Support NeoGAF

[walking fiend]

Wouldn't it be more accurate to compare the 3DS to the Vita? Do we know the battery life figures for that yet?

PSV is 35% bigger in size, if you want to add the Nyko battery pack, yes it is. DSi XL has a considerably better battery life than DSi, although having a considerably larger screen size.

How does the 3DS stack up against an iPhone 4? The iPhone obviously has a much better screen and a much smaller form factor so I'd expect the 3DS to win out. I charge my iPhone 4 overnight but I've never expended the entire battery gaming so I don't know how long it lasts under those conditions.

I believe iPhone is around 4 hours (from what I have read), 3DS min is 3 hours in 3D mode.

The 3DS is still a technological disappointment, battery life aside

PSV has a much more compelling hardware for normal type of usage. 3DS only advantages in terms of hardware design are being 3D, spotpass/streetpass, dual screen and having a clamshell design.

However, iPhone is much more expensive and it fails in comparison to PSV.

 

[taranatar]

technologically it is different and you actually see more (I believe you have actually seen 3D), and even without considering this, it has 15% more screen in 2D mode than PSP.

They are not comparing the 3DS to the PSP as you seem to be doing. In their opinion the 3DS doesn't equal good value money or perform very well in the way its designed for.

Lets be honest here the 3DS is leaps and bounds ahead of the PSP in terms of years and technology but for a 'portable' console it fails at that job right out of the box. Saying oh buy a new battery or turn the 3D feature off is defeating the purpose of the machine.

First of all maybe they should of included a better battery with the console from the get go. And how on earth is saying turn the 3D off a valid argument? If you turn it off you get rid of the main selling point of the console hence forth you might as well buy a normal DS.

Anyway you buy a gaming console for gaming. I would also love 3DS but there's currently no software which I'm desperate to play even less so if I have to turn to 3D off on my lunch break to actually play it.

 

[gerg]

It's not a question of stupidity, it's a question of interest. Most consumers aren't as involved as we are in gaming, they buy systems and games on a whim, or for the kids.

They walk into Best Buy and see a big sign that says "choose your DS" and has the 3DS listed right alongside the others. Anyone not consumed by gaming would easily come to the conclusion that the 3DS is a high priced DS.

It's a failure of marketing by Nintendo, plain and simple.

But, equally, is it not possible that people realise that it's an upgrade over the DS, but still don't care for it?

That people seem to deny that possibility is what I don't understand.

 

[Kagari]

My favorite is hearing people call it 'DS3' ... is it the third DS? lol

 

[Tobor]

But, equally, is it not possible that people realise that it's an upgrade over the DS, but still don't care for it?

That people seem to deny that possibility is what I don't understand.

That's a problem for some people as well, sure. Both can be true.

 

[Smokey]

I've never understood why people think that consumers are that stupid. Ignorant, perhaps, but not stupid.

Guess you've never worked retail before.

 

[Dabanton]

They are not comparing the 3DS to the PSP as you seem to be doing. In their opinion the 3DS doesn't equal good value money or perform very well in the way its designed for.

Lets be honest here the 3DS is leaps and bounds ahead of the PSP in terms of years and technology but for a 'portable' console it fails at that job right out of the box. Saying oh buy a new battery or turn the 3D feature off is defeating the purpose of the machine.

First of all maybe they should of included a better battery with the console from the get go. And how on earth is saying turn the 3D off a valid argument? If you turn it off you get rid of the main selling point of the console hence forth you might as well buy a normal DS.

Anyway you buy a gaming console for gaming. I would also love 3DS but there's currently no software which I'm desperate to play even less so if I have to turn to 3D off on my lunch break to actually play it.

Pretty much Nintendo has dun goofed with this. How they decided to place their entire system around something as divisive as 3D baffles me.

You see a 3DS

To most people they would think Ok it's a 3D game system.

I don't particularly want a 3D game system.

People in the 'know' would say "Oh but you can turn the 3D off."

But the 3D is the main selling point, so i'm paying extra for a feature i don't want.

