# Sony reaffirms that they do NOT plan to create a Vita successor



## DinohScene (Nov 9, 2017)

I like Sony handhelds.
They fare much better with bigger titles then Nintendo does.
To bad most of the games are weeb waifu sims ;/


----------



## europat (Nov 9, 2017)

I think smartphones / tablet and Nintendo take so much parts in handheld gaming that there not a lot of rooms left for Sony to start something new right now


----------



## FAST6191 (Nov 9, 2017)

europat said:


> I think smartphones / tablet and Nintendo take so much parts in handheld gaming that there not a lot of rooms left for Sony to start something new right now


Ignoring for a tiny moment that Sony has at least a little interest in the mobile phone/tablet market I am not sure I would phrase it that way. Though I suppose if this is Nintendo doing well that is even sadder than the state of the library and upcoming releases.

I do hope this means we get a mobile phone/tablet with some features aimed at more traditional gaming.


----------



## Sonic Angel Knight (Nov 9, 2017)

So did they admit they gave up on vita? Cause that what it seem to me. I mean They hardly ever talk about the thing but they still make updates for it. I just wonder why they quit so early. Before it was like vita this and vita that, it was like in 2012, by the time they announced the pstv within a year they just gave up on that. I mean I guess if they have a new strategy they better do something soon. I know some companies having bad flops but they are also persistent in their stuff which is good.


----------



## Flame (Nov 9, 2017)

PSP only sold like 80 million you greedy cunts. here take my shirt, my pants. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT !


NO; NOT THE SONIC SOCKS TOO?


----------



## Spectral Blizzard (Nov 9, 2017)

good 4 dem


----------



## Dr.Hacknik (Nov 9, 2017)

Basically, no matter how you hit the Vita; IT WONT DAMN DIE!


----------



## WiiUBricker (Nov 9, 2017)

Well that‘s not necessarily a bad thing. One handheld less to choose from.


----------



## Deleted member 408979 (Nov 9, 2017)

hmm. SO it's finally dead?


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

I can see how Sony would be discouraged by the market's response to the Vita - it was as close to a perfect handheld as you could get. Top smartphone specs, great screen, 3G, WiFi and BT connectivity, dual analog sticks, the Vita was awesome. I still can't quite wrap my head around why it failed - its only shortcomings were superficial. It needed support, but it never really got much outside of Japan. Shame, a big shame.


----------



## rileysrjay (Nov 10, 2017)

I loved the Vita, but In a way I'm kind of glad they've decided against it. Assuming Sony had made a hybrid console similar to the switch, I just don't see two hybrid consoles making it in a pre-dominant smartphone gaming world. Glad to see that Sony is focusing its resources on the PS4 and Nintendo is starting to focus its resources on the switch.


----------



## RedBlueGreen (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> I can see how Sony would be discouraged by the market's response to the Vita - it was as close to a perfect handheld as you could get. Top smartphone specs, great screen, 3G, WiFi and BT connectivity, dual analog sticks, the Vita was awesome. I still can't quite wrap my head around why it failed - its only shortcomings were superficial. It needed support, but it never really got much outside of Japan. Shame, a big shame.


That's exactly what it was. A lack of support in the US and EU markets. With so many games being ports and so few first party games being out (and so few games early on) I think Sony just decided to cut support because of the lack of sales. It's a shame since there are a lot of decent games on it, especially JRPGs. Now if only some of them would get localized sooner.


----------



## Sleet (Nov 10, 2017)

Sony probably thinks Remote PS4 play from Xperia phones is adequate.


----------



## VinsCool (Nov 10, 2017)

Aww I would have loved a PSP 3.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> Top smartphone specs.


I mean, not really on this point. 444mhz max CPU frequency, with the vast majority of games using 333mhz or lower, isn't exactly "top specs" compared to phones from 2012. It's more like "budget smartphone specs". Gotta remember in 2012 we had quad core 1+ghz phones with 1+GB of RAM at the time  Of course the Vita can use more of that power vs what a smartphone could cuz of potato Android, but even then it's still far from the high end scale, technically speaking. It was basically the "perfect handheld" for the time it was released though, definitely agree on that front. 

The main reason the Vita failed is people's incorrect assumption that there was little support outside Japan. The Vita had tons of first party games released for it the first 2-3 years of it's life, they simply failed on the entire marketing aspect of it. Thanks to that, Sony assumed there was no real pull in the western markets, so they focused on making the Vita a PS4 companion rather than it's own handheld. That, coupled with the outrageous memory card prices, is mainly what screwed the pooch for the Vita IMO. Though I wouldn't say it's a "failed" console necessarily, as it has a ton of great games even if you don't like weeb stuff, just an poorly received one.


----------



## Viri (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> I can see how Sony would be discouraged by the market's response to the Vita - it was as close to a perfect handheld as you could get. Top smartphone specs, great screen, 3G, WiFi and BT connectivity, dual analog sticks, the Vita was awesome. I still can't quite wrap my head around why it failed - its only shortcomings were superficial. It needed support, but it never really got much outside of Japan. Shame, a big shame.


Vita cards.


----------



## fgghjjkll (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> I can see how Sony would be discouraged by the market's response to the Vita - it was as close to a perfect handheld as you could get. Top smartphone specs, great screen, 3G, WiFi and BT connectivity, dual analog sticks, the Vita was awesome. I still can't quite wrap my head around why it failed - its only shortcomings were superficial. It needed support, but it never really got much outside of Japan. Shame, a big shame.



Games and Memory Cards. The lineup for Western markets was pretty poor and the library didn't get any better. Using proprietary memory cards that cost an arm and leg pretty much killed any potential it had.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Nov 10, 2017)

They failed to support their own platform and then say there is no market for handhelds. It's like they live in a parallel universe where the Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, DS, 3DS and Switch don't exist.


----------



## Gizametalman (Nov 10, 2017)

Sony does what Nintenwon't.


----------



## RedBlueGreen (Nov 10, 2017)

rileysrjay said:


> I loved the Vita, but In a way I'm kind of glad they've decided against it. Assuming Sony had made a hybrid console similar to the switch, I just don't see two hybrid consoles making it in a pre-dominant smartphone gaming world. Glad to see that Sony is focusing its resources on the PS4 and Nintendo is starting to focus its resources on the switch.


There's a big difference between smartphone and handheld gaming though. There are very few mobile games that are the same quality as a console game.


----------



## simbin (Nov 10, 2017)

It's a shame really, as the Vita is mostly a nice piece of hardware. I'm not sure all the reasons it failed, but their ludicrous proprietary SD technology certainly didn't help. Once Sony abandoned it, everyone stopped making games except for some indie JRP studios.

With hacks, you can overcome the storage limitations and it makes for one amazing little emulation device.

There's a couple rare Vita (demo) units with HDMI out. Imagine how things could've been different if they kept HDMI and went for the hybrid approach - 4 years before the Switch. They deny their intent to offer hybrid functionality, but the PSTV and Remote Play were botched attempts.


----------



## Xzi (Nov 10, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> I like Sony handhelds.
> They fare much better with bigger titles then Nintendo does.


If that was the case they wouldn't be pulling out of the market.  Sony handhelds have always sold poorly compared to Nintendo's, and all the proprietary disc/memory stuff didn't help things.


----------



## DinohScene (Nov 10, 2017)

Xzi said:


> If that was the case they wouldn't be pulling out of the market.  Sony handhelds have always sold poorly compared to Nintendo's, and all the proprietary disc/memory stuff didn't help things.



They might have sold poorly but the games where just better.
Then again, it's not much of a fair competition and neither handheld received much of the same game.

I had more memorable moments and joy with games on the PSP/Vita then on DS/3DS.


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> I can see how Sony would be discouraged by the market's response to the Vita - it was as close to a perfect handheld as you could get. Top smartphone specs, great screen, 3G, WiFi and BT connectivity, dual analog sticks, the Vita was awesome. I still can't quite wrap my head around why it failed - its only shortcomings were superficial. It needed support, but it never really got much outside of Japan. Shame, a big shame.


Game library. Wrapping up UMD drive which they spent money to developed for PSP for another game reader, while DS -> 3DS game reader/ game cartridge is pretty much straight forward from Nintendo. When there ain't enough hit game for 3DS, people can just play their favorite DS games. 3DS homebrew came and boost the 3DS for the last couple years. On the other hand, I meant Sony hung the faithful PSP game buyers out to dry. Not too many great games to play for Vita while you can't just play your PSP collection UMD games without repurchasing digital copy. Good luck marketing PS Vita.

Then the whole memory card mess. Games take more space and Sony memory card is just silly expensive.

Vita used to have good spec when they first came out. However, with time, it's just overpriced piece of gaming hardware with not much to do with until recently when Henkaku being released. Nintendo handheld gradually improve DS-DSI-3DS-Switch. It doesn't let a huge gap with too many what if like Vita. With this Nintendo handhelds just do enough. On the other hand, PS Vita with all the potential didn't do anything to hold its ground and now being surpassed in hardware specs, it has not enough pull to create a scene.


----------



## Xzi (Nov 10, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> They might have sold poorly but the games where just better.


Meh, a lot of games were on both systems at the time (3DS/Vita, DS/PSP).  It's not a very accurate way of measuring things, but I counted the number of games above an 80 score on Metacritic for both Vita and 3DS.  Vita has 99 where 3DS has 91.  In the end just about anybody should be able to find plenty of games to enjoy on either system.  Again it was the insistence on proprietary memory cards that helped sink any chance for the Vita.


----------



## DinohScene (Nov 10, 2017)

Xzi said:


> Meh, a lot of games were on both systems at the time (3DS/Vita, DS/PSP).  It's not a very accurate way of measuring things, but I counted the number of games above an 80 score on Metacritic for both Vita and 3DS.  Vita has 99 where 3DS has 91.  In the end just about anybody should be able to find plenty of games to enjoy on either system.  Again it was the insistence on proprietary memory cards that helped sink any chance for the Vita.



Deffo.
It's unfortunate as playing games on OLED truly enhances the experience.
Fuck me, GTA VCS on OLED is better then a wet dream about a lumberjack.


----------



## DRAGONBALLVINTAGE (Nov 10, 2017)

R.I.P PSP Line products 2004-2017



one death after another


----------



## ZeroT21 (Nov 10, 2017)

Buying a handheld added on that you had to get sony's own overpriced propriatary storage media killed it.


----------



## rileysrjay (Nov 10, 2017)

RedBlueGreen said:


> There's a big difference between smartphone and handheld gaming though. There are very few mobile games that are the same quality as a console game.


I agree with that statement fully, console and handheld games are almost always better in quality than mobile phone games (not to say all mobile games are bad, I've played some pretty good games on mobile over the years). But that casual type audience that the DS and psp had that made them so successful has moved on to mobile devices, no doubt about it. It's part of the reason why the 3ds and Vita didn't do as well as their predecessors and why I don't see two hybrid consoles co-existing well with each other; there's just not a big enough market for it imo in a world where mobile phones predominate the mobile gaming market.


