What do Vita owners think of vita

[Aeroracer]

Hi,

This thread is ideally for vita users to post their first impressions of their new console, good or bad though ultimatley anyone is welcome to post.

I traded in my 3ds and its games and had to pay £50 and got a ps vita

I am very dissapointed with it

The remote play function is pointless as no games appear to work and I get the impression they would rather users just buy 2 versions of the same game for each console rather than stream ps3 to vita.they say stuff like lag and quality of play but i do not believe it as I have seen videos of ps3 games played remotely on a hacked vita.

No facilty to get umd onto your vita.I heard in japan there was a program to do it but we are not getting it as there is apparently no demand for it which is total crap and not even worth debating.they just want us to rebuy the games

Got locked out of ps store for 24 hours for downloading some freebies. think i downloaded 20 items (1 gig total). I got a message "sorry you cant download come back in a while"...lol.. come back in a while traslated into english means 24 hrs..cant find any mention of this but its does happen its not 3g related as i was using normal wifi.

Activating a sim was a right pain in the butt as many people had issues with this including me as instructions were bad.you cant top up without an account , you cant create an account without activating the sime you couldnt activate the sim because you didnt get the text message, well you did it was hidden in the settings menu but as its a new console it took time to work out.

3G is pretty pointless at the moment even more so if you have a smart phone, way too expensive cant play propper games on it, good for facebook and twitter nerds i guess, im hoping it will be useful in time and serve a real function
,
controls are very good but should of put in L3 and R3

screen quality is very good

Sound quality is very good

Game wise

Ive only played 2 games so far

ridge racer
do not get this game it is total crap 0/10 its not even good for a demo and should be removed from sale.worst game in the world ...all time

marvel vs capcom

good port from ps3 pretty good if you like those types of games


overall im bored already with it and prefer my psp
i got code for wipeout ill download it and see if i start liking vita more.

launch titles were not very good imo but then 3ds were pants too but they never got better either probally why i sold mine i hope vita sorts itself out as console could be really good.

[Amorbis]

I can't say that I'm disappointed with the Vita. I do detest the forced use of the touch screen like it's some sort of smart phone, I would like an option for button controls so I'm not always putting finger prints on the screen. I also miss the XMB, it felt tidier and stuff was categorised making it easier to find.

I don't think I'd have got a Vita on launch if it didn't have WipEout, I spent more than 300 hours on HD and Pure/Pulse, so I should manage the same on 2048. I wouldn't have got a 3DS if they hadn't ported Zelda to it, so as long as a console has good games the other features don't mean much to me. The Vita can try to be a tablet/phone, but that's not why I bought it.

I'm sure that Europe is getting the UMD to Vita programme at some point. I think that North America is the only place without it, but I could be wrong. I was planning on playing some of my unfinished PSP games on the Vita depending on how much the transfer costs. But until then I'm content with 2048 and Uncharted.

[Darkdrium777]

Hacked Vitas already exist?

[Amorbis]

I don't think it's the Vita that has been hacked, rather a PS3 with unofficial firmware can play any PS3 game over remote play even if it isn't supposed to support it. I don't know if I'm allowed to link to them here, but there are videos of someone playing Battlefield 3 on their Vita over remote play.

[Hellfire_WZ]

Best if we don't go down that path again

[Dogg Thang]

After some initial frustrations with updates and so on (I suspect constantly having to connect to PSN and updates will be the bane of this machine), I really got to like it once it was all up and running. Somewhat resent the price of memory cards though. The actual system I love. Yes, it's big and exposed but the screen is gorgeous and having the dual sticks is great. The quality of graphics seems superb even just with the launch titles.

So, yes, I like it. You know that feel of a shiny new system? I totally got that with the Vita.

[Colonel]

Mine arrived today. I put the memory card in and turned it on, set the location, time and date etc. Then it asked me if I wanted to use my PSN account with it, so I said Yes. I've put the modem password in and it says I need to get a system update, but I've no idea how. It just keeps going back to the same menu.

Anybody know what I'm supposed to do? Sorry I know I sound very thick here, but I'm kind of stumped. Thanks in advance.

[Hellfire_WZ]

Just cancel entering your PSN. You'll be asked for your name and date of birth IIRC, then you can just access the Settings menu and update. Then you'll be able to input your PSN

[Colonel]

So do I say "No I don't have a PSN account" or "Yes I do, but I don't want to use it on my Vita? If I click No I don't have an Account it says "This step will set up your system for trial use of Playstation Network.

Edit - All sorted now I think. Thanks Charlie :+

[Colonel]

Well this is just fking marvellous. I entered the wrong email address and signed in with my old PSN account. Tried to sign in with my other account and it says I have to sign in with the account that is linked to the Vita. Does anybody know how I can get around this? Right now I just want to sell the bloody thing.

Edit - Job's a good un, formatted the memory card and did a system reset.

[infoxicated]

LOL! I like the "All sorted now" followed by disaster, followed by all being well.

Such an emotional roller coaster! :D

I really do love mine - about the only thing that I think I would change would be for it to have a better battery life. Not that I've run it down to nothing during normal use yet, it's just that I can see it being an issue on a long flight somewhere.

