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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PlayStation Vita Came "Too Late," Former Sony Exec Says

KBG29 on 28 September 2016

Yeah, good idea, lets all dance around the real issue.

The market evolved, and Sony didn't evolve the Vita with it. No amount of games, and cheaper memory cards was going to save Vita when the hardware itself was missing its most major feature, (MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS).

Sony nearly got it right with the 3G Vita, but they stopped just short. Had they allowed Texting and Calling people would have seen the value, and it would have sold like crazy. This would have lead to more games, and eventually a 4G model. Once there was a 4G model, the mobile network would have supported great online play experiences, which again would have pushed sales higher.

Sony messed up when they didn't offer a Vita model with full mobile communication. It killed PlayStation Mobile, and has set the PlayStation brand back by nearly a decade now. There is still a massive market for a device like Vita that offer phone functionality, and it is just waiting for Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo to tap it.

Lastly, on a minor side note. I will not pretend the 3DS is doing alright. Nintendo will have given up more than half their marketshare when 3DS is all said and done. They are trying to save it as much as they can by holding the NX announcement off since it will send sales to WiiU levels once people see it is a handlheld/console hybrid. Had Nintendo added 4G and mobile communications to the 3DS, they would be stepping on Apples heel, and Pokemon Go would have been a 3DS exclusive that drove the sales of their phone to rediculous heights, but instead, they have consumers, and investors begging for their content to come to Android and iOS. 3DS is doing horribly, and Nintendo, just like Sony, are refusing to evolve their platform to garner success.



Stop hate, let others live the life they were given. Everyone has their problems, and no one should have to feel ashamed for the way they were born. Be proud of who you are, encourage others to be proud of themselves. Learn, research, absorb everything around you. Nothing is meaningless, a purpose is placed on everything no matter how you perceive it. Discover how to love, and share that love with everything that you encounter. Help make existence a beautiful thing.

Kevyn B Grams
10/03/2010 

KBG29 on PSN&XBL

Around the Network
MikeRox on 28 September 2016
Lawlight said:
think-man said:
Bs, the 3ds has sold fine. Sony just gave up too fast

The 3DS was first to the market and much cheaper. Its sales peaked in its first year and has dropped every year since then.

It also had a HUGE MSRP reduction to stimulate those sales, leading to Nintendo taking a loss on hardware. Something Sony avoided rightly or wrongly.



RIP Dad 25/11/51 - 13/12/13. You will be missed but never forgotten.

freebs2 on 28 September 2016

The rise of mobile gaming shows there's more interest than ever in playing games on the go.
The lackluster success of 3DS and the flop of PsVita shows both Nintendo and Sony completely failed to assess the market.



Jranation on 29 September 2016
Sixteenvolt420 said:
VITA doesn't have enough of games to keep most of us occupied, outside of RPG's. That's at least why i got rid of mine.

Yep. Games do sell hardware. And thats why the PS4 has been doing so well. Sadly sony couldn't do it with the vita. 



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Nautilus on 30 September 2016
twintail said:
Nautilus said:

And where exactlu does he says that it is not the only reason.The moment he failed to say that when asked the question implies that he thinks that is the only motive he thinks the Vita failed.I mean, I cant read his mind.

He isn't being asked the reasons the Vita failed so it really deosn't matter if he needs to say there other reasons or not (he doesn't though)

The entire interview is about Tretton's views from the inside of Sony and how things operated in terms of management and marketting etc. He therefore answered with this angle in mind. His comment that it is 'too late' is not an after the fact when Vita sales were floudering, it was the thought interally at SCEA when they had to push the machine out to the public (hence the present tense and not the past).

Anyhow, the entire interview is a pretty interesting listen into how various things played out within Sony from PS1 to PS4.

Well, the whole discussion I was having so far was about the reasons it failed.The comment made by him acted more of a catalyst of sorts, so my whole point remains.

But seeing from this angle I agree with you.While the article title implies otherwise, he does state that this is his opinion, and it actually makes sense, from a marketing viewpoint.I will read through the whole article, seems interesting enough.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Around the Network
asqarkabab on 30 September 2016

So sad that the vita was a fail



REQUIESCAT IN PACE

I Hate REMASTERS

I Hate PLAYSTATION PLUS

Nautilus on 30 September 2016
torok said:
Nautilus said:

What BS?That after the one year(more or less) period, they only released one or two big releases on Vita?And by that I mean first party titles, not bundles which are way easier to do.And in the whole period you listed, Sony launched just a handful of big titles, like Killzone and Tearway and LBP(Im sorry but I dont count a collection of remaster as trying).So launching 3 or 4 big games in a period of 3 years(not countinh first year) is trying?Please.The PS4 can do that because it has heavy third party support(and even then it releases about 3 big titles every year), Sony knew the Vita needed a bigger push.I mean, the only big new IP the Vita had for a good while was Gravity Rush, and that game isnt even great(my opinion).

