Support NeoGAF

[Griss]

Aside from the reasons given so far (that are all good), the problem was one of concept. The concept was 'AAA console experiences - on the go!' That was the pitch.

There was a problem with this:
1. These types of games are better on consoles, on the big screen.
2. Those consoles had / have a larger install base.
3. As a result the best devs of the biggest franchises kept their best teams on console.
4. This left b or c-teams to handle Vita, leaving the Vita with second class games in the biggest franchises.
5. This was noted by players and reviewers, which left people understanding that...
1. These types of games are better on consoles, on the big screen.

And therefore the console was largely ignored. (Note - you can start with any point of the above cycle and it still works.)

What they needed from the start was a Pokemon - a game suited to handheld play that wouldn't be an inferior version of a famous console series.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

And again, opinions are subjective. I enjoyed Uncharted, so where exactly would continuing this line of discussion lead? The Vita wasn't a failure because of an (in your opinion) inferior Uncharted. And it wouldn't have been a success if a (in your view) superior effort was produced on the level of an Uncharted 2.

Actually, this is getting away from my initial point - that I think the idea of "Western gamers would rather play games on their TV instead of a portable device" or that "Big games are better on TV" is a flawed one and the actual answer varies from person to person. If you offered a bunch of gamers their choice between two versions of Uncharted 4 that were identical in graphics, audio, and controls, except one version played on a TV and one version played on a portable device, I'm sure a lot of people would pick the portable one.

 

[Ric Flair]

The foldable screen was a big reason. You can drop a 3ds and not have to worry about the screen shattering (for the most part), the vita isn't as portable. The Nintendo lineup is unbeatable in mobile as well.

 

[cartographer]

Do people believe that of the tens of millions of potential customers in the handheld market that even a significant minority know anything about the memory card prices?

This concern always seem overblown as far as it relates to Vita's sales numbers, as if there were millions of people lining up to buy a Vita but they were turned off by memory card prices.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Expensive memory cards and the price point being higher than the 3DS' after the 3DS dropped its price probably did it. The rest of the stuff, like cancelled games and dropping of support, are fruit from that poisonous tree.

 

[outunderthestars]

What they needed from the start was a Pokemon - a game suited to handheld play that wouldn't be an inferior version of a famous console series.

The problem is that every game like that made in the last 4 years has been made for phones.

 

[twobear]

I think some people underestimated (still don't know) how powerful the system is and Sony...again...didn't advertise it right.

the power of the system is irrelevant......didn't people learn this when ds ran laps around the psp by selling sudoku games? virtually nobody wants 'your home console on the bus'

 

[Mass_Pincup]

Just making a well reasoned assumption that based on the PSP output (handheld version of console games which were pretty naff) that the Vita would be the exact same. And based on no one rushing out to buy one for any of those games, I'd say that no one is rushing out to buy one for any of those games.

Where did this shit about wanting the newest most popular thing come from?

And lol at "Mercenarys is better than all Killzone games but the one called best in the series which I've not played". The Killzone series isn't even that good anyway for starters, Killzone 2 was just surprisingly good.

Good you admit that you don't know what you're talking about and you're just tripping over yourself to justify not buying a Vita.

You know you can just say that non of the games are appealing to you or that you don't want to play on an handheld instead of your "well reasoned assumption" based on nothing.

A system seller is "the most popular thing"

 

[Nuu]

Which is why I add the qualifier "quality."

Uncharted Vita just isn't a good game and even if it was, you can see how doing a new Uncharted game in the style of the 1st game after Uncharted 2 & 3 came out isn't a great move.

Killzone & Resistance aren't really on the same level of the other games that were mentioned as series in general. And Killzone: Mercs came out well after the Vita was already "doomed" in the West.

I thought MGS: Peace Walker sold well compared to the install base?

Uncharted Abyss was widely seen as a good game. Just because you didn't enjoy it doesn't change the consensus. Killzone Mercenary is about the same level of quality as the console games. Only Resistance was mediocre. Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker was widely seen as a disappointment as it had very poor world-wide sales outside of Japan.

As far as "tons of direct console ports" on the Vita go, they're almost entirely fighting games, RPGs, and platformers. Not really any of the big AAA series that were mentioned.

