You have to admit that Sony have been on a roll lately. The PlayStation 4 seems to be getting better all the time, and the PlayStation 3 has been completely turned around from the overpriced game-less mess that was it's launch. The PS3 has the most exclusives out of all the consoles and PlayStation Plus seems like a complete steal because of its free games.
Sony are really committed to their consoles; the PS3 and the PS4. But why don't Sony give their handhelds the same treatment? Why do their handhelds always get pushed to the side when they announce a new console? It happened with the PSP after they announced the PS3, and now it's happening again with the Vita.
I remember going into Google four or five times a day, every day, putting 'PSP2' into the search bar to see if anything came up. I did this for years but nothing ever showed up, and after every time I searched and found nothing, I gave a sigh of disappointment. Then the rumors started and the mock ups began to appear, and it finally looked like Sony were going to announce the 'PSP2'. I was super excited every time a shred of evidence showed up, or when a company PR person hinted at a new handheld.
When Sony finally showed off their new handheld, I was blown away by it. It had a touch pad on the back, a touch screen on the front, a large five inch OLED screen, and most importantly - two analog sticks. TWO FRIGGIN' ANALOG STICKS! It had, and still has, so much potential you could taste it. Then they showed gameplay of Uncharted: Golden Abyss, and I couldn't believe the graphics. It was insane.
The launch finally came and I was able to get a Vita on day one. I opened the box and pulled the Vita and I was in awe at how nice it felt to hold - it was perfect, and still is.
Some really incredible games have been released for the Vita, such as Gravity Rush. It was built from the ground up with the Vita in mind and couldn't be done on any other device. It was the type of game I bought my Vita for. I wanted more of this type of game. I wanted more console-style games on the Vita, such as Metal Gear Solid, Fallout, and Battlefield.
It didn't take long to see that Sony had taken their focus off the Vita, though.
They got a company with a terrible track record, Nihilistic, to make two major franchise installments on the Vita - Resistance: Burning Skies and Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified. Both games were terrible and the sales reflected that fact. Although, Activision have stated that they are happy with the sales figures of Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified.
Why did Sony get a cheap, mediocre developer to make these games for the Vita? Why did they allow this developer to screw up two major franchises in a row?
At E3 2012, the Vita's first showing at a major game event after release, I expected a tidal wave of Vita games. I expected to see things like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Dark Souls or even an Elder Scrolls game maybe. Instead, Sony showed a thirty second (if even that) video of Assassin's Creed III: Liberation, and another equally short video of Call of Duty: Declassified. That's it. There were some indie games shown after the on-stage part of E3, but that's not good enough for a handheld that you should be shoving down peoples' throats.
E3 2013 was even worse. Sony announced that The Walking Dead series would be coming to the Vita, and didn't do a damn thing else. They moved on from their handheld as if they were in a hurry to change the subject to something else, something non-Vita related.
These days, the only times Sony talk about the Vita is when they're touting it's Remote Play capabilities. Do they actually think that the majority of Vita owners want Remote Play over good, solid games? I sure as hell don't! Like I have said multiple times in the comment sections here on N4G - I bought my Vita to play Vita games on it, not to do Remote Play with PS4 games.
Don't get me wrong here, Remote Play is an awesome feature, but it's limited. Firstly, people are unlikely to get a strong enough internet signal to be able to stream PS4 games to their Vita and be able to play them properly. Yes, you could tether to your smartphone, but I don't see a lot of people doing this. Secondly, the majority of handheld gamers play their games at home on their couch, not sitting in a bus stop. Thirdly, Vita's back touchpad isn't really ideal to be used as a replacement for the R2 and L2 buttons. Sure, the touchpad works, but it makes holding the Vita awkward, which makes playing the game awkward. The front touchscreen on the other hand, is a perfect replacement for the R3 and L3 buttons.
I can't help but get the feeling that if the Wii U hadn't been announced, Sony wouldn't have such a big focus on Remote Play. Maybe they would probably have tried to sell their handheld as a handheld.
In the coming months, the PlayStation Vita will get a game called Killzone: Mercenary. It's got insane graphics for a handheld game, and it looks like it'll be the Vita's best game so far. This game is why I'm happy that I still own my Vita. It's definitely the type of game I want to see on Sony's handheld, but if the upcoming GamesCom turns out like the last two E3s, it will be the last game I play before trading in my Vita and being done forever with Sony handhelds.
I'm not saying that the Vita doesn't have games. It does, and it has some classics. What I'm saying is that I don't like the direction Sony is going with the Vita. They release every game on both the PS3 and Vita, and that kills off any appeal that the Vita might have. Why would someone buy a Vita if they own a PS3? Sony aren't giving people a good enough reason to buy the Vita over other devices.
Would I recommend the PlayStation Vita to you at this point in time? No, I wouldn't. I recommend you not only wait until after GamesCom, but to wait until after the Tokyo Game Show, too. That way, you can see how the Vita will shape out over the next year or so.
If you're the type of person that is heavily into the thought of playing your PS4 games remotely, then the Vita is probably the device for you. Personally, I feel that I could have easily waited another year or two for the Vita, which is a shame because it's such an incredible device that's oozing with potential.
