Top
250°

Sony: everything the Wii U can do, the PS3 and Vita do already

Stuff: The Wii U isn’t even out yet, and already Sony is trying to spoil Nintendo’s party. Sony executive John Koller told Engadget that, “what the Wii U is offering is something that Vita and PS3 can do quite easily.”

The story is too old to be commented.
GribbleGrunger1373d ago

Well this is just the truth. I've been saying this since the Wiiu was announced, even though for some very odd reason the articles on here wanted to compare the Wiiu to Smartglass. It was almost as if they didn't want to see the obvious. That's not to say the the Wiiu isn't brilliant or it won't be successful, it just means that if developers can make games for both systems then Nintendo and Sony are going to benefit.

ArchangelMike1373d ago

The problem with Sony is actually getting the combination of vita and PS3 to work for them. They have to push the tech with first and 3rd party devs. If not they'll end up with another duff - like the PSMove. Lots of potential, but no one develops for the thing.

MaxXAttaxX1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

"But I has to buy two different systemz!..." No you don't. For PS Vita and PS3 owners, this is one of many extra features we get to enjoy.
The PS Vita is not just a controller with a screen that works in front of the TV. It's a entire multimedia gaming system on its own that can be played anywhere. So the price argument doesn't even apply.

This is interesting:
http://youtu.be/X6U0ufl-J4I
http://m.youtube.com/watch?...
creative.

Anyway... NOT saying the Wii U won't do a better job. On the contrary, it is THE main feature of the Wii U, so it's dedicated to it and might do a really good job at it.
For current and future PS3 and PS Vita owners, it's just one of the many features.
People need to stop getting worked up about what a Sony exec said.

DOMination-1373d ago

The difference is, the WiiU is designed from the ground up around that controller and every game will take advantage of it.

Sony on the other hand are doing their usual thing of leaving it up to the devs and so far... Only LBP2 works and tgats only certain levels.

If Sony want this to work as a genuine rival they need to make it mandatory. Like what they did with trophies. Until then hardly anyone bothered because it was extra work. Same with custom soundtrack.

black9111373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

Just imagine a PS3 Vita Bundle. And a Vita Firmware Update which allows 3g/4g cross-platform play that lets you control your PS3 from anywhere.

bintarok1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

To support Sony's claim, is there any example of **current PS3/Vita game** like this already?

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Some would argue that Sony shouldn't need to imitate Nintendo WiiU. The gigantic 1GB RAM allocated for WiiU OS might have anything to do with the cross-play system and that would be a perfect match for the PS3's 512MB and the Vita's 512MB RAM to compete.

Just a wild guessing, so it could be wrong.

neogeo1372d ago

I'm sure all the people there were going to buy WiiU will not dtop there pre orders and go picks up a PS3 and a Vita. I'm also sure the casuals read n4g 100 times er day and are in the know.

That's almost like me saying I can do the same thing with my PC. All I have to do is buy a gaming desktop and a samsung tablet and download some drivers and WHAM! better thn WiiU!

GrahamGolden1372d ago

its sony dude
if someone lacks of third party thats nintendo nuff said

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1372d ago
LX-General-Kaos1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

It seems that this comparison has gone a bit too far, and I think it is finally time to set the record strait. So it begins.

The PS3/Vita combo does have a few mild comparisons to the Nintendo Wii U entertainment system system, that is quite obvious. When it comes down to it both offer dual touch screen display that allows you to interact with home console experiences from a tablet function in hand. They both offer remote play, but thats pretty much where the comparison ends in this situation. The Nintendo Wii U entertainment system delivers offerings far more advanced than any current gen platform experience.

For starters, the Nintendo Wii U entertainment system tablet experience is far more efficient from the start. Each Nintendo Wii U entertainment system sold to the consumer will deliver the full dual screen experience right out of the box. Without the separate purchase of a $250 handheld device. Landing the combo up to $200 more than the Nintendo Wii U entertainment system. Which will not receive full support from devs because many PS3 owners do not have a Vita to take advantage of that joint technology.

