Support NeoGAF

[DragonSworne]

I don't understand this how this is an acceptable quote. "Also, some people in Japan may not yet be aware of PS Vita and it has to be experienced."

Really?? That is a failure in marketing, it shouldn't be used as some valid excuse for poor sales.

 

[John Harker]

Well, the Vita is doing slightly better than I was expecting. Take that as you well.

 

[charlequin]

The only difference can be how good the games turn out to be. But sure, i wouldnt mind to see games from i.e Naughty Dog and Sony Santa Monica on Vita

This is exactly the problem that exists here, though. Any team at Sony whose history stands out and whose games attract an unusual amount of positive attention will never make a Vita game. We already saw this principle applied on PSP and we'll see it repeated now: ND and SSM will be seen as too valuable to waste their time on Vita; instead we'll get a flow of games from teams who might be perfectly competent in their own right, but whose work doesn't inspire the same type of devotion and therefore doesn't have quite as much pull on the consumer.

That said, Sony doesn't really have any teams whose games attract an unusual amount of positive attention in Japan at this point anyway, so.

 

[Father_Brain]

So, is Yoshida:

1.) Lying.
2.) Counting ports like MGS collection and FFX as major franchises.
3.) Referring to actual, notable unannounced games from Japanese publishers.

I'd say mostly #2, with a dash of #3 - he's probably referring mainly to announced multiplatform titles like MGS, FF, and the next KojiPro project, along with unannounced multiplatform titles such as Square Enix's Unity-powered PS3/Vita project. I'll believe that Vita is getting any significant exclusive Japanese support when I see it, after the complete absence of such announcements last year.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

Sure, but i ment as they deliberately cut down on the budgets. As in "here you have 1 million dollar, make the best of it".

Doesnt the game feel quite different when it is a 3rd person shooter instead? Like Killzone Liberation for PSP, it feels like a very different game than Killzone 1-3.

By the way, Resistance Retribution does support a PS3 controller, so you can use a 2nd analog stick You need Resistance 2 and a PS3 to be able to do this though.

The Sony First Party handhelds games are developed differently, by different teams, because they're on a different system. This is just my interpretation, but that disparity between console and handheld versions is almost perceived as a failure because they weren't able to nail the experience exactly.

And I'm continuously baffled to watch Sony pretend that the PSP and now the Vita don't have appeal once you hook it up to a TV. I considered buying a PSP Go for that purpose. While some of the games are trying to be console-lite, there's a pretty decent number of games on the PSP I would love to play on a TV, such as Crisis Core or Persona 3 Portable. I shouldn't have to buy a PS3 and a game to get that working.

I understand what you mean. When Sony says that it is like Uncharted, i'm pretty sure that they are referring to that it is the same experience. I havnt tried Uncharted Vita yet (i've been busy with other games), but from what i have read, many have said that it gives the same Uncharted feeling/experience that the console games give.

This is why I say that the Vita will be more successful at the experience equivalence. The Vita is closer to PS3 than the PSP was to PS2. In some cases it might bring over an entirely identical experience made by a different team, at least until the PS4 is released. The problem then becomes, well, what is the Vita offering? B-team copycats of the PS3 heavy-hitters? Which means that Sony will be under pressure to actually get their A-teams to make something for the system, much like Nintendo did, and that won't happen anytime soon.

It would be the same with i.e Mario Kart, to say that Mario Kart 7 is like Mario Kart Wii, only that it is portable (thinking about the gameplay stuff then, not that the games are identical). So i dont think that there is much difference between Nintendo and Sony in this case. The only difference can be how good the games turn out to be. But sure, i wouldnt mind to see games from i.e Naughty Dog and Sony Santa Monica on Vita

The difference between Nintendo and Sony in this specific instance has lessened with the Vita, yes. But there's still a divide there. Uncharted: Golden Abyss still isn't seen as Uncharted 4, whereas everyone was quick to mention earlier in the thread that Mario Kart 7 is without a doubt the next mainline release. Of course this conversation doesn't address whether or not it matters to the market. I would argue it does. But once we get closer to Sony's experience equivalence peak, I think Vita might gather some better mindshare, assuming that it has other types of games as support.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

Mario and Mario Kart are mainline releases. Hell, Mario Kart 3DS is called Mario Kart 7.

