Support NeoGAF

[Chuck Norris]

Sony should be supporting it a lot more

They have increased their development so much since PS3's launch, yet their handheld has seen nothing of that increase. We got a Wipeout, a game from Sony Bend, and a couple of unsupported SCEJ games. To me that speaks of the bare minimum

It's playing the role of unwanted step-child, and if that's how Sony were going to treat it then they never should have put it out.

How can they expect third parties to support something Sony themselves aren't supporting

Nintendo does it right, they basically moved their whole development bandwidth away from Wii to support 3DS getting off its feet. This won't last because they'll then move to WiiU, but they will do enough to get 3DS sales moving before third parties can support it along with a slower output of Nintendo games. Vita should have a massive influx of games, PS3 does not need them at this moment.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

So its about the price now? Make up ur mind.

What?

Vita isn't selling because it's not worth the money it costs, particularly considering the continued existence of its predecessor which sports a vastly superior game library.

3DS suffered from the same problem (Nintendo incorrectly thought the 3D would be enough to sell the consoles weak library) then said fuck it and slashed the price, greatly increasing it's worth and making it viable to purchase in place of its predecessor.

 

[Metalmurphy]

Being the most expensive video game device on the market certainly doesn't help...

It's definitely the vitas biggest struggle right now but his initial comment was how it was just a psp with a nicer screen. I simply corrected him on that.

 

[Chuck Norris]

Vita has alot going against it including its predecessors performance. This puts alot of added pressure on Vita.

3rd parties are going to leery because of the PSP and when they make a Vita title it needs to perform magnificantly or they will write it off as just another PSP.

Sony needs some really big guns on the system by A teams. Not A Team Franchises done by B and C teams.

Vita needs new IPs created by A teams specifically for Vita. It needs its own identity as a platform

 

[Oddduck]

Personally I think that Playstation All Stars fighting game should have been made for PS Vita. It would have been a great exclusive for Vita.

I don't see the point of putting it on PS3 when PS3 is almost out the door anyways.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

They needed to find a better hook. Playing watered down versions of the games everyone has been playing already for the last 5 years isn't going to get it done. It didn't work for PSP and it will work even less so now.

 

[Foffy]

at 250 dollars (plus the hidden fees) it's actually not much more.

I think for the tech, it's a steal. But as Iwata said a few days ago, people buy hardware for the software. As much as the screen is pretty and the system is solid, there's not a single game out for it that's worth playing. And I own a Vita.

 

[outunderthestars]

It's definitely the vitas biggest struggle right now but his initial comment was how it was just a psp with a nicer screen. I simply corrected him on that.

That doesn't help either. I really don't think anyone gives a shit about the cameras, touch screens etc. Sony added a ton of features that are really unnecessary. The dual analog sticks are damn nice though.

Also, every time I see your avatar I want to see a 2/2.5D Jak game on the Vita.

I think for the tech, it's a steal. But as Iwata said a few days ago, people buy hardware for the software. As much as the screen is pretty and the system is solid, there's not a single game out for it that's worth playing. And I own a Vita.

Agreed on all points.

 

[BigDug13]

Question, why was the Vita needed? The PSP is still graphically superior to the 3DS. They could have released a dual stick revision without sinking whatever billions they sunk into R&D. They innovated with touch screen I guess to try to compete DS style, but their games seem to be mostly PS3-esque gameplay using the controller.

They took a huge gamble that a large enough market existed for this shiny new machine without a UMD drive.

 

[MYE]

I don't see the point of putting it on PS3 when PS3 is almost out the door anyways.

hmmm, i really dont think so

 

[Chuck Norris]

Personally I think that Playstation All Stars fighting game should have been made for PS Vita. It would have been a great exclusive for Vita.

I don't see the point of putting it on PS3 when PS3 is almost out the door anyways.

Yup

And even if they do put it on Vita, the PS3 version will obviously be the one to get

 

[Oddduck]

hmmm, i really dont think so

It may not be exactly out the door, but Vita needs more attention than PS3 right now.

