Just what is Sony doing with Vita? If they've given-up, they should just kill it.
- Thread starter ZombiePlatypus
- Start date
Chuck Norris
Banned
I thought it had an Ass Creed bundle?
I think we will see a price cut soon. Sony will try to maximise their margins from the Holiday, then kick in the price cuts next year. Its only been on the market for less than a year. We know Nintendo slashed prices quick, but they are bleeding for it
The funny thing about handhelds is that all of them seem to be a disaster in the first 12 months. DS was, 3DS was, PSP was. And all of them seem to turn it around with the right piece of software, the right price cut or the right hardware revision
I wouldn't write of Vita just yet. But Sony should be putting in a more a a active effort, new colours, advertisements etc etc
Iacobellis
Junior Member
PSP was a disaster in 2005? Sony was the king then, every kid I knew wanted a PSP.
Chuck Norris
Banned
I suppose, but it fell off a cliff and then we had a long time of "PSP is dead" before it eventually turned around
lunchwithyuzo
Banned
Nintendo is the developer; they're centralized and the R&D groups are their core. There's no fragmented dev teams that are given a pre-engineered piece hardware to make games on, the hardware comes up from the same people as everything else. Nintendo promotes hardware and software in concert, it's a different sort of culture.
Now, with external owned and contracted teams, Nintendo has a much different approach and definitely not the delicate touch SCE seems to handle their teams with. But then they also tend to "strong arm out" stuff like Xenoblade, Metroid Prime or DKC, so maybe it's not necessairily a route one should be too quick to pass over?
Chuck Norris
Banned
I believe SCE Japan works in a similar fashion, more like R&D studios. Except they don't have output of Nintendo. Which they have no real excuse for. SCE Japan should be one of the Premier developers of the region and should be pumping out hits
Jawmuncher
Member
It'll be fine.
Also LOL at the THEY SHOULD JUST END IT
Yeah because that's how these things work.
Also LOL at the THEY SHOULD JUST END IT
Yeah because that's how these things work.
Sure, why not?
Less money wasted on trying to keep the Vita relevant means more funding available for PS4 projects, something that Sony will desperately need against Microsoft's strong momentum going into next gen.
Iacobellis
Junior Member
That was because Sony did not put any effort into it. Focus is put on PS3 in 2006 and 2007, all PSP gets is weak firmware updates, a slim model, and some "okay" first party games.
To Far Away Times
Member
Yeah, I think this is the real underlying issue.
The two biggest Vita games this holiday, Assassin's Creed and CoD, are both lesser versions of games available elsewhere.
Nintendo has their best teams make mainline entries in their biggest series on their portable systems. It makes a difference in how people perceive the software on the system and I believe it makes a big difference in overall software quality as well.
Agent Unknown
Member
I'm a die hard PSP fan, own a phat for my CFW and a blue 2000 for the Dpad (which is bliss with my Konami shmup collections) and own a ton of UMDs. But I still have little desire to get a Vita, too many missteps with storage and media, little to no BC/trickling out of PSX support and they're just letting it languish, it's disgraceful. I'd love to get one for LBP, Wipeout and Super Stardust but that's not going to be enough.
I say kill it or go tablet/iPhone with it. I just do not think with the exception of Nintendo, you cannot sell a 30 to 40 dollar game for handhelds. There is just so many alternatives. And it is already an inferior form of gameplay on a small screen in short bursts. They could make a psp tablet maybe
, but the audience for vita has become so small. I mean you can get a great Rayman game for 5 dollars. People are not really looking for an uncharted experience on the go. What the beta does, is in the realm of tablets and phones.
, but the audience for vita has become so small. I mean you can get a great Rayman game for 5 dollars. People are not really looking for an uncharted experience on the go. What the beta does, is in the realm of tablets and phones.
Chuck Norris
Banned
Sometimes it is the little things. If they had released "LittleBigPlanet 3" instead of "LittleBigPlanet Vita"' (exact same game,mjust different name) suddenly that game recieves a LOT more relevance and attention
Agent X
Member
First: read post #814.
Second: This was the point I (and staticneuron, and others) made yesterday in your thread about Sony's "corporate culture". We often see armchair analysts suggesting that Sony yank some of their developers off of perfectly good PS3 projects in order to prop up the Vita.
