Support NeoGAF

[James Sawyer Ford]

3DS is doing MUCH better in the West than the Vita, and it's main problem selling is still the fact that content isn't being released fast enough. Still, Nintendo has an ace up it's sleeve in the form of Pokemon Gen 6, and when that hits in either 2013 or 2014, sales will boom.

Doing better than vita in the west isn't a feat to crow about.

"Wait till Pokemon" sounds suspiciously similar to "wait for X" ps3 arguments.

3DS will do substantially worse than its predecessor, and that's despite good hardware and software. Again, the market has changed.

 

[Vol5]

Well I'm not a CEO so can't comment on whether the corporate culture (who to anyone outside Sony has zero knowledge of) is one that can steer Sony through financial trouble and next-gen.

All I can say about PS4 is, if they release close to 720, has compelling software day one (games PLUS community features / PSN integration) and a good price point, they should be good. PlayStation is still a huge brand.

 

[Metallix87]

Doing better than vita in the west isn't a feat to crow about.

"Wait till Pokemon" sounds suspiciously similar to "wait for X" ps3 arguments.

3DS will do substantially worse than its predecessor, and that's despite good hardware and software. Again, the market has changed.

What proof is there of this? Seriously, people keep saying this, but there is no evidence.

As for Pokemon, it's a proven system seller, so it's quite different from the PS3 arguments, but I do think it's cute that you'd try to make that correlation.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

What proof is there of this? Seriously, people keep saying this, but there is no evidence.

As for Pokemon, it's a proven system seller, so it's quite different from the PS3 arguments, but I do think it's cute that you'd try to make that correlation.

All the evidence you need is in the western sales data. DS took off big time after its first year, sold huge numbers on the back of content that is now wildly popular on mobile devices. That market isn't coming back for Nintendo, and you will see starting next year that if you launch align DS and 3DS sales, the latter will be doing much worse.

 

[Count Dookkake]

.

 

[Bgamer90]

The worst thing Sony ever did in the FPS space was trying to back two of them as their Halo counterpart instead of focusing everything behind one.

Really good point.

I feel that SOCOM was on its way to becoming that for the Playstation console(s). Sad to see how far that series went down in quality.

EDIT: You said "FPS" when I was just thinking of shooters overall. My point still stands though.

 

[Silvawuff]

I think Sony's problem is general ignorance of what their two primary markets want. Pair that with lack of functionality that should be day one (PS1 games on Vita, no PS2>PS3 compatibility with later PS3 models, etc), and lack of new or interesting games to push consoles off shelves.

The frustration is limitless, because I think the potential is there for them to do something fantastic with their gaming products.

 

[Bgamer90]

Why are people talking as if Sony is in worse shape than they actually are?

they speak of the ps3 as if its a failed console when its been outselling the 360 over these last years. not to mention trying to say that Sony cant have 2 video games of the same genre like come on

Who is acting like the PS3 is a failed console?

Either way though, the Playstation brand did take a major hit this gen in comparison to where it was at the beginning of the previous decade.

 

[Man God]

They did also drop the ball on SOCOM especially considering all that team speak and voice command stuff they had on the PS2. It was a this gen franchise deployed too early.

 

[Chuck Norris]

1.) Based on the fact that Uncharted couldn't really move PS3 systems or Vita systems. It's not a strong enough franchise to really move hardware in a meaningful way.

2.) Of course it's foolish, since Sony today and Sony in 2004 are two entirely different companies. Sony back then was still the king of gaming, and it's hard to dismiss that. That's why sales started out so strong for PSP, and why Sony was able to secure so many strong third party exclusives for the device.

3.) The difference is, PSP and 3DS each had lots of content announced as on the way, and in PSP's case, it's recovery ended up being a miracle brought on by an unlikely new franchise, Monster Hunter. Vita's future looks extremely bleak, with third parties avoiding it like the plague, and Sony refusing to put their top tier developers on the platform.

4.) Again, it has less to do with pricing, and more to do with the type of content handheld gamers want.

1) and how on Earth are you measuring Uncharted's ability to move PS3 systems or not?