A next gen Playstation console is coming in a few years. PS3 doesn't need all this attention.

 

[Metalmurphy]

Question, why was the Vita needed? The PSP is still graphically superior to the 3DS. They could have released a dual stick revision without sinking whatever billions they sunk into R&D. They innovated with touch screen I guess to try to compete DS style, but their games seem to be mostly PS3-esque gameplay using the controller.

They took a huge gamble that a large enough market existed for this shiny new machine without a UMD drive.

Erm... it most definitely isnt. Have you played RE:M?

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

I think for the tech, it's a steal. But as Iwata said a few days ago, people buy hardware for the software. As much as the screen is pretty and the system is solid, there's not a single game out for it that's worth playing. And I own a Vita.

Sony is seeing first hand how many sales a "steal for the tech" is getting them.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

Vita needs new IPs created by A teams specifically for Vita. It needs its own identity as a platform

I would like to hear support from Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, and Media Molecule all with new IP. That would show that they are very serious about the platform.

I think for the tech, it's a steal.

Same was said at the time for the PS3 when it was $599.

 

[Synless]

I think for the tech, it's a steal. But as Iwata said a few days ago, people buy hardware for the software. As much as the screen is pretty and the system is solid, there's not a single game out for it that's worth playing. And I own a Vita.

This is how I feel, the system is amazing, the OS needs some work, but it has no games. I need a library to look forward too soon.

 

[frAntic_Frog]

They took a huge gamble that a large enough market existed for this shiny new machine without a UMD drive.

people hated the UMD drive, remember?

barely anyone bought UMD games/movies and there usually were more Torrents of PSP games online than units sold at retail....

 

[outunderthestars]

Personally I think that Playstation All Stars fighting game should have been made for PS Vita. It would have been a great exclusive for Vita.

I don't see the point of putting it on PS3 when PS3 is almost out the door anyways.

Because Sony wants to make money and the install base on the PS3 is massive in comparison?

 

[zroid]

Because Sony wants to make money and the install base on the PS3 is massive in comparison?

It's also exactly the kind of thinking that will lead Vita down a one-way trip to the gutter.

there's not a single game out for [Vita] that's worth playing

Ouch. That's harsh!

I think the Vita has good games, and it definitely has a better library than the 3DS did at comparable points in their life cycles. Yet, even 3DS wasn't struggling this badly, and they were even priced the same! (well... except for the memory card situation)

I still think it comes down to creating an identity and having games people feel like they have to play. The first game should be Gravity Rush, and I think it can pull decent numbers if marketed correctly. It's a shame that for Sony to market their products well is never something you can count on.

 

[civilstrife]

Question, why was the Vita needed? The PSP is still graphically superior to the 3DS.

Joke poster confirmed.

 

[OmegaZero]

Question, why was the Vita needed? The PSP is still graphically superior to the 3DS. They could have released a dual stick revision without sinking whatever billions they sunk into R&D. They innovated with touch screen I guess to try to compete DS style, but their games seem to be mostly PS3-esque gameplay using the controller.

The things you find on GAF...

 

[Chuck Norris]

I would like to hear support from Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, and Media Molecule all with new IP. That would show that they are very serious about the platform.

Yup Naughty Dog have already counted themselves out. But new IPs are in the works from Sucker Punch, Media Molecule, Guerrilla and SSM. I'd like to see them ALL as exclusive Vita games

I don't care that I don't have a Vita, I want to be compelled to buy one

 

[outunderthestars]

It's also exactly the kind of thinking that will lead Vita down a one-way trip to the gutter.

Yea, instead Sony should put one its largest teams on a project for a platform that cannot possible generate a return on the money invested....

 

[Oddduck]

Because Sony wants to make money and the install base on the PS3 is massive in comparison?

Sony then needs to do a better job of dividing up their teams between PS3 and Vita development if they want to support both. Especially with PS4 on the way.

It's a lot harder to make games for three different things (PS3, Vita, PS4) than anyone thinks. There is limited resources, limited amounts of teams/studios, and limited budgets.