Gamesbeat caught up with Blackley to extract some wisdom about Microsoft’s journey in games, what he thinks Sharma should do, and where gaming can go next. Part of his message is hopeful, but Blackley sees a lot of peril on the road that Microsoft is following. And it makes him worry about the future of gaming.
Sarah Bond's "Xbox everywhere" strategy and controversial "This is an Xbox" campaign have been blamed for alienating Xbox employees and failing to deliver results, with multiple sources telling they're relieved by her departure.
This adds more clarity to the situation. She was in charge of marketing so I 100% do. Believe this was her. The fact that she pissed off a lot of ppl with this campaign was interesting. The kicker she kicked you out if you questioned her moves. Sounds like a Satya move to me.
Ok when it comes to the marketing of the Xbox maybe not get rid of where Xbox is at but advertise the console, bundle 1 month of GP and have "xbox everywhere" as a side thing or just a minor thing. It's too late for Series consoles but do this with their next console. If GP is 30$ this needs to justified ASAP put all of ABK. Remake remaster popular games and put those out on the service. Have a handful of AAA games come day one even. Perma exclusivety is dead however they can be timed. The would at least give ppl a somewhat of a reason to invest. Satya will not allow permanent exclusives again.
Do I still think Xbox is dead? Depends, how much will Satya not get involved and let Asha and Matt figure something out. The more I think about it, I think Satya only really gets involved if the financials aren't lookin so hot. I think Xbox going multiplat was a result of wanting make their money back from ABK and of course raise their unreasonable and near unrealistic margins.
Anyway, things did get interesting and adds nuance just how Xbox is ran.
I’ve read that article they put out on this and it just sounds like a massive hit piece on her. They’ve basically thrown her under the bus.
I highly doubt all of this was just her idea, especially the multiplatform stuff.
Ever since the Zenimax and Activision deal all eyes have been on the Xbox department. There’s no way she’d have acted alone with decisions as big as these, Phil Spencer and Satya Nadella would have been all over this aswell, especially with them both being higher than her.
When they brought her in I thought to myself she’d be used as a scape goat and here we are.
It’s the exact same thing they did when Don Mattrick left “oh it wasn’t our idea, it was all Don, our new leader Phil Spencer is a gamer and will turn things around”.
Exactly, they always have to pin it on someone. Everything was Don Mattrick's fault before. Now everything is Sarah Bond's fault.
People act like these companies don't have focus groups, board meetings, focus testing, etc for these ideas before they hit.
They'd rather blame her rather than the product they asked her to market. How else was she going to market playing your xbox games on any device? Has anyone stopped to think that the marketing was bad because the product itself was bad?
But I don't feel sorry for her, she knew the kind of people she was working with
Would it still be a hit piece if it was actually true? If she really was behind the whole everything is an xbox... then I say they took the chance and it didnt pay off. Most companies let people go over bad decisions like that.
That's just it darth72, it more than likely isn't the truth because we know she didn't have control over everything at Xbox. That would be Phil Spencer, who has Don Mattrick's old position.
And to be fair, even he can't be blamed for everything since it's highly unlikely all this goes on without Nadella's blessing at some point
Resident Evil 7: Biohazard returns the series to its horror roots, and on the Nintendo Switch 2, you can take those frights everywhere.
PSP did so well because it had a massive library of games, 32 player Medal of Honor, Resistance Retribution, Modnation, Phantasy Star Portable, Persona 3 Portable, Final Fantasy Tactics and so many more.
Sadly, we haven't seen anywhere near the amount of diversity that PSP had so far.
"They release every game on both the PS3 and Vita, and that kills off any appeal that the Vita might have. Why would someone buy a Vita if they own a PS3?"
I agree this has been a dumb move which they thought would make people buy a Vita. We are already seeing this policy starting to go away (the Gaikai service launching next year might also have something to do with it).
With the games front I think Killzone may put developers to shame. It is looking really good at the moment. The problem is the Vita is so powerful that it cost a lot to develop for it. But publishers don't want to put X amount in when it is risky so we end up with shoddy games (AC: Liberations was a buggy game).
I like my Vita. The issue with it is those damn memory cards and the price just isn't right for more people to buy into it. They need to drop the price, Have a 499 PS4/Vita bundle (can't be more as the One is 499) and the system should sell. The problem is people just don't feel handheld gaming is a necessary purchase especially when they cost almost as much as consoles which is why it needs to be cheaper.
The PS Vita, without software to back it, is on the way out the door or will just sit in limbo as a gimmick device.
With the PS4 being released, the PS Vita is taking a huge back seat as Sony focuses on that. I wouldn't really expect any big movement on PS Vita unless the PS4 does well, and even then not until mid next year.
Gravity Rush wasnt built from the ground up for the Vita - it started life as a PS3 game in 2008 and was then moved to the Vita much later.
Personally i think the Vita is great, i actually use mine more than i use my PS3 these days. I would disagree that it dosnt have software as it has some great exclusive games.
I think the main problem with it from a sales perpective is the perception of value. Sony should release a Vita 2.0 with 8gb internal storage and a 3 month subscription to PS+, and they need to sell it under $200.
Yea pretty much whatever Sony says about the Vita in the next few months will determine if I get Vita or wiiU this holiday.