I'm trying to cast my mind back to when I got my first PSP to remember how I felt about that, but it's not a fair comparison because Sony gave us all one for the European launch so it wasn't like I invested my own money. I did, however, buy a PSP 2000 on the day that launched and I was delighted with how light it was and how much faster games loaded in comparison to the original.

That only cost £130, though, and I've invested double that in the Vita thus far, so if I was going to feel some buyer's remorse then it should have kicked in by now!

I just wish I could play all my PSP games that are still sitting there - I'd play through Vice City Stories all over again and fire up my other old favourites.

Just looking forward to a decent shooter and a proper racing game for it and I'll be very happy with it.

[Darkdrium777]

Not a Vita owner but apparently the memory cards have absolutely terrible performance when transferring files.
TBH that's unforgivable for the price. I really don't know when I'll become an owner.

[infoxicated]

Yeah, they're not high speed memory cards, but to say they're "absolutely terrible" is stretching the boundaries of both credibility and drama. If they were "absolutely terrible" then the Vita would be unusable, but I guess that doesn't stop wanker gaming journalists from going for baiting headlines.

I think for sure Sony is scalping on the new form factor, though - probably to subsidise the Vita's price. I paid £38 for a 16Gb card and five years ago I paid over £90 for an 8Gb card for my PSP. I expect in two years time I'll be able to get a high speed 32Gb Vita card for half what I paid for the bog standard 16Gb one. (Not that high speed is that important - it's not like it shoots 1080p HD video.)

Such is life as a consumer. You either wait it out or adopt early and absorb the cost, so I don't think it's "unforgivable" at all.

Samsung and the rest of their cronies fixed LCD panel prices for much of the naughties and they were fined heavily for doing so. That's unforgivable in my book.

Then there's Apple - richest, most profit hungry consumer electronics company in the world who absolutely rip their customers wallets a new one and yet people were lighting candles outside of retail stores when their CEO died. Somehow, despite having an obscene profit margin on every last one of their products, they're untouchable, yet Sony, who rarely sell gaming hardware for any real profit, are always on the hate list.

Anyone else who actually has a Vita want to comment on how the over-priced, average performing memory cards are ruining the experience for them or are you, like me, having too much fun with the games to care?

[Dogg Thang]

My theory is that there was so much piracy on the PSP that the new memory cards have basically got a built-in piracy tax. If they don't make money from the pirates on games, they'll still at least make something on the memory they're using so it's not a total loss. Just a theory of course.

Admittedly it was the memory card price that, out of everything, stung a little bit while getting my Vita but, no, hardly ruining the experience, is it? They work absolutely fine.

[Darkdrium777]

Then there's AppleI don't like Apple more than you care to know. Don't criticize one of my positions on Sony because I did not mention Apple in my post, which would have been totally off topic by the way.
I just think Sony is insulting their own technology by using outdated memory cards on a platform containing the mobile technology of the future.
I'll come back when they have class 10+ cards instead of what appears to be some weird class 4 thing that is fast or slow on a whim of the content manager.

[infoxicated]

Don't criticize one of my positions on Sony because I did not mention Apple in my post, which would have been totally off topic by the way.
I brought Samsung into it because they're a large consumer electronics company who have a great deal to be ashamed of but don't seem to attract the same level of hate as Sony does. I brought Apple into it because they don't appear to attract the same amount of hate in the games media as Sony does. Both of which I thought were fair supporting counter points to the assertion that Sony was being unusually evil in their tactics.

So isn't it a bit rich to suggest that I was dragging the thread off topic when you were complaining about the price & speed of Vita memory cards in a thread aimed at gathering comments from people who actually own a Vita?

You were completely off topic from your first four words so, throw us a bone here, if you have rules we're supposed to play by when we reply to your posts (regarding relevance to the topic and the bits we're allowed to criticise) it'd be nice to know in advance. :)

[Darkdrium777]

You started by dismissing my post because I said wasn't an owner of a Vita. And then you tell me that I have special rules? Are you kidding?

Fine. I own a Vita. Which one is true now? Is my comment more appropriate if I say I have one?

[infoxicated]

Nah, I responded to your assertion that the Vita's memory cards have "absolutely terrible performance" and that in selling them at a premium Sony had done something "unforgivable".

I dismissed your assertion on the grounds that the performance of the memory cards is adequate for what is expected of them and that if Sony have a large profit margin on them then that's not something I'd class as unforgivable given the same tactics are employed by competitors.

Then I asked if anyone who owned a Vita was having their experience ruined by the memory cards.

At no point in my original reply to you did I dismiss your post on the grounds that you are not a Vita owner. I dismissed it because you were using dramatic language to make an assertion that I do not believe is rational or accurate, given my own experience with the Vita.

Now I'm done with responding to you in this thread because you're going for straw men and pedantic posturing.

