The first console launch I ever covered for Push Square was the PlayStation Vita, so I remember those heady February winter days well. It was 2012 and message boards were aflame with complaints about the infamous Online Pass (remember that?), while the PlayStation 3 was struggling to step outside of the Xbox 360’s considerable shadow in English-speaking territories. Elsewhere, smartphone apps were in vogue, and the media was telling us how they’d eventually crush console games for good.
And then there was this nugget: why would you ever play Uncharted on a handheld? It was the hot button topic of the time: the PlayStation Portable – despite its enormous 80 million units install base – had failed to engage fans with its promise of console gaming on the go, so why was Sony repeating the same strategy for a second time? No one could fathom it, and so the confusion continued until the platform holder unceremoniously popped the system in its console crypt, where it remains covered in cobwebs today.
Don’t believe me? While my Google-fu is yet to reach black belt status, I did manage to dig up a couple of ancient articles proving that I remember correctly. Take this one from Wired way back in 2013: “After two bites at the apple, Sony may have to admit that gamers simply aren’t drawn in by the idea of almost-console-quality games in their pockets,” Andrew Groen analysed. “Most hardcore gamers would rather play a higher-quality console experience on the big screen.”
It’s a statement you’ll find repeated in practically every editorial written about the Vita from the moment it was announced through to today. Here’s another quote, from The Guardian’s Keith Stuart: “[With] the PSP and Vita [...] the philosophy has been ‘bringing the home console experience to your pocket’. Not only has that proved costly to the consumer in terms of retail price and battery life, it grates against what a lot of people want from a portable experience.”
Why am I bringing all this up? Because after I rubbed the salt from my fanboy eyes and saw the world afresh, I actually started to agree. I’ll never forget reviewing Gravity Rush in the summer of the Vita’s launch year, sitting on the same seat I use to review all of my games, only with the television screen off and my hands clamped around Sony’s expensive slab of portable plastic. “What am I doing?” I remember thinking to myself, amid crude fantasies about protagonist Kat.
And yet last week’s Nintendo Switch release of DOOM brought with it a chorus of chirpy Mario, Link, and Metroid avatars: can’t wait to play this very console-esque experience on the go, they all sang. I’m not going to lie to you, I’ve been sat here with a scrunched face for a while now: I honestly didn’t think this was what anyone wanted. And if it is, where were you when Sony was biting away at an apple that everyone already agreed was rotten at the core?
Now I understand that the Switch scenario isn’t exactly comparable: the console’s hybrid nature has always seemed like a more elegant realisation of Sony’s efforts to put console games in the palm of your hands – after all, cross-buy and Remote Play and cross-save are all part of the same playbook, aren't they? But back then it was very much considered a bad idea, and now all of a sudden it’s a brilliant idea. And I’m not really sure what’s changed?
I suppose someone looking to shoot holes in my article would point to the fact that the likes of Skyrim and L.A. Noire on the Switch are the complete console games, like Borderlands 2 and Resident Evil Revelations 2 never came to the Vita at all. I’d argue that if people had indicated they actually wanted to play these titles portably in years past, there might have been a teensy bit more incentive for publishers to actually take a chance.
So I’m not sure what’s changed – or, indeed, if anything even has. Perhaps I’m being suckered by the online echo chamber, where common opinions reverberate but never actually reach the masses at all. A quick look at DOOM’s UK debut on the Switch – where it sold an estimated 3,500 units at retail – suggests that may be the case. Either way, I’m certainly not arguing that the Vita was some underrated uber-appliance that deserves your love and admiration; I’m merely illustrating how tones have changed.
Do you agree with Sammy that tones have changed quite considerably? And why do you think that is? Are you one of those people that wants to play console experiences on the go, and why? Take your experience out and about into the comments section below.
Comments 175
As a casual first comment, this article is not necessarily about expensive proprietary memory cards or any of the (many) other issues with the PlayStation Vita.
It's about a complete change in tone from consumers and the media, so please read the article and respond to the contents within.
Borderlands 2 did come to vita
Vita did not fail, Sony failed the Vita... end of wise words
@tonyp1987
@BLP_Software Honestly, no. But I certainly address that point in the article.
People doesn't want console quality experience on the go, they say they want it, but they don't. While playing uncharted vita and gravity rush I always thinking "I want to play it on the big screen".
I bought the switch not because I want to play games on the go, I bought it because it's the only way to play new mario and zelda.
Personally, I think it's more to do with Nintendo marketing/timing than customer desire. In terms of the Switch, I know many gamers who are desperate for any games for the thing. I think it was somewhat similar around Vita's launch. What I would consider good games, but not great, where getting inflated user reviews just because people wanted games for the thing.
For me, I still look at the Switch as an extremely underpowered console that just happens to also be portable. I don't see it as a portable that can also be played on a proper display. The Vita was clearly a portable console, but people were still begging for an HDMI port on the thing. Being able to do both is huge.
i've always wanted console games on the go, but vita never delivered
Biggest factor is the Nintendo bias, they generally get a pass when others don't.
@iARDAs exactly
Great article. I wonder if this means that Microsoft and Sony will attempt to emulate Nintendo's Switch model in the future. I did love my Vita, I still have a charger for it plugged in, but the console sits dormant in my drawer. I use my 3DS a bunch.
Nah people who say that lie to you,most don't want on the GO even when Nintendo Did that poll 80% answered they play only at home.
Plus when they say little compromises on switch dude I played Doom on Switch that game was not meant to play on the "GO"
And please everyone knows Nintendo Would have died out in Console Space if they went with power,Switch was the only logical choice they tried it with WII U.
Biggest thing that i like on the Console are Joycons those things are cool.
I think it's largely in part because people don't like the idea of feeling limited to a handheld only console. With the Switch, many people could play on the TV if they wanted to, whereas that was never an option with the Vita. Even if people wanted to play primarily on the go, the option to play on the big screen might give people who are hesitant about a mobile-only device incentive to buy it.
As a former Vita owner and a current Switch owner, I knew anytime a port came to the Vita, it would always be more disappointing than a home console equivalent. Additionally, I had to wonder when developers would put aside making a console game to work on a Vita game. Those fear don't exist on the Switch.
I never really understood the articles at the time saying people didn't want console experiences on the go. Nintendo portables, while rudimentary in terms of technology, always had fully-featured full-length games, whether it be Zelda, Mario or Pokémon. The graphics and sound were worse than whatever was on the SNES or N64 or GameCube, but the games felt like the real deal. The idea that portables were the preserve of throw-away bite-sized games was always wrong. Also, I reckon a lot of people play their handhelds at home rather than "on-the-go". I certainly do. I like to be comfy. Maybe the Vita just wasn't an attractive enough proposition for the average gamer. Why would someone buy one to play Need for Speed when they can play it on a PS3 they already own? It's not about not wanting a console experience in handheld form, it's about not needing it.
Sony gave up pretty early and had they put more into it, maybe it would have sold more, but it is very difficult to say. Nintendo are more committed to the success of their portable hardware than Sony as they have far more at stake. The 3DS had to succeed and now so must the Switch. Now that it is the only new Nintendo hardware, it will be the only place for people to get their Nintendo fix. Also, Nintendo have always been an important part of popular culture and I feel that now they have a product that is attractive, fans are coming back. Of course, it remains to be seen if it will be able to sustain its sales and be a success in the long-term.
@BLP_Software I think you make a good point, but there were 7.5 billion people in the world five years ago, too. They went on commutes just the same?
The tone has undeniably changed, and the old articles I dug up demonstrate it.
I'm certainly not saying anyone is right or wrong here; I just thought it was an interesting point of discussion.
Speaking from the perspective of being a 31 one year old with two jobs and little time to dedicate to my hobby:
Portable gaming is just convinient, in the past couple of years gaming has been hard for me on my PS4. The experience is amazing but to finish the games I love takes a lot of time. For example, The Witcher 3 took me a whole year, games like FFXV, Bloodborne and MGSV demand that I loose sleep in order to give them at least a couple of hours. And losing sleep now that I go to bed at 11pm to wake at 6am is a no-no, specially since I have to work at least 12 hours to live in a third world country.
Anyways, portable gaming: I can play indie games on my Vita while on the bed, or while taking a dump and that was a joy. The same with the Switch but now I can play games with better gameplay and graphics on the go. Pulling a cup on Mario Kart 8 or looking for Shrines in BotW in a couple of minutes while taking a dump has been my main source of gaming in the last months, and it is amazing!
In my opinion they don't want games on the go, they want the new zelda and mario games.
I'm with you 100% on this Sammy, I just don't get it either. I've played my friend's Switch for a considerable amount of time, and not once did I feel the need to take it off the dock and play a game like Doom or Odyssey on a tiny screen. It makes zero sense to me. I mainly bought my Vita for a travel machine, and of course as a portable PS1 classic player, and to that end it has served it's purpose very well.
I think the difference is in where Nintendo is coming from, having something to prove after bungling up the wiiu, and how they tend to market their machines when they're firing on all cylinders. They've marketed the switch to make it look very appealing, like the second rebirth of the Gameboy, that also hooks up to your TV. Hell, i'll end up buying one when Metroid Prime 4 comes out, but you can be 100% sure it's only coming off the dock when i turn it off!