2) Sony secured GTA and Final Fantasy, the two biggest brands on their console at the time. This time they secured COD and Assassins Creed; the two biggest of the current era. Whether Vita will take off or not, I don't know. But the fact is that PSP was immensely successful. They looked to build off that with a great new interation utilizing similar steps to what went right with PSP, but the reality of the situation is that if they had launched it as a smartphone without buttons they probably would have done better in today's market.

4) yes, and that content is available on their phones. Which is why Nintendo and Sony have both hit far, far below expectations

 

[Nemo]

Sony's side don't mean shit, PS2 became a success because of the support, that's all they need

 

[Napalm_Frank]

Their biggest obstacle right now? Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again: They long strong franchises that can move systems. Their four strongest franchises right now are Gran Turismo, Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank, and God of War.

Ratchet & Clank ain't really that big. I think both LBP games sold way more than ACIT for example. Even Killzone 2 outsold em. Not sure about KZ3 tho.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

1.) Based on the fact that Uncharted couldn't really move PS3 systems or Vita systems. It's not a strong enough franchise to really move hardware in a meaningful way.

You have no proof what so ever that Uncharted GA did not move hardware. Actually U:GA sold over a 100k in the US on launch month. Half of Vita sales. U:GA was top seller in European chart. Yeah, U:GA moved some hardware.

3.) The difference is, PSP and 3DS each had lots of content announced as on the way, and in PSP's case, it's recovery ended up being a miracle brought on by an unlikely new franchise, Monster Hunter. Vita's future looks extremely bleak, with third parties avoiding it like the plague, and Sony refusing to put their top tier developers on the platform.

the library for the PSP as a whole made it sell not just MH. FF, KH, MGS, etc....
AssCreed:L, COD, Phantasy Star potable 2 is coming to Japan next year. Actually 2013 looks alright for the Vita in Japan so far.

4.) Again, it has less to do with pricing, and more to do with the type of content handheld gamers want.

If that was true Nintendo would not have slashed the price of the 3DS and lost a lot of money because of it. With regards to handheld gaming, price is king.

3DS is doing MUCH better in the West than the Vita, and it's main problem selling is still the fact that content isn't being released fast enough. Still, Nintendo has an ace up it's sleeve in the form of Pokemon Gen 6, and when that hits in either 2013 or 2014, sales will boom.

People said the same thing about MK7, 3DSXL and MNSB2. MNSB and MK sell much more than Pokemon WW. So yeah.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Launch lineup was strong, launched with an Uncharted game

Price was reasonable. Same price as PSP launched at. Fantastic for the hardware and made all the more reasonable by 3DS launching at the same price

PSP sold 71 million units, and had been dominating the Japanese markets for the past two or three years. How on Earth was PSP a flop? Please enlighten me

Frankly they hit all the right notes with Vita. But the market is changing and there is less room for this sort of dedicated gaming machine on the go

So who's responsibility is it to know that the market is changing? Are you saying it's not Sony's responsibility?

 

[Bgamer90]

Now when it comes to taste I can respect your opinion that you don't like Sony IPs, but MS does NOT have the level of high quality exclusive that Sony has, and calibre of First party studios. They might need another gen to get close....considering that Sony does nothing in that same gen.

Your opinion but I disagree. I prefer Forza (& Forza Horizon) over Gran Turismo (at least GT5) and I would rather have Halo and Gears than Uncharted & Resistance.

Also, I'm saying this as someone who loved the PS2 and preferred it over the original Xbox.

MS is already planning new IPs for early next gen. If they do well, they will become new franchises via sequels. It's not like they are going to only rely on "the top 3".

 

[Metallix87]

You have no proof what so ever that Uncharted GA did not move hardware. Actually U:GA sold over a 100k in the US on launch month. Half of Vita sales. U:GA was top seller in European chart. Yeah, U:GA moved some hardware.

the library for the PSP as a whole made it sell not just MH. FF, KH, MGS, etc....
AssCreed:L, COD, Phantasy Star potable 2 is coming to Japan next year. Actually 2013 looks alright for the Vita in Japan so far.

If that was true Nintendo would not have slashed the price of the 3DS and lost a lot of money because of it. With regards to handheld gaming, price is king.

People said the same thing about MK7, 3DSXL and MNSB2. MNSB and MK sell much more than Pokemon WW. So yeah.

Now THESE are really bizarre arguments! Wow!

