cj_iwakura
Member
The Vita still has a constant influx of software releases, and I don't see the harm in Sony acknowledging and/or supporting that fact.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Andrew House: PS Vita a 'legacy platform' outside of Japan and Asia
- Thread starter SFenton
- Start date
The truth hurts huh
He has been doing that last guardian fans too!
Which truth?
The shutting down of three 1st party studios, with PSV development experience (like Studio Liverpool and Zipper Interactive) very early in PSVs lifecycle, was a very clear sign. Something that fans really tried to play down a lot back then. Followed by former "handheld" devs that worked with and on some Sony projects like ReadyatDawn moving to consoles.
If I had to choose a game as a symbol/metaphor of PSV life, strategy and effort, it would be Ridge Racer PSV (which "surprisingly" is a joint venture project between BN and Sony).
If I had to choose a game as a symbol/metaphor of PSV life, strategy and effort, it would be Ridge Racer PSV (which "surprisingly" is a joint venture project between BN and Sony).
Something to debate or a question if you will. If you really want to lay all the blame at the feet of the mobile market then why is it the PSP and the Vita to an extent are still doing better in the Japanese markets and getting support there in an arguably more entrenched and advanced mobile market than the U.S. ?
Japan lagged behind in the smartphone revolution in terms of market penetration. Combine that with the larger and more dedicated handheld fanbase that they started with and it isn't surprising that the decline in Japan has been slower.
The PSP did well in the U.S., but the mobile market had nothing to do with it, it wasn't nearly as much a factor during its lifespan. Otherwise your point is a really easy thing to counter; Japan prefers handhelds to consoles. Handheld sales in japan are doing better than console sales(which are disastrous), but not nearly as well as they used to. Mobile is indeed eatting the handheld market there, which is why a lot of japanese gaming companies have been shifting to mobile.
Well, they published all these games in 2012-2013 for PS Vita:
- Tearaway
- Gravity Rush
- Uncharted Golden Abyss
- Super Stardust Delta
- LittleBigPlanet PS Vita
- Killzone Mercenary
- Soul Sacrifice
- Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time
- PS All-Stars Battle Royale
- Wipeout 2048
- MotorStorm RC
- Smart As...
- ModNation Racers: Road Trip
- Everybody Golf/Hot Shots Golf
- Ratchet & Clank Trilogy
- Sly Cooper Trilogy
- Unit 13
- Sound Shapes
That's like the triple of the amount of first-party games for PS4.
Japan's a leading market for smartphone games, and even before that it had a vibrant feature phone gaming market. Japan's not really lagging in this area, it's been leading for decades now.
AgentOtaku
Member
Sad but it's still in my top 3 of gaming hardware in my 32 years of existence
I still have A TON of content to play on it. Just finished Shovel knight
I still have A TON of content to play on it. Just finished Shovel knight
Sad but it's still in my top 3 of gaming hardware in my 32 years of existence
I still have A TON of content to play on it. Just finished Shovel knight
For me it's top 2. Only thing that tops is, is PC. (maybe not a fair comparison, because it is not a standardized hardware platform) If we just count handhelds and console systems then it's obviously 1.
Nikodemos
Member
Ignoring Vita's very real design flaws is as bad as ignoring Gamecube's ones. It leads to warped narrative and wrong conclusions.
The OLED was an excessively overspec component which caused a considerable cost spike. IIRC, it was rumoured to cost as much as the rest of the parts (and assembly) combined. Basically an even worse situation than the Wii U's Gamepad. Going for an LCD (plus some corner-cutting w.r.t. assembly, like the 2000) would have made the proprietary card unnecesary. It is worth remembering that the memcard wasn't just supposed to subsidise the device; it was also an incentive for retailers not to deathmark the Vita like they had the Go. Absent the OLED, the Vita could have been a better sale at its initial pricepoint, with game cards (and the MS M2, which was more expensive than the MicroSD) providing sufficient incentive/monetisation (the Go, as a purely online device, had only memcards and they were deemed insufficient, since games are the main income flow on handhelds; people generally buy only one memcard, and even with the requirement for several cards->accounts it is unlikely the Vita would've fared better only on them).