The only way Sony could solve this is by using the Nintendo strategy. Nintendo makes a lot of deals with third party studios who aren't own by Nintendo, but they have a good relationship with Nintendo. This helps Nintendo free up their staff and teams to work on major projects while outsourcing smaller Nintendo games to third party studios like they did for Luigi's Mansion 2, Punchout Wii, Pilotwings Resort, Zelda Ocarina of Time remake, etc. Like how they have Camelot making Mario Tennis 3DS.

If Sony doesn't have enough teams to support PS3, PS4, and Vita, then maybe they were stupid for releasing Vita without being able to support it?
Sony can only spread themselves so thin among 3 different platforms.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

Because Sony wants to make money and the install base on the PS3 is massive in comparison?

Good thing Sony didn't keep only making PS2 games once the PS3 was released.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Because Sony wants to make money and the install base on the PS3 is massive in comparison?

Pretty much why the Vita is doomed right here in a nutshell. If Sony can't be arsed to try to make money on it, why would it make any?

 

[saichi]

worst case scenario is it continues selling this way after the "big games" are released.

 

[outunderthestars]

Sony then needs to do a better job of dividing up their teams between PS3 and Vita development if they want to support both. Especially with PS4 on the way.

It's a lot harder to make games for three different things (PS3, Vita, PS4) than anyone thinks. There is limited resources, limited amounts of teams/studios, and limited budgets.

The only way Sony could solve this is by using the Nintendo strategy. Nintendo makes a lot of deals with third party studios who aren't own by Nintendo, but they have a good relationship with Nintendo. This helps Nintendo free up their staff and teams to work on major projects while outsourcing smaller Nintendo games to third party studios like they did for Luigi's Mansion 2, Punchout Wii, Pilotwings Resort, Zelda Ocarina of Time remake, etc.

If Sony doesn't have enough teams to support PS3, PS4, and Vita, then maybe they were stupid for releasing Vita?

Agreed. I think the Vita is the last gasp of old Sony. Will be interesting to see how the company restructures and handles the transition from PS3 to PS4

 

[gogogow]

Yea, instead Sony should put one its largest teams on a project for a platform that cannot possible generate a return on the money invested....

How big is that software house creating that playstation all stars game? One of it's largest teams?

 

[Thraktor]

I don't know if it's the worst or the best case scenario (depends on your perspective, I guess), but I expect that Sony will announce a Vita phone next year (or possibly even late this year if things go further downhill). Smaller screen, same CPU/GPU, and slide-out controls like a less shitty version of that PS-phone they released a while ago and never really supported.

Sony's problem with the Vita is that it's impossible to compete in terms of specs with smartphones. They're trying to sell a stand-alone device for $/€250, while phones which retail unlocked at up to $/€700 are being given away for nearly nothing on contract. While the Vita just about has the technological edge at the moment, phones that match it will be out by the end of the year, and by next year it'll start to look obsolete in comparison to much cheaper devices. For a device whose main selling point appears to be its graphical capabilities, that doesn't point to a particularly long shelf-life.

The only way they can keep up is to literally just turn it into a phone. Once it's in that phone form factor people can get it as part of their contract and Sony can benefit from the subsidies. It might actually do alright as a phone, given the PSone/PSP back-catalogue and the appeal to people who want to play games on their phones with buttons. If they're smart, they'll go all-out to establish it as a high-end gaming-oriented alternative to the iPhone and re-target their mobile strategy around it. Of course, the impact of such a strategy would be bigger if it weren't for the aforementioned damp squib of a "Playstation Phone".

 

[shira]

$99-125 price point for iPod touch or 3DS would be the nail.

 

[Effect]

But even with the doom and gloom in the early period of the 3DS, we had big games to look forward to. We knew Kid Icarus, Super Mario 3D Land, and Mario Kart 7 would be big games. As much as I'll probably enjoy Gravity Rush, that's not nearly in the same atmosphere as those games, and that seems to be the biggest standout out of Sony's first party affairs.

