I just noticed how similar both systems are. Follow my line of thought here:

The Game Boy was released in 1989 for US$90. The Game Gear came out in 1991, costing 150 dollars.

The 3DS launched in 2011 for $250, but was slashed to $170 a few months laters. The Vita, in 2012, launched for $250 (the Wifi model).

Adjusted for inflation, the Game Boy would cost today around $165, and the Game Gear about $250.

The Game Gear's hardware was vastly superior to the GB's hardware. It had color, better sound and stuff. The best-selling game was Sonic the Hedgehog 2, a handheld version of a popular home console game. The best-selling game on the Vita is Uncharted. Same situation.

Now, I can't say for sure, but it seems to me that, considering the capabilities of the system and its library, the Game Gear also was trying to offer a home console experience on a handheld. It sold around 15 million units and the GB sold nearly 120 million (Color included, but whatever). The Vita stands at nearly 6 million units, and the 3DS has almost 34 million. The GG was discontinued in 1997, a full 6 years after it's north american release. It wasn't a huge success, but it was the first time Nintendo had SOME kind of competition on the handheld arena.

And here are some quotes from wikipedia:
"And even though the Game Gear could be considered a success, its bulky frame, relative high price, constant consumption of AA batteries, and a lack of appealing games ultimately kept Sega from releasing a true successor."

"With its 8-bit processor and bright color screen, it was basically the Sega Master System in your hands."

"(t)he software was completely lacking compared to its chief rival, which was bathed in quality games. It didn't matter that the Game Gear was more powerful."

Maybe I'm full of bullshit, but the similarities are pretty impressive. You replace a few words, and you can say those EXACT SAME THINGS about the Vita.

The Vita has better battery life than the 3DS while the Game Gear took six double a batteries which would be dead within a couple hours.

because people buy dedicated gaming handhelds for battery life.

Good analogy. Hopefully the end is not the same and Vita surpass 40m at least...

i think it's more of a lynx 2 or something. great specs, bad price, no games. and the competitor, low specs, great price, lots of games.

He was comparing it to the Game Gear and I was throwing some facts out there showing how that's not correct.   

Also, didn't people bash the PSP for only having four hours of battery life compared to the DS' six?  So yeah.  I think people do care about battery life.  Or maybe it was just Nintendo fans that bashed the PSP's battery life and then when all hypocritical on everyone when the 3DS was announced to have less than four hours.

The Atari Lynx was as much as the 3DS was after the price drop, and that was way back then.  Both systems are priced well, Vita is priced better.  Both have no games if you really want to put it into perspective.  Vita has mostly multiconsole titles that you can play on another console, 3DS has mostly shovelware garbage.  Both games have around an equal amount of quality exclusives. 

in my many years in the Nintendo fandom, i have never seen a Nintendo fan use that as a point against the PSP :P

While it's a similar situation, I don't think the Vita is quite that doomed. Once the Vita gets games, the sales will follow.

The main thing i see working in the Vita's favor is it has the potential to live a much longer life than the 3DS, if Sony continue to support it for many years and it gets those damn games. That's of course assuming mobile hasn't destroyed handheld gaming by then ^^;

It sucks that the Vita isn't doing too well. It's an amazing piece of hardware and has some pretty great games on it. I'm also loving all the cross-buy and cross-play functionality it's been getting.

Once it gets more titles like Killzone:Mercenary I will be very happy.