Support NeoGAF

[Drek]

I think it's disingenuous to blame Sony's marketing instead of the market they've placed their product into. They can only do so much with this product in a landscape that it's leaning toward different experiences. A "killer app" for the hardcore would not make as big a dent as some are suggesting, I don't think.

The PSP lived most of it's life in the post-iPhone world against the strongest handheld the industry has ever seen and it did well enough.

I would still argue that the Vita will wind up somewhere similar to the PSP but likely a little more balanced worldwide. Sony has shown a proven ability to stick to the marathon of building up a struggling console (PSP and PS3) into a stable position and like both of those systems Sony will likely find it's "voice" for the Vita at some point.

The problem is their inability to gauge what the market will bare for price and how long it takes them to find a voice for their products, so their systems recently have stumbled out of the gate and demanded that long term strategy of them.

All this thread really amounts to is another instance of that with the same questions we've heard from both of Sony's previous systems.

Also, I've never suggested the need for a "killer app". There is no such thing. There is a "killer library" or a "killer release list" though and those do move systems. If Sony painted a road map for gamers that showed such a "killer library" was coming and showed enough media to make it feel tangible the perception of the Vita would be entirely different. The sad part is most of those "killer apps" are coming but Sony fails to bundle it into a package for marketing purposes or to show it off appropriately.

 

[SmokedMeat]

For example, Resistance: Burning Skies is coming out in late May. A date for a demo should already be announced and some real previews should be coming out, not cam footage from trade shows.
Sony is letting what content it has slip by unnoticed just like they did with the PSP. They need to make a legitimate effort to educate gamers on what is coming both short and long term, not just assume everyone will wait and expect the best.

Hate to say it, but I've got a feeling there's a reason why they're not showing off Resistance. And if I'm right on my feeling then they're probably hoping to sell copies to Vita owners that are desperate for anything new or are dying to finally play a FPS on a handheld with dual sticks. At least before reviews and word of mouth sour that early sales window.

Hope I'm wrong, but if this was truly going to be something special they'd be crowing about it, or having demos installed on Vita demo units.

 

[zoukka]

THAT is god damned depressing.

No, Nintendogs is actually quite the opposite of depressing if I go by watching my gf playing it :b

 

[theBishop]

THAT is god damned depressing.

I don't think we should be depressed about it. We should just see it as separate from our hobby. This is the silly thing about sales obsession.

It's like a film fan getting upset that Toy Story 2 grosses more than No country for Old Men.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

Sure. It has a bunch of franchises migrating straight over from the most successful handheld of all time and will likely follow in said handheld's shoes towards a strong user base.

Why do people keep viewing this as a 3DS v. Vita deal? Of all the "we don't compete with them" arguments you can make for system v. system comparisons this one is by far the most valid. The two systems have massively different hardware features, genre types, and target demographics. Sony carved out a healthy niche for the PSP within the shadow of the most successful handheld ever and throughout its life cycle the PSP was declared "dead" repeatedly.

If you put Nintendogs on the Vita and gave it nothing else from Nintendo do you think it would suddenly move millions of Vitas? If you put Layton 5 on it do you think that it would suddenly be selling like wild fire? Of course not. The entire rest of the system is targeting a different customer. Very few people buy systems (especially $250 systems) for just one game.

Actually I'd argue 3DS & Vita have far more in terms of target audience overlap than DS & PSP did, or Wii and PS360 do. Monster Hunter alone was an obvious volley on Nintendo's part, the reason these systems are constantly being pitted against each other is self evident; they're clear competitors.

I'd also argue 3DS is taking a different upfront approach than DS did, and this isn't exactly a "business as usual" hardware transition. Mobile/Browser gaming is sucking up the casual mainstream and as a result you're seeing Nintendo making a lurch towards the core, which is exactly what Sony's market has been reduced to post-PS2. I mean sure 3DS had Nintendogs, Layton and Mario Kart front and center at it's unveiling, but it also had Resident Evil, Metal Gear and Kingdom Hearts. This isn't really just DS2.

 

[SmokyDave]

The unit seems to be selling slowly, yes... saying it has issues with "support" is unjustified... It's been out in the West for two months; what other system ever had this much quality software available two months after launch?