[Darkdrium777]

Jesus Christ I don't even know why I try to be nice to you anymore. You always take everything I say so to the letter and always go on a righteous crusade about how my choice of words is horrible when in fact it's the point I'm making that's important.
You ALWAYS forget that I'm from Québec and that I might not be choosing the right words every single time. Because if I try and do that, I spend a lot of time looking up definitions, grammars and other stuff online. Why do I do this now and on every single website I visit? It's so that I make my best attempt to not offend or insult anyone, because I learned my lesson as you are well aware.
I don't do that for every reply however, as evidenced here, but I'd really appreciate it if you did not jump on me every single time. Otherwise what's my motivation to live up to the title you gave me of Content Contributor?

EDIT: More than writing, I have trouble understanding. If you want to tell me that I'm using the wrong words to explain something, tell me just that. Please, for my sanity. The other way you are using is not working, as I never get it.

For the record, here is my point detailed (And yes I had to look things up this time):

I think the Vita itself is a great piece of technology and I am very excited for it's potential. Unfortunately right now there is one game that is interesting to me.
Also, it is my opinion that the memory cards proposed by Sony are not on the level of tech in the Vita and the price charged for them is too high. I believe Sony have made a mistake with choosing the memory technology, as while adequate, it could be so much faster and then worth it's price in my eyes.
What I meant by unforgivable before was that because of that fact, I really don't see myself become an owner as I do not wish to support that kind of business decision.

[vincoof]

it's not a fair comparison because Sony gave us all one for the European launch

Hey, who is "us" in your sentence ? oO'

As for the hardware itself, I for one can't really judge it since I only tried it and don't own one (at least, "not yet"™) but I see alot of comments about how expensive it is (except for Foxx !), how terrible is the memory card or how complicated it is to login with one's PSN account... but what about the game itself ? Or other games than WipE'out" since we're inside the general gaming & hardware forum ?

Reading about the comments I have the uncomfortable feeling that "playing" games is the least concern of everyone... am I the only one who wonders about how good it feels while steering the ships to their maximum potential on the tracks ? Isn't it the reason why you bought the console after all ?

[Colonel]

Erm, I think my Vita might have just died. I'd just finished a speed lap session and went to exit. The screen froze as it was loading the results page and I couldn't do anything. Tried switching it off etc, nothing's happening. Left it for a bit and now the screen is blank, and the PS button is going on and off slowly.

Any help? :(

EDIT: Sorry, sorted it now, found a forum where they said to hold down the power button until it brings up a reset menu. Thank the Lord.

EDIT: Aaaand, Wipeout's buggered. Can't get past the loading screen now. Excellent.

[infoxicated]

Corrupt save, I'd bet.

Bad luck, man. :|

[Aeroracer]

my wipeout game crashes sometimes about 3-5 times just freezes and i gotta roboot..nothing major ive experienced worst.

ive warmed to my vita i like it now but i still would like remote play to be able to play games and i would like to be able to trasfer my psp stuff onto it without having to pay ful price again from sony.

[Rapier Racer]

Amazon has the cards discounted when you buy a Vita, a game too. I love my Vita its a great piece of kit, screen looks great bright and very responsive, not really had a chance to use the rear touch panel yet. Tried out the motion controls with Super Stardust they feel really responsive. It’s almost like having a mini PS3 in my hands I didn't expect the battery to last as long as it does either impressed by that.

So far the only thing that annoyed me was 2048's broken online, appears to be fixed, still see some having trouble though. A little worried about the game, still see people having trouble with it and lack of Racebox mode, and feels totally restrictive. I do hope it won't hurt any possible new Wipeouts. On the other hand I find the game to be to a lot of fun, enjoying it for the most part.

Only little downside is the lack of UMD transfer, I want Pure on my Vita without having to pay whatever the full asking price for the digital version is, I think a sale including Pure is the only way I'll get that. Also the PS plus minis don't work yet, I want my hungry giraffe on the go damn it lol

[chalovak]

If I put aside the fact that I bought Vita only for WipEout (2048, Pure, Pulse & Original) with no plans of other ways of exploitation (I know it may sound stupid, but hell with that, it's WipEout! :) ) then I would say this:

SONY did it again. They produced something that from the beginning of its lifespan looks already dead.
I have concerns about the future support of Vita. I am afraid that story of PS eye camera, Move and any other Sony gaming product will be repeated - Sony (and devs) will abandon Vita. Maybe it's too early to say that and I am too pessimistic, but looking at Vita makes me feel that way.

It appears that the development of this device took place in some underground bunker with total ignorance of what was going on in the world of mobile devices. Closed platform, limited online functionality (+ horrible browser. AGAIN), absolutely stupid interface, strange buttons and analog sticks layout, no HD video support and so on. Will any of these be fixed over time. I highly doubt it. I know, some will say that Vita is a gaming device. But will additional features kill someone? No. They will only make the device more attractive.

Sony should hide their pride in the bunker where Vita came from and look at things others are doing. Oh, well...

Of course, Vita has its pros, but I ignore them here for everybody has already mentioned them in this thread.

[vincoof]

Of course, Vita has its pros, but I ignore them here for everybody has already mentioned them in this thread.

Really ? If all the good things she has have are already been mentioned, well, huh, I'd rather at best delay or at worst cancel my projects of buying one in the future.