----------



## kuwanger (Nov 10, 2017)

What killed the Vita for me is mostly that Sony did a pretty horrible job at marketing the Vita as something other than a long series of failures of the PSP line.  Not that the PSP was a complete failure, but I'd put it in the same category of the Game Gear.  Too much hardware requiring too much power for the time (relative to the Nintendo handheld of the same era).  Once they ditched the UMD, the whole PSP Go line was a mess for previous owners (AFAIK).  Add in, of course, the proprietary memory card costs (as everyone else has mentioned), and I think that's the key part that really killed it from gaining traction at that point--ignoring that even then, file sizes still heavily favor the Nintendo line until the 3DS era.

Of course, this is heavily based upon more of sideline watching than actual experience.  The PSTV seemed like a joke, especially when it requires whitelisting of games.  Thanks to Henkaku and dsmotion, though, things have changed heavily.  Even still, there's way too many Japan exclusive games and/or ones that are ridiculously ecchi.  I mean, there's the difference between targeting hardcore gamers and targeting otaku gamers.  So, even there, I think the Vita failed (in a meaningful way).

*shrug*


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

rileysrjay said:


> I agree with that statement fully, console and handheld games are almost always better in quality than mobile phone games (not to say all mobile games are bad, I've played some pretty good games on mobile over the years). But that casual type audience that the DS and psp had that made them so successful has moved on to mobile devices, no doubt about it. It's part of the reason why the 3ds and Vita didn't do as well as their predecessors and why I don't see two hybrid consoles co-existing well with each other; there's just not a big enough market for it imo in a world where mobile phones predominate the mobile gaming market.


Sony didn't play their cards well enough. I meant Nintendo have their own trademark titles that they won't sell the license for mobile games: Mario, Pokemon (until Pokemon Go), Zelda, Samus... This means they will have certain amount of fans. Sony depends on independent game developers which with mess by taking a big cut in Vita hardware profit (read my previous post regarding game reader, memory card), it doesn't give off a reassuring platform as both developer & buyers ain't being well attracted. Also many titles for Vita were released for PS2/PS3/PS4, and they are better on home console than on Vita. Buying a console so you can just play it portably is not worth it. Nintendo home console & handheld may share some of the titles, but there are more exclusive titles (taken from their own trademark brand).

I don't buy into the " the handheld market is only this big" argument. People can't stop changing phone every year, despite the feature ain't getting ground breaking improvement annually. Look at 3DS. It's didn't do well couple years ago and for several reason, the New 3DS era did quite well for revision model. I meant if Sony decided to make a revision of Vita today with UMD reader, micro SD reader, OLED, and adding more games, it can be revived. Homebrew scene spike some life into it like CFW for 3DS couple years ago. It's up to Sony to do the right thing, which they refuse to.


----------



## rileysrjay (Nov 10, 2017)

tivu100 said:


> Sony didn't play their well enough. I meant Nintendo have their own trademark titles that they won't sell the license for mobile games: Mario, Pokemon (until Pokemon Go), Zelda, Samus... This means they will have certain amount of fans. Sony depends on independent game developers which with Sony messes up Vita the way they did (read my previous post regarding game reader, memory card), it doesn't give off a reassuring platform as both developer & buyers ain't being well attracted. Also many titles for Vita were released for PS2/PS3/PS4, and they are better on home console than on Vita. Buying a console so you can just play it portably is not worth it. Nintendo home console & handheld may share some of the titles, but there are more exclusive titles (taken from their own trademark brand).
> 
> I don't buy into the " the handheld market" is only this big. People can't stop changing phone every year, despite the feature ain't getting ground breaking improvement annually.


I didn't mean that smartphone gaming was the main reason why the Vita failed, sorry if I came across that way. I was just pointing out how, in general, smartphone gaming is one of the reasons why sales in handheld gaming have declined since the glory days of the psp and DS. No doubt Sony's stupidity in not supporting the Vita with a good stream of first party content plus triple a third party games and the proprietary card crap is what killed the Vita. I owned a Vita and it was one of my favorite handhelds I've ever owned. I have a switch now and I've really enjoyed it as well, I'll always be a handheld gamer at heart as it's what introduced me to gaming and I've always loved being able to take quality games on the go. The handheld market is smaller than what it was before smartphone gaming became a thing Imo. Not to say it still isn't a decent sized market, look at how well the switch is doing!


----------



## ArugulaZ (Nov 10, 2017)

TwinRetro said:


> They failed to support their own platform and then say there is no market for handhelds. It's like they live in a parallel universe where the Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, DS, 3DS and Switch don't exist.



When they say that, they mean there's no market for handhelds for anyone BUT Nintendo.


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

rileysrjay said:


> I didn't mean that smartphone gaming was the main reason why the Vita failed, sorry if I came across that way. I was just pointing out how, in general, smartphone gaming is one of the reasons why sales in handheld gaming have declined since the glory days of the psp and DS. No doubt Sony's stupidity in not supporting the Vita with a good stream of first party content plus triple a third party games and the proprietary card crap is what killed the Vita. I owned a Vita and it was one of my favorite handhelds I've ever owned. I have a switch now and I've really enjoyed it as well, I'll always be a handheld gamer at heart as it's what introduced me to gaming and I've always loved being able to take quality games on the go. The handheld market is smaller than what it was before smartphone gaming became a thing Imo. Not to say it still isn't a decent sized market, look at how well the switch is doing!


I see. Still I edited my previous post and covered the point that there is always room to expand in handheld market for gaming console

I haven't got a Switch yet so no comment. Pre Switch, Vita 1000 is definitely my favorite hardware, design and OS wise. The problem as I explained is the lack of support from Sony to make a scene around the console. Gaming console and you need game to fulfill its potential. In this regard 3DS especially N3DS era, beat Vita to a pulp, even though the improvement ain't exactly that huge within the 3DS model.


----------



## TyDye (Nov 10, 2017)

even though im a nintendo guy i was still waiting for PS vita 2 to bad it wont ever be


----------



## rileysrjay (Nov 10, 2017)

tivu100 said:


> I see. Still I edited my previous post and covered the point that there is always room to expand in handheld market.
> 
> I haven't got a Switch yet so no comment. Pre Switch, Vita 1000 is definitely my favorite hardware, design and OS wise. The problem as I explained is the lack of support from Sony to make a scene around the console. Gaming console and you need game to fulfill its potential. In this regard 3DS especially N3DS era, beat Vita to a pulp, even though the improvement ain't exactly that huge


Same here, the original Vita 1000 was awesome with that oled screen and it had a really solid design (my only complaint would be the proprietary cord for charging and transferring data to a computer; I tried and I could never get my Vita to transfer stuff to my PC through that cable). I always waffle between whether I like the 3ds or the Vita better, they're both amazing handhelds. The Vita has that gorgeous screen and some great Indies, jrpgs, and some good ps2 and PS3 ports, while the 3ds has virtual console and some great first party games.


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

rileysrjay said:


> Same here, the original Vita 1000 was awesome with that oled screen and it had a really solid design (my only complaint would be the proprietary cord for charging and transferring data to a computer; I tried and I could never get my Vita to transfer stuff to my PC through that cable). I always waffle between whether I like the 3ds or the Vita better, they're both amazing handhelds. The Vita has that gorgeous screen and some great Indies, jrpgs, and some good ps2 and PS3 ports, while the 3ds has virtual console and some great first party games.


That's the point. If Sony did the right thing couple years ago just like Nintendo to the 3DS:Vita decided to upgrade instead downgrading with cheaper material for the Slim. New Vita with micro sd card reader, add UMD drive to bring back the PSP faithfuls, adding more game... And a bit of luck with homebrew scene make the same breakthrough as 3DS back then; arguably Vita scene would beat 3DS. 3DS won due to both luck and good strategy. If Nintendo happens to have approach similarly to Sony with the 3DS by only looking to downgrade design with cheaper material, and show lack of support in term of games, noone would touch a 3DS. It looks too childish design wise and without games to play with, it's awkward to carry around. You can't use 3ds for music with closed lid ffs (I meant using the built in speaker)


----------



## Jayro (Nov 10, 2017)

Then they might wanna pick up the Vita support a bit... Just sayin, it's basically an indie/weeaboo platform now.


----------



## Fugelmir (Nov 10, 2017)




----------



## rileysrjay (Nov 10, 2017)

tivu100 said:


> That's the point. If Sony did the right thing couple years ago just like Nintendo to the 3DS:Vita decided to upgrade instead downgrading with cheaper material for the Slim. New Vita with micro sd card reader, add UMD drive to bring back the PSP faithfuls, adding more game... And a bit of luck with homebrew scene make the same breakthrough as 3DS back then; arguably Vita scene would beat 3DS. 3DS won due to both luck and good strategy. If Nintendo happens to have approach similarly to Sony with the 3DS by only looking to downgrade design with cheaper material, and show lack of support in term of games, noone would touch a 3DS. It looks too childish design wise and without games to play with, it's awkward to carry around. You can't use 3ds for music with closed lid ffs (I meant using the built in speaker)


Well, in a way Nintendo did make a downgrade with the 2ds, but at least they were highly strategic with it and the price point of it unlike the Vita revision. The newer Vita models look pretty plasticy and childish as well imo. Even if Sony had done a good job with the revision I still think the Vita wouldn't have done that well; it still needed that first party support from Sony and some good third party support too and it had a limp leg from the start in the form of the proprietary cards.


----------



## jt_1258 (Nov 10, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> To bad most of the games are weeb waifu sims ;/


hay now, the hatsune miku games are realy good rythm games, though I suppose one mans trash is another mans treasure


----------



## Hyborix3 (Nov 10, 2017)

Shame, a hybrid PS4 portable console is the only thing I wouldn't mind from them as they have a nice library of games/ indies on it. Then again they don't really knew how to sell the Vita handheld with the overpriced memory card, little marketing and lack of first party. Even the Vita TV was a mess...


----------



## p1ngpong (Nov 10, 2017)

I think it speaks a lot about Sony that they still support the vita with updates and it is still getting a trickle of games consistently. People who keep demanding Sony "admit the vitas dead" and cut off support for it just come across as imbeciles to me. Isn't it a good thing that they are supporting a device people invested in for far longer than anyone would expect?

Anyway I fully agree with @Foxi4 that it is a fucking crying shame the vita didn't have a better run. It would have benefited everyone if it was more successful. It was a perfectly designed gaming machine and in my opinion makes the original 3DS look like a piece of badly designed trash in comparison in practically every respect.


----------



## Fugelmir (Nov 10, 2017)

It still amazes me how sturdy the vita is.  Imagine if all consumer electronics were that durable.


----------



## CMDreamer (Nov 10, 2017)

"We do not see potential in the handheld market."

Translation:

We screwed it really big with the Vita, we're afraid of even trying it again.

The Vita is a great handheld for sure, but on the hands of that crap brand owner it got reduced to what all user with a firmware > 3.60 have on their hands.