The backtouch is an imprecise and inadequate control interface, both for the originally envisioned 3xA gaming on the go and more financially conservative ventures. Switching it for a second pair of shoulder buttons would have improved the control scheme for titles both of big-name and more modest origins. The reason Sony spent so much money on attempting to attract the heavy hitting franchises of the day was inextricably linked to the high cost (and consequently price) of the device. A more conservatively designed Vita, sold for the same price, would have had less need of flashy mainstream names to buoy it. Whether it would have sold the same or more is hard to discern, but it would have definitiely been a considerably better grounded (for lack of a better term) platform and Sony would have had less impetus to throw large amounts of money at courting expensive franchises. At the same time, the titles present on it would have benefitted from a more familiar control scheme, improving user experience (not least because one wouldn't accidentally hit the backtouch anymore).
The OLED was an excessively overspec component which caused a considerable cost spike. IIRC, it was rumoured to cost as much as the rest of the parts (and assembly) combined. Basically an even worse situation than the Wii U's Gamepad. Going for an LCD (plus some corner-cutting w.r.t. assembly, like the 2000) would have made the proprietary card unnecesary. It is worth remembering that the memcard wasn't just supposed to subsidise the device; it was also an incentive for retailers not to deathmark the Vita like they had the Go. Absent the OLED, the Vita could have been a better sale at its initial pricepoint, with game cards (and the MS M2, which was more expensive than the MicroSD) providing sufficient incentive/monetisation (the Go, as a purely online device, had only memcards and they were deemed insufficient, since games are the main income flow on handhelds; people generally buy only one memcard, and even with the requirement for several cards->accounts it is unlikely the Vita would've fared better only on them).
The backtouch is an imprecise and inadequate control interface, both for the originally envisioned 3xA gaming on the go and more financially conservative ventures. Switching it for a second pair of shoulder buttons would have improved the control scheme for titles both of big-name and more modest origins. The reason Sony spent so much money on attempting to attract the heavy hitting franchises of the day was inextricably linked to the high cost (and consequently price) of the device. A more conservatively designed Vita, sold for the same price, would have had less need of flashy mainstream names to buoy it. Whether it would have sold the same or more is hard to discern, but it would have definitiely been a considerably better grounded (for lack of a better term) platform and Sony would have had less impetus to throw large amounts of money at courting expensive franchises. At the same time, the titles present on it would have benefitted from a more familiar control scheme, improving user experience (not least because one wouldn't accidentally hit the backtouch anymore).
AgentOtaku
Member
For me it's top 2. Only thing that tops is, is PC. (maybe not a fair comparison, because it is not a standardized hardware platform) If we just count handhelds and console systems then it's obviously 1.
My man
AgentOtaku
Member
Yeah, I think Sony could have REALLY handled it much better, but probably weren't in a financial position to do so. They bet the farm on the PS4 tho and at least that payed off.
That's why:
a)ps4 games are more time and resources demanding,
b)many of thse games are not "big" games
c)some are multis and other are (bad)ports so i won't really count them
you should also separate between scea, scee and sceja games, scea is the one not supporting vita, sceja and now rarely(and badly)scee still support vita.
The only big exclusive vita games SCEA did are uncharted and unit 13, the other big western games like killzone, tearaway, lbp, wipeout etc were all made by SCEE, saying that SCEA tried hard with vita is pure bullshit, uncharted and unit 13 are both launch window games, SCEA dropped the support instantly.
fvng
Member
Sony and Nintendo have completely different dev structures. Nintendo's highly centralized around their internal R&D while Sony's more regionalized with major self-sufficient studios in each major market. SCEA has way more power than NOA does though, they're not reporting everything back to Japan for approval and they produce their own games.
flaviusconstantius
Member
I don't think people here understand management or the challenges facing Sony's Western branches. It is very obvious why they did what they did.
In 2004 the PS2 was ontop of the world with a 75% marketshare. That meant not only did Sony have substantial resources, but it also had influence with developers who wanted to work on Playstation platforms.
2010 was another world. The Playstation 3 was being sold at a massive loss, and that not only denied Sony the financial resources needed to promote another system, but also increased the cost to get developers to do so. In 2005 developers wanted to work with the Playstation 2. In 2008/2009 they were barely releasing playable ports on the PS3.
The European and American branches were also getting their clocks cleaned by the Xbox 360. The last thing they needed was to spend their time and resources on another system. They correctly judged that their success or failure would be determined based on the performence of the PS3 and the rollout of the PS4 and that the Vita's performence or lack thereof would be irrelevant. And proceeded accordingly.