 

[walking fiend]

They are not comparing the 3DS to the PSP as you seem to be doing. In their opinion the 3DS doesn't equal good value money or perform very well in the way its designed for.

Others specifically compared it to similar devices which are iphone and psp at the moment. I never denied this, this is what it is, but don't label it with nintendo being cheap or other similar devices performing better, there's no other 3D gaming device to begin with.

Lets be honest here the 3DS is leaps and bounds ahead of the PSP in terms of years and technology but for a 'portable' console it fails at that job right out of the box. Saying oh buy a new battery or turn the 3D feature off is defeating the purpose of the machine. First of all maybe they should of included a better battery with the console from the get go. And how on earth is saying turn the 3D off a valid argument? If you turn it off you get rid of the main selling point of the console hence forth you might as well buy a normal DS.

someone said people don't care about whether the screen is 3D or not, they care about the screen being 3.5inch, so...

however, buying a 20$ battery is quite a reasonable suggestion and I meant it, it is much ike buying 9cell batteries for laptops; whether Nintendo should have included that, or whether you don't feel good to buy a 20$ battery pack for a 250$ device, are other stories.

Anyway you buy a gaming console for gaming. I would also love 3DS but there's currently no software which I'm desperate to play even less so if I have to turn to 3D off on my lunch break to actually play it.

you don't have to turn 3D off if you want to play at launch breaks, lets not take this into hyperbole. It lasts min 3 hours of gameplay everything max, and a day in sleep mode, which is comparable to my DSi as I almost always play it at the highest brightness.

 

[gerg]

That's a problem for some people as well, sure. Both can be true.

To be honest, I'm not sure I even understand how important it is that people realist that the 3DS as a "new generation" above the DS. All that matters is that they see value in it, and I think that all the marketing is clear that the 3DS plays different 3DS cartridges that have different, 3D graphics. And if consumers aren't buying the 3DS the problem is that, at the moment, they don't care for that content, plain and simple.

Guess you've never worked retail before.

I know people who didn't realise that Nintendo made the Wii, sure. But that was something specifically intended by Nintendo, which is why their named is removed from all the official branding for the Wii.

Of course, that may be a sign of ignorance or disinterest, but I really don't think that the majority of consumers don't understand that the 3DS plays distinct 3D content. There will always be exceptions.

 

[walking fiend]

seemingly people in US being misinformed about 3DS, has actually paid them better. In japan not only 3DS is not selling, DS has stopped selling as well (I believe because it is now considered a discotinued device, specially because both nintendo and lots of 3rd parties abandoned the system abruptly.)

talk about fucked up marketing and planning.

 

[Celine]

Pretty much Nintendo has dun goofed with this. How they decided to place their entire system around something as divisive as 3D baffles me.

You see a 3DS

To most people they would think Ok it's a 3D game system.

I don't particularly want a 3D game system.

People in the 'know' would say "Oh but you can turn the 3D off."

But the 3D is the main selling point, so i'm paying extra for a feature i don't want.

It's like saying that you won't buy a DS because his main selling point, the touch screen, doesn't suit your taste and you only want to play with standard d-pad/buttons.
Quite silly if you ask me.

In the end it's all about the games ( the experiences ) and if there isn't anything compelling to you than it's obvious you don't long for a system.

 

[Square Triangle]

So apparently having games on your system isn't enough.

 

[Tobor]

To be honest, I'm not sure I even understand how important it is that people realist that the 3DS as a "new generation" above the DS. All that matters is that they see value in it, and I think that all the marketing is clear that the 3DS plays different 3DS cartridges that have different, 3D graphics. And if consumers aren't buying the 3DS the problem is that, at the moment, they don't care for that content, plain and simple.



I know people who didn't realise that Nintendo made the Wii, sure. But that was something specifically intended by Nintendo, which is why their named is removed from all the official branding for the Wii.

Of course, that may be a sign of ignorance or disinterest, but I really don't think that the majority of consumers don't understand that the 3DS plays distinct 3D content. There will always be exceptions.