Most are crap games, depending on an anime for their existence. Even though I like anime, don't like crap games based on them. Even so, that most of those games were third party, that crap brand owner created just more crap as games to try to compete with other handhelds.

And I agree, that crap brand owner's plans are to get only "refurbished" games from old consoles, nothing new on sight, nothing really innovative from them.

And no, VR gaming is not the future.


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

p1ngpong said:


> I think it speaks a lot about Sony that they still support the vita with updates and it is still getting a trickle of games consistently. People who keep demanding Sony "admit the vitas dead" and cut off support for it just come across as imbeciles to me. Isn't it a good thing that they are supporting a device people invested in for far longer than anyone would expect?
> 
> Anyway I fully agree with @Foxi4 that it is a fucking crying shame the vita didn't have a better run. It would have benefited everyone if it was more successful. It was a perfectly designed gaming machine and in my opinion makes the original 3DS look like a piece of badly designed trash in comparison in practically every respect.


Fully agree. Just annoyed about how miserably Vita failed than feeling the need for a new Sony handheld gaming console. Even the New 3DS ain't that good design. How they hide the memory card slot is annoying. New 2DS XL has the best design doesn't match Vita 1000's feel. If only Vita were a success, it would have benefited gamer more, as that would mean the future handheld need to step up big time given Vita's spec potential was very high.


----------



## ThoD (Nov 10, 2017)

Let's all be honest here, compared to how great the PSP was, the Vita was so bad it was the Sony equivalent of the WiiU! It hardly got any decent titles, TOO many security fixes and even the interface was kinda annoying to name some issues. At least they can now focus on the main PS series more and improve it enough to warrant a purchase Not saying that Vita was all bad though, it had quite a nice backwards compatibility, allowed for a lot of control in games and was comfortable to hold, but that was pretty much it.


----------



## Xabring (Nov 10, 2017)

they beat Netflix to the punch....still gonna make less subscribers, I bet. At least from the people I know.


----------



## KingVamp (Nov 10, 2017)

3ds aside.  

While I agree with wishing it did better, it seems handhelds "step up big time" despite the hardships of the Vita.


----------



## duffmmann (Nov 10, 2017)

Whether or not Sony has intentions of releasing a similar hybrid system, I wouldn't expect them to announce so until a product is nearly finalized, and until then they'd just deny that such a device is even in development.  So i just take a claim like this with a grain of salt these days.


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

duffmmann said:


> Whether or not Sony has intentions of releasing a similar hybrid system, I wouldn't expect them to announce so until a product is nearly finalized, and until then they'd just deny that such a device is even in development.  So i just take a claim like this with a grain of salt these days.


Hmm. But if they're not planning to marketing for the new console while the current handheld console looks like dead beaten, then it would take years if we look at how Nintendo handles Switch situation. They had New 3DS generation selling well. They didn't go out their way to shoot down NX rumor for the sake of 3DS. They just found a way to smooth thing out with NX was rumored as a hybrid console to with main aim to replace dead beaten Wii U. Even when Switch portability was confirmed, 3DS was backed to get more games.

The way Sony acts, it doesn't sound good marketing wise. Taking their word literally, it sounds depressing for the handheld gaming scene.


----------



## duffmmann (Nov 10, 2017)

tivu100 said:


> Hmm. But if they're not planning to marketing for the new console while the current handheld console looks like dead beaten, then it would take years if we look at how Nintendo handles Switch situation. They had New 3DS generation selling well. They didn't go out their way to shoot down NX rumor for the sake of 3DS. They just found a way to smooth thing out with NX was rumored as a hybrid console to with main aim to replace dead beaten Wii U.



But i wouldn't expect them to announce a new device that isn't finalized or a done deal at this point.  I'm sure at the very least they're doing some R&D right now to determine whether they should give such a device a go, and if they did what that might look like.  Just because they're probably looking into it, is no guarantee that anything would ever come from it.  As such right now, the best thing to do would say that they have no plans for such a device. And then should things progress and they decide that they should move beyond research and prototyping, then that would be a much more logical time to start teasing that such a device may be on its way.


----------



## netovsk (Nov 10, 2017)

It's ok Sony makes money mostly from selling AAA releases like BF, CoD and FIFA to people who don't have a gaming PC and Vita won't allow that so from a financial standpoint the decision to withdraw from the handheld market makes sense.


----------



## Thirty3Three (Nov 10, 2017)

They plan on making a PSP successor  Wording.

It'll happen. I'm sure of it. And when it does I'll be SO ready.


----------



## rileysrjay (Nov 10, 2017)

Thirty3Three said:


> They plan on making a PSP successor  Wording.
> 
> It'll happen. I'm sure of it. And when it does I'll be SO ready.


Don't think so, if we're judging off what the representative said:
“The Nintendo Switch is a hybrid device, thus it has a completely different strategy from the PlayStation,” House said. “We are focusing our attention on making products that can be played in the living room. *We do not see big potential in the handheld market*.”


----------



## froggestspirit (Nov 10, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> I like Sony handhelds.
> They fare much better with bigger titles then Nintendo does.
> Good thing most of the games are weeb waifu sims ;/


I agree


----------



## Hells Malice (Nov 10, 2017)

Sony reaffirms their business level incompetence.


----------



## Futurdreamz (Nov 10, 2017)

literally the whole selling point if the PS4 was that it was the most powerful console ever, but with the XbOX that is no longer true. I think finding a way to portableize the PS4 (with backwards compatibility) should be heavily considered at least, unless they think they can win the graphics race that has already passed the point of diminishing returns. They seem to be doubling down on vr, not sure how that will go.

if anyone comes out with a true Sword Art Online esque thing it will probably be Sony. They might be researching direct neural interfacing now.


----------



## ov3rkill (Nov 10, 2017)

Sony could just upgrade Vita. Take some inspiration on the Switch. Use the latest OLED tech or high refresh rate IPS. And they're good to go. Heck, they could just re-use the OS on PS4 but repurpose for the handheld or something. Get some exclusives like what they did on God of War on the PSP. They have enough exclusives to create some spin-off or milk some franchises. 

I was loving the exclusives on the Vita including, Soul Sacrifice, Freedom Wars, Uncharted, Killzone, Resistance, etc. and some ports were freakin' cool as hell. Too bad they just declared the Vita a legacy which didn't help at all. They didn't even give it a chance. They could've refreshed it like what Nintendo does with upgraded CPU, more buttons , etc. Declaring it a legacy console while some games are still coming is a kick in the nuts to the devs and publishers. That's bad marketing. You see Nintendo is still telling us that the Switch won't replace the 3DS. We all know it will in due time. It's a slow transition as there are still a lot of 3DS owners out there. Just like what the GBA to DS to 3DS was.

They should've learned from there mistakes and not give up. They sure make one hell of a console. Then again, if they won't make a handheld anymore, I hope we'll get to see some of their IP on the Switch.


----------



## HaloEliteLegend (Nov 10, 2017)

This video is highly relevant right now.


----------



## BARNWEY (Nov 10, 2017)

The Switch is kind of hard to compete with....


----------



## KingVamp (Nov 10, 2017)

ov3rkill said:


> Sony could just upgrade Vita. Take some inspiration on the Switch. Use the latest OLED tech or high refresh rate IPS. And they're good to go. Heck, they could just re-use the OS on PS4 but repurpose for the handheld or something. Get some exclusives like what they did on God of War on the PSP. They have enough exclusives to create some spin-off or milk some franchises.


Well, if they were to take some inspiration from the Switch, this PSV2/PS4P would have the exact same games as the PS4. Not just spin-offs.


----------



## ov3rkill (Nov 10, 2017)

KingVamp said:


> Well, if they were to take some inspiration from the Switch, this PSV2/PS4P would have the exact same games as the PS4. Not just spin-offs.



Probably, but it would be a crappy version of the PS4  game as the PS4 console itself is too powerful. There would a lot of compromises unless ported properly. Might as well make some good exclusives. Streaming it on the handheld would sound so much better. A better little brother for the PS4 I'd say. A cheaper one like around 200-250. Like I said, just an upgraded Vita would suffice, better streaming connectivity support if you want to play PS4 games and complete buttons this time.  Just wishful thinking.


----------



## zoogie (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> I can see how Sony would be discouraged by the market's response to the Vita - it was as close to a perfect handheld as you could get. Top smartphone specs, great screen, 3G, WiFi and BT connectivity, dual analog sticks, the Vita was awesome.* I still can't quite wrap my head around why it failed - its only shortcomings were superficial. It needed support, but it never really got much outside of Japan. *Shame, a big shame.


Support goes both ways. You need developer/publisher support to make compelling software, but the platform needs to reward those developers/publishers with high sales if the content is good. Killzone mercenaries -- a great game -- got killed in sales, as an example. It could have easily sold 5x that amount at $60 retail with the added benefit of cheap disc media, if they had went with PS3/4.

Another problem: vita AAA games require PS3 budgets to produce the graphics level people expect, but can only charge handheld prices. Bad business model. Sure you can make indie style games for cheap but you have phones for that.

The 3ds survived because people needed it to play Nintendo games.
The Vita didn't have that luxury. They needed 3rd parties to make impressive games but they jumped to the phone market instead (or PS3/PS4 for AAA) -- where the real money is and less risk.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Nov 10, 2017)

hehehe they can't compete against the switch


----------



## Polopop123 (Nov 10, 2017)

Those would’ve been a perfect time to get in and do it again. The could’ve learned so many things from the Psvita and what not to do, and a lot from the Switch


----------



## linuxares (Nov 10, 2017)

They have confirmed now that they can't beat the Switch/3DS. So they focus all on beating the Xbox to a pulp?


----------



## Bladexdsl (Nov 10, 2017)

linuxares said:


> So they focus all on beating the Xbox to a pulp?


which won't be hard to do when it has no exclusives


----------



## Retinal_FAILURE (Nov 10, 2017)

The Nintendo Switch is a hybrid device, thus it has a completely different strategy from the PlayStation. We are focusing our attention on products that can specifically be played from the living room. We do not see potential in the handheld market.

Sony will probly make a handheld outside of the PlayStation line. He's just saying PS will remain home. New name new marketing strategy. How many people saw American Pie 3 compared to American Pie? PsP Vita 3 just sounds a little complex. It might appeal to an alien, but for marketing it's a disaster, and they'd be creamed. If it doesn't sound right there not going to produce it. They'll probly open up mobile gaming to a upgraded and better quality. Imagine after that we'll [robky see a VR phone. Hands free, pocket free. Sony in my lifetime has made great quality electronics at prices that arent astronomical compared to competitors, but if you were to tell me Tiffany's, Leica, or Ferrari were going to make a handheld to compete with Nintendo, then I might have to start doubting a delivery. This seems like step one in a Sony hype game, taken from the Nintendue and Microsots handbooks.


----------



## Deleted-355425 (Nov 10, 2017)

linuxares said:


> They have confirmed now that they can't beat the Switch/3DS. So they focus all on beating the Xbox to a pulp?



