@Chark, ok but in order to grow the install base you need games first before it will grow, and the libarary right still isnt at that critiical mass. There is two problems with saying Sony should rely on its first party games to sell the Vita. First, their first party games don't have the history, sales, and attach rate that Nintendo's do, so its harder for Sony to sell systems based only on those games. Thus, they have to attract more 3rd party support than than ms or nintendo.

Well of course it has that stuff via browser (though I suppose there are browsers out there that can't do cetain sites) so does the Vita and it does it well. I wasn't listing things that 3DS doesn't have, just what the Vita does have because I'm not fully familiar with the 3DS's offerings.

I really don't think Nintendo eShop is a proper platform to become an Android-esque app store. From what I see it isn't open development and is more like what PS Store does than PS Mobile. I was interested in the rumours regarding the Wii U having an app store, but haven't heard much since. Maybe Nintendo will surprise me though or perhaps I'm not seeing it, but as of right now it seems more like what XBL and PSN have been offering for a while now. PSM on the other hand is open and with free dev kits, only $99 a year to publish as many titles as you want and it uses the same code as the Android Marketplace.

Systems are never at a critical mass this early in their lifecycle. Even Vita selling as is will increase the install base to give the system something to show for it a year or so from now. With a price cut next year, new features, and a building library (it actually has a decent sized 1st year library) 3rd parties could start developing now nowing the install base will be larger when their game is completed. The hurdle of the lowest install base period is ending.

ah, get what you were listing now, no being honest the Eshop is pretty much more psn'y than an app store in that regards, just got some Virtual console stuff on there from the NES/gameboy/gamegear and some downloadable nintendo games. It's good stuff for the most part but there is no way to get your games on there without being a big developer with ties in nintendo.

With regards the features the vita and the 3ds both have which is pretty rubbish has to be the camera .3mp was okie for my old nokia cellphone that cost 20euros but the vita's OLED screen showing a .3mp picture makes it look absolutely horrendous, it's slightly less noticable on the 3ds because of the smaller screen, but on the wifes XL you got the same jarringly low quality on a big screen, shame really. Worst thing is, I love the app for making stop motion video with the 3ds.... just the quality really kills it.

I wont read an article with a title that doesn't even make sense.

Bolded is exactly what people were doing to the 3DS (and still are doing, as I am hearing it from multiple people still in person).

Well...dang. That's quite a list. Half of that stuff I haven't even heard of! I'd best read up on these devices a bit better before I decide which one I want to get first.

I've re-read it to mean that once the Ps-vitas price gets a drop this author is going to have a talk with the Society for Teachers Opposed to Physical Punishment, or stopp. I will recheck the article once the price drop has happened to know the Societies views on the Vita.

If more expensive iPads outsell the Vita, what would that say about price then?  I see it as people aren't buying for price point reasons, so slashing prices doesn't really help.

"Because much like the Vita is right now, the 3DS was in bad shape market wise until they dropped the price $70. And ever since then, they've been selling great."

Both sentences here are incorrect. The 3DS' initial price was $249.99. It dropped to $169.99. That's $80, not $70. The second statement is also incorrect, as the sales didn't reach the way it is now until Super Mario 3D Land came out.

"When the 3DS price was higher, that was Nintendo trying to be greedy. Selling a fairly cheaply made product at a premium price."

Saying Nintendo was trying to be greedy sounds stupid, and the concept is incorrect as well. They decided on the price based on the reception it got at things like e3. They were trying to make a profit (like any for-profit company does), not trying to be greedy. It's also not a "cheaply made product" as it survived the exact same drop-test the Vita got.

"So unlike Nintendo's case, it's not so easy to drop the Vita's price because then you'd have to redesign it in a cheaper way."

It wasn't easy for Nintendo to drop the price, because they started selling at a loss once they did.

"Regardless, the system has been getting a continous stream of applications of all sorts. Ranging from major ones such as Netflix, Hulu Plus, Youtube, and Skype. To the lesser known ones such as Wake Up Club. And just recently, the Vita received it's on addition to the Playstation Plus program, allowing people to be part of both at one price. But no matter what the system receives or what good it does, pricing is everything."

Most consoles have Netflix, the 3DS was planned to get Hulu Plus (don't know why they never did), and those things aren't even what sell a system anyway. Also, price is NOT everything. If it were, cheap devices would always be the successor. So why is Apple doing so well?

So overall, pretty much everything was dumb in the "article."