Another point that needs to be addressed is that the Nintendo Wii U entertainment system has 2 gigs of ram with 1 whole gig dedicated to games. The other dedicated to the Operating system/online features. The PS3 has combined total of 512mb, with only a partial amount dedicated to things like Vita connectivity. Which is simply not enough to compare to what is and will be offered in the future of the Nintendo Wii U entertainment system.

After reading thousands of "we can do it too" comments, and complaints. I see that people here continue to dismiss Nintendo Wii U entertainment system tablet control features on purpose almost. After a handful of Nintendo Directs, it has come quite clear that the features found on Nintendos platform are far more advanced.

Japanese language but point is made. Wii U browser. http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Wii U Tokyo Street Demo.. http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Near Field Communication.. http://www.youtube.com/watc...

And many further innovations not possible with last generation PS3/Vita combo technology.. http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Nintendo TVii.. http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Also quoted from Dynasty Warrior developer. “From a visual standpoint, based on the performance of the Wii U, we knew the game had the capability of having much better graphics than games on PS3 and Xbox 360,” he added. “Make no mistake, from a visual standpoint, it is able to produce better graphics.”

The Nintendo Wii U will soon not be ignored for its innovations and technology soon after release this holiday season. After sitting through months of Kaos, it has become quite clear that some people just dont want to see technology evolve without their brand of choice leading the helm. Sometimes you just have to admit, and show respect where it is due. The Next generation of gaming has started with the Nintendo Wii U entertainment system, which I am happy to say is far more advanced.

Have a blessed day and happy gaming

Rated E For Everyone

Nimblest-Assassin1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

Every title launched with the wiiU has that compatbility... and the vita/ps3 only has a few titles that can work together, and only 2 that support remote play

And you need a vita+PS3 to do it... so its more expensive than the wiiU

Sony needs to stop advertising the vita/ps3 as competition for the wiiU and get some more big franchises for the vita... or else its going to be destroyed and left in the dust by the 3ds

Seriously sony... get your s*** together, TGS was a joke

zebramocha1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

You're kidding with that fourth video right,it was really pointless and most of the stuff looks impractical,this story was already posted,what with these reoccuring articles.That near function is counter by smart ar.

@nim They are not advertising the ps3/vita combo as a counter to the wiiu but if you have either or both,the connection between the two devices will be close enough to be similar to the wiiu.

rainslacker1373d ago

You feeling OK today Kaos? Your post seems almost somber compared to your others.

Anyhow I think your right on most points. Nintendo likely has between 1-2 years on the market without another next gen system coming out, so for the time being they are competing with this generations tech. They are doing this with new tech that isn't 100% available on the other platforms, which does give them the advantage to push the touchscreen technology in cross-play scenarios.

However, I think Sony's current cross-play model is set up to start ushering in something more for the PS4 era. If this is the case then the Vita/PS4 combo would be something directly marketed to compete with the Wii U, and if so could leave the Wii U in a precarious position to be behind come the next ps360 cycle, especially if those consoles rumored specs are close to accurate. It's hard to say right now if Sony would release a partial Vita like controller for the PS4, but I wouldn't count it out, and this could help to directly effect Vita sales, thus keeping the Vita relevant longer.

In the end you aren't likely to see a huge visual difference between systems for at least another 4 years, as the ps360 won't push those boundaries until a couple years into it's life cycle. The Wii U will likely only be on the market for another 2 years after that with another system looming to compete with the PS4/360, which in theory could be equal or slightly better than those offerings. This gives the Wii U a solid 6 years of market viability, and likely a couple more as a cheaper alternative to whatever they come out with next.

In the end Nintendo will likely succeed with the Wii U, and they do seem to be taking a very pro-active stance on both the hardcore and casual side of things. Nintendo showed they could cater to the casual, and before the Wii they had a pretty good record with the Hardcore. It does seem the Wii U is something that would attract both without requiring a fragmentation of the market(ie Move/Kinect).

L6RD7BLU31373d ago

Man! you can write novels :D lol

Qrphe1373d ago

@Nimblest-Assasin

We'd probably only start seeing 2nd screen compatibility for multiplats if the Wii U's way of playing games becomes truly successful.
We knew Sony had Wii-like technology by the time the Wii was launched but it didn't put it out the market ONCE the Wii was successful (and so did Microsoft).