1.) 100k does NOT make a system seller. Yeah, it moved "some" hardware, but when people use the term system seller, it usually means a piece of software that can make millions of people crave the hardware it appears on. This is NOT Uncharted: Golden Abyss.

2.) Those games you listed will do nothing for Vita in Japan. 2013 looks awful for the system, honestly, in all regions.

3.) 3DS sales boomed for a short while after the price drop, sure, but then they started to drop again. It took big franchises like Mario and Mario Kart to help stabilize the situation. Price is important, but content is more important. Content is king.

4.) Pokemon is more important than NSMB and Mario Kart. Those sell more overall, sure, but that's due to the long legs of those titles. Pokemon games, particularly new gen titles, have explosive openings that move lots of hardware.

 

[GQman2121]

This game would help jump start their initial sales next gen.

I am serious.

The market is ready for something new. Sony can make something old new again by adding to what they already did right a decade ago.

 

[Shai-Tan]

W
Since they're not targeting Nintendo, I feel they need to try and take Microsoft head on in the 5-10+ million selling multiplayer focused game category, and they need to do it early and often next generation, along with release at least two of their 5-6 million selling existing series in the first year of the system's life.

The thing is there is a big pile of failures we never hear about or flash in the pan that sell OK for every good and successful multiplayer game like Halo. Microsoft were smart putting money into the obvious winner in Call of Duty. And to really set itself apart whatever it is that we are imagining would have to be head and shoulders above the competition which seems overly dependent on luck when the next big thing could easily be from one of the many multiplatform publishers that MS could again lock up system preference with some kind of limited exclusivity.

And on top of that it could be the supporting hardware or software that makes a difference in what system is chosen. Like if someone actually figured out a controller that could legitimately replace a gamepad or just hitchhiked on an unrelated differentiator. If families are buying the next Xbox to get the new Kinect it might not even figure to choose platforms based on one game. This repeats again on the general software front.

 

[SuperSonic1305]

Amazing how people thought 250 was a steal for Vita when it was announced and that Sony was making all the right moves by involving developers in it's design and features. Now people are saying the complete opposite?

 

[Metallix87]

Amazing how people thought 250 was a steal for Vita when it was announced and that Sony was making all the right moves by involving developers in it's design and features. Now people are saying the complete opposite?

These people are backpedaling for no reason. 250 is a fine price point. The issue arises when you factor in mandatory memory cards that are very pricey, and the fact that no developers want to touch the device, including Sony's own development studios.

 

[5amshift]

$399 for the premium model or Sony is done.

 

[noobasuar]

Nintendo knows software sells hardware whereas Sony seems to have forgotten that years ago.

Sony just doesn't have the pull to get any meaningful exclusive third part game and their first party output just isn't very exciting for someone looking for hardcore games.

I loved Sony during the PS1 and PS2 era but that time is long gone. The last system I bought from them was the psp which I sold after a few months after only having wipeout to play on it at the time. I really don't see any chance of Sony coming back but who knows. They might have some huge exclusive game that could turn everything around for them.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

These people are backpedaling for no reason. 250 is a fine price point. The issue arises when you factor in mandatory memory cards that are very pricey, and the fact that no developers want to touch the device, including Sony's own development studios.

And yet plenty of Sony's studios are touching the device including media molecule and guerrilla games, not to mention ubisoft. Why is it a necessity that their console developers work on the vita? Bend is a great studio.

Software isn't the platforms problem in the west

 

[omonimo]

Now THESE are really bizarre arguments! Wow!

1.) 100k does NOT make a system seller. Yeah, it moved "some" hardware, but when people use the term system seller, it usually means a piece of software that can make millions of people crave the hardware it appears on. This is NOT Uncharted: Golden Abyss.

2.) Those games you listed will do nothing for Vita in Japan. 2013 looks awful for the system, honestly, in all regions.

3.) 3DS sales boomed for a short while after the price drop, sure, but then they started to drop again. It took big franchises like Mario and Mario Kart to help stabilize the situation. Price is important, but content is more important.

A further drop? :/ You have big hope on nintendo policies, but those comment remind me to the ps3 in the past years, 'will see', 'at the next price drop' or 'will wait the new exclusive in coming'. So if you mean 3DS will follow the same path of ps3, I'm with you, of course will improve a bit compared now, but forget it the glorious DS past.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

Now THESE are really bizarre arguments! Wow!