Well, yeah, I kinda see that too. Thing is, I was bitterly disappointed with the first 3 months of the 3DS and I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't say the same of the Vita. The quality is there but the quantity isn't. My wallet lies ready to spew forth notes as soon as more worthy titles arrive but right now it's not even a question of choosing a worthy title, it's a matter of waiting for titles at all.

I still love this device and I already know I'm going to love it as much as the PSP, Dreamcast and Saturn combined. It's the first proper handheld console AND it benefits from a smartphone style OS. So fucking good.

(I'm intentionally ignoring the Nomad and that huge TurboGrafx thingy because they weren't really mainstream).

 

[SmokedMeat]

To think they're not competing would be silly. Personally I think Nintendo was maybe a bit worried in the beginning and was looking to squash Vita before it had a chance to leave the starting gate.

Not just taking away Monster Hunter, but they really came out swinging with a slew of first party game previews and announcements for the 3DS. Paper Mario, Fire Emblem, a Mario platformer, Mariokart, Zelda, Starfox, Layton, Kid Icarus, Luigi's Mansion, Mario Tennis, and Smash Brothers. Have they ever announced so many games in such a short span? I mean, releasing Mariokart and a Mario platformer within a month of each other sends a clear message that they aren't fucking around.

And of course there was pricing the 3DS a bit high, and having that wiggle room to lower it knowing that Sony couldn't really follow without taking some losses they can't afford.

 

[Kobun Heat]

All of this hemming and hawing over launch lineups and staggered rollouts and Monster Hunter is entirely beside the point. The PlayStation Vita is failing because of the fundamental fact that the mass market no longer sees any reason to spend $250+ and $50 for each additional game on a device that only plays games.

That's why 3DS stumbled out of the gate and why Nintendo responded with a fire-sale price drop. What's Sony's plan?

 

[Skilletor]

Well, yeah, I kinda see that too. Thing is, I was bitterly disappointed with the first 3 months of the 3DS and I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't say the same of the Vita. The quality is there but the quantity isn't. My wallet lies ready to spew forth notes as soon as more worthy titles arrive but right now it's not even a question of choosing a worthy title, it's a matter of waiting for titles at all.

I still love this device and I already know I'm going to love it as much as the PSP, Dreamcast and Saturn combined. It's the first proper handheld console AND it benefits from a smartphone style OS. So fucking good.

(I'm intentionally ignoring the Nomad and that huge TurboGrafx thingy because they weren't really mainstream).

I'm the exact opposite. I bought 6 games at launch, and have plenty to play on my Vita until Gravity Rush comes out (this isn't even taking into account the psp titles). After that, things look slim, but this has been an amazing launch. Definitely one of the best ever, imo.

I just hope that of the things announced at e3, some good stuff will drop this year.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

I am really torn right now. I love my VITA (hardware) and I have enjoyed playing Rayman, Uncharted and Hot shots.. nothing else really interests me until Gravity Rush and after that?????????

I have been debating selling my Vita and grabbing a 3ds with Mario3d and mario kart.

I just had a kid and I need bite size gaming while I have the time and the 3ds has more games right now.

 

[MrPliskin]

Since you seem to know, can you elaborate on how much Sony is selling each unit for? Can you go into any detail about how much their R&D costs were, or discuss their marketing budget?

You seem to know alot but what Sony can, or can't do, so I'm just curious as to where your getting this information, especially when most sources seem to lean more into them either breaking even, or making a profit on unit sold.

A corporation that just lost 6 billion really doesn't want to gamble on their hardware w/out the games to drive sales significantly, and the Vita doesn't have that at the moment.

I think a price drop will CERTAINLY be in order at the end of this year, but it'll be accompanied by a new CoD release on Vita, or some other power house. It won't be "just because".

 

[casabolg]

Just played a demo of the Vita over at a Wal-Mart. There was a fantastic Gravity Rush demo. So sold.

It's over, Sony is finished.

 

[theBishop]

All of this hemming and hawing over launch lineups and staggered rollouts and Monster Hunter is entirely beside the point. The PlayStation Vita is failing because of the fundamental fact that the mass market no longer sees any reason to spend $250+ and $50 for each additional game on a device that only plays games.