Sony has a multitude of development studios under their umbrella. Some of them are working on PS3 games. Some are working on Vita games. A few of them might even be on both. However, we don't need to have every one of those studios making games concurrently for both systems. The notion that every Sony studio needs to be represented on Vita is nothing more than a ridiculous strawman argument.
Using the frequently cited Naughty Dog example again, if Sony were to force them to directly make Vita games "just for the sake of it", then this would mean having to redirect manpower and other resources away from their existing PS3 projects. As a result, PS3 games already in development like The Last of Us and/or Uncharted 3 would suffer. They'd either be:
1. Delayed
2. Downscaled radically from the original vision (due to lack of resources)
3. Cancelled altogether
As far as I see it, Sony made the right call with regard to the development of Uncharted: Golden Abyss. They had the bulk of the work done by Bend Studio, yet still had some level of involvement by Naughty Dog to keep the game consistent. The end result was an excellent product, just as Uncharted 3 was, and just as I am confident The Last of Us will be also.
To Far Away Times
Member
I love those collections. The one with almost all the Gradius games and the one with Salamander and Xexex. So good.
scytheavatar
Member
It's not a disaster but it didn't take long for the PSP to be completely overshadowed by the DS. And since then the PSP hardware sold decently but the sales numbers of the software has been a complete joke. Based on that it would have been unwise for any 3rd party developer to spend much time and effort on the Vita unless Sony was giving them big incentives for doing that.
I don't think it's sunk in for some people just how bad, historically, the Vita's hardware sales actually are. That, and a combination of people forgetting how well the PSP did out of the gate.
To Far Away Times
Member
Yeah. The Vita worldwide sales are tracking below launch alined Japanese-only Dreamcast sales. There really is little precedent for this type of launch. Sony isn't above dropping a console if they determine that they cannot make money from it in the long term.
I think you mean the launch-aligned Japanese Vita sales have fallen behind the Dreamcast's Japanese sales numbers. Though it'd be interesting to know what the DC was doing worldwide, just for curiosities sake.
Agent Unknown
Member
The Salamander collection is amazing just for having the only home port of Xexex. I also own the guide for Gradius Portable, every game mapped with concept art and creator interview. Some pics of the guide with my Vic Viper gashapon:
Hmmm, Gradius thread?
I'm not talking about Sony, though. I'm talking about NeoGAF. There seems to be a lot of people on this forum that view handheld game developers as less than console game developers. I see this implied over and over again on this forum, but it mostly seems to hover around PSP or Vita developed titles. When God of War showed up on the PSP, from Ready at Dawn, people just assumed it would be a half-assed attempt to cash in on the GoW series. Both games turned out to be jewels in the entire God of War saga, with Ghost of Sparta being one of the best in the series, and quite possibly better than it's more powerful counterpart, God of War 3.
Assassin's Creed 3: Liberation was developed by Ubisoft: Sofia, and a lot of people were convinced it would also be a half-assed port of AC3, and when they learned it was an original title, set in the AC3 universe, they still throw out the "We need more original content on the Vita you can't play anywhere else!" You can't play AC3: Liberation anywhere else. The quality of the game is rather high, especially given that it is on a brand new portable device, in its first year, with developers getting their hands around the hardware. AC3 Lib isn't as simplified as AC1, but it's not as complicated as AC2 or AC2: Brotherhood. It may be somewhere in between. Most of the key components of an AC game is there, the look, tone, music, animations, it's all there. The visuals are mighty impressive, even if there are aliasing problems (but come on, guys, this is a handheld gaming device, not a $2,000 PC, it's going to have aliasing).
I'm not a CoD fan, so I can't speak on that franchise on the Vita, but I'm sure the average consumer won't balk at there being a CoD game they can play on the go that looks like it plays like a CoD game, and not forced to completely change it's game design for portables (ie, become a top down, isometric shooter, or a generic side-scroller with pixelated visuals).
I think that a lot of handheld game developers develop for handhelds, not because they are incapable of developing console games, but because the may simply enjoy creating games on a platform that has some clear limitations, and maybe bottle-necks to overcome and work through. Some programmers love those kinds of challenges.