[chalovak]

Really ? If all the good things she has have are already been mentioned, well, huh, I'd rather at best delay or at worst cancel my projects of buying one in the future.
Well, I guess in your case it is better wait and see what Sony's actions will be. :)

[amplificated]

I think the hardware quality is good, but as with Chalovak said - it's so obvious the system is built from the ground up to be a closed platform. In today's world, I think that's a major hindrance and there's too much competition from more open and dev-friendly platforms (even & especially iOS) for the Vita to make an impact outside of its' graphical prowess (which it has... for the time being) mixed with decent controls (although, really, they messed up with their symmetrical-at-all-costs design IMO).

I think the Vita's life will be a ho-hum affair. It's good, but it could have been more.

However, I believe that Sony will be releasing some SDK to "developers" in April, which could mean some unique and cool content may become available; but it doesn't stop the fact that everything is locked down to a single small platform. Vita's sales need to be dramatic in order to atract developer attention, as without dev. attention, the Vita will be a lost cause. With the amount of negativity in the press regarding Sony's attitude towards dev. access to their systems, it's probably too late to make a difference; though Sony has been making concessions as of late, such as granting Dust514 devs the ability to skip the Sony verification process for program updates. So... I don't know, but I aren't optimistic about the quality of the Vita's life being that great. It could be good... maybe. Great? Almost no chance. It's pretty average as of right now.

[chalovak]

The only thing that can save Vita's ass - like amplificated has said - is releasing SDK for "developers".

[G'Kyl]

Indeed. I think that's exactly what they need to do. I bet small development teams would love to do something awesome for a gamer's system like Vita, but somehow I doubt Vita will have quite the same kind of stomach to wait as long as PS3 did until the its PlayStation Store started to get the awesome content it is now notorious for.

[infoxicated]

This is going to be a long one because all I'm reading here is rampant negativity. So bear with me...

Sony have demonstrated time and again that it's a long term game and that they'll stick with the hardware for the duration. It seems to be folk outside the industry and "analysts" who are keen to write the system off really early on. Anyone who actually owns one and has played the launch titles should have no fear at all that they'll be able to pick up new content on the PSN in two or three years time (about the average complete lifecycle of a Nintendo console) on the Vita even if it hasn't sold 50 million units by then, which seems to be the mass market interpretation of "success" for folk who have never seen the projected numbers for the device.

Which is why I don't understand how, without internal knowledge of the company's projections or plans, anyone can write off their chances of success so soon in the life cycle of the product as if Sony are some fledgling start-up with no experience in the games industry. History just doesn't support the widespread belief that Sony don't know what they're doing when it comes to games hardware. Well, save for the original PS3 that had to be trimmed down to reduce costs, but if Ken Kutaragi had predicted the global recession in the first place there are maybe a lot of things everyone would have done differently.

Maybe my memory isn't all it could be, but without going and looking all this up, I believe the original PlayStation launched against the industry incumbents Sega & Nintendo in the mid 90's and schooled them in terms of volume of content and variety with a powerful console that used CD-ROM's when they were still using cart's. In the early 2000's Sony beat Sega out of the games console industry with DVD playing PS2. The PS2 then goes toe to toe with the Microsoft XBox and their 40 million dollar marketing budget - it does quite well and brings some innovative new stuff like EyeToy (ooh, motion control!) and SingStar to our living rooms. Sony would also launch the PSP in the mid naughties, going up against the Nintendo DS and doing reasonably well over its lifespan despite crippling piracy problems.

Microsoft realise that the best way to ensure next-gen success against Sony is to launch ahead of the competition, despite their console only being four years old at the time, ushering in the XBox 360 in 2006 - a console made of cheap and nasty parts that would go on to fail, often. Sony would bring the PS3 to market a year later with a Blu-Ray drive. Nintendo would go on to capitalise during the recession with a cheap console that had motion control (ooh, motion control!) & family games as it's selling point. Nobody but Nintendo would make any money on it because only Nintendo games sell well on Nintendo systems. Regardless of Nintendo's success with the Wii, the sales of PS3 in Europe would catch up with that of the XBox 360 by mid-2010, having done so during a global recession.

That's not too bad a record at selling games hardware over the space of 15 years or so. Yet, somehow, you read gaming forums and the consensus is that Sony have no frickin' idea what they're doing and are doomed to failure with each and every piece of hardware they produce. The "fact" that the "PSP was a complete failure" is usually thrown around by the people who say these things.

Somewhat inconveniently for the folk who say those things, it was a 71 million unit selling "failure".

I remember Phil Harrison saying in Easter 2002 that the important period for the PS2 would not be xmas 2002 or even 2003 - it would likely be xmas 2004 when they would be making and selling the console in such large volumes that the revenue from the games would allow them to fuel the fire with marketing spend. He was predicting a scenario that would unfold two and a half years later. In the event he was a year out, because the PS2 did so well with exclusives like GTA Vice City and online play with EA Sports games that it was light years ahead of the XBox by the time Xmas 2004 rolled around. I find it somewhat ironic that this week Phil has taken a high ranking position with Microsoft, but Phil's point still stands - it's a long term game where success is measured toward the end of a life cycle, not in the year of launch.

