Do you think Vita had nothing to show at E3?

[Ajescent]

RolStoppable said:

Ajescent said:

Compare Nintendo's treatment of the Wii about the last 1/3 of its life and MS' treatment of the 360 in the last 3-4 years to Sony's treatment of the Vita, I'd the Vita fairs better.

Let's look at it another way, are we not allowed to blame consumers if they rush out enmass to buy a game/product we all know to be technically and critically bad. Whose fault is that?

I'd say 2011/12 for the Wii were comparable to Vita's lifespan so far and if I had to pick a side, I'd take the Wii; the alarming difference is that the Wii was nearing the end of its life (admittedly, greatly accelerated by Nintendo) while the Vita was the new kid on the block. Microsoft's treatment of the 360 in the last 3-4 years was obviously better, because this includes games like Halo 4, Gears of War 3 and Forza 4. It's not like Microsoft could get distracted by another system, because they only had the 360 to take care of.

As for your question, let me answer it with another question. In the case of a fraud, who do you blame: The person who set it up or the person who bought into it?

So if a million+ people fall for a trap, we are not allowed to blame them for some of it? I agree that majority of the blame lies with the fraudster but the victim still needs to own up to some responsibility especially when there have been so many before hand.

But I still stand by my arguement, Sony and developers can only do so much, consumers need to pick up some of the slack themselves.