Support NeoGAF

[test_account]

Mario and Call of Duty


Now, combine those and you have an unstoppable force!

At least Sony got 50% of that covered then

 

[AceBandage]

At least Sony got 50% of that covered then

Theoretically, at least.

 

[nickcv]

Mario and Call of Duty


Now, combine those and you have an unstoppable force!

WiiU npd will be interesting to watch

Spoiler

if would actually get some numbers q_q

if they get

Spoiler

and i think they will

a CoD game...

 

[test_account]

Theoretically, at least.

I'm really surprised if doesnt come out. E3 will tell the answer, i'm pretty sure.

 

[grimshawish]

I would exactly say that they got lazy. The problem was that Sony took a big risk (they even said so themself) with making the PS3 that expencive. They took a gamble, hoping that people was very interested in it, but with the high price and the big competition from both Xbox 360 and the Wii, this gamble didnt work out.

This is actually not much different from what Nintendo did with the Wii. They made something very different, and that is a risk as well. No one could know how successful the Wii would be.

True but Nintendo were launching off the Gamecube!
If Sony had launched a PS3 that was a decent price they'd have been sorted. End of. They didn't and the Playstation brand lost the home market just after losing the portable market. Overall we all know the PS2 was a fucking amazing machine and frankly the new generation has NEVER EVER built up to what the PS2 did to gaming and just general gaming quality (frankly its become much less exciting, and this in part is a failure of single player, which fortunately indies are taking the slack for now)

Making the hardware is afterall the other half of the equation. Software cant excist without hardware, so it is important to make hardware that people want as well. The PS Vita hardware is great, so i'm actually wondering a bit why more developers havnt embraced it more yet, at least from what have been announced so far. If not exclusive games, at least multiplatform stuff.

What can the Vita do the 3DS can't? Better graphics? Not really when you play 3D Land and experience what the 3D adds. Same with RE:R.

Vita's problem is that its a PSP. In every shape and form its a PSP launched a few years later. The PSP fucking flopped. A handheld needs games made FOR IT, not multiplatform stuff, which at the end is to expensive to ship to customers VS the amount of sales.

At the same time a number of developers are yet to get into the 3DS, but after RE:R I am hoping for a good FPS as Metroid proved the DS was great for it, just now they have the abilitiy to run those sorts of games!

Vita isn't getting support for the same reason no one is buying it, why do I spend my limited money on Vita? Why not all the other options?

 

[BassForever]

But would a Black Ops 2 Vita really have a big impact on sales? I feel that the audience that purchases that game out the wazoo would not feel the need to go out and pay 300 dollars to play a portable version of the game game they already own. If 3G actually allowed you to play online anywhere, anytime that might be something but as it stands your average person would only be able to play CoD Vita single player, and no one is buying CoD for single player lets be honest.

 

[AceBandage]

But would a Black Ops 2 Vita really have a big impact on sales? I feel that the audience that purchases that game out the wazoo would not feel the need to go out and pay 300 dollars to play a portable version of the game game they already own. If 3G actually allowed you to play online anywhere, anytime that might be something but as it stands your average person would only be able to play CoD Vita single player, and no one is buying CoD for single player lets be honest.

If it came with the PS3 version for free (it won't) then it could create a pretty good userbase for the series on the Vita.

 

[nickcv]

But would a Black Ops 2 Vita really have a big impact on sales? I feel that the audience that purchases that game out the wazoo would not feel the need to go out and pay 300 dollars to play a portable version of the game game they already own. If 3G actually allowed you to play online anywhere, anytime that might be something but as it stands your average person would only be able to play CoD Vita single player, and no one is buying CoD for single player lets be honest.

someone could tell you that the married man or the kid who has to share its tv would like the idea of playing cod online at home, in their bed...

and someone else could tell you that the wii u will steal that userbase...

 

[bigtroyjon]

What did the other 99.99% of video game consumer want?