You see no problems with their marketing up to this point? Seriously?

Somebody post that Best Buy pic of the signage.

 

[Rourkey]

The 360 numbers are unbelievable, it has to be Kinect in my view, people are checking it out, loving it, buying it, then putting it in the cupboard and getting it out at parties...

Sound familiar?

 

[gerg]

You see no problems with their marketing up to this point? Seriously?

Somebody post that Best Buy pic of the signage.

Are you referring to the one that shows the 3DS as part of the "DS family"?

Continuing the DS branding is one of the best things that Nintendo could have done (and did) with the 3DS. I really think that this supposed "consumer confusion" is playing a very small part in the 3DS' flagging sales.

Basically, I'd ask one question: is it obvious in most consumers' minds that the 3DS plays 3D content and the DS does not? If "yes", I think the distinction between the 3DS and the various DS models is sufficient.

 

[walking fiend]

The 360 numbers are unbelievable, it has to be Kinect in my view, people are checking it out, loving it, buying it, then putting it in the cupboard and getting it out at parties...

Sound familiar?

the overall trend partially yes, but this months bump was most likely because of the it being through promotions with laptops, giftcards, etc.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=29328399&postcount=1275

---
and for gods sake, Wii software tie ratio is almost the same as PS3, and like 20% less than 360. It doesn't sound familiar!

Are you referring to the one that shows the 3DS as part of the "DS family"?

Continuing the DS branding is one of the best things that Nintendo could have done (and did) with the 3DS. I really think that this supposed "consumer confusion" is playing a very small part in the 3DS' flagging sales.

Basically, I'd ask one question: is it obvious in most consumers' minds that the 3DS plays 3D content and the DS does not? If "yes", I think the distinction between the 3DS and the various DS models is sufficient.

it is a very good marketing strategy, but not when they suddenly take the plug out of their last gen devices development, it will make them as good as discontinued OS, you are stuck with the legacy.

 

[Tobor]

Are you referring to the one that shows the 3DS as part of the "DS family"?

Continuing the DS branding is one of the best things that Nintendo could have done (and did) with the 3DS. I really think that this supposed "consumer confusion" is playing a very small part in the 3DS' flagging sales.

Basically, I'd ask one question: is it obvious in most consumers' minds that the 3DS plays 3D content and the DS does not? If "yes", I think the distinction between the 3DS and the various DS models is sufficient.

I think there is a segment of consumers who walk in to buy a "DS", see three price tiers, and choose the cheaper tier.

 

[lowrider007]

Basically, I'd ask one question: is it obvious in most consumers' minds that the 3DS plays 3D content and the DS does not? If "yes", I think the distinction between the 3DS and the various DS models is sufficient.

What about when some consumers and I've actually meant some that think the 3DS can play their DS games in 3D?

Seriously, it's not enough of a distinction in imo.

 

[jagowar]

Really impressive 360 numbers..... guess that "buy a pc get an xbox360" promotion is working.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY6su9hYCRU
The latest commercial (showed up yesterday on facebook).... if they actually start advertising it more that number will probably keep growing.

 

[1-D_FTW]

Guess you've never worked retail before.

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. - George Carlin

 

[Kusagari]

Are you referring to the one that shows the 3DS as part of the "DS family"?

Continuing the DS branding is one of the best things that Nintendo could have done (and did) with the 3DS. I really think that this supposed "consumer confusion" is playing a very small part in the 3DS' flagging sales.

Basically, I'd ask one question: is it obvious in most consumers' minds that the 3DS plays 3D content and the DS does not? If "yes", I think the distinction between the 3DS and the various DS models is sufficient.

The mass market has rejected 3D. This is obvious by the continued aversion to see movies in 3D at the boxoffice that has been documented all summer. If all the average consumer thinks when they see the 3DS is that it plays 3D content, then that isn't much of an incentive.

There's far more to the 3DS than the 3D content. Nintendo needs to take hold of that and start advertising the fact that this is the full blown successor to the DS.