That's why 3DS stumbled out of the gate and why Nintendo responded with a fire-sale price drop. What's Sony's plan?

Only one Vita game costs $50 and it's the #1 seller on the platform. :|

I don't see how it's a simple matter of fact that "the mass market" will pay $180 for 3DS hardware and not $250 for Vita's hardware. Also, there's more core gamers today than at any time in history.

 

[muu]

Also, there's more core gamers today than at any time in history.

I don't see this at all. There's more self-proclaimed core gamers than ever, yes, but they're playing watered-down versions of previous-gen games with prettier graphics and more hand-holding than ever. 'core gaming' has become nothing more than a way to get kids into thinking they're playing adult games now because blood comes out when you shoot something. Style over substance in many, many cases.

 

[GraveRobberX]

Only one Vita game costs $50 and it's the #1 seller on the platform. :|

I don't see how it's a simple matter of fact that "the mass market" will pay $180 for 3DS hardware and not $250 for Vita's hardware. Also, there's more core gamers today than at any time in history.

The $249.99/$299.99 price point is misleading, cause when those people go buy it, they get hit with the "You do know you need a memory card... don'tcha'"
Want the 4GB card, $19.99, 8GB, 29.99, most will go no internal memory?

Most of the market is fine tuned with Apple's market persuasion that 16GB is considered the absolute low tier standard for a handheld/table device, and 16GB as a memory card it's fucking $59.99, 32GB, $99.99 on top of the VITA price

So right there you might sour away a fuck ton of purchasers, going fuck that shit

Grab a 3DS + 2 games would = VITA + Memory card w/o a game, price wise

Also core gamers are more educated than ever before, most now read reviews visit the kotaku/ign/gamespots of the world, we here on GAF are the hardcore+.

Listen I love my VITA, I was LOL'ing @ it before launch, but I got such a good deal, I couldn't pass it up
I got rewarded with a 3G VITA (3 days old after launch date) + 8GB Memory Card + Uncharted GA roughly for $250 (120GB 360 + $100 Cash)

That deal is getting surpassed now by crazier deals on the second-hand market
The retail deals always leave 1 part out of the equation to get you to bite, then cover it up with the part that is missing

Advertising wise, on ESPN the #GAMECHANGER ad is such bullshit. "Start a game on your PS3, continue it on your VITA"... Which is COMPLETE HORSESHIT!

 

[theBishop]

I don't see this at all. There's more self-proclaimed core gamers than ever, yes, but they're playing watered-down versions of previous-gen games with prettier graphics and more hand-holding than ever. 'core gaming' has become nothing more than a way to get kids into thinking they're playing adult games now because blood comes out when you shoot something. Style over substance in many, many cases.

 

[darkwing]

if GoW4 turns out to be only for the PS3, then yup, support for the Vita is dying

 

[aknbad30]

I am really torn right now. I love my VITA (hardware) and I have enjoyed playing Rayman, Uncharted and Hot shots.. nothing else really interests me until Gravity Rush and after that?????????

I have been debating selling my Vita and grabbing a 3ds with Mario3d and mario kart.

I just had a kid and I need bite size gaming while I have the time and the 3ds has more games right now.

I wouldn't do it, but to each his own.

 

[Glorified G]

I don't know about that - it still managed to move around 40 million units outside of Japan, so perhaps it helped?

And that's without the "Mario Calvary to save the day".

To say Vita is dying less than three months on the market is beyond hyperbolic.

 

[axisofweevils]

Sony need to show that their top tier teams think the Vita is worth developing for.

When you read articles like this about Naughty Dog, it doesn't inspire confidence.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-02-21-naughty-dog-were-not-working-on-anything-for-ps-vita

When I buy a Mario game for the 3DS, I know that Miyamoto and Nintendo's A team was involved in it. It hasn't been farmed out to a lesser studio.

 

[darkside31337]

I am really torn right now. I love my VITA (hardware) and I have enjoyed playing Rayman, Uncharted and Hot shots.. nothing else really interests me until Gravity Rush and after that?????????

I have been debating selling my Vita and grabbing a 3ds with Mario3d and mario kart.