On the other hand, most of Sony's handheld first party efforts are done by second rate studios, that didn't originally develop the IPs they work on.

And when the original dev works on it (say, GTPSP) the product arrives ultra late and incomplete.

The only real exceptions Sony side to this I think are Wipeout (which has been "downgraded" to digital status anyway) and Hot Shots (which is outsourced).

 

[FoneBone]

We're not seeing a lot of evidence that the Vita can handle even current gen multiplatform games, so to expect it in the next generation is delusional.

Fighting games aside, that whole supposed PS3/360/Vita ecosystem doesn't exactly seem to be materializing. Maybe a little in Japan, with Kojima's Fox Engine and that Square PS3/Vita project.

 

[muu]

Fighting games aside, that whole supposed PS3/360/Vita ecosystem doesn't exactly seem to be materializing. Maybe a little in Japan, with Kojima's Fox Engine and that Square PS3/Vita project.

You'd think there would be much more in the states, what with UE3 support for Vita and all.

 

[Father_Brain]

You'd think there would be much more in the states, what with UE3 support for Vita and all.

That would require Western publishers having confidence in Vita as a platform, and Western developers wanting to port games to a system that's (a) a handheld and (b) significantly less powerful than PS3/360, so...

 

[dacuk]

I could see Vita start selling by the boatloads in Japan if they get FFX early + remakes of either FFVI or VII. Plus Monster Hunter, Dragon Quest, Pro Evolution Football, a one piece mussou game,... All of those could be pretty far away.

There is an insane amount of wishful thinking on this post.

 

[Ignis Fatuus]

There is an insane amount of wishful thinking on this post.

No kidding.

"Monster Hunter, Final Fantasy 7, the next Dragon Quest...I've solved the Vita's problems! We can all go home."

 

[Apenheul]

EDIT: wrong thread.

 

[Dalthien]

That said, it's not Sony's call on anything but first party/second party titles.

If Sony has any involvement in the games (moneyhats, license discounts, publishing incentives, co-marketing arrangements, loaning of mascots, etc.), then yeah - they absolutely have a say in announcing the 3rd-party projects if they feel it would help boost interest in the platform.

 

[Chris1964]

Well, the Vita is doing slightly better than I was expecting. Take that as you well.

Vita does exactly what was expected to do this period.

 

[frankie_baby]

If Sony has any involvement in the games (moneyhats, license discounts, publishing incentives, co-marketing arrangements, loaning of mascots, etc.), then yeah - they absolutely have a say in announcing the 3rd-party projects if they feel it would help boost interest in the platform.

so then its fair to assume that there are no games with moneyhats, licence discounts, co-marketing arrangements or loaning of mascots (what mascots?) being developed for vita right now

 

[Opus Angelorum]

Vita does exactly what was expected to do this period.

So when will/should it pick up, if this ever decreasing sales data was genuinely expected?

 

[InsaneZero]

So when will/should it pick up, if this ever decreasing sales data was genuinely expected?

The only real opportunities, judging with what we know now, is when the Gundam game comes out or the release of P4G. Mind you, these are still long shots, with the latter having more possible pull.

In short, unless there is a drastic revamp in schedule for the upcoming months, the Vita's not going anywhere for a while.

 

[Dalthien]

so then its fair to assume that there are no games with moneyhats, licence discounts, co-marketing arrangements or loaning of mascots (what mascots?) being developed for vita right now

Well, companies do try to space out their announcements so that there is a steady stream of news and momentum for a platform throughout the year. And they hold stuff back for reveals at big shows like E3 or TGS.

But there is no strategic value to waiting or holding onto announcements when your platform is about to fall below 10k per week less than 3 months after launch. And really, Sony has never been the least bit shy about announcing stuff early.

 

[frankie_baby]

In short, unless there is a drastic revamp in schedule for the upcoming months, the Vita's not going anywhere for a while.

except down further

 

[frankie_baby]

Well, companies do try to space out their announcements so that there is a steady stream of news and momentum for a platform throughout the year. And they hold stuff back for reveals at big shows like E3 or TGS.