Xbox one x just beat the PS4 to a pulp


----------



## BvanBart (Nov 10, 2017)

Dr.Hacknik said:


> Basically, no matter how you hit the Vita; IT WONT DAMN DIE!



Thank you for this post! Good 'ol times


----------



## Snitzle (Nov 10, 2017)

zoogie said:


> Support goes both ways. You need developer/publisher support to make compelling software, but the platform needs to reward those developers/publishers with high sales if the content is good. Killzone mercenaries -- a great game -- got killed in sales, as an example. It could have easily sold 5x that amount at $60 retail with the added benefit of cheap disc media, if they had went with PS3/4.
> 
> Another problem: vita AAA games require PS3 budgets to produce the graphics level people expect, but can only charge handheld prices. Bad business model. Sure you can make indie style games for cheap but you have phones for that.
> 
> ...




It's gutting but I feel like they could have kept it alive if they wanted. It's like they put it out, had a bit of trouble and decided to not even bother which is insane considering the investment. I'm glad I like JP games because I get some use of out of it but it's a damn shame because I think it's the best quality handheld that's been released so far.


----------



## Xzi (Nov 10, 2017)

BARNWEY said:


> The Switch is kind of hard to compete with....


This is also a good point.  Best they could do right now is match 720p for a portable, and that'd probably even require similar internals.  Of course, their sales history with portables and Nintendo's established portable base can't be overlooked, either.


----------



## ThoD (Nov 10, 2017)

Xzi said:


> This is also a good point.  Best they could do right now is match 720p for a portable, and that'd probably even require similar internals.  Of course, their sales history with portables and Nintendo's established portable base can't be overlooked, either.


The problem isn't that Nintendo has established a better base for portable systems, it's that Sony hardly ever takes any risks these days. Reason the Vita failed so miserably is because they were too afraid to invest in it since it was a gamble, so they ended up losing even without bothering with it! If Sony takes a big risk and brings something good, powerful, easy to program/develop for and original with a nice selection of games at launch, of course it's gonna go well.


----------



## linuxares (Nov 10, 2017)

mech said:


> Xbox one x just beat the PS4 to a pulp


hardware wise, sure. But game wise?


----------



## leon315 (Nov 10, 2017)

this is a GREAT newz, FROM NOW ON all weeb games will move to nintendo's handhelds! And Steam too!


----------



## WhiteMaze (Nov 10, 2017)

Apparently Sony's *version* of "potential in the handheld market", is selling 16 GB memory cards for $60.


----------



## Pluupy (Nov 10, 2017)

Fugelmir said:


> It still amazes me how sturdy the vita is.  Imagine if all consumer electronics were that durable.


Depends on which model you mean. The original is bulky and higher quality than the slim model, which has cheaper plastic.



Futurdreamz said:


> literally the whole selling point if the PS4 was that it was the most powerful console ever, but with the XbOX that is no longer true.


If anyone is buying a console for power, you're already doing it wrong.


----------



## DarthDub (Nov 10, 2017)

I get to save my money? Good.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Nov 10, 2017)

mech said:


> Xbox one x just beat the PS4 to a pulp


how with no games?


----------



## p1ngpong (Nov 10, 2017)

Futurdreamz said:


> literally the whole selling point if the PS4 was that it was the most powerful console ever, but with the XbOX that is no longer true. I think finding a way to portableize the PS4 (with backwards compatibility) should be heavily considered at least, unless they think they can win the graphics race that has already passed the point of diminishing returns. They seem to be doubling down on vr, not sure how that will go.
> 
> if anyone comes out with a true Sword Art Online esque thing it will probably be Sony. They might be researching direct neural interfacing now.



They have no need to go down the portable route with PS4 and BC obviously makes no difference in sales as the PS4 has sold a boatload from day one. Most powerful or not the Xbox is dead in the water with almost no games worth caring about as a selling point for it. Has the new xbox even made a dent in the PS4's sales figures? Will all the millions of people already invested in a PS4 jump over to a platform with almost nothing going for it for the sake of power? I don't think so. I still don't understand why MS invested so much in making a hugely powerful console but have seemingly invested nothing and are not even attempting to secure some exclusivity for it.


----------



## Snitzle (Nov 10, 2017)

WhiteMaze said:


> Apparently Sony's *version* of "potential in the handheld market", is selling 16 GB memory cards for $60.



That's a good point actually. Was there ever any reason they were so expensive?


----------



## WhiteMaze (Nov 10, 2017)

Snitzle said:


> That's a good point actually. Was there ever any reason they were so expensive?



A̶n̶t̶i̶ ̶p̶i̶r̶a̶c̶y̶

Sorry I meant greed.


----------



## Nekomaru (Nov 10, 2017)

Well, House is about to step down as the chair of SIE by the end of the year, which might suggest he is alone with at least some of his opinions... Virtually we can get an announcement of a "New PlayStation Sweeta XL" handheld even on Jan 1st 2018.


----------



## Deleted User (Nov 10, 2017)

Nekomaru said:


> Well, House is about to step down as the chair of SIE by the end of the year, which might suggest he is alone with at least some of his opinions... Virtually we can get an announcement of a "New PlayStation Sweeta XL" handheld even on Jan 1st 2018.


I seriously doubt that anybody's screaming "MORE SONY HANDHELDS!!!", so I think we're good.


----------



## ZeroX504 (Nov 10, 2017)

The Vita is not dead only thanks to the homebrew community. I think $ony failed the Vita due to the stupid memory stick's prices, they are ridiculously expensive.


----------



## Chrisssj2 (Nov 10, 2017)

Nonsense... I think there is a market for it.. fail. just look at the 3ds


----------



## th3joker (Nov 10, 2017)

the original psp was never a run away success and being hacked did scare off 3rd party AAA support to the vita. the vita never got a metal gear solid, or a gran turisom or a grand theft auto, ya know system sellers. sony was more commited to the psp and it being the sony branded gamboy for teens and young adults vs the nds catering to children. the vita was a here this is what we wish psp was but we are not commited into hyping up something we dont even want to develope games for. . ... that being said id still like to see a pspgo esque psvita 3.0 with a cradle dock pstv and ds4/ds3 support. make the vita like the switch. i still love my pspgo and its cradle and component cable and a sixaxis controller since psp games dont have rumble anyways


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> I can see how Sony would be discouraged by the market's response to the Vita - it was as close to a perfect handheld as you could get. Top smartphone specs, great screen, 3G, WiFi and BT connectivity, dual analog sticks, the Vita was awesome. I still can't quite wrap my head around why it failed - its only shortcomings were superficial. It needed support, but it never really got much outside of Japan. Shame, a big shame.


Top smartphone specs? It had a 444MHz Cortex A9. The Galaxy S2 (April 2011) has a 1.2GHz Cortex A9. Granted, the Vita's a quad-core whereas the S2 is a dual-core, but still, my point stands.


----------



## Zukov (Nov 10, 2017)

I will carry you wherever I go, dear Vita. You and Henkaku are the shit.


----------



## leon315 (Nov 10, 2017)

Now can we officially confirm that psdead is dead??


----------



## depaul (Nov 10, 2017)

PSP wasn't bad tbh


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 10, 2017)

Between expensive proprietary hardware and awful ergonomics. It shouldn't be a surprise that the Vita flopped. The first gen had that shitty cable that broke due to how flimsy it was. The slim gave us Micro USB cables, but didn't change the memory options. Even the 8GB card that came with the first slim models was filled so quickly.

The PSP was a fun system. However it was so damn uncomfortable to hold. Couldn't ever get a proper grip on the system, so extended playtime would kill my wrists. The Vita actually made it worse. Between smaller buttons and awkward stick placement, you practically HAD to buy a decent grip. The DS line and 3DS line aren't much better, but I never had a problem with long sessions

It was obviously the more powerful of the two handhelds, and it has a nice library to look at. However, half of the titles that are worth a damn came after the general consensus that the system sucked.


----------



## geodeath (Nov 10, 2017)

Well the market has definitely changed. Many people who relied on the DS/3DS/PSP/VITA for portable gaming were casual gamers (just check the ads selling ds, 3ds, psp and vita consoles and see the titles coming with them) that could not care less today, as many 'game' on mobile phones and tablets.

And i am pretty sure that if the switch was released as a device with a portable and home consoles alternative (so the home would be just a box, no screen no nothing, much like other consoles), a big percentage would buy that instead of the portable one. I would for sure.


----------



## TehCupcakes (Nov 10, 2017)

I wouldn't say there's "no potential in the handheld market", but I don't think Sony has anything _new_ to offer at this point that would make a new handheld successful. Between the 3DS, Switch, smartphones, and Vita, there is just no room left in the market. As far as sheer power and mechanics go, the Vita is still close to perfect for a handheld in present time. No major technological advances have been made that would dramatically change the experience with a new system, so it would be a hard sell to get people who own a Vita to upgrade to a new handheld. Smartphones and the 3DS basically beat out the Vita, and nothing has changed since then that would give them any more success. It would take a dramatic innovative breakthrough for Sony to have a successful new handheld, so I think it is wise of them to hold off right now.


----------



## Deleted User (Nov 10, 2017)

They just needed to support it more.  They put all that money into to just. . . .pretend like it don't exist. The vita is still a great machine and there are developers/publishers that are still willing to support it at least. Releases may have slowed down, but there are still games being released for it.


----------



## TankedThomas (Nov 10, 2017)

Not surprising. They made two solid systems (especially the Vita) and completely mishandled both of those. If Sony released a third handheld, they'd likely only screw it up again because they're almost as incompetent as Nintendo.
I mean, hell, the Vita just copied the PSP:

Expensive, proprietary memory cards - check
Lack of first-part support - check
Next to no new features added to the OS - check (and also, a lot of homebrew and plugins have been adding simple features which Sony refused to add, but they just patch up the system instead of adding those much-desired features because "muh piracy" - oh the irony)
Too much stability - no check because there can never be enough stability
Poor PS3/PS4 compatibility - fucking check check check because even when it worked, it didn't often work well
High price - check
Lack of support immediately following release - check
Abandoning/half-assing supposedly big features (I'm looking at you, Near) - check
You get the idea.

And this is coming from someone who loves handhelds in general _and_ owns two Vitas.


----------



## weatMod (Nov 10, 2017)

i think  that sony should sell the rights to the vita to valve and have them  manufacture the next one  for obvious reasons


----------



## TankedThomas (Nov 10, 2017)

weatMod said:


> i think  that sony should sell the rights to the vita to valve and have them  manufacture the next one  for obvious reasons


Why, so that they can change the analogue sticks to touch-sensitive craters and release zero games for it?

You know, on second thought, that fits Sony quite well.