LX-General-Kaos1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

@zebramocha

Actually good sir the video was not pointless. It clearly shows a good amount of potential future game changing features that are not possible on anything available right now.

You can sit around and pour salt on my points all day in hopes that you can sway the truth. But in the end of the day you know that the Nintendo Wii U entertainment system tablet control functions as of right now are a one of a kind. I will be waiting for you to prove me wrong if you can. Show me what the PS3/Vita combo can do. If you dont want to waste your bubbles send me a PM and ill waste my own showing what you dug up. Show us all some of the features that can be compared.

This is your chance to show if this headline is realistic.

Rated E for Everyone

MySwordIsHeavenly1373d ago

Many of us already have both the PS3 and Vita, if not just the PS3. That would mean the PS3/Vita combo is cheaper for us.

The thing is...Nintendo isn't leading the way any more than Toshiba is with computers. Just because you're the first one to release the next inevitable evolution of console doesn't mean you are a pioneer. Sony and Microsoft could release systems today that could crush the Wii U's specs. My cheap laptop could crush it. I'm sure the Wii U will be a fine system, but don't make it out to be something it's not. The Vita and PS3 are more than capable of everything the Wii U does. The Vita alone multi-tasks incredibly well. As far as the TVii thing goes, isn't that basically like having...I don't know...TV? It's just like an extra remote. That's just an app. One that's already available on tablets and phones. The gameplay, however, you want proof of. Little Big Planet 2. Go watch a YouTube video and stop pretending to be a Nintendo fanboy. That race died when Nintendo stopped caring.

miyamoto1373d ago

a blessed gaming indeed.

we are blessed with gaming on PS3 & PSP everyday.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1373d ago
WeskerChildReborned1373d ago

But with Nintendo, it's simple, you get to use your touch screen controller and do stuff with it while if you wanted to do the same stuff with a PS3 and Vita, you would have to pay around $400 - $600 for both if someone doesn't have both.

chrisarsenalsavart1373d ago

Ps3 160 g = £199.00 vita Lbp bundle= £189.00
total = £388
wiiu 32 g= £329.00
£60.00 difference is not that much, especially when you think the superior technology of the vita compares to the wiiu pad.

If sony were to bundle the ps3 and vita with lbp2 for £389.00, i am convinced they could sell a lot of those bundle.

And third party publishers would start to integrate cross play features on The ps3 version of their games.

GribbleGrunger1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

The thing is the Vita/PS3 bundle doesn't have to be as cheap as the Wiiu or even close. It just needs to give the developers an option for making two versions of the same game. Clearly the Wiiu is not that much more powerful than the 360 and the PS3 and most of that extra power will be used by the controller anyway.

People keep going on and on about how much it is to buy both the PS3 and the Vita... why? Why are Nintendo fans so scared of admitting that the Vita can do the same? Is it going to stop support for the Wiiu? NO. So what is this really about? There is definitely something very fanboyish about the responses you get in these articles. 66 million PS3 owners only need to buy a Vita to get the Wiiu experience but over and over this is overlooked in favour of the 'duel purchase' argument. What about the 'dual purchase' argument for the Wiiu? Anyone mention that? NO.

If you want to play with the traditional controller (and clearly Nintendo expect that) then you will have to buy another controller. And I think you'll find that it will cost you a hell of a lot more to buy another wiiu tablet. Why aren't these costs being added in?

No, this whole argument is fanboy driven because for some reason they feel the Vita/PS3 combo hurts them... It DOESN'T, it helps you. Developers are more likely to support the Wiiu if they have two consoles to put their games on. The PS3/Vita can do everything the Wiiu can do. Oh, but the Vita doesn't have L3 or R3, a feature that's been on the PS3 controller since the beginning but never hardly ever got mentioned, but suddenly this feature is HUGE. Whilst this is being played up to convince the combo isn't as good as the Wiiu, the fact that the Vita has multi touch isn't mentioned. Why?

