Pachter on PS4 and PS Vita integration: 'I don't quite get it'

Nearly a year ago, Sony announced the type of integration that would be coming to the PlayStation Vita via the PS4. Fast forward 11 months and thousands of people have seen just what type of experience the two devices provide consumers, but is it undoubtedly connecting with consumers?

Recently, Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter talked about his thoughts when it comes down to the PS4 raising the overall sales of the PS Vita.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
PoSTedUP1695d ago

PS: Now + PSvita + PS4 = play ps4 (remote play) AND ps3, vita, psp, ps1 (and possibly ps2) games on the PSvita everywhere. dream come true, imo.

dedicatedtogamers1695d ago

I don't think remote play by itself will sell the Vita in droves (Wii-U, anyone?). However, the "ecosystem" that Sony has been creating over the last few years with PS+ and now PS Now makes the system a more attractive choice. And it's nothing new. It's a proven business model that has worked well for Apple and for Microsoft: they integrate all of their own products, so if you - for example - own an iPad, why not also get an iPhone since you already own all those apps? Heck, why not get an Apple desktop, too, since your entire iTunes library transfers over.

As such, I think that as more content comes out, people will buy the Vita, not for a single exclusive system-seller, but because they want to buy into the "ecosystem".

Volkama1695d ago

Because I really don't like iTunes or Macs.

Oh... rhetorical.... I get it.

Death1695d ago

I would agree with you if game consoles were sold at a profit and didn't need software sales. PS+ is a great service for gamers, but not necessarily for Sony. I bought a Vita last summer, it's a sexy piece of hardware and very well built. The couple games I would have bought were "free" with Plus. The ecosystem Sony is creating doesn't work with gaming where hardware losses are offset with software sales.

Vita/PS4 compatability isn't helping Sony since software isn't being sold, simply played from one device on another.

Volkama1695d ago

but Death it gets people on the platform. Someone with a PS4 and a Vita is highly likely to buy games for one or the other, and/or take a Plus subscription.

Software and services is where the money is, and getting people invested in the ecosystem is the way to get the money rolling in. So Vita sales can't really be bad.

JohnnyTower1695d ago

The WiiU isn't the best example to use. The distance limitations of the tablet hold it back. If you could take the tablet farther than 15' away, then it would probably get more use. It doesn't make sense to have the tablet tethered to the same room as the tv.
Vita was smart and allowed remote gaming. Totally different. Once PS does a Vita/PS4 bundle, obviously the adoption rate would climb.

dedicatedtogamers1695d ago

@ Death

I think in the case of Vita, Sony makes a profit on each unit sold, even after the price drop to $200. And you and I both know they're making MAD profit on those dang memsticks...

PoSTedUP1695d ago (Edited 1695d ago )

a sony marketing manager came out and said the vita has been doing better right since the launch of the ps4. psNOW isnt out yet nor is the cheaper psvita slim, word wide. they can do amazing things with the Vita relaunch, especially since the state of mind they have been in. and i personally havent seen one mention of the vita on tv or the remote play feature. they should have mentioned it in the first ps4 commercial, imo.

Hicken1695d ago

Death, I really can't understand how you can come off as being so smart... except that you're not.

Yes, Plus will eat into some software sales. SOME. But the fact that people buy the system at all means they're that much more likely to buy software period. And it's not as if there are NO games NOT on Plus that are worth buying. Besides, it wouldn't take many sales to make a profit, and that's outside of the memory cards.

You have this thing for only looking at whatever aspect either makes Sony look bad, or Microsoft look good. It's a deliberate form of trolling that's annoying because it shows you have more intelligence than you actually display. Can't figure out how it hasn't cost you any bubbles. But I guess if JokesOnYou is sitting at ten or something, you having six isn't that surprising.

nukeitall1695d ago (Edited 1695d ago )


"However, the "ecosystem" that Sony has been creating over the last few years with PS+ and now PS Now makes the system a more attractive choice."

I wonder if people will still consider PS Now "attractive" when the consumer price tag finally revealed, and they realize that the experience is full of encoding artifacts on the video feed, and the input is laggy.

It will make regular laggy multiplayer experience seem like heaven.

"It's a proven business model that has worked well for Apple and for Microsoft: they integrate all of their own products, so if you - for example - own an iPad, why not also get an iPhone since you already own all those apps? Heck, why not get an Apple desktop, too, since your entire iTunes library transfers over."

"As such, I think that as more content comes out, people will buy the Vita, not for a single exclusive system-seller, but because they want to buy into the "ecosystem"."