I don't know, I'm not a market researcher but sales are showing that outside of GAF few people want what the Vita is currently offering and there is virtually no enthusiasm for the product aside from the hardcore gaming internet community.

 

[beril]

Hypothetically, could they survive on console game ports until, say, 2013, when whatever games they announce at E3/TGS come out?

Will it get any console ports though? There still isn't that much evidence that it can support easy ports from PS3/360 games. So far the only cross platform games we've seen are PS2 ports and fighting games

 

[nickcv]

Will it get any console ports though? There still isn't that much evidence that it can support easy ports from PS3/360 games. So far the only cross platform games we've seen are PS2 ports and fighting games

well, there's FF X, but it's a port from a previous gen, and anyway one game doesn't mean much...

 

[DiscoJer]

Probably not, no one is going to run out to buy Vita to play GTAV or AC3 on it, they'll just save 250 + 40 or 50 dollars and just get the 60 dollar version for their PS3/360 to play on their 50inch HD tv. The only way Vita could survive this way was if buying the PS3 version got you a digital download code that gave you the vita version for free or for only like 5-10 dollars. That would give it "take my save on the go" appeal and be reasonably priced.

I dunno. Look at the iPad - it's $600 and a lot of the reason people buy it is to play games on it.

I think Sony just wasn't bold enough with the Vita. They needed to completely re-organize their gaming and electronics division into one.

The Vita should have been a whole line of products, not just one.

You would have the Vita itself, which should be competing with the iPod Touch. Then the Vita Phone.

Then you should have a Vita 7" Tablet that competes with the Amazon Fire and Nook Tablet. Plays games and works as an e-reader, as well as streams media

Then you have the full sized Vita tablet, basically like an iPad, but with buttons.

And at every level, you'd have to undercut Apple/Amazon.

Instead, you have a whole bunch of competing products from Sony. E-readers, tablets, phones, there is just no cohesion (other than most run Android), but they can't possibly compete with more nimbler companies like Apple or Amazon or on the game side, Nintendo.

 

[AceBandage]

I dunno. Look at the iPad - it's $600 and a lot of the reason people buy it is to play games on it.

I think Sony just wasn't bold enough with the Vita. They needed to completely re-organize their gaming and electronics division into one.

The Vita should have been a whole line of products, not just one.

You would have the Vita itself, which should be competing with the iPod Touch. Then the Vita Phone.

Then you should have a Vita 7" Tablet that competes with the Amazon Fire and Nook Tablet. Plays games and works as an e-reader, as well as streams media

Then you have the full sized Vita tablet, basically like an iPad, but with buttons.

And at every level, you'd have to undercut Apple/Amazon.

Instead, you have a whole bunch of competing products from Sony. E-readers, tablets, phones, there is just no cohesion (other than most run Android), but they can't possibly compete with more nimbler companies like Apple or Amazon or on the game side, Nintendo.

Nope.
They may buy games on it, but they don't buy it for games.

 

[test_account]

True but Nintendo were launching off the Gamecube!
If Sony had launched a PS3 that was a decent price they'd have been sorted. End of. They didn't and the Playstation brand lost the home market just after losing the portable market. Overall we all know the PS2 was a fucking amazing machine and frankly the new generation has NEVER EVER built up to what the PS2 did to gaming and just general gaming quality (frankly its become much less exciting, and this in part is a failure of single player, which fortunately indies are taking the slack for now)

Yeah, i'm sure that Sony hoped the big popularity from PS1 and PS2 would transfer over to the PS3 (probably the same with Nintendo, hoping that the DS popularity would transfer over to the DS) indeed, but branding alone can only get you so far. This generation is a prime example of that. People will mostly buy something if the experience is interesting and if the price is right. Personally i've had a lot of great single player experiences in this generation as well

By the way, losing the portable market? Did Sony ever have that market? I know that the PSP did quite well to begin with, but still.