This all so obvious.

Tonester9251373d ago

I'm getting tired of telling people that the PS3 + Vita combo can do the same things the Wii U can do if programmed to

EmperorDalek1373d ago

Lets not forget the cost. Imagine if Sony packaged the Vita and PS3 as a combo to take on the Wii-U. Would be great but twice the price and would fail.

GribbleGrunger1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

See, perfect example. In order to win an argument this poster reaches for the 'duel purchase' argument, but ignores the obvious. When the Wiiu launches it will have a userbase of '0'. 66 million PS3 owners will only have to buy a Vita and they're good to go. The 'duel purchase' argument is redundant. What Nintendo fans need to worry about is that 66 million people could get the Wiiu experience for a lot less money. I have both already and most of the 2.5 million Vita owners do too.

It's clear that the majority of posts in this thread are from Nintendo fans. It appears as if the dasagrees suggest that Nintendo fans feel as if this is their territory and Sony fans have no place in here. Well I'm afraid that it's you that are trespassing my friends. This is Sony business for Sony fans. Welcome to this gen, and remember, graphics don't matter.

Trunkz Jr1373d ago

@GribbleGrunger

"66 million PS3 owners only need to buy a Vita to get the Wiiu experience"

Good luck convincing the developers with that pitch!

nukeitall1373d ago

The problem isn't feasability with the technology.

What Sony still doesn't get isn't feasability with technology, but rather practicality!

Who in their right mind would pay roughly $300 to get shoddy Wii U like support on the PS Vita, when they can get the latest technology for the same price with the Wii U?

If you happen to have a PS3 and a PS Vita (or want one), sure that is a nice addition, but no developer other than Sony's own is going to support those features like they will on the Wii U, just simply due to guaranteed secondary screen on every Wii U.

Hicken1372d ago

Shoddy? We could turn that (very weak) argument right around, couldn't we?

Who on Earth would buy a Wii U for the pretend experience of doing what the PS3/Vita combo is capable of doing? After all, you're only pretending you can take your console game on the go, since you can't even leave your house. Do people keep forgetting that, because the Vita is a standalone system, it's capable of far more than the Gamepad is? And that because of that, this apparently prohibitive price you guys keep bringing up has more value added to it.

Why wouldn't the devs who support the feature on Wii U not support it on PS3/Vita? As Mr. Beatdown has detailed quite well in numerous posts, the 3/Vita combo has a larger install base than the Wii U, but Nintendo's having no problems getting people to support their system.

Hypocrisy is an interesting thing.

nukeitall1372d ago

@Hicken:

"After all, you're only pretending you can take your console game on the go, since you can't even leave your house."

Nobody is pretending anything. It is a continuation of what you are doing, but more importantly it opens up gaming in new ways.

Lets face it, the Wii U probably at launch has more games using the secondary screen than PS Vita/PS3 combo has since launch.

"Why wouldn't the devs who support the feature on Wii U not support it on PS3/Vita?"

Because the install base of Wii U undoubtedly will eclipse the PS Vita in a matter of months. The system is very competitively priced compared to what is out there.

It is a guaranteed support, and a huge platform unlike the slow start of the PS Vita and the high price tag relative to anything else out there.

"Hypocrisy is an interesting thing."

Indeed it is! XD

MrBeatdown1372d ago (Edited 1372d ago )

Sigh.

Let's just pass over the whole "shoddy" thing. The people who don't see that that's just a baseless assumption won't care about anything anyone has to say to the contrary about that anyway.

What is it with the simplistic price comparisons? Why is it that a stand-alone portable that also happens to be capable of Wii-U like features when combined with PS3 is such a terrible alternative to the Wii U?

Unless you absolutely MUST have gameplay with two screens in every game, what makes Vita such an unworthy choice? It's got touch screen gameplay. What is it that is so attractive about DUAL screens that makes everyone balk at the prospect of buying something that doesn't offer dual screen gaming in every last game?

All the PS3/Vita naysayers act like it's no contest. The Wii U wins every time because it's dual screens all the time or bust. Nobody is interested in the alternative, and neither are developers if it doesn't have the biggest install base. It's nonsense.

