in the PS ecosystem, you basically have a DS3

and yup, this is very enticing for those already in that ecosystem

but a pretty poor idea for bringing more people into said ecosytem

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

Competing with Apple TV?

Yeah, good luck with that, House.

Good luck finding someone with Apple TV here. But I know a lot of people that would be interested in a 100 dollars console, even if they don't have a good Internet conection.

 

[Miletius]

I'd consider it if it came out here. I would like to play some Vita games. If it eventually plays PS3 games (which I missed out on) then it'll be cool too. Chromecast is like $40 bucks though, so I dunno if Vita TV can compete with that low low price point. Apple TV is $100 so that comparison makes more sense.

 

[chickdigger802]

does the base model even come with a DS3?

 

[frankie_baby]

Good luck finding someone with Apple TV here. But I know a lot of people that would be interested in a 100 dollars console, even if they don't have a good Internet conection.

you mean a 150 dollar console

 

[frankie_baby]

does the base model even come with a DS3?

nope

 

[Skilletor]

What's the best option for importing a VTV right now? Trying not to spend more than 200 on importing it.

 

[BadWolf]

I really wonder why they didn't brand it with that. Vita TV just gives it the impression that it only plays Vita games when in reality it also plays PS1 and PSP games and perhaps eventually PS3 games. Also works great for whenever they get their internet TV stuff off the ground.

People might mistake it for a PS1TV?

 

[coolasj19]

Yup. Hard to compete with all those Apple TV's out there. Oh wait.

Out of the 5 massive Apple Fanatics I know. 1 has an Apple TV. And it's jailbroken, and it's prime features don't work that well. I don't know why I paid for half of it when he was my roommate.

Yup. This is an awkward and confusing product. The antithesis of the dead simple Apple TV. I think they would be better served marketing this as a PS4 remote play extender.

It IS a PS4 Remote Play Extender. And everyone that has a PS4 will probably know that by the time this releases. And besides, why would you market to an audience that will barely be over a few million? This will certainly be the best STB on the market when it releases. And it does all this other Trojan Horse stuff too. The only confusing part about this device is because of all it's positive. Do you market it as a Vita-Microconsole? A Set Top Box? PS4 Remote Play companion? Which of these 3 do you market to? Obviously, the ones that don't know about it, the non-gamers. For all we know, this might grow the market as much as the Wii did when people find out that this Sony STB they just bought can play good modern games.

 

[Huff]

They should rebrand it for western markets

 

[Nikodemos]

It does so much else I could maybe live with 720p. Bit weird it doesn't do it though, I have things going back years that do it and are cheaper. Especially when PS4 will have 1080p games.

It may have been a streaming concession. Lossless 1080p needs somewhat more bandwidth than 720p/1080i. They probably erred on the side of caution regarding lag.

 

[chickdigger802]

nope

...


so this is really a $150 then.


Wonder what compels people to get this over a ps3 which starts at $200. ps3 has a vastly bigger library, and most vita games also seem to appear on ps3 in a better running package.

I guess some of the ps4 streaming stuff is neat... but 'casuals' wouldn't have a ps4 in the first place?

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

I think this thing could end up being huge if handled properly. Best of luck to Sony.

 

[$h@d0w]

I agree with this as well. "Playstation TV" would be a better fit.

Sony may want to use the PS Vita name in the West because at the moment it doesn't really stand for anything in the mass market yet and plus word Vita communicates that it plays Vita games and does almost everything the current Vita does. It's kind of a blank slate for the casual market.

Whereas right now PlayStation means this, hardcore gaming:

 

[Marty Chinn]

I really wonder why they didn't brand it with that. Vita TV just gives it the impression that it only plays Vita games when in reality it also plays PS1 and PSP games and perhaps eventually PS3 games. Also works great for whenever they get their internet TV stuff off the ground.

That's the Japanese name. Don't rule out that it could get rebranded elsewhere. The Vita is actually doing decent in Japan so it makes sense in that market to call it that.