From his list, Fifa and Madden were. On top of that you had ports of Need for Speed, Football Manager, Sonic & All Stars Racing Transformed. All these series have sold well within six digits.

The Vita had a lot of direct ports of sports, fighting, racing, rpgs, and platformers. Again the problem is that few people were interested.

Actually, this is getting away from my initial point - that I think the idea of "Western gamers would rather play games on their TV instead of a portable device" or that "Big games are better on TV" is a flawed one and the actual answer varies from person to person. If you offered a bunch of gamers their choice between two versions of Uncharted 4 that were identical in graphics, audio, and controls, except one version played on a TV and one version played on a portable device, I'm sure a lot of people would pick the portable one.

What is your evidence of this? Even with direct Vita and PSP ports the console versions usually sold significantly more and at a higher attach rate.

 

[Sorcerer]

Do people believe that of the tens of millions of potential customers in the handheld market that even a significant minority know anything about the memory card prices?

This concern always seem overblown as far as it relates to Vita's sales numbers, as if there were millions of people lining up to buy a Vita but they were turned off by memory card prices.

You may have answered your own question. Where were the tens of millions of potential customers? They never showed up. Perhaps they were aware of those memory card prices and just said "nope".

I remember its first days in retail around where I live, the system was stillborn collecting dust in glass cases. I was pretty shocked about it.

 

[Griss]

Well, I just saw Y2Kev's post. Yep, that's it. He put it much better than I did, but our conclusions were roughly similar - it was doomed from concept.

The problem is that every game like that made in the last 4 years has been made for phones.

Right - I agree - but imagine a top-quality game that specifically needed buttons to be playable but was tailored for handhelds. Something like Pokemon. The Vita might have stood a chance if such a game took off or if multiple quality games of that nature had been widely available. Nintendo still moves plenty of copies of games like that on the 3DS - games that suit handheld gaming and aren't just scaled down versions of AAA blockbusters on other consoles.

Instead, Sony tried to sell the Vita on the back of Uncharted, Killzone, and CoD etc. The audience they went for was never going to move to Vita to play inferior versions of games they like to play. (Which are online-dependent, graphically intensive blockbusters, and therefore by definition worse on Vita.) Therefore there needed to be something else there to appeal to people. And there really wasn't - not until the great JRPG rush and all that to appeal to otaku.

 

[cartographer]

You may have answered your own question. Where were the tens of millions of potential customers? They never showed up. Perhaps they were aware of those memory card prices and just said "nope".

I remember its first days in retail around where I live, the system was stillborn collecting dust in glass cases. I was pretty shocked about it.

They never showed up because they were never interested enough in the VIta to even know about memory card prices. This is not a thing that people generally talk about outside of enthusiast forums like this one.

They bought a 3DS. Or no handheld at all. They don't care about VIta's memory card issues.

 

[Jito]

Good you admit that you don't know what you're talking about and you're just tripping over yourself to justify not buying a Vita.

You know you can just say that non of the games are appealing to you or that you don't want to play on an handheld instead of your "well reasoned assumption" based on nothing.

A system seller is "the most popular thing"

How am I tripping over myself at all? I'm clearly only speaking for myself and of my opinions of the console, don't try to overstate what I'm saying here.

This is quality though, defense league for everything, even failed handhelds.

No a system seller isn't necessarily the most popular thing.

 

[McLovin]

For me it was the memory cards, every time I was on the verge of buying one(happened a lot actually) I remembered I had to get an expensive proprietary memory card. I honestly wanted one.

 

[Crono27]

Memory card was the reason

 

[S-God]

-Memory Cards
-Types of Games ( early on in the life cycle)
-Price of the device itself (350 and 300$ launch price).


For people bringing up Nintendo handheld games, they have a catalog that they have built over the years around the handheld market and that helps them a lot to market their device.

 

[twobear]

You may have answered your own question. Where were the tens of millions of potential customers? They never showed up. Perhaps they were aware of those memory card prices and just said "nope".

they didn't even bother to find out about the memory card prices. you can book me on that. suggesting they were put off by memory card prices suggests that they were interested in it in the first place, and all signs point to not very many people being interested in the first place.

 

[outunderthestars]

I remember its first days in retail around where I live, the system was stillborn collecting dust in glass cases. I was pretty shocked about it.