I just had a kid and I need bite size gaming while I have the time and the 3ds has more games right now.

Get yourself an iOS device.

Bought myself a 3DS and it was the most regrettable purchase I made this year for a myriad of reasons. The slate of upcoming games for the 3DS over the next handful of months is actually somehow more lackluster than the Vita schedule.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

Get yourself an iOS device.

Bought myself a 3DS and it was the most regrettable purchase I made this year for a myriad of reasons. The slate of upcoming games for the 3DS over the next handful of months is actually somehow more lackluster than the Vita schedule.

Got this covered! 4s and a new iPad.

I do love me some iOS gaming but it can't compete with a full retail game on a handheld.

not yet anyways.

 

[Diablos54]

The slate of upcoming games for the 3DS over the next handful of months is actually somehow more lackluster than the Vita schedule.

lol no way. Fire Emblem and Mario Tennis alone will shift more units than almost everything the Vita has in the same timeframe, the best of those being a PS2 port up.

 

[RoninChaos]

I feel like the biggest problem with the Vita, besides software (which isn't really an issue. This is launch after all) is that Sony made some really stupid decisions when it came to how the system works. The load times are attrocious, the mandatory memory cards, fucking INSTALLS, it's god damned ridiculous. I don't want a portable game to be as cumbersome as ones on the PS3 when it comes to just being able to play the fucking thing.

And the stuff people here have said about the games being PS2/PS3 games is kind of true. The DS, like the Gameboy before it, was successful because it offered experiences that couldn't be had on ANY OTHER PLATFORM. The PSP was the opposite. I remember a bunch of games coming out that people said "Shit, I wish this was on my ps2!".

Now, granted, there could be some cross platforming that would work well here, but I really feel that until some games come out that are specific to Vita, that haven't been done before on a console, and won't be for whatever reason, then the Vita will really take off.

Of course, the Vita could do immensely well if it offers PS2 style games if the new next gen systems are incredibly over priced and don't have those kinds of games. I could see some people going "Whelp, I'll wait on that shit, and get my fix with portables". I know a lot of people this gen that have done that, particularly with JRPGs on both the PSP and the DS.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

I agree with you on every point except for when it comes to securing real big third party exclusives being a problem shared with PSP. With the PSP Sony secured exclusive GTA, Final Fantasy, and MGS titles. Arguably three of the biggest franchises at the time, and suprisingly it mattered little.

GTA wasn't exclusive to the PSP.

Only one Vita game costs $50 and it's the #1 seller on the platform. :|

I don't see how it's a simple matter of fact that "the mass market" will pay $180 for 3DS hardware and not $250 for Vita's hardware. Also, there's more core gamers today than at any time in history.

Don't forget the required memory card to play said $50 game when discussing the price of the unit.

 

[saichi]

It's like a film fan getting upset that Toy Story 2 grosses more than No country for Old Men.

wtf is this? Toy Story 2 is great!

 

[DangerousDave]

GTA wasn't exclusive to the PSP.

Yes, they were.

They were ported to PS2, but later, and the ports were announced after PSP releases.

 

[FireCloud]

http://stuffthatlookslikejesus.com/photos/thumbs/potato-chip.jpg

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumblarge_491/12701399957BB0WE.jpg

Oh, I get it. Sad at how long it took me though.

I think he should have started with "Back in my day..."

Don't forget the required memory card to play said $50 game when discussing the price of the unit.

I got an 8GB memory card included with my 3G/Wifi Vita. The Wifi only models had a 4GB card included. I think there are plenty of deals to be had that the memory card price isn't so much of an issue right now.

 

[theBishop]

wtf is this? Toy Story 2 is great!

nobody said Nintendogs wasn't great... in its own way.

 

[theBishop]

Oh, I get it. Sad at how long it took me though.

I think he should have started with "Back in my day..."

Meh. I doubt it's that noble. I don't want to look at that guy's post history. If he games on anything but PC, he's full of crap.

 

[donny2112]

They were ported to PS2, but later, and the ports were announced after PSP releases.

GTA:LCS for PS2 came out before GTA:VCS for PSP. Therefore, most everyone was expecting VCS to eventually come to PS2, too, and it showed in the sales with VCS substantially underperfoming LCS from their respective launches on PSP.