----------



## weatMod (Nov 10, 2017)

TCJJ said:


> Why, so that they can change the analogue sticks to touch-sensitive craters and release zero games for it?
> 
> You know, on second thought, that fits Sony quite well.


no so  it can be called the valve vita






pretty cheesy pun i know


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

ThoD said:


> The problem isn't that Nintendo has established a better base for portable systems, it's that Sony hardly ever takes any risks these days. Reason the Vita failed so miserably is because they were too afraid to invest in it since it was a gamble, so they ended up losing even without bothering with it! If Sony takes a big risk and brings something good, powerful, easy to program/develop for and original with a nice selection of games at launch, of course it's gonna go well.


I disagree. Sony invested heavily for the PS3 & PS Vita era. The problem is they tried to be too clever which ended up putting too much cost on the console, which in turn passing down to buyer. Sony bit more than they can chew. Pretty much PS3 was to be ultimate home entertainment system with the latest Bluray technology, developer unfriendly Cell processor ... Game console is known with overheating issue. Overambitious backfired as the more you use the faster it is getting to its death bed. It's one of those case where you want specialist devices, and Sony can release special edition with Blueray a little later once they fix the overheating issue design flaw. Also not many shipped with backward compatible for PS2 stinks, as PS3 faced stiff competition from XBOX 360 for games. Not using the PS2 edge to help keeping the faithfuls is shooting their own feet.

PS Vita was similar. I explained in my previous post. I will add that Sony tried to use Vita to compete with not only DS & 3DS, but Mp3 players and smart phones. Nintendo focus on games which its console is purposed for. With game console you need build the game library first. Feature can come later with newer revision. By keep producing games, Nintendo subtly encourage people to update. Most of common users do. This narrow the hacker back in the days. Without games, people wouldn't care about Vita as the hardcore game should be better played on the home console given the all round overpriced cost of Vita. Nintendo and smart phones share the silly smaller games market. Vita is just too big for mere music players. Sony can't compete in app market. Vita ain't dedicated built for. All the amazing securities of Vita actually adds the extra kick on Vita dead body as homebrew scene found it too hard to get PSP emulator to work. It's like Sony was trying to kill the PSP themselves.

Enter Dark Knight quote for PS Vita...



Pluupy said:


> Depends on which model you mean. The original is bulky and higher quality than the slim model, which has cheaper plastic.
> 
> 
> If anyone is buying a console for power, you're already doing it wrong.


Agree. Microsoft got carried away with Xbox One after Xbox 360 success and stepped straight to Sony PS3 & PS Vita car crash. Gaming console sole purpose is dedicated gaming. Losing focus on that then it's a piece of overprice PC.

Build a dedicated gaming system first and add games, then upgrade with newer revision instead of downgrading (PS Vita Slim, PS3 killing off PS2 backward compatibility)


----------



## the_randomizer (Nov 10, 2017)

Hey, at least they're learning their lesson


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 10, 2017)

the_randomizer said:


> Hey, at least they're learning their lesson


Not really. They're still ignoring their user base when it comes to what's actually desired out of their systems.


----------



## the_randomizer (Nov 10, 2017)

Memoir said:


> Not really. They're still ignoring their user base when it comes to what's actually desired out of their systems.



Oh right, if they did listen, there'd be less issues.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 10, 2017)

the_randomizer said:


> Oh right, if they did listen, there'd be less issues.



Nah. However their handheld market wouldn't be shit.


----------



## duffmmann (Nov 10, 2017)

mech said:


> Xbox one x just beat the PS4 to a pulp



Let's talk in a few months. A little ridiculous to assume that after one week of new hardware selling well to think that the momentum will be maintained.  I'd like to see the X continue to succeed in order to up the competition which in turn breeds better games, but the first month of sales are going to be good regardless of the hardware, so long as it's coming from one of the big 3, hell even the Wii U had a strong first month on the market.


----------



## the_randomizer (Nov 10, 2017)

Memoir said:


> Nah. However their handheld market wouldn't be shit.



Good thing I never bought a Vita


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> Top smartphone specs? It had a 444MHz Cortex A9. The Galaxy S2 (April 2011) has a 1.2GHz Cortex A9. Granted, the Vita's a quad-core whereas the S2 is a dual-core, but still, my point stands.


If you don't know much about hardware, we speak up and make a fool of yourself? The Vita's CPU had a maximum clockspeed of 2GHz each core and was downclocked to a lower clock deliberately because CPU power was not required for gaming, a strong GPU was, which is why the Vita was equipped with a PowerVR GPU. That, and having multiple cores run at a lower speed as opposed to less cores at a higher speed is beneficial thanks to parallelism. It took a while for phones to catch up with what the Vita could render. Next time check the actual chip you're talking about and read up on the Megahertz Myth.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> If you don't know much about hardware, we speak up and make a fool of yourself? The Vita's CPU had a maximum clockspeed of 2GHz each core and was downclocked to a lower clock deliberately because CPU power was not required for gaming, a strong GPU was, which is why the Vita was equipped with a PowerVR GPU. That, and having multiple cores run at a lower speed as opposed to less cores at a higher speed is beneficial thanks to parallelism. It took a while for phones to catch up with what the Vita could render. Next time check the actual chip you're talking about and read up on the Megahertz Myth.


... So it is a high end CPU that was downclocked? How is that any different from not having a high end CPU at all? It's irrelevant whether it can go up to 2GHz or 10GHz or whatever if it is not used. I am not saying a strong CPU was required, but that doesn't make the specs high-end. Parallelism etc etc, sure, but the difference between 444MHz and 1.2GHz is a bit... Big. I didn't mean to say you can compare it directly through clockspeeds, but the difference is not irrelevant. Plus, regardless of my understanding or lack thereof, you needn't be so... Aggressive. Chill out.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> ... So it is a high end CPU that was downclocked? How is that any different from not having a high end CPU at all? And parallelism etc etc, sure, but the difference between 444MHz and 1.2GHz is a bit... Big. I didn't mean to say you can compare it directly through clockspeeds, but the difference is not irrelevant. Plus, regardless of my understanding or lack thereof, you needn't be so... Aggressive. Chill out.


I'm not aggressive. A difference in megahertz is irrelevant, megahertz is a measurement of CPU cycles per second, not a measurement of processed instructions - it has nothing to do with performance, read up on the Megahertz Myth. CPU power was not required, GPU power was, so the CPU was downclocked in order to maximise battery life - it's an easy trade-off.


----------



## DJPlace (Nov 10, 2017)

the age of handheld gaming is dying....


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> I'm not aggressive. A difference in megahertz is irrelevant, megahertz is a measurement of CPU cycles per second, not a measurement of processed instructions - it has nothing to do with performance, read up on the Megahertz Myth. CPU power was not required, GPU power was, so the CPU was downclocked in order to maximise battery life - it's an easy trade-off.


Sure you aren't. Megahertz myth? Ha. I am familiar with it. Comparing clock speeds is not meaningless in the case of the S2 and PSV as they use similar CPUs (both use Cortex A9 cores, etc). The IPC shouldn't differ too much, I suppose. I would love for a benchmark to exist to allow for better comparisons, but no such thing exists as far as the Vita is concerned.


----------



## DinckelMan (Nov 10, 2017)

DJPlace said:


> the age of handheld gaming is dying....



Everyone who owns a switch begs you differ. Switch isn't a perfect console by any means but being able to play great games on the go is pretty sick. That said, it's definitely not a pocket sized console though


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> ... So it is a high end CPU that was downclocked? How is that any different from not having a high end CPU at all? It's irrelevant whether it can go up to 2GHz or 10GHz or whatever if it is not used. I am not saying a strong CPU was required, but that doesn't make the specs high-end. Parallelism etc etc, sure, but the difference between 444MHz and 1.2GHz is a bit... Big. I didn't mean to say you can compare it directly through clockspeeds, but the difference is not irrelevant. Plus, regardless of my understanding or lack thereof, you needn't be so... Aggressive. Chill out.


Jeez. Re read.

Vita didn't need to get to max processing power because it doesn't need to. It's like to say F1 car is not better than regular car comparing a regular car running on empty free way vs F1 car being stuck in school zone speed.

The point regarding Vita used to have top spec for handheld stands. Vita failed to tap into its potential is Sony fault. If Vita was a hit and app, games with more demand being ported, then for sure Sony would have release the inner power it has


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

DinckelMan said:


> Everyone who owns a switch begs you differ. Switch isn't a perfect console by any means but being able to play great games on the go is pretty sick. That said, it's definitely not a pocket sized console though


Tbh, seeing as I seem to carry a backpack everywhere I go, it not being too small doesn't really bother me.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



tivu100 said:


> Jeez. Re read.
> 
> Vita didn't need to get to max processing power because it doesn't need to. It's like to say F1 car is not better than regular car comparing a regular car running on empty free way vs F1 car being stuck in school zone speed.
> 
> The point regarding Vita used to have top spec for handheld stands. Vita failed to tap into its potential is Sony fault. If Vita was a hit and app, games with more demand being ported, then for sure Sony would have release the inner power it has


I never said it needed any more. As far as I can remember, the phrasing used was "top smartphone specs" and that was the only thing I was disagreeing with. I never said it was a weak handheld (especially seeing as its competitors are so weak as they are)


----------



## DJPlace (Nov 10, 2017)

DinckelMan said:


> Everyone who owns a switch begs you differ. Switch isn't a perfect console by any means but being able to play great games on the go is pretty sick. That said, it's definitely not a pocket sized console though



i forget about the switch... but what i meant is by sony not joining in the war.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

DJPlace said:


> i forget about the switch... but what i meant is by sony not joining in the war.


I don't like this "war" term that I see so many players throwing around, I'll say. It seems to spawn a lot of "omg your console sucks" over time, for no real reason other than "platform wars", and also seems to be used a lot by fanboys to defend their platform of choice like their lives depended on it. Just wanted to state that. I don't feel it is an accurate term.


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

DinckelMan said:


> Everyone who owns a switch begs you differ. Switch isn't a perfect console by any means but being able to play great games on the go is pretty sick. That said, it's definitely not a pocket sized console though


I believe Sony tackle the problem wrong with Vita. Vita could have been built with PSTV hook to TV feature from the get go and advertised as portable home console which has its own library and support for port from their other system: PS1 PSP PS2, PS3. It has enough power to get demanding game built in its time. Instead Sony tried to play against smart phone, music players and Nintendo gaming handheld console in 1 go as a dedicated multimedia handheld.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> Sure you aren't. Megahertz myth? Ha. I am familiar with it. Comparing clock speeds is not meaningless in the case of the S2 and PSV as they use similar CPUs. The IPC shouldn't differ too much, I suppose. I would love for a benchmark to exist to allow for better comparisons, but no such thing exists as far as the Vita is concerned.


You can compare the actual SoC's - the Vita is using a Cortex-A9 MPCore coupled with the SGX543MP4+ GPU, a modified version of the GPU that powers the iPad 3.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> You can compare the actual SoC's - the Vita is using a Cortex-A9 MPCore coupled with the SGX543MP4+ GPU, a modified version of the GPU that powers the iPad 3.