You ask "who in their right mind would pay roughly $300 to get shoddy Wii U like support", but you blindly assume gamers are interested in nothing but dual screen gaming all the time, and that no gamer would consider an alternative, regardless of what features or content it provides that Wii U doesn't.

What about those that want that kind of functionality, but don't need to have it 100% of the time? What about those that think having a handheld with it's own touch screen features in it's own unique games, while getting just some dual screen functionality is a worthy trade off? What about those that want to try dual screen gaming, but don't want to start buying their games for Wii U instead of PS3, and give up their friends, trophies, and whatever else it is drawing them to PS3 or Vita?

You pretend they don't exist.

As for the whole "guaranteed secondary screen" thing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Funny that even without guaranteed motion controls, the Move received a good amount of support during a time when the control scheme is even losing popularity on the console that pioneered it.

Or how about this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Everyone that developed Kinect titles weren't bothered that not everyone was guaranteed to have Kinect.

That's the ridiculousness of that "guaranteed screen" argument. There's plenty of proof out there that developers will support something even if it doesn't have as big of an install base as something else. With something like Wii U out there encouraging devs to do the work anyways, there's even more incentive to port over those features to the other versions. Some developers even ported over Wii-exclusive games to PS3 just for those with Move.

Sure, Move isn't getting EVERYTHING Wii gets, but then again, nobody's really asking for, or expecting that either. Nobody ever did. Yet for some reason, people act like that's what everyone wants and is expecting from the PS3 and Vita combo, and if that isn't what it gets, only a moron would buy it.

nukeitall1372d ago (Edited 1372d ago )

@MrBeatdown:

"What is it with the simplistic price comparisons? Why is it that a stand-alone portable that also happens to be capable of Wii-U like features when combined with PS3 is such a terrible alternative to the Wii U?"

Because buying a Wii U with a 3DS is still cheaper than a PS Vita and PS3 combo by *far*!

The kicker? The price gap will widen after this Holiday, because Sony increased the price on the PS3. Amazing!

Is Sony run by monkeys over there?

"Funny that even without guaranteed motion controls, the Move received a good amount of support during a time when the control scheme is even losing popularity on the console that pioneered it."

Motion control was losing popularity on the console that pioneered it, because it received more competition. Furthermore, the support for the PS Move from third parties are non-existant even from the beginning. What you showed me was a list of games with tacked on feature, not real support. Heck even on that list, the number of "exclusive" PS Move games *NOT* excluding the shovel ware, there was 32 games.

Kinect received proper support from developers, but not enough from different studios. MS should have really released an XNA kit for Kinect, but the technology isn't mature enough for core gamers.

That said, Kinect was the fastest selling device so yeah, it's not going to be like most accessories and even then it was pretty muted. History has shown time and time again, accessories or in this case with Vita, additions don't receive proper support especially half assed ones.

In the end, it is all about user base and PS Vita doesn't have the it, nor is it gaining enough customer fast enough to make it an attractive platform.

"Nobody is interested in the alternative, and neither are developers if it doesn't have the biggest install base. It's nonsense."

Developers aren't interrested in the biggest install base, they are interrested in realistic opportunity for profit.

"Unless you absolutely MUST have gameplay with two screens in every game, what makes Vita such an unworthy choice? It's got touch screen gameplay. What is it that is so attractive about DUAL screens that makes everyone balk at the prospect of buying something that doesn't offer dual screen gaming in every last game?"

You are in an article about "dual screen" and of course the discussion will be about "dual screen". Want to talk about something else, go somewhere else... like a different article.

My comment still hold, it is not about feasability, but practicality. Because it can, doesn't mean it will!

It is about willingness from both sides, starting at business that connects to consumers.

@Hicken:

"As Mr. Beatdown has detailed quite well in numerous posts, the 3/Vita combo has a larger install base than the Wii U, but Nintendo's having no problems getting people to support their system."

I forgot to respond to this, but isn't it obvious? The Wii U is a new platform, the path isn't set and there is expectations that the platform will flourish.