 

[gerg]

I think there is a segment of consumers who walk in to buy a "DS", see three price tiers, and choose the cheaper tier.

Right, because at the moment the value of the 3DS is not sufficient.

But, I ask, how would this problem be solved by not branding the 3DS as a "DS"? This supposed segment of consumers would walk in to buy a "DS", but wouldn't even give the 3DS a look, for it wouldn't be connected with that brand.

Nintendo's clearly mucked up the launch of the 3DS. The demand simply isn't there, or at least it hasn't been able to create it. But Nintendo also knows that it's still selling 386,000 units of DS family hardware. Once demand for that dies down I'm sure we'll start to see the 3DS positioned more in the middle, as opposed to the expensive high-end, of the DS brand.

The mass market has rejected 3D. This is obvious by the continued aversion to see movies in 3D at the boxoffice that has been documented all summer. If all the average consumer thinks when they see the 3DS is that it plays 3D content, then that isn't much of an incentive.

There's far more to the 3DS than the 3D content. Nintendo needs to take hold of that and start advertising the fact that this is the full blown successor to the DS.

Sure, as I discussed in the last NPD thread, if there is one definite, large mistake that Nintendo may have made with the 3DS it may have been believing in the power of 3D technology. I think it may still be a bit too early to call, but it wouldn't surprise me if 3D on the whole is rejected by the consumer.

And, I agree that, if this is the case, Nintendo would then need to start marketing the 3DS as a full-blown successor to the DS. But it should probably do that when there's less risk of cannibalising sales of the original DS by doing so.

What about when some consumers and I've actually meant some that think the 3DS can play their DS games in 3D?

Seriously, it's not enough of a distinction in imo.

But they realise that the DS doesn't play content in 3D, right?

 

[walking fiend]

The mass market has rejected 3D. This is obvious by the continued aversion to see movies in 3D at the boxoffice that has been documented all summer. If all the average consumer thinks when they see the 3DS is that it plays 3D content, then that isn't much of an incentive.

There's far more to the 3DS than the 3D content. Nintendo needs to take hold of that and start advertising the fact that this is the full blown successor to the DS.

Almost every impression of 3D in OoT I read were absolutely positive, some to the point of calling it amazing. I believe when the word of mouth starts spreading after the better games start hitting after september, 3D will be able to act as a main selling point.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Are you referring to the one that shows the 3DS as part of the "DS family"?

Continuing the DS branding is one of the best things that Nintendo could have done (and did) with the 3DS. I really think that this supposed "consumer confusion" is playing a very small part in the 3DS' flagging sales.

Basically, I'd ask one question: is it obvious in most consumers' minds that the 3DS plays 3D content and the DS does not? If "yes", I think the distinction between the 3DS and the various DS models is sufficient.

But Nintendo has charged a premium price for what is frequently being mistaken for an incremental upgrade. That's a poor recipe for sales. They've de-emphasized one of the usual signs of a new console generation (form factor and name), minimized the immediate graphical leap by porting N64 games to a platform more powerful than the PS2, and pushed 3d on public that is largely apathetic and occasionally even hostile to the technology.

I can't see how anyone could argue that NoA has done a good job marketing it.

 

[Jokeropia]

What kind of fuzzy logic is that? It's the same screen with the same number of pixels. 3D mode doesn't magically make it bigger, it just has one half the pixels display a different image than the other half.

No, there are actually twice the amount of pixels. (800 x 240.) A pixel is by definition "the smallest addressable screen element" so it's impossible for half a pixel to display one thing and the other half another. The pixels in the 3DS top screen are rectangular.

 

[Tobor]

Right, because at the moment the value of the 3DS is not sufficient.

But, I ask, how would this be solved by not branding the 3DS as a "DS"? This supposed segment of consumers would walk in to buy a "DS", but wouldn't even give the 3DS a look, for it wouldn't be connected with them.

Nintendo's clearly mucked up the launch of the 3DS. The demand simply isn't there, or at least it hasn't been able to create it. But Nintendo also knows that it's still selling 386,000 units of DS family hardware. Once demand for that dies down I'm sure we'll start to see the 3DS positioned more in the middle, as opposed to the expensive high-end, of the DS brand.