 

[coolasj19]

I'd consider it if it came out here. I would like to play some Vita games. If it eventually plays PS3 games (which I missed out on) then it'll be cool too. Chromecast is like $40 bucks though, so I dunno if Vita TV can compete with that low low price point. Apple TV is $100 so that comparison makes more sense.

It's $35, and it doesn't come with a controller for some reason. Also, the app selection is very very bare right now. It's less backed by Google and more, hey make your stuff support this if you want, I guess.

I agree with this as well. "Playstation TV" would be a better fit.

They needed to communicate that it plays Vita games I guess. The only other reason I can think of is that they'll use Playstation TV when those IPTV deals come in. Then again, it's not like the Vita is a massively popular brand yet. It's basically ripe for the taking.

It may have been a streaming concession. Lossless 1080p needs somewhat more bandwidth than 720p/1080i. They probably erred on the side of caution regarding lag.

If people have a feature they expect it to work well. Probably best to not put something it that's not going to work well.

 

[AranhaHunter]

I agree with this as well. "Playstation TV" would be a better fit.

Considering they are trying to go after appletv, googletv, and the like, I reckon they should name it sonytv.

 

[Birbo]

If they get HBOgo and XBMC on that thing I'm gonna want one.

Fixed for me. Ah, I'll want one regardless.

 

[frankie_baby]

...


so this is really a $150 then.


Wonder what compels people to get this over a ps3 which starts at $200. ps3 has a vastly bigger library, and most vita games also seem to appear on ps3 in a better running package.

I guess some of the ps4 streaming stuff is neat... but 'casuals' wouldn't have a ps4 in the first place?

I do wonder if maybe, after ps4 releases maybe sony might want to try killing off the ps3 hardware, its complicated design could be causing problems with cost reducing it to become a budget console so vita tv could be a replacement for it

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Of course. And they're also hoping it will up game sales some as it can appeal perhaps to gamers like me who aren't really into portables but would like to play some of the games.

 

[Nikodemos]

If people have a feature they expect it to work well. Probably best to not put something it that's not going to work well.

According to Sony, it works about as well as Nintendo's Miracast implementation in the GamePad, which is the golden standard in streaming, and isn't 1080p either.

 

[frankie_baby]

That's the Japanese name. Don't rule out that it could get rebranded elsewhere. The Vita is actually doing decent in Japan so it makes sense in that market to call it that.

not as terrible as elsewhere and decent aren't the same thing

 

[jiggles]

Seems like such a missed opportunity that it doesn't have a UMD drive. It was a great chance to close the hole in Vita's backwards compatibility through remote play from Vita TV.

 

[ambar_hitman]

I am buying it day 1 it launches in India.

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

That's the Japanese name. Don't rule out that it could get rebranded elsewhere. The Vita is actually doing decent in Japan so it makes sense in that market to call it that.

I don't think Vita as a brand has some really bad connotations to amerit a rebranding. Outside, of course , don't sell and there is little games for it. But quality wise I have not heard complains.

 

[Father_Brain]

Sony may want to use the PS Vita name in the West because at the moment it doesn't really stand for anything in the mass market yet and plus word Vita communicates that it plays Vita games and does almost everything the current Vita does. It's kind of a blank slate for the casual market.

Whereas right now PlayStation means this, hardcore gaming:

But it doesn't actually support a large percentage of the Vita games that aren't available on other Sony platforms. Even if Vita were a success, retaining the brand name would be very odd for that reason alone.

I don't think Vita as a brand has some really bad connotations to amerit a rebranding. Outside, of course , don't sell and there is little games for it. But quality wise I have not heard complains.

I think you kinda rebutted your own point there.

 

[Tobor]

Seems like such a missed opportunity that it doesn't have a UMD drive. It was a great chance to close the hole in Vita's backwards compatibility through remote play from Vita TV.

UMD is dead. Let it go.

 

[travisbickle]

...


so this is really a $150 then.


Wonder what compels people to get this over a ps3 which starts at $200. ps3 has a vastly bigger library, and most vita games also seem to appear on ps3 in a better running package.

I guess some of the ps4 streaming stuff is neat... but 'casuals' wouldn't have a ps4 in the first place?

Form factor
UI
it's still cheaper
newer product
game titles less army-murder-sim
resemblance to similar products (apple TV etc..)