Someone summed it well for me: Sony developed the most amazing machine for a market that simply didn't exist. It was too expensive/delicate for kids and adults would have rather spent the $250 -$300 on a tablet or new smart phone. It could have launched with any lineup of games and it would have still met the same fate.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

How am I tripping over myself at all? I'm clearly only speaking for myself and of my opinions of the console, don't try to overstate what I'm saying here.

This is quality though, defense league for everything, even failed handhelds.

What am I defending?

I'm just responding to your questions.

First it was "If only it had games on it"

After it was "Oh can you give me some system seller or games worth buying for on it?

Then it was "Great it's the PSP all over again with so so games from console franchise" (games that you never played to begin with not to mention some of them are new IPs)

If anything your post are funny, especially your pseudo interest in the console.

 

[Sorcerer]

They never showed up because they were never interested enough in the VIta to even know about memory card prices. This is not a thing that people generally talk about outside of enthusiast forums like this one.

They bought a 3DS. Or no handheld at all. They don't care about VIta's memory card issues.

Point taken. Your assessment is a much more brutal take than mine. You think the tech would sway some at least.

Would you say the PSP damaged the Vitas chances in any way?

 

[Yasumi]

for the same reason the WiiU failed:

3rd parties rejected it = no games = no sales

As someone with well over 100 games for it, it has plenty of third party stuff to play, just not the kind of games that the western mass market wanted. You can only get so many sales with PS2-style niche Japanese games and indies.

 

[KAL2006]

I wish Sony had another attempt at a Xperia Play with Vita support

 

[twobear]

claiming memory cards killed vita is like the inverse of people claiming that a lack of removable battery and memory card slot would kill interest in the iphone.........if people want the product, they don't care about stuff like that.

 

[Skinpop]

it will always be a success in my heart.

 

[outunderthestars]

Well, I just saw Y2Kev's post. Yep, that's it. He put it much better than I did, but our conclusions were roughly similar - it was doomed from concept.



Right - I agree - but imagine a top-quality game that specifically needed buttons to be playable but was tailored for handhelds. Something like Pokemon. The Vita might have stood a chance if such a game took off or if multiple quality games of that nature had been widely available. Nintendo still moves plenty of copies of games like that on the 3DS - games that suit handheld gaming and aren't just scaled down versions of AAA blockbusters on other consoles.

Instead, Sony tried to sell the Vita on the back of Uncharted, Killzone, and CoD etc. The audience they went for was never going to move to Vita to play inferior versions of games they like to play. (Which are online-dependent, graphically intensive blockbusters, and therefore by definition worse on Vita.) Therefore there needed to be something else there to appeal to people. And there really wasn't - not until the great JRPG rush and all that to appeal to otaku.

To be fair, if you remove Pokemon the top 5 selling 3DS games are all watered down versions of console franchises: Mario Kart, Smash Bros, 3D Mario, 2D Mario, and Animal Crossing.

 

[SinCityAssassin]

In Japan, the vita is generally outselling the new3DS on a weekly basis at this point.

I mean. The regular one sure, but the XL? Or even both models combined? No.

That being said, god I wish memory cards were cheaper. The only reason I even have a 16 GB one is because Gamestop did a sale like 2 years ago for 20 bucks. I don't even have the room to download half of my retail biz.

 

[Jito]

What am I defending?

I'm just responding to your question.

First it was "If only it had games on it"

After it was "Oh can you give me some system seller or games worth buying for on it?

Then it was "Great it's the PSP all over again with so so games from console franchise" (games that you never played to begin with not to mention some of them are ne IPs)

If anything your post are funny, especially your pseudo interest in the console.

Oh you saw through my fake interest to asses that there are still no games for the dead console? How astute of you, should be a detective with awareness like that.

And yeh you're clearly on the defensive foot about the whole thing, anyone not in denial can admit that the Vita has a weak offering of games, let alone any single game worth buying the console for.

 

[Aters]

Aside from the reasons given so far (that are all good), the problem was one of concept. The concept was 'AAA console experiences - on the go!' That was the pitch.

There was a problem with this:
1. These types of games are better on consoles, on the big screen.
2. Those consoles had / have a larger install base.
3. As a result the best devs of the biggest franchises kept their best teams on console.
4. This left b or c-teams to handle Vita, leaving the Vita with second class games in the biggest franchises.
5. This was noted by players and reviewers, which left people understanding that...
1. These types of games are better on consoles, on the big screen.