Once this happened, American MBA Management kicked in, whereby it is extremely dangerous to dissent from the consensus. Once a decision was made to relegate the Vita to second-tier importance in their strategy, anyone speaking up for the Vita at meetings was going to be labeled eccentric, found obnoxious, and potentially put in charge of it, which would be fatal to their career. Hence no one wanted to be associated with it.
As someone who tried(with poor results) to move from an analyst position to management and from a European to American branch I have some experience with this dynamic as well as why to the extent the Vita got any support it was from Sony Europe, where there is a (limited) tolerance for "eccentric" and "quirky" individuals. Hence Shahid gets to be a Vita/Indie guy, likely because he has a patron high-up who finds him valuable and/or enjoys the degree to which his Vita advocacy irritates everyone else. But that indulgence does not go anywhere near as far as giving him an actual budget.
All of Sony's actions are easily explained by management decisions which were clearly correct. Did some of those dynamics likely hurt the Vita more than necessary? Absolutely. It is likely if there had been less stigma against the Vita at the executive level, things like ports of the mobile versions of GTAIII, Vice City, and San Andreas would have come out. After all, the first two run on the Xperia Play. But even if they were successful and sold, say 350K copies, would you want to be the person whose GTA games sold 300K when GTAV on consoles sold 55 million? Much better to be whoever was in charge of Bloodborne's marketing.
But this reveals another truth. The PS2 GTA trilogy on the Vita would not have saved it, merely increased its sales from 20K a month in the US to 40K or so. And without the real performence to compare it to, that still looks like a failure, so isn't it better to not try and get 20K than try really hard and get 40K a month even if the actual monetary situation is better in the latter case?
In 2004 the PS2 was ontop of the world with a 75% marketshare. That meant not only did Sony have substantial resources, but it also had influence with developers who wanted to work on Playstation platforms.
2010 was another world. The Playstation 3 was being sold at a massive loss, and that not only denied Sony the financial resources needed to promote another system, but also increased the cost to get developers to do so. In 2005 developers wanted to work with the Playstation 2. In 2008/2009 they were barely releasing playable ports on the PS3.
The European and American branches were also getting their clocks cleaned by the Xbox 360. The last thing they needed was to spend their time and resources on another system. They correctly judged that their success or failure would be determined based on the performence of the PS3 and the rollout of the PS4 and that the Vita's performence or lack thereof would be irrelevant. And proceeded accordingly.
Once this happened, American MBA Management kicked in, whereby it is extremely dangerous to dissent from the consensus. Once a decision was made to relegate the Vita to second-tier importance in their strategy, anyone speaking up for the Vita at meetings was going to be labeled eccentric, found obnoxious, and potentially put in charge of it, which would be fatal to their career. Hence no one wanted to be associated with it.
As someone who tried(with poor results) to move from an analyst position to management and from a European to American branch I have some experience with this dynamic as well as why to the extent the Vita got any support it was from Sony Europe, where there is a (limited) tolerance for "eccentric" and "quirky" individuals. Hence Shahid gets to be a Vita/Indie guy, likely because he has a patron high-up who finds him valuable and/or enjoys the degree to which his Vita advocacy irritates everyone else. But that indulgence does not go anywhere near as far as giving him an actual budget.
All of Sony's actions are easily explained by management decisions which were clearly correct. Did some of those dynamics likely hurt the Vita more than necessary? Absolutely. It is likely if there had been less stigma against the Vita at the executive level, things like ports of the mobile versions of GTAIII, Vice City, and San Andreas would have come out. After all, the first two run on the Xperia Play. But even if they were successful and sold, say 350K copies, would you want to be the person whose GTA games sold 300K when GTAV on consoles sold 55 million? Much better to be whoever was in charge of Bloodborne's marketing.
But this reveals another truth. The PS2 GTA trilogy on the Vita would not have saved it, merely increased its sales from 20K a month in the US to 40K or so. And without the real performence to compare it to, that still looks like a failure, so isn't it better to not try and get 20K than try really hard and get 40K a month even if the actual monetary situation is better in the latter case?
Eolz
Member
sörine;165531008 said:
Obviously they have more power (especially since NOA isn't what it was in the past), but they don't decide all alone who can do what. They have probably nearly no supervision from japan, but there is still a global strategy being made.