If the sales on doom on switch we're on Vita it would have been considered a failure. Even more Nintendo is portable gaming.
Let's put another picture why did the Wii U fail. It had Nintendo exclusives to start with.
Vita is an excellent machine but market expectations and the fact it was never bundled with PS4 means it did not succed.
On the other hand like the current situation everyone has a share in the market so we are allhappy that way.
@Fath But if those are the sales is it really worth it??
@lixei32 Eh, I'm dropping my comment. I could muse over this issue more, but I need to focus on other things this morning.
Because it's a way better system than the Vita.
People basically only buy the Vita for the indies anymore, and it's clear that the Switch is becoming a lot of people's ideal way to play indies. Add onto that a system that lets you effortlessly switch between portable and TV mode, has all the buttons and functionality of any home console, a decent amount of AAA third party support so far, and all of Nintendo's first party games, and you have a recipe for success.
Besides, with how well Nintendo's portable systems have always sold, it's not really surprising that there's a market for portable gaming. The Vita just doesn't do it very well in most people's opinion, judging by the sales.
Gamers have always wanted this, and developers want it even more. Developers learn to make their games leaner and aging gamers get to play in quick sprints between work/family/life-things.
The idea just had to be executed without compromises to the control scheme....and this is the important part: the games have to be good.
Psvita's biggest 1st party efforts weren't very good. RemotePlay is a decent concept with bad execution. Cross-buy was really only ever used for indie games.
The thing I like about portable is you can game in any room in the house.
I wonder if all the people that still use physical copies of games........get up of the Chair to change the channel on the T.V.
I love my 3ds/2ds sometimes I wish I could play the games on the big screen.......oh wait I need a Switch.
I think it’s got to be the treatment and support from Nintendo, that pushes people to change their tone.
This is Nintendo’s new Home Console. Their main system, whereas the Vita was a compliment to Sony’s main system. This adds the benefits of Nintendo’s first party fully dedicated to the platform, as well as giving 3rd parties a clear sight at the future of Nintendo rather than splitting their support between different systems.
This is the only way forward for Nintendo fans, they don’t have another option of a dedicated home platform so they have been forced to give it a go and while some do enjoy the portability aspect, I personally still think they are in the minority. I will never forget the poll on one of Nintendo’s Twitter pages asking where people play their Switch most, outside at the park? On the train? At the beach? Or at home.
90% said at home....
Edit: the final poll results were 83% prefer playing at home, out of 46,000 votes.
https://mobile.twitter.com/NintendoAmerica/status/897856262221602820?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fmynintendonews.com%2F2017%2F08%2F18%2Foverwhelming-majority-of-nintendo-switch-owners-prefer-to-play-at-home%2F
Well argued article. Hope people give it a proper read, before jumping in to comment.
I don't think tones have changed. It's a vocal minority clamouring for these games. I believe with every fibre of my body that third party will to an extent abandon the Switch, or it won't be a priority.
FIFA & Doom were the two big tests- Switch failed both. Skyrim is sure to follow. Heck I would put money on Skyrim VR to outsell Skyrim Switch.
Nintendo are in a unique position. They could develop games for a toaster and their fan base would buy it. Now that they essentially only have one hardware fans will have to buy it to play their favourite Nintendo games.
I love handheld gaming. I have a GBC, DS, 2 x Vita, 2 x PSP, a PSP Go & as of last month a Switch.
I'm loving Mario on the go, because It's easy to pick up and put down. That doesn't mean I want to take Uncharted 4 with me on the go.
What I mean by that is that there are different kinds of games that translate better to both handheld & console gaming.
I have made this point in the forums before:
The Switch fails as gaming hardware for me. Too big to be a handheld, lacks the power to be a console. However, you have to buy one to play Nintendo games.
We here and the folks over at NL don't represent the market. People buy Nintendo hardware for Nintendo games. That's a fact.
This doesn't mean that the Switch won't be successful. I think it'll do 50-60million. It's selling very well, but it's only a matter of time before the big publishers pull their support.
Nintendo's cadence has been a lot better with the Switch than Sony's was with the Vita. Switch came out with a 10/10 Zelda then it had games like ARMS and Slaptoon 2 in the near future with the clincher of a 10/10 Mario game coming out in the same year. Zelda and Mario shift units, and when they come out in the same year for a brand new console, it's bingo.
Good article by the way. I've been thinking along the same lines.
Your answer is right in the Wired quote: "almost-console-quality games".
Switch delivered on Sony's promise of "taking gamers out of the handheld ghetto". PSP and Vita were always compromises of varying degrees, Switch is literally console on the go, and more importantly console not-necessarily on the go: PSP and Vita output to the TV was atrocious.
What else is there to say?
@Fight_Teza_Fight I think DOOM you’re judging too fast it literally JUST came out... whereas FIFA yea I can understand that tbh...
@Fight_Teza_Fight Except the big publishers so far have done the opposite, and have been pleased with their sales on Switch. Doom's UK sales aren't representative of everywhere else either.
EA is literally the only publisher so far that hasn't been pleased with their sales.
Everyone always wanted full console gaming on the go. People seemed to use it as an excuse for Vita's failure (while the 3DS's proper console games are the reason for its success) ... "Sony didnt understand that people dont want full console game experiences on a handheld"! What a load of rubbish. Just about every handheld game Ive played since the GameBoy through to 3DS has been a full console game. The only reason Vita failed was due to Sony thinking that cynical, greedy practices had any place in handheld gaming. They then had the chance to resolve the problem with the redesigned Vita model ... but no ... they stuck with the greedy practices and drove the final nail in! Shame ... lovely wee console.
@3MonthBeef That wasn’t really the point I was trying to make though. The argument is about gaming on the go, with the vocal minority talking about playing outside of the household.
It’s pure convenience playing undocked at home. In my opinion, that isn’t gaming on the go.
Come on let's be realistic it's a Nintendo Hand held sort of and Nintendo always does well with handhelds.
@Spiders I genuinely believe that had Uncharted: Golden Abyss been Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception but at half the resolution with some performance problems (like DOOM appears to be), the criticisms would have been exactly the same at the time.
It was never really about the games: a lot of people swore down they simply didn't want these types of experiences on a handheld at the time. Take a look at The Guardian article, for example.
I've personally always wanted console games on the go. I bought into it enough to get a PSP ten years ago, and I do admittedly want a Vita even though support has dried up, as well as a Switch.
There's plenty of reasons why Sony's efforts have failed while Nintendo is succeeding, most of which have already been added or are being added as I type this (I started typing when it was 26 comments, now it's 42), but my personal reason is that some of these console quality games came later on after their console equivalents came out, such as Persona 3 Portable, Persona 4 Golden, or Tekken Dark Resurrection. Not to mention that by the time these came out, the hardware they had for these games was already outdated, so instead of sealing the gap, it kinda accentuated it instead. Those are still good games, but from a general POV, it would probably look underwhelming. That's me talking personally though.
Petty thing to say/Ignorant thing to say: Handheld Gaming is dead. Mobile Gaming is cancer. It’s either Console Gaming or PC Gaming for HC Gamers. Why doesn’t Nintendo get this? No wercs it they should be a 3rd party dev what were they thinking? Imagine Mario Odyssey in 1440p 60fps on PS4 Pro, 1800p 60fps on X, and 2160p 60fps+ On PC. Imagine Zelda BoTW officially on PC at 2160p 60fps+, 1440p 60fps on PS4 Pro actually stable on PS4 and Xbox One (30fps) (1080p On PS4)... Imagine Pokemon on PS4...
My real Comment: Shrugs I feel this is Nintendo being Nintendo assuming the market and they might know what they want... well with Switch back with Sony’s Systems they have issues but I feel Sony had ways of holding em back
@GamingEagle lol, Gaming while taking a dump is magical.
People are simpler than they care to admit or able to understand. Switch being a success has little to do with it being something people actually want and a lot with it being perceived as an item that you "have to have". Same with apple/samsung products.
It's called the snowball effect. Ninty played their hand right. They knew a lot of Ninty fans care about portable gaming and that a lot of people care about homeconsole versions of Mario and Zelda. They decided to combine the userbases and make it look like a more successful product than it actually was. With shortages everywhere, just like the wii, and gaming sites reporting how it broke records (simply by having a bit more stock than past Ninty hardware) it became a product that a lot of people wanted, but couldn't get. When they did, they made a huge deal about it online. Then other people who are easily influenced (i.e. the masses) decided that they needed it too! And now you have a successful product because of its public perception as a cool item.
To an extent, the same thing happened with Ps4 and ps2. People bought them because they were seen as hot items and since everyone else had one, then the easily influenced people had to have them, too. There have been reports of people queuing to buy an xbox1 only to switch (pun intended) queues and get a ps4 instead because they saw everyone else getting one.
Shortages and hype even helped amiibos of all things do well. Mom's spaghetti.
Speaking for others and not myself, I think a lot of the mainstream market didn't and still doesn't want to be FORCED to play tv quality experiences on a handheld. They don't realize the appeal or potential. I think if the Switch were handheld ONLY it would be experiencing a lot (but not all due to a more acclaimed/better marketed exclusive lineup) of the same problems that the Vita.