So, to write off the Vita after three months just seems very premature indeed - the same journalists and analysts were doing the same with the 3DS six months ago, before it got its second wind.

Sony already have a publishing model for small, independent developers and the Minis (as they call them) specifically for the Vita will come thick and fast, I'm sure. In six months time we'll have our choice of tower defence and swipey swipey, me-too games that have already bored the heck out of me on my smart phone. Where do companies like Rovio go next? Angrier Birds? What about the Minecraft guy?

Those small companies who struck it big have to branch out and support things like the Vita because catching lightening in a jar like they did during the smart phone app boom of the last couple of years is not a business model that's sustainable.

And for the smart phone game developers that are truly innovative, the control options with the Vita will allow them to take their creativity beyond the confines of a single touch screen & tilt. And they have to - the smart phone game market is so ridiculously overcrowded that for every Angry Birds & Cut the Rope there are thousands of other games & apps that struggle to bring in beer money.

As a pure entertainment and gaming device the Vita is already better than any smart phone out there, not just because of the control options, but because while all the manufacturers have been having a bun-fight over making faster and thinner hardware, they've been hamstringing their devices with skinny batteries that are good for two hours play, tops - then you lose your phone and your entertainment device, woo!

That's me - I'm done. I have some Unit 13 to go play on my Vita - probably the best strategic shooter I've played in years. :)

[vincoof]

Interesting analysis of Sony's past (as well as other companies) and lots of numbers supporting everything written.

Good job Foxx, you definitely are no ordinary blogger =)

Not that my judgement has any kind of importance, anyway...


History just doesn't support the widespread belief that Sony don't know what they're doing when it comes to games hardware.
While the "history" proved that Sony handled correctly (maybe not perfectly, but good enough) the console market over the last 15 years or so, the main concern here is that Sony ~might~ make wrong decisions, hardware as well as software ones, and get overwhelmed by other platforms living in the "present".

Details like crappy web browser or 3G issues mean a lot for some users, especially the ones who already bought devices that already do this for years and don't understand why a top-notch 2012 platform doesn't perform them correctly. One may argue that "performing correctly" is a personal point-of-view and every player places the acceptance level differently, and that no company in the world - not even Sony - can build a system which passes all levels for every player in the huge player base. Not to mention that the player base is more and more finicky every year.

Being hopefully objective (because I'm much less involved in the console wars these years) I'm looking at Sony a bit like I'm looking at Nokia : both are companies which had a major technological and political advantage in their respective business and seemed to sit down on their throne, thinking that nobody could topple their kingdom, but one day they woke up and found that not only someone was going to surpass them but were running so fast that they couldn't be stopped.

Talking about Sony' main product, they did an outstanding success with the first PlayStation. The second PlayStation did pretty well, mainly because so many PS1 players were waiting for PS2. But the third PlayStation didn't appeal as many players because it was too late, too expensive, and it had too few improvements. Fortunately they opted for a Blu-Ray drive in the middle of the BRD vs HDDVD war and they had bet for the best horse. Many players use the PS3 to play BRDs (just like many players used their PS2 to play DVDs) and there's no doubt it helped selling the platform. Good job... except that it was more a lucky shot than a well-studied technological choice. And then there's doubt. What if the company we trusted for so long couldn't propose us what's best for us ?

I know it's unfair but Sony just doesn't have the right to fail. Fortunately for them, counterexamples exists, even in the gaming industry. For instance Nintendo made some bad things, like the N64 which was much less rewarded than the effort that was put into, yet the Japanese company still lives in the same industry they admittedly failed numerous times, and they are one of the most lucrative ones.


And for the smart phone game developers that are truly innovative, the control options with the Vita will allow them to take their creativity beyond the confines of a single touch screen & tilt. And they have to - the smart phone game market is so ridiculously overcrowded that for every Angry Birds & Cut the Rope there are thousands of other games & apps that struggle to bring in beer money.
They need to be innovative for the exact reasons you depicted, but what guarantees us they will ? And if innovation is on its way, why Vita games would be more innovative than e.g. iPhone games ?

The only thing that the Vita is the only one to bring is the rear touch pad. I'm pretty sure that if a game developer shows a fun and creative way to use it on a best-selling game, it would open the way for many game developers, and that would show that Sony did "again" the right thing by granting this uncommon feature. The point is: when will we see such game ? Will this day even come ?

[Darkdrium777]

I think they need to open up the Vita a bit to indie for it to be a resounding success. Make a free SDK on a free and flexible engine, see what happens. Maybe there will be the next Minecraft, or the next Angry Birds. The console has good and unique features, and the more people have access to those and can tinker with them the better IMO. They should take some example from Android and XBLIG.
I'd personally like it to be as open as Android or as the PSP turned out to be, but we know Sony won't ever make a system like that ever again. I liked the PSP custom firmwares for the added functionalities but that caused too much problems overall with cheap people. Meh. Now I have root, it's just as fun so there's that.
I want the console to be successful because it's good tech. I wish I could personally see the memory cards as less offensive but I can't, so I'll wait for the price. But the console should succeed. There's nothing on the market that's comparable right now. The new iPad is real close though, and we know that's a well oiled machine. It's less powerful but that never mattered.