What can the Vita do the 3DS can't? Better graphics? Not really when you play 3D Land and experience what the 3D adds. Same with RE:R.

Vita's problem is that its a PSP. In every shape and form its a PSP launched a few years later. The PSP fucking flopped. A handheld needs games made FOR IT, not multiplatform stuff, which at the end is to expensive to ship to customers VS the amount of sales.

At the same time a number of developers are yet to get into the 3DS, but after RE:R I am hoping for a good FPS as Metroid proved the DS was great for it, just now they have the abilitiy to run those sorts of games!

Better graphics in terms of details and dual analog sticks out of the box. But this arguement can be used for consoles as well. PS3 and Xbox 360 is essentially the same experience and that is no hurdle for developers. And when i said multiplatform in this case, i'm thinking about multiplatform between 3DS and Vita.

Are we talking about Japan or worldwide here? In Japan, the PSP didnt flop at all, and it sold over 70 million units worldwide. The software situation hasnt been very good in the west during the last years, but the PSP in general is not a "fucking flop".

Vita isn't getting support for the same reason no one is buying it, why do I spend my limited money on Vita? Why not all the other options?

Opportunity. If developers didnt take a chance, everyone would have made games for the Wii and the DS this generation, but we know that this is far from the truth. Like, why make games for consoles that sells less?

I don't know, I'm not a market researcher but sales are showing that outside of GAF few people want what the Vita is currently offering and there is virtually no enthusiasm for the product aside from the hardcore gaming internet community.

The hardcore market is quite big, and it seems like Sony is mainly focusing on this group (didnt they even say this directly in some interview if i remember correctly?). The Vita will probably be on the market for at least 5 years, so it is a long race.

 

[BassForever]

I dunno. Look at the iPad - it's $600 and a lot of the reason people buy it is to play games on it.

I think Sony just wasn't bold enough with the Vita. They needed to completely re-organize their gaming and electronics division into one.

The Vita should have been a whole line of products, not just one.

You would have the Vita itself, which should be competing with the iPod Touch. Then the Vita Phone.

Then you should have a Vita 7" Tablet that competes with the Amazon Fire and Nook Tablet. Plays games and works as an e-reader, as well as streams media

Then you have the full sized Vita tablet, basically like an iPad, but with buttons.

And at every level, you'd have to undercut Apple/Amazon.

Instead, you have a whole bunch of competing products from Sony. E-readers, tablets, phones, there is just no cohesion (other than most run Android), but they can't possibly compete with more nimbler companies like Apple or Amazon or on the game side, Nintendo.

Maybe on GAF, but Sony already sold Vita to GAF so that really doesn't change anything.

 

[jman2050]

haha, I've been wondering the same thing for the past month or so. Just what was said in the meeting rooms that gave the Vita project the greenlight. What were the selling points?

I still maintain from long before the Vita was announced that a successor to the PSP should not have been made. Excepting a huge stumble by Nintendo, there just was no realistic upside to it. That they suddenly had to deal with the quickly accelerating mobile consumer electronics market made things even worse as now the premium techhead niche they could have grabbed with another PSP-like handheld was now getting filled quickly.

I'm just not sure what significant space in the market is left after you factor in Nintendo's dominance of handheld gaming and Apple et al's dominance of general-purpose electronics. Sony is better served applying their strengths solely to the console market.

 

[test_account]

I still maintain from long before the Vita was announced that a successor to the PSP should not have been made. Excepting a huge stumble by Nintendo, there just was no realistic upside to it. That they suddenly had to deal with the quickly accelerating mobile consumer electronics market made things even worse as now the premium techhead niche they could have grabbed with another PSP-like handheld was now getting filled quickly.

I'm just not sure what significant space in the market is left after you factor in Nintendo's dominance of handheld gaming and Apple et al's dominance of general-purpose electronics. Sony is better served applying their strengths solely to the console market.