And therefore the console was largely ignored. (Note - you can start with any point of the above cycle and it still works.)

What they needed from the start was a Pokemon - a game suited to handheld play that wouldn't be an inferior version of a famous console series.

Totally agree. Sony had one of those games: Monster Hunter. Too bad it was a 3rd party game and Sony let Nintendo snatch it. MH was what kept PSP relevant in Japan, and then other 3rd parties and 1st parties make games for PSP because there was an install base, which further kept PSP relevant in other regions.

When Nintendo announced MH3G on 3DS, Vita was dead, and it was only its first year.

To be fair, if you remove Pokemon the top 5 selling 3DS games are all watered down versions of console franchises: Mario Kart, Smash Bros, 3D Mario, 2D Mario, and Animal Crossing.

One can argue Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, and Smash are almost as fun as they are on home console. They are watered down in some departments, but enhanced in others.
Can't say the same for Uncharted Vita, CoD Vita, AC Vita.

 

[nillah]

Imagine a 3rd handheld from SONY with all the issues in this thread addressed.... Some potential

 

[sindbadthesailor]

Changing market plus sony penny pinching once it was released.

Yeah, a huge chunk of the market moved to smart phones but that doesn't change the fact that sony dropped the ball when it comes to actually supporting the vita. An utter lack of advertising, promoting garbage like the wonderbook (remember that?) at key events like E3 over the vita, canceling almost finished games like Warrior's Lair/Ruin and moving all first party studios to PS3/PS4 development, and so on and so forth. Stuff like the proprietary memory cards didn't help either.

The vita absolutely could have established a greater market share in the west had sony actually tried to make the device a success by promoting it and bothering to develop quality games for it. PS3 era sony, due to their overall arrogance, would have pushed for first party games like Infamous, R&C, GoW, etc., while even going as far as money hatting Rockstar to develop a GTA title, even if it was nothing more than a port of San Andreas. Those type of moves absolutely would have sold more units.

Frankly, it's an absolute shame there's a lack of quality western titles given the vita is the best handheld device ever designed.

 

[KAL2006]

The console type only games is bullshit. Sony released a range of games some were watered down Console games whichcto be honest 3DS does also. But they also released unique Handheld games like Smart As, Little Deviants, Reality Fighters, Tearaway and etc. The main reason it failed was simply there is no market for it. Nintendo only succeeed simply because they have a cheap system with Pokémon and Mario on it.

 

[s_mirage]

From a personal perspective, initial price and the price of memory cards. I have less games for my Vita than any other system, and the main reason is that I balk at paying Sony's ridiculous memory card prices.

 

[Woo-Fu]

I think it could have been a qualified success considering the shrinking market had its media not been ridiculously expensive.

I don't have one now solely due to the cost of the memory cards. I'll find one used for dirt cheap to play hotshots golf on.

claiming memory cards killed vita is like the inverse of people claiming that a lack of removable battery and memory card slot would kill interest in the iphone.........if people want the product, they don't care about stuff like that.

I guess I'm not "people", whatever you mean by "people". Some of us aren't slaves to our every desire. I want a Vita, I've always wanted a Vita. I'm not going to get a 2nd job to pay for their proprietary memory cards.

 

[Weevilone]

-Marketing
-Memory card price
-Focus on watered down AAA games
-Some games ported to lowest common denominator 3DS levels

 

[Mass_Pincup]

Oh you saw through my fake interest to asses that there are still no games for the dead console? How astute of you, should be a detective with awareness like that.

And yeh you're clearly on the defensive foot about the whole thing, anyone not in denial can admit that the Vita has a weak offering of games, let alone any single game worth buying the console for.

That's based on interest, I personally have more then a hundred Vita games.

Did I say that most of them are worth buying for the mass market? Or that they'll appeal to a lot of people? I really don't care if you like Vita games or not, I just found it funny to interact with people who obviously don't care about the quality of games on the handheld. Nothing to do with being defensive or being "in denial".

And the Vita already has more then a thousand games, not weak by any means or "no games" like you keep repeating as if it was true.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

The console type only games is bullshit. Sony released a range of games some were watered down Console games whichcto be honest 3DS does also. But they also released unique Handheld games like Smart As, Little Deviants, Reality Fighters, Tearaway and etc. The main reason it failed was simply there is no market for it. Nintendo only succeeed simply because they have a cheap system with Pokémon and Mario on it.

