Could Sony have turned Vita into a success, or was it doomed from the start?

DunDunDunpachi

DunDunDunpachi

Banned
Curious to hear opinions. The standard assumption is that handheld gaming got pinched by smartphones and there wasn't enough room for a "premium" handheld like the Vita. Software support was tepid so that contributed to the flop. Remote play was an idea ahead of its time but I don't think many people knew it existed. Should Sony have pumped more AAA software into it, or would that not have made any difference? Was a "premium" handheld in late 2011 a misread of the market?

Vita is one of the sharpest declines in gaming history, so it's fascinating to examine it from a business perspective. From 75 million units down to 15 million units.
 
It was a good handheld, but Sony just didn't have the interest in keeping it going.

Maybe ifwas built like the Switch it could have found an audience.
 
In Japan, there are used Vitas and software all over the place. My hunch is that most of it was considered 'too Japanese' for the international maket.
 
Incredible system. But they're up against the DS and mobile gaming really coming into their own at the time.

Also, couldn't get out of their own way with that stupid, insanely expensive proprietary memory.
 
The Vita is easily my favorite handheld system I've ever owned. It's really sad Sony let it die. Dun mentioned a few of the reasons but another one was the required proprietary, insanely over priced memory cards as well.
 
The upfront cost of it being a handheld was a huge issue. Once you factored in memory and a game or two you were looking at $400 maybe more. That's just too high for that market.

The memory was a real issue. Not really acceptable at the time imo.

Also the 3g model didn't need to exist.
 
Yeah I forgot about the memory cards. Early on I plugged my nose and imported a 64GB card so it wasn't much of a concern for me but... yeah.
 
Last edited:
Maybe with some more support from Sony and using standard SD cards it could have done better.

I still have my doubts it could have turned into a massive success though. Even back then mobile was already dominating gaming on the go, and Sony exclusives just don't have the same selling Power as Nintendo ones
 
It should have had a full implementation of the DualShock's button layout. The rear touchpad and the touchscreen were unnecessary and poor substitutes for the lack of R2, L2, R3, L3.
 
Looking past all the ports and JRPGs, it lacked mainstream killer apps. Uncharted was a good early showcase Sony didn't capitalize on.
You can't dismiss the bizarre failure to continue PSP's most popular franchises. Not one of the top ten selling PSP games received an original Vita sequel!
 
I think it was doomed. I just don't think there's that big of a market for a dedicated handheld focused mostly on adult gamers--at least outside of Japan. A Hybrid like the Switch? Sure as people who don't have much use for a portable can play mostly docked to the TV.

I also think it's just a bad for the types of games Sony is known for. Something like Uncharted Golden Abyss just felt inferior playing on a tiny screen vs. playing the PS3 games on a big HDTV. I think a lot felt the same and thus a lot of Sony's PS3 base just wasn't interested in buying a portable and playing worse looking entries in their favorite franchises.

Nintendo with their cartoony graphics doesn't have that feeling for me. Hell, a lot of their stuff I prefer on a smaller screen and think it doesn't look that great blown up on a big screen (though that's more them opting for low power than the handheld/console thing). Plus Nintendo has long had the kid/family market in the handheld space on lock down. They're the safe option for parents who want a dedicated portable to keep their kid occupied in the car, or in the house with out occupying a TV. The smartphone/tablet market certainly ate into that, but the 3DS still sold well and it's still a decent part of the Switch/Switch Lite's market.

All that said, I did enjoy my Vita as it was great for things like Indie games with pixel graphics that I think look terrible blown up on a big TV, long RPGs like P4G as I rarely finish those if I have to be tied to my TV but can chip away at them here and there over a few months on a handheld. The Switch has taken over the Vita's place as where I play retro style indies, some RPGs etc., along with being my usual Nintendo console for their big games.
 
Breakage said:
It should have had a full implementation of the DualShock's button layout. The rear touchpad and the touchscreen were unnecessary and poor substitutes for the lack of R2, L2, R3, L3.
Click to expand...

Yeah I hated the back touch screen. It mostly just got in the way. I never really used the front touch screen but I don't feel like it hurt the system except maybe they could have just excluded it to reduce the selling price. I would love to see a third attempt with a dualshock type layout, a microLED screen, and more software support. I don't think phone games will ever push handhelds out of the market because people still want a dedicated gaming machine with physical buttons and a phone is never going to offer that unless it's a phone designed around gaming.
 
If Nintendo could with the 3ds and switch Sony could have made a successful portable gaming device as well.

