Forums

Topic: Sony Has Equal to Switch But Just Does not Know it.

Posts 1 to 14 of 14

Highlander21

Sony playstation vita and tv together can act the same as the switch play on the go save on the cloud, download on ps tv and carry on easy.
Also play two player with vita and playstation tv.
If only sony knew what they had and marketed appropriately ps vita and tv together that could also do remote play as a bonus.
I HAVE LOOKED AT THE SWITCH and then thought add vita tv instead with wide gaming range already hear.

Edited on by Tasuki

Highlander21

Tasuki

I think at this point Sony doesn't care about the Vita anymore. So it's not that they don't know.

RetiredPush Square Moderator and all around retro gamer.

My Backlog

PSN: Tasuki3711

get2sammyb

It is interesting how the Switch ultimately concludes the goal Sony was always striving for in the handheld space: console gaming on the go. I still don't believe that prospect is as tantalising as people think it is; the Vita proved to me that I don't want to play games like Killzone or Uncharted on the move, and I think the same thing will eventually ring true for Zelda and Skyrim.

I also think that's why Sony's bowed out of the handheld market. I don't think they believe there's a market there anymore, so we'll see whether Nintendo can prove otherwise. Obviously Nintendo's always done well in the portable space, but I really think the jury's still out on Switch in the West — especially once it's sold to core fans.

Edited on by get2sammyb

BAMozzy

Whilst there are similarities between the Vita and the Switch, the Switch is a generational leap ahead of the Vita. Undocked, its similar to a WiiU in terms of performance and docked it receives a boost which makes it much more powerful than its predecessor. I guess if Sony were to bring out the Vita 2 at a similar time, maybe that could 'compete' spec wise.

The Vita isn't exactly HD in terms of visuals - Not that it needed to be with a small screen. Its 960x544 resolution is qHD - in otherwords 1 quarter of the resolution of full HD but still not high enough to be considered as HD. 720p is HD though - albeit at the lowest end - and the Switch Screen is 720p. Even if the Switch wasn't getting a boost when docked, the visual difference on screen would be significant.

Its not just resolution though although it does show the difference in power. The Vita has 51Gflops compared to the WiiU 352Gflops. The Switch has yet to release its specs officially so I don't want to give information that could turn out wrong when released, but based on the leaked info, this puts the performance at ~315 Gflops when in mobile, pushing up to ~785 Gflops when docked (using 16bit or 'half-floats'). Whilst it does compare well with the WiiU, it's significantly more powerful than a Vita.

To say that the Switch and Vita are 'equal' is like saying the PS2 and WiiU are equal as they both play games too in a similar way. Of course the form factor is similar and both offer gaming on the go but thats where the similarities end. When docked, the Switch becomes a true HD home console and more powerful than WiiU. Instead of buying a PS console and a Vita, each with its own library and different media meaning that even if the same game was released on both, you would have to buy it 'twice' (at least if you buy physical) to play on both systems.

What Nintendo have done, is to try and give gamers the best of both worlds essentially. The Switch is a Vita, a Wii (controls) and a WiiU (upgraded) combined to work well as a home console as well as a handheld gaming device. Whilst it maybe possible to play the Vita on a big screen, its not designed to do that.

Whether the Switch is a success or not remains to be seen. It stands a better chance than the Vita because of the support that Nintendo will give. For those wanting an upgraded WiiU, then the Switch can offer that but also have the portability of a mobile device.

I agree with @get2sammyb that I don't want to play games like Skyrim on the go. Mobile gaming tends to suit those games that have short levels and little depth, pick up and play type experiences that feel like you can get somewhere in 10-20mins, have a race or 2 in Mario Kart, complete a level or 2 in Mario Bros etc. In Skyrim, you could spend that time just getting from point A to point B without actually doing anything. I do disagree that Mobile gaming is dying and I do think that Nintendo are masters at creating mobile experiences. I guess the difference is though, that you can dock the Switch and carry on when you get home and get the full home console experience.

A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!

Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??

Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...