And it really makes me chuckle when people try to make 3DS sales bad even though it has passed 60 million and it will probably pass 70 million.I mean, yes it isnt the best selling Nintendo console, but it is still freaking 70 million on a shrieking market, and it is even funnier when people like you say that Vita failure is acceptable because the "market is not there anymore" but the 3DS is dissapointing because it, for some reason, should have made it better in the same market.

Look, if Sony had done the same thing as Nintendo by lowering 3DS price at the beginning when it was not selling, by making the memory cards cheaper, the system cheaper, made more games tailored for the system, in another words, tried harder instead of jumping ship in the first sign of failure, I would take on his word(and lets be honest, its not the first time they do that)But that was not the case.So Im sorry, but it is also Sony fault.

Oh, and by the way I do have a Vita and enjoyed it alot, so Im not trying to piss on it.Just making a constructive argument.

They did a sizeable push, with a bunch of 1st party titles. It just didn't worked out. You are forgetting stuff like Soul Sacrifice, Gravity Rush, Resistance, Uncharted, Hot Shots Golf, MLB, LBP, Killzone, Tearaway, etc. And it had a fairly good 3rd party support at the start, with Mortal Kombat, SF vs Tekken, Marvel vs Capcom, Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Ninja Gaiden.

3DS sales aren't nowhere neas as bad as Vita. Both are acceptable for a dying market. But the point is that putting effort on Vita wouldn't just get them a lot more than 10M extra sales. Which still makes it a fairly low number. It's better to put their effort on PSVR or PS4 revisions that can simply pour that extra sales for a device that costs 2X more, so more profit.

The point is that if the biggest impact on Vita sales were their mistakes, why would 3DS be so low? Let's face it, the only mistake with 3DS was pricing, but they fixed it in a year. A near perfect run by the company that always wins on portables and it still did poorly at the end. It really doesn't paint a good scenario for the company that got outsold 2:1 last gen.

I'm not taking away Sony's errors here. Basically, the memory cards and Vita's price. But taking losses by cutting this prices while still making games for it wouldn't make it sell much more.

Also, I think people are harsher on 3DS because of the situation of both companies. While Vita flopped hard, the PS4 is a big success, so the main device is doing great. For Nintendo, 3DS is the main device right now and the predictions aren't good.

The problem with your point is that you are focusing on things they did that had a slight impact on the final result. If it was correctly managed, do you think it would do 50 or 60M, maybe even beating the 3DS? Of course not. Anything they do wouldn't make it go as far as 30M, even 40M would be a moonshot. The PSP was half of the DS, it is really crazy to believe that Vita could do better. You're focusing on stuff that simply didn't matter. It would make maybe 10M more, but that's still a failure. So it really doesn't matter. The handheld market is dead, Sony and Nintendo already agreed on that.

The first year was good, I said that already.What I stated was the problem lied in the subsequent years.So from all the games you listed that takes off Gravity Rush, Uncharted, Resistance, Little Big Planet, and many more.When you take those out and spread the rest through the remaining years, it will look barren to say the least.(and Soul Sacrifice is a second party game by the way).

And Vita sales arent acceptable even in a daying market.I mean, it managed to bring profit?If not, then its not acceptable.And if what you say its true, that even if you fixed the miriad problem the Vita had and those extra 10 millions were not enough to bring in profit/satisfy Sony projected sales, then the concept itself of the Vita was flawed.For all the blame people like to throw at Nintendo hardware for being underpowered at launch, they do understand the handheld market, and thus the decision that the 3DS of being a weak machine was because that was the fit for the market.If a powerful handheld machine was never going to be successful, or Sony didnt have enough attrractive games to compete with Nintendo or to survive in the market, that should have been accounted for in the planning phase of the Vita and measures should have been taken accordingly, even if it meant not releasing the machine at all.

In the end, if something fails, it is still pretty much your fault.Wether you failed to grasp if it had a market for your product, or if your product isnt simply atrractive enough, its all on you.The Wii U bad sales was Nintendos fault.Why isnt Vita Sonys fault? 



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Lauster on 30 September 2016
Nautilus said:

and Soul Sacrifice is a second party game by the way

I don't think so, not when SCEJ is the developper with Marvelous (like with FromSoftware for Bloodborne). But that's another debate ^^"



Nautilus on 30 September 2016
Lauster said:
Nautilus said:

and Soul Sacrifice is a second party game by the way

I don't think so, not when SCEJ is the developper with Marvelous (like with FromSoftware for Bloodborne). But that's another debate ^^"

Really?wasnt Keiji Inafume team that developed it?I thought that Sony just published it.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1