Topic: PlayStation Boss Admits Vita Has Been A Tough Sell To Publishers

[Chozo Ghost]

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/08/10/playstation-boss-admits-vita-has-been-a-tough-sell-to-publishers.aspx

The Vita hasn't been an easy sell to third-party publishers, according to Sony. In a recent interview, Sony Worldwide Studios president Shuhei Yoshida spoke about the challenges the company has been dealing with in the handheld space.

"We're having a more difficult time than we had anticipated in terms of getting support from third-party publishers, but that's our job," Yoshida told PlayStation: The Official Magazine. "We will continue to talk to development communities and publishing partners and tell them why Vita can provide a great experience for the IPs they have."

As a Nintendo fan who has seen Nintendo going through the exact same thing these last 15+ years, it is refreshing to see the tables finally have turned on the evil Sonyian empire.

[Halbred]

After the middling response to the PSP, I can see why. The Vita is, sadly, little more than a PSP with better graphics and a second stick. And lots of proprietary barriers to entry.

[shingi_70]

How is Sony the evil empire?

[broodwars]

I think you have to give Yoshida a lot of credit for fully accepting that while 3rd party publishers haven't signed onto Vita, it's because Sony hadn't done their job as 1st party company in selling them on it.  That kind of honesty from a representative of one of the Big 3 is rather refreshing, honestly.  Now that they've admitted they screwed-up, I hope that they actually change directions now and do the things that have to be done to make Vita relevant.  At the moment, I like both my 3DS and Vita for different experiences, and I'd like to see both continue to get new games.

[ShyGuy]

Rear touch pad innovation

[Chozo Ghost]

Rear touch pad innovation

Didn't that innovation first appear in Prison showers?

[shingi_70]

Vita was always going to be a tough sale. Its a nice price of tech in relation to the 3DS but its not impressive when comparing it to smartphones and tablets. Parents will go toward the 3DS because it is and it looks less expensive as well as having a nice fatality for the kids. The vita is trying to get the admit market where most of them go to phoned and tablets. The market for a high end dedicated gaming handheld for the core gamer is pretty niche. The price as well as the memory card deal didn't help it at all.

[nickmitch]

It's an incredibly tough sale especially when Sony pushes what might be its worst feature. The idea of getting the full console experience on a handheld is pretty much meh. Especially with such high barriers as previously mentioned. The 3DS offers something you don't get on the Wii. It's easy to want to own both. Why would I spend hundreds of dollars to play a game that I already have at home while not at home? The touch screen is something that's been done, the second analogue stick is unnecessary, and that rear touchpad is mostly there for show.

[Chozo Ghost]

Vita was always going to be a tough sale. Its a nice price of tech in relation to the 3DS but its not impressive when comparing it to smartphones and tablets. Parents will go toward the 3DS because it is and it looks less expensive as well as having a nice fatality for the kids. The vita is trying to get the admit market where most of them go to phoned and tablets. The market for a high end dedicated gaming handheld for the core gamer is pretty niche. The price as well as the memory card deal didn't help it at all.

I agree, and over the long term the Vita's problem with the tablets and stuff will only get worse and worse because tablets will keep improving and getting better and better whereas the Vita hardware is finalized and stuck that way forever. Right now the Vita may seem powerful and not too bad in relation to tablets, but over the next few years this gap will widen.

The PSP was a fairly successful system, but it came out back in 2005 when Tablets and stuff were either non-existent or very primitive and crappy. The PSP was able to carve out a niche, but this niche has now been usurped by iOS, Blackberry, and Android. For this reason the Vita probably doesn't have any hope of selling the same 70+ million units as its predecessor did.

[Louieturkey]

It's an incredibly tough sale especially when Sony pushes what might be its worst feature. The idea of getting the full console experience on a handheld is pretty much meh. Especially with such high barriers as previously mentioned. The 3DS offers something you don't get on the Wii. It's easy to want to own both. Why would I spend hundreds of dollars to play a game that I already have at home while not at home? The touch screen is something that's been done, the second analogue stick is unnecessary, and that rear touchpad is mostly there for show.

FYI, the second analogue stick is the number one thing that gamers complained about with the PSP.  I think that was very necessary if for marketing alone.  It may not be necessary for gaming, but the backlash they got for it not being there on the PSP made it so they had to have it there.  The rear touchpad was stupid and the thing that Sony decided to put in to say they innovated.

[Louieturkey]

Parents will go toward the 3DS because it is and it looks less expensive as well as having a nice fatality for the kids.

So the more nice fatalities a system has, the better?

[NWR_insanolord]

The rear touchpad is worth it to me just for its implementation in FIFA. It's a lot more convenient than the same functionality in the 3DS and Wii U versions that require you to take your hands off the controls.