It's not as if they wanted to create another Crash (if ND had the IP) and Japan said "sure, go ahead". But they obviously can try to make things fitting a need, which sony japan can then approve (or not) after various milestones.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Sad to hear. Vita is my favorite gaming device. Just yesterday I bought Persona 3 and Gran Turismo PSP for it (EU sale), and I still haven't started with Personal 4 Golden and Danganronpa 2. All are installed and ready to go . Resogun is kind of the perfect time killer. Ah, I'll miss it! Then again, there are so many cool Vita games out there (Shovel Knight, to name one) that I really have no idea when to play them at all...
. Resogun is kind of the perfect time killer. Ah, I'll miss it! Then again, there are so many cool Vita games out there (Shovel Knight, to name one) that I really have no idea when to play them at all...If the completely different product is still a dedicated gaming handheld, then it wouldn't matter.
flaviusconstantius
Member
They also had a lot harder job. Sony of Japan did not face any direct competition post-Wii spike in Japan. SCEA was desperately trying to save the PS3 when the 360 ran virtually all multiplatform games better and was cheaper to produce. SCEA's #1 job was keeping the Playstation brand viable and that meant not letting the PS3 become the Saturn 2.0. The handheld space was kind of irrelevant because the PSP brand was not worth that much financially, and hence was not a big loss. Whereas if the PS3 died completely, which it could have early on, then the PS4 would face an impossible task.
flaviusconstantius
Member
Should they have? Can you make a credible case that with limited resources, getting 30% market share(v. 10%) against the 3DS was more important than getting 40%(v.20%) against the 360?
GloriousBagel
Banned
SenatorBot
Member
I think the issue here is that Sony is the captain and they aren't going down with the ship.
The Vita is supposed to at least have a 10 year lifecycle and with all the money Sony is making from the PS4, they should at minimum stick with it and throw in some of their less experienced developers and use them to work on Vita games.
At the very least it won't create an image that Sony would abandon any console if it's doing badly and the fact that the Vita is the last Sony handheld to ever exist, at minimum is that they could go out with a bang instead of a whimper and running away from the challenge. Sony themselves said that they value hardcore gamers and the vita is full of their most loyal and hardcore fans, saying it outright that they're abandoning it is just a massive disappointment and a creates a huge mistrust over Sony.
The Vita is supposed to at least have a 10 year lifecycle and with all the money Sony is making from the PS4, they should at minimum stick with it and throw in some of their less experienced developers and use them to work on Vita games.
At the very least it won't create an image that Sony would abandon any console if it's doing badly and the fact that the Vita is the last Sony handheld to ever exist, at minimum is that they could go out with a bang instead of a whimper and running away from the challenge. Sony themselves said that they value hardcore gamers and the vita is full of their most loyal and hardcore fans, saying it outright that they're abandoning it is just a massive disappointment and a creates a huge mistrust over Sony.
PurpleSquid
Neo Member
most of them being ports you're down to 10 games. and even then its a bit of a stretch since some are really weak games like Golden Abyss and Modnation Racer. what great support that is. and is comparing the vita to the current state of the ps4 really your best line of defense? Games take longer to make on the ps4 and sony themselves have even said that all their studios are now working on ps4 games, even their former handheld only studios.
Please do this with newer releases instead of just exclusives. I want you to go down the entire hardware library list and dismiss all ports and indies. Then do the same for the PS4 library just so you can compare/contrast.
I like the Vita a lot, but it was the wrong product at the wrong time. They were designing a handheld for a market that didn't really exist any more, and it was a market that nobody outside of the otaku developers wanted to make games for. Given all this, it's no surprise the Vita is in the shape it's in. We can all point to areas where Sony could have made the unit more appealing, but none of that would have changed its ultimate fate.
I don't see the problem here. Sony has no reason to throw tons of money into a market that they're not even interested in anymore. Besides, it's not as if the Vita has a dearth of games - there's still tons of titles coming out for it from Japanese developers.
weevles
Member
The only reason there is still Vita is Japan.
Thank you Japan!
I have to admit, it's pretty amazing there are still cross-platform games, PSN/PSN store support, and third party software considering the system has been a loser pretty much since launch. I love my Vita, but also concede that I play my 3DS more.
Thank you Japan!
I have to admit, it's pretty amazing there are still cross-platform games, PSN/PSN store support, and third party software considering the system has been a loser pretty much since launch. I love my Vita, but also concede that I play my 3DS more.