I think that their biggest issue is that most adult/teen gamers now get their multi-media needs filled on the phone/tablet, another gaming only device is harder to justify, so the library has to stand out quite a lot... The switch sells pretty well in portable form, in 2020, so there is still a viable market, this is their failure to not have found a way to address this need with their product.
 
It sucks. I still buy off the PSN store for mine. There are good games on there. You can get MGS, FFX, Ninja Gaiden, Jak Collection, God of War, Secret of Mana, Persona 4, and many more. It could have had a Catherine port in English, but it wasn't translated or brought over.

I play PS1, PSP, and Vita games on mine. I also switch over to my PSTV to play on TV. Why did it fail?

There's so many good games to the PlayStation brand, but look at what happened to the PS Classic. Tekken 3 gets a release on there and no one bats an eye. Do people care that they can play Final Fantasy or Parasite Eve on a handheld? I think it wasn't enough to keep the Vita alive. It also wasn't enough to keep the PS Classic alive either. All those things are wonderful to have.

The Vita games were a hit and miss. There were a handful that looked appealing, but there weren't too many that stood out. Silent Hill Book of Memories didn't do well and neither did a lot of games. Army Corpse from Hell didn't review well. No one paid attention when Secret of Mana or Final Fantasy X got released on there. It could appeal to a hardcore audience, but I don't think it had the numbers to make it a global success. The PSTV is an amazing idea. Play your PSP and Vita games with a DualShock 3, but do you care enough to actually buy it just for that?
 
Last edited:
TheContact said:
Yeah I hated the back touch screen. It mostly just got in the way. I never really used the front touch screen but I don't feel like it hurt the system except maybe they could have just excluded it to reduce the selling price. I would love to see a third attempt with a dualshock type layout, a microLED screen, and more software support. I don't think phone games will ever push handhelds out of the market because people still want a dedicated gaming machine with physical buttons and a phone is never going to offer that unless it's a phone designed around gaming.
Click to expand...
I think Sony over-desgined the Vita when they should have kept it simple and straight forward. It would have been cheaper and more ergonomically friendly. If they attempt a third handheld, they could probably even dump a couple of rumble motors in there too.
 
Last edited:
Nintendo has a knack for making games that showcase their hardware. Sony has a spottier record when it comes to this talent.

Tearaway was the perfect Nintendo-esque guided tour of the Vita's features, but it fizzled. A shame because it's one of my favorite platformers. What the system needed most was a solid lineup of games demonstrating the touch + gyro plus some games that showed off the hardware power in more conventional ways, and some games ended up doing both (like Killzone: Mercenary).
 
A great piece of hardware that no one (casuals, the market that is the driving force of gaming) asked for at the time. Total focus on enthusiasts. It was like a portable gaming Ferrari when the majority of people preferred to game with accessible Honda Civics.
 
Northeastmonk said:
There's so many good games to the PlayStation brand, but look at what happened to the PS Classic. Tekken 3 gets a release on there and no one bats an eye.
Click to expand...
No one wanted it, because that was just bad product. Almost half of games were in slowed down to 50fps PAL versions and it forced 60fps output which created stutter in that games. In addition to that it was to slow to properly emulate some of that games.
 
The thing is Nintendo is so dominant in the portable market that for Sony to really compete they'd have put a home console's amount of effort into making content. Like have as many studios working on Vita games as they do working on PS3/PS4. Just over a year after they launched the Vita, they launched the PS4 so Sony's focus was on making games for that. Sony didn't have the manpower to makes games for 2 products which both had such high production value.

If Sony want to go into the portable market again, they actually need a decent set of studios who will be fully dedicated to making portable games or have off-shot teams in already established studios ready. LBP wasn't made by Media Molecule, Uncharted: Golden Abyss wasn't made by Naughty Dog, Resistance: Burning Skies wasn't made by Insomniac... Only Killzone Mercenaries was actually made by the original devs (or at least one of their teams) and the other Sony first party standout was Gravity Rush. Everything was outsourced to third party devs because all of Sony's main studios were already busy.
 
kuncol02 said:
No one wanted it, because that was just bad product. Almost half of games were in slowed down to 50fps PAL versions and it forced 60fps output which created stutter in that games. In addition to that it was to slow to properly emulate some of that games.
Click to expand...

That is true, but if you made Mario run on a Etch A Sketch-people would buy it.
 