1.) 100k does NOT make a system seller. Yeah, it moved "some" hardware, but when people use the term system seller, it usually means a piece of software that can make millions of people crave the hardware it appears on. This is NOT Uncharted: Golden Abyss.

The game moved hardware. It did its job. Of course it did not move millions. But even NSMB2 did not move millions of 3DS.

2.) Those games you listed will do nothing for Vita in Japan. 2013 looks awful for the system, honestly, in all regions.

Phantasy Star portable 2 will be big. Than you have that Gundum game, and some games that were announced at TGS. Plus God Eater 2 which will also be on the PSP, but it will most likely push Vita numbers as well. We don´t know how Soul Sacrifice will do.

3.) 3DS sales boomed for a short while after the price drop, sure, but then they started to drop again. It took big franchises like Mario and Mario Kart to help stabilize the situation. Price is important, but content is more important.

Price is the most important. Even after MK7 and Mario Land 3D the 3DS plunged to the low 100k (116k) in March or April. NSMB2 and 3DSXL did not set the world on fire. Actually they barely pushed the hardware in the US, comparatively to previous iteration of XL and NSMB game.

4.) Pokemon is more important than NSMB and Mario Kart. Those sell more overall, sure, but that's due to the long legs of those titles. Pokemon games, particularly new gen titles, have explosive openings that move lots of hardware.

No it´s not. MK and NSMB sold 20+ million. Pokemon sold half of that. So no.

 

[omonimo]

Nintendo knows software sells hardware whereas Sony seems to have forgotten that years ago.

Sony just doesn't have the pull to get any meaningful exclusive third part game and their first party output just isn't very exciting for someone looking for hardcore games.

I loved Sony during the PS1 and PS2 era but that time is long gone. The last system I bought from them was the psp which I sold after a few months after only having wipeout to play on it at the time. I really don't see any chance of Sony coming back but who knows. They might have some huge exclusive game that could turn everything around for them.

Nintendo & it's relationship with third parties is even worse of sony... I don't know to what do you talking about, imho.

 

[Metallix87]

And yet plenty of Sony's studios are touching the device including media molecule and guerrilla games, not to mention ubisoft. Why is it a necessity that their console developers work on the vita? Bend is a great studio.

Software isn't the platforms problem in the west

Media Molecule has a small team working on Tearaway, and couldn't even be bothered to work on LittleBigPlanet Vita.

Guerrilla Games is coming off a pretty big disappointment in Killzone 3. Being relegated to "Vita duty" is almost like punishment, at this point.

Sony Bend is such a great studio that they're not allowed to make games for consoles anymore, Sony's strongest area.

It's all an image problem. Sony doesn't feel their top tier developers are worth "wasting" on Vita content. So they send smaller teams, or devs who have recently disappointed, or devs who are clearly the B or C studios, to work on Vita content. Everyone knows this. It's common knowledge. Frankly, it's shocking that you're saying this isn't an issue.

Software is the main issue, in all regions. Sony needs to show they have faith in the device they've put out, and that means moneyhatting more big exclusives, putting their best developers to work on Vita content, and also keeping Nihilistic the hell away from the big franchises which they expect to move hardware.

 

[noobasuar]

Nintendo & it's relationship with third parties is even worse of sony... I don't know to what do you talking about, imho.

Well Nintendo's first party output is good enough to the point where it really doesn't matter what third parties want to do.

 

[noobie]

Sales do matter though

Did we really need a Resistance 3 or Killzone 3 that quickly or even Starhawk

Sony isn't a charity, they might make their money back via slow burn, but making droplet noises in a huge fucking ocean that is the video game industry doesn't help

They should use resources to have 2-3 main games that all studios help/work out
Then if titles sell boatloads, you subsidize pet projects for the studios

It's like Sony is held hostage by their own studios

Look @ TLG, I mean come the fuck on, even GT to a point

At least Santa Monica/Naughty Dog deliver in fucking spades

They should get the lions share, if they fuck up, other studios with-in their eco-system have a chance to shine over take

Create competition with-in or have synergy that studios talk to each other and give advice

Sony shows themselves off as a Melting Pot, while really they are like a salad bowl, each section offed and sometimes mixed together

Brother i dont think that putting Killzone team members in Santa Monica or Naughty Dog is going to add any value rather its going to destroy the harmony..
Each studio has its own short coming and its own pros.. so i think its the studio manager/director/GM responsibility to see how he can get the best out of them.