[Louieturkey]

Actually, it looks like some devs are getting the hang of it.  Media Molecule's new game, Tearaway looks like the read touchpad is going to be vital to the game and the way it is used looks really fun as well.  If I ever do get a Vita, I think I'm going to get this game.  It looks like loads of fun and in a different way than LBP was fun.

[Ian Sane]

The Vita, to me, was like if Nintendo tried to release a Virtual Boy 2 in 1997.  The PSP wasn't a particularly popular system that the public was demanding a successor for in the first place.  The Vita is a product that no one really asked for.  It's the sequel to the movie no one liked.  It came across like Sony merely survived the PSP.  "Well, thank God this undesirable product didn't completely sink us."  And then their response was to tempt fate and try this foolhardy nonsense all over again.

The lesson to learn from the PSP was "don't bother with another handheld because you suck too much at it" and Sony really missed that.  I suppose a Sony fanboy could say the same about Nintendo making consoles but at least they have some positive track record there.  There is a rich history of Nintendo console success while the Sony' entire handheld history was just "the PSP?  Oh right, THAT thing."

[broodwars]

The Vita, to me, was like if Nintendo tried to release a Virtual Boy 2 in 1997.  The PSP wasn't a particularly popular system that the public was demanding a successor for in the first place.

Wow, that is a particularly stupid comparison.  The Virtual Boy had at best one or two decent titles from a tiny library, and it was dead within 6 months.  The PSP, while nowhere near as popular as the DS was, eventually made Sony money; was around for a full life cycle; and was immensely popular in Japan thanks to Monster Hunter and its steady stream of JRPGs.  Just because it got curb stomped by the DS outside Japan that doesn't make it a failure, as even outside Japan it had a good library of games.  The Virtual Boy was a failure on pretty much every level.

The Vita is a perfectly fine handheld with a decent library, but one that suffers from some spectacularly terrible marketing & design choices (i.e. the lack of internal storage).  Comparing it to a "Virtual Boy 2" is beyond inaccurate.  The Vita is at least competent.

[NWR_insanolord]

The Vita's a good system that's being held back by Sony's decision making. Don't write it off; if Sony can figure a few things out and get out of their own way it can definitely get back in this race. As someone who owns a Vita, as well as someone who thinks Nintendo could stand to benefit from some real competition, I hope they get it back on track.

[BranDonk Kong]

It's also being held down by no one wanting it.

[NWR_insanolord]

Sony's awful decision making is a big part of the reason no one wants it.

[Chozo Ghost]

As someone who owns a Vita, as well as someone who thinks Nintendo could stand to benefit from some real competition, I hope they get it back on track.

Nintendo doesn't benefit from real competition. For some, competition may be beneficial, but Nintendo is like a kid that is forced to live inside of a bubble because any sort of competition is fatal. Look what happened when they got "real competition" from the PS1 and how it devastated the N64. If it weren't for Nintendo's handheld monopoly they almost certainly would have gone the way of Sega. Well, now Sony is attempting to do to Nintendo's handhelds what it already did to Nintendo's Consoles.

The problem is in Nintendo's case 3rd parties actively look for and seize onto ANY sort of excuse not to support their hardware. If Sony were able to offer a serious competitor in the handheld market this is exactly what would happen. Competition would not make Nintendo better off. I'm not saying it would kill them, because I'm sure with 1st party support alone they would be fine, but you see how the Vita is getting Black Ops 2 yet the 3DS is not? You see how the Vita is getting Madden but yet that is no where to be seen on the 3DS? This is exactly what I'm talking about. Imagine that multiplied by a hundred fold. That's what would happen if Sony offered serious competition.

The best thing for Nintendo is if the Vita fails. I'm dead serious on this. If the Vita versions of Madden and COD fail, then next year they will come to 3DS. If those titles sell well enough on the Vita though, then perhaps they will never EVER come to the 3DS. Do you see what I'm saying?

So like I said, competition to Nintendo is like an infectious disease to a kid who lives in a bubble. It might not necessarily be fatal, but it sure as hell isn't going to be beneficial either.

[broodwars]

The best thing for Nintendo is if the Vita fails. I'm dead serious on this.

Considering you're the guy who's on the record stating you "wanted the Wii U to fail" to make Nintendo better, I consider your opinion null and void and quite possibly hypocritical.  Besides, I thought Nintendo did some of their best creative work when they were having the crap pounded out of them in the console space by Sony (and to some extent Sega).  Ever since Nintendo became Top Dog again with the Wii, I've felt their creative output has severely stagnated and they've accordingly turned out lesser product.