PSN: TaimeDowne

johncalmc

It's weird because Nintendo said they didn't want to show Switch at E3 because they didn't want competitors to steal their ideas, but it is essentially a bunch of ideas taken from existing consoles amalgamated into one system.

It certainly has similarities to the Vita. And the Vita has some functionality that the Switch doesn't - such as playing PS4 games via remote play and doing it pretty well. But then the Switch has other pros that the Vita can't match. They're similar ideas, just Nintendo has gone to the Nth degree with it.

Either way, Vita failed. Switch probably won't set the world alight either.

johncalmc

Twitter:

RPE83

@get2sammyb
I found that playing Knights of the Old Republic (again) on Android has been one of my favourite game experiences in a long time. Except for the ship shooting sections.

If IoS and Android can offer gaming experiences from 5 min here and there freemium to 35 hour RPG's on a lot of "best ever" lists, why would anyone want to lug around an extra device in addition to something that is now as ubiquitous as a phone?

After making mountains of cash from a beloved IP, is there any reason Nintendo aren't going full out on premium , or mobile based dev after Pokemón Go?

I thought consoles were traditionally a loss leader for game sales anyway? Surely it would be more profitable for them?

RPE83

KitsuneNight

consoles are sold by the razor blade model
the console is sold at a loss ( the razor ) while the profit is made from the games ( the blades)
you cant use one with out the other

the real money is in the licencing fees the library fees and first party games cuts of third party games using psn and ps plus
if consoles sell at cost break even or a small profit its gravy on top of the substantial profits

KitsuneNight

Octane

@RPE83 Pokemon GO is just one success story, how many other mobile games have failed? The reason why Pokemon GO was a success is nostalgia, because people played it on a dedicated gaming system first. No console/PC gaming company is going mobile only. Yes there's money to be made, but the market is too unpredictable to guarantee profits.

Octane

Berto_Gamut

I would absolutely love Zelda and Skyrim on the go. The games won't need a level structure because the Switch can suspend games just like 3DS, PS4, or XBO. That means you can stop playing Skyrim smack dab in the middle of a fight with a dragon and continue playing at a later time.

The only similarity to vita is that they both play games. Different power structure, different storage options, different form factor, different game quality.

Sony bowed out of the handheld market because they're notorious for dropping support when a system gets lukewarm reception/sales. Tons of JP devs still support psvita, it's a great handheld, but the back touchpad should've been tossed out for L2/R2 buttons and it should've supported sd cards.

Edited on by Berto_Gamut

Berto_Gamut

Feena

@BertoFlyingFox It's absolutely similar to the Vita when it comes to the concept of home console quality gaming on the go. As many have said it's the last and more complete version of a lot of different ideas we have seen with Vita, Vita TV, remote play and WiiU. Also look at the form factor: in its portable form the Switch pretty much looks like a Vita successor (or a Gameboy Advance successor if you want) and nothing like a DS or 3DS.

Some of the gimmicky stuff they have put in the joycons is from the Wii era ...and they feel so unnecessary and mundane that the flagship launch title Zelda is not even using them. And the title showcasing them (1,2, Switch) is not even bundled with the console and nobody in will buy it for 40$. I have WiiU flashbacks about this kind of things...but I do think the Switch will be a commercial success, even if not right away. Japan is theirs to take and in the West they can count on the kids who buy those Pokemon/Yokai games, the Nintendo loyalists and the Vita orphans.

Edited on by Feena

Never belligerent but always uncompromising.

kyleforrester87

@get2sammyb Skyrim on the go is a nice idea but I can barley make a dent on it through extended sofa sessions. It's a nonstarter on portable for me.

kyleforrester87

PSN: WigSplitter1987

Octane

@Feena Zelda is a Wii U port, nobody ever expected HD rumble support or whatever the Joy-Cons can do. If you want to see how they're implemented, you should look at games that were developed for the ground up for the system; ARMS for example. Albeit optional, I've heard the game makes great use of the motion controls.

Octane

Top

  • Pages:
  • 1

This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.