After the success of the PSP (especially in Japan), i would find it really surprising if Sony didnt make a successor to it. Making a new device also gives room for improvement and correcting mistakes done in the past.

 

[nickcv]

After the success of the PSP (especially in Japan), i would find it really surprising if Sony didnt make a successor to it. Making a new device also gives room for improvement and correcting mistakes done in the past.

i'm afraid that so far they missed the boat...

 

[Bullza2o]

Vita still has some life to it...barely

Do people in Japan not like Gravity Daze much, or were most sales DD?

 

[muu]

Are we talking about Japan or worldwide here? In Japan, the PSP didnt flop at all, and it sold over 70 million units worldwide. The software situation hasnt been very good in the west during the last years, but the PSP in general is not a "fucking flop".

The miracle known as Monster Hunter saved the PSP. "But some non-MH titles sold 500K too!" because the hardware gained some traction thanks to MH. Follower titles can't do shit when system sellers are not present, something we saw firsthand last year with 3DS and the last few months with Vita.

Opportunity. If developers didnt take a chance, everyone would have made games for the Wii and the DS this generation, but we know that this is far from the truth. Like, why make games for consoles that sells less?

Devs bet on the HD consoles when the Wii was considered dead on arrival. Going to HD wasn't a risky venture, it was simple progression for a lot of the devs. Publishers are out there to make money, and it's pretty apparent that most of them took as many measures as possible to starve the system out of proper releases.

I still maintain from long before the Vita was announced that a successor to the PSP should not have been made. Excepting a huge stumble by Nintendo, there just was no realistic upside to it. That they suddenly had to deal with the quickly accelerating mobile consumer electronics market made things even worse as now the premium techhead niche they could have grabbed with another PSP-like handheld was now getting filled quickly.

I'm just not sure what significant space in the market is left after you factor in Nintendo's dominance of handheld gaming and Apple et al's dominance of general-purpose electronics. Sony is better served applying their strengths solely to the console market.

Vita had to be made. Kaz's legacy lies in SCE, and successful or not he had to keep that circus running.

 

[mclem]

The miracle known as Monster Hunter saved the PSP. "But some non-MH titles sold 500K too!" because the hardware gained some traction thanks to MH. Follower titles can't do shit when system sellers are not present, something we saw firsthand last year with 3DS and the last few months with Vita.

What were the highest-selling titles before Monster Hunter went massive?

 

[donny2112]

Vita had to be made. Kaz's legacy lies in SCE, and successful or not he had to keep that circus running.

I kind of wonder whether Vita was supposed to help prop up the game division's profitability while PS4 was to gain traction. PS2 and PSP softened the blow from PS3, so maybe Vita was intended to fit that same position.

 

[pieatorium]

What were the highest-selling titles before Monster Hunter went massive?

The biggest games before MH caught fire (I'm going to define this as when MHP2 came out, which when the series exploded):

Minna no Golf Portable - 399,257
Metal Gear Solid Portable Ops - 358,277
Brain Trainer Portable - 297,816
Dynasty Warriors - 286,274
SD Gundam G-Generation Portable - 278,702
Ridge Racers - 273,521
Minna no Golf Portable (The Best) - 270,907

These are the only ones which sold more than 250k before MHP2 was released. Minna no Golf Portable and Ridge Racers were PSP launch titles. Dynasty Warriors came out the week after launch.

.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

well at least the Vita was good for Sales Age threads so its not all bad news am I rite?

 

[frankie_baby]

I kind of wonder whether Vita was supposed to help prop up the game division's profitability while PS4 was to gain traction. PS2 and PSP softened the blow from PS3, so maybe Vita was intended to fit that same position.

i think right now every last spec and feature that isnt already locked down for ps4 is getting cut down as much as they can after the vita disaster

 

[charlequin]

I dunno. Look at the iPad - it's $600 and a lot of the reason people buy it is to play games on it.

