Sony, You Disappoint Me

You have to admit that Sony have been on a roll lately. The PlayStation 4 seems to be getting better all the time, and the PlayStation 3 has been completely turned around from the overpriced game-less mess that was it's launch. The PS3 has the most exclusives out of all the consoles and PlayStation Plus seems like a complete steal because of its free games.

Sony are really committed to their consoles; the PS3 and the PS4. But why don't Sony give their handhelds the same treatment? Why do their handhelds always get pushed to the side when they announce a new console? It happened with the PSP after they announced the PS3, and now it's happening again with the Vita.

I remember going into Google four or five times a day, every day, putting 'PSP2' into the search bar to see if anything came up. I did this for years but nothing ever showed up, and after every time I searched and found nothing, I gave a sigh of disappointment. Then the rumors started and the mock ups began to appear, and it finally looked like Sony were going to announce the 'PSP2'. I was super excited every time a shred of evidence showed up, or when a company PR person hinted at a new handheld.

When Sony finally showed off their new handheld, I was blown away by it. It had a touch pad on the back, a touch screen on the front, a large five inch OLED screen, and most importantly - two analog sticks. TWO FRIGGIN' ANALOG STICKS! It had, and still has, so much potential you could taste it. Then they showed gameplay of Uncharted: Golden Abyss, and I couldn't believe the graphics. It was insane.

The launch finally came and I was able to get a Vita on day one. I opened the box and pulled the Vita and I was in awe at how nice it felt to hold - it was perfect, and still is.

Some really incredible games have been released for the Vita, such as Gravity Rush. It was built from the ground up with the Vita in mind and couldn't be done on any other device. It was the type of game I bought my Vita for. I wanted more of this type of game. I wanted more console-style games on the Vita, such as Metal Gear Solid, Fallout, and Battlefield.

It didn't take long to see that Sony had taken their focus off the Vita, though.

They got a company with a terrible track record, Nihilistic, to make two major franchise installments on the Vita - Resistance: Burning Skies and Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified. Both games were terrible and the sales reflected that fact. Although, Activision have stated that they are happy with the sales figures of Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified.

Why did Sony get a cheap, mediocre developer to make these games for the Vita? Why did they allow this developer to screw up two major franchises in a row?

At E3 2012, the Vita's first showing at a major game event after release, I expected a tidal wave of Vita games. I expected to see things like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Dark Souls or even an Elder Scrolls game maybe. Instead, Sony showed a thirty second (if even that) video of Assassin's Creed III: Liberation, and another equally short video of Call of Duty: Declassified. That's it. There were some indie games shown after the on-stage part of E3, but that's not good enough for a handheld that you should be shoving down peoples' throats.

E3 2013 was even worse. Sony announced that The Walking Dead series would be coming to the Vita, and didn't do a damn thing else. They moved on from their handheld as if they were in a hurry to change the subject to something else, something non-Vita related.

These days, the only times Sony talk about the Vita is when they're touting it's Remote Play capabilities. Do they actually think that the majority of Vita owners want Remote Play over good, solid games? I sure as hell don't! Like I have said multiple times in the comment sections here on N4G - I bought my Vita to play Vita games on it, not to do Remote Play with PS4 games.

Don't get me wrong here, Remote Play is an awesome feature, but it's limited. Firstly, people are unlikely to get a strong enough internet signal to be able to stream PS4 games to their Vita and be able to play them properly. Yes, you could tether to your smartphone, but I don't see a lot of people doing this. Secondly, the majority of handheld gamers play their games at home on their couch, not sitting in a bus stop. Thirdly, Vita's back touchpad isn't really ideal to be used as a replacement for the R2 and L2 buttons. Sure, the touchpad works, but it makes holding the Vita awkward, which makes playing the game awkward. The front touchscreen on the other hand, is a perfect replacement for the R3 and L3 buttons.

I can't help but get the feeling that if the Wii U hadn't been announced, Sony wouldn't have such a big focus on Remote Play. Maybe they would probably have tried to sell their handheld as a handheld.

In the coming months, the PlayStation Vita will get a game called Killzone: Mercenary. It's got insane graphics for a handheld game, and it looks like it'll be the Vita's best game so far. This game is why I'm happy that I still own my Vita. It's definitely the type of game I want to see on Sony's handheld, but if the upcoming GamesCom turns out like the last two E3s, it will be the last game I play before trading in my Vita and being done forever with Sony handhelds.