Actually, it has been completely opposite. For consoles or handheld devices, it has almost been exclusively been due to software with a hint of technology.

PS Vita isn't selling poorly because it lacks "ecosystem", but because the design targets a demographic that moved on, lacks compelling content, and is priced too high compared to the competition.

Lower price and more compelling content will sell a device that as it's almost only feature is gaming and at that, the games are at a premium.

Remote play and PS Vita is for the hardcore Sony fans. The rest gets a 3DS, a smart phone, tablet or a console.

With that said, remote play is a value add, and pretty cool one if the PS Vita had a controller that didn't require as much remapping of buttons.


PS+ is undeniably great value, but it isn't doing Sony any favors in the long run.

PS+ devalues games and dominates gamers time. Think about it, if you get lots of great games likely more than most can consume in the given time frame and for for less than the price of a single brand new game. What do you think will happen to that user base?

They will stop buying games, wait for it to appear on PS+ and will dominate their time with free games. After all they are being trained to this with PS+.

If people thought "used games" are an issue or even online multiplayer games is, then think again.

This will hurt the industry in the long run, but if history has shown anything, people will go for the short term gain in favor of the long term even when that short term gain damages their industry.

There is a reason why Nintendo has been consistently able to keep the value of their games. In a similar vein, Disney has been able to keep the value of their content.

PS+ is hurting the industry.

iiorestesii1695d ago

I think remote play will become dominant in the next two years.

PoSTedUP1695d ago (Edited 1695d ago )

@ nukitall- at your first paragraph (sorry, no copy n paste).

true if that is the case, but no one knows the price or the quality as of right now. ovbioulsly most ppl wont buy an over priced and poor quality service.

@ps plus being bad for the industry.

gamers do not know whats comming out on ps plus and what isnt, and especially knowing that they will have to wait a year maybe more, and there is a chance that that specific game they want to play wont be on ps plus. i highly doubt that will stop gamers from buying a game that they want; to wait a whole year and still not know if theyll get it for free, when after a year itll be pretty cheap used anyway.

if anything itll get gamers to try new franchises that they might not have given a chance on a whim, and if they like, will buy the next installment, talk about it, become a fan etc. increasing fanbase. and if anything, it gives deveopers more money from sony, if say they werent selling that well (some games and some indie games for example), will stay a float and be able to thrive in the industry a little better. (not that i know exactly how much they get from offering their games for free, and it definately varies). for example: i wasnt gonna buy hotline miami, but i got it for free, and now i absolutely cant wait for the second one. and they got paid on top of that for it being free so more money for the dev and another sale in the future. they wouldnt be doing this if it were hurting the industry, most of them are in the position they are in because they are smarter about this stuff than you and I.

so ps plus is actully good for deveopers, sony and gamers. thus the entire industry.

ShinMaster1695d ago

It's simple.

If you own a Vita, you can Remote Play PS4 games on your Vita using Direct Connect at home or WiFi from anywhere. And soon PS3 games.

UltimateMaster1695d ago

Patcher doesn't get gaming. 3DS was to be a flop?
He will say any platform "except the Xbox" will be a flop. People are just dumb enough to believe him and essentially it Does flop.

johndoe112111695d ago


I bet if microsoft was doing the same thing as ps+ you would think it was the best thing in gaming history right?

nukeitall1695d ago (Edited 1695d ago )


"I bet if microsoft was doing the same thing as ps+ you would think it was the best thing in gaming history right?"

Although I love free things and loved the fact that MS gave away Gears of War (and want the sequels and prequels for free too), I would say the same if MS did it or anyone else.

As it is, smart phones and tablets has already devalued games. We don't need more devaluing of games!

Outside_ofthe_Box1695d ago (Edited 1695d ago )


***"I wonder if people will still consider PS Now "attractive" when the consumer price tag finally revealed, and they realize that the experience is full of encoding artifacts on the video feed, and the input is laggy."***

You said the same thing about remote play and was wrong. It's best to wait and see how it turns out.

***"PS Vita isn't selling poorly because it lacks "ecosystem""***

You misinterpreted what he was saying. Obviously software is what ultimately sells gaming devices. This is what he was trying to say:

- A Person doesn't doesn't own a Vita or Next-Gen Console

- The Person purchases a PS4

- The Person purchases a PS+ subscription in order to play PS4 games online

- The Person downloads free games from Instant Game Collection which includes Vita games.