Pokemon (JRPG), Zelda (Action/Adventure), Mario (Platformer), Monster Hunter (Action/RPG/Hunting) vs Persona 4 Golden (JRPG), Gravity Rush (Action/Adventure), Tearaway (Platformer), Freedom Wars (Action/RPG/Hunting). The 3DS franchises are definitely more popular, but they're not really any more portable-friendly than games in the same genre on Vita. EVERY game is portable friendly when you can put the system in and out of sleep mode in a second.

What is your evidence of this? Even with direct Vita and PSP ports the console versions usually sold significantly more and at a higher attach rate.

We don't really have any good way to judge this for Western gamers since portable systems that aren't phones aren't very popular here. But if you look at Japan, there were numerous instances of games that came out on both PS3 & Vita at the same time where the Vita version did as well or even better than the PS3 version despite the PS3 having a much larger install base. It's a chicken and egg problem - Western developers won't make games for portable systems because the install base isn't there, but the install base isn't there because Western developers won't make games for portable systems.

 

[outunderthestars]

I think it could have been a qualified success considering the shrinking market had its media not been ridiculously expensive.

I don't have one now solely due to the cost of the memory cards. I'll find one used for dirt cheap to play hotshots golf on.



I guess I'm not "people", whatever you mean by "people". Some of us aren't slaves to our every desire. I want a Vita, I've always wanted a Vita.

I would argue that if $50 - $60 has kept you from buying something for almost 5 years, then you really don't want it that badly.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

This is one of those topics where you can tell the hardcore are just completely disconnected from reality.

I'll reposT:

I see a lot of posts lamenting the death (or non-life) of the Vita. I find there to be a lot of misinformation and/or misattribution of responsibility for the reasons why the device failed. I am interested in having a discussion. Put bluntly, I believe that if you believe the Vita failed because a) Sony did not have its “big” first party studios working on it, b) because memory cards were expensive, or because c) it wasn’t “marketed,” I would suggest you should reevaluate your position.

Sony’s Big First Party Studios

I think that when most people complain about the lack of presence of Sony’s big first party studios, they’re basically saying that Naughty Dog, Guerrilla, and Sony Santa Monica did not produce titles for the platform. While this is true, I do not believe this to be relevant to why the Vita failed. If you look at the PSP—which I think most people would say was successful, or at the very least “far more” successful than the Vita—Sony’s big studios did not really work on marquee titles in their big franchises here either (with the exception of Guerrilla, who published a fantastic spinoff that bombed). Naughty Dog was not present. Instead, Ready at Dawn, then (and perhaps now!) a B-tier studio, produced a title in a Naughty Dog franchise in Daxter. Ready at Dawn also produced two God of War games, perhaps Sony’s biggest IP in the States, instead of Sony Santa Monica. Guerrilla, as mentioned above, produced a Killzone spinoff. Insomniac was not present; instead, a bunch of Ratchet spinoffs were produced by smaller profile developers. Resistance was present, but again by Bend and not by Insomniac. Team Ico was not present. Sucker Punch was not present. Evolution was not present, but a spin-off (Artic Edge) was produced by another studio. Media Molecule was not present. Polyphony only appeared very late in the PSP’s lifecycle. Zipper was present.

On the Vita, the same is largely true—the big developers are not present on the platform. There were some important changes. While Ready at Dawn was not present, Bend produced a title in Sony’s other big western IP, Uncharted. Team Gravity appeared and produced a “big” title for the platform. Guerrilla Cambridge was present and produced a FULL Killzone game. Zipper produced a brand new IP for PS Vita launch. Media Molecule produced a brand new IP for Vita. Evolution, Polyphony, Santa Monica, Naughty Dog, and Insomniac were still not present, though Vita got a port of a PS3-bound Ratchet that was developed by Insomniac.

I’m not even going to discuss the massive “undersupport” from the various studios across the platforms (that produced small games like Patapon and such). There’s just so much to cover here and I don’t think anyone would disagree it doesn’t move the needle really either way.