Anecdotal, but a lot of people have purchased the Switch with the intent of primarily playing games docked to the tv and falling in love with console experiences on the go.
@IceClimbers "EA is literally the only publisher so far that hasn't been pleased with their sales."
And this is what I hate about the internet. You don't know this, dude. You just don't. Mom's spaghetti.
Completely agreed. The 2DS is great because it has its own games, not just downports of current home console games. PSP didn't get to 80 million because of ports and ports and ports, it got there because it started getting its own games.
I love my vita, have hundreds of games for it, and will often buy the vita version over the ps4 version (just last month I bought danganronpa 3, ys 8, yomawari midnight shadows and chaos child for vita) and thats entirely because I want the convenience of playing these on the go.
The big difference between vita and switch is that Nintendo have always, even on 3ds, put their top devs on making games for their system. Nintendo wouldn't have put nihilistic software on resistance or call of duty for instance at a crucial period in building customer engagement in a new console. Sony were rightly criticised at the time for the poor experience when compared to the home console equivalents. Particularly when the console was capable of gems like killzone mercs.
The other problem was that vita was slightly ahead of available technology at the time. The cross play / cross buy idea was genius and switch have largely taken that, developed it into something that fundamentally works (clearly Sony had similar ambitions for vita), and that has captured the jays and minds of the public.
I still love my vita. I certainly don't feel it's a failure, and will be playing for years to come
@Derpie1 I played through BotW on WiiU, and after seeing some of the mods on PC, I'm definitely giving it another go in 4K. Mario Odyssey on the other hand actually looks really good on a big screen, and with the art style they chose for it I don't think a bump in resolution would be as big of a difference as it is in BotW. Would still try it though....
@naruball
"To an extent, the same thing happened with Ps4 and ps2. People bought them because they were seen as hot items and since everyone else had one, then the easily influenced people had to have them, too". spot on Sir
With that in mind Good or Bad for long term Gaming.
Weekend Hippies annoy me.....they Protest and save the Green Planet on the weekend's.....and back to work Monday Hypocrites.
@RedMageLanakyn well it’s just me playing a petty/ignorant card BoTW still looks good either way yea textures look PS2/EPS3 but it’s Nintendo...
I have been saying this since the Switch wqs announced!! The only reason the Switch is praised where they Vita was scorned is because it has the "Nintendo" name attached to it. Fanboyism and Nostalgia and this notion that Nintendo can do no wrong.
@IceClimbers @Derpie1 Doom did 3500 in the UK. An estimated 1% of Switch UK owners bought the game.
FIFA for Switch isn't charting anymore. NBA2K18 didn't do well either.
The Indies were always going to do well. There is more visibility on the Switch as it's doesn't have many AAA games. In a sense it's a much more successful vita.
Nintendo read the market. Handheld gaming is dying, so they consolidated their business. A hybrid was the answer for Nintendo and it makes sense. However being a hybrid the Switch makes far too many compromises, especially in the power department.
I've made this point before, but if the Switch has to cut so many corners to get 2016 Doom to run, what do you think 2019 games will look and perform like?
I'm a Switch owner, but I'm also a realist. You buy Nintendo hardware to play Nintendo games.
Nobody will buy a Switch to play GTAVI on the go.
I think the issue with the Vita was the price (especially if you look at how expensive it would be today in comparison) and how that compared with the PS3/XB360 at the time. It was more expensive and it wasn't much better than a PS2. It made more sense to keep with your mobile or a DSi.
I was very tempted to buy a vita but my DSi rarely got used. As I got older, learned to drive and then had kids , my opportunities to gaming on the go dropped and dropped. I could go months and months without the opportunity and then when opportunities did arise, it was Dr's/Hospital waiting rooms. Mobiles also really started offering much more in gaming as well as internet access - then tablets so as an Adult, I could do more with a mobile/tablet. These mobile/tablets offered more on a day to day basis.
As I said, I found 'on the go' gaming to be less and less viable so spending 'big' on a handheld that may only get a few hours over a year use didn't make sense to me.
The Switch is a different beast. Its a direct replacement for a 'home' console. I can see why PC/Console gamers may opt for it as their 'hand held' option but it also has the 'appeal' of a home console and big screen gaming. If the Vita offered a simple docking option, the games really wouldn't hold up visually to the quality we saw on the vita screen - let alone PS3 games of that era. The Switch gets a boost to enable games to look as good, if not better on a big screen and better than the console its replacing.
I don't know if attitudes are changing or whether its the fact the Switch is also a home console. I don't know whether more people are commuting, leaving the car at home or not. I don't know how many people are buying a Switch purely to play Doom, Wolfenstein and/or Skyrim on the go. I can believe that those with a PC/PS4/XB1 will be buying those games for that benefit but I would expect that's more of a 'bonus' as they bought the Switch primarily for first Party software. Where did Switch Doom chart? It would be interesting to see 'Switch' figures that show the percentage of time spent gaming on the go or in console mode. If the majority of gamers are gaming on the go, then there is a case to be made for Sony to bring back their Vita.
I don't think its 'unfeasible' for Sony to build a portable PS4 that targets 720p and be more powerful than a Switch - whether or not they could get the battery life to last longer though if they are running more powerful hardware - if they also increased the screen resolution to full HD that would also drain battery life. Point is though, they could target more powerful hardware that's 'closer' to the XB1 than the Switch - the hardware exists. That would enable them to offer a 'portable' PS4 in essence and maybe some 'link' that your progress on one device, could be carried to the other. Buying 'Digital' could enable both the home and portable console versions - a bit like MS does with their PC/Xbox games.
Basically you could have a three tier settings option - the Handheld 720p, PS4 1080p and PS4 Pro 1440p settings. It could also use CB rendering methods to deliver higher that supersample down to the 720p screen or uses CB rendering to offset the drop in specs that a handheld would need. Scaleability as well as new rendering techniques could help Vita 2 and maybe another reason the Vita struggled as games were not so scaleable.
The issue though could be cost. Chances are, a new Vita would cost more than a PS4, XB1 and/or Switch. If its that 'powerful' though, you have much more chance of developer support. In theory, it could play all the current games - and those upcoming on this generation - albeit scaled down. If the Vita could have played Uncharted 1-3, Last of Us, Resistance 1-3, Killzone 2-3 etc - albeit scaled down a bit, it may well of been more successful. We will probably never know. If Sony were to build the Vita 2 as I envisioned, the current games would scale down (something that has become more important and easier to do) and it could be a relatively simple port - in some cases, nothing more than a drop in resolution to run.
Whether Sony need to take a chance on Portable gaming again right now or not, is a different matter. They are doing well again across the company but they do also have PSVR, two PS4 models and no doubt looking towards their PS5. Where would the 'Vita' fit in? If its a portable PS4 in essence, its a 'generation' behind as soon as the PS5 lands and will that make it seem dated? Will Sony be able to offer a similar 'cross-play' digital purchase option - something I think could really help the Vita 2 and digital sales. If you bought Days Gone digitally, you got the Vita 2 version. That would help Vita 2 sell. It would seem more like a 'companion' to the PS4, a way to play PS4 games on the go and then transfer your progress to your home console and carry on but with PS4 or Pro boost to visual/performance. Of course they could do this with the PS5 too - I think - because of the scaleability of games but I think you would get more half frame rate (30fps) on Vita where the PS5 offers 60fps - I think Sony will be looking for a significant CPU boost on the PS5 - more of a boost than the GPU will get over Pro. An 8Tflop GPU is less than 2x boost over Pro but I bet the CPU gets more than a 2x boost over Pro. A 6core/12 thread Ryzen clocked at 3ghz ish for example but Sony could use 'Jaguar' in its Vita 2.
@Nygiantz17 " I knew anytime a port came to the Vita, it would always be more disappointing than a home console equivalent." This is yhe case with Switch. Almost every port of a CURRENT gen game is disappointing compared to PS4/XBO.
I dont think that there is some major change in people thinking. Vita is different type of device. If you want compare vita to 3ds. Switch is big portable console. And what about ps tv? Difference is that you will buy 2 in 1 with switch and also it’s nintendo, so it appeals to families. Vita has it’s flaws but switch also (32GB really???). On switch you have big games. Maybe performance is last gen, but you have it. On vita? It’s still only portable. But in the end there is nothing about changing attitudes. 3ds sold well, switch sells well. Vita has some good features - like remote play. But if you want to play big games on vita you need also big console, so that’s different approach than switch. And you can take switch to train, bus etc... simply can’t compare these two. Maybe Sony had similar concept but did it differently (not wrong imho). I think vita would end same these days.
Great article! I‘m honestly also puzzled by the Switch numbers. I have a PSP and a Vita and I never used them on the go but in bed or on the couch (and even in the tub).
It must be the whole package: bigger HD screen with superb graphics, better and flexible controls and a full blown Zelda and Mariokart.
Really, I often wished for an even bigger screen on the Vita. Although Muramasa or Killzone look fantastic!
@Fight_Teza_Fight "Handheld gaming is dying" I can see what your saying in the whole context and where usually I agree with your post's I have to say Handheld gaming is in it's infancy Mobile gaming is massive and going to get better........it's the future of gaming.