[G'Kyl]

I think they need to open up the Vita a bit to indie for it to be a resounding success. Make a free SDK on a free and flexible engine, see what happens.
I think this might be the biggest thing Sony should pursue in terms of dev support (given they already give the usual big third party developers everything they need). I bet Indies would love to see what they can do with Vita - if only to get some of their existing games to the PSN. I know a bunch I'd buy right away!


The new iPad is real close though, and we know that's a well oiled machine. It's less powerful but that never mattered.
It is and you're right about how little power matters at the end of the day. But I don't think iOS platforms are close enough as gaming machines. In fact, I consider a first generation Game Boy much closer. As long as there's no equivalent I do need buttons. :)

Also, thumbs up for the post, Rob! I tend to be skeptical myself, but it's quite shortsighted to write off a new device right at launch.

[infoxicated]

Being hopefully objective (because I'm much less involved in the console wars these years) I'm looking at Sony a bit like I'm looking at Nokia : both are companies which had a major technological and political advantage in their respective business and seemed to sit down on their throne, thinking that nobody could topple their kingdom, but one day they woke up and found that not only someone was going to surpass them but were running so fast that they couldn't be stopped.
I don't see the comparison, really. Nokia built their empire on cheap hardware with built in obsolescence - even a quality Nokia phone was never meant to last longer than 18 months because their cash flow depended on people upgrading on a 12 month cycle. But they didn't push the boundaries of what a phone could do, really - each year there was an incrementally safe plastic upgrade to be had. I know, because I had Nokia phones pretty much exclusively from July 1998 to November 2010, and I knew to expect the buttons to start failing within a year.

In the end, Nokia got what was coming to them when the iPhone came along and the Android platform enabled other hardware manufacturers to compete. Nokie were arrogant, and they were oblivious to the tsunami coming their way. Signing up to create Windows 7 phones was the equivalent of grabbing onto the only lifeboat that was available to them.

Sony's dominance in the last generation was built by the perfect storm of the PS2 having very little competition early in its life cycle and GTA III selling (both itself and the console) like hot cakes in it's entire second year, with Vice City further accelerating the growth in the run up to Xmas 2003. That's a scenario that is never likely to happen again - I don't believe that we'll see a new generation of consoles where one manufacturer gets such a huge head start.

Microsoft tried to create that scenario by launching the XBox 360 out of step with the PS2 to PS3 transition, but shot themselves in both feet and the ass by attempting that land-grab with a pretty cheap PC in a well designed box. This allowed Sony to recover somewhat, despite the recession. It could have been a lot different if Microsoft had actually executed with a quality piece of hardware.

So it's not like Sony sat there thinking their empire would never be toppled - it's that they were beaten to the punch in the current generation by Microsoft. Sony's hands were tied - they had to wait for the Cell to be available in high enough yields and for the Blu-Ray drives to be in plentiful supply after that. If you've previously been the fastest runner in the world, but you have to wait at the start line of a new event for your shoes to arrive before you can set off I don't necessarily think that means you were arrogant and didn't take the competition seriously.


except that it was more a lucky shot than a well-studied technological choice.
That's not really true - the Cell was ready for a while before the Blu-Ray drives were in plentiful enough supply that Sony could go into production with the PS3. Putting a high capacity, high quality Blu-Ray drive in the specification was a statement of intent that definitely was very well researched, it wasn't just blind luck or settling for what was available. We've had XBox 360 games that come on two or more discs for some time now, yet the high capacity of the Blu-Ray discs means that space for games is not going to be a problem for the lifespan of the PS3. Sony's strategy here again shows that they were planning for the long term - Microsoft's strategy was to get a cheap box of bits out there with a DVD drive in it to try and get as much of a head start as they could. You have to say it worked for them despite the hardware failures, as they set the landscape up so that the '360 was the first platform to be developed for.


The only thing that the Vita is the only one to bring is the rear touch pad. I'm pretty sure that if a game developer shows a fun and creative way to use it on a best-selling game, it would open the way for many game developers, and that would show that Sony did "again" the right thing by granting this uncommon feature. The point is: when will we see such game ? Will this day even come ?
I think it will - Sony has given independent developers access to the PlaySation Suite for developing games for the Xperia Play and other PlayStation Certified devices for some time. There's a company in Dundee that did a talk a while back at the Glasgow Tech Meetup and they said that it was pretty easy to have their games published on the PlayStation Network. I can't imagine that scenario has changed with the arrival of the Vita and for games developers who have cut their teeth on touch screen smart phone games it's a path for them to evolve onto a proper console.

For me, Tales from Space: Mutant Blobs Attack (http://www.mutantblobsattack.com/) demonstrates fantastically the clever game mechanics that can come together when you have the combination of a touch screen and traditional console controls. I hope we'll see more of that kind of game for the Vita from the independent developers.

[G'Kyl]

Rob, you almost sound like Microsoft failed to compete with Xbox 360, yet they are quite successful compared to both competitors. Are you solely referring to the quality of the hardware?