The 360 was a breeze to develop for. That has its advantages. The PS3 is a bitch to develop for, but that also has its rewards.
I think the elitism against handheld developers needs to stop. They aren't coding for "weaker" hardware because they are "weaker" developers, although a lot of new guys and gals certainly cut their teeth on smaller projects. The thing that makes the Vita so intriguing, is that the games don't have to be as small as they used to be, or altered in significant ways due to lack of inputs, or a second analog stick. We can have legitimate console experiences on our handheld devices now, and that's exciting to many people. We can have a Fallout: New Vegas, or an Elder Scrolls, or a Bioshock, or a Mass Effect, on a portable. That kind of thing pumps me up. The Vita isn't a PSP. It's not even a PSP2. It's a whole nother animal that is capable of far more engrossing and higher quality experiences than the PSP was able to deliver with it's horsepower, form, and functional limitations.
We can also have original titles like Gravity Rush, Unit 13, Ragnarok Odyssey, Sound Shapes, etc. Yes, games like Sound Shapes and Motorstorm can be played on the PS3, but that's just an another option. Maybe you guys haven't tried it,but starting a game on your console, and then syncing it to your Vita, and playing it on the go, is actually pretty damn cool. Cross Play is making it so you aren't forced to buy multiple copies of one game, which is a great initiative.
As someone who has been following the Vita very closely since it's initial rumors and reveals, I know a lot about, at the least, what is coming to the platform that makes me excited for it. What Sony does to market that to people that haven't followed the system is up to them.
To Far Away Times
Member
Indeed.
Evolution_1ne
Banned
lmao this is what this site calls being fucking objective? what a mess of a thread
metalslimer
Member
Yep, the comparisons to PSP, 3DS, or PS3 make no sense whatsoever.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
I think the point myself and others are trying to get across is that Sony has no sense of urgency with Vita. No one's asking them to make their developers cancel PS3 projects and jump on Vita, however it hasn't even gotten to that. Sony hasn't put teams on Vita. It is a platform that is doing poorly in its infancy. It needs a steady stream of titles in order to maintain solvency, just like PS3 and PSP did before it. When questioned about their output for Vita, Sony's chief devs basically say "We don't have time for it". How is this supposed to instill people who bought the hardware with confidence?
Even if Sony at very least gave a wink wink "They don't have anything brewing right now, but perhaps in future" I don't think this would be as big of a problem. However when quizzed about it, answer is flat out "nope; nothing in development and there won't be - we don't do Vita." That immediately says Sony doesn't care about the hardware, so why should I pay 250+ bucks for this thing?
billy beane
Banned
I'd hardly call Uncharted and LittleBigPlanet mass appeal games though. When I say mass appeal, I'm talking about things like Mario, Pokemon, Call of Duty, Halo, etc.
I was actually. at one point considering a Vita purchase when Sound Shapes was to come out.
Liberation is a game people barely know exist. It won't sell for shit.
I don't think the number of people who want home experiences on their portable system is enough though. I don't even mean they don't have enough to be a huge success, I mean there aren't enough people out there to make it a success at all.
Casuals don't care about unique games, but they do want simple games. That's why there are so many Angry Bird clones.
EDIT: Also, to add on to my Liberation reply, it doesn't just matter that a successful franchise is on a system. People need to know that it exists for your system. Yes there is a Call of Duty game coming to Vita, but does anybody know it? Of course Vita owners do, but you have them, it doesn't matter if they know. You need to tell people why they need to own your shit, and that's where Sony fails.
To Far Away Times
Member
These are developers that have *ahem* "inherited" these franchises, though. People generally look down on outsourcing. Look at the initial reaction to Treyarch getting involved with Call of Duty on consoles. Not very positive.
It also comes down to developer status. EAD Tokyo loses nothing by making mainline portable Mario games. It does a lot for their game's reputation though.
Sony's popular studios could learn from their example. For example, a Gran Turismo 6 game given a full effort by Polyphony Digital could go a long way...
RukusProvider
Banned
If the PS4 is truly coming out in 2013, then I question sonys commitment to the vita similar to how the PSP was treated with the PS3 launch.
The home console is their flagship product and it'll get such treatment. The biggest competition for the vita will be getting attention internally.