@naruball Out of the ones that have supported Switch? Yes, they've all said they're pleased with their sales except for EA. So I do know that.
Unless you're gonna go conspiracy theorist and say they're lying? Are you really gonna go there?
@Fight_Teza_Fight think Nintendo should just hit the road n go 3rd party (albeit they do it now welp you n I just wasted 300+ dollars)
@get2sammyb And it also claims the portable convenience and fullblown HD homeconsole (that the Vita never was). See also in regards to VR: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-11-09-where-is-vrs-nintendo-switch
@Furtin The NS is a lot behind systems like PS4 and Wii, and the games aren't doing too hot if they don't have Mario or another big Nintendo property in them. Don't believe the spin of Nintendo sites.
@Mahe should they pack thier bags n jump onto PS5 development I mean Nintendo
Alright, to break it down:
The whole notion of cross-save, cross-play and cross-buy is a nice concept. But you don't have to have two seperate consoles to achieve it on the Switch, you also don't have to constantly upload saves and swap devices. This is a no-brainer.
You can also use a decent controller on Switch games, the Joycons are much more comfortable than the tiny buttons on the Vita. I love the Vita for RPGS and Visual Novels but nothing else really. You also have Pro Controller and USB Controller (including Gamecube) options)
Popping the thing into a dock and instantly playing it on the TV is what brings it closer to being an actual console, instead of buying a PS3/PS4 and watching a sluggish Remote Play game.
The rear touch pad is the worst invention in the history of handhelds, and yes I am aware of the N-Gage.
The Vita's screen is also too small and in many games this interfered with the gameplay. The Switch's screen size seems to remedy this.
It's not about a difference in opinion, it's a difference in what was delivered by the company who made it. So many mistakes were made with the Vita, Nintendo have made some mistakes with the Switch so far but nothing anywhere near as damaging.
@Furtin I don't really agree with this article, but I definitely don't really know what it's got to do with my Soapbox TBH?
@get2sammyb
Nothing has changed.
1) Your initial observation, "people don't want console games on the go," was never established in the first place. The PS Vita's failure had little to do with concept and everything to do with execution.
2) Nintendo Switch's primary appeal isn't just about portability, it's about versatility. I mean, yes, being able to play on the tablet is a part of that, but so is being able to play on the TV. It's about reducing the friction between wanting to play games and actually being able to play games, whether alone or with friends, as much as possible. That's why the joycon controllers double as makeshift individual controllers for spontaneous multiplayer possibilities.
@IceClimbers Sources on every single company/developer who has released a game on Switch saying they were pleased with their sales, please. I'll wait.
As for your second "point", you know who else said they were happy with their sales when they weren't? Ubisoft with Assassin's Creed: Liberation. But sure, let's call it a conspiracy theory. Mom's spaghetti.
@Fight_Teza_Fight NBA 2K18 did do well though, or at least according to Take Two's expectations.
https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/7bkdua/taketwo_very_pleased_with_nba_2k18_sales_on_switch/
As for Doom, yes, it did poorly in it's UK debut. But again, the UK is not representative of other markets at all! The UK is one of Nintendo's poorest markets.
But sure, FIFA is gonna kill third party support for others who have had success on Switch. /s
Try again.
@IceClimbers UK is like for Nintendo as Japan is for Microsoft least in terms of games sales maybe not as bad but uhhhh yea
It's because the media and core gamers go all misty eyed over anything Nintendo does. Best examples are look how PS Allstars was received before it even came out, it was just dismissed as a "Smash Bros clone" like Nintendo are the only ones allowed to make that kind of game. Or the Amiibos that people couldn't get enough off despite been years behind Skylanders and Disney.
@adf86 can’t say that for Australia or UK of the modern day... + they are constantly criticized w certain things (thier relationship w YouTube Creators and if you think about it how they are w Copyright n YT translates to Twitch you rarely see a Nintendo game on the Top 10 played games plus in ways they are inferior in every way to Sony/Microsoft plus thier failures they have been criticized as thier fault whether it’s thier power, marketing, discs vs cartridge, etc. They’re criticized in many ways it requires digging but it’s there heck TheGamingBrit, Haedox, and various other YouTubers have made “exposed” videos on em which got many views and even had a high like over dislike ratio... Nintendo in a way is like recently Ricegum for years has been ABOVE criticism then 2015 happened and since that Creators Program existed its like iDubbz came n did a Content Cop cus then they have been getting slammed hard!
@get2sammyb I think it really is just the hybrid nature of it, you are literally taking your home console game and save file with you, no compromises, no hassle.
Both PSP and Vita had issues with this, PSP could take your save files but you had to buy the game twice. Whilst Vita fell awkwardly between the PS3 and PS4, meaning that it was all but finished before the benefits of any potential connection to PS4 could be established. One final factor could be that Switch finally has all the necessary buttons for its controllers, something missing on both Sony handhelds meaning the games feel the same to play
@Derpie1 That's what annoys me, their Youtube policies, Switch's terrible storage and late 90's inspired online services yet they get put on a pedestal for not doing too much right.
I think it makes sense for Nintendo. I honestly think it's best for Nintendo to not have gone for a normal console with higher specs that would be obsolete in comparison with Xbox One X and PS4 Pro. With that in mind, a handheld hybrid is just the best they can do. And here's a single reason: Pokémon. It is Nintendo's biggest system seller after Mario. Just because it's not good for Playstation it doesn't mean it isn't to everyone else. Sometimes it's not always about what the whole market wants, but what's logic for one of them at the time, and it made total sense for Nintendo. Now, of course they didn't have only pokémon in mind when designing the Switch (that's just my fanboy speaking), but having 2 systems was harming them in a big way, with huge game release droughts. It's best for them, not for Sony. And it's not just about the hybrid nature, but the hybrid nature solves the problem of having to develop for two new systems
@Maxymik That sums it up. lol Launching with BotW was a BIG deal
@adf86 I updated my post you’ll love it!
@naruball Square, Namco and Capcom (I believe) just reported that the games they put on the platform surpassed expectations and are pleased with the results. Square mentioned they're looking to support the platform "aggressively", Capcom plans to put more multiplats on it and Namco is currently developing three exclusives for it. It's all recent news, comes from these companies' fiscal quarter reports.
@MarcelRguez what about the rest? When someone says all, I assume they mean all. Mom's spaghetti.
@naruball The rest of the big publishers that have put games on the system? EA and 2K have already been covered. That leaves Ubisoft. They too put Mario + Rabbids as one of their big successes of this quarter. There's Sega too with Puyo Puyo Tetris, which I'm sure didn't need to sell much to justify its existence since it's a 2014 game. Sonic Forces will surely do well enough too, since it's always sold well enough on Nintendo hardware.
Even if you want to turn the conversation towards how the smaller titles are faring, stuff like Stardew Valley and SteamWorld Dig 2 are making a killing. SteamWorld recouped its dev costs in less than a week, even. The same sentiment was being echoed even before those titles came out: I recall Shin'en being very impressed with Fast RMX's sales (especially compared to the original's sales numbers on Wii U) and Yatch Club Games being more than pleased with Shovel Knight as well.
@Derpie1 I would love it if Sony and Nintendo joined forces. Nintendo makes the handheld, Sony makes the console. That would be an ideal scenario imo.
@IceClimbers I'm not a fan of FIFA, I prefer PES. That doesn't change the fact that FIFA is the godfather of sports games. UK sales aren't the be all, end all, but they give an indication of worldwide trends.
As for NBA it didn't do terrible, but it certainly didn't set the world on fire.
I would bet good money on Skyrim VR outselling Skyrim Switch.
The simple answer: People LOVE Nintendo handheld devices. Period. It has been proven time and time again. The fact that it is a hybrid is merely a bonus.
@MarcelRguez I'll give you a hint. The problem is making a claim that "all of them said".
@naruball Who made that claim? @IceClimbers was obviously talking about the big publishers, as he said previously in that post. Either your reading comprehension is seriously lacking, or you got caught with your pants down and are just moving the goalposts by now.
Sammy, go back and watch the first Vita ads. They portray an experience much closer to what the Switch offers than anything the Vita was ever capable of. The one that sticks out in my mind was an ad featuring MLB The Show. Buddy is playing the PS3 version, checks his watch, drops the controller, picks up his Vita and continues his game while strutting down the street. People realized very quickly that those ads were taking liberties and that the actual system did not work as it was portrayed in the ads. They didn't show buying 2 copies of the game (if the game was even available on both systems), syncing your save file (if it actually supported cross play) , reloading the game in the 2nd system, then trying to play on a controller that didn't have enough buttons.
When the Switch was first shown, a lot of people were skeptical of the hybrid nature and if it would actually work as shown in the ad. It does work like it shows in the ad. For EVERY game. Nintendo delivered the experience that Sony promised, but never really tried to offer in reality...
If they had focused more on the Vita just being a great handheld in it own right (which it was, i loved mine), it might have had a better chance of finding its audience, but it always felt to me like their marketing was pushing the AAA title cross-play experience a little too hard when those experiences were very few and very far between.