But there is no strategic value to waiting or holding onto announcements when your platform is about to fall below 10k per week less than 3 months after launch. And really, Sony has never been the least bit shy about announcing stuff early.

if they had something worth announcing there is no way they wouldnt have announced it

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

The notion that Sony has absolutely no leverage in announcing 3rd party games for their platform is pretty amusing. If the games were there to announce, they would have been already. Just like they were for 3DS on day one.

 

[guek]

I can't fathom sony's current plan right now. The only logical explanation I can think of is that they're waiting to announce a handful of key titles at some sort of event later this year. It'd still be a bizarre strategy though since it really does look like they have no set plan at all from the perspective of an outside consumer looking in.

It's very hard to believe Sony thought the vita would be a resounding success with its current lineup. At least with the 3DS, it was understandable how hype and anticipation led Nintendo to believe $250 would be an acceptable price.

 

[muu]

Well, companies do try to space out their announcements so that there is a steady stream of news and momentum for a platform throughout the year. And they hold stuff back for reveals at big shows like E3 or TGS.

But there is no strategic value to waiting or holding onto announcements when your platform is about to fall below 10k per week less than 3 months after launch. And really, Sony has never been the least bit shy about announcing stuff early.

No doubt. We know that Call of Duty, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed is coming -- but we've either seen next to nothing about the game (CoD, AC), or they're still at an early planning stage (Bioshock). In terms of Japan FFX's logo-only announcement made quite an impression as far as how much they've worked, and other than that we mostly got bullet pointed template titles to work off. They must have something coming up the pipeline for E3, but it'll take a special megaton or three to take the attention off all the HD franchises, WiiU re-reveal and anything that's coming up for the 3DS.

 

[test_account]

This is exactly the problem that exists here, though. Any team at Sony whose history stands out and whose games attract an unusual amount of positive attention will never make a Vita game. We already saw this principle applied on PSP and we'll see it repeated now: ND and SSM will be seen as too valuable to waste their time on Vita; instead we'll get a flow of games from teams who might be perfectly competent in their own right, but whose work doesn't inspire the same type of devotion and therefore doesn't have quite as much pull on the consumer.

That said, Sony doesn't really have any teams whose games attract an unusual amount of positive attention in Japan at this point anyway, so.

It could be, i guess it depends on how serious Sony want to be with the Vita. The PS4 might be "around the corner" (~1 year away) too, so people need to work on that as well, which might leave less time for Vita. But only time will tell True about what you say about Sony and Japan.

The Sony First Party handhelds games are developed differently, by different teams, because they're on a different system. This is just my interpretation, but that disparity between console and handheld versions is almost perceived as a failure because they weren't able to nail the experience exactly.

And I'm continuously baffled to watch Sony pretend that the PSP and now the Vita don't have appeal once you hook it up to a TV. I considered buying a PSP Go for that purpose. While some of the games are trying to be console-lite, there's a pretty decent number of games on the PSP I would love to play on a TV, such as Crisis Core or Persona 3 Portable. I shouldn't have to buy a PS3 and a game to get that working.

I think it depends on from game to game. Like the two God of War games on PSP were not developed by Sony themself, but yet i found those two games to be excellent, especially Ghost of Sparta. It felt very much like a God of War game to me, just the same experience i got from the console games

I have no idea why Sony dont have TV out on Vita. It might be a cost decition, but i dont know. The PSP-3004 also supports TV-out by the way, in case you dont want to get a PSP Go due to being download only for games.

This is why I say that the Vita will be more successful at the experience equivalence. The Vita is closer to PS3 than the PSP was to PS2. In some cases it might bring over an entirely identical experience made by a different team, at least until the PS4 is released. The problem then becomes, well, what is the Vita offering? B-team copycats of the PS3 heavy-hitters? Which means that Sony will be under pressure to actually get their A-teams to make something for the system, much like Nintendo did, and that won't happen anytime soon.

Yep, the hardware also play a role in what is possible indeed. A FPS wont work well on the PSP for example due to hardware and control limitation. I think this is why i.e Killzone was a completely different game on the PSP.