I think Killzone and Resistance were good games not awesome or great.. just got some weak points and but more importantly they were not advertised as they should have been.. You have to create the hype/buzz for your product to really shine..

 

[Metallix87]

The game moved hardware. It did its job. Of course it did not move millions. But even NSMB2 did not move millions of 3DS.

Phantasy Star portable 2 will be big. Than you have that Gundum game, and some games that were announced at TGS. Plus God Eater 2 which will also be on the PSP, but it will most likely push Vita numbers as well. We don´t know how Soul Sacrifice will do.

Price is the most important. Even after MK7 and Mario Land 3D the 3DS plunged to the low 100k (116k) in March or April. NSMB2 and 3DSXL did not set the world on fire. Actually they barely pushed the hardware in the US, comparatively to previous iteration of XL and NSMB game.

No it´s not. MK and NSMB sold 20+ million. Pokemon sold half of that. So no.

1.) NSMB2 suffered for multiple reasons, the most obvious of which was that it was developed by a C-team instead of the usual team. The media attacked the hell out of the game for looking like "more of the same". That was a game that suffered major image issues among gamers and the gaming media, and still it has done respectable numbers. What does it need right now? The Holidays. Guess what's coming up real soon?

2.) Phantasy Star Portable 2? No, correct yourself. This is Phantasy Star Online 2, a downgraded port of a PC title, and one that requires you to be online to play. That game is destined to disappoint on Vita, and I can't believe you're talking it up so much. Gundam game? Irrelevant. God Eater 2? It's on PSP, and thus will move very little Vita hardware. Soul Sacrifice is the real mystery, and hopefully it does really well and moves some serious hardware, because if it doesn't, it may be time to pack it up.

3.) Multiple reasons, including image and the fact that the release list has more or less dried up. Content is missing. Nintendo and third parties need to release more content in the West to alleviate a lot of the situation.

4,) Learn to read. Those titles sell more, yes, but because of longer legs. Pokemon has explosive openings, but lacks the long legs, namely because multiple Pokemon games end up being released on the same hardware. That cuts the legs of the previous games substantially.

 

[gofreak]

It seemed to be in a right enough place to do what was necessary to ensure PS3's relevance and market success despite a cacophony of initial setbacks. Something like what happened with PS3 could have sunk other companies, in terms of their motivation or corporate (parental) support of gaming endeavours, but if anything Sony doubled down. They did shake up SCE but the corporate commitment was unwavering. And Sony corp's management today is likely to feel even more favourably toward gaming initiatives with Kaz's ascension.

So assuming the market has not fundamentally shifted, I think the corporate context is there to ensure PS4 is a success in the market in at least as much as PS3 was - in so far as I believe Sony is as committed as ever to the market and to doing whatever is necessary to maintain that business.

(If we're talking about corporate context for profitability on the platform - well, there has been big shifts in SCE's cost base since PS3 launch, so I would think things are in a better position now in that regard than then)

 

[grimshawish]

Nintendo & it's relationship with third parties is even worse of sony... I don't know to what do you talking about, imho.

...
...
...
...
I can't even be arsed.

 

[omonimo]

Well Nintendo's first party output is good enough to the point where it really doesn't matter what third parties want to do.

It's not exactly true.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Sony really dropped the ball with their handling of the PS3.

They demonstrated that they learned nothing from that experience with the fumbled Vita.

I have no faith in them what so ever to spec, price, launch and support the PS4 as required.

I won't even consider buying it until at least 18 months after launch. There's no way I'll be "buying on potential".

Don't tell, show me that you know what you're doing this time Sony.

Some nice target renders sir?

I think final specs and a very tempting price would be a good start. The problem is can Sony afford a huge loss-leader model again? What if MS out-prices them on performance to cost?

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Media Molecule has a small team working on Tearaway, and couldn't even be bothered to work on LittleBigPlanet Vita.