[infoxicated]

Oh, of course not - I was merely referring to their attempt to gain an unassailable head start without paying a premium for quality hardware. When I said "You have to say it worked for them despite the hardware failures, as they set the landscape up so that the '360 was the first platform to be developed for." I thought I was being clear on that - maybe not.

It's obvious the 360 has done very well in the current generation and Kinect is definitely a great innovation for Microsoft. There was never a compelling reason for me to pick one up, but appreciate the quality of exclusive titles and online play on the system. I think the fact that Microsoft are in no hurry to usher in their next console shows that they're happy with the market share they have with the XBox 360 - now into it's 6th year, where the original XBox got 4 years before they replaced it.

Still, this is a Vita thread and I wanted to steer it back onto that topic. :)

[Dogg Thang]

I'm not always convinced that innovation should be a primary goal. It's certainly an attention-grabber but I'm not sure it always does us any favours. The DS, for example, had loads of innovation - two screens, touch screen, mic. Most of my favourite DS games were great in spite of these features, not because of them. Ouendan is about the only game I can think of that was fantastic and entirely built around one of those features. Many games, especially early on, actually would have benefited from just using traditional control schemes. Of course then we might have missed out on that wonderful blowing in the mic feature of many games.

On the Vita, I don't see Uncharted as being better because it uses the touchscreen, back touch pad, camera, gyroscope. In fact the gyroscopic bits are just frustrating and pointless. It would be a better game without these innovations.

I think innovation and the search for it can often be a distraction. It doesn't always make games better. In many cases, it can make them worse (Metroid Hunters control versus traditional dual-stick control, for example). For the most part, traditional controls have evolved really well. They work great. Often games and systems don't need to be innovative. They just have to do what they do really well and that bit better each time.

For me, the best part of the Vita is actually just that it's finally a handheld with dual sticks - a (now) traditional and proven control method.

[G'Kyl]

Rob: Aye and thanks! Just wanted to clear it up, mostly for myself. :)

Dogg Thang: A agree, innovation for the sake of it seems a waste. However there are two aspects that make it worth the while. One being that some innovations turn into essentials for generations to come. Think analogue sticks, which you mentioned yourself in the opposite context.

The other is that new approaches to hardware and software solutions can open a media like video games to a whole new audience. I know, Wii is not a sexy example, but it works. :) More important - or at least I believe it is - is the fact that only gamers can wrap their minds around common control mechanisms like, for instance, those of a common shooter. Developers sometimes talk about how people who are generally interested in games but don't know such established concepts as we grew up with have a very hard time getting used to the controls. I guess they'd probably give up playing Uncharted before getting to terms with how the game actually works.

Touch controls however are more intuitive, since "touching to interact" comes more naturally. I too find most touchscreen controls on Vita "gadgetey". But if Vita is the system that makes "real" gamers out of smartphone users... I think the system definitely has a chance of doing so as well es introducing innovative and fun stuff into common games.

[vincoof]

I don't see the comparison, really. Nokia built their empire on cheap hardware with built in obsolescence
Consoles are built with a limited lifecycle, we knew that way before the PS1 went out, so I'm pretty sure Sony knew that too. Moreover, the optical drive issues of the PS1 that prevented almost any original PS1 to work for more than 2 years (at best) pretty looks like "built in obsolescence" to me, though it is unclear if it was intended or not (and we will probably never know).

I agree that Nokia's arrogance was really too high, but I wouldn't say Sony has none either. Far less for sure. But building a PS2 that had creepy hardware and basing their marketing strategy on the fact that so many PS1 lovers would wait for the PS2, this looks like arrogant to me.


Microsoft tried to create that scenario by launching the XBox 360 out of step with the PS2 to PS3 transition, but shot themselves in both feet and the ass by attempting that land-grab with a pretty cheap PC in a well designed box.
I wouldn't say they failed so badly, or even failed at all. The former XBox had so many problems (technically-wise and selling-wise) that I'd say I'm pretty impressed with how Microsoft ended with its second try. And that means much to me, living in a place where we spit on Microsoft nearly every day.


That's not really true - the Cell was ready for a while before the Blu-Ray drives were in plentiful enough supply that Sony could go into production with the PS3. Putting a high capacity, high quality Blu-Ray drive in the specification was a statement of intent that definitely was very well researched, it wasn't just blind luck or settling for what was available.
Mind me, I'm not saying they were lucky for using a high capacity disc. This was clever, pretty much like it was clever to get a CD-ROM drive on the PS1 when almost every other console sticked to cartridges. The lucky shot was to choose the Blu-Ray drive when they didn't know if HD-DVD or BRD would won the HD war. Sega tried something similar with GD-ROMs but this format didn't succeed at all and eventually almost nobody remembers this format ever existed.

As for the cheap choice of MS for the DVD drive, well, you're certainly right. Very few games are sold with more than one DVD so it doesn't sound a big deal for MS, but what players rarely know is that many game developers provide either less content or less quality in order to fit into one DVD.

