MS vs Sony's lowest selling; Original Xbox vs PS Vita

[ArchangelMadzz]

HoangNhatAnh said:

ArchangelMadzz said:

What?

No it wouldn't have sold better because like I just said, the 2 other reasons it didn't sell well was because of bad price and bad business practices.

Making first party titles is a good thing, they did it for 2 years then stopped. They stopped because it wasn't selling well apparently, and it wasn't selling well because of bad price and bad business practices. Having bad support only gave people another reason not to buy.

I've literally just repeated myself.

I repeat too:

$250 vita is just a bait and switch, the true price for vita is definitely $300 or more. At least with Sony's original strategy, people would believe vita only cost $250 at lauch, that's why they even got a vita, and Sony could get a bit of profit. Pricing the proprietary cards so cheaply wouldn't help, the software situation for vita could still remain the same, hence the hardware sales wouldn't be much better, and yet Sony had to take a loss with every vita sold.

The design for the PS Vita is fundamentally bad business practice. Requiring the expensive proprietary cards should never have been a thing, it would've been possible to produce a vita that wasn't as overdesigned, they went with a no compromises approach, that's what screwed them, if they had made compromises on the hardware, the price would've been more attractive. A better memory management system being more consumer friendly etc all could've made more people buy it and then buy more games.

Do you believe the Vita failed simply because it existed? I'm not too sure where you stand with that?