By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Vita needs permanent $169.99 price drop. Here's why.

Max King of the Wild said:
DirtyP2002 said:
Max King of the Wild said:
the_dengle said:

The Vita has sold much more slowly than the 3DS sold pre-price cut. It will take more than an $80 price cut to save the Vita, and frankly, Sony can't even afford that much.

First of all, Sony doesn't need to sell more than the 3ds. That's an unrealistic feat brought up by people like you. Sony isn't expecting or should expect to sell on the same level as nintendo. That market has been dominated by nintendo 20 years before the PSP came to being. Selling 80mil first try is mission accomplished for Sony even though Nintendo sold more.

Secondly, Vita needs as much asaving now as the Ps3 needed in 2006. In other words, none. It needs to sell and make money. Even with a small userbase Sony and 3rd parties can be profitable with the machine as long as they know the market and have reasonable expectations.

Sony = Microsoft
3DS = PS3
Nintendo = Sony
PSP = Xbox

--> you must be blown away that MS managed to achieve just that within 2 generations.


What the fuck are you talking about? MS doesn't even have a handheld because it would loose more money than the 360 did.

I figured out your code. However you are mistaken on so many levels.


I am saying that MS did achieve with home consoles what Sony failed to do in the handheld market.
Nobody expected them to beat (or tie with) Sony, because they ruled previous generations, when MS was not even on the market. 

You seem to have a problem to acknowledge that.

OT: I think the Vita is in a market and in situation where even a price cut would not boost sales sustainably.



Imagine not having GamePass on your console...

Around the Network
VGKing said:
ibrahimman0 said:
Actully ur totaly wrong ! , i wouldnt buy a console over the other for like what 80$ difference and btw 3DS XL is 200$ so 50$ difference, the reason i got 3DS not Vita is cuz 3DS has alot of good games 1st and 3rd party , but vita doesnt really have any games except few of them like P4G , Gravity Rush......

Uncharted, Wipeout, Modnation Racers, Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty.......you were saying?


Why list a turd like Call of Duty Declasified and exclude gems like Sound Shapes and LittleBigPlanet?



bouzane said:
VGKing said:
ibrahimman0 said:
Actully ur totaly wrong ! , i wouldnt buy a console over the other for like what 80$ difference and btw 3DS XL is 200$ so 50$ difference, the reason i got 3DS not Vita is cuz 3DS has alot of good games 1st and 3rd party , but vita doesnt really have any games except few of them like P4G , Gravity Rush......

Uncharted, Wipeout, Modnation Racers, Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty.......you were saying?


Why list a turd like Call of Duty Declasified and exclude gems like Sound Shapes and LittleBigPlanet?

Cuz I don't pay attention to reviews and because I only  had 30 seconds to think before writing my comment.



VGKing said:
the_dengle said:

lol. Yes, people like me. It's funny how a little over a year ago, Vita outselling the 3DS was an inevitability, and now it's "an unrealistic feat."

Of course, it is unrealistic now. Sony doesn't have to outsell the 3DS, and that's good, because they can't. What they do need is to sell well enough to stay afloat and continue receiving software support. They're not doing that right now. In order to do that, they need a price cut and a rebranding.

And sure the PS3 didn't need saving in 2006; that's why it got a price cut in 2007, right? Also note that I never said the Vita had to outsell the 3DS. It was the OP that stated Sony needs to make drastic changes to save the Vita.

That was back when Vita and 3DS were supposed to be $250. Can you blame people for thinking Vita would outsell the 3DS? If 3DS didn't do a price cut maybe Vita would have...

You should check the second article again. It was written in October 2011, two months after the 3DS price cut. And I recall at least a few VGChartz users, even after the Vita's launch, claiming it would ultimately surpass the 3DS*. As for the bolded, that's downright preposterous. The week before the price cut (25th week in Japan), the 3DS had sold over 3.5 million units. The Vita just passed that point a couple of weeks ago, almost a full year after its release. 3DS sales still would be been in the 15-20 million range at least, and it probably would have gotten a price cut regardless when the XL launched.

*And... by golly, one of the users springing to the defense of the Vita in that thread was you!

"Think of Xbox as the PSP.
The Xbox 360 as the Vita.

Be afraid. Be very afraid."

Can't imagine what you could have meant by that if you weren't claiming the Vita would be able to contend with the 3DS. And you said that not only well after the 3DS price cut, but after the Vita had launched in all major regions. I take it you are not still so optimistic?

Apart from all that, all you have to remember is that Sony themselves expected to sell three times as many Vitas as they will this fiscal year, which would have put them at least in the vicinity of 3DS's first year sales.



pokoko said:
I don't really agree that they have to lower the price as soon as possible. People on gaming forums always get caught up with the idea that it's all about some kind of race and that if you don't sell the most units then you "lose", but that's not really how business works. Sony's first priority with the Vita has to be making it profitable, due to the financial problems of the company at large. The second priority has to be luring PSP developers to the Vita--looking at you, Namco Bandai.