- After a couple of months or so the Person has a backlog of Vita games in his/her PS+ account

- The Person now realizes this and now the Vita (or Vita TV eventually when it comes to the West) becomes a viable option of purchase due to the fact that the Person already has games for the Vita via PS+ and the fact that you can play PS4 games on the go due to remote play (or PS Now eventually down the road). In the Vita TV's case it serves as a second PS4 within the house and allows you to play Vita games and PS Now as well. At this point the Vita becomes a legitimate option of purchase for this Person.

That is what is meant by "people may want to buy the Vita because they may want to buy into the PlayStation ecosystem" especially as more content gets added through time. He wasn't saying that the lack of an ecosystem is why the Vita isn't selling. The reason why the Vita isn't selling right now is definitely due to the lack of recognizable games and price difference compared to its competitor. Nobody is denying that.

***"PS+ is hurting the industry."****

Yet you have no problem with Games with Gold that actually lets you keep your games forever. Hypocrisy at its finest(not that I'm surprised since it's coming from you after all).

Has inevitable price cuts a couple months down the line on games prevent people from purchasing games day one at launch? No. Neither is a game that may or may not be free on PS+ a couple months down the road is going to prevent people from buying games. In the end Pubs/Devs can always say no to releasing their game on PS+ if it's truly hurting them.

dedicatedtogamers1695d ago

@ Nukeitail

I agree with you, but not for the reasons you outlined. PS+ isn't to blame, nor is Steam or GMG or whatever.

Crappy games are to blame.

I don't see it as the games being "devalued". I see it as games being brought in line with the value that the market determines. There are games that still hold their value and still sell. When was the last time Minecraft was on sale? It sells just fine. As much as I like Uncharted: Golden Abyss, it wasn't what the mass market wanted. Obviously, else the Vita would've sold more and the game would've sold more. That's why they're giving it away for free. And guess what? The devs are taking a cut for each "free" download. Much better than unbought copies sitting on store shelves.

Believe me, if you're annoyed by the "I'll just wait until it goes on PS+" crowd, I am too. But I think that crowd is in the very narrow minority.

user55757081695d ago

its all about the perception pach! if i buy a ps4 i need to buy a vita and vice versa. i dont really get what you dont get about it...vita right now has a great library of games and is worth buying on its own anyway. the ps4 connectivity is just gravy in my opinion

1694d ago
+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 1694d ago
k2d1695d ago

Being able to join my girl as she goes to bed and bring my PS4 game session with me is worth the entry price for the Vita in my opinion. Having collected over 40 Vita games through PS+ is just the sweetest icing on the cake ever.

Pricey1695d ago

I play other games in bed with my girl. Each too there own :-)

dodgemoose1695d ago Show
Pricey1695d ago (Edited 1695d ago )

Adam who is princey? Dont throw stones in glass houses tut tut

I do love typing whilst walking, do you ?

BattleTorn1695d ago

I do the same. But I also have console in the bedroom. But she usually wants to watch something, so remote play works for me! :D

k2d1695d ago

@Pricey: What, you only get to play games with your girl in the bedroom? You're missing out bro ;)

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1695d ago
ninjahunter1695d ago

*Checks wallet*
Well, a guy can dream.

CocoWolfie1695d ago

I comment on a good bit of vita posts, its where i feel at home the most, i mean all i have is a vita rn until i can get a next gen console.. but this guy.. if your playing a game and someone wants to watch tv do you just say oh ill dvr it? its not about that, its about gaming anywhere even if you just wanna lye down. look at dont starve, the creator is considering a ps vita port due to how many people are playing it on the go. sure its a controller but you can literally play assassins creed 4 where ever you want right? i mean how cool is that, your not limited to a tv. in a few month playstation now will come across and for that you need a controller to use it on your tablet.. but with the vita you have a full controller right there built for gaming. i seriously dont know what his deal is but oh well suit yourself..

jujubee881695d ago

Your right. VITA's actually got controls and connected functionality which have wider implications at first sight.

jujubee881695d ago

If I'm on the toilet or around a place in my house were there isn't a TV screen I'd love to use PS4 still. Plus, I wouldn't have to move my new hardware around.

JohnnyTower1695d ago

Seal it in a Zip Lock bag and you can play it in the shower!

Neonridr1695d ago

While I agree with the above posters about the remote play functionality (IMO that is the best feature of the Vita right now), it still boils down to the fact that it's an optional accessory. Nintendo at least did it right by making it included. The fact is you have to pay $200 to basically have a portable controller for your PS4 when Nintendo gives it to you for free is where I think most people's gripes come from.

If there are games that interest you enough to buy the Vita, then great. You get the remote play as a bonus then. But it's a lot to ask someone to spend if all they want it for is to play the PS4 elsewhere in the house.