It's $500 for the entry level one (actually, $400 now) and almost nobody buys an iPad just to play games on. If anything, it's comparable to the era where PC gaming first took off -- when every home and business PC could play the latest games, and as a result people buying the hardware for other reasons were suddenly also an eager gaming market.

You would have the Vita itself, which should be competing with the iPod Touch. Then the Vita Phone.

Then you should have a Vita 7" Tablet that competes with the Amazon Fire and Nook Tablet. Plays games and works as an e-reader, as well as streams media

Then you have the full sized Vita tablet, basically like an iPad, but with buttons.

The idea that Sony is going to successfully take on Apple (where Google and Microsoft have both, to varying degrees, failed) is ludicrous.

 

[Truth101]

I dunno. Look at the iPad - it's $600 and a lot of the reason people buy it is to play games on it.

I think Sony just wasn't bold enough with the Vita. They needed to completely re-organize their gaming and electronics division into one.

The Vita should have been a whole line of products, not just one.

You would have the Vita itself, which should be competing with the iPod Touch. Then the Vita Phone.

Then you should have a Vita 7" Tablet that competes with the Amazon Fire and Nook Tablet. Plays games and works as an e-reader, as well as streams media

Then you have the full sized Vita tablet, basically like an iPad, but with buttons.

And at every level, you'd have to undercut Apple/Amazon.

Instead, you have a whole bunch of competing products from Sony. E-readers, tablets, phones, there is just no cohesion (other than most run Android), but they can't possibly compete with more nimbler companies like Apple or Amazon or on the game side, Nintendo.

Dear me...

 

[Kazerei]

So no retail impressions yet? There were lots of new releases this week, namely Hatsune Miku, MGS Snake Eater 3D, Girls RPG, Street Fighter X Tekken, Nobunaga's Ambition Online, and Mobile Suit Gundam UC. Oh, and Unit 13.

Hatsune Miku should do well. Not sure about Nobunaga or Gundam. Everything else is probably bombing.

 

[Fantastical]

I dunno. Look at the iPad - it's $600 and a lot of the reason people buy it is to play games on it.

You've been spending too much time on message boards.

 

[DiscoJer]

You've been spending too much time on message boards.

What is the main use for tablets? 84% say gaming

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2011/apr/08/tablets-mainly-for-games-survey

The idea that Sony is going to successfully take on Apple (where Google and Microsoft have both, to varying degrees, failed) is ludicrous.

They're already trying to take on Apple. They have a full range of Android devices from the Walkman to tablets to e-readers to phones.

I think they have a much better shot of actually being successful if they integrate it with the Vita, rather than having separate divisions for each product. And they should have one big ecosystem, rather than a lot of little ones.

Amazon and Barnes & Noble have carved out niches, why not Sony? Sony is a media company - they have games, movies, music, books, phones - why can't they compete with Apple? Clearly they're not going to win, but they could be profitable, which is the main thing.

Why not be able to buy a Vita game on cart, plug it into your phone, then come home and plug it into your Vita or Tablet? Or buy it digitally and have it available on all the devices on your account...

 

[pieatorium]

What is the main use for tablets? 84% say gaming

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2011/apr/08/tablets-mainly-for-games-survey

No mention of main use in that article but being the most common response among all users is a bit surprising. I think the bigger suprise is that only 11% say they use it portably vs at home.

 

[bigtroyjon]

What is the main use for tablets? 84% say gaming

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2011/apr/08/tablets-mainly-for-games-survey

I don't think you understand what the survey is asking.

 

[Cosmo Clock 21]

But would a Black Ops 2 Vita really have a big impact on sales? I feel that the audience that purchases that game out the wazoo would not feel the need to go out and pay 300 dollars to play a portable version of the game game they already own. If 3G actually allowed you to play online anywhere, anytime that might be something but as it stands your average person would only be able to play CoD Vita single player, and no one is buying CoD for single player lets be honest.