The home console is their flagship product and it'll get such treatment. The biggest competition for the vita will be getting attention internally.
Agent Unknown
Member
THIS is why Nintendo portable games are so good. They don't treat them like second tier products, they put their A teams on them. Knowing that the same people who made SMG made SM3DL and that Hideki Konno and Retro teamed up to make MK 7 added to the value of those games greatly, both quality wise and from a consumer perspective.
RoboGeorgeForeman
Banned
If it could be released it a reasonable time frame then sure, but Gran Turismo Portable and GT5 both took 5 years to be released (from announcement to release date). However, they do need games of this calibur if they want to sell Vitas.
To Far Away Times
Member
I'm pretty sure they just ported what they could of GT4 and did minimal work on it while making GT5. The game shipped with only one single player mode and that was just a simple stage select mode. It was the laziest single player I think I've ever seen in a modern racing game.
If the whole studio were dedicated to making a Vita exclusive GT6 I imagine they could have it ready in a few years. We tend to think of Polyphony not delivering games on time, but GT1-5 came out between the time Duke Nukem Forever was announced and finally released.
They don't even necessarily need to do that, because Nintendo used more junior staff from the NSMB team for NSMB2.
Why there isn't a similar style of team inside Naughty Dog working on a Vita title, I'll never know.
Agent X
Member
Great point, and yet another fantastic example of Sony making the right call when having Ready at Dawn develop the PSP God of War games.
What's funny is that these arguments rage on video game forums like this one. However, in the "real world", nobody seems to complain that the games were developed primarily by Ready at Dawn and not directly by Santa Monica Studio.
The only time this should ever be a concern is if we get a noticeably inferior product as a result.
Here we go again...
Some of these development studios have staffers that already have years of experience under their belt, working on games, game engines, and development tools to enable certain types of games to be made on the platform(s) of their choice. They are very comfortable, they are very knowledgeable, and they are very proficient. Changing over to Vita would mean having their programmers take time to learn the ins and outs of new hardware, and work on new game engines and internal development tools. They'd also have to decide whether to make the types of games they're known for on PS3 (which some people here continually complain "aren't suited to portable play" and "I'd rather play on a home console"), or switch up their strategy and make some other type of game in a genre that they aren't experienced with.
Why do you feel these development studios should be forced by the parent company to work against their wishes (leading to internal struggles and personal resentment), and work outside of their area of great expertise and proficiency?
As I said earlier, Sony has a multitude of development studios. Let these developers do what they do best, on the platform(s) where they are confident they can do it best.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Doesn't really bother me what they do. (Or don't do, as it were). Seems to be bothering Vita though.
Agent Unknown
Member
Good point, and NSMB2's design choices definitely benefited from bringing in fresher, younger people.
I still stick by my idea.
Sony should have released a phone SKU of the vita with a subsidized price through carriers. Having a similar model as the PSP go, with slide out controls. Running android 4.1 in the background for calls over the main vita os.
That way they could have built up a decent sized user base at a good price for the consumers. Sold them cheap android games over the play store, and work on getting their core games developed.
Sony should have released a phone SKU of the vita with a subsidized price through carriers. Having a similar model as the PSP go, with slide out controls. Running android 4.1 in the background for calls over the main vita os.
That way they could have built up a decent sized user base at a good price for the consumers. Sold them cheap android games over the play store, and work on getting their core games developed.
Guerilla Games, Media Molecule, Japan Studios, Sandiego Studios, Santa Monica, Superbot Ent. are all really good studios, are all making games wich we know about wich is coming for PSV. :-/ XDev is also making games in cooperation with a few studios.
In addition Sony has hired Sanzaru, Bluepoint, Marvelous, Insomniac and several other working on upcoming first party properties overseen by first party.
Naughty Dog, Polyphony, London and Sucker Punch are the only first party studios wich dosn't work on announced PSV-titles wich I know about at the moment.
It's pretty obvious that Sony put alot of devs at work at the platform, so if you wanna spend 250$ that's one publisher wich will get some of the cash you spend afterwards.