That being said, because I love the Off Screen Play of the Wii U so much, I am so close to purchasing a Vita so that I can play my PS4 while I am in bed. Usually I end up playing my Wii U or 3DS in bed, so why not my PS4 right?

Hk85karlsson1695d ago

Yeah but the gamepad only allows me to move like 5-6 meters away from the main console before it starts to get sad. The Vita you can play remotely.

Neonridr1695d ago

I can go a whole floor down and use the washroom or go to my bedroom and it still works. I guess my walls are thinner, lol. They said the range really depends on wall thickness, etc.

Here's hoping a Gamepad+ gets released down the road with a better range on it.

There's pros and cons to the gamepad too. While the Vita lets you play remotely, you are tethered to your network, so connection speeds vary, especially as you get further away. Lag or latency can creep in as demonstrated in some videos. However it doesn't look like enough to detract too much.

Megaplaynate1695d ago

Nintendo is not giving it for free, actually the reason the system costs so much is the gamepad. And you can't take it outside your house
Anyway hopefully I can buy both the vita and wiiu soon. I gotta play wind waker and all my ps+ vita games.

Neonridr1695d ago

Of course it's not free, but it's included in the hardware price. I pay $299 for the Wii U I get a gamepad with a feature similar to remote play. I pay $399 for a PS4, I still have to pay another $199 to get the remote play feature. That is what I was getting at.

Death1695d ago

The WiiU gamepad also adds to on screen play which is a great feature. It's like Smartglass anda Vita combined into one unit.

bryam19821695d ago

man vita remote play is a.dream come true like for me a parent of 2 kids and yeah i own 3 tv's but you have to.have kid's to understand me doesn't matter how.many tvs you own they want to daddy watching spongebob :-P

Neonridr1695d ago

The Off Screen is huge for me in that same regard. The wife or son always want to monopolize the TV, so being able to play on the gamepad is a godsend.

It's really an underrated feature much like the remote play.

Jrocks_4_ever1695d ago

I wouldn't say that Nintendo did it "right" with their Wii U. I think that Nintendo just added an extra screen with their new console, for consumers to use and thats all. But as far as the Vita, its the best of both worlds. You have to look at the vita as a portable handheld to play handheld games first, then everything else is just a bonus. Vita is a true handheld that is used for the "best of both worlds" in home use and on-the-go as well. If you want to play all of nintendo's software the same way, you will have to fork out a lot more money(buying a DS and a Wii U/controller). The biggest problem for the Vita is the lack of software at the moment. I do believe that the software will begin to increase dramatically over the next year or so due to the ps4/vita linkage, as well as the playstation now coming soon.

And yes it is a beautiful thing to be able to play your ps4 in bed with the vita. I personally think that the vita is the final piece of the puzzle to complete gaming with ALL playstation software, ps2, ps3, ps4, and the vita..... couldn't be more complete


Death1695d ago

I would rather play on my 46" HDTV in my bedroom. I guess it depends on your age. My youngest would probably like the remote feature since she could hide it when she's supposed to be sleeping.

Jrocks_4_ever1695d ago


No, it has nothing to do with your age, its about how your home is setup. Meaning if my ps4(s) are elsewhere is my house and don't have one in my bedroom, then playing a PSVita in bed is Genius.

Soldierone1695d ago

Not really. What about people that don't want it? Now they are forced to have it, and games will start including funky un-needed features to utilize it. If they don't, then the people that do use it will feel it was worthless.

Look at MS. How many people would instantly jump on their ship if they took stupid kinect out of the box?

I do however think Sony should be bundling Vita with the PS4 for certain packages. Maybe even have an "ultimate" package, Vita and the camera included.

Jrocks_4_ever1695d ago

@soldierone I don't think that people would just "jump ship" to MS if Kinect wasn't bundled. I think that MS "fudged-up" with how they introduced the Xone and all the negative press from last gen(x360) and lack of "real exclusives"......I just think people are getting fed up with all of their crap. But I do believe that people will cater to the Xone if MS put out a lot of real xclusives and actually buy more first party studios for "real" games and not Kinect games.

Neonridr1695d ago

If you didn't want the gamepad, you wouldn't buy a Wii U then. The gamepad is one of the main selling points of the Wii U.

Nintendo is touting off screen play as a great feature. Sony is showcasing remote play as an "optional" feature since not everyone who owns a PS4 owns a Vita.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1695d ago
hkgamer1695d ago

Well, I think Pachter wouldn't understand why people would use this because he is rich and has a massive house.

For some people who either lives in a studio flat or a 1 bedroom apartment with only 1 TV would struggle.

However, I think only a few people would find this feature useful.