Guerrilla Games is coming off a pretty big disappointment in Killzone 3. Being relegated to "Vita duty" is almost like punishment, at this point.

Sony Bend is such a great studio that they're not allowed to make games for consoles anymore, Sony's strongest area.

It's all an image problem. Sony doesn't feel their top tier developers are worth "wasting" on Vita content. So they send smaller teams, or devs who have recently disappointed, or devs who are clearly the B or C studios, to work on Vita content. Everyone knows this. It's common knowledge. Frankly, it's shocking that you're saying this isn't an issue.

Software is the main issue, in all regions. Sony needs to show they have faith in the device they've put out, and that means moneyhatting more big exclusives, putting their best developers to work on Vita content, and also keeping Nihilistic the hell away from the big franchises which they expect to move hardware.

This post is disgusting, you're disparaging many great studios because they're either working on vita (i.e., gg is so bad theyre now working on vita...ugh), have a small team working on vita (which you'd expect since it doesn't require as many resources), and these teams are b or c level efforts because they don't "get" to work on consoles. So much wrong in this post.

There's nothing b-team about bend or tarsier, both have made great entries to lbp and uncharted, and many consider lbp vita to be the best in the series.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

Doing better than vita in the west isn't a feat to crow about.

"Wait till Pokemon" sounds suspiciously similar to "wait for X" ps3 arguments.

3DS will do substantially worse than its predecessor, and that's despite good hardware and software. Again, the market has changed.

Well okay, how about we just say "better than PS3 in the west" then.

Hardware wise 3DS is at parity with DS (though yes, it's going to fall behind soon) and at parity with GBA (it can hold this one). Sofware wise though it's major "gamey" releases are generally matching or outperforming both it's predecessors (Super Mario, Mario Kart, Legend of Zelda, etc), while the "non-games" are falling behind (Nintendogs, Brain-Age, etc). "Substantially worse" isn't really the full picture, I mean even in Japan where 3DS is utterly dominating and greatly exceeding DS for marketshare, it's not going to match it for units. It really depends on what metrics you use.

 

[falconzss]

These people are backpedaling for no reason. 250 is a fine price point. The issue arises when you factor in mandatory memory cards that are very pricey, and the fact that no developers want to touch the device, including Sony's own development studios.

It's more like most people don't want to shell out more than 200 bucks max for a dedicated gaming handheld. Doesn't matter if the price is justified or not. The 3DS also struggled at the 200 price point.

 

[Metallix87]

This post is disgusting, you're disparaging many great studios because they're either working on vita (i.e., gg is so bad theyre now working on vita...ugh), have a small team working on vita (which you'd expect since it doesn't require as many resources), and these teams are b or c level efforts because they don't "get" to work on consoles. So much wrong in this post.

There's nothing b-team about bend or tarsier, both have made great entries to lbp and uncharted, and many consider lbp vita to be the best in the series.

No, I'm saying that Sony feels Vita is beneath their top tier developers. It's obvious. You call my post disgusting, I call it a dose of reality.

As far as Bend and Tarsier go, they are B-teams. Tarsier could likely even be considered a C-team. Their success with LBP is due to the fact that the Vita's touch controls make content creation a cinch, and remember, they were one of three C-teams working on the game.

 

[Dorfdad]

Well they have a new CEO. The Vita is old Sony. The PS4 will be new Sony.

Which was the new Sony when the PS3 launched etc.. Sony has dropped so many balls this gen

 

[staticneuron]

Vita is a perfect example of this - it is a platform that has no identity, no major strong suit to separate it from its competitors. It's a reflection of Sony themselves -Jack of all trades, master of none. The Move is another - a "me too" knee jerk reaction that lacked any discernible foundation besides what already existed. Even PSN is a reaction to the mega popular XBOX Live. Sony's once masterful relationships with third parties is now more attributed to their similarities with their competitors than it is their dominance of the marketplace.

The Vita is a powerful handheld that is mainly designed to play games but also can do other things. It's biggest selling points is the power and the buttons. How much more specific does it need to be? The fact that you have options to do more things really is confusing? Can the same be said of the iphone or the 3DS?