I'm not saying that the Vita doesn't have games. It does, and it has some classics. What I'm saying is that I don't like the direction Sony is going with the Vita. They release every game on both the PS3 and Vita, and that kills off any appeal that the Vita might have. Why would someone buy a Vita if they own a PS3? Sony aren't giving people a good enough reason to buy the Vita over other devices.

Would I recommend the PlayStation Vita to you at this point in time? No, I wouldn't. I recommend you not only wait until after GamesCom, but to wait until after the Tokyo Game Show, too. That way, you can see how the Vita will shape out over the next year or so.

If you're the type of person that is heavily into the thought of playing your PS4 games remotely, then the Vita is probably the device for you. Personally, I feel that I could have easily waited another year or two for the Vita, which is a shame because it's such an incredible device that's oozing with potential.

[HammadTheBeast]

PSP did so well because it had a massive library of games, 32 player Medal of Honor, Resistance Retribution, Modnation, Phantasy Star Portable, Persona 3 Portable, Final Fantasy Tactics and so many more.

Sadly, we haven't seen anywhere near the amount of diversity that PSP had so far.

[wishingW3L]

PsP did well because it had Monster Hunter in Japan but in the west is was mostly utilized for piracy. The success of a platform lies in the amount of software it sells you know, not the hardware.

[Gamesgbkiller]

Medal of Honor was really fun to play.

[joeorc]

because if you want a game to take advantage of the hardware that is in the PSVita it takes anywhere from 12 months to 18 months to make one game, and that is not taking into account all the bug testing that can further delay the game!

the 1st and 2nd generation PSP has 32 MB and 64 MB of system ram, with 4 MB of dedicated GPU ram, with 2 system Processor's with a clock speed of 333 Mhz.

the Nintendo 3DS , Has 128 MB of total system ram, and 6 MB of dedicated GPU video ram, with 2 Arm 11 processor's clocked @ 268 MHz, with the PICA 200 GPU clocked also @ 268MHz.

while the PSVita, has 512 MB of system ram, and 128 MB of dedicated GPU Ram. and a Quad Core Cortex A9 with each core clock at a Min of 800 Mhz, combined with a Quad Core SGX543MP4+ GPU clocked over 400 Mhz.

And people are expecting the games for each platform to take the same amount of time to create let along to go through and test code for debugging?

for one the PSVita is way above and to further this point, way above both the PSP and the 3DS, just by GPU ram alone.

THE PSP HAS 4 MB
THE 3DS HAS 6 MB
THE PSVita HAS 128 MB

NOW WHAT DOES EACH SYSTEMS FUNCTIONALITY OF EACH GPU HAVE INSIDE. What is Each GPU from each system capable of.

the PSP has a SINGLE MIPS CORE 4000
the 3DS has a SINGLE PICA 2000
the PSVita has a Quad Core SGX543MP4+

if you look up what function's each one of those GPU's support in tool chain and APi's you would know there is a very large gap between those chips let alone what it would take in time frame to code for each one, with code optimization, debugging, and the length of time until you are ready for publishing.

Quick games can be made for the PSVita, and are but to expect more games to be made like uncharted or Gravity Rush, or Tearaway or Killzone its going to take a hell of alot of time, manpower and resources over what it would take to make AAA budget games on both the PSP or the 3DS. the PSVita is not the PSP or the 3DS, its very far above in its hardware but also the core functionality of the chipset functions that developer's can take advantage of that just with the Arm Cortex A9 chipset instruction's that developer's use it is not like developing games for something like a MIPS 4000 or a Arm 11 processor core. and the PSVita has 4 of these Cortex A9 cores! , and to top it off the PSVita contains also another Quad core SGX543 GPU with EACH core running @ 400 MHz+

[iamnsuperman]

"They release every game on both the PS3 and Vita, and that kills off any appeal that the Vita might have. Why would someone buy a Vita if they own a PS3?"

I agree this has been a dumb move which they thought would make people buy a Vita. We are already seeing this policy starting to go away (the Gaikai service launching next year might also have something to do with it).

With the games front I think Killzone may put developers to shame. It is looking really good at the moment. The problem is the Vita is so powerful that it cost a lot to develop for it. But publishers don't want to put X amount in when it is risky so we end up with shoddy games (AC: Liberations was a buggy game).

I like my Vita. The issue with it is those damn memory cards and the price just isn't right for more people to buy into it. They need to drop the price, Have a 499 PS4/Vita bundle (can't be more as the One is 499) and the system should sell. The problem is people just don't feel handheld gaming is a necessary purchase especially when they cost almost as much as consoles which is why it needs to be cheaper.