 

[Miletius]

It's $35, and it doesn't come with a controller for some reason. Also, the app selection is very very bare right now. It's less backed by Google and more, hey make your stuff support this if you want, I guess.

For gaming it might suck, but it does streaming pretty well. If they want to position this as a low cost media device then they have to take that into consideration.

 

[No_Style]

Competing with streaming boxes? Not until you get dual band wireless and 1080p in there at least, Sony. Also will this have an IR port? There's the whole streaming services side of the equation as well.

If this thing at least supports a friendly language for devs to get apps like Plex in there, I'd consider it for streaming.

 

[frankie_baby]

Seems like such a missed opportunity that it doesn't have a UMD drive. It was a great chance to close the hole in Vita's backwards compatibility through remote play from Vita TV.

why let people play games they already own when you can charge them again for the privilege

 

[$h@d0w]

I do wonder if maybe, after ps4 releases maybe sony might want to try killing off the ps3 hardware, its complicated design could be causing problems with cost reducing it to become a budget console so vita tv could be a replacement for it

I think you're right and this is the two pronged software plan for phasing out the PS3:

- Support the Vita platform with native ports of bestsellers (Borderlands, God of War, Sly Cooper, Jak & Daxter, Ninja Gaiden, Flower, Metal Gear Solid etc.) and cross play indie titles (Hotline Miami, Spelunky, Guacamelee etc.). All these games are released or coming.

- Use Gaikai to fill out the full catalogue of titles and please the hardcore fanbase who want everything.

 

[Mung]

Competing with Apple TV?

Yeah, good luck with that, House.

Can I ask where you are from, where Apple tv is popular? Here, I have never met anyone with or interested in Apple TV. I know many who intend to buy Vita TV if it comes out here.

 

[$h@d0w]

Seems like such a missed opportunity that it doesn't have a UMD drive. It was a great chance to close the hole in Vita's backwards compatibility through remote play from Vita TV.

The Japanese have the UMD passport upgrade program to convert physical to digital, but the PSP simply wasn't popular enough in the West for this initiative to come over to the West.

 

[jiggles]

UMD is dead. Let it go.

I'll let it go when there's some solution that lets me play Jeanne D'Arc, Birth By Sleep or Crisis Core on my Vita.

 

[frankie_baby]

I think you're right and this is the two pronged software plan for phasing out the PS3:

- Support the Vita platform with native ports of bestsellers (Borderlands, God of War, Sly Cooper, Jak & Daxter, Ninja Gaiden, Flower, Metal Gear Solid etc.) and cross play indie titles (Hotline Miami, Spelunky, Guacamelee etc.). All these games are released or coming.

- Use Gaikai to fill out the full catalogue of titles and please the hardcore fanbase who want everything.

wow my idea wasn't as crazy as I was thinking it might be then

 

[chickdigger802]

Can I ask where you are from, where Apple tv is popular? Here, I have never met anyone with or interested in Apple TV. I know many who intend to buy Vita TV if it comes out here.

i dont think people are interested in apple tv, not because of what it is, it's just most people didn't realize what it can do.

I've blown minds when people come over and i show them how airplay works, and how you can facetime on your tv, or just throw up your photo library or a video. Most went out to best buy or w/e and got one within a week (and spam me phonecalls on how to set stuff up ;_

airplay really is the key thing for apple tv imo. netflix and other stuff work fine, but airplay is quite 'magical' for most people.

 

[mrklaw]

That's $50 more than an Apple TV or Roku.

Sony kind of messed up there. If they included a small remote, it'd have to be Bluetooth which would suck batteries and be expensive. IMO I think they should have included a simple IR receiver somehow and then a cheap IR remote for basic navigation

They also need massively more media apps to even pretend they are competing with roku or Apple TV

 

[Graphics Horse]

Sony kind of messed up there. If they included a small remote, it'd have to be Bluetooth which would suck batteries and be expensive. IMO I think they should have included a simple IR receiver somehow and then a cheap IR remote for basic navigation

They also need massively more media apps to even pretend they are competing with roku or Apple TV

I can turn my PS3 on and navigate the UI using my standard TV remote, If they know what they're doing it should work the same as that with any TVs that support HDMI CEC.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Yeah I don't get what Sony has against IR sensors for remotes. It was dumb as hell that the PS3 didn't have one and was strongly marketed as a bluray player. Anyone with a decent home theater (I.e. the vast majority of people who they were wanting to early adopt bluray) have nice universal remotes (Harmony etc.) and want to use them.

