Top
270°

PlayStation Boss Sees Limited Potential for Handheld Gaming

Focus to remain on entertainment for the living room.

Sony’s gaming chief Andrew House sees limited global potential for handheld gaming in the age of smartphones, saying that the company doesn’t have any concrete plans to take on Nintendo's Switch.

Read Full Story >>
bloomberg.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Araragifeels 81d ago

Maybe is because the memory card, horrible marketing, not a lot of first party games and no big third party games like GTA was the reason that sales were very low compared to PSP.

FinalFantasyFanatic81d ago

*Clap Clap* these are Sony's issues in a nutshell with the Vita.

trumpwonstopcrying80d ago

Yea they had a complete lack of software support other than Japanese games for the Vita

KionicWarlord22281d ago

Of course because you cant succeed with a Vita "Switch".

You cant just throw a copycat version of the switch out there thats more powerful it wont get big appeal just like what happen with vita and 3ds.

Sony lacks any first party that could even sell the device.

Just like vita it would be left to die on the mountain of memory cards and indies.

Woolly_81d ago

Of coarse, Andrew House is not going to admit that Sony cannot compete in the handheld Space.

Nintendo has a stronghold on handheld gaming + a history of dominance in the space. Even with the rise of mobile games, Nintendo is the least affected. Their in_house IPs are too strong.

Benjaminkno81d ago

Well handhelds are phones now.
If you're going to go that route, you have to know what you're doing, and you're still going to have challenges.

Vita and 3ds are the same price now.
That's all the proof you need that better hardware doesn't trump games.

UltraNova81d ago

Exactly ^^^
As long as Sony doesn't form hanheld-only high caliber internal studios to keep pumping out kid/teenager friendly games, they will never be able to compete, let alone win, Nintendo at their own game.

segamaniaco81d ago

Why? Just to lose money? They have VR now to distribute their first party resourses

SickSinceSix81d ago

Copycat Switch? Sony's PSP's were portable consoles that could be connected to tv's over a decade ago.

GordonKnight81d ago

What about multiplayer table mode, can Vita do that?

EddieNX 81d ago (Edited 81d ago )

There was the Sega nomad. And the Game boy player that allowed you to play your games on the TV before the psp....

Switch is the first ever truly hybrid console with detachable controllers , table top multiplayer, handheld mode and full.hd TV gaming.

Neonridr81d ago

PSP didn't offer console level quality games though. Their games were watered down versions of PS2 titles. Nobody wanted to play an ugly game even uglier by plugging it into your TV.

segamaniaco81d ago

Nor switch with a 720p 30fps doom version without map editor

Switch will never be console-level

Ps4 and xbox are console level now

Neonridr81d ago

@segamanico - a map editor? Who honestly uses the map editor outside of PC users? That would be a ridiculous console feature to have, so to be honest, good riddance to that.

TallonIV81d ago

Uhm.. you do realise you could connect the GBA to the the tv via the gamecube correct?

Kun_ADR80d ago

Segamaniaco

Uhh...Switch will never become console level?

L.A. Noire, Doom, Skyrim, WWE2K18, and Wolfenstein 2 say Hi.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 80d ago
rainslacker80d ago

I can see Sony proper wanting to maybe do something again just because of the market in Japan.

But I do believe that Andrew House isn't that keen on it anymore. I'm not sure about how Sony US feels about it.

I don't think Sony is going to pursue it again anytime soon.

Despite the reasons that Vita struggled, and I'm sure Sony is aware of those reasons beyond the mobile market being more prevalent, it still didn't sell well enough to really warrant pursuing it further unless they have something new and unique to offer. Hopefully if they ever do revisit it, they don't repeat the mistakes of the Vita. But given their current success in the home console market, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to split their focus onto more devices. That'd be a Vita2, PS(something), and the PSVR. That's a lot of support to manage.

porkChop81d ago

Sony should stick to consoles. That's where they excel. They won't take resources away from their console business to support a handheld, which I understand. But if you can't fully support both, then don't do both. Just do the one that you can do best.

UCForce81d ago (Edited 81d ago )

You just need to focus on PS4, Sony. Just do what is best for ya.

PhoenixUp81d ago

Sony's biggest selling factor with their handhelds for the past 13 years was console style gaming on the go.

With Switch pretty much taking this selling point as its main appeal, it'd be hard for Sony to make another handheld compelling enough to justify their continued manufacturing in the portable space for future generations.

