Zackasaurus-rex said:
Regarding the last statement, this just tells us that you are uninformed on the subject. While VGC's consistently troubled tracking of physical sales tells one imperfect story, it completely neglects the digital side, and digital sales make up a higher percentage of Vita sales than they do on any other console/handheld. Devs have spoken out about the high attach ratio, indicating that it was over ten games per system owners many months back. That's actually pretty incredible. It makes sense, though. The Vita has an extremely core demographic, meaning that people who don't consume a lot of games aren't likely to buy a Vita. Meanwhile, the Vitas has more than a strong enough library to keep that core buying.
Regarding the first thing, you're making a fallacy. A launch doesn't define a platform's library (though the titles I mentioned go way, way beyond launch), but it does indicate early success. What we learnt from the Vita is that excellent games from new IPs and popular old IPs alike were not driving sales. The games were not the problem (though certainly we can endlessly posit that more games at least constantly help to some degree), because the system was not selling particularly well even when it was releasing quality, high-profile games much more than the 3DS was. Blaming a fancied lack of games is to not understand that the system and its positioning are the real problems. The Vita gets less high-profile exclusives now than it used to get because the system itself did not sell well enough when it already had the games. This is a bit of a chicken-and-egg scenario, and you're getting it wrong.
|
It's not very hard to get a high tie ratio when you have a samll userbase ...
So your still telling me that games weren't the problem ?