PS Vita with it's current user base is far from enough to profit from a diverse game eco-system. It's not exactly looking like a bright future with Sony to drastically increasing the user base, like Nintendo did with the 3DS.

On the Wii U, it is an even odds bet while on the PS Vita it is a bet with bad odds!

Heck, I believe the odds on the Wii U is actually quite good given the price, and what they offer.

MrBeatdown1372d ago (Edited 1372d ago )

@nukeitall

"Because buying a Wii U with a 3DS is still cheaper than a PS Vita and PS3 combo by *far*!"

Wow. You didn't even acknowledge my point that additional features can justify the price differences. You fall back on the same hollow price argument. Consumers aren't that stupid. They care about more than the price tag. And they care about more than one feature.

As for your "kicker", Sony confirmed a $250 slimmer model. Sorry.

And you ignore that 60+ million gamers only need to buy a Vita. To them, Wii U has no price advantage. Depending on memory card choice, Vita could even hold the advantage. Funny so many people try to ignore that.

And boiling it down to 3DS/Wii U price vs. PS3/Vita price is just as stupid as what I was calling you out for in the first place. You're completely ignoring features, games, and personal preference, and every other reason the cheaper platform doesn't destroy the others.

"What you showed me was a list of games with tacked on feature, not real support."

You can pretend every dev made a genuine effort on Wii, and half assed it on the Move, but you're only fooling yourself. The bottom line is the Wii got support, and so did Move. In terms of quality, there isn't much of a difference. How many multiplatform games got "real" Wii support, yet didn't get Move support? And how many cared when it didn't?

"In the end, it is all about user base and PS Vita doesn't have the it"

So, Nostradomus, what exactly are the numbers Wii U and Vita will achieve? Wii outnumbers Move 10:1 in install base yet Move still got support. Somehow I doubt Wii U is going to build up that kind of lead.

You pretend PS3 and Vita can't get support because of install base, and you not only try to dismiss the fact that Move and Kinect got decent support despite small install bases, but you ignore the fact that Wii U is getting support despite the fact that it will always be at a massive 60+ million numbers disadvantage compared to PS3 and 360. You know why Wii U is getting support? Because developers don't need mindblowing numbers to justify support. If Wii U, Vita, Kinect, and Move can all garner support, so too can PS3/Vita connectivity.

"Developers aren't interrested in the biggest install base, they are interrested in realistic opportunity for profit."

Of course they are. But yet you pretend PS3+Vita doesn't have a realistic opportunity, despite the similarities to other platforms.

"You are in an article about "dual screen" and of course the discussion will be about "dual screen". Want to talk about something else, go somewhere else... like a different article. "

Insert face_palm here.

I AM talking about dual screens. I'm talking about how not everyone views it as the one and only feature to consider when choosing between a Wii U and PS3/Vita. Some may want dual screens 100% of the time. Others might be fine with just some dual screen support if it means they get a handheld too. Get a clue.

Practicality. You harp on it, but can't back it up. Install base isn't an issue as proven by numerous platforms. It's not the lack of ubiquitous PS3/Vita connectivity, because not everyone demands support in every game, as proven by Move and Kinect.

Sorry, but you don't have anything that actually reinforces the notion that support for PS3/Vita connectivity isn't practical.

nukeitall1371d ago (Edited 1371d ago )

@MrDown

"Wow. You didn't even acknowledge my point that additional features can justify the price differences."

Wii U and 3DS cost less than PS Vita and PS3. Sure, for the select few price isn't an issue and feature is. For the rest of the population, price is the single biggest factor to increasing value. There is nothing to acknolwedge about additional features, because those to combos are practically as equivalent as it gets.

"And you ignore that 60+ million gamers only need to buy a Vita. To them, Wii U has no price advantage."

No, but if they buy a Wii U they get to be on the cutting edge technology while PS Vita is a stagnant platform.

"Sorry, but you don't have anything that actually reinforces the notion that support for PS3/Vita connectivity isn't practical."

It isn't practical for developers to support. How many games has this supported right now? Who uses it? What is the install base of PS Vita? Does the PS Vita have the momentum to be worthy investment?