DJK1NG_Gaming81d ago

Switch didn't take anything. Switch is console gaming on the go.
PSP and Vita never achieved this.
Vita could've but never did because the games were created with handheld in mind despite trying to be console on the go.

SickSinceSix81d ago (Edited 81d ago )

PSP came out during the sixth generation and gave us games like Liberty City Stories a portable GTA as big as GTA III plus a Vice City later too. PS Vita came out during the 7th gen and launched with an Uncharted game which albeit shorter was a good portable version of Uncharted on par with the original game. I'd count those as examples of console games on the go.

EddieNX 81d ago

Cm on the Vita didn't get close to console gaming on the go
...

segamaniaco81d ago

Nor switch horrendous third party multiplat games, like fifa

Its still a capped mobile dockable shittiest version

wonderfulmonkeyman81d ago (Edited 81d ago )

No, Vita and PSP were distinctly marketed as portables.
They weren't marketed as hybrids and no long-term emphasis whatsoever was put into their inferior streaming capabilities, especially in regards to making sure literally everything played on it on-the-go with no other efforts required.
Switch is a hybrid, marketed AS a hybrid, and plays ALL of its games, most of which being console titles, on the go natively as well as at home. No internet reliance required outside of online multiplayer.

You can't compare the two, let alone say Switch is taking anything away from Sony.XD

PhoenixUp81d ago

PSP and Vita both showed the power of then contemporary consoles PS2 & PS3 packed into a handheld. Many games were released on consoles and that handheld with little reformulating which was happened with a console/handheld multiplat that's also on a Nintendo handheld.

Nobody can deny that Sony's biggest marketing push for both handhelds was the power of a console in the palms of your hands. This idea was later expanded upon by Nintendo with its hybrid system.

Benjaminkno81d ago

You'd be right if vita came with 4 shoulder buttons and didn't require an internet connection.

Those memory cards though.. can't bitch enough about that.

segamaniaco81d ago

Vita has 2 touch screens, doesnt need more shouder buttons

PhoenixUp81d ago

What do extra shoulder buttons have to do with anything? Vita doesn't require an internet connection to function.

Benjaminkno80d ago

It does for the crossplay function

PhoenixUp80d ago

What does Remote Play have to do with how powerful the Vita is on its own?

Neonridr81d ago (Edited 81d ago )

But PSP and Vita never offered console level gaming. Both offered watered down versions of the bigger games. The only ones I give them credit for doing well was Killzone and Uncharted. Mercenary was a solid title and Golden Abyss was fun. But look at titles like Call of Duty for example, not sure what the Vita got there but it was absolutely one of the worst things I have played.

segamaniaco81d ago

Same for switch. A 720p30fps zelda is not ps4 level gaming

Neonridr81d ago

@segamaniaco - nope, but will still win GOTY. It's 900p when docked too, everything is 720p when in handheld mode, can't change that due to the screen.

PhoenixUp81d ago

@ Sick

PSP came out during the 7th gen and Vita came out during the 8th gen.

@ Neo

At the time they both came out, PSP and Vita had parity with the contemporary consoles at the time and shared various unreformulated multiplat titles with them.

I'm not going to argue with you on something so basic. Sony's own marketing hyped up how powerful these handhelds were.

Neonridr81d ago

Vita had parity with the PS3? Could have fooled me. Games were still watered down, my Call of Duty point still stands. Sure, some indie titles were the same across both, but it's not like the Vita was running Gran Turismo 5 or anything like that.

SickSinceSix81d ago (Edited 81d ago )

You're wrong, PSP released before the Xbox 360 which started the 7th gen and Vita launched before the Wii U which started the 8th.

In handheld they're 7th and 8th gen but they released before home consoles 7th and 8th generations began.

PhoenixUp80d ago

@ Neo

Yeah it did. Titles such as Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3, Rayman Legends, Dragon's Crown, Sly 4, Ratchet & Clank: FFA, & Injustice ran on the handheld as it did on console. You're using Call of Duty like it's the rule rather than the exception, ignorantly overlooking the other AAA ultiplat titles that weren't reformulated on Vita. You're also overlooking the other multiplat titles released on PS2 & PSP.

@ Sick

Of course PSP came out before 360. DS & PSP both signaled the beginning of the 7th gen the same way 3DS & Vita signaled the beginning of the 8th gen.

I know you're not actually trying to say that DS, PSP and GBA are all part of the same 6th generation of platforms

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 80d ago
Show all comments (54)
The story is too old to be commented.