Just as dumb to make a streaming tv box and not put one on it or pack in a cheap remote like Roku, Apple TV etc do.

 

[Finalizer]

Nonw fo which these casuals care about, since those are features only the more enthusiast crowd into Playstation are into.

You're working off a silly assumption that casuals will disregard vidya entirely.

Seriously though, there's already plenty of competition in the market. This is Sony's way of giving themselves a way of distinguishing themselves from others' offerings. It doesn't need to light the world on fire, it just needs to show it's got something else to offer in addition. Hence why I specifically stated "it can carve out a little niche."

Hell, I don't really see much reason in heavily marketing it toward the Playstation crowd - the hardcore are already paying attention, and they'll see a handy little thing that can be used to get a PS4 in other rooms without buying a whole 'nother PS4. Also an extremely niche market, but again, it's about scratching little itches to help distinguish the product.

It'll do fine if Sony doesn't drop the ball.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

Google Inc's "Chromecast," Apple Inc's "Apple TV," etc are considered as rivals to the PS Vita TV.

Western release confirmed

 

[TheMasterGoblin]

Just an FYI, as of May Apple TV has sold over 13 million units with about half of those in the year prior.

According to Fortune, at the time, it had 70% of the digital receiver market (excluding game consoles).

 

[bobbytkc]

It just needs to be moderately successful to beat the appletv to be honest, and they don't really lose much if it fails since it is just using vita hardware. Worth a try.

 

[Lasdrub]

They're going to need to focus on multiplayer. Local multiplayer is a staple for casuals.

 

[Devilgunman]

Obviously...

Some don't think it's obvious

Is this thing confirmed to release worlwide too? I

Yes. House said on the stage that it will be release globally.

Yup. This is an awkward and confusing product. The antithesis of the dead simple Apple TV. I think they would be better served marketing this as a PS4 remote play extender.

Because there're already large PS4 install base out there right? Advertising it as a peripheral means sending it to die. PS4 enthusiasts should have already heard about Vita TV and konwn what it actually is. Those people don't need any more convincing. Advertising it as a separate hardware allows Sony to expand the market into different direction, which means more people will have exposure to it. That's a smart move.

They're going to need to focus on multiplayer. Local multiplayer is a staple for casuals.

That's what Sony is actually aiming for.

 

[$h@d0w]

But it doesn't actually support a large percentage of the Vita games that aren't available on other Sony platforms. Even if Vita were a success, retaining the brand name would be very odd for that reason alone.

Yeah, I think Sony have a branding challenge here, but I do expect by the time you see it on Western shores it will support more of the games that people are asking for on this message board and in article comments.

If at the time it comes out in the US, someone buys the box and Uncharted Golden Abyss together, then finds out it doesn't work, I would say that Sony has made a mistake somewhere in the chain.

Uncharted is the flagship product of the Vita platform in the West and they need to make these marquee Vita titles compatible by launch to avoid confusion. At the moment these titles aren't so important because in Japan the highlight games are Soul Sacrifice, Toukiden, Danganronpa etc. these are all compatible from Japan release day one.

 

[Withnail]

I think it's the right approach. Could be a nice cheap games/media device for a mainstream audience. They should bring it to CES next year.

 

[Raoh]

For what it's worth, I don't know one person with an Apple TV, but I know a few considering getting the Vita TV.

I own an apple tv and also very much interested in the Vita TV. I love my apple tv, especially after I jailbroke it. But the Vita TV opens up a lot of possibilities.

On name alone my wife may not be interested in a Vita TV but would recognize the apple tv name.

A stealth move by Sony should be to include this into Sony Smart TV's, wife gets her smart hub we get our vita. Win/Win