That is practicality! It is practically a dead platform unless Sony turns it around soon, but instead, they see fit to increase the price of the PS3.

I personally would sure as hell run away from PS Vita as a platform and sooner support 3DS.

"You can pretend every dev made a genuine effort on Wii, and half assed it on the Move, but you're only fooling yourself."

Really? That is a hollow assed argument. Very convincing! /s

"Wii outnumbers Move 10:1 in install base yet Move still got support."

Duh... the initial support isn't necessarily indicative of long term support. PS Move support fizzled out faster than my fart.

"You pretend PS3 and Vita can't get support because of install base, and you not only try to dismiss the fact that Move and Kinect got decent support despite small install bases,"

No PS Move got support due to being a new platform, that fizzled out. Kinect got support, and then some long term support due to being the fastest selling device.

Again, it was the potential for profit in both cases that spawned that support. As soon as that wanes, support dissappears fast.

"Of course they are. But yet you pretend PS3+Vita doesn't have a realistic opportunity, despite the similarities to other platforms."

Similarities, yet completely different execution. That is why one is destined to fail. Mark my words a year or even 6-months from now.

"I'm talking about how not everyone views it as the one and only feature to consider when choosing between a Wii U and PS3/Vita."

Of course not, but in almost every other respect Wii U/3DS is comparable to PS3/Vita except for price.

Bottom line:

* PS Vita is slow and painfull growth that Sony cannot afford or is willing to push.
* PS3 is an aging platform that isn't competitively priced compared to a Wii U. Especially after the new model announcement.
* Wii U is competitively priced, is exciting, and likely will outdo PS3 in almost every way, and incorporates many PS Vita features likely with better support for the price of a PS Vita.
* If anything, PS3/Vita support is more akin to GameCube/GameBoy Advance than anything, that was shown to fail with practically no support!

Give me some real arguments, instead of "I proven" when all you have given me are empty arguments with no analysis.

YOU have *NOT* proven anything! All you have provided are opinions and an attempt to "beat down" people with empty arguments.

Insert coin, try again! XD

MrBeatdown1371d ago (Edited 1371d ago )

"Sure, for the select few price isn't an issue and feature is."

Right. The "select few".

PS2
Xbox
360
PS3
Vita
PSP
Xbox Live

Those "select few" equate to hundreds of millions of sales of the more expensive choices, even when a cheaper, and very similar alternative was on the market.

"Select few." Hilarious.

"if they buy a Wii U they get to be on the cutting edge technology while PS Vita is a stagnant platform."

Wii U is cutting edge but Vita isn't? Lulz. As for being stagnant, I'll get to that.

"It isn't practical for developers to support. How many games has this supported right now?"

You act is if the support for something today, before even one game is released that has this kind of functionality, is indicative of the next several years. You assume Wii U and the dual screen feature will be a success, and that the Vita situation will never improve, and never be worth consideration from developers, as if the effects of its first holiday sales season, it's two biggest releases, a full-blown expansion of PS+ that's free to existing subscribers, and an awesome feature like cross-buy don't warrant any uncertainty that the Vita's fortunes won't change.

Everything you say is based on your own speculation that Wii U will succeed and that the Vita is forever stuck in a rut. You dwell on practicality based on small install bases, but it didn't matter for Move, Kinect, GameCube, or Xbox.

"they see fit to increase the price of the PS3."

Talk about desperate. I corrected you already. Google it and accept reality.

"Really? That is a hollow assed argument. Very convincing! /s "

I gave you an opportunity to explain the difference between "real" support and the supposed half-assed support you think Move got, and cite some examples. You chose not to. Gee, why is that?

"Duh... the initial support isn't necessarily indicative of long term support"

And surely it's just Move's problem. Wii motion controls are at the height of popularity, right? Hell, even Nintendo saw fit to replace it with something else to make people care. Keep on pretending all of Move's problems are exclusive to the Move. We all know just how many big motion control games released on Wii these past two years and how desperate PS3 owners are to get them. /s

"Similarities, yet completely different execution. That is why one is destined to fail."