Honestly, they woud have been better off numbering it. DS 2 sends a clearer message. There's a consumer expectation that comes with numbering a new device.

It's a new platform, with all new software, treating it like a revision is a mistake. We agree on this point, there is a lack of interest, but there is not one reason solely responsible. We're both right.

 

[gerg]

But Nintendo has charged a premium price for what is frequently being mistaken for an incremental upgrade. That's a poor recipe for sales. They've de-emphasized one of the usual signs of a new console generation (form factor and name), minimized the immediate graphical leap by porting N64 games to a platform more powerful than the PS2, and pushed 3d on public that is largely apathetic and occasionally even hostile to the technology.

I can't see how anyone could argue that NoA has done a good job marketing it.

I don't think that a lot of those points come under the term "marketing".

Honestly, they woud have been better off numbering it. DS 2 sends a clearer message. There's a consumer expectation that comes with numbering a new device.

But then you lose the wonderful look (and clear messaging) of "3DS". Seriously, "3DS" is such a wonderful mark that Nintendo would have been stupid not to use it. "DS 2" tells you comparatively little about the device.

It's a new platform, with all new software, treating it like a revision is a mistake.

This is where I disagree. Avoiding the semantics of a difference between "revision" and "extension", I don't think that continuing the DS brand so strongly with the 3DS is hurting it.

We agree on this point, there is a lack of interest, but there is not one reason solely responsible. We're both right.

Again, I don't think that consumers are mistaking the 3DS for something with only the functionality of, say, the DSi XL.

 

[lowrider007]

But they realise that the DS doesn't play content in 3D, right?

well yeah, that makes sense since they way Nintendo has been advertising the system and the name of it tbh, I guess that was Nintendo's mistake, betting everything on 3D, becuase most 'regular' people I know think the 3DS is just a 3D version of the DS, and a quite a few people I spoke to thought that the 3D was going to 'pop' out at you rather than it being depth 3D.

 

[walking fiend]

Honestly, they woud have been better off numbering it. DS 2 sends a clearer message. There's a consumer expectation that comes with numbering a new device.

It's a new platform, with all new software, treating it like a revision is a mistake. We agree on this point, there is a lack of interest, but there is not one reason solely responsible. We're both right.

Reggie, if I am not mistaken, called Wii U an extension of their line of product. The next console will be Wii U Others, and that will have chat support and unified online to play with others.

they either have a long term plan with what they are doing (long term for nintendo is probably decades), or they are risking too much on whether this pays off or not.

 

[SmokyDave]

And, I agree that, if this is the case, Nintendo would then need to start marketing the 3DS as a full-blown successor to the DS. But it should probably do that when there's less risk of cannibalising sales of the original DS by doing so.

I think they'll have an uphill battle. 3D aside, there just doesn't seem to be the increase in graphical fidelity one would expect with a true successor. I understand it's early in the products lifecycle but are there even any impressive tech-demos out there?

The price of games is something else I see as a stumbling block. The days of £40 portable games being palatable are coming to a rapid close.

 

[Tobor]

I think they'll have an uphill battle. 3D aside, there just doesn't seem to be the increase in graphical fidelity one would expect with a true successor. I understand it's early in the products lifecycle but are there even any impressive tech-demos out there?

The price of games is something else I see as a stumbling block. The days of £40 portable games being palatable are coming to a rapid close.

An even bigger problem they'll need to deal with somehow.

 

[Stumpokapow]

The price of games is something else I see as a stumbling block. The days of £40 portable games being palatable are coming to a rapid close.

Supposedly their 3DS software offerings were intended to counter against price erosion by providing higher value and more depth. I don't think the strategy has succeeded so far. So then, the argument is "Yes, but <games x, y, and z including Pokemon> will succeed at full price", but then the scope of the debate is no longer whether games as a whole can sustain the top tier price, but whether or not there exists some premium class that can sustain the top tier price. That's already a huge loss for premium priced gaming, if many genres and many games that would have succeeded five years ago wouldn't now.