That being said, the Vita won't sell in the west until it gets a price cut and I think they're going to do it as soon as it's feasible. If the lower the price in conjunction with the release of one of the bigger titles, like Killzone or Soul Sacrifice, then I think it might provide a nice boost.

I would love to know what kind of dialogue they're having with Japanese developers. Yoshida said that they've expanded their efforts in that area greatly, but unfortunately we probably won't see the fruits of that labor until late this year or perhaps 2014.

The thing that will lure developers away from the PSP is a price drop and and increased installation base. It just doesn't make sense from a business standpoint to create exclusive content for the vita unless you're Sony and you're hoping that said software will push hardware out the door.



Around the Network

In other news, looking at the sun through binoculars is a bad idea.



I LOVE ICELAND!

If they did slash the price that far I would definitely look into getting a Japanese one (only for the AKB48 game, but no need to worry about that (^.^'') )



osed125 said:

People forget the Vita's memory cards, unless those prices also decrease you will still be paying $200+ (for more than 8GB that is). Sure it will cheaper, but it's still not a very "attractive" price for most people imo. Or Sony could simple included at least a 8GB card in every handheld, that would definitely help.  


First off, let me say that I agree with you, memory card prices are ridiculous.

That said, at the moment, Sony seem unwilling to take a loss on the system.  For whatever reason.  In my opinion, I think their price gouging on the memory cards is a way to introduce choice to people buying the system to keep costs lower for people who want the option.

They could just tack another $30 onto the cost of the Vita to keep it breaking even if they wanted.  But of course, that would hurt sales even further, and it would be a mandatory cost for anyone buying.  Alternatively, they could do what they appear to be doing which is adding that $30 onto the price of bigger memory cards and giving people a choice.  Are you going to be playing mostly physical and can you juggle with a PS3 hard drive?  4GB and 8GB are for you then, and you'll save a bit of money.  Do you have lots of digital PSP games and do you want your Vita games to be digital too?  16GB and 32GB, but you'll have to pay for it.

If Sony are convinced that they cannot sell the system at a loss at the moment (which I'm not saying is the right decision), then I'd rather the extra price was on memory cards than the system itself, because like I mentioned, that gives you options about how you want to handle your content.  A mandatory extra cost on the system itself would damage sales further and there would be no way to avoid it.  So if there's no other way around the cost issue, then I think this is the best way to do things.  At least in my opinion.

 

@ OP, interesting, but I don't think any more needs to be said other than "Vita needs a permanent price drop to keep it alive".



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

Why I think it is in desperate need of a price cut: It currently is a more expensive console (compared to the 3DS) requiring expensive memory cards and the exclusive games that it offers are of low demand. Additionally, there are often similar games of higher quality available for the PS3 anyway, further convincing the consumer that it really isn't worth the money just yet. It really isn't any more complicated that that.

I fail to see the discussion value though, given how a price cut already has been confirmed for next year. It's not like Sony isn't aware of Vita's issues.


Pretty much what I was thinking.  It isn't some big secret that the Vita is to expensive and doesn't have a system seller.




       

DirtyP2002 said:
Max King of the Wild said:
DirtyP2002 said:
Max King of the Wild said:
the_dengle said:

The Vita has sold much more slowly than the 3DS sold pre-price cut. It will take more than an $80 price cut to save the Vita, and frankly, Sony can't even afford that much.

First of all, Sony doesn't need to sell more than the 3ds. That's an unrealistic feat brought up by people like you. Sony isn't expecting or should expect to sell on the same level as nintendo. That market has been dominated by nintendo 20 years before the PSP came to being. Selling 80mil first try is mission accomplished for Sony even though Nintendo sold more.

Secondly, Vita needs as much asaving now as the Ps3 needed in 2006. In other words, none. It needs to sell and make money. Even with a small userbase Sony and 3rd parties can be profitable with the machine as long as they know the market and have reasonable expectations.

Sony = Microsoft
3DS = PS3
Nintendo = Sony
PSP = Xbox

--> you must be blown away that MS managed to achieve just that within 2 generations.


What the fuck are you talking about? MS doesn't even have a handheld because it would loose more money than the 360 did.

I figured out your code. However you are mistaken on so many levels.


I am saying that MS did achieve with home consoles what Sony failed to do in the handheld market.
Nobody expected them to beat (or tie with) Sony, because they ruled previous generations, when MS was not even on the market. 

You seem to have a problem to acknowledge that.

OT: I think the Vita is in a market and in situation where even a price cut would not boost sales sustainably.


Why was their a need to bring up microsoft consoles in this thread?  I usually don't say much to MSFT fans on this site simply because you guys are extremely out numbered but their is no need to bring stuff up like that.