torok said:
The abandon of first party games was just a side-effect of abysmal sales. They did tried until Tearaway and KZ, and that was more than 2 years after launch. While these factors did impact it, the handheld market is just a shell of the former days. If 3DS had performed admirably, we could say that was just a problem with Vita, but it isn't even on 60M and will hardly do 70M. The full handheld market this gen is at less than 80M while last gen it was at 240M. It's a stark fall to simply ignore. Hell, GBA had only 3 years on the market before being prematurely killed by the DS and it still manages to outsell both handhelds this gen combined. Even Nintendo seems to realize it now that they are inded launching mobile games and are combining their handhelds with their home consoles to create a platform that does both things. The impact cell phones have is too big. It's not like the console vs PC fight, because to have a gaming PC you have to: - Have a desktop, everybody has laptops. Unless they build one just to game. - Buy hardware that you don't have: GPUs, etc. - Reserve a good space on your house to host a massive PC. The handheld vs smartphone fight is different. Because most phone games run well on mid-end devices and everyone already have a cell phone. Unlike a PC, where you either have to buy an entire desktop or simply upgrade it with parts that cost as much as an entire console. The space thing is reversed: with a handheld, you have to walk around with it plus your phone. Why not game on it? Of course, the games are simpler, but you just want something to kill time for some minutes. The time where you want a more substantial gaming experience, is when you are at home. So you go for your PS4, X1 or PC. I actually do prefer handhelds, but I understand why people would rather just game on their phones. You even have nice options for hardcore gamers such as Xcom, multipe GTAs and emulators. Get a controller for your phone and you're good to go. |
twintail said:
the hyperbole is strong.
Anyhow ignoring the reality of the handheld climate when the Vita launches is ignorant in itself. The vita had quite a few issues that ultimately was it's undoing. but the vita did launch to late and the market had already begun changing. It affected Nintendo too but less so for a variety of reasons. |
Before I begin, i never said that the mobile market had anything with it.It HAS eaten a portion of the handheld market, and anybody who says otherwise is just fooling themselves.But if you say that is the only reason the vita failed is simply wrong.
The Vita was plagued by a mirriad of mistakes.Expensive memory cards, lack of support after 1 year, expensive launch price, lack of good third party(more mainstream and compared to the 3DS), and many more smaller reasons.The point I am trying to make is that the shrinking of the market alone didnt make the Vita fail this bad.I mean, look at the 3DS.It didnt perform like the DS or the original Gameboy, but it is very likely that it will end selling over 70 millions(It already passed the 60 million mark according to Nintendo, and that was more than 2 months ago.VGchartz numbers are wrong), landing somewhere near what the GBA has done.And with that number, it will have been a successful console.Now, is it wise to launch another handheld console?Most likely not, since the smartphone market probably grew even larger and ate a bigger share of the handheld market, but by the time the Vita launched, it could have been more successful, if the right choices were made.I mean, its not PSP-successful, but I would argue that it could have reached the 30-40 million mark.Maybe even more, who knows.
I understand if he listed that reason as one of the reasons the Vita failed, but as the sole one?They are just trying to push the blame to others, when part of the blame is on them.
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