 

[DangerousDave]

GTA:LCS for PS2 came out before GTA:VCS for PSP. Therefore, most everyone were expecting VCS to eventually come to PS2, too, and it showed in the sales with VCS substantially underperfoming LCS from their respective launches on PSP.

Also, LCS savegame had an exploit to hack PSP, VCS not.

 

[donny2112]

Also, LCS savegame had an exploit to hack PSP, VCS not.

Was that known by then (2006)? PSP Slim wasn't even out by then, I think.

 

[Kobun Heat]

Also, this is not Nintendo vs. Sony. This is traditional game systems versus iPhone/Android. Nintendo has lowered its prices but is still up against a wall because of its high boxed game prices and the fact that its digital store is the worst in the entire category. Sony is just in more trouble and doesn't seem to have an out.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

Yes, they were.

They were ported to PS2, but later, and the ports were announced after PSP releases.

"were" is past tense. Fact: A gamer who wanted to play these games did not need a PSP to do so. If anything you could call them timed exclusives but nothing past that since they were ported to another system.

I got an 8GB memory card included with my 3G/Wifi Vita. The Wifi only models had a 4GB card included. I think there are plenty of deals to be had that the memory card price isn't so much of an issue right now.

Stores run their own regional promotions but Sony does not currently include a memory card in any Vita unit they sell. Your mileage may vary. Regardless of how much extra they cost... they cost extra on top of the $250 so $250 is *not* the price of the Vita if you want to play games on it.

 

[Cipherr]

Also, this is not Nintendo vs. Sony. This is traditional game systems versus iPhone/Android. Nintendo has lowered its prices but is still up against a wall because of its high boxed game prices and the fact that its digital store is the worst in the entire category. Sony is just in more trouble and doesn't seem to have an out.

We already back to pretending the 3DS is bricking? Trying to shovel a little bit of that Vita failure off onto the 3DS (which is currently doing just fine) for whatever reason? All of a sudden, they are in it together eh? Thats awful convenient. Link the two together so that any success the 3DS has is irrelevant unless the PSV shares in it.

Sorry but no.

 

[KiNeSiS]

like the Gameboy before it, was successful because it offered experiences that couldn't be had on ANY OTHER PLATFORM.

This is where you are wrong the game boy experience was the NES experience, only on a spinach green monochrome color scheme. It really was an etch-a-sketch screened Famicom/NES. This was the only different experience from the NES, a gross lack of color & the fact you could take it anywhere.

They both have the same controller layout cross pad, A & B, Start & Select buttons.
Sure they had their own respective libraries still the experiences were very similar other than the lack of color. They even shared many titles with very little noticeable difference.
Tell me (other than being portable,) what experiences could be had on the original Game-Boy that couldn't be had on the Nes, or the more powerful TurboGraphx-16, & Sega Genesis. They all launched in the same year 1989.

The Atari Lynx was way more ambitious but it's battery life and games sucked. that offered at least color.

The Vita being a downscaled PS3 is an awesome draw it is eons ahead of what can be played currently from a portable system phone or tablet.
Don't you see the Vita is to the PS3 as the Game-Boy was to the NES.
I personally wish the same success on the Vita that the Game-Boy had.

The O.G. Game-Boy proves one thing to me. The PS3 & 360 could go a while longer if they wanted to before committing to a launch date on new systems. The GB held it down for years and competitors with slightly better tech couldn't stop it!

 

[ghibli99]

This is where you are wrong the game boy experience was the NES experience, only on a spinach green monochrome color scheme. It really was an etch-a-sketch screened Famicom/NES. This was the only different experience from the NES, a gross lack of color.

They both have the same controller layout cross pad, A & B, Start & Select buttons.
Sure they had their own respective libraries still the experiences were very similar other than the lack of color. They even shared many titles with very little noticeable difference.
Tell me (other than being portable,) what experiences could be had on the original Game-Boy that couldn't be had on the Nes, or the more powerful TurboGraphx-16, & Sega Genesis. They all launched in the same year 1989.

The Atari Lynx was way more ambitious but it's battery life and games sucked. that offered at least color.