Different execution? That being... what, exactly?

"Of course not, but in almost every other respect Wii U/3DS is comparable to PS3/Vita except for price."

Game libraries, online, Blu-Ray, storage... You continue to pretend they're basically the same thing, when anyone here... well, anyone without an agenda... can see they aren't.

"Give me some real arguments..."

I cited multiple examples that prove ubiquitous support isn't necessary, that install bases don't need to be spectacular to garner support, and that price isn't the make or break factor for consumers. You haven't. All you can do is come up with excuses as to why PS3 and Vita is somehow different... Vague assumptions about future install bases. Undefined differences between "real" and "tacked-on" support. Downplaying feature importance. An over-reliance on price despite hundreds of millions of game consoles sold that defy that argument.

Now we can add pretending what is and isn't competitively priced to that list.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1371d ago
Moonman1373d ago

Sony should really stop putting its foot in it's mouth. Nobody honestly believes this on a 1:1 on par experience. WiiU will probably be in more homes than Vita in like a month.

Blackcanary1372d ago

lmao that's all i have to say.

fermcr1373d ago

WiiU is one console, PS3/Vita are 2 consoles... and since Vita sales are crap, i don't see a lot of developers investing in the PS3/Vita combo.

SAE1372d ago (Edited 1372d ago )

it can do it , but they are not letting us use it , that's the thing , sony just want to sell , if they use these features they will lose money or developers will not want it because it won't give them anything unless sony forced them ...

tordavis1372d ago

PS3 doesn't have Bayonetta 2 or Wonderful 101. People are gonna buy the WiiU. Nothing Sony can do to stop it.

Beastforlifenoob1372d ago

Personally, I won't be purchasing a WII U. However, I believe that it will be a huge success. Third party development is going to boost it into crazy sales and therefore garnish the attraction of other third party developers and hopefully, increased amounts of first party developers joining hands with Nintendo. Not saying it's better than *whatever console/pc etc* but It will be a success in terms of the business world nearly 100%

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1371d ago
Axonometri1373d ago (Edited 1373d ago )

Really Sony? I love our Sony PS3, but what a lame comment. How about you don't flap your yapper and concentrate on what "your" fans are waiting for?

My kids and I would welcome any free test bundle of the Wii U this Christmas. That way we can do all those things that we could just do on the PS3 and Vita... just say-in'

Axonometri1373d ago

Sony: here is your chance to prove your words. We also would welcome a new PS3 and Vita for Christmas with a copy of Call of Duty Black Ops 2 and Assassin's Creed 3. That way we can play multiplayer games with one person on the PS3 and another on the Vita ( oh wait ) one person on the PS3 and another on the other PS3... just say-in'

SAE1372d ago

what you say is true , i don't know why people disagree with you , you can't play any ps3 or ps2(only 2 or 3 games available -.- ) or even psn game in remote play , if you use it only the vita can control the ps3 because the screen will be black...

i can't even watch movies in remote play !!! sony aint doing it right this time , vita remote isn't different then psp remote , it's just a feature to show off in e3 and then we get screwed ...

that's why hacking vita is much much worth it because it will give me what sony promise , you disagrees are welcome , these are facts and promises sony made and didn't stick to it's word , hacking it as soon i see a hack , im not satisfied of what i have when i see i can get a lot more , it's like buying an iPhone without it's features , it's a waste of money , just by a 15$ used phone and you will get the same features...

they say they can -.-

Axonometri1372d ago

I don't know this man and I am not affiliated with him in any manor.

The_Infected1373d ago

Except come in an all in one package for $300 to $350. Keep telling yourself that Sony.

live2play1373d ago

i didnt know vita/ps3 could play legend of zelda, and metroid..?

Salamander1373d ago

Apparently some people dissagree...

live2play1372d ago

apparently some people cant take a joke xD

i should know i got bubbled down because if one xD

AusRogo1373d ago

That's not the point they're making, just the vita/ps3 combo.

MySwordIsHeavenly1373d ago

Actually, they can play many Zelda and Metroid games via emulators.