Not only that but that 3DS was selling better then the DS during the same time periods yet people were ignoring that fact as well. The doom and gloom around the 3DS wasn't really warranted when you look at what people were saying and looked at what was really happening compared to the DS. It's just that Nintendo expected to much and had to reworked their expectations.

Sony and the Vita don't have a Mario Kart 7 or Super Marion 3D Land or even a Pokemon (games with proven track records on both consoles and portables) waiting in the wings that will certainly be a big hit that can make things better. That is the big difference here. People saying that the 3DS started off bad aren't making a correct comparison. People can't use what happen with the 3DS and say things will turn around for the Vita.

I wish things would turn around for the Vita. I want to buy one but no games interest me outside of Gravity Rush and Warrior's Lair and they aren't out yet.

 

[highrider]

people not buying it, which is happening now. i love my vita. between my ps3 and 360 i still think the vita is a more compelling platform in some ways. but what can you do? i like the product and support it through buying games, but i can't really say what the vita needs to get better sales. to me it sells itself now, but i'm obviously a minority.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

How big is that software house creating that playstation all stars game? One of it's largest teams?

They aren't even owned directly by Sony, they are independent.

 

[InfiniDragon]

The PSP is still graphically superior to the 3DS.

...lol?

And a dual stick PSP would still be getting it's tail handed to it by the 3DS.

 

[Captain Tuttle]

Pretty much why the Vita is doomed right here in a nutshell. If Sony can't be arsed to try to make money on it, why would it make any?

And why would third parties try?

 

[outunderthestars]

Pretty much why the Vita is doomed right here in a nutshell. If Sony can't be arsed to try to make money on it, why would it make any?

OK, why would a local multi-player focused four player game work better on a handheld than a console? What about the Vita makes it a better platform for it?

 

[zroid]

Yea, instead Sony should put one its largest teams on a project for a platform that cannot possible generate a return on the money invested....

They need to be able to take risks, that's the point. There's no way in hell PSABR will sell as well on the Vita as it would on the PS3, but imagine the calamitous demand for the Vita it might lead to. It would be THE system seller, there's almost no doubt in my mind about that.

 

[jman2050]

They need to be able to take risks, that's the point. There's no way in hell PSARB will sell as well on the Vita as it would on the PS3, but imagine the calamitous demand for the Vita it might lead to. It would be THE system seller, there's almost no doubt in my mind about that.

I question Battle Royale having any sort of frenzied demand as it is as a PS3 title. Making it a Vita game won't help there.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

OK, why would a local multi-player focused four player game work better on a handheld than a console? What about the Vita makes it a better platform for it?

It's not necessarily a question of Vita being the best platform for the game. It's about exclusivity. You need a game boy/DS to play the latest mainline Pokemon game. If Nintendo threw those on their console, with better graphics and sound to boot, who would seriously buy it for a portable?

Vita needs something. Every Vita game people talk about is a warmed over PS3 game. Uncharted. Asscreed. Call of Duty. what if Vita had its own version of Smash bros. that you couldn't get anywhere else but Vita? that to me is a reason to invest in the thing - to get games I can't get anywhere else.

And why would third parties try?

Third parties sure as hell won't do it if they don't see Sony themselves succeeding doing it.

 

[DeliciousDoc]

Worst case scenario is that smaller Japanese developers keep ignoring the Vita because making psp games is cheaper and they sell, basically completely ignoring the new system like they did with the PS3. Based on how psp and vita games are priced on PSN, Japanese people don't buy digital copies of games. For all intents and purposes, Vita is not backward compatible for most users and future titles are remakes. If this keeps up, Japan will stay with old tech or move to new platforms with low development costs (Browser, smart phone).

The only western devs that might be willing to take a risk on the platform are those who have nowhere to go. Otherwise, they will only make inferior ports of existing games. No one buys a system for that.

 

[zroid]

I question Battle Royale having any sort of frenzied demand as it is as a PS3 title. Making it a Vita game won't help there.