Northeastmonk said:
That is true, but if you made Mario run on a Etch A Sketch-people would buy it.
Click to expand...
Zelda was running on CDi and no one was fooled. And if that PSClassic would work as well as SNES mini and had its price then it would be big hit. Now i'm not sure if it's worth to buy even to rip games from it.
 
They could, i bought that at launch, loved it, still have it. As people have said, insane memory card prices and lack of marketing, most "normal" people didnt even know about it, some even thought it was an addon to the playstation console. (Like the wii u situation)

Also i wanted to see the bioshock game they where working on for it, shame that never came out
 
It wouldn't have been a DS killer but it had all the potential to be a succes.

Reasons it failed:
1) most importantly: Sony dropped it like a brick. This is the main reason for its downfall.
2) overpriced first party memory cards
3) competitive market: DS and (at the time) increasing smartphone market
4) It was too good. I know that sounds strange but hear me out. The graphics were on next gen levels meaning development required more time and finances which was a risky thing for developers because of the weak sales caused by the abovementioned points. This led to a platform with few games at PS3/360 price-ranges which held gamers back to invest in the handheld. This again led to developers not wanting to take the risk and make games for a weak selling platform which led then again to fewer buyers. Eventually the poor handheld fell into a downward spiral leading to its inevitable demise.

This could all have been avoided if Sony gave it the support it deserved. Well it's a good learning experience about trusting Sony with new projects.
 
Last edited:
I still intend to buy a Vita eventually.

If only my PSP wasnt so damn entertaining still. CFW life is the best life.
 
Replace rear TouchPad with 1:1 dualshock layout.

Cheaper memory

Continued AA software development...

Day and date ports of certain PS3 titles beyond indies.
 
50 and 50.
Vita was supported very bad by Sony. But it's also true mobile games played a huge role in its failure.
 
I've owned two of those L2/R2 Vita grips, one for my (now broken) OG Vita and one for my current Vita Slim. They work really well especially for playing old PS1 titles, since you can remap stuff.
 
alabtrosMyster said:
If Nintendo could with the 3ds and switch Sony could have made a successful portable gaming device as well.
Click to expand...

3DS struggled a lot in its time as well. Price cuts and the right software eventually helped the platform amass a fairly sizeable install base (near about the same as PSP even, which should be a qualified success even if it only did half the numbers of DS) but it never had the level of support it needed to be more than a Mario/Pokemon machine. Unlike DS/PSP, you didn't see most of the major 3rd Parties even try a version of their brands on 3DS, and even Capcom (who had IMO the best engine for 3DS games) was hot in the beginning but gave up early except for the successful Monster Hunter games. (It wouldn't have saved Vita, but it would have been interesting if MH had stayed on PlayStation from PSP to Vita instead of jumping to 3DS.) Sales figures are not as prevalent these days as they were back before digital and before NPD clammed up, but the estimates and reported numbers seem to show why most publishers (even Japanese companies) didn't shop that market.

If you liked JRPGs and certain other types of software, it had good things to fit your interests, and for sure if you are a Nintendo fan you needed 3DS since its console companion Wii U did not work out, but it's a little hard to find evidence that the general audience really took to the platform as much more than a satiation of desire for core Mario/Pokemon/Zelda/MH/FE hits. (Admittedly, I'm having difficulty hiding my bias; I own a 3DS and maybe 10 games but never took to it fully. But I also remember relatively little chatter about 3DS in its day, like I remember we had to post "Oh yeah, 3DS, you should play this game" threads a lot, and scrolling through the 3DS software library doesn't really scream at me that I remember wrong or that there's tons of hits I'm not crediting. I'm open to being thrashed with a counter assessment if opinions are different on 3DS.) When the Switch arrived, you could almost feel the collective sigh of relief to having a robust Nintendo platform again, and the 3DS faded out almost instantaneously.
 
Last edited:
DunDunDunpachi said:
Curious to hear opinions. The standard assumption is that handheld gaming got pinched by smartphones and there wasn't enough room for a "premium" handheld like the Vita. Software support was tepid so that contributed to the flop. Remote play was an idea ahead of its time but I don't think many people knew it existed. Should Sony have pumped more AAA software into it, or would that not have made any difference? Was a "premium" handheld in late 2011 a misread of the market?

