ElectricBlanketFire
Member
It does when the attach rate is over 100%.
-
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.
Could Vita still be alive today if it launched with a game as successful as BotW?
- Thread starter ZombiePlatypus
- Start date
It does when the attach rate is over 100%.
Wafflecakes
Member
I don't think Vita launching with a "BotW" type title would have made up for its shortcomings.
This is the same thing as saying what if Wii U launched with BotW, doesn't make up for the fact of what caused it downfall with that due to software droughts and lack of 3rd party support.
It's weird that Sony didn't bring out the Vita sooner, I guess it's because Sony had to focus so hard on bringing the PS3 back. What I mean is that Sony kept Nintendo on its toes by announcing the PSP so Nintendo launched the DS in reaction.
The weird thing is how Vita didn't end up being a threat at all to the 3DS, it launched late and didn't really address things to make it competitive with the 3DS. Eg. They decided to use proprietary memory instead of SD cards.
This is the same thing as saying what if Wii U launched with BotW, doesn't make up for the fact of what caused it downfall with that due to software droughts and lack of 3rd party support.
It's weird that Sony didn't bring out the Vita sooner, I guess it's because Sony had to focus so hard on bringing the PS3 back. What I mean is that Sony kept Nintendo on its toes by announcing the PSP so Nintendo launched the DS in reaction.
The weird thing is how Vita didn't end up being a threat at all to the 3DS, it launched late and didn't really address things to make it competitive with the 3DS. Eg. They decided to use proprietary memory instead of SD cards.
You're forgetting Switch has Vroom in the night Sky breh
I think launching the Vita with Uncharted: Golden Abyss was a mistake - while a great showcase for the technical ability of the Vita, for what was supposed to be the biggest game for the system it was hugely impacted by being released just 3 months after Uncharted 3 and the game was clearly rushed for launch.
Lord of Ostia
Member
They released a lot of good games, but they didn't really do a good job marketing those games. I mean, Tearaway has an 87 on Metacritic with 76 positive reviews, and it deserves those reviews because it's an awesome, unique game that is different than anything on any other platform. But they barely marketed the game and it sold poorly. The game released on the same day as Link Between Worlds and the Xbox One Launch. They sent it do die.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Why would they release a big tent pole Naughty Dog game on Vita and not PS3/PS4 though?
nycgamer4ever
Member
But that is an opinion no? We are talking about a launch "lineup" which by definition is more than one.
Definition of lineup
1
a : a list of players taking part in a game (as of baseball) the starting lineup
b : the players on such a list
2
a : an alignment (as in entertainment or politics) of persons or things having a common purpose, distinction, or bond the show's star-studded lineup
b : line 11 the new lineup of fall fashions
c : a television programming schedule tonight's lineup of programs
3
: a line of persons arranged especially for inspection or for identification by police was asked to pick her attacker out of a lineup
James Scott
Banned
While many point towards this being a major reason for Vita's downfall, I'd imagine it's something Sony did to make up for the Vita's low launch price (same as 3DS launched at) rather than something that needed to cost that much
The Horror the horror
Banned
Sony didn't fail the Vita; third parties, the lifeblood of every Sony console, failed it and unlike in the PSP era which coincided with their greatest generation ever, Sony didn't enjoy a virtually uncontested market in 2012 by which to more assertively induce that support.
Lord of Ostia
Member
Don't do this man, just stop. Don't post definitions like a jerk.
Magic Mushroom
Member
Golden Abyss is the worst UC by a mile. None of the dynamic combat of 2 and 4 and to a lesser extent 3. Boring pop and cover shooting, no memorable set-pieces and shitty touchscreen gimmicks. It's not a great game. To call it way more rounded than one of the most acclaimed games in history is ludicrous.
nycgamer4ever
Member
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
Yes, and Breath Of The Wild is LeBron James. Which is better than, say, the Pacers.
Vroom in the night Sky in the Switch launch lineup made Breath of the Wild seem that much better in comparison.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Okay so which "lineup" is better: LeBron James and 4 other d-leaguers or the current New York Knicks? I mean the Knicks lineup has legitimate NBA players and some of them were all stars at one point so I mean, quantity over quality right? You'd rather have Derrick Rose, Carmelo Anthony and Joakim Noah than LeBron James right? That's the better "lineup"?
Lord of Ostia
Member
I don't agree with this, there is a ton of third party support for Vita. Sony first party support ended in 2014, and marketing for the system basically ended in 2013. Meanwhile it is 2017 and in May the Vita is getting 8+ retail releases, all from third parties.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Well, for starters, there were more games than just Zelda at launch. Secondly, I think you're ignoring that my all star team of Michael Jordan at his prime and 4 "decent" players that can competently dribble and pass a basketball might be able to beat your team of 5 "good" but not "great" players.
Edit: I see that Ninja Scooter beat me to precisely the same point. Well done.
Edit 2: Oh and ElectricBlanketFire too!
nycgamer4ever
Member
I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm being told there is no debating this and I'm wrong for thinking this way. It's how I feel and trying to make my point. Whatever I see there is no discussing it here. People love their Zelda. I'll take a loss.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
It should have been a wild success. Sony did a terrible job marketing it. And I believe the high cost paired with the proprietary expensive memory cards did them in. It could have fought off the poor marketing by itself, as long as games actually got developed for it.
Long story short, Sony ruined it for no reason, then blamed cell phone games for its demise. No, Sony, people want dedicated gaming devices, just not for $250 + $100 for a glorified SD card, and then it has no first party support, FFS.
Long story short, Sony ruined it for no reason, then blamed cell phone games for its demise. No, Sony, people want dedicated gaming devices, just not for $250 + $100 for a glorified SD card, and then it has no first party support, FFS.