Oh, I don't care if the games are ports lol. I play many ports that are great on PC and PS Vita. Couldn't care less what the original system was. In fact, I applaud that the game is available on more platforms so that more people can play it.
Not to mention, as far as handhelds go, it isn't like the PS3 versions of the games that are multiplatform are a substitute for playing on the go. PS Vita is pretty much the only option if you want portable version of those games, unless there's a good mobile version of said game with controller support. Even if it was available on 3DS, that wouldn't even be an option, due to that system having an unplayably low resolution and garbage build quality unfortunately. :l
The only games there that you can call ports are R&C and Sly trilogies. The others were simultaneous releases with the PS3 versions no? Also SSD is a different game to SSHD.
Anyway why is the credibility of a game diminished because it's also available on another platform?
FantasticMrFoxdie
Mumber
Im content with what it has become. I enjoy the indie and Japanese game lineups. Remote play is icing on the cake. This is the console thats kept me in touch with Japanese games which is something I lost in the PS2-era, but am happy to have found again.
It still saddens me there was no GTA
It still saddens me there was no GTA
Ingueferroque
Banned
Beautiful device with so much potential, much like Dreamcast. RIP (and will continue buying new releases for it every month until 2016 probably)
SCEJA isn't calling the shots for the WWS though, unlike NCL's EAD/SPD groups for all their other studios and contractors. That's what I'm saying, the structures are so different as to be functionally incomparable. SCE's set up more like a western publisher like EA or Ubisoft than it is a traditional Japanese publisher like Nintendo or Namco Bandai. Their comparably weak Japanese R&D and general lack of investment in the region really reflects that too.
AgentOtaku
Member
I remember going in to GameStop to pick up my reserved copy and getting the oddest looks. Interesting day.
Some great responses in this thread guys. It's depressing for me to realize that I'm finally in a niche, and that niche won't be catered to anymore. I don't think any title would have helped staunch the bleeding in the West, though Liberation and CoD being shit certainly didn't help.
RIP little buddy. Tearaway and Killzone replaythroughs will be happening soon.
alfredofroylan
Member
The fact that Tearaway is getting a port but not WipEout 2048 is really sad.
That rumour is bull. Even though the screen was great, is, for a dedicated portable game system it was pretty cheap so that even Samsung didn't see fit to put in their mobile phones.
Anyway, repeating the cycle, does it matter? Outside of Freedom Wars, Uncharted, Gravity Rush and KZ which first party games actually cost them anything other than chump change? The better the game from Sony on the system came from an internal game jam that lead 12 people to make Tearaway. And we can even debate how fucked the development for Freedom Wars was. 3 years in the making if the jungle drums are correct. Don't get me wrong, the game is great but what the hell? 3 years.
Nah, SCEJA has been in shambles and let's get it straight. If Sony first party was to expand on the Vita it would have been SCEJA and whichever other Japanese studio that they would have recruited.
Obligatory screw you Wonderbook: Screw you Wonderbook.
News fellow Gaffers:
http://venturebeat.com/2015/05/27/s...ment-our-portable-business-will-be-continued/
What Andy mentioned as legacy platform was part of the write-off for PS Vita components for the first generation of the PS Vita, which is no longer available in the market, a Sony spokesperson said in a statement provided to GamesBeat. And he did not directly mean the current PS Vita and PS TV models, which are available in the market. Our portable business will be continued, and many users are now enjoying PlayStation 4 remote play features as well as original PS Vita game titles on PS Vita and PS TV.
Theres still hope.
http://venturebeat.com/2015/05/27/s...ment-our-portable-business-will-be-continued/
What Andy mentioned as legacy platform was part of the write-off for PS Vita components for the first generation of the PS Vita, which is no longer available in the market, a Sony spokesperson said in a statement provided to GamesBeat. And he did not directly mean the current PS Vita and PS TV models, which are available in the market. Our portable business will be continued, and many users are now enjoying PlayStation 4 remote play features as well as original PS Vita game titles on PS Vita and PS TV.
Theres still hope.
RPG_Fanatic
Member
Serious question, what is the definition of manbabby in this context? Adults who like games aimed at kids? I'm genuinely curious.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Golden Abyss is the opposite of weak, I didn't play Modnation Racer so I can't say anything about this one. Show me a system that had the same number of quality 1st Party game in a year if the support is that bad.
Source for the bolded part?
Similar threads
- Poll