Two things seem to be being used as evidence of doom
1) low sales. Fine, can't disagree with numbers. But sales can pick up over time, no reason to abandon a machine so quickly for that
2) lack of games down the line. Really? This is where GAF disappoints me. They don't get spoon-fed information to their satisfaction and jump to negative conclusions. How many other platforms do we see release plans past spring next year? Other than a couple of Ps3 games, I don't see much. Because publishers are focusing on Christmas. If there is nothing in next years E3 for vita, then I'll ring the doom bell myself, but it just feels unwarranted right now.
1) low sales. Fine, can't disagree with numbers. But sales can pick up over time, no reason to abandon a machine so quickly for that
2) lack of games down the line. Really? This is where GAF disappoints me. They don't get spoon-fed information to their satisfaction and jump to negative conclusions. How many other platforms do we see release plans past spring next year? Other than a couple of Ps3 games, I don't see much. Because publishers are focusing on Christmas. If there is nothing in next years E3 for vita, then I'll ring the doom bell myself, but it just feels unwarranted right now.
Iacobellis
Junior Member
We are entering the eighth generation of consoles soon, developers are putting their main resources into these new machines. Vita, on the other hand...
The Vita has only been out a year and for my money has a really strong lineup. I don't buy into the myth that lack of games are the problem.
Marketing has clearly been non-existant. That seems to be changing in the run up to Christmas (here in the UK), as I've seen plenty of TV adverts for the Vita pushing its Assassins Creed/CoD variants. I hope this continues all the way up to Christmas and will be curious to see how it performs once on the other side.
For me, the biggest problem with Vita is that it costs a lot to buy the machine, to buy the games and to buy the memory. None of that is poor value (memory, notwithstanding), but when taken in the context of a world offering powerful and well supported mobile phones and tablets then its value diminishes.
Sony need to be more creative with pricing and more rigourous at pushing this device to consumers. Maybe offer some kind of subscription model where you pay into a PS+ account for a year and recieve a heavily subsidised/free console. Maybe bundle them in a PS4 premium pack, with even better cross functionality. I don't know. But what they're offering now isn't doing it and they need to find a way to make it work or the games will completely dry up and I don't think it will take long at all to see that happen.
Getting Japan onboard is also essential, seeing that while they have been percieved to have dropped behind western devs on home consoles, their industry in general understand far better than any western dev how to make portable games. If it continues to limp along in Japan, it will die everywhere.
Marketing has clearly been non-existant. That seems to be changing in the run up to Christmas (here in the UK), as I've seen plenty of TV adverts for the Vita pushing its Assassins Creed/CoD variants. I hope this continues all the way up to Christmas and will be curious to see how it performs once on the other side.
For me, the biggest problem with Vita is that it costs a lot to buy the machine, to buy the games and to buy the memory. None of that is poor value (memory, notwithstanding), but when taken in the context of a world offering powerful and well supported mobile phones and tablets then its value diminishes.
Sony need to be more creative with pricing and more rigourous at pushing this device to consumers. Maybe offer some kind of subscription model where you pay into a PS+ account for a year and recieve a heavily subsidised/free console. Maybe bundle them in a PS4 premium pack, with even better cross functionality. I don't know. But what they're offering now isn't doing it and they need to find a way to make it work or the games will completely dry up and I don't think it will take long at all to see that happen.
Getting Japan onboard is also essential, seeing that while they have been percieved to have dropped behind western devs on home consoles, their industry in general understand far better than any western dev how to make portable games. If it continues to limp along in Japan, it will die everywhere.
What I never understand is the people who say that a console/handheld is their favorite platform of all time, it gets most of their gaming time, it's the very best, and they don't care how well it sells.
How is that possible? If your very favorite platform ever isn't doing well, doesn't that decrease the software support? Isn't it bad for something you love to be less viable for frequent or long term use? Shouldn't you want Sony to take more of an active hand in promoting such a great system?
I love my Vita, but I'm also really unhappy with its horrible sales and what that might mean about future software support for the system. It's actually possible for both feelings to coexist! In fact, it's logical.
The Wii U isn't out yet and we know quite a bit about its 2013 lineup. Because it's a new platform.