My point had nothing to do with that to begin with x.x. I was just talking about the A9. I'm fully aware that the GPU is superior to the S2. I was just saying that such a CPU isn't really top-tier smartphone tech when it was made.


----------



## DJPlace (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> I don't like this "war" term that I see so many players throwing around, I'll say. It seems to spawn a lot of "omg your console sucks" over time, for no real reason other than "platform wars", and also seems to be used a lot by fanboys to defend their platform of choice like their lives depended on it. Just wanted to state that. I don't feel it is an accurate term.



shit... i'm saying a lot of things wrong today... but meh don't care.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

DJPlace said:


> shit... i'm saying a lot of things wrong today... but meh don't care.


Eh, worry not, it's something I see many use, it's just my opinion on it.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> My point had nothing to do with that to begin with x.x. I was just talking about the A9. I'm fully aware that the GPU is superior to the S2. I was just saying that such a CPU isn't really top-tier smartphone tech when it was made.


And my point is that it was - it was downclocked because the games didn't need raw integer processing power from the CPU, they needed a multicore setup for multitasking and parallelism. If Sony wanted to, they could make the Vita run at 2GHz all day everyday, but that'd be pointless and it'd kill battery life. They focused on the GPU, that's what matters in gaming. If full clock didn't provide any benefit in-game then it was a detriment, every piece of dedicated hardware does this.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> And my point is that it was - it was downclocked because the games didn't need raw integer processing power from the CPU, they needed a multicore setup for multitasking and parallelism. If Sony wanted to, they could make the Vita run at 2GHz all day everyday, but that'd be pointless and it'd kill battery life. They focused on the GPU, that's what matters in gaming. If full clock didn't provide any benefit in-game then it was a detriment, every piece of dedicated hardware does this.


Then I have an idea - let's make a PC with an i7-7700K, only we will make it so it cannot go above 1GHz, and the clock cannot be changed. Is it still high end? I wouldn't say so.


----------



## BARNWEY (Nov 10, 2017)

Xzi said:


> This is also a good point.  Best they could do right now is match 720p for a portable, and that'd probably even require similar internals.  Of course, their sales history with portables and Nintendo's established portable base can't be overlooked, either.


That's true... However, I feel it won't do so hot now because Nintendo has started to address the more mature market of gaming, instead of being family friendly. Couple that with it's exclusive titles and the fact that the Switch can plug into a TV, and that makes the Switch a formidable foe. Not to mention, if Sony made a console to compete with the Switch, it would create direct competition between it and the PS4 (due to it needing higher specs than the PS3 to compete with the Switch.) Overall, it just seems like it would be too much work for something that might have little turn-out at this point...


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> Then I have an idea - let's make a PC with an i7-7700K, only we will make it so it cannot go above 1GHz, and the clock cannot be changed. Is it still high end? I wouldn't say so.


That's kind of exactly what the PS4/Xbox One are, except with AMD hardware. Welcome to the world of dedicated platforms. Even with those restrictions in place the Vita was unmatched in terms of real-life performance - polycounts in games and picture quality blew contemporary handsets away.


----------



## Lord M (Nov 10, 2017)

PSP still the best and my fav portable console.
Have the best d-pad for fightning games like Tekken among portable devices.

Sure, if someday i'll put my hands on Razer Edge Pro, it'll be my almost-definitive portable device for gaming.


----------



## cvskid (Nov 10, 2017)

tivu100 said:


> I believe Sony tackle the problem wrong with Vita. Vita could have been built with PSTV hook to TV feature from the get go and advertised as portable home console which has its own library and support for port from their other system: PS1 PSP PS2, PS3. It has enough power to get demanding game built in its time. Instead Sony tried to play against smart phone, music players and Nintendo gaming handheld console in 1 go as a dedicated multimedia handheld.


Yeah, that's one of the good things about psp models 2000 on up, having tv out support. pstv shouldn't even exist.


----------



## godreborn (Nov 10, 2017)

the way that the psp 2000 was designed made it cumbersome to play on the tv (the d sub cable being towards the player).  if it were towards the tv, that would be fine.  as for the vita/pstv, I kinda prefer playing it with the ds4 since you don't have any cables getting in the way.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> That's kind of exactly what the PS4/Xbox One are, except with AMD hardware. Welcome to the world of dedicated platforms. Even with those restrictions in place the Vita was unmatched in terms of real-life performance - polycounts in games and picture quality blew contemporary handsets away.


I mean, I wouldn't call the PS4 or X1 high end either tbh.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



godreborn said:


> the way that the psp 2000 was designed made it cumbersome to play on the tv (the d sub cable being towards the player).  if it were towards the tv, that would be fine.  as for the vita/pstv, I kinda prefer playing it with the ds4 since you don't have any cables getting in the way.


I actually liked that it was at the bottom. Having cables at the top bothers me quite a bit. The PSP video out cable didn't bother me. I had a terrible TV at the time though, so I never played it that way much.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> I mean, I wouldn't call the PS4 or X1 high end either tbh.


For a portable system, the Vita was definitely on the higher end of things. Especially for the time.

Your examples and ideas are weird.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Memoir said:


> For a portable system, the Vita was definitely on the higher end of things. Especially for the time.


Again, I was talking about the comparison to smartphones. Not the actual competitors of the Vita , which are rather underpowered compared to that console.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> I mean, I wouldn't call the PS4 or X1 high end either tbh.


Let me put it this way - we're talking about hardware, and the hardware was high end. Now, the clock was lower than stock, and the reason for that was that the device was dedicated to one purpose and one purpose only, playing video games, and that purpose was determined not to require full stock clock. To use your PC parallel, imagine that you are an engineer and you have your gaming PC project under your desk - it has great specs, and among those specs there's a weird expansion card in one of the PCI slots. It doesn't really improve gameplay at all, it just sits there and eats, say, 50 watts out of the total of 500 watts you're supplying to the rig. That's cool, it doesn't matter, you're hooked into the mains. Now, imagine that you have to make that PC capable of running on a battery - that card is cutting into your battery life significantly. Do you disable the card that does nothing for you or do you lose an hour of battery life? To Sony extended battery life was more important than resources that are not used in gameplay, therefore they lowered the clock. The Vita hardware is still high-end, it didn't magically become something else, it was merely custom-tailored to a specific purpose. In fact, even when downclocked, it was still competitive if not better than most handsets on the market. Do you understand now?


----------



## Pacheko17 (Nov 10, 2017)

Assholes. 
They killed my favorite console, that's enough reason to hate Sony.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> Again, I was talking about the comparison to smartphones. Not the actual competitors of the Vita , which are rather underpowered compared to that console.


[/QUOTE]

Then talking about a CPU processor does nothing for your argument. Foxi has it pretty much covered.. But it's a dedicated game system vs the phone. Which did so much more.. If the Vita was fully capable of handling the phone aspect with the dedicated gaming aspect, then the Vita would have been the Xperia Play all over again. Or in other words an abysmal failure.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 10, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> Let me put it this way - we're talking about hardware, and the hardware was high end. Now, the clock was lower than stock, and the reason for that was that the device was dedicated to one purpose and one purpose only, playing video games, and that purpose was determined not to require full stock clock. To use your PC parallel, imagine that you are an engineer and you have your gaming PC project under your desk - it has great specs, and among those specs there's a weird expansion card in one of the PCI slots. It doesn't really improve gameplay at all, it just sits there and eats, say, 50 watts out of the total of 500 watts you're supplying to the rig. That's cool, it doesn't matter, you're hooked into the mains. Now, imagine that you have to make that PC capable of running on a battery - that card is cutting into your battery life significantly. Do you disable the card that does nothing for you or do you lose an hour of battery life? To Sony extended battery life was more important than resources that are not used in gameplay, therefore they lowered the clock. The Vita hardware is still high-end, it didn't magically become something else, it was merely custop-tailored to a specific purpose. In fact, even when downclocked, it was still competitive if not better than most handsets on the market. Do you understand now?


I understand where you are coming from, but I think it sounds rather... Misleading, perhaps? To call it high-end when it is... Artificially limited?... Eh.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


Then talking about a CPU processor does nothing for your argument. Foxi has it pretty much covered.. But it's a dedicated game system vs the phone. Which did so much more.. If the Vita was fully capable of handling the phone aspect with the dedicated gaming aspect, then the Vita would have been the Xperia Play all over again. Or in other words an abysmal failure.[/QUOTE]
Uh, it was not a great success regardless of that *cries in PS Vita*


----------



## tivu100 (Nov 10, 2017)

godreborn said:


> the way that the psp 2000 was designed made it cumbersome to play on the tv (the d sub cable being towards the player).  if it were towards the tv, that would be fine.  as for the vita/pstv, I kinda prefer playing it with the ds4 since you don't have any cables getting in the way.


Vita has bluetooth. I meant Sony can just integrate PSTV into Vita thus make a dock to transfer Vita to TV via HDMI. You can use your PS3 controller to play wirelessly. It's not as cool Switch Joycon design, but it would have save the Vita from the mess it has been in reality. So pretty much Sony wasted the resource


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 10, 2017)

tivu100 said:


> Vita has bluetooth. I meant Sony can just integrate PSTV into Vita thus make a dock to transfer Vita to TV via HDMI. You can use your PS3 controller to play wirelessly. It's not as cool Switch Joycon design, but it would have save the Vita from the mess it has been in reality. So pretty much Sony wasted the resource


There are no physical connections from the graphics output of a standard Vita to any of the connectors as was initially assumed due to the presence of the mystery dock. The only way to get HDMI output out of the system is rewiring it, a standard Vita cannot be made into a PSTV with just software. Releasing a dock for the system and rolling out a system update would be insufficient, unfortunately.


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> Deffo.
> It's unfortunate as playing games on OLED truly enhances the experience.
> Fuck me, GTA VCS on OLED is better then a wet dream about a lumberjack.


I bought a vita just for that oled screen. I wanted to see what the technology looked like as before that time I never seen an oled. 
It did have this weird black splotch problem on dark and black scenes. Sony really cheaped out on their vita oleds, Im guessing to save costs as it is a handheld. Its still much better than the new 3ds lcd ips panel.


----------



## DinohScene (Nov 10, 2017)

SG854 said:


> I bought a vita just for that oled screen. I wanted to see what the technology looked like as before that time I never seen an oled.
> It did have this weird black splotch problem on dark and black scenes. Sony really cheaped out on their vita oleds, Im guessing to save costs as it is a handheld. Its still much better than the new 3ds lcd ips panel.



All OLED Vitas suffer from it.
Mine as well.

Yeh, they did cheap out and reproducing those OLED panels or replacing them is incredibly costly or just not possible ;/


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> All OLED Vitas suffer from it.
> Mine as well.
> 
> Yeh, they did cheap out and reproducing those OLED panels or replacing them is incredibly costly or just not possible ;/


It had to be the best part of vitas that was cheaped out on. Since the defining feature of oleds are black levels and high contrast ratios. 
It was a bit of a disappointment since I was expecting this truly excellent picture they were advertising. 