You seem upset.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Yeah but people as in consumers were more interested by one over the other. which is the entire and most important point. There's no point have a "great" range of launch titles if none of them are appealing to consumers. People actually have to buy these games and the system for these games.
Lord of Ostia
Member
You can't prove one launch lineup is objectively better than another because launch lineup quality is incredibly subjective. That's all people are trying to tell you.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Wrong. YOU are the one who said there was no debating, and claimed that the Vita lineup was "factually" superior. And people called you out on it yet you insist on being too obtuse to wrap your head around the idea that someone could prefer one game to the Vita's entire launch lineup.
nycgamer4ever
Member
Are we talking the same team as the Chicago Bulls now? Those teams were more than 1 great player and 4 "decent" player but I see your point. I'll back off. But it's just my opinion is all having purchased both systems at launch.
A system seller by Sony right at launch would have helped greatly (same is true for WiiU too) though it wouldn't have solved the fatal flaw of the system that is to be a PlayStation console with a lack of strong third-party games due to the circumstance it was released on (mobile absorbing western third-party support dedciated to handheld from western publishers and 3DS absorbing japanese handheld third-party support dedicated to handheld).
Steve Youngblood
Member
It's absolutely fine to have an opinion that the Vita lineup was better than the Switch's. But what people are taking issue with is the rhetoric that seeks to establish that this is a proven fact backed up by SCIENCE when it's obviously just an opinion.
Bullseye.
I'm sure BotW would have propelled any system to the stratosphere, because it's just that good, but the only Zelda game that would've come out for Vita (if Sony owned Zelda) would be the sideshow Zelda to PS4 Zelda, that you would have to buy separately. And that's a hard sell for people that already own a PS4.
The reason Switch is doing so well is because it offers superior value. Handhelds were 'dying' because they couldn't compete with F2P on mobile. With Switch, Nintendo technically gives the handheld portion 'for free' with the console game, at more or less parity. It's doing something notably different from Vita.
nycgamer4ever
Member
Based strictly on the number and variety of games. Maybe I wasn't clear on that. I was debating strictly under the assumption that a lineup consist plural. But I get the point.
The Horror the horror
Banned
It didn't get the type of sustained support that would sell the system which is the only support that matters.
I think you are overthinking this slightly. Most people would agree that N64 had a excellent launch lineup. It consisted of Mario 64 and Pilotwings.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Quantity and variety is not equal to quality. Otherwise iOS would be the greatest gaming platform of all time.
nycgamer4ever
Member
I get it. I was just strictly talking about the number and variety of new games. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Vita launched with Sony's biggest franchise, while the 3DS launched with no big first party games and guess which one did better.
James Scott
Banned
People love to state opinions as facts, many news shows make careers out of it. The fact is if we do look at this scientifically I think we would see that the individual Vita launch games likey did better than Switch launch games minus Zelda. On that same page though I can say with extreme confidence that no Vita game had more than a 100% attach rate. It's comparing apples to apples, just different kinds of apples.
The issues were:
-Unappealing hardware. I know i know "dat OLED". That isn't enough.
-Unappealing software. Yeah, a outstanding title like BoTW would have helped. I still think the biggest mistake Sony made during the PSP era is not establishing a musthave portable IP.
-Being in internal and external competition with PS3/PS4
Vita was the secondary fiddle for the marketing and dev teams. Which brings us to external, why would a significant amount of people buy Vita over PS3?
-Unappealing hardware. I know i know "dat OLED". That isn't enough.
-Unappealing software. Yeah, a outstanding title like BoTW would have helped. I still think the biggest mistake Sony made during the PSP era is not establishing a musthave portable IP.
-Being in internal and external competition with PS3/PS4
Vita was the secondary fiddle for the marketing and dev teams. Which brings us to external, why would a significant amount of people buy Vita over PS3?
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
I think we should combine NBA GAF with the gaming side.
witchedwiz
Member
vita ain't *dead* yet at least 
as a *rpg fan, vita is still terrific..
pity that sony stopped their own support, but third party are still doing the work :/
as a *rpg fan, vita is still terrific..
pity that sony stopped their own support, but third party are still doing the work :/
Same reason Nintendo's big-time development houses put out games on 3DS, presumably: wanting the platform to succeed. From the outside looking in, it always seemed that Sony was more interested in trying to leverage their handheld business to create success in other proprietary technology (memory cards, UMDs, etc.) than in pushing out big games that people want to buy on handheld.
James Scott
Banned
Nah, the hardware was the biggest thing Vita had going for it.
Though the other points still stand.
nycgamer4ever
Member
I understand this but I think you are downplaying the games the Vita had at launch and lauch Window. Were they all Zelda Quality no but there were some good ones, especially for a handheld. I think we are just forgetting them.
The Vita would be alive (well, more alive) and well today if it had games that a large variety of people cared about as opposed to games for
1) People desperate to feed their fancy handheld
2) People who love indie games but hate sitting in one place to play them
3) Anime people
4) People who just wanted a fancier option for playing their PSP and PS1 titles on
I find it weird how all the support that the PSP had dried up for Vita. I guess those titles were tied to the install base, and that install base was tied to Monster Hunter.
1) People desperate to feed their fancy handheld
2) People who love indie games but hate sitting in one place to play them
3) Anime people
4) People who just wanted a fancier option for playing their PSP and PS1 titles on
I find it weird how all the support that the PSP had dried up for Vita. I guess those titles were tied to the install base, and that install base was tied to Monster Hunter.
nycgamer4ever
Member
I remember those days very well. Two awesome games.