What games do you have on 3DS that are NOT from a console Series?

[forevercloud3000]

Nem said:

forevercloud3000 said:

miz1q2w3e said:

forevercloud3000 said:

miz1q2w3e said:
So 3DS sells > Vita, even though Vita = 3DS. A shame, but what can you do?

Yup. Nintendo just has a long history of owning the entire handheld market, it was never going to change over night. There mindshare with games like Mario is just too strong. Sony, after heavily relying on 3rd parties for too long, is now creating the 1st party franchises they should have years ago and their popularity has to be given a chance to grow in multiple venues.

The fact the Vita is significantly more costly doesn't help the situation either. Or at least the consumer is still conditioned to THINK it costs much more. Sony needs to teach them that its really not, but god knows their marketing departement is ran by monkeys.

Except this time things are much worse than their last attept, i.e. PSP. They're literally making negative progress.

I honestly believe the one and only reason why the Vita is not doing as well as the PSP is because NIN dropped price and Sony stubbornly refused to follow suite, at least as soon as they did. When Nintendo slashed price they set precedent that demands all others follow suite. No one wants to be a 3DS early adopter with the Vita. What I mean by that I think many are holding out (more so than normally) because they are afraid the second they get it it will drop in price, and they will feel shafted. I know I would too. Everyone knows they have to do so in order to compete with 3DS now so many find it unnessessary to buy it now, knowing it will cheaper just a few months from now.

What an incredible tale. Again, you are ignoring what consumers dictate. Its simpler than that. Sony cant afford to lose money on it, cause they are buried in debt with problems to finance themselves.

Nintendo did what needed to be done to save their product and flip it into a sucess. It wasnt nintendo that wanted to do it, it was the consumers that dictated it. You can only blame Sony for not beeing able to predict it after what happened to the 3DS.

I am not trying to spin this into whether they were right or wrong to do so, it was their choice as a company.  You say it like not doing so would have put Nintendo in Sony level financial jeopordy. They were/are completely stable and could have toughed through the low sales for a year.3DS at its original price was pure Apple level profit. During that time there was much back talk that at the same price point Nintendo looked meek next to the Vita. After a few months of baring the torment and low sales they caved in. They didn't want to possibly be seen as  on even ground with Vita. They COULD have stayed their ground, it wasn't like they were losing money. If they kept the course they could have squeezed more of that hi sell value out of consumers before dropping. At least that way the consumers wouldn't feel they can just cold shoulder a system in the future just so they can get the price point they want(which in the future might not be a feasible choice) hence the reason it could be seen as detrimental.

Nevertheless it was pure bad news for Sony upon release. Sony is opting to stick to their ground for the very reason I described. At this point its too late for them to keep tight lipped as Nintendo already set that standard that they have to if they don't want to fall too far behind. Regardless, Sony is making profit on all games and systems sold, which is all they care about right now. We will just have to see how this all pans out for Sony in the end.