The tech and design about the move has been shown (on video) as far back as 2002. The PSN was simply a necessary step (they had services in place but spread to far, they needed to centralize offerings) and Sony's relationship with third parties is the same as it has always been. The third parties keep themselves in mind first so they only deal with who is popular at the time,

The real problem with Sony this gen, is stuff like you posted in the OP. Perception of the company added with FUD simply equates to a huge target on Sony's back so when regarding their games and products there is are illogical (and often negative) stances or opinions about them.

All Sony can do is refine how their company runs and continue on the path that they started out with.

No, I'm saying that Sony feels Vita is beneath their top tier developers. It's obvious. You call my post disgusting, I call it a dose of reality.

As far as Bend and Tarsier go, they are B-teams. Tarsier could likely even be considered a C-team. Their success with LBP is due to the fact that the Vita's touch controls make content creation a cinch, and remember, they were one of three C-teams working on the game.

Bend is a fantastic team and it shows in their work past and present.

From what I gather, when it comes to games and platforms to develop on, Sony rarely pushes their teams onto something. It is more like they let their established teams have a say on which direction they want to go in and they have constant conversations about their tech and designs. I hear their relationship with second (published but not owned by) and third party devs are a bit different but that is another topic entirely.

 

[Currygan]

The Vita is a powerful handheld that is mainly designed to play games but also can do other things. It's biggest selling points is the power and the buttons. How much more specific does it need to be? The fact that you have options to do more things really is confusing? Can the same be said of the iphone or the 3DS?

The tech and design about the move has been shown (on video) as far back as 2002. The PSN was simply a necessary step (they had services in place but spread to far, they needed to centralize offerings) and Sony's relationship with third parties is the same as it has always been. The third parties keep themselves in mind first so they only deal with who is popular at the time,

The real problem with Sony this gen, is stuff like you posted in the OP. Perception of the company added with FUD simply equates to a huge target on Sony's back so when regarding their games and products there is are illogical (and often negative) stances or opinions about them.

All Sony can do is refine how their company runs and continue on the path that they started out with.

power and buttons as selling points? Good luck with that

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

No, I'm saying that Sony feels Vita is beneath their top tier developers. It's obvious. You call my post disgusting, I call it a dose of reality.

As far as Bend and Tarsier go, they are B-teams. Tarsier could likely even be considered a C-team. Their success with LBP is due to the fact that the Vita's touch controls make content creation a cinch, and remember, they were one of three C-teams working on the game.

How about Sony feels certain developers are best suited towards certain platforms?

Naughty Dog makes cinematic games best suited to consoles.

Media Molecule makes games that align well with handhelds, which is why they're making tearaway - which you discredit because its made by a smaller team? So what?

If tarsier is a c team, then they just made an a game so I really dont give a rats ass about studio classifications.

 

[noobasuar]

It's not exactly true.

Well I'm just saying Nintendo doesn't need the same level of third party support since it's first party output is capable of selling a decent amount of hardware at least compared with Sony or Microsoft who don't have anywhere near as many impressive first party games.

Also with how high development costs are these days no third party games are going to be exclusive to a single platform anymore which bodes well for Nintendo who has an amazing first party line-up but not so much for Microsoft or Sony.

 

[Mxrz]

They've focused on games moreso than the other two. E3s have been a pretty good indication these last couple of years. As far as the PS4: Naughty Dog, SSM, etc. means it'll have games I want. For a lot of people, that's the most important bit. "We realized gamers want games" sounds silly, but having one of the big 3 acknowledge it in this day and age was nice.

In Kaz we trust and all that.

And once again a thread about Sony turns into a Nintendo/WiiU defense thingy. Geh.

 

[gofreak]

As an addendum to my last post, I also think Sony's 'corporate culture' (or whatever you want to call it) is showing signs of open thinking and flexibility that might be eluding its competitors, about how the rules of platform ownership might be changing. There seems to be a hierarchy in place that is allowing certain people to drive agendas without the kind of protectionism or infighting that you might expect sometimes in a company like this.

 

[staticneuron]

power and buttons as selling points? Good luck with that

Basically the same stuff as the PSP and that ended up selling 70 mill. The truth is the design of the hardware itself is going to be the separating line between more powerful phones/tablets/mini's and handheld consoles. All of these devices are getting to the point where thier features and abilities overlap so they are going to survive by what point they emphasis the most. For devices like the 3DS and the Vita it will be games and it is made obvious by the design of the systems.