@Fight_Teza_Fight issue: Legal reasons and That one contract Nintendo don’t wanna lose thier IPs nor thier revenue for said IPs soooooo there ya go
@MarcelRguez keep making assumptions, buddy. Whatever helps you sleep at night. Also lol at pretty much saying "you're either wrong or I am right". Sure, if you say so.
"Big" publisher is a relative term. Has Sega commented on all the games released on The Switch? Has Ubisoft? Have they mentioned if they are happy about the sales of Just Dance 2017 and 2018? Has every big publisher made a comment about every single game they've released and all said they are happy about each game's sales? No. For the very simple reason that we rarely hear from them talking about sales. Also, notice how neither of you made a comment about the example of Assassin's Creed: Liberation (vita) that I provided?
As for non-big publishers, you're the one who brought them up. But don't let facts get in your way. Mom's spaghetti.
@3Above are you sure about that?! I mean maybe that`s a reason too. but I think the real reason is exclusive games like Zelda or Mario they`re making a chance for Nintendo to have fans. that`s not just because of nostalgia things . just look at the meta score
the point is , a portable console can live with good exclusive games. look at PSP what you can see? the ocean of exclusive games even a Metalgear came out just for PSP . but look at vita.. that`s why vita failed but PSP and switch got Success
in sale.
I think Sony can`t do what did in the past for PSP . they can Focus
on other things and maybe 3 years later we could have a successful portable console.
p.s: Sony closed many studios which worked on portable games. even GC has been closed and Bandi studio (made uncharted GA) Is working on days gone. so there is no chance for sony to has a good portable console for now.
______________________
other reasons why vita failed:
1- on that period people thought mobile would be a new home of GO games.
2- Sony named it PS Vita not PSP 2 ! It`s one of the biggest mistake ever Sony did in all these years
3- there was no serious exclusive for console. Sony support is awful for vita. even now there is no reason to buy it because big games came out for PS4 . Even half of PSP exclusive games could save vita...
4- Sony closed studios or got them VR projects . so how they could make games for vita? I don`t know really
5- Sony did really bad Advertising for vita .
Nintendo's new strategy for the Switch is brilliant. Take full console games and make them playable on a portable device. This merges both of their hardware divisions which simplifies their process and gives the ability to play console games on the go. Not to mention they are putting out excellent new age versions of their classic games.
Edit: Word up son*
@naruball No (Sonic) and yes (Just Dance), respectively.
Has every big publisher made a comment about every single game they've released and all said they are happy about each game's sales?
You're not reading my posts, I take it. Yes, they have. Go read Mochizuki's twitter, it's all there.
That aside, let me get this straight: first you claimed people couldn't know if games are selling well on the system (even though these publishers said it themselves). After that, you re-interpreted the original post at your convenience to say "well, not every single publisher has said so, huh?", which has now turned into "well, even when they say they're happy with those sales numbers, they aren't". That's no assumption, that's the definition of moving the goalposts.
Let's take a step back, shall we? You have two different people telling you that yes, third-party publishers have come forward saying their software has done very well on the Switch. We're even telling you where to find this info, if not giving you the source outright. Who's disregarding the facts, exactly?
I'll gladly shoot some holes in this article: Borderlands 2 and RE Revelations 2 on Vita are absolute garbage. The frame rates are horrendous. (Yet the original Revelations on 3DS was lovely. A true technical marvel) Vita is a sub-par PS3 at best in terms of raw power. They had no business porting those titles over.
Sony never belived in Vita. Seems they abandoned it within 2 years of it releasing. Leaving it up to third parties. Whereas Nintendo still supports 3DS even now in 2017.
I'd like to see where this data of DOOM only selling 3500 retail copies in the UK is coming from. On the eshop charts, it's doing quite well. Also, it's over a year old, did you expect 100K in 2 days? Try harder, Sammy.
@pbernoos Nostalgia and "The Nintendo Factor" are exactly why BoTW has the score it does. Other games get criticized for things that Nintendo games get a pass for. Why was it ok for Doom Switch to be Sub HD ( mostly 600p per Digital Foundry) but Titanfall 1 was ragged on for its 792p. The AC series is always criticized for its frame rate issues and review scores reflect that. But BoTW launches with frame rate dips and frame pacing issues and it gets a 10/10.
Nintendo just isnt held to the same standards but ppl are ok with that for some reason.
Simply put, the people, specialy gramers, don’t know what they want. They follow trends, simply as that, that’s the only rational reason to justify now shallow games like COD or BF sell more than any other type of game...
@3Above I’ll counter this w one thing 4 words: Nintendo YouTube Creators Program
Context: After this program launched its almost as if iDubbz did a Content Cop on Nintendo (which would be a wierd thought btw) cus then lots of criticism both during that time and AFTER there was lots of criticism and cynicism thrown at the Behind The Times Kyoto Based Company...
@NathanUC I disagree with the power aspect. It's more than capable for what I want out of a console. Granted, my expectations are generally lower than many in the gaming community. But I think the sacrifices made are inconsequential to have the ability to play in handheld mode. The games so far look really good.
I love my Vita, lots of excellent games to play on it. Easily got my money's worth out of it over the years.
@3Above
Hmm. Yeah at this point I'am agree with you maybe reviewers has a special look at switch games because they're for nintendo.
But Im not Convinced yet , why many people look for nintendo switch and what is special about this portable console?
There should be something more than brand name .
Or maybe you're right ... All of this sales are because of the name of company and nostalgia
When the vita came out tablets and smart phones were onthe rise and no one was interested in having another device fast to 2017 mobile gaming innovation has stalled, Android tablets have fell off and no offline mode on most games and touch controls are okay,psychal controlls are way better,Most people don't care for tablets anymore so a dedicated hand held makes sense. I didn't get a vita back in 2011 because I thought phones and tablets were the future,but as years went by,I found myself less and less playing on phones tablets,intill I sold my tablet and completely stopped, and eventually bought a vita in 2016,this was the experience I have been wanting not a watered down mobile game that has lousy touch controls,no offline mode and filled with micro transactions. Mobile gaming is garbage in my eyes and will never replace a dedicated portabel console,an updated vita with Android support would kill it,also with backwards cartridge support of old Vita and micro SD.
I don't agree with the article to be honest. The reason the switch is doing well is nothing to really do with people wanting hand held near console experiences. The simple reason is Nintendo have a loyal following akin to Apple. Bring out a good Mario or zelda game and it'll sell bucket loads. Regardless if it's 2d or high end.
Pretty sure it's just because of bias.
Since Nintendo is doing it, it's suddenly the most brilliant idea ever.
1) Switch is fantastic and fresh, other game formats have tried to change the way we play. Switch fits into your life.
2) The screens nice and big, bigger than a normal handheld.
3) The Joycons are awesome and responsive. Unlike the awkward handhelds of yesteryear.
4) playing fully realised games on a plane is a joy.
5) Use the stand on the back of car seats for instant media screens adding uber value to your car. (That ones a lie but my son did this a few weeks ago and had a great time gaming on the M6).
The title question has several pretty obvious answers:
1) economical hijinks (crises, brexits and whatnot) have made earning good money like disposable income a busier task yet. People are increasingly enamored by the prospect of big games on the go because that's where they can find themselves spending most of the day, and by the time they get home, the couch can become increasingly more potent as a bed than as a Battlefield plane cockpit. Add the big games' hour count value, the need to balance games and the rest of the life you have, the wish to still witness more than 1-2 main story endings per year... and voila.
2) mobile gaming has done little but bust the myth of its own once alleged omnipotence. Touch screen controls (ironically streamlined by a CONSOLE when it came to games) expanded the scope greatly but failed to prove any uncompromising alternative to firm buttons - and the mobile market rapidly eschewing the latter has significantly narrowed mobile gaming's genre scope. Aaand what was left has been further compromised by the copious paywall practices in the freemium land. Don't forget phone games' sheer internet dependence either - not only that can rule out subway commutes (unless you're from some first world country where subway cars have their own free wi-fi), but some games love rebooting or crashing when they lose the precious signal during a simple menu screen transition.
3) portable hardware is gradually but decisively closing the gap between itself and home consoles. "Big games on the go" was never a precise revolution initiative from PSP/Vita/Switch per se because portable consoles have ALWAYS offered big games - even Game Boy RPGs and Zelda entries offered gameplay length on par. The upward climb has been bringing current or relatively recent home console ports on the go without shaving off most of the content and experience. That's where portables started making particularly notable advances since last decade, with Sony's initiative helping press the matter. After all, PSP didn't need to outsell DS in the end - it just needed to sell well, and we got a solid chunk of PS2 library in our pockets. The rest is history, and DOOM on Switch is the latest page in it. As home consoles are struggling to raise the plank while staying in the bounds of human perception (or erecting shrines to Digital Foundry at Sony and Microsoft HQs), the proudly hybrid Switch promises the historically lowest number of compromises when not just taking games on the go but even affording a constantly adjustable choice whether you want it on the go or on TV in some lucky mome- er, periods.
And it can only get better yet from here. Switch makes a real promise of what is to come and continue improving in a few years, blurring the line. Even though home consoles aren't likely to ever become obsolete either - especially since experiences like VR seem better off couch-bound ("VR on the go" sounds borderline suicidal in the world where so much as heavily indulged texting can land people in hospital bed... or worse).