I think the performance of console ports during the PSP's early lifespan showed that "it's like a nut you can play outside" isn't a good enough reason for consumers to purchase a feature-identical portable version of a game.

 

[Instro]

What is the main use for tablets? 84% say gaming

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2011/apr/08/tablets-mainly-for-games-survey

84% of tablet owners play games, ahead of even searching for information (78%), emailing (74%) and reading the news (61%). 56% of tablet owners use social networking services on their device, while 51% consume music and/or videos, and 46% read ebooks.

If those percentages mean anything, it's that the ipad is used for everything. There's nothing in there that indicates what the main use is.

 

[DiscoJer]

If those percentages mean anything, it's that the ipad is used for everything. There's nothing in there that indicates what the main use is.

Okay, here's another survey from about 6 months later about tablet usage

http://www.theappside.com/2011/11/28/games-videos-and-music-are-top-tablet-entertainment-activities/

Basically same thing, gaming is the most popular activity on the list, both for once a month or daily.

 

[Dalthien]

Okay, here's another survey from about 6 months later about tablet usage

http://www.theappside.com/2011/11/28/games-videos-and-music-are-top-tablet-entertainment-activities/

Basically same thing, gaming is the most popular activity on the list, both for once a month or daily.

And a ridiculous percentage of people regularly played FreeCell and Solitaire on their Windows PCs back in the 90s and early 00s. But very few of them were buying PCs for the purpose of gaming.

 

[Chris1964]

Technically, could the Vita be the inverse of what normal handhelds are like and survive on console ports on the West? I mean, GTA sold quite well on the PSP, and LCS/VCS were just a spinoff. If a GTAV/AC3/other major AAA IP ports were announced for Vita at E3, could the Vita survive on the sales in the West?

LCS/VCS weren't ports. Direct console ports will give Vita some sales but they won't revive anything.

 

[rpmurphy]

Okay, here's another survey from about 6 months later about tablet usage

http://www.theappside.com/2011/11/28/games-videos-and-music-are-top-tablet-entertainment-activities/

Basically same thing, gaming is the most popular activity on the list, both for once a month or daily.

The surveys do not specify main use, only activity frequency, which lacks the measure of duration (which is actually what determines main use). Furthermore, you also have to be aware of categorization. If they had surveyed gaming vs. all non-gaming activities, the results would favor against gaming as opposed to if they split up non-gaming activities into subcategories (and splitting subcategories into sub-subcategories like browsing -> searching for info and reading news).

 

[charlequin]

They're already trying to take on Apple. They have a full range of Android devices from the Walkman to tablets to e-readers to phones.

Hitching their wagon to Android is quite a bit different from trying to launch their own unnecessary platform.

Amazon and Barnes & Noble have carved out niches, why not Sony?

Because Amazon and B&N are successful businesses tapping into content networks that already exist and already have value to the consumer whereas Sony would be trying once again to sell a proprietary ecosystem people don't actually want to buy into?

The idea that Sony could only be more successful here if they only forced the Vita software platform into other products people don't want is really wild, basically. Sony doesn't have the capital or development resources to implement their own compelling phone/tablet ecosystem outside of what others are doing (and they certainly don't have any way of drawing in support from others on such a plan.) At least making a videogame system is something they're actually skilled at and have useful resources to leverage towards, even if they're currently not bringing that skill to bear on the Vita in specific.

 

[test_account]

i'm afraid that so far they missed the boat...

Sorry, i should have pointed out that i was mostly talking in general. That making a successor gives the opportunity to make a different system. The same things could be said about i.e the Gamecube and Xbox as well. The Xbox 1 and Gamecube didnt have huge sales, so Microsoft and Nintendo shouldnt make a successor. I'm pretty sure that they are glad they made a successor.

I remember especially with the Wii, that there were spectical thoughts that said that Wii wouldnt sell. If the Wii ended up selling much less, it would be easy to say this after seeing the sales result. If the Vita was selling hand over fist now, would people still say that it was a mistake to make a successor to the PSP?