 

[Robot Pants]

Sony really dropped the ball with their handling of the PS3.

They demonstrated that they learned nothing from that experience with the fumbled Vita.

I have no faith in them what so ever to spec, price, launch and support the PS4 as required.

I won't even consider buying it until at least 18 months after launch. There's no way I'll be "buying on potential".

Don't tell, show me that you know what you're doing this time Sony.

Words are cheap.

This dude gets it.

 

[flattie]

Nintendo knows software sells hardware whereas Sony seems to have forgotten that years ago.

Sony just doesn't have the pull to get any meaningful exclusive third part game and their first party output just isn't very exciting for someone looking for hardcore games.

I loved Sony during the PS1 and PS2 era but that time is long gone. The last system I bought from them was the psp which I sold after a few months after only having wipeout to play on it at the time. I really don't see any chance of Sony coming back but who knows. They might have some huge exclusive game that could turn everything around for them.

Speak for yourself. For my needs, Sony has plenty coming in the next year that will keep me happy until the next gen arrives.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

1.) NSMB2 suffered for multiple reasons, the most obvious of which was that it was developed by a C-team instead of the usual team. The media attacked the hell out of the game for looking like "more of the same". That was a game that suffered major image issues among gamers and the gaming media, and still it has done respectable numbers. What does it need right now? The Holidays. Guess what's coming up real soon?

Wait for ..... the holidays.

2.) Phantasy Star Portable 2? No, correct yourself. This is Phantasy Star Online 2, a downgraded port of a PC title, and one that requires you to be online to play. That game is destined to disappoint on Vita, and I can't believe you're talking it up so much. Gundam game? Irrelevant. God Eater 2? It's on PSP, and thus will move very little Vita hardware. Soul Sacrifice is the real mystery, and hopefully it does really well and moves some serious hardware, because if it doesn't, it may be time to pack it up.

Ok we will see.

3.) Multiple reasons, including image and the fact that the release list has more or less dried up. Content is missing. Nintendo and third parties need to release more content in the West to alleviate a lot of the situation.

Oh yeah, western gamers will flock towards code princess and the game will sell hardware by the millions. Handheld content is not that appealing to westerners besides big franchises. There´s barely if any western third party support for the 3DS.

4,) Learn to read. Those titles sell more, yes, but because of longer legs. Pokemon has explosive openings, but lacks the long legs, namely because multiple Pokemon games end up being released on the same hardware. That cuts the legs of the previous games substantially.

Ok, so Pokemon is more important than MK7, NSMB2 and 3DSXL. We will see anyway.

Media Molecule has a small team working on Tearaway, and couldn't even be bothered to work on LittleBigPlanet Vita.

Yeah, fuck new original IP. Diversifying the library with new games is also enticing to the consumers.

Guerrilla Games is coming off a pretty big disappointment in Killzone 3. Being relegated to "Vita duty" is almost like punishment, at this point.

Lol WTFisthisshit? GG has 3 teams 1 of them is working on Killzone Vita. It´s so funny when some people here say, oh look Sony does not put its big studios on the Vita and when Sony does, the studio is relegated to the Vita. What a joke.

Sony Bend is such a great studio that they're not allowed to make games for consoles anymore, Sony's strongest area.

Tell me more. You really seem in the know. Bend made amazing PSP and Vita games.

It's all an image problem. Sony doesn't feel their top tier developers are worth "wasting" on Vita content. So they send smaller teams, or devs who have recently disappointed, or devs who are clearly the B or C studios, to work on Vita content. Everyone knows this. It's common knowledge. Frankly, it's shocking that you're saying this isn't an issue.

GG, Liverpool (RIP) SCEJ, Zipper (RIP), MM. All of these made/are making a game for the Vita. GG, and MM are prime Sony studios. You sound so schizophrenic. First you say that GG was relegated and now you say that Sony puts B and C to develop their games. What is it? Make up your mind.

 

[meta4]

MS has two decent IP's. Thats it. None of their IP's sell well and most are mediocre IMO. I dont think Sony has anything to worry about. For a system that was overpriced and had virtually no functional online system it still outsold 360 since its release and continues to. Next gen they do not have much to worry about if they build on what they learnt this gen with online infrastructure.