[Chozo Ghost]

The best thing for Nintendo is if the Vita fails. I'm dead serious on this.

Considering you're the guy who's on the record stating you "wanted the Wii U to fail" to make Nintendo better, I consider your opinion null and void and quite possibly hypocritical.

Not really, because the circumstances are different. The DS/3DS has solid software support and it doesn't have the "Wii" name which is **** and needs to be dropped ASAP, but Nintendo will only drop it if the Wii U fails. That's the only way we are ever going to get a console that isn't going to be made a laughing stock due to the ridiculous name. You also have to remember the context of when I said that which was back during E3 where everyone was severely disappointed, including you btw. So you can't really judge me on something I said back then because as I recall you were disappointed as well and probably felt similar.

Ever since Nintendo became Top Dog again with the Wii, I've felt their creative output has severely stagnated and they've accordingly turned out lesser product.

But remember the NES was Nintendo's golden age when most of the franchises we know and love today were first introduced, and the NES had like 90% market share. So you can't say the lack of competition made things stagnant. What it did do however, was give Nintendo nearly all (if not all) the 3rd party support. This is what I want to see happen again, but it won't happen if Nintendo has "serious competition". 3rd parties have proven time and time again that they hate Nintendo and will look for ANY excuse to not support them, and the presence of serious competition makes for a perfect excuse.

[NWR_insanolord]

Nintendo doesn't benefit from real competition. For some, competition may be beneficial, but Nintendo is like a kid that is forced to live inside of a bubble because any sort of competition is fatal. Look what happened when they got "real competition" from the PS1 and how it devastated the N64.

Devastated isn't a word I'd use. Yeah, Nintendo lost the sales race to Sony, but look at the games they put out for that system and tell me they didn't have an amazing software lineup for that thing. I don't care if Nintendo "wins" in terms of sales or market share or whatever, and neither should you. I want to see them at the top of their game creatively, and in that generation they absolutely were.


EDIT: For the love of god, Chozo, the name is irrelevant. You need to shut up about the name, because whether that system bombs or sells 200 million units it will have absolutely nothing to do with the name.

[broodwars]

You also have to remember the context of when I said that which was back during E3 where everyone was severely disappointed, including you btw. So you can't really judge me on something I said back then because as I recall you were disappointed as well and probably felt similar.

Yes, except I'm being consistent: I don't feel that the Wii becoming the success it is was in Nintendo's best creative interests, as they lost that fire that drove them to create such interesting projects in the N64/GameCube eras.  I'm not the one saying that Nintendo needs to be so dominant that it knocks out their competition as a presence in the marketplace.  I think part of what made DS such an interesting experiment is that Nintendo was genuinely threatened by Sony entering the handheld space with the PSP.  They couldn't just rest on their laurels, and they didn't until the later years of the handheld when their dominance was assured.

But remember the NES was Nintendo's golden age when most of the franchises we know and love today were first introduced, and the NES had like 90% market share. So you can't say the lack of competition made things stagnant. What it did do however, was give Nintendo nearly all (if not all) the 3rd party support.

And look how well having all that 3rd party support did them in the later years, when Nintendo's iron-fisted monopolistic treatment of 3rd parties sent them all to Sony (and to some extent Sega).  Nintendo's their own worst enemy.  And incidentally, they couldn't rely on the same 3-4 franchises back then like they could now, as they didn't have franchises.  Yeah, I grew up on an NES and I have some heavily rose-tinted nostalgia for those days, but looking back at what the market was back then I'll take the diversity of our competitive modern era any day.

[Chozo Ghost]

Yes, except I'm being consistent: I don't feel that the Wii becoming the success it is was in Nintendo's best creative interests, as they lost that fire that drove them to create such interesting projects in the N64/GameCube eras.  I'm not the one saying that Nintendo needs to be so dominant that it knocks out their competition as a presence in the marketplace.

The rule of the game is kill or be killed. Look what happened to Sega. Sony did that to them, and probably would have done the exact same to Nintendo if Nintendo didn't have the handheld market. Diversity and competition are sometimes a good thing, but not always. Look what happened to the native wildlife in Australia when things like Dingoes and Foxes (and man) were introduced there. Diversity is nice in theory, but when you put a lot of different competing things into an environment together sometimes things end up extinct, and that's not good or healthy.

[NWR_insanolord]

Sony didn't kill Sega. They may have twisted the knife, but Sega stabbed themselves in the back. Nintendo was never in danger of going that route, no matter how much more popular Sony's products were. The funny thing is, back when Nintendo was getting their ass kicked in sales they were making more money than anybody, and it's only now, when they're "winning", that they're posting annual losses, which they'd never done since going into gaming.