 

[Fafalada]

Smartphones typically get 24-48 idle hours

Which is every bit as sucky as 3DSs 3hours - mine gets around 8days of Idle time (with 3G) and the only relevant difference with others is the CPU clock (and dramatically lower price-tag, but I disgress).

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I don't think that a lot of those points come under the term "marketing".



But then you lose the wonderful look (and clear messaging) of "3DS".



I don't think that it is being treated like a revision.



Again, I don't think that consumers are mistaking the 3DS for something with only the functionality of, say, the DSi XL.

In as far as the system could have the exact same guts, but be better positioned in the market had they thought out a few things better? I think things like price, color, in-store displays, logo, commercial design, and flagship game choice all fall under marketing.

"Hey look, it's new hardware! Now here's a few 15yo games as your summer tentpole releases."

 

[Jokeropia]

3D aside, there just doesn't seem to be the increase in graphical fidelity one would expect with a true successor. I understand it's early in the products lifecycle but are there even any impressive tech-demos out there?

3DS is unquestionably a full generational leap ahead of DS. Look at RE:Revelations for example.

 

[gerg]

In as far as the system could have the exact same guts, but be better positioned in the market had they thought out a few things better? I think things like price, color, in-store displays, logo, commercial design, and flagship game choice all fall under marketing.

"Hey look, it's new hardware! Now here's a few 15yo games as your summer tentpole releases."

You are talking about changing the product, though. You're suggesting changes to the hardware (in terms of form and colour), and to the software line-up - the former is product design, the latter is software development. (I guess that colour variations of hardware may be considered as part of marketing, but I'm struggling to see how the choices of colour for the 3DS have really stunted it.)

Marketing is more closely associated with branding and advertising than those much more fundamental changes. I'm not sure that I'd even say that price drops come under marketing, as they may be more associated with business strategy.

But, now that I think about it, Iwata himself has said that the in-store displays for the 3DS have not been good enough at presenting the value of the 3D display, and that is certainly a failure of marketing.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

I was one of those 360s.

Had to replace my old one.

 

[orion434]

I would have never guessed 500K for the X360, I would have definitely put it under last years numbers. Glad I missed this weeks prediction thead while on vacation.

 

[ElNino]

Seriously? How old are they? I don't know a single child with an ipod touch. You mean tween/teen?

Well, "Santa" brought my 4 year old son an iPod Touch for Christmas last year. He also has a DS which he likes for Super Mario/Mario Party/etc. but he plays on his iPod more.

 

[clifftrapremover]

Impressive numbers for LA Noire, Bondi and R* have a hit on their hands. Surprised about Duke but this cements that we'll see him again soon. I'm willing to bet that inFamous 2 will do well again next month due to people finishing their free copies of inFamous1.

 

[szaromir]

I was one of those 360s.

Had to replace my old one.

And the mystery's solved.

I'd say if people see 3DS as a part of the "DS family", then Nintendo's handheld business isn't in any immediate danger - DSL/i/XL will be slowly phased out and 3DS with price drops and newer models are going gradually to replace them. Nintendo just has to make sure that people know that higher priced SKU can always play games from the lower priced SKU but the reverse is not necessarily true.

Of course, there's problem of increased competition, overpriced games etc. Hopefully Nintendo will do something about it, their behavior in the last case is very anticonsumer.

 

[walking fiend]

I think they'll have an uphill battle. 3D aside, there just doesn't seem to be the increase in graphical fidelity one would expect with a true successor. I understand it's early in the products lifecycle but are there even any impressive tech-demos out there?

and it is in 3D this time.

 

[SmokyDave]

Supposedly their 3DS software offerings were intended to counter against price erosion by providing higher value and more depth. I don't think the strategy has succeeded so far. So then, the argument is "Yes, but <games x, y, and z including Pokemon> will succeed at full price", but then the scope of the debate is no longer whether games as a whole can sustain the top tier price, but whether or not there exists some premium class that can sustain the top tier price. That's already a huge loss for premium priced gaming, if many genres and many games that would have succeeded five years ago wouldn't now.