I think a big difference is that the Vita just isn't very good for "Console Style" games. It's missing two shoulder buttons, doesn't have clickable sticks, and honestly isn't very comfortable to control. And Remote Play only really worked over Wifi so it wasn't really portable.
With the Switch, there is literally no difference in how you play. The only real difference is the screen size (excluding some porly optimized 3rd party games). And with Switch, it's extremely easy to ...well... switch between the two modes.
I also think attitudes may have changed with the Wii U as the one thing people seemed to universally like about it was the ability to so easily do Off TV play. So the Switch took that idea and finally made Off TV play untethered. Which I think people have actually wanted, it just never was done right.
@viciousarcanum Then what about the Wii U
For me I never understood why people wouldn't want console games on the go. Unless they are too complicated to control or with limited/small controls.
I loved playing Killzone and Uncharted on my Vita and am equally loving Zelda on Switch.
@sr_388 remote play absolutely works without WiFi in the same premises if thats what you mean. I remote play my ps4 from work every weekend.
@solocapers @sr_388 Yeah as long as you had a good upload speed for your home internet and good internet speeds with your vita connected wifi you were good to go.
The problem I had with that is the vita just never felt comfortable and I wish I could bluetooth my DS4 to my Vita to play in a legit fashion. The Vita controls were not great to play PS4 games in my opinion.
@Fight_Teza_Fight NBA 2k18 was not released in retail till a few weeks ago and had massive issues upon release that took a while to fix. FIFA didn't include many of the features that its console counterparts included. Third party publishers have generally been optimistic about the Switch
Between working part-time and being a mostly stay at home dad, I either have no time to sit in front of the TV to play or I can't use the TV period due to the kids either watching something or using their Leapfrog thingy. This is pretty much why I've turned to my laptop/3DS/Wii U and my Vita for my gaming bursts without having to rely on the television.
@YummyHappyPills Vita had full on AAA games and not ports or watered down versions of existing games only. GRAVITY RUSH, UNCHARTED GOLDEN ABYSS, TEAR AWAY, Not to forget the best version of FIFA 2015, just to name a few. What the heck are you talking about? You apparently were too busy with your Wii U to notice it.
I bought a Switch with the intention of playing it at home. The portability was just an added bonus. However I've been playing it out and about more than I expected and the two built-in controllers work really well to just hand someone one and have a match.
@sr_388 remote play works over 4g
@nhSnork if someone says "on the go" one more time when talking about handheld consoles I'm gonna be "on the go" running from the cops after I've murdered them.
Poor Vita. It deserved better honestly. Maybe one day, the rest of its 1st party line-up will be given some type of remaster akin to Gravity Rush and LocoRoco.
@solocapers Do you mean connecting directly to the PS4? Cause that's what I usually did. I think I used the wrong words. I would bring my PS4 somewhere and then remote play there lol. But as a handheld playing PS4 games away from the console, I was never able to get that working.
@Biotechzilla I forgot there's a 4g Vita, huh? Mine is WiFi only. And people got that to work "on the go?" (Sorry, I had to. Don't kill me!) That's cool.
I guess my point was just that the Switch makes the hybrid thing so easy that it's something people are more likely to use.
I believe it all sums up to three reasons:
(1) Gaming has evolved a lot thanks to kids who started gaming in the 90s growing up and continuing to enjoy games, that matured to meet its new audience's expectation. This same audience lacks time to play games at home now, mostly thanks to work, so portable console-like gaming becomes interesting. This isn't the main reason, though.
(2) Playstation (joined by Xbox and PC) is widely recognized as a powerful console for playing games at the big screen, filled with as many pixels as possible. It focus on realistic games with a lot of storytelling. Its audience wants each iteration to be more powerful than the last one, in terms of hardware. A portable Playstation is basically weaker than the console and offers pretty much the exact same experience (hardware differences aside), at least for the average PS gamer.
(3) Nintendo is widely recognized for its IPs and for its portable gaming ("horizontal" technology, i.e. do more with old tech instead of pushing more powerful hardware). Although there's a huge Nintendo fanbase, myself included, with the exception of Wii, Nintendo hasn't really been successful with its consoles after SNES; but it's the queen when it comes to portable gaming ever since GameBoy. It focus on colorful, artistic games with a lot of gameplay and nostalgy. Its audience wants each iteration of portable and console to gain the next entries in Nintendo IPs (and expects nothing less than being amazed by them). They also want to be surprised by the hardware, not in terms of power, but of gaming possibilities. A portable Nintendo continues to be attractive to gamers and a portable that also allows you to play the next AAA 3D Mario, Legend of Zelda, Metroid and puts Pokémon on the big screen is extremely attractive.
So, you see, it all comes down to understanding your audience. I don't think Vita would attract gamers even if it was released right now, alongside Switch, because the audience simply isn't there.
@3Above There is a difference between "not as good" and "disappointing". The recent ports of DOOM, Dragonball Xenoverse 2, and NBA 2k18 have all been good games, they just haven't been quite as good as their counter parts on PS4 and Xbox. It doesn't compare to the slew of bad games that the Vita saw, including a terrible Call of Duty and multiple badly attempted remasters of PS2 Classics.
Also, the Switch is a dedicated Nintendo console, meaning it has and will continue to have AAA titles, something the Vita severely lacked.
A couple reasons I can think to why Vita failed where the Switch is succeeding
1/ the Switch has full console style controls (Vita is missing L2/ R2 and clickable joysticks)
2/ the Switch is a actual console/portable hybrid, just simply dock it and play on tv, or take it out and play portable. Vita was mostly a portable with console like games that could play streamed games from a PS4 (a Switch is cheaper then owning a PS4 and Vita combo)
3/ The memory cards for the Vita where ridiculously priced, where Nintendo was smart and went with micro sd
4/ Nintendo games are great to usually play quick gaming sessions, or very long gaming sessions, which make the portable/ console hybrid work. Sony games are usually more cinematic and require longer play sessions to get fully into a game, not really idea for a portable.
Just some of my thoughts as to why, personally I would love a hybrid console from Sony, but I doubt it would happen.
@YummyHappyPills I live in Japan. I have a 55 inch TV and a PS4 pro. Most of my friends have the same or similar. The smallest TV I've seen someone using in the last few years is 40 inch. I think this notion of Japanese people live in small spaces and don't have TVs is a bit outdated.
The work part is spot on (including commute I average about 14 - 15 hours per day and I know others who work much more)
Methinks it's all about the games.
I don't know, but I was on the side that the vita and the whole idea was bad (even owing a vita). But after the Switch I did start to think that the problem is the Vita itself, which isn't a good handheld at all.
The controllers suck, the screen isn't good enough, the expensive memory cards, and the games in general were unappealing to the masses. So the problem wasn't the concept but Sony take on it.
@Nygiantz17 I know I'm nitpicking your use of "anytime" and "always," but I will say with 100% confidence that the Disgaea games were much better on Vita than PS3
@Biotechzilla Also, Little Big Planet, which according to some reviewers, was the best LBP game, and Killzone, one of the most impressive games on a handheld to date.
@AVahne and had it failed, it would have been the butt of the joke like WiiU was. But as soon as something succeeds, everything about it becomes "wonderful" ignoring its obvious problems. Mom's spaghetti.
U Vita can`t play game on the tv , for remote play you need internet or be near your ps4. The Switch is better "designed" system.
@3Above If Ninty games were reviewed by people who aren't in their thirties and didn't grow up playing them, I doubt they'd get over 8.5. But, of course, they are always assigned to the ones most eager to play them, hence the scores and the double standards.
@NathanUC I agree 100%
@naruball
I smell a ps fanboy here...
@get2sammyb
I think it very simply comes down to this... People want and expect high powered systems from Sony and Microsoft, those who want to play Nintendo games don't really care how they get them, though the market has always been bigger for Nintendo handhelds. I can only speak from my perspective but when it comes to things like Uncharted, MLB The Show, Yakuza, Horizon, God of War, Halo, Gears and Forza, I'd rather play on a tv. I don't care how I get Mario, Zelda and Metroid just as long as I get them. The fact Nintendo seems to be trying to unite their home and portable divisions, however, is something I've wanted to see for a long time. I use the Switch mostly in tv mode but the option to take Super Mario Odyssey or The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on the go (albeit with a dip in graphical quality) is awesome.
@naruball May I ask how many Nintendo games you've played in recent years?
Who was against console quality games on the go? I remember PSP owners saying how good their games looked and how PSP games compared to PS2 games. Flash forward to the next generation, people were talking up the Vita's power and how good the PS3 ports looked(relative to the hardware of course)... Furthermore, the gaming media and gamers as whole were gloating over how great KZ Merc looked.
Some folks have already stated why the Switch is attractive(the versatility, good price, etc) Some comments here assume the Switch's success is based off "Nintendo Bias" but if that was the case, how come the 3DS started slow and how come the Wii U bombed?
Its fine if you're not into the Switch(different strokes) but I think most people can agree that nintendo really hit the right spots with the Switch. At the same time, Sony did a lot wrong with the Vita. Sales numbers for both units prove that.
Imo, the main reason why Vita was unwanted (I guess this is what we discuss and not why it actually failed) is just bad timing.