If you want to see a truly excellent picture then Oled Tv's, Plasma Pioneer Kuro's, and Crts are the way to go.


----------



## DinohScene (Nov 10, 2017)

SG854 said:


> It had to be the best part of vitas that was cheaped out on. Since the defining feature of oleds are black levels and high contrast ratios.
> It was a bit of a disappointment since I was expecting this truly excellent picture they were advertising.
> 
> If you want to see a truly excellent picture then Oled Tv's, Plasma Pioneer Kuro's, and Crts are the way to go.



AMOLED phones.


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> AMOLED phones.


That too. And they also include a accurate picture setting to choose from too. Since i'm use to looking at accurate picture as I calibrate all my screens.

The vita though, its a shame, I liked it. But those expensive mem cards really killed it.


----------



## FAST6191 (Nov 10, 2017)

gnmmarechal said:


> I don't like this "war" term that I see so many players throwing around



It has been going on for decades, seems google groups lost its nice usenet search but in the meantime here is an article from CNN in 1999 using the term
http://money.cnn.com/1999/09/09/technology/dreamcast/
2002 the economist http://www.economist.com/node/1189352
1999 print gaming magazine https://i.imgur.com/1KbxtuZ.jpg
Unsure what year but as the PS1 was kicking off http://photobucket.com/gallery/http...sprite/media/Magazine Scans/UFG4Pg58.jpg.html
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-J_npv8ApY...vk/s1600/GamePro_Issue061_August_1994-032.jpg
1994 there.

I guess this has little bearing on whether you like it or not or find it productive. I don't, I see similar things in all sorts of fields though and as marketing people have a fair bit of money to ply their trade and it has been seen to work for years I doubt it will be going away any time soon.


----------



## SLiV3R (Nov 11, 2017)

Its a shame. I have loved my PSViTA equally much as my N3DSXL. 

But we have known this for many years


----------



## Pluupy (Nov 11, 2017)

Memoir said:


> The PSP was a fun system. However it was so damn uncomfortable to hold. Couldn't ever get a proper grip on the system, so extended playtime would kill my wrists.


What kind of crazy hands do you have? If the PSP was anything  it was a comfortable system to hold in-hand.   

The Vita is even better with it's dual joysticks. It has the same layout as dualshock controllers, imo the best and most culturally beloved controller out there. There's a reason why the dualshock design has barely changed since the 90s.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 11, 2017)

Pluupy said:


> What kind of crazy hands do you have? If the PSP was anything  it was a comfortable system to hold in-hand.
> 
> The Vita is even better with it's dual joysticks. It has the same layout as dualshock controllers, imo the best and most culturally beloved controller out there. There's a reason why the dualshock design has barely changed since the 90s.


Eh, I wouldn't say the PSP was "comfortable". It wasn't the worst, but ever since I started using my Vita and DualShock 4 for games such as the Project Diva series, I never went back to the PSP just because of how uncomfortable it was. Not that its competitors were any better at the time, but imo it was definitely not "comfortable". If anything, it was the least uncomfortable one out of the available options.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 11, 2017)

Pluupy said:


> What kind of crazy hands do you have? If the PSP was anything  it was a comfortable system to hold in-hand.
> 
> The Vita is even better with it's dual joysticks. It has the same layout as dualshock controllers, imo the best and most culturally beloved controller out there. There's a reason why the dualshock design has barely changed since the 90s.


The dualshock design is not the most culturally beloved design. There's actually a nice split between the likes of Xbox/Switch and what Sony did.

The PSP was and will always be the worst handheld I've played on for ergonomics. The little nub was in such an awkward spot that my hand would cramp after an hour of Socom. It's the only system to this day that's ever been a huge issue. 


The Vita didn't exactly improve on the awkward layout, that's for sure. I had to buy a grip due to how awkwardly small everything is. Even playing with just the dpad and four face buttons never was comfortable.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 11, 2017)

Memoir said:


> The dualshock design is not the most culturally beloved design. There's actually a nice split between the likes of Xbox/Switch and what Sony did.
> 
> The PSP was and will always be the worst handheld I've played on for ergonomics. The little nub was in such an awkward spot that my hand would cramp after an hour of Socom. It's the only system to this day that's ever been a huge issue.
> 
> ...


Yeah, using the analog stick was a bit of a pain, forgot about that. I mostly played games that didn't use it, so that didn't bother me too much. It definitely wasn't comfortable even so, though.


----------



## MeowMeowMeow (Nov 11, 2017)

europat said:


> I think smartphones / tablet and Nintendo take so much parts in handheld gaming that there not a lot of rooms left for Sony to start something new right now


Smartphone/phones game are pure shit. Most of them is pay to win and micro transactions


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Nov 11, 2017)

It would've been retarded. They would've been limited by current technology and would've got a device which is basically as powerful as the Switch (at most), but without the Nintendo exclusives.


----------



## FAST6191 (Nov 11, 2017)

MeowMeowMeow said:


> Smartphone/phones game are pure shit. Most of them is pay to win and micro transactions


Seen the ratio of shovelware to goodness on the DS (otherwise known as Nintendo's last unarguable success)? Equally you can have 20000 pieces of shovelware all you like if there is still a good library to be had out of it.


----------



## Pluupy (Nov 12, 2017)

Memoir said:


> The dualshock design is not the most culturally beloved design. There's actually a nice split between the likes of Xbox/Switch and what Sony did.
> 
> The PSP was and will always be the worst handheld I've played on for ergonomics. The little nub was in such an awkward spot that my hand would cramp after an hour of Socom. It's the only system to this day that's ever been a huge issue.
> 
> ...


Sounds like the problem is that your hands are too big.


----------



## aofelix (Nov 12, 2017)

Its crazy how the Vita pretty much defined at the time a console experience in your hands, yet Nintendo have ran with the idea and now making $$$$$$. We all know the Vita was hardware wise phenomenal, software wise + marketting wise very meh.

They should have released a Vita + PS3 bundle, I think that would have saved it. The issue I had with the Vita was the slack of L2/R2 and clickable analogues, maybe if they'd spent less money on the touch portion of the device and incorporated those two elements, along with cheaper memory cards, it would have held more longevity as at least a solid remote play device.


I'm playing Cold Steel 2 on it now and its really really nice.  Some of my best gaming has been on the Vita. It makes me VERY excited for my eventual purchase of the Switch. Portable gaming is just so phenomenal and its sad that Sony missed this trick.


Overall I think its wise Sony just leaves Nintendo to dominate the handheld market now. Nintendo have so many phenomenal IPs from a portable standpoint and Sony sadly left all of theirs in the dirt. I hope MS or Sony do release a Switch competitor. Playing Dark souls 3 or Kingdom Hearts3 on the go is a dream I want fulfilled but I don't see anyone stepping up. I think the chase for 4k will end either parties' interest in fighting with the Switch. 





FYI PSP ergonomics were awful. I HATED playing Kingdom Hearts on it. The nubs were just very very awful. But again, such a great fun console with a phenomenal lineup of titles.


----------



## Pokepicker (Nov 12, 2017)

Is this bussiness lingo for "Might happen. Nintendo seems to be printing Switch consoles."?
Sorta like how iPods didn't need to play videos, iPhones would never grow passed 3,5" and styluses where a sign of failure?

Or kinda like how the DS was not a replacement for the GB line? And how the 3DS will continue on and on, longside the Switch?

I don't know. It doesn't make much of a difference to me. As I would have no inclination of purchasing a new "psp/vita".
But saying "no", doesn't always really mean no.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Nov 12, 2017)

Yeah, except the Switch is like 10 times more powerful than the Vita @aofelix


----------



## aofelix (Nov 12, 2017)

yup 6 years later, for its time the vita was a powerhouse imo on the portable perspective


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 12, 2017)

Pluupy said:


> Sounds like the problem is that your hands are too big.



I'm banking on bad design. Everyone I knew that owned it had the same problem. Can't all be blessed with tiny hands I guess. 

The Vita would have bee alright if they didn't make everything so small.


----------



## BetaXenon (Nov 12, 2017)

Ah, Vita support outside of Asia has been quite bad, especially for Europe. To many people forced to create Asian accounts to just have ability to download dlc for JRPG and receive new patches for imported games (which is, considering how Vita don't have software/hardware region lock is quite strange policy), notwithstanding how they turned to force "whitelisting" on all internet providers or you can't even login to PSN.
And I prefer games with worse texture quality every day to game with insanely small texture loading distance and lags, but they keep marketing games as "they have same graphics as PS3 version" and when people complain they answering "whatever, probably it is bad market, people prefer playing mobile games instead of handheald consoles, it's not our fault, it's their why we don't see reason to make vita successor". Good grief.


----------



## Pluupy (Nov 12, 2017)

Memoir said:


> I'm banking on bad design. Everyone I knew that owned it had the same problem. Can't all be blessed with tiny hands I guess.
> 
> The Vita would have bee alright if they didn't make everything so small.


Surprise! Asians making small electronics.


----------



## Codemastershock (Nov 13, 2017)

tivu100 said:


> Also many titles for Vita were released for PS2/PS3/PS4, and they are better on home console than on Vita. Buying a console so you can just play it portably is not worth it.


This is the exact thing that Nintendo is doing with the Switch.


----------



## Nekomaru (Nov 13, 2017)

Codemastershock said:


> This is the exact thing that Nintendo is doing with the Switch.


No. Except from BoTW every Wii U port on the Switch had extra content so far. Also Switch works like Vita + PSTV in a single device.


----------



## Pachee (Nov 14, 2017)

Nekomaru said:


> No. Except from BoTW every Wii U port on the Switch had extra content so far. Also Switch works like Vita + PSTV in a single device.


Extra content or not, it is still the same games with crippled features to run on a mobile device, be it switch or vita.

The only difference i see here is that one side is Sony and the other is Nintendo. We all know which one gets the free pass to screw up.


----------



## Nekomaru (Nov 14, 2017)

Pachee said:


> Extra content or not, it is still the same games with crippled features to run on a mobile device, be it switch or vita.
> 
> The only difference i see here is that one side is Sony and the other is Nintendo. We all know which one gets the free pass to screw up.



Crippled features? Switch outpowers Wii U slightly. 720p was max on Wii U, at least for a something demanding like Bayonetta 2. 