So I think it’s unlikely that the buying public gives much of a damn about WHO is developing the games. The PSP was successful without the big name studios from Sony. I think the reality is that Sony’s franchises do not have sufficient pull to attract a big audience interested in a Sony handheld platform. Naughty Dog could have made a big original IP and it would have bombed and it wouldn’t matter.

Memory Card Prices

Memory card prices are a big thorn in the side of the hardcore, but I’m not sure they really dissuaded a large number of buyers in the mainstream. Sony basically subsidized the price of the Vita with the price of the memory cards; the price of the memory cards lowered the price of the Vita and therefore I feel this is largely had a counterbalancing effect. The hardcore are more interested in digital sales and carrying large libraries. I understand and appreciate that expensive memory cards are annoying and frustrating for the core, but I think its myopic to believe this had any real effect. I think it is far more likely this limited the Vita’s ability to penetrate the hardcore audience (say a total demographic of 20 million gamers) than reach the mainstream. We’re talking about the successor to a platform that sold 80+ million units. I do not believe this can be attributed to memory card prices.

Marketing

So why did the Vita fail? The reality is that the Vita was designed for an audience that does not exist. Sony’s traditional core gamer is the 18-35 year old male interested in cinematic and multiplayer experiences like the ones provided by the larger third parties and Sony today. They have never had tremendous penetration with the younger audience. They have never had tremendous penetration with lapsed, female, or casual gamers. Lots of people who bought the PSP simply migrated to mobile to get their gaming fix as the mobile platform met their needs better—cheaper games, more durable hardware, lower “all in” hardware cost considering the utility, and software more targeted at their demographic. Candy Crush wasn’t a big franchise before it was released, but it met the needs of the average gamer more than Uncharted or Gravity Rush, so they moved. And nobody cares that Naughty Dog didn’t make Uncharted.

Marketing refers to the complete design process through which a product is developed from concept to actual product on store shelves. Vita is a true failure of marketing, but not a failure of advertising. It was designed for an audience that does not exist at a price point they do not want to pay with software people do not largely want to buy. All those things considered, the device has done very well for itself. It is now being supported largely by Japanese niche titles and indie games because that is the demographic that originally bought the system so there is somewhat of an audience there. As casual gamers and cinematic gamers and multiplayer gamers did not purchase the system, those games did not appear. There is nothing Sony could have done to change this except fundamentally change the design of the Vita (which would have changed the type of software that released on the Vita).

I am continually frustrated by the failure of this handheld as I find it to be a comfortable, connected, and integrated device with nice graphics and good ergonomics. But I realize that I am a hardcore gamer with specific needs that are no longer desired by the mainstream in the market. So I am a niche customer with a niche device. I am at peace with the fact that the type of experience I like cannot be supported by the market any more than I am mad that I do not get tons of Japanese RPGs on consoles or that 3D platformers are all but dead.

Vita was star-crossed from day 1. I will always love it, but it had no chance of being successful.

"Disconnected from reality" is spot on for a lot of people here.

 

[EGM1966]

1. No room in Western market for such a device vs general mobile devices and DS marketshare
2. Lost Monster Hunter in Japan
3. Marketing wasn't great and many initial big brand games (such as CoD) were disappointing vs expectations of a twin stick mobile device
4. Market displeasure over memory cards

I think technically the initial model with that lovely, lovely screen was the best dedicated mobile game device ever but it just didn't find an audience and started looking anemic for games too early in its life as a result.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Do people believe that of the tens of millions of potential customers in the handheld market that even a significant minority know anything about the memory card prices?

This concern always seem overblown as far as it relates to Vita's sales numbers, as if there were millions of people lining up to buy a Vita but they were turned off by memory card prices.

This is spot on. People have to be interested in the system first in order for the memory card prices to even become an issue. People weren't interested in the system.

When you hear stuff like that being parroted as a reason the Vita failed, it makes me wonder if some people are just so in denial about the impact those dirty mobile games have on their favorite hobby that they are willing to accept any reason for why the Vita (and 3DS) markets disappeared other than the one that is right in front of their face. "Uhhh, no it's the memory cards......or no Gran Turismo!....or, uh....it needed two extra triggers!!!" anything to avoid acknowledging those filthy casuals.

 

[Sangetsu-II]

The memory cards were a big factor. I know a few people who that turned off from buying one.

No monster hunter

Pretty much these two.