I've tried the two first chapters Uncharted: Golden Abyss earlier today and the game seems very good far. I dont think that the A-teams is necessarily needed to make great games, but of course, it wouldnt hurt to have the A-teams to work on Vita games as well

The difference between Nintendo and Sony in this specific instance has lessened with the Vita, yes. But there's still a divide there. Uncharted: Golden Abyss still isn't seen as Uncharted 4, whereas everyone was quick to mention earlier in the thread that Mario Kart 7 is without a doubt the next mainline release. Of course this conversation doesn't address whether or not it matters to the market. I would argue it does. But once we get closer to Sony's experience equivalence peak, I think Vita might gather some better mindshare, assuming that it has other types of games as support.

True what you say about Uncharted, but i think that is mostly because it is more of a spinoff. The game's story isnt a contunie after Uncharted 3. But lets take Super Mario 3D Land instead as an example, do people see this as Galaxy 3?

I dont know how the general consumer think about these things. I would assume that if the game looks interesting/fun is the absolute most important thing.

 

[Aostia]

get6-2 only said that Tales sellthrough is bad, nothing has been said about HM shipment.

My mistake, sorry!

 

[duckroll]

There really isn't such a thing as a "mainline" release for most of Nintendo's franchises, since the same team makes the game regardless of whether or not it's on a portable console. Mario Kart by the Mario Kart team. Mario 3D Land by the current 3D Mario team.

I dunno, the most recent Mario Kart was by Retro Studios.

I think the more important point is that it doesn't matter, because when we talk about "mainline" and "spin off" they are terms which have more meaning if the series has a smaller core following driven by story. When it comes to huge mainstream stuff, most people don't even know or care who makes the games, as long as it is the game they want to play.

 

[Father_Brain]

The notion that Sony has absolutely no leverage in announcing 3rd party games for their platform is pretty amusing. If the games were there to announce, they would have been already. Just like they were for 3DS on day one.

That's the easiest conclusion to draw right now, yeah. But even for someone like me who's been extremely skeptical about Vita's place in the market since before it was officially announced, it's still hard to believe that Sony could have fucked up quite that badly.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

True what you say about Uncharted, but i think that is mostly because it is more of a spinoff. The game's story isnt a contunie after Uncharted 3. But lets take Super Mario 3D Land instead as an example, do people see this as Galaxy 3?

I think Mario and Uncharted are seen in a similar way: an adaption of a generally console experiences onto new hardware. There's difference to that much, at the very least. The difference in Mario versus Uncharted is Uncharted's relevance to the other self-contained stories in the series, in addition to the pedigree of Mario's dev team. These are very tiny, though, in comparison to the other major differences in brand and sales.

I think the more important point is that it doesn't matter, because when we talk about "mainline" and "spin off" they are terms which have more meaning if the series has a smaller core following driven by story. When it comes to huge mainstream stuff, most people don't even know or care who makes the games, as long as it is the game they want to play.

I think it does matter to some degree in the context of system sellers. I'm not trying to paint every potential Vita buyer as someone who goes combing through GAF threads to find out who's developing what, but I do think that consumers become more discerning when analyzing a game with a $250 barrier attached, even fanbases of huge mainstream stuff.

 

[nordique]

I dunno, the most recent Mario Kart was by Retro Studios.

I think the more important point is that it doesn't matter, because when we talk about "mainline" and "spin off" they are terms which have more meaning if the series has a smaller core following driven by story. When it comes to huge mainstream stuff, most people don't even know or care who makes the games, as long as it is the game they want to play.

In addition to this, I would add that although Mario 3D Land or Mario Kart 7 may not be the "main console" type entries, they are still full fledged independent games. Mario Kart 7 has a ton of content, in my opinion it is the definitive Mario Kart game.

Even if we were too look back at the last gen of handhelds, PSP had "spin off" titles yes but very few of them were "fully fledged" games on their own. I would count the God of War games as such perhaps, but other games like Resistance or Syphon Filter, seemed more like "2nd tier" titles and by extension not "fully fledged", whereas on the other we had games like Mario & Luigi 3 or Pokemon Black that were felt of higher quality simply because it didn't feel like a "B team" or some team that specialized in quick ports, was assigned to the task.