If you read my past posts, you'll see that I am highly critical of the Switch but I always emphasise that it found a niche for its own - whereas Vita failed to do so. At the time of release Vita was technologically ahead of the competitors but the functionality was not innovative enough and the market positioning failed. Switch is outdated on the inside but has great IPs and offers unique playing experience tailored to casual gaming on the go. Both Sony and Nintendo are evil empires - the first one launched a "pro 4K console" where they failed to put enough RAM for native 4K so the high resolutions have to be upscaled with image processing. The latter sells you a device not much more powerful than a Raspberry Pie with 21 roms and two pads for EUR100. :-)


----------



## Pachee (Nov 14, 2017)

Nekomaru said:


> Crippled features? Switch outpowers Wii U slightly. 720p was max on Wii U, at least for a something demanding like Bayonetta 2.
> 
> If you read my past posts, you'll see that I am highly critical of the Switch but I always emphasise that it found a niche for its own - whereas Vita failed to do so. At the time of release Vita was technologically ahead of the competitors but the functionality was not innovative enough and the market positioning failed. Switch is outdated on the inside but has great IPs and offers unique playing experience tailored to casual gaming on the go. Both Sony and Nintendo are evil empires - the first one launched a "pro 4K console" where they failed to put enough RAM for native 4K so the high resolutions have to be upscaled with image processing. The latter sells you a device not much more powerful than a Raspberry Pie with 21 roms and two pads for EUR100. :-)


Yes, crippled features when compared to the wii u, worse battery power, also [email protected] gen NX that "outpowers Wii U slightly".



> The only difference i see here is that one side is Sony and the other is Nintendo. We all know which one gets the free pass to screw up.


Industry is again giving it to Nintendo, along with fanboys.


----------



## pasc (Nov 15, 2017)

DinohScene said:


> I like Sony handhelds.
> They fare much better with bigger titles then Nintendo does.
> To bad most of the games are weeb waifu sims ;/



What big titles anyways ?

The only games that spring to mind for me are Square Enix or Rockstar Games related.

Most games on PSP seemed boring at best...

Maybe it's just me


----------



## fengjunzi (Nov 15, 2017)

Chary said:


> View attachment 105437​
> With the Nintendo Switch taking the gaming market by storm, it seems like there's a perfect climate for Sony to step in and create a handheld to compete with Nintendo's hybrid, much like they've done in the past, with the PSP and PS Vita. However, Sony Interactive Entertainment's CEO, Andrew House, disagrees, and is quoted as saying the following during an interview with Bloomberg JP.
> 
> 
> ...


RIP


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Nov 15, 2017)

Pachee said:


> Yes, crippled features when compared to the wii u, worse battery power, also [email protected] gen NX that "outpowers Wii U slightly".
> 
> 
> Industry is again giving it to Nintendo, along with fanboys.



Nintendo is doing something right. If power is really your goal, then consoles aren't what you should look at. It's interesting how loose the term "fanboy" is becoming. More sad, but interesting.


----------



## Viri (Nov 15, 2017)

Pachee said:


> Yes, crippled features when compared to the wii u, worse battery power, also [email protected] gen NX that "outpowers Wii U slightly".
> 
> 
> Industry is again giving it to Nintendo, along with fanboys.


Then get a PC? All 3 consoles are garbage in the power department, when compared to PC.


----------



## Pachee (Nov 16, 2017)

Nintendo is doing it right by killing their main console earlier after miserable support (also lying about it) and rehashing it as a mobile device along with rehashing games? And the answers are "get a pc"?

Kinda sad to read this on the same thread where a page back the Vita was being burned on a stake for having ps3 rehashes and sony again reiterating they gave up on handhelds, unlike a certain other company who was pretending to support their home console until last minute.



> The only difference i see here is that one side is Sony and the other is Nintendo. We all know which one gets the free pass to screw up.


And now we are back to step one.


----------



## Stephano (Nov 16, 2017)

pasc said:


> Most games on PSP seemed boring at best...


I guess you haven't played _Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker _then. 
Naw just kidding... sort of. The PSP actually had some awesome games for it like Monster Hunters 1-2 with all of its HORRIBLE HIT BOX glory and Star Wars Battlefront 2. 
But i will admit, the one thing that kept me going back to the PSP was the homebrew. _*Beautiful *_


----------



## ThoD (Nov 16, 2017)

Stephano said:


> I guess you haven't played _Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker _then.
> Naw just kidding... sort of. The PSP actually had some awesome games for it like Monster Hunters 1-2 with all of its HORRIBLE HIT BOX glory and Star Wars Battlefront 2.
> But i will admit, the one thing that kept me going back to the PSP was the homebrew. _*Beautiful *_


PSP was BY FAR the best system for homebrews, it had everything! From simple stuff like enhanced browsers to streaming gameplay without any hit in performance whatsoever and even windows XP, emulators galore, was a joke to play ISOs/CSOs as there was no need to install them (just have them in memory card and that's all), supported PS1 and all it's great games (Digimon World trilogy for example) and so on! That was perfection! Then the Vita came and did nothing more for the most part and almost everything it did was because it included everything PSP had! Also, yeah, PSP had AWESOME games, GTA, Monster Hunter, Kingdom Hearts, Dissidia Duodecim FF12, Crisis Core 10th Anniversary Final Fantasy VII, Driver '76, 7th Dragon 2020 and 2020-II, Gran Turismo, Eragon (unlike the lame PC version you control the DRAGON in this), Harvest Moon/Innocent Life, Hatsune Miku Project Diva (1, 2 and Extend), all the good old Need For Speed games, Test Drive Unlimited (that also had real online with randoms), Silent Hill Origins (and Shattered Memories but who cares about that?), Summon Night 3-5, every Ys game except for the recent one and Ys Origins, Disgaea I and II, Prinny I and II (lol) and many, many, MANY more awesome games! On my hard drives alone, despite only keeping the games I thought of as good, I still have well over 1000 games! It had 13000 games and even though 7000 of those are Visual Novels (some of which are great), that's a LOT of games and let's not forget that the Indies and small games didn't suck at all (eg; Hoard)!

Yeah, when you put out a console in the market after making the perfect portable gaming device for that time and you hardly have any good games, it's doomed to fail miserably!


----------



## Stephano (Nov 16, 2017)

ThoD said:


> PSP was BY FAR the best system for homebrews, it had everything! From simple stuff like enhanced browsers to streaming gameplay without any hit in performance whatsoever and even windows XP, emulators galore, was a joke to play ISOs/CSOs as there was no need to install them (just have them in memory card and that's all), supported PS1 and all it's great games (Digimon World trilogy for example) and so on! That was perfection! Then the Vita came and did nothing more for the most part and almost everything it did was because it included everything PSP had! Also, yeah, PSP had AWESOME games, GTA, Monster Hunter, Kingdom Hearts, Dissidia Duodecim FF12, Crisis Core 10th Anniversary Final Fantasy VII, Driver '76, 7th Dragon 2020 and 2020-II, Gran Turismo, Eragon (unlike the lame PC version you control the DRAGON in this), Harvest Moon/Innocent Life, Hatsune Miku Project Diva (1, 2 and Extend), all the good old Need For Speed games, Test Drive Unlimited (that also had real online with randoms), Silent Hill Origins (and Shattered Memories but who cares about that?), Summon Night 3-5, every Ys game except for the recent one and Ys Origins, Disgaea I and II, Prinny I and II (lol) and many, many, MANY more awesome games! On my hard drives alone, despite only keeping the games I thought of as good, I still have well over 1000 games! It had 13000 games and even though 7000 of those are Visual Novels (some of which are great), that's a LOT of games and let's not forget that the Indies and small games didn't suck at all (eg; Hoard)!
> 
> Yeah, when you put out a console in the market after making the perfect portable gaming device for that time and you hardly have any good games, it's doomed to fail miserably!


 Wow... that's a lot you can name off the top of your head. Although correction, the PSP had 869 games released for it according to Wikipedia.
Although how the heck were you even able to play all those games that you listed? Playing all of them seems like it would take forever!
It's a shame the Vita didn't have any good games. As of today, I have purchased a total of 3 games (One of which is Shantae, which i can't play cuz 3.61+) and have been given 2, totaling 5 games. There just were not any games i wanted to play. But what the Vita does have is *Adrenaline*! My PSP has been through Vietnam and barely works anymore. Thanks to the Vita and PSTV, I can play my PSP games again.


----------



## ThoD (Nov 16, 2017)

Stephano said:


> Wow... that's a lot you can name off the top of your head. Although correction, the PSP had 869 games released for it according to Wikipedia.
> Although how the heck were you even able to play all those games that you listed? Playing all of them seems like it would take forever!
> It's a shame the Vita didn't have any good games. As of today, I have purchased a total of 3 games (One of which is Shantae, which i can't play cuz 3.61+) and have been given 2, totaling 5 games. There just were not any games i wanted to play. But what the Vita does have is *Adrenaline*! My PSP has been through Vietnam and barely works anymore. Thanks to the Vita and PSTV, I can play my PSP games again.


I had the PSP from early 2011 all the way until 2016 (games were STILL coming out on it), so I had a LOT of time to play at least a bit of every single game on the system! As for the 896, that's not accurate, AT ALL! That may just be how many big studio releases were localized, since from the day it was released up until games stopped coming out (summer 2016), there were about 7-12 game releases for it PER WEEK (neoseeker had the list for every week on the PSP threads)! About 90% of it's library never left Japan and that's why people don't know about them. The usual site I used for the ISOs/CSOs alone, that is however missing a LOT of the games (they got DMCAed), has 12 pages of 150 games each and that's PSP games, not including PS1 and stuff! Anyway, my PSP have been through Nam too and even Hiroshima, so it's basically dead (can fix it easily but too lazy). Screen has downward black bars all over the display and analog is broken beyond repair (I'm using an app to nullify it's input in games so it's not that bad in games that don't use it). For PSVita games, only one I ever liked was Gravity Rush and that got old very fast! If only it allowed playing PS2 games with something like PSP's PS1 popsloader support it would have been great!


----------



## wafflestick (Nov 16, 2017)

the vita was a failure so they might not have much luck with a new handheld anyway not to mention the annoying proprietary storage trend they have had


----------



## ThoD (Nov 16, 2017)

shredrdie said:


> the vita was a failure so they might not have much luck with a new handheld anyway not to mention the annoying proprietary storage trend they have had


Now that I think about it, what was up with that? A memory card that cost 60-100€ when a same capacity one was at 15? Seriously, how did they think that was a good idea?


----------



## wafflestick (Nov 16, 2017)

ThoD said:


> Now that I think about it, what was up with that? A memory card that cost 60-100€ when a same capacity one was at 15? Seriously, how did they think that was a good idea?



Just a stupid way to make more money That's why I love my 3DS cause I can store all my uh legally dumped games in a cheap SD Card


----------



## ThoD (Nov 16, 2017)

shredrdie said:


> Just a stupid way to make more money That's why I love my 3DS cause I can store all my uh legally dumped games in a cheap SD Card


Nintendo has done similar bs things too though with the 3DS, like selling the system without a charger so you would have to buy one separately Not as bad as Sony, but still annoying practices.


----------



## gnmmarechal (Nov 18, 2017)

Stephano said:


> I guess you haven't played _Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker _then.
> Naw just kidding... sort of. The PSP actually had some awesome games for it like Monster Hunters 1-2 with all of its HORRIBLE HIT BOX glory and Star Wars Battlefront 2.
> But i will admit, the one thing that kept me going back to the PSP was the homebrew. _*Beautiful *_


Elite Squadron though


----------