I bought two though

 

[Onemic]

Did they ever manage to get homebrew on the vita like the PSP?

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Actually, this is getting away from my initial point - that I think the idea of "Western gamers would rather play games on their TV instead of a portable device" or that "Big games are better on TV" is a flawed one and the actual answer varies from person to person. If you offered a bunch of gamers their choice between two versions of Uncharted 4 that were identical in graphics, audio, and controls, except one version played on a TV and one version played on a portable device, I'm sure a lot of people would pick the portable one.

Of course there are some who'd prefer the portable version for whatever reason. It's just a MUCH smaller number than those who'd prefer it on their big screen in the West--especially in the US.

Thus there's just not a big enough market to justify a dedicated portable aimed directly at it, nor for developers to fork over the budgets for those kind of games.

Nintendo gets by as they have Pokemon, Monster Hunter exclusive lately, etc. that are perfectly suited to portables, and their art styles and genres like Mario, Mario Kart etc. don't lose nearly as much when scaled down to a small screen as do the cinematic, big budget, spectacle driven AAA games like Uncharted or Killzone from Sony.

With Nintendo's games, the look and sound isn't a huge part of the appeal. Sure, a lot of people love those art styles, but those aren't the Sony fans that want (and are used to) top level console graphics, cinematic experiences, more realistic art designs etc. An average Nintendo fan can enjoy Mario 3D Land on 3DS as much or more than Mario 3D World on Wii U. The Vita flop shows the average Sony fan isn't nearly as interested as games like Uncharted or Killzone on a portable instead of the console/big screen. And it makes sense as those games are much more driven by great graphics, set pieces and spectacles, where as Nintendo's games are mostly purely gameplay driven.

 

[ZoltanXerxes]

I was in Japan 2 weeks ago and the Vita selection is crazy! Not sure if it's a failure in Japan though.

 

[Celine]

To be fair, if you remove Pokemon the top 5 selling 3DS games are all watered down versions of console franchises: Mario Kart, Smash Bros, 3D Mario, 2D Mario, and Animal Crossing.

It can be made the case for Mario Kart 7, Smash Bros 4 3DS and NSMB2.
However SM3DL was tailor made for 3DS to leverage its strengths and Animal Crossing while beginning on home console (N64) is now mainly a handheld series with spin off on home consoles simply because the franchise is more fit for handheld (and sales show as much).

I was in Japan 2 weeks ago and the Vita selection is crazy! Not sure if it's a failure in Japan though.

It's a distant second place.
Japan got the best software selection that's for sure.

 

[SurfaceofChristianity]

But I thought http://www.ign.com/articles/2011/10/22/the-playstation-vita-is-set-to-succeed it was set to suceed?

 

[DrROBschiz]

You guys are looking at this all wrong and with old tried and true arguments

Vita and 3DS were never going to hit the numbers of their predessors in the new mobile environment

True

However Vita could have been MUCH more successful than it is now... and honestly maybe its not the worst thing Sony has ever done considering the software it still gets

As a conduit to the PSN ecosystem the largest failure of the Vita IS the memory cards and still is

 

[Ninja Scooter]

You guys are looking at this all wrong and with old tried and true arguments

Vita and 3DS were never going to hit the numbers of their predessors in the new mobile environment

True

However Vita could have been MUCH more successful than it is now... and honestly maybe its not the worst thing Sony has ever done considering the software it still gets

As a conduit to the PSN ecosystem the largest failure of the Vita IS the memory cards and still is

Yes, it could have been MUCH more successful, if it were a completely different product. The memory card issue is so overblown.

 

[Man God]

But I thought http://www.ign.com/articles/2011/10/22/the-playstation-vita-is-set-to-succeed it was set to suceed?

That article didn't even make sense back then. One of 3DS's biggest strengths out of the gate was the list of promised games, most of which it delivered on.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Yes, it could have been MUCH more successful, if it were a completely different product. The memory card issue is so overblown.

No its not

Its a complete antithesis to what could have been a larger contributor to THIS

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1212815

Dont you get it

Vitas role shouldn't be about replicating PSP. Its not the same ballgames as so aptly pointed out by every single poster on here

Maybe moving large volumes of hardware isnt as important as moving software. And Hell if Sony had pivoted the Vita correctly they could have tackled both issues more successfully