I think you've brought up a similar train of thought in the past.


Mind you I have yet to try Uncharted on the Vita (though I do own it) so I can't compare, but that seems like it would feel more like the God of War's on PSP


Perhaps one area Nintendo also has an "up" on Sony, regarding software, is that they have been able to successfully make compelling original portable adventures. Again, I will point to Mario & Luigi 3 as an example, and many of their 3DS games are following suit (i.e. Kid Icarus).

 

[duckroll]

I think it does matter to some degree in the context of system sellers. I'm not trying to paint every potential Vita buyer as someone who goes combing through GAF threads to find out who's developing what, but I do think that consumers become more discerning when analyzing a game with a $250 barrier attached, even fanbases of huge mainstream stuff.

I think you misunderstand. I'm not saying that no one cares, but rather that when certain titles are expansively mainstream, it doesn't matter. The number of people who actually let something like that dictate their purchase are insignificant in the overall analysis.

This definitely applies to Mario. The majority of consumers who are interested in a Mario game are not interested in who develops it or whether it is a "mainline" or "spin off" or "whatever", but rather their practical concerns are: "how does it play" and "do I think I will enjoy this". It doesn't matter what platform the game is on, but rather what sort of game it is.

 

[Road]

On hold....

 

[duckroll]

No Grand Battle Fullblast?

 

[Road]

No Grand Battle Fullblast?

You think it's going to sell anything? I'm going by COMGNET and it doesn't even have the measly 14pt enough to chart right now.

 

[duckroll]

You think it's going to sell anything? I'm going by COMGNET and it doesn't even have the measly 14pt enough to chart right now.

Even if it sells like 5k it -might- chart with numbers right? I dunno, it's just that a single release prediction is kinda... boring. Lol. Not even multiplatform!

 

[Road]

Even if it sells like 5k it -might- chart with numbers right? I dunno, it's just that a single release prediction is kinda... boring. Lol. Not even multiplatform!

But in this case we'll run in the situation where where that prediction is so small next to One Piece that it'll basically be responsible for the percentage rankings, pointed out by donny.

After that exchange, I came to the conclusion that there are two types of rankings and that problem only affects the percentage method, so, even if you're screwed by this game that sold 5k, it doesn't mean you'll do as badly on the unit rankings.

But I don't want to force my opinion on the game. If you and others think it's better to go despite that issue, then we can add GBF, Mario and Sonic and Doreamon too.

 

[InsaneZero]

I dunno, the most recent Mario Kart was by Retro Studios.

Everybody knows that Retro Studios is treated as code monkeys at Nintendo and needs to work on a HD Zelda that'll sell in Japan to redeem itself.

 

[Nekki]

Woot, i just realized the rank i got on the last predictions, pretty nice for being my first time

Theathrythm had a low shipment for the demand it has, hopefully word of mouth helps it keep sales when the next shipment arrives!

I wonder if NLP will be as frontoaded as LP+. It probably will be, but it could be helped being the first iteration in new hardware.

Also now that Sony has a handheld with a touchscreen, is it feasible to think that there could be a love plus version for the Vita in the future??? Or is the game not touch-focused (i know how this sounds) at all?

 

[duckroll]

Everybody knows that Retro Studios is treated as code monkeys at Nintendo and needs to work on a HD Zelda that'll sell in Japan to redeem itself.

??????

 

[duckroll]

But in this case we'll run in the situation where where that prediction is so small next to One Piece that it'll basically be responsible for the percentage rankings, pointed out by donny.

After that exchange, I came to the conclusion that there are two types of rankings and that problem only affects the percentage method, so, even if your screwed by this game that sold 5k, it doesn't mean you'll do as badly on the unit rankings.

But I don't want to force my opinion on the game. If you and others think it's better to go despite that issue, then we can add GBF, Mario and Sonic and Doreamon too.

That's a good point, but in that case I sort of wonder if we really need to have a prediction for this week. This is just my personal opinion, but it looks to me like the coming weeks are more interesting, and we should plan for those instead, rather than forcing a prediction league for a week where there is only one worthwhile game, and pretty much everyone knows it will do around a certain number.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

 

[TheNatural]

How much is the price of Vita in Japan exchanged to US currency? Just curious.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

I dunno, the most recent Mario Kart was by Retro Studios.