The Vita being a downscaled PS3 is an awesome draw it is eons ahead of what can be played currently from a portable system phone or tablet.
Don't you see the Vita is to the PS3 as the Game-Boy was to the NES.
I personally wish the same success on the Vita that the Game-Boy had.

The O.G. Game-Boy proves one thing to me. The PS3 & 360 could go a while longer if they wanted to before committing to a launch date on new systems. The GB held it down for years and competitors with slightly better tech couldn't stop it!

It was pretty much Tetris. It was the best version for a long time, and was perfectly suited for the system. Everyone wanted it, and everyone bought a GB for it. The technical deficiencies didn't matter. Being portable meant you could show it to anyone (like at school). It's kind of been Nintendo's driving philosophy to varying degrees of success for every one of their systems (at least through the N64... SMB, Tetris, SMW, SM64).

The Vita doesn't have its 'Tetris' yet. We're crazy about Gravity Rush, but even as a relative optimist around GAF, I don't see it being the killer app.

 

[AceBandage]

It was pretty much Tetris. It was the best version for a long time, and was perfectly suited for the system. Everyone wanted it, and everyone bought a GB for it. The technical deficiencies didn't matter. Being portable meant you could show it to anyone (like at school). It's kind of been Nintendo's driving philosophy to varying degrees of success for every one of their systems (at least through the N64... SMB, Tetris, SMW, SM64).

The Vita doesn't have its 'Tetris' yet. We're crazy about Gravity Rush, but even as a relative optimist around GAF, I don't see it being the killer app.

This is something I never really got about companies.
They see these games that work for Nintendo and they don't get why.
Easy to play. Hard to master. Addictive gameplay.
Forget your giant stories and budgets.
This has been Nintendo's MO for decades. And no one tries to copy that philosophy.

 

[boingball]

This is something I never really got about companies.
They see these games that work for Nintendo and they don't get why.
Easy to play. Hard to master. Addictive gameplay.
Forget your giant stories and budgets.
This has been Nintendo's MO for decades. And no one tries to copy that philosophy.

Well, Rovio did and made Angry Birds. And Miyamoto wishes he would have invented it first.

 

[Bumhead]

Also, this is not Nintendo vs. Sony. This is traditional game systems versus iPhone/Android.

I can't get on board with this idea.

Nintendo and Sony remain separate entities in the portable gaming space. Both systems need to justify their own existence based on their own merits. There is no team effort. No united sales pitch in a fabricated "War" against an area of gaming people have decided they don't like for whatever reason.

Personally, I believe Nintendo and iOS can co-exist. I think they're a better "team" than Nintendo and Sony are, if that's how you want to look at things. Nintendo is doing what they're doing and what works successfully for them, and they're achieving the sales to do it.

Sony on the other hand.. eh. I say this as someone who has put their own money into backing the Vita from Day One, but I'm finding it increasingly difficult to see how they're going to fight their own battle here.

 

[TheNatural]

Well, Rovio did and made Angry Birds. And Miyamoto wishes he would have invented it first.

Why would he care? It wouldn't have gone to a phone platform for a buck to sell like crazy anyway.

 

[Father_Brain]

I can't get on board with this idea.

Nintendo and Sony remain separate entities in the portable gaming space. Both systems need to justify their own existence based on their own merits. There is no team effort. No united sales pitch in a fabricated "War" against an area of gaming people have decided they don't like for whatever reason.

Personally, I believe Nintendo and iOS can co-exist. I think they're a better "team" than Nintendo and Sony are, if that's how you want to look at things. Nintendo is doing what they're doing and what works successfully for them, and they're achieving the sales to do it.

Sony on the other hand.. eh. I say this as someone who has put their own money into backing the Vita from Day One, but I'm finding it increasingly difficult to see how they're going to fight their own battle here.

Agreed.

Nor can I agree with anyone who looks at Vita's software lineup, the presence/absence of established IPs, how said IPs have historically performed on handheld platforms, how that software is currently selling, etc. and still comes to the conclusion that its hardware pricing is a more fundamental problem than its software.

 

[Kobun Heat]

There is no team effort.

No, what I'm saying is Nintendo doesn't win if it beats Sony and Sony doesn't win if it beats Nintendo.