Around 2012 was the big bang of large cellphones and small cheap tablets. Suddenly vita from the main portable playing machine, as psp was, had had multiple do-it-all rivals so not many cared for a small(er) expensive tablet-like console even with its full length games. The hype was with fancy phones, fancier tablets and ps3/ps4 for games (plus ds/3ds for traditional "game boy" gaming).
Now market is more clear. We all have big cellphones mostly for internet/social use, tablets are dead, so a big(ger) portable game machine can have its place with no actual competitors. Plus the hypes of Mario, zelda, of the hybrid character and the lovable joycons, and so we have a winner!
@YummyHappyPills unfortunately much of the work is work for the sake of work (not so much in my company but as an inherent part of the working culture).
From a purely observational point of view, I have seen very few Switches being played publicly (can't recall even one instance in the train) and still see a reasonable amount of Vitas (and PSPs!)
@Spiders I have always looked at handhelds being one or two generations behind, but still offer full-scale games. Just because the games on the systems aren't OMG BEST GRAFIX EVAH for the brodudes doesn't mean that most of the games themselves were shallow.
@3MonthBeef I'm not saying it as a negative, just as an observation. I've been doing the daily commute for 14+ years here in Japan and its an interesting way to observe changes in portable technology and trends.
@YummyHappyPills I still see the odd GB from time to time.
Still hoping one day to see someone pull out a Virtual Boy.
I take my vita with me when I travel long distance by plane only. I love it. However most of the time if I'm outside I'm not gaming. It's something I don't really understand. Go to a beautiful beach or up to the mountains and....pull out your game system and let it distract you from the natural beauty around you. Definitely wouldn't teach my kids to do that. Whatever everyone is different.
I know if I still lived in NYC I wouldn't be pulling out a switch or Vita. Not if I wanted to keep it for more than a day. I almost had my og Gameboy stolen from me. Never again!
@YummyHappyPills I understand what you're saying but there's been plenty of compromises when it comes to visuals on the go with the switch
@manu0 I beg to differ when the vita has gravity rush,killzone mercenary,borderlands 2,Uc golden abyss etc that all could have easily been console titles hell gravity rush eventually did become one
@BAMozzy the ps5 is des going to be more than 8tflops especially if it isn't coming until 2019. It'll probably be at least 10 to 12 with like you said double the CPU power
@EVIL-C dude take it easy it's just an opinion piece and you could easily look up the U.K. charts doom did garbage just like FIFA and NBA did and like skyrim will most likely do
@MarcelRguez dude yes some publishers have come forward but to be frank their mostly middle of the road aa type of publishers which let me be clear there's nothing with that but most of the big triple aaa games from the big triple aaa publishers have sold poorly and I guarantee just like Wii U who had decent third party support in the beginning it's eventually going to dry up.
The only reason the Vita failed is because of expensive prioritary memory cards.
How about the lack of support from Sony themselves? Nintendo is getting quality 3rd party support while the Vita gets trash?
Well, for me, I always bought Nintendo handheld systems. Only way I can play Nintendo games. Sony handhelds never clicked with me.
People wanted it with Vita. It was the Vitas main selling point, after all. I bought one ant launch on the promise of console gaming on the go so I remember how the dream faded quite well.
Kilzone was a launch title that was good but not great. Many of us turned our eyes fairly quickly to the Call of Duty franchise. But COD,: Black Ops Declassi was awful. A quick look at. Metacritic will tell you how bad that game turned out to be.
“No matter” we thought. “Soon Resistance: Burning Skies will be our and THAT will be the promise fulfilled.” But again, we got a terrible game which no no one wanted to play.
Outside of FPS, The Vita’s Uncharted title was underwhelming compared to the PS3 games. It was good but lacked the spark of the home console titles.
So people wanted it on Vita but the system didn’t deliver. The Switch, so far, has. Mario Kart 8 is every bit as good, if not better, than the Wii U version and MARIO Odyssey and Zelda are perfect. Doom has made many sacrifices to run on a Switch but reportedly it still looks fantastic.
If Vita had delivered better games from established home console franchises I think it would have done better than it did. But after the so-so Millzobe and Uncharted titles and the massive twin disappointments of CID and Resistance, there was sadly no recovery.
@Biotechzilla I succumb to verbal trends more often than I would like to admit.
I'd say it comes down to a lack of killer apps, like Zelda and Mario, and the size of the Vita's screen. That last one might sound petty, but think about it. Would you really want to play full size games on that tiny screen? It's the main reason I stopped using remote play.
@dark_knightmare2
I am. It's just a very ill-informed opinion. At the end of the day, global sales matter. Not just one region. Did Fifa bomb on switch? Yes. (EA is a big factor in this. They're not off the hook) Did NBA? Based on 2K's recent comments, they seem okay with it. And Doom... It literally has been out 3 days. And it's a port of an 18 month old title. And it's full price. Are you expecting 150K in 24 hours? It's doing well digitally. "Don't count your chickens before they've hatched."
@SwitchVogel Screen size wasn't a huge deal for me. At the time, Uncharted sure looked fantastic. Lack of other killer apps, absolutely. Random JRPG #684 is not what I ever look for, as I'm not an Otaku weeb. Sony just doesn't bring the games to its Handhelds, like it does to its consoles, unlike Nintendo. The result is just boring titles not worth paying premiums for, when a PS3/4 game is a little more.
What about the lack of buttons?
@KirbyTheVampire
Pretty much this. It comes down to Nintendo having the better overall system.
For me, I wanted a Vita. I really did, but I couldn't deal with the whole memory format thing and as others have stated, it lacked a killer app game. The closest it had to a killer app for me was Persona 4: Golden, and even that wasn't enough to convince me.
Another thing I disliked is how they ditched UMD's and then expect me to rebuy my PSP games digitally. No thanks. Worst of all, the PSP games I DO want to play on the Vita aren't on the playstation store, so... yeah. Swing and a miss, big time. Not having any Monster Hunter games or anything I cared about didn't help.
I realize none of that has much to do with the soapbox article at hand but I don't personally think much has changed. People have always wanted gaming on the go, that didn't change with the Vita, Sony just handled it poorly and I suspect no one wants to admit that. It has nothing to do with "timing" or anything of that sort, Nintendo simply did what Sony couldn't, now some Sony fans are bitter about it. Sony had a shot at it and blew it.
The Switch is simply more versatile, less expensive, has a better library, and more convenient.
@SwitchVogel I would and I do. I didn't get a DS Lite until 2011, then I got a PSP... and then Vita's and N3DSXL screens - not to mention Switch's! - look downright huge to me to this day. Maybe many people are just spoiled by wallcarpet-sized TVs, but Vita has never had a "tiny screen". And this screen took me through the entirety of Dishonored without problems, that's a fact. Despite what some say, I haven't had any personal issues navigating Gravity Rush either.
@dark_knightmare2 Is Ubisoft a "middle of the road aa type publisher" now? Is Square-Enix? Going by what they're saying, their games have sold well on the system. Enough to pledge more support.
But hey, maybe if every Bethesda game tanks, and if L.A. Noire does as well, then we'll be able to have an actual discussion about the topic. As of now, what you're saying is just factually wrong.
A lot of AAA games are deeply cutscene heavy lead, with pre-game credits with theme tunes, quicktime events and moments where a lot of control is taken away from the player. This works on a big telly made for TV and film experiences, but when you're on a bus, it A: loses impact, and B: takes you out of the moment, as you feel slightly ridculous tearing up over a NPC's death while sitting on the 286 bus.
Nintendo's games aren't that. It's all about control. Admittedly Zelda is a bit like that, but it doesn't have voice acting, and only happens at key points. The games that really work on the Switch are Mario, Stardew Valley, Rocket League, and Mario Kart 8, because in the 15 minute bus ride, or tea break, or waiting to pick the kids up, you don't want the control taken away from you from having a quick game. That's why I think most of the big games Sony have (or 3rd party AAAs) wouldn't work on the Switch.
The Vita is still a great gaming platform and I'll take it any day over the vastly overrated Nintendo games.
@MarcelRguez no bro it's not considering doom failed,FIFA and NBA 2k which are huge failed,skyrim will most likely fail and Ubisoft hasn't said anything about just dances selling well because it most likely failed but they were happy about rabbids /Mario but that's only because there wasn't really much to choose from when that came out and Mario being in it helped a ton. I guarantee if Mario wasn't in that game it would have failed and I can almost guarantee that just like the Wii U in the beginning which had decent third party support like the switch does now it's going to dry up and not receive any support.
@dark_knightmare2 Nice
I've had my PS Vita since Summer 2012, love the Vita. It feels so right in my big hands and my hands don't feel cramped up like after I use my 3DS for a while.
@Onion Yeah, I think it could have done pretty well if the games were there, despite its other shortcomings. I know I would have seriously considered getting one.
Not so black and white as to say attitudes have/haven't changed. There has always been a desire to a certain degree for home console games on the go, Sony just got their attempts wrong, Nintendo imo have got it spot on for various reasons such as timing, incredible line up of 1st party games, ease of use and versitility. It's versitility and ease of use is the key for me and made Switch a day 1 purchase, and that is what has changed peoples attitudes who weren't fussed about gaming on the go, it all works beautifully and is super quick to do so in all it's forms. Let's not forget it's reveal didn't go down that well until people started seeing the thing in practice. It's that old thing about putting something out there people never knew they needed.