Vita is one of the sharpest declines in gaming history, so it's fascinating to examine it from a business perspective. From 75 million units down to 15 million units.
Click to expand...
Definitely doomed. Vita's schtick was the continuation of PSP and GBA philosophy of making big consoles games playable on a portable system. It made sense during GBA days, which allowed a revival of 16 bit games that weren't made anymore. However with PSP and Vita you had systems that, instead of selling a unique gaming experience, just offered severely gimped versions of home console games. Budgets weren't too high for PSP games so they were ultimately made (but i'd rather play most of them on a TV). Vita games though required a lot more investment and it wouldn't have made sense even if the system sold well. Most people would rather play Uncharted Golden Abyss on a TV. It would have sold better that way too.

Unlike Vita, DS and 3DS offered unique gaming experience and these games are unportable to home systems.
 
In terms of hardware we probably can't improve much, this console is pure perfection in terms of size and build quality (OLED).

The problem is the games output, it needed to have more handheld experiences. You can't make a handheld, throw home console games at it, and call it a day.
People don't buy handhelds to play inferior home console game ports on the go, especially as you don't quite get the right ergonomics for extended dual stick/dual trigger gameplay.

Sony did not understand this. They were actually better on PSP with games like Patapon or LocoRoco. But on Vita ? They just threw "PS3" games at it. It did not work, they gave up immediately. Disrespectful of the buyers. Even if your console does not sell well, you can still release a few smaller games. The Wii U was not selling that much, Nintendo still made a few games for it.

They did try to imitate the success of Monster Hunter with Soul Sacrifice and Freedom Whatever.
 
Last edited:
Andodalf said:
The Vita was perfect and had some solid support, the market just bailed. A shame, legit goat tier handheld
Click to expand...

The things that kept Vita from being perfect were that it didn't have physical L2/R2 buttons and the price of the memory cards.
I really wish that Vita wouldn't have the back touch and just have the L2/R2.

Yes I have a trigger grip with L2 and R2 buttons, but it sucks compared to using a Dualshock.
 
Eimran said:
It wouldn't have been a DS killer but it had all the potential to be a succes.

Reasons it failed:
1) most importantly: Sony dropped it like a brick. This is the main reason for its downfall.
2) overpriced first party memory cards
3) competitive market: DS and (at the time) increasing smartphone market
4) It was too good. I know that sounds strange but hear me out. The graphics were on next gen levels meaning development required more time and finances which was a risky thing for developers because of the weak sales caused by the abovementioned points. This led to a platform with few games at PS3/360 price-ranges which held gamers back to invest in the handheld. This again led to developers not wanting to take the risk and make games for a weak selling platform which led then again to fewer buyers. Eventually the poor handheld fell into a downward spiral leading to its inevitable demise.

This could all have been avoided if Sony gave it the support it deserved. Well it's a good learning experience about trusting Sony with new projects.
Click to expand...

Came here to post this. Games were just too expensive to make for the Vita. Some budgets matched those of console games.

The cost-per return value for developing on the system just wasn't there. I think this is the biggest reason it failed. Developers and Sony themselves knew this so they didn't really support it.
 
Going up against the 3DS and Sony pulling the rug from under it as well as Western devs not realizing it wasn't a prototype Switch fucking killed it.

It's okay baby, aside from the drift I still love you. You've given me plenty of quality experiences since January 2015. ❤
 
Doomed, with smartphones gaming becoming big less and less people wanted to carry a handheld. If anyone did it was the 3DS. Maybe if they launched with a new monster hunter in Japan it could've done alright and lasted longer. Man the PSP was soo good easily one of the best handheld systems of all time. I like it more than even the ps3/4.
 
Its one of the best pieces of gaming hardware ever created.

Odds were against it; the market just wasnt there and all that, but they could have done a lot more, and it could have sold significantly better.
 
Sony absolutely could have turned it into a success. They should have leaned hard into ports from the GCN/PS2/Xbox generation, and harder into indie gaming. Handheld games need cheaper prices and cheaper games.

If they had released an updated model that accepted SD cards instead of their proprietary bullshit alone, the system would have had much more success. Many, many times I thought about buying the console, but was dissuaded by the ridiculous memory prices.
 
PS Vita could've been a hit had Sony taken a few key steps.

1.) No Proprietary Memory Cards - This was unnecessary, and showed that Sony learned nothing from UMD and Memory Stick. Micro SD would've been a better alternative.

2.) If you had to use them, then don't price them way above standard - $20 for 4GB is laughable. These Cards really should've been $5-20 MAX.

3.) Market the damn thing - Even at launch, the Vita had barely any advertising. They should've ran a substantial ad campaign that demonstrated the console's unique capabilities, not put out 2 commercials and that's it.

