He was'nt talking trash,he was just saying he's sure it'll be a great product,but he's not completly sold and has some questions about it. He was doing this while talking up the PS Vita. This was nothing more then PR speak,in which all companies do the same thing.

This is possibly the most ignorant post I've read.

Well they said themselves it's not like they are trying to be best at online so I do expect an inferior online experience.  The lackluster launch of the 3DS and it's online features only point torwards the same portrait.  Let's face it Nintendo doesn't value the online the same way Sony and M$ do.  The online communities are a very large portion of the HD console experience.  I don't expect people to abandon those communities for a small lackluster one when they can play the same games on a system they already own and are already a member of a online community.  

Based off what they have shown so far I don't see why anyone would be interested in Nintendo's Wii U games.  The best one they announced hasn't even started  production. For them to be targeting this demographic they don't seem to be doing it all that well.  

if this was last yr i wouldn't have minded all the info but that while informative was information overload.

thanks and i think we both can agree its not important enough for Sony to focus resources to implement the 2 devices on that level, but also that doesn't mean they won't, but it does seem like they want the 2 products to work together while still maintaining there innovative deferences.

If this sort of thing does get enabled on PS3 with Vita, we can't expect games to have Uncharted 3 like graphics at the same time the PS3 is rendering geometry for the Vita screen as well.That's kind of where I think it would be beneficial for the PS3 to just send executable code to the Vita, rather than just video, or a hybrid of both.

There's no reason the PS3 can't load an inventory screen and the like onto the vita and have it execute that code itself. Where I think Vita can be much more useful is where it would actually download a client app that's meant to interact with the PS3 title.

Vita has bluetooth, so it can act as a controller for the PS3. So think of the demo they showed with Zelda where you use the touchscreen for item selection or a map? That sort of thing should be easily doable with no lag. While that may not open nearly as many 'new' gaming experiences, it would be a very welcome addition to those that have a Vita ... and would be quite easy to develop at little expense.

Playing a full game the way Wii U does it won't be done on Vita. Take that new Dragons Crown game for instance. You own PS3 version and Vita version. You play on PS3, save, transfer to Vita, load up game on Vita, and pick up where you left off.

Theres no lag that way since the game itself is running on the Vita. Think of it like a glorified version of Kojimas Transfaring idea for PS3 -> PSP.

That said, its not exactly what Wii U is doing since that only requires one game copy. Its also more time consuming unless they use cloud saves. And its more expensive since youll need both game copies unless they start doing cheap pack ins.

Wii U's method of streaming is also better. The Vita receives streaming data from the PS3 over 802.11g it will first need to be processed and converted to whatever your display understands and be fed to the display in the fashion. The display will then use its own processor that decodes the signal.

If the WiiU is using something similar to wireless HDMI, the conversion to whatever your display needs/understands is done by the console and streamed directly, alongside the signal to your TV, to controller screen (which decodes the signal). So in essence WiiU is doing away with that one extra step that needs to be done on the PS3/Vita combination.

There are 2 kinds of "streaming" we are talking about here.

1 . The network/IP kind, you do over your network, ala Netflix. That's handled by your router, that's local internet traffic.

2. A proprietary wireless RF video-mirroring solution. This is what Nintendo is using, some kind of UWB thing - this does not run on your network. It's like a cordless phone base, it's its own thing, and won't impact the traffic on your local network.

The only real issue is potential interference but I imagine they have that sorted with frequencies and channel hopping.

The Wii U method is #2, it is going to be extremely solid and not prone to dropping out, in all likelihood. Sony would have to employ method #1 for video streaming, which they do NOT need to do to support 2-screen gaming. The PS3 game on disc would come with a little Vita app that would install once and handle very light communication via WiFi or BT, obviating the need for compressing and throwing around a big laggy video stream.

Play4Fun was right and is better than you in every way.

Call it what you chose. It's not my fault people are too blind to see that Nintendo is alienating both segments of the consumers they claim to be courting by catering to developers.

Woa! How funny.

There is a thread for developers talking about the possibilities and praising the idea about Wii U, and nobody comments. But then the competition comes and said the words that obviously the competitor always said, and the thread is full of comments (in a flame war).

More funny is how not only this developer, but also most on this thread knows that PS3 and Vita can do exactly what Wii U can; and the developers with dev kits don't have the final one. You people and the developer must have the console. You are lucky.

Hmmm. joined immediately after Play4Fun AND his alt was banned and you say that.

..... obvious alt is obvious

I doesn't matter whether a feature can be "mimicked", it only matters whether a feature will be taken advantage of at a high enough quality often enough to have an impact on sales; and anyone who believes this is the case with the PS Vita/PS3 connectivity is simply being delusional. After all, over 5 years ago Sony talked about how the PSP and PS3 could interact and yet almost no games were released that took advantage of those features; why would we expect PS Vita/PS3 connectivity to be taken advantage of when PSP/PS3 connectivity never was?

I miss-read your statement as Sony releasing controller with a screen that was standard, rather than Sony releasing a System with a standard controler that has a screen.

That is a different beast altogether. Part of the reason we had multiple viable systems in the current generation unlike previous generations is because the market became asymetric, which resulted in more customers and more multi-system owners. If the market becomes more symetric as Sony "copies" Nintendo it is likely going to result in lower overall system sales, and this could disproportionately impact one manufacturer. Given that there was a significant advantage to a market leader when they launched before their competition regardless of whether their competition had more processing power, features or launched at a lower price I would think that Sony would be the net-loser if they decided to "copy" Nintendo.