@rockodoodle "More than capable" doesn't seem fair for a device that sometimes struggles at even 30fps 720p in 2017. It's fine for first party games that have the luxury of being exclusive and designed solely for the Tegra chipset, but for third party, it's just not up to spec in my opinion. Doom is a great example. Graphics surely aren't everything though. It's nice to see Nintendo actually making games for their device this time around.
@get2sammyb This is simple Nintendo already had masses of "on the go" Gamers.
I think the article brushes aside the other issues of the Vita too readily to focus on the one point. Expensive proprietary memory cards, mostly mediocre experiences from the supposed AAA games (even Uncharted and Gravity Rush were 'only' solid 7s and definitely not system sellers), divisive design, relatively high price point and (iir) uninspired launch line up are just some of the reasons we can view as to why the Vita didn't do well.
The fact Sony did what they are reliably known to do these days, that is mostly abandon the tech if it isn't doing great in the first 6 months, was a move that effectively killed most support for the Vita. If I remember correctly the 3DS struggled in its first year, but Nintendo actually stuck by the system and it went on to do well.
What confuses me more is why the Switch is doing so well, when it is effectively a Wii U with a bit more portability, but a slightly cut down feature set. I mainly ask this as everyone seemed to hate the Wii U, but they praise the Switch (for reference I own both a Vita and Wii U and like both systems, no Switch yet though).
I had a Vita and sold it. The reason being I didn't really enjoy the watered down types of games it had. I also used to get bad cramp if i played it for more than 45mins at a time as it isn't the most ergonomic device ever made! If only they had moved that left stick..... But yeah, I believe the main reason is full fat games. The Switch is selling because it has full, console-like games, of the sort 'I' want, on the go and that is what I thought the Vita would have.
They need to create unique handheld games that are actualy decent to attract people to a handheld device, no poor spin offs of other games
Loved my vita but the remote play without an l2 and r2 kinda killed it for me, great handheld tho.
The Vita was truly ahead of its time, but was handled poorly by Sony. Playing console quality games on the go was just too much for the thing. Then Sony just changed strategy with the Vita by advertising it as an accessory for the PS3 and PS4 rather than as its own device. Poor Vita, we hardly knew ye.
Because people are stupid.
I think that people now want console games on the go for two reasons.
One, Nintendo are doing it now. Nintendo's next console could be a hat with Nintendo written on it and there'd be some corners of the Internet hailing it as a wonderful, stripped back approach to gaming.
Two, Nintendo are doing it now. The prospect of playing mainline Mario, Zelda, Smash, Mario Kart, Xenoblade Chronicles on the go is far more tantalising than the idea of an Uncharted not even made by Naughty Dog. Yeah, Golden Abyss was fine. But most of the "console quality" games on Vita felt like the not-quite-as-exciting little brothers of their home console counterparts.
That being said, as somebody who recently chucked money at a Switch, I still don't get the appeal of console gaming on the go. Mario and Zelda controls like a joy when playing on the TV. They control like a bathtub on wheels in handheld mode. Handheld has always, and likely will always, suit smaller, simpler, and, well, handheld games.
For me personaly, I mainly play handheld consoles.
Mainly focus on Japanese games.
As for Switch's sucsess, I guess its because its both a handheld and a console in one, Vita TV is an extra thing and you can't even play all Vita games, and cross games still would need another console.
personally i think the Switch is succeeding where the PS Vita failed because it also allows you to game on the TV really easily plus it doesn't have any gimmicky touch controls AND the controls themselves are much more comfortable to use, especially the analogue sticks
honestly as much as i love the vita after about a hour of playing my hands ache like hell
not to mention the terrible battery life when playing games AND as @get2sammyb times have changed and mobile gaming is becoming more advance all the time
the Vita was released too soon, i think if they released it at the start of the PS4 generation it would have been much better received
Yeah that was already my opinion. I always thought the vita was a good handheld but never fully realized it selg till now.... but it is hard to argue that it is notmainly a jrpg mega machine now.
Salt. A whole lot of salt.
Your article implies the direct opposite of what actually happened. When NGP was revealed people proclaimed it the 3DS killer and that 3DS was obviously Nintendo's downfall.
You are using hindsight of what people were saying after the sales actually came in. NeoGAF, GameFAQs, N4G, Playstation Lifestyle, IGN etc were all hyping Vita as the second coming. To me personally I got the impression this was a repeat of PSP and Sony had learned nothing but the backers were saying that "cartridges, trophies, proper dual thumb sticks, OLED screen, region free and the best launch lineup ever" would prove Vita was the go to handheld.
Even after pricing and memory card catches came up people still threw out that Vita was going to crush 3DS UNTIL the sales showed up. Then suddenly they acted like they knew all this was coming. Look up EA and Colin Moriarty's comments on Vita before it came out. Look up the interviews with Geoff Keighley vs Reggie on 3DS and Guy Longworth on Vita.
He asks Reggie "why should people pay $45 on 3DS games when they can get them for $2 on a smart phone?" He asks Guy "What is your sales pitch to people? You know people want a dedicated gaming handheld because the games are so much better". Notice = Geoff KNOWS phone games are no substitute for proper games so why was he trolling Reggie but backing up Sony?
@johncalmc Can't agree with you on handheld mode (most games control as good, or better, on the tablet for me, but then, I'm used to gaming on portable systems), but you make a good point about the "console quality" games on the Vita. The Vita got "console-lite" games. Games that possessed neither the pick up and play sensibility of classic handheld titles nor the ambitious, engrossing design of home console games. Games on the Switch, on the other hand, are the full experience. It really is a home console you can take with you anywhere, and based on usage stats, people seem to be receptive to that concept.
Another aspect that helps is that, unlike Sony, Nintendo is able to throw its full weight behind the hybrid concept. No half-measures.
I wanted a Vita from day one, and it was only when I actually had one that I didn't like it due to how hard it was to control a lot of games (namely FPS games and anything cross-play) due to the lack of buttons and the nubby control sticks.
So...I'm not sure why people didn't want one (without having tried it).
@Ralizah Maybe it's just my big sausage fingers. I'm used to playing my Vita, and I had a DS, and a Gameboy and whatever. These things, I think, are all fine for playing games suited to them - Persona 4, Ace Attorney, Pokemon, whatever. The problem here is when the "console quality" games come to town.
On Vita, I found games like Uncharted and Freedom Wars and other, faster, action-y games like that very difficult to control, and the screen was too small to get a bead on all the action. That's why "console quality" games on Vita never really mattered to me. I used it for indies, visual novels, JRPGs, stuff like that.
With Switch, I've tried it in handheld mode and I think it suffers from the same problems. Yeah, undoubtedly, the selection of games is better because unlike Sony, Nintendo is all in on it, and the games that are handheld are the full, proper iterations of their biggest series'. The smaller games on Switch, like Vita, are fine. But playing Mario in handheld mode was a total chore. The controls are garbage town, particularly having to do anything at all with the right analogue stick which is weirdly placed. Zelda was the same for me.
I guess I just don't get the appeal of it. But then, I can't think of many occasions in my life where I really needed to take my games anywhere other than the TV. If I leave the house it's probably for a good reason, so I don't need to take games with me. The bigger, more complicated games have always and will always just feel better played on a TV to me.
@premko1 Says the guy with the Warrio avatar. Such a strong argument. Mom's spaghetti.
@KirbyTheVampire I played Pokemon Y and Super Mario 3d Land on my 3ds. Both games being the epitome of what's wrong with Nintendo, at least for me. Mom's spaghetti.
@Sentinator I see a lot of generalizations and selective memory.
Perfect example: "people proclaimed it the 3DS killer and that 3DS was obviously Nintendo's downfall"
Who are these people? Sony fans? You mean unlike Ninty fans who didn't make the exact opposite remarks about the success of 3ds and psvita? Why bring up the former and ignore the latter?
For some reason you forgot to mention that the psvita was trashed to death by journalists even before it was released in the West to the point that some journalists expected that it wouldn't even launch in the West. The 3ds doing so much better than it in Japan sealed its fate. It became an unwanted item in no time and, as a result, it failed spectacularly.
I played psp and 3ds on the go. Short levels, kill time. I never considered a consol game playing as they typically take more time to finish a level. Now I play iPhone games on the go, and looking around in the sub - if not texting - everybody does. For the question is not if I would play a console game on the go, its about what would you like to play on the go and why? This ranges from psp to switch to iPhone; all works as long as I can have a satisfactory experience during my travel time.
@Derpie1 I'd be interested to know how long you have been gaming and what you class as a hardcore gamer. I have been gaming since the Atari VCS in the late 70s. I own near on 30 different consoles and handhelds but can't stand gaming on a PC. I hate Call of Duty and Fifa yet I adore the Switch. I would rather play something like Golf Story where and when I want than sit at my computer playing the latest online borefest. It's personal preference isn't it. Oh and I am a hardcore gamer or whatever silly tag you want to give to someone who has been obsessed with videogames for over three decades.
@YummyHappyPills vita means life
Tap here to load 175 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...