| joeorc said: you don't think games are a first priority for the PSVita? |
I just don't think the Vita is a priority for Sony, period, and I don't know why they even launched it in the first place. But yeah, I think they have especially taken their eyes off the ball when it comes to games. All they had to do was line up substantial software support from day one, and the rest would have taken care of itself. They even let Monster Hunter - the game that basically single-handedly saved the PSP - slip away from them. Now it's stuck in one of those feedback loops where nobody will make games for it because nobody else is making games for it, and the Vita is dead because everyone thinks it is dead.
A lot of your arguments give me the impression that you think it's somehow ridiculous to expect a platform holder to make games for its own system. It isn't. Sony blew something in the neighborhood of $100 million for marketing the Vita in America, and that ad campaign was almost completely invisible. Considering how massively ineffective it was they would have done better to throw that money at publishers to get them to make Vita games that could shift hardware.
The Vita doesn't make a good comparison to the PS3 because the PS3 was always going to get good software support. It was similar enough in capabilities to the 360 that it could always piggyback off of it in a way that the Vita can't piggyback off of any other system. More importantly, after the PS1 and PS2 all the third parties were banking on the PS3 to be a successful product. When it flopped they were all too invested in it to drop it and had to follow through with their planned support, so it became a success anyway. It's the flipside of how the Wii was written off by all third parties before launch and when it became such a runaway success no one was positioned to take advantage of it.