No, I think it would. Sony fans are hungry for a Smash Bros. type of experience. It won't be gangbusters like Smash is, since the mascots don't have that level of recognition, but it's definitely a game people want.

 

[BlackJace]

If they announce a new dissidia, I'm buying a Vita next day.

Until then, I'm good with my 3DS.

 

[outunderthestars]

It's not necessarily a question of Vita being the best platform for the game. It's about exclusivity. You need a game boy/DS to play the latest mainline Pokemon game. If Nintendo threw those on their console, with better graphics and sound to boot, who would seriously buy it for a portable?

Vita needs something. Every Vita game people talk about is a warmed over PS3 game. Uncharted. Asscreed. Call of Duty. what if Vita had its own version of Smash bros. that you couldn't get anywhere else but Vita? that to me is a reason to invest in the thing - to get games I can't get anywhere else.


Third parties sure as hell won't do it if they don't see Sony themselves succeeding doing it.

I understand what you are saying, and I want amazing vita games as well, but I want them to be games that are well suited for the platform. Pokemon works really well in the portable format, whereas a four person local multiplayer game like Sony' Smash Bros clone simply wouldn't.....

 

[zroid]

I understand what you are saying, and I want amazing vita games as well, but I want them to be games that are well suited for the platform. Pokemon works really well in the portable format, whereas a four person local multiplayer game like Sony' Smash Bros clone simply wouldn't.....

It'd be a decent fit, I think. The reduced focus on local multiplayer is certainly regrettable, but brawlers and fighters are pretty well suited to handhelds. They're relatively short-burst experiences, and especially for a SSB-type game it's fairly pick-up-and-play.

Online multiplayer will have to be there of course.

 

[McLovin]

The only real reason I haven't bought it is because of the memory card thing. Give me a redesign with built in memory with the option to add more and I'll bite for 250. Also reduce the price of the memory cards, those prices are ridiculous.

 

[Carl]

Sony then needs to do a better job of dividing up their teams between PS3 and Vita development if they want to support both. Especially with PS4 on the way.

It's a lot harder to make games for three different things (PS3, Vita, PS4) than anyone thinks. There is limited resources, limited amounts of teams/studios, and limited budgets.

The only way Sony could solve this is by using the Nintendo strategy. Nintendo makes a lot of deals with third party studios who aren't own by Nintendo, but they have a good relationship with Nintendo. This helps Nintendo free up their staff and teams to work on major projects while outsourcing smaller Nintendo games to third party studios like they did for Luigi's Mansion 2, Punchout Wii, Pilotwings Resort, Zelda Ocarina of Time remake, etc. Like how they have Camelot making Mario Tennis 3DS.

If Sony doesn't have enough teams to support PS3, PS4, and Vita, then maybe they were stupid for releasing Vita without being able to support it?
Sony can only spread themselves so thin among 3 different platforms.

Uh, they do get 3rd parties to help out and make their games. Then everyone whines that they wont buy it because it's made by a "B Team"

 

[zroid]

Uh, they do get 3rd parties to help out and make their games. Then everyone whines that they wont buy it because it's made by a "B Team"

That might be because those games are actually not particularly good. When they are good (see: the PSP Gods of War) people tend to buy them more. Well... insofar as people will buy PSP games outside Japan.

 

[frAntic_Frog]

i would also like to see sony open up the Android Apps market onto the Vita scene....so much potential for cheap quicky games...i think the PS Suite is a good start...i just wish they had done it waay earlier since Japanese launch, cuz we'd probably have Angry Birds VIta by now

 

[VanWinkle]

Worst case scenario is it's a fantastic PSP-playing machine. It is amazing hardware. I'm hoping to see a bunch of announcements from Sony at E3. They need it.

Really, I think Sony's biggest mistake is that they won't have/make any of their first parties develop on the Vita. Nintendo has a lot of their main devs working on 3DS as well as their consoles. It feels like, for Sony, the handheld always gets the short end of the developer straw.