Back on topic for the PS Vita, I must admit I don't know the "real" plans of Sony - and I guess nobody really knows here either unless someone works for the company - and I'm still curious what it can become. But today if I have to buy a PS Vita I know I'd spend my time almost exclusively playing WO2048 and I find pretty awkward to buy an entire system for a single game. Not to mention that my wallet would commit suicide if I had to buy a new system for every game I played =)

[G'Kyl]

The lucky shot was to choose the Blu-Ray drive when they didn't know if HD-DVD or BRD would won the HD war.
Well.... Blu-ray is - pretty much - Sony's own format. So, lucky or not: They were pushing a new format, which was supposed to flush in money from licensing, among other things. They were successful in making it the industry choice and some luck might have been involved there. But it certainly wasn't a case of having a choice and waiting to get lucky. :)

[chalovak]

I'm on the verge of selling Vita. Don't know what else I can do with it except playing WipEout (which is not bad, but still...). I was hoping that I could use it not only like a gaming system, but also like a tablet device. Guess I was wrong and... well, now I feel stupid. :)
What bothers me especially is that Sony doesn't seem to hurry with all the announcements considering the future of Vita.

[infoxicated]

What announcements do they have to make?

There were more high quality launch games than the average console début, so I don't think we'll see a second wave of titles for a few months yet.

In terms of future announcements I think the Vita will have a big E3, though. I'm thinking we'll see a Gran Turismo and a few other big names.

I am looking forward to what's next for the Vita, but Unit 13 will keep me busy in the meantime - might go back to WipEout eventually, but that game needs a patch the size of a small planet before I'll play it again! :D

If you do sell it on chalovak, be sure to offer it to the folks on WipEoutZone first! :+

[chalovak]

If you do sell it on chalovak, be sure to offer it to the folks on WipEoutZone first! :+
Hah! Nice idea, in that case someone'll get a chance to visit Russia. :) Anyone is welcome.

[Boycey83]

I've played my Vita an absolutely ridiculous amount. There's so many games out for it. So far I've got Wipeout 2048, Fifa, Ridge Racer, Lumines, Mutant Blobs Attack, Super Stardust, Escape Plan and Motorstorm RC. So far the only game I have played over £20 for is Wipeout too, everything has been really cheap.

I actually really like Ridge Racer, I've got something stupid like 18 hours against it so far.

[XoPachi]

I love it more than my 3DS, that's for sure. Of course, I only bought it for WipEout. Like the 3DS I only own one game on it by choice until both libraries beef up some. I'm looking into Gravity Rush. And a certain game company, Cave, said they were going to support it which could mean awesome shooters and ports of their old ones finally. That's a major plus.

I have very limited tastes in games unfortunately and nothing on shelves besides maybe Lumines interests me. The system itself is phenomenal! I love how simple everything is and it has a lovely, friendly appeal to it. The 5 MP camera is excellent and the content manager makes music adding a lot faster. I always preferred my PSP over iPods and my phone. It played every beat with good volume. The Vita is no different. Great job on this, Sony.

[Aeroracer]

I started this thread around mid febuary and I gave my honest opinion of what i thought of my vita along with other memebrs.
now we are in mid april and i have had my vita for 8 weeks now.
I no longer bother playing vita its sits in a drawer collecting dust and i consider it a total waste of money
the romote play promised is non existent unless you hack the firmware.
games bore me and nothing is really coming out, unless you want to pay for your favourite psps games again which i refuse to do.
to summarise i personally think the vita is a super flop it may have all this hi tech specs but it dont change a thing.
perhaps in another 8 weeks my mind will be changed..we shall have to see

I have gone back to using psp

[infoxicated]

I still use mine pretty much every week day on my commute to work and I still love it.

Unit 13 has been one of the best games I've played in years, and even though I've earned five gold stars in all but one mission, I'm still going back trying to improve my scores on various missions when I see people on my friends lists have beaten me.

I want Everybody's Golf, but was wanting to wait until the price came down before I got it. I'm super tempted to just go for it now regardless of the price, as I have one game I think I'll trade in before it loses too much value.

Curiously, that's the game I actually bought with the console, but I've barely been back to WipEout 2048 - haven't even used the network pass. It's odd that the game that motivated me to buy the thing in the first place is the only thing that's disappointed me about my Vita experience!

One thing that I never thought would be a benefit of it is that the Music Unlimited client on the Vita is brilliant if you have that service - such a nice interface for browsing the music, and the sound quality that comes out of the Vita is superb. :)

[Temet]

You're making my curious about Unit 13 Rob!
I like the Vita, but I currently have few interest to use it.
I believe in the potential of the console anyway, I like several kind of games so no doubt I'll use it again :)
It's a great piece of hardware, too bad the video player sucks that much... but with the experience from PSP and PS3, it was not really a surprise. Too bad, the screen is so nice!

I may be interested in Gravity Rush, when available in Europe.

[jetsetsonic]

I love my Vita. I bought it about a month ago, and I guess part of me was still on the fence about it right up until the moment I played it for the first time. It's a very well built, very solid piece of hardware. It's also the first Sony system to get online functionality right. Aside from that, the games available for it now are very good, despite only being on the market for two months. Right now I have Ridge Racer and Wipeout 2048, but in the future I'm looking to buy Virtua Tennis 4, Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom, and Lumines. The interface is also pretty neat, certainly a breath of fresh air from iOS and Android.