When the 3DS was announced, we knew about Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario, and Kid Icarus well in advance. Because it was a new platform. We can also look to the lineup in Japan and see quite a few possibilities for localization down the line. The same is (unfortunately) not true for the Vita. Given the length of time it takes to localize, the fact that Japan is also fairly sparse on software announcements for Vita -- when most western developers have largely abandoned handheld gaming altogether -- is worrying. I wish that it weren't the case, but unfortunately it is.
How is that possible? If your very favorite platform ever isn't doing well, doesn't that decrease the software support? Isn't it bad for something you love to be less viable for frequent or long term use? Shouldn't you want Sony to take more of an active hand in promoting such a great system?
I love my Vita, but I'm also really unhappy with its horrible sales and what that might mean about future software support for the system. It's actually possible for both feelings to coexist! In fact, it's logical.
The Wii U isn't out yet and we know quite a bit about its 2013 lineup. Because it's a new platform.
When the 3DS was announced, we knew about Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario, and Kid Icarus well in advance. Because it was a new platform. We can also look to the lineup in Japan and see quite a few possibilities for localization down the line. The same is (unfortunately) not true for the Vita. Given the length of time it takes to localize, the fact that Japan is also fairly sparse on software announcements for Vita -- when most western developers have largely abandoned handheld gaming altogether -- is worrying. I wish that it weren't the case, but unfortunately it is.
j0hnny_385
Member
I think the Vita is a stunning piece of hardware with great software lineup but I don't think that I'll ever buy it and it's pretty simple why:
1. I don't commute and for me that's a huge factor in owning a handheld.
2. Even though games look amazing on Vita and there are some great "AAA" (I hate that word) games on it, I prefer to play those on my PC or X360/PS3 (comfy couch+big TV factor). Why would I play my games on Vita after 8-10hr workday staring at CAD screens and project calculations? I don't think my eyes could handle it...
So overall, it's a great piece of hardware but I personally don't need it with PC/X360/PS3 providing loads of fun for me (+ the fact that I have a hefty backlog). Vita is offering a phenomenal gaming experience, but it's just not something that I need or that I actually want to play on a handheld. Nothing more, nothing less.
I do however wish them the best and hope they can turn things around for Vita.
1. I don't commute and for me that's a huge factor in owning a handheld.
2. Even though games look amazing on Vita and there are some great "AAA" (I hate that word) games on it, I prefer to play those on my PC or X360/PS3 (comfy couch+big TV factor). Why would I play my games on Vita after 8-10hr workday staring at CAD screens and project calculations? I don't think my eyes could handle it...
So overall, it's a great piece of hardware but I personally don't need it with PC/X360/PS3 providing loads of fun for me (+ the fact that I have a hefty backlog). Vita is offering a phenomenal gaming experience, but it's just not something that I need or that I actually want to play on a handheld. Nothing more, nothing less.
I do however wish them the best and hope they can turn things around for Vita.
Canis lupus
Member
Vita first year>>>PSP first year in terms of games.
DiscoJer
Member
I would say it's the other way around.
You had a better launch, with many of the same franchises, but with a real NFS game (not a Gameloft knock off), a real Ridge Racer, a better loot RPG, and a number of JRPGs
You also had Grand Theft Auto, Midnight Club 3, another NFS (the original Most Wanted), and a decent FPS, Star Wars: Battlefront II in the first year.
I don't think people remember how popular that last franchise was, but it was then, what Borderlands is now. It was so popular on PSP it got two sequels.
I think people here are overlooking how not having a big name, quality FPS is hurting the Vita. It's such a big genre, and to have it not really represented on what is supposed to be a core gaming device is shocking.
You also had the promise of games from Square-Enix as well as Gran Turismo PSP, which drove sales. Of course, that support actually materializing would be years off, but still, I think a lot of people bought PSPs for it.
Because it sends a message that they're easily willing to give up, which will completely drain the confidence of both third parties and consumers. Not to mention they may still have some titles yet to be released for the platform. It won't put Sony in a good light at all and could damage their prospects for PS4.
The repercussions of just pulling the plug really could be huge. Hence they have to be very careful how they move forward.
Outside of a small group on GAF (and everywhere) there is a lack of perception about sales be them in the past or current.
Canis lupus
Member
The current NFS is Most Wanted, and CoD Declassified will be for the Vita what Battlefront II for the PSP.
Similar threads
- Poll