[PopRocks359]

I've been saying this for a while and for some reason people constantly get on my case about it.

"Vita's library should stand on its own."

"YOU'RE JUST A HATER AND A FANBOY!!"

"Okaaayyy..."

The Vita is amazing. But so far Sony has been cannibalizing the system with their home console marketing. The Vita is not a portable PS3 OR a PS4 controller no matter how much Sony tries to advertise it as such. It's a dedicated portable gaming device and it deserves a lot more respect than that.

There's a ton of potential in the hardware and for some reason Sony (and the Vita's more optimistic fanboys) don't seem to want to demand more from it like how many demand more of the Wii U. That, to me, is the most disappointing aspect of the ordeal.

[Donnieboi]

I never once saw Sony try to "advertise" the vita as a portable ps3/4. The remote play is an additional option. There is zero evidence that they plan on abandoning dedicated Vita games. In fact, there will be 85+ games coming to Vita in the next 4 months, plus Sony just hinted at a new Infamous series Vita game.

Your apparent "zeal" for the Vita's well-being (and "concern" that it will be "cannibalised") is quite touching, however, it is misinformed. 85 games in 4 months is astounding, and with Tearaway, Killzone Mercs, Oddworld, Infamous, and 80+ more, it is quite clear that Sony has no intention of abandoning dedicated Vita games for the Vita. Especially not because they added Remote Play. Check Shahod Kamal's twitter every day, and you'll see how blazing fast they are breaking deals with publishers, devs, and indies on a daily basis.

Somehow, I don't see how people can think that Sony can abandon the Vita, when they didn't even abandon the PSP despite it's horrible initial start. In fact, Sony pushed so hard that the PSP turned around and sold millions. And that was under Kaz's leadership. Now that he's CEO, we won't ever have to worry about that.

So I'll save you some heartbreak; next time people dissagree with you about this whole vita/ps4 "cannibalisation" thingy, you can tell them that there are 85 games coming out in the next 4 months (I believe one of them is "The Binding of Isaac" y'know, that game that Nintendo refused to allow on it's systems), then you all can quit fighting over unfounded, easily-deflected assumptions.

http://m.ign.com/games/upco...

Also Trenton stating 85 + more games coming by years end and hint at a new infamous:

http://n4g.com/news/1334812...

[Donnieboi]

Correction, the Infamous rumor may not be true. Not sure about that atm, but the 80+ games is the main point of my response any way, not just one.

Also *Shahid not Shahod

[memots]

yeah i agree, i paid 100$ for a 32gig mem card.

100$ !! that one was a little hard to swallow.

[ABizzel1]

I paid $60 through a price match with Best Buy, but even then that's still to much just to be able to store games on the Vita. You can find 32GB microSD for $10 - $20 constantly.

I know it's to prevent piracy, but that doesn't mean the righteous need their heads busted too.

Worst of all my 32GB is already full.

[Christopher]

The PS Vita, without software to back it, is on the way out the door or will just sit in limbo as a gimmick device.

With the PS4 being released, the PS Vita is taking a huge back seat as Sony focuses on that. I wouldn't really expect any big movement on PS Vita unless the PS4 does well, and even then not until mid next year.

[iamnsuperman]

I think all we will see is a price drop/cheaper PS4 Vita bundle. They do have studios who work specifically with their handheld console so we may see stuff from them but announcement wise these games probably be announced through the Sony blog page with more stuff/details being shown, as you said, mid next year

[iceman06]

True. I expect them to repeat what they did with the PSP. They announced a price drop and then promoted the crap out of it with a new, focused ad campaign. Truthfully, it has games. People just don't know it. Much like the PSP was said to be suffering from a lack of games. In retrospect, most people realize that it had games too. It was a matter of getting people to realize that and then giving them an incentive to try them (price drop). I can forgive them, as they are currently trying to support 3 consoles. However, if by chance Vita does get completely ignored, I won't forget it!

[ABizzel1]

That's why I keep saying the Vita is really going to get time to shine until 2014, but people on n4g always think you're condemning something.

2013 is the launch of the PS4, it's going to overshadow any other PS game console by default. Then looking at all the games coming out, and the PS3 takes the win there with The Last of Us, Dragon's Crown, Tales of Xillia, Beyond 2 Souls, Puppeteer, Gran Turismo 6, GTA 5, Battlefield 3, Watch Dogs, Assassin's Creed 4, Batman Arkham Origins, and more.

There's just too much going on for the Vita to get any attention this holiday season, even a price cut would be overlooked, because it now has to compete with the PS4's hype, and the PS3 library, and the Vita is going to lose that battle.