I really don't know what they're going to do about it. Pretty much all the 3DS games I've seen so far should've been £20-£25 (excepting OoT) and some of them deserved to sink at that price, being sub-par and all that. The problem is, I don't see how they can establish a £20-£25 price point for most of the games and then pull out the occasional blockbuster £40 game. Consumers may see the £40 as a money grab rather than the £20 as a money saving. I don't envy them.

3DS is unquestionably a full generational leap ahead of DS. Look at RE:Revelations for example.

I don't know what to say other than I find the graphics I've seen so far utterly underwhelming including RE:R (although I've not seen that running on an actual 3DS). On the plus side, graphics may not be a priority for the demographic Nintendo want to attract.

 

[lowrider007]

3DS is unquestionably a full generational leap ahead of DS. Look at RE:Revelations for example.

My two younger brothers (aged 12 and 14) exact words on the 3DS are "it's rubbish blocky graphics for kids", they are massive xbox 360 fans and also love their iTouche's, they got rid of their DS and PSP's years ago, this is the market your dealing with today, their market.

And honestly, how many people are prepared to pay £40 RE:Revelations?, I wouldn't pay £5 for it, it's not just iTouch/iPhone games that have changed peoples perception of the value of handheld games but even when you look at the 'core' market it's hard for me/us to justify £40's on a handheld game when you look at the price and value proposition of games on XBLA and PSN at less than half the price of a 3DS title.

 

[Tobor]

Supposedly their 3DS software offerings were intended to counter against price erosion by providing higher value and more depth. I don't think the strategy has succeeded so far. So then, the argument is "Yes, but <games x, y, and z including Pokemon> will succeed at full price", but then the scope of the debate is no longer whether games as a whole can sustain the top tier price, but whether or not there exists some premium class that can sustain the top tier price. That's already a huge loss for premium priced gaming, if many genres and many games that would have succeeded five years ago wouldn't now.

Sony is in the exact same boat with the Vita.

 

[ShapeGSX]

I'm not sure why every game for the 3DS is $40. Games for the DS seemed to range from $20 to $35. Why not have a range of prices for the 3DS, too?

Pac-Man and Galaga isn't a $40 game.

 

[gofreak]

Sony is in the exact same boat with the Vita.

3DS hasn't, by far, made a best-case for premium handheld gaming.

The hardware is not very premium (3D aside), and a lot of the software to date has been extremely questionable value for money.

If there's a battle here to 'save' premium handheld gaming, I'd say Sony appears to be making a much stronger effort than Nintendo has so far. But maybe Nintendo's been rushing things, perhaps it'll make a better case itself going forward.

 

[SmokyDave]

Sony is in the exact same boat with the Vita.

Kinda, but I'm expecting the PS Suite / Android stuff to provide them with a chunk of low-end £1.99 timewasters, then they have PSN & Minis in the middle and PS3 ports / multi-plat ports and some dedicated Vita stuff to fill in the high end. I've no doubt Sony will muff it somehow but in theory, they could have a wide range of software at a wide range of price points.

 

[AranhaHunter]

The price of games is something else I see as a stumbling block. The days of £40 portable games being palatable are coming to a rapid close.

Very true, this will be an issue for Vita as well, I don't see myself paying more than U$20 for a portable game, and that's if I really want the game like Uncharted GA or Bioshock Vita. It's still a lot compared to iOS and Android, but I feel it's worth paying the premium for the superior controls and bigger experience. I'll generally keep my handheld game purchases to < U$10 though. I think the most expensive game on the ipad is like U$15 bucks.

 

[f@luS]

Sony is in the exact same boat with the Vita.

outdated hardware, games worse looking for most of them than psp, 3D that isnt verry appealing to mass, same form as previous machine, overpriced for what is it , and most of all , not enough game at all..

i dont think this will be the same for vita