 

[impact]

No, what I'm saying is Nintendo doesn't win if it beats Sony and Sony doesn't win if it beats Nintendo.

They need to combine their resources to destroy Apple's evil empire.

 

[ghibli99]

I don't know if Nintendo really cares about competing with anyone. That's why I think it's strange that they're always part of the comparison. I know people hate that they get by mainly on first party software, but that's the reality of it. They keep producing - more often than not - fun software that is highly polished and familiar to a large number of people.

Why would he care? It wouldn't have gone to a phone platform for a buck to sell like crazy anyway.

I don't know if it's so much about that, but he understands its appeal, simple gameplay, addictive nature, etc. I don't believe he thinks it's an original idea, but a known concept that was executed better than many other games. He probably also likes the branding, design, and personalities of the in-game creatures, which have translated into merchandising gold for Rovio.

Angry Birds is synonymous with mobile's success (mainly on iOS), but thus far, Vita, like the PSP, is that system where you can play similar - and usually better - games of the exact same franchises on PS3. It needs something that is going to capture the collective imagination. Say what you will about Nintendogs, but it was at that point that the DS took off and never looked back. We're seeing a similar shift with the 3DS with its offerings that finally came late last year, although I still think that system has a ways to go. A 3DS Lite and strong software at E3 could do it.

 

[Bumhead]

No, what I'm saying is Nintendo doesn't win if it beats Sony and Sony doesn't win if it beats Nintendo.

I don't understand why these things always have to come down to "winning" or "losing".

Nintendo "wins" if it produces a successful gaming platform which makes them profit, is well received by gamers, leads to strong software sales and maintains a strong, profitable userbase and brand for a number of years. That's it. History shows that Nintendo doesn't need to beat anybody. It's quite happy to exist in it's own space so long as that space works for them. Frankly, that's how it should be.

The same for Sony, but with the obvious difference being that at this point, they face a significantly more uphill battle to achieve that.

It's not about one company "winning" against the other, which is a good job really as there is no chance of Team Traditional "beating" iOS and Android and no chance of Team Sony "beating" Team Nintendo.

 

[BSTF]

Angry Birds is synonymous with mobile's success (mainly on iOS), but thus far, Vita, like the PSP, is that system where you can play similar - and usually better - games of the exact same franchises on PS3. It needs something that is going to capture the collective imagination. Say what you will about Nintendogs, but it was at that point that the DS took off and never looked back. We're seeing a similar shift with the 3DS with its offerings that finally came late last year, although I still think that system has a ways to go. A 3DS Lite and strong software at E3 could do it.

Will you be using this same argument once the Wii U comes out, making the 3DS useless as a gaming device?

It just seems like there's some arbitrary distinction with Nintendo's handhelds.

 

[Erethian]

No, what I'm saying is Nintendo doesn't win if it beats Sony and Sony doesn't win if it beats Nintendo.

If Nintendo releases compelling software, they'll do fine.

One thing that always bothers me about the smartphone vs dedicated handheld debate (or the smartphone debate in general) is that for some reason people ignore the fundamentals of what makes a successful system. Ubiquity through non-gaming functionality doesn't automatically override the ability of software to sell systems, just like everyone owning a PC didn't/doesn't make consoles obsolete. If those platforms don't have the games people really want, they'll by the systems that do.

Games matter, basically. If Nintendo were to release the equivalent of a Brain Training or Nintendogs, a new concept that uses the system in novel and interesting ways, there's nothing to stop that sort of game being just as successful as it would have been in the DS era. And selling just as much hardware.

That isn't to say smartphones don't have an impact, they do, but sometimes I think people ignore the reason why people play games to begin with.

 

[ghibli99]

Will you be using this same argument once the Wii U comes out, making the 3DS useless as a gaming device?

It just seems like there's some arbitrary distinction with Nintendo's handhelds.

Not even sure what you're getting at with your first sentence. WiiU is coming out after 3DS, and they'll offer different experiences.

As for that distinction, what do we have to compare Nintendo handhelds to? PSP? NGPC? GG? Lynx? Nothing comes close (and I've owned them all). So I think that distinction is valid.