Bentley makes a mighty fine luxury automobile that its competition can't even come close to matching, it also sells a couple orders of magnitude fewer cars than its primary competition because of how expensive it is ...

With all products and services it is important to decide who your market is and to determine whether your business model is viable before you enter into the market. In the case of a dedicated videogame systems the ideal target market is the middle 60% of potential consumers; after all, the top 20% has unrealistic demands which will (eventually) make the product unacceptable to the bottom 80%, and the bottom 20% will (likely) never be willing to spend enough to make a product that the top 80% will buy into.

With the Wii, PS2 and Nintendo DS you see a clear effort by console manufacturers to target the mass market (middle 60%) audience and this worked out very well for the console manufacturers. With the 3DS Nintendo crept forward trying to please more of the high end customers and got into trouble with the masses, and they cut the price trying to retain support from the mass market audience. Sony has pushed even further into this territory with the PS-Vita and likely can't afford to agressively price the system like Nintendo did with the 3DS ...



I'm not surprised that elitests gamers love the technology behind the PS-Vita (I think it is pretty impressive myself) but I think it may end up falling flat within the broader market primarily because it is not designed to take into consideration the needs of the broader market.

the broader market is the one that apple is eating up right now.  after playing my vita over the weekend and thinking about things I decided it is a mistake for sony to pursue the touch screen controls too far.  if the game only uses the touch screen it feels an aweful lot like an iphone game but at waay to expesive of a price.  its the games that require the anolog or d-pad or shoulder buttons that is really distinguishing itself for me as, "yes, this is more expensive but also worth it".

I think about games like brain age and I just can't imagine paying the price i did on the DS anymore.  apple ate that lunch for me. I find i'm agreeing with the camera analogy presented in the OP -- i'd never buy a point and shoot again but I just bought an SLR last year. I bought the SLR specifically because it's quality is soo much higher than my iphone.  3DS/vita games are going to have to show off that quality to justify a higher price or be priced like an iphone game...well under $10.

Which might actually be a gamble that pays off.

NDS and PSP had total userbase of over 200 milions and tragic attachment ratio or 4-5 games sold per console.

Now if Vita is succesfull among core gamers only and reaches 20-30 milions of userbase but that userbase buys 10-20 games each over the lifetime of machine with let's say 1/3 of game sales coming from digital store at twice the profit of high street sales for publisher that would be very viable market to support with games.

I think both are needed for the success.

On one hand big titles like Uncharted which offers console experience on the go but those need to be suplemented by smaller stuff like Motorstorm RC which costs few bucks and gives perfect gameplay for few minutes long sessions.

I felt the article was right on the money. In the end,people will speak with there wallets.

Lumines:  Vita: $35  iphone: Free (ad based) or $2.99.

everyone is saying this game is amazing and such but really?!?  really, really!?!?    i just don't think i can justify it on vita..

smaller stuff sure but it had better be priced like smaller stuff and apple has now set the standard on what pricing smaller stuff means.  this is the problem that vita/3DS will find moving forward.  how do they get design games and get the customer to understand that a higher price is justified.  for camera's it's easy, just but the tech specs in front of the customer.  for games were value is purely subjective...it'll be a challange.

I personally don't think it's going to fall in line with the IP itself (as i'm think you're implying).  Loco Roco is first party but the game itself doesn't distinguish itself from rolando (imo) and i really doubt i'd buy it for vita.  i bought brain age for the DS but i'd never buy it for 3Ds when brain trainer is free on iphone. 

first party games will get just as devalued imo by the cheap smartphone iterations unless the gameplay itself distinguished from what smartphones can do.  at the very least, my view of both vita and 3DS games has become quite devalued.

True story: My friend got a Vita just for Lumines. He already owns like three or four versions of it. 

I really do not want handheld gaming to end with just androids and iphones and games like angry birds. I want full fledged games on the go. That is why I bought the PSP, it had awesome games that lasted and felt like actual gaming.

Nothing against smart phone gaming, but it just isn't my cup of tea. I'm positive the PSVita will pull through. Even if it is beaten by the 3DS sales wise, It will still hold a place in my heart as the best handheld up to date.

Except that it will never work out that way ...

While they can make it more and more of a "dream machine" to these high end gamers, they probably will not see a significant increase in game sales because (while these high end gamers do buy more games) the high end gamers are more likely to own multiple systems and will be buying/playing games on those systems rather than on the PS-Vita.

Essentially, while there are people who buy 20+ games a year the vast majority of them will own multiple platforms and will be selectively playing the best games available for the PC, XBox 360, PS3, Wii, PS-Vita, iPhone and 3DS; and even though they think the PS-Vita is way better than the 3DS they still won't be buying more than 5 or 6 games a year for it. Even if they do buy more games they're far more likely to be involved in buying/selling used games than the mass-market gamer meaning that Sony doesn't see the benefit from these game sales.