Retro redesigned and integrated the classic courses but they didn't make the game. EAD1 (ie: the Mario Kart team) did.

 

[duckroll]

Retro redesigned and integrated the classic courses but they didn't make the game. EAD1 (ie: the Mario Kart team) did.

They certainly did "make" the game along with EAD1. Their contribution and manpower is significant enough.

 

[Road]

That's a good point, but in that case I sort of wonder if we really need to have a prediction for this week. This is just my personal opinion, but it looks to me like the coming weeks are more interesting, and we should plan for those instead, rather than forcing a prediction league for a week where there is only one worthwhile game, and pretty much everyone knows it will do around a certain number.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

I just thought people were interested in One Piece's release. And predicting for one game just means it is easier than trying to guess for 4 or 5!

But, yes, people, please talk.

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

They certainly did "make" the game along with EAD1. Their contribution and manpower is significant enough.

I'm not saying their contribution was insignificant, but they weren't the lead development team here. Saying Mario Kart 7 was by Retro Studios isn't really accurate.

 

[duckroll]

I'm not saying their contribution was insignificant, but they weren't the lead development team here. Saying Mario Kart 7 was by Retro Studios isn't really accurate.

EAD1 didn't make the game completely on their own either. Which is my point. Most people who play MK don't care who makes the game as long as it looks good. Same with Mario. Otherwise NSMB would have been shunned as a spinoff game of dubious quality by a team of "interns" or whatever. Going by what core gamers on forums tend to talk about. Instead it sold far beyond what any Mario game from the main EAD team had made in years.

 

[InsaneZero]

??????

Just a joke with a botched execution, pay it no heed.

Although back to that whole "mainline" conversation, I believe that even though what you said was mostly correct, there is still something to be said about the whole "mainline"/"spinoff" aspect.

For instance, Pokemon is a mainstream franchise that has a mainline set of titles (Red/Green/Blue/Yellow/Gold/Silver/etc.), a series of console-based spinoffs that expand upon particular aspects of the games (Stadium/Colosseum/etc.), and whole bunch of other tangentially related spinoffs. While most of these games sell well, the mainline titles are the ones that stand out from the crowd specifically with its sales. So even if customers aren't actively aware of it, they may still be able to distinguish between what they actually want (the combined elements found in the mainline titles) and what is only somewhat similar (the spinoffs).

 

[test_account]

I think Mario and Uncharted are seen in a similar way: an adaption of a generally console experiences onto new hardware. There's difference to that much, at the very least. The difference in Mario versus Uncharted is Uncharted's relevance to the other self-contained stories in the series, in addition to the pedigree of Mario's dev team. These are very tiny, though, in comparison to the other major differences in brand and sales.

Sure, in that sense it is eaiser to play/get into a Mario game since it doesnt really have any continuing story indeed. But i do belive it is works fine to play any Uncharted 3 game standalone and still enjoy the story in one particular game It certainly doesnt hurt to know the whole story though.

But my main point in this discussion was just to say that eventhough so called "B-teams" are making many of the Sony Vita games, i think that many of the games can turn out to be great games regardless. It reminds a bit of i.e how someone say that Treyarch didnt make good Call of Duty games before Black Ops came out, but personally i enjoyed Black Ops, and the game also sold amazingly. So i'm sure that tons of people enjoyed Black Ops eventhough that Infinity Ward didnt develope it.

It surely doesnt hurt to have the A-teams working on games. But i dont think that having many B-teams making the games (at least so far) necessarily mean that Sony doesnt take the Vita seriously (or whatever platform it might be for that matter).

 

[20yearoldnerd]

It's alright for the Vita. It'll steadily, but slowly keep improving. It just needs more Japanese titles.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

It's alright for the Vita. It'll steadily, but slowly keep improving. It just needs more Japanese titles.

Except it's doing the opposite.

 

[InsaneZero]

It's alright for the Vita. It'll steadily, but slowly keep improving. It just needs more Japanese titles.

Really, the only positive thing about Vita's current standing is that it's still young.