The miracle known as Monster Hunter saved the PSP. "But some non-MH titles sold 500K too!" because the hardware gained some traction thanks to MH. Follower titles can't do shit when system sellers are not present, something we saw firsthand last year with 3DS and the last few months with Vita.

Even without Monster Hunter, the PSP would still have sold respectable numbers in my opinion. And Monster Hunter didnt do much for the PSP in the west.

But what does this have to do with the PSP not being a flop? I'm not trying to sound rude or anything, i'm just wondering why you say this arguement to when i said that the PSP wasnt a "fucking flop". Personally i'm not calling something that sold ~70 million hardware and ~300 million software for one system as a "fucking flop".

Devs bet on the HD consoles when the Wii was considered dead on arrival. Going to HD wasn't a risky venture, it was simple progression for a lot of the devs. Publishers are out there to make money, and it's pretty apparent that most of them took as many measures as possible to starve the system out of proper releases.

To begin with yeah, when they didnt know much the Wii was going to sell. But what was the reason after they saw how much the Wii sold? As you say, publishers are out to make money, so they are not going to ignore or trying to eliminate another system if they see that there is money to be made there.

 

[Mpl90]

Let's do something much more useful than that thread opened in that way: a new Little Battlers game is coming to PSP...and 3DS. Another evidence of some brands shifting from PSP to 3DS?

 

[duckroll]

Let's do something much more useful than that thread opened in that way: a new Little Battlers game is coming to PSP...and 3DS. Another evidence of some brands shifting from PSP to 3DS?

Let's not. Because you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[nickcv]

Let's do something much more useful than that thread opened in that way: a new Little Battlers game is coming to PSP...and 3DS. Another evidence of some brands shifting from PSP to 3DS?

i personally don't know the IP, what kind of sales did previous release had?

Let's not. Because you don't know what you're talking about.

oh, it's just a rumor?

 

[Cosmonaut X]

oh, it's just a rumor?

It's a magazine cover - no word on what game it is, what features, any changes etc.

 

[Mpl90]

Let's not. Because you don't know what you're talking about.

Ouch, now I've read the already closed thread, and I've seen these are two different games.
Danball Senki W & Danball Senki Bakuboost.
...Apparently, since neither this is confirmed. Lol XD

 

[electroplankton]

Among all the software houses, Level-5 is the one I could see shift from PSP to 3DS, and not to PSVita, considering their history. But let's wait for something more concrete to talk.

 

[nickcv]

oh, i see... anyhow how is this IP sales wise?

 

[frankie_baby]

oh, i see... anyhow how is this IP sales wise?

Its little battlers, 200 to 300k ish i think

 

[duckroll]

I think Level5 is a bit more lost than usual right now. They started out with excellent success on the DS, and for a time they were perfectly confident of putting out stuff on the right system. But now with the DS being displaced, it seems they are no longer as sure as they used to be.

- They continue to put DS sequels on 3DS because it makes sense, but because of the smaller installed base they are selling less right now.

- Their attempts to make a big major RPG series with Ninokuni has pretty much failed on both the DS and the PS3.

- They're putting Time Travelers on THREE platforms, indicating that they are not as sure of the 3DS as an exclusive platform for that game.

- Gundam AGE is a huge failure and Hino's credibility as a hitmaker in the creative industry has definitely suffered.

- They seem to be having problems with getting games which they announced ages ago to come out. Fantasy Life and Phoenix Wright vs Layton are still totally MIA.

- It looks like Girls RPG isn't going to take them anywhere new in terms of demographics either.

 

[thestopsign]

Through the end of 2011 according to Famitsu:

033 [PSP] Little Battlers eXperience (Level 5) {2011-06-16} - 324.204
094 [PSP] Little Battlers eXperience - Boost (Level 5) {2011-11-23} - 130.198