If anything gets a price cut this holiday it needs to be the PS3. The 12GB PS3 for $199 is the only price cut Sony needs, because the core gamer is buying the PS4 this holiday, and with a $200 price point the PS3 will scoop up the remaining stragglers trying to buy a low cost, but still supported console.

The PS Vita needs to wait until spring of next year for a price cut and remodel. The PS4 launch will be over, core gamers will have tested remote play to see if it's worth buying a Vita for, and Gaikai will be launching soon (hopefully the Vita's dedicated controls will help). On top of that games the spring game line-up needs to be decent to help sales, but E3 2014 needs to be able PS4 and PS Vita with huge names like GTA Vita, Gran Turismo Vita, Monster Hunter Vita and more (give PS3 the backseat and help your new systems).

That's not what people want to hear, but it's the truth. 2013 is the year of the PS4 and PS3's swan song. Make 2014 the year of the PS4 and PS Vita revival. If that doesn't work then the Vita is dead.

[Nicaragua]

Gravity Rush wasnt built from the ground up for the Vita - it started life as a PS3 game in 2008 and was then moved to the Vita much later.

Personally i think the Vita is great, i actually use mine more than i use my PS3 these days. I would disagree that it dosnt have software as it has some great exclusive games.

I think the main problem with it from a sales perpective is the perception of value. Sony should release a Vita 2.0 with 8gb internal storage and a 3 month subscription to PS+, and they need to sell it under $200.

[GreenRanger]

@ Nicaragua
I didn't know that Gravity Rush started on PS3. You learn something new everyday, it seems.

Anyway, the end result can only be found and done on the Vita.

[Nicaragua]

Indeed, and i think the end result is a much better fit for the Vita.

I would imagine it would get lost amongst the PS3 titles whereas it got the praise it rightfully deserves on the Vita.

[iamnsuperman]

It moved because the lead developer though that with shifting gravity it would be more intuitive to move around with the Vita than playing it on a PS3

I can't find where I read that

[DEATHxTHExKIDx]

Yea pretty much whatever Sony says about the Vita in the next few months will determine if I get Vita or wiiU this holiday.

[Nicaragua]

As someone who has both I would strongly advise you to get a Vita over a WiiU.

[DEATHxTHExKIDx]

For me personally The only Vita games I want to play right now are Persona 4:golden(especially) ,gravity Rush and maybe uncharted.

WiiU I already know is gonna hit its stride this holiday and in 2014. If I was going that route I know for sure I would get Wind wakerHD,Bayonetta 2,'X',Sonic lost world,Smash bros and maybe Mario 3D world.

I already know what Nintendo has planned now just need to know what Sonys gonna do.

[TheFirstClassic]

P4 Golden is incredible. If you have ps+, you should definitely get a vita. I believe that gravity rush, uncharted, and wipeout 2048 are all still free right now.

[InTheLab]

You should really check out Dragon's Crown and Soul Sacrifice. Particularly Dragon's Crown. I own it for PS3 and Vita and can safely say the Vita version is superior.

[zerocrossing]

This is another reason why I haven't felt the need to buy a Vita, most games I actually want are also available on the PS3 so I have a choice, do I want to play my games on a 52-inch HD widescreen or on the Vita's 5-inch OLED widescreen?.

I'm not much of a portable gamer but I've still had pretty much every major portable gaming device since the Gameboy. Honestly I might have had a Vita by now if it had more worth while exclusives.

[AceofStaves]

The Vita is an amazing device, but Sony really needs to lower the price of the memory cards and the unit itself. I can't remember the last time I saw an ad for Vita. You can have a great library of games and services, but if nobody knows your device exists, or thinks that the device has no games or support, then you can't be surprised it's not selling as well as you'd like.

I'm hoping Sony will announce some Vita-related things at Gamescon. They'd better.

[theunleashed64]

great read, and i agree. saying this as a former vita owner.

[fsfsxii]

Yay!
Lets run with the bandwagon thats the Vita has no geams!
Its really depressing how people are misinformed and eat up anything the media tells them.
Vita has games, people aren't looking for them, and most of these games are niche titles. What people are asking for is mainstream port of their mediocre AAA title. And then keep complaining.

[princejb134]

Vitas hardware is excellent but the software line up is ok at best
I have a feeling if vita don't succeed the way Sony wants it to, it may be sonys last handheld device
Psp go was a total failure and now the pep successor doesn't seem to be doing as we'll
2 handhels that fail do make profits for a company would most likely be cut off