4.) Get better third party games - Banking your system's future on a Crappy CoD spin-off instead of some decent exclusives or ports is laughable. Try to get better deals with third parties, and make sure to get the right games the PS Vita needed.

5.) Invest in more first party games - I get that Naughty Dog and the like aren't interested in developing for underpowered handhelds. But You should've found more developers who would support the Vita using PlayStation IP, and get some of your lower tier developers to make more games for it. Games like Gravity Rush and Tearaway should've been way more common than they ended up being.

6.) Don't compete with smartphones - Instead focus on what makes the Vita unique compared to smartphone gaming. Switch has shown that both types of systems can co-exist, so Vita could've done the same.

This is all what the Vita needed to have a better chance in the market.

Eimran said:
4) It was too good. I know that sounds strange but hear me out. The graphics were on next gen levels meaning development required more time and finances which was a risky thing for developers because of the weak sales caused by the abovementioned points. This led to a platform with few games at PS3/360 price-ranges which held gamers back to invest in the handheld. This again led to developers not wanting to take the risk and make games for a weak selling platform which led then again to fewer buyers. Eventually the poor handheld fell into a downward spiral leading to its inevitable demise.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't really buy that. Vita was much weaker than the PS3 and 360, and the games that were expensive to make were simply developers trying to bite off more than they could chew. IMO, the Vita simply needed more games built from the ground up for it. Ports of console games are fine, but not when the system doesn't have any exclusives to help drive sales and make it worth it. This is yet another thing the Switch got right over the Vita. It had a strong lineup of First party games and exclusives right out of the gate, thus driving up software and hardware sales making publishers confident in porting games to it.
 
Last edited:
Kill the touchpad and give it an L2, R2. Also kill the proprietary memory card and it would have survived. I play it more than I do my switch. Amazing hand held.
 
They screwed up by not having 2 shoulder buttons. The really awful wifi chip in it was also a problem, as it wasn't strong enough to do Remote Play and then they heavily advertised the feature anyway.

But the shoulder buttons were the real issue. They were selling a PS3 experience in your hands without the ability to properly play any PS3 experiences simply because of the controls.
 
Should have had SD Cards, better robust software to not be hacked and actually have their best teams on the system for experimental titles.

Still...it is still going strong and my library of games ranges from Launch Day titles to a game coming out in a months time. I have enjoyed the ride.
 
The Vita was a beautiful bit of kit but Sony didn't have the games to support it.

Their first party output tends to require graphical bells and whistles to wow, which is why they shine on home console. Nintendo, in contrast, do not need that graphical fidelity, so their games can take off on handheld.

That said, the price of the Vita was worth it for P4 alone.
 
Doomed. No on wanted it, it had great first parties, Call of Duty. The target market preferred the console experience after getting their fill with PSP.
 
I do think it's growth was stunted from the start due to the high price point, proprietary memory, and even the name. They should've just called it the PSP 2. Following the Vita's poor launch, Sony redirected all their attention to the PS4 and VR and never looked back.

The Vita was so ahead of it's time and the technology still impresses to this day. People forget that it has a touchscreen, front and back cameras, rear touchpad, bluetooth headset support, the old models have OLED screens and some have 3g support. Sure some features are somewhat gimmicky, but not even the Switch has native support for bluetooth headphones. My hacked Vita came out in 2011 and still gets more love than my Switch.

I'm a big Sony guy, but the way they gave up on the Vita and their lack of commitment to BC sets a bad precedent. Not sure why they don't seem to appreciate their own legacy and rich catalog of games. It's unlikely they'll ever reenter the handheld space either and it sucks.
 
I doubt it, not in its actual form. And that is coming from someone who uses her Vita all the time still.

All the aforementioned reasons, especially the memory cards.

But people forget the PSP software sales were terrible in its last few years of life. It was going to be an uphill battle no matter what.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Should the new PlayStation Portable have 'back touch' or has Vita killed any chance of Sony trying that again?
20
430
diffusionx replied
Resistance 4 Was Pitched By Insomniac, But Sony Turned It Down
2 3 4 5
202
10K
Audiophile replied
The Game Business: It was the biggest console launch of all time, but was Nintendo Switch 2 a success for third-parties?
Business Analysis Sales-Age  2 3
123
1K
Miyazaki’s Slave replied
Laura Fryer: Was Avowed a success?
NSFW  2 3 4
171
13K
Kvally replied
[Gamesradar] The First Berserker: Khazan missed sales targets, but Nexon says it was still a success because it will popularize Dungeon & Fighter
News 
10
332
Arsic replied
Top Bottom