By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - When will the Vita get THE game.

bananaking21 on 24 June 2012
SunofKratos said:
Funny at the people who said that a Gran Turismo, Uncharted and God of War game would not push sales.

When a niche game like Gravity Rush push vitas why should a God of War Game not push hardware?
Gran Turismo 5 sold over 7,7 M, Uncharted 2 sold over 6 M and God of War 3 sold over 5 M and now there are people who think those games would sell systems. Sure they havent the selling power like a Mario Game but combined they have a huge fanbase. And the reason i bought a PS3 are Gran Turismo and God of War 3.

And the reason i bought a vita were Uncharted Golden Abyss and Gravity Rush. So we can easily say that Uncharted moved vitas. This was the only reason why most people get a vita at the beginning. If Uncharted wouldnt be a launch title i haved buyed the vita some monts later.

And Soul Sacrifice has the potential to become really big. Even a monster hunter game has need time to become big. Bundling, good advertising, good reviews can make this game the monster hunter for the vita.


i completely agree with you, even though gravity rush did manage to push hardware up it still didnt do much, 22% in europe and usa. but still its a start, also this is a new IP with no where near the hype of a god of war or gran turismo tittle would have. they would literally make sales explode. people dont seem to understand just how big these tittles are. also uncharted GA has a 25% attatch rate and thats not counting digital sales, it would be stupid to think that a game with an attatch rate that high didnt sell systems. littlebigplanet is coming soon and it looks like to be a great game, if it gets decent reviews i think both it and gravity rush can pull vita out of its slump for a while. maybe its just me but i do think the vita has some good system sellers coming in its way. littlebigplanet, soul sacfirice, CoD, assassins creed, playstation all starts battle royal and littlebigplanet karting.



Around the Network
NobleTeam360 on 24 June 2012

Final Fantasy type o or whatever its called now.



Dodece on 24 June 2012
Khuutra said:
Dodece said:
Everyone is making the same mistake in their thinking that Sony is making. Which is why Sony doesn't have the game it really needs in the pipeline. The platform needs to differentiate, and it needs to really exploit its advantages. That means Sony should be looking towards non linear expansive gaming experiences. If you are to spend four hundred or so dollars on the Vita, Card, and a game. That games need to have serious staying power, and they need to be of a quality that cannot be found anywhere outside of consoles.

I suppose what I am saying is the game the Vita needs are titles in the Elder Scrolls series, Fallout series, or Mass Effect series. Those are experiences your not finding on other portable devices, and their shear size, and quantity of content give them a severely long play life. Anything large open world would be very attractive in the market. I really think that is where Sony should be placing serious emphasis. Get the games on the platform that others are not able to match when it comes to scope.

Sounds like a good strategy for a console game killer app.

Sounds like a terrible strategy for a portable game killer app.

The Vita needs portable-specific games that appeal to huge segments of the market, not experiences which are demonstrably better in every way that counts on consoles. Positioning the Vita as a console stand-in will only lead to ruin.

The problem is that everyone does exactly what you suggest. You have Nintendo, Laptops, Smart Phones, and Tablets all offering the same experience. What we have now is a glutted market that also happens to be a buyers market. Since everyone is giving about the same experience the one with the better priceing, or the one that serves as multiple devices will have the decided advantage. Unless the Vita can distinguish itself by pushing some envelope the others are not able to do, or cannot do effectively.

The way I see things is Sony can have a particular game, but the competition can sometimes have three or four answers to that game. What Sony needs are games the competition cannot answer, and have a long enough play life to offset the costs. What Sony needs is games that equal out to three or four games on any of the other platforms. I am not saying they dump the candy, but they need to offer up more of a main course.

For the price Sony is charging the Vita does need to be more like a console then your typical portable. If someone on the go is going to fork out that kind of hard cash. They are going to expect a premiere experience to be available. One typical game is not going to offset the price differential. Unless that game is so huge in its approach that it can offer up a solid hundred hours. Hell Sony needs games that big to offset the library size differential.



http://live.xbox.com/member/Dodece

Khuutra on 24 June 2012
Dodece said:
Khuutra said:

Sounds like a good strategy for a console game killer app.

Sounds like a terrible strategy for a portable game killer app.

The Vita needs portable-specific games that appeal to huge segments of the market, not experiences which are demonstrably better in every way that counts on consoles. Positioning the Vita as a console stand-in will only lead to ruin.

The problem is that everyone does exactly what you suggest. You have Nintendo, Laptops, Smart Phones, and Tablets all offering the same experience. What we have now is a glutted market that also happens to be a buyers market. Since everyone is giving about the same experience the one with the better priceing, or the one that serves as multiple devices will have the decided advantage. Unless the Vita can distinguish itself by pushing some envelope the others are not able to do, or cannot do effectively.

The way I see things is Sony can have a particular game, but the competition can sometimes have three or four answers to that game. What Sony needs are games the competition cannot answer, and have a long enough play life to offset the costs. What Sony needs is games that equal out to three or four games on any of the other platforms. I am not saying they dump the candy, but they need to offer up more of a main course.

For the price Sony is charging the Vita does need to be more like a console then your typical portable. If someone on the go is going to fork out that kind of hard cash. They are going to expect a premiere experience to be available. One typical game is not going to offset the price differential. Unless that game is so huge in its approach that it can offer up a solid hundred hours. Hell Sony needs games that big to offset the library size differential.


This is a sound idea except that portable games must be portable. The most successful portable games are always games where significant progress can be made in the space of minutes, even if they're many, many hours long (Pokemon being the best example of this). The only portable phenomenon I can think of off-hand that didn't meet this criteria was Monster Hunter, and it benefited from ad hoc local multiplayer functionality, which is still an intrinsically portable feature in this day and age.

The PSP was positioned as a console replacement at the start of its life in the West. It didn't help then, and I have trouble believing it will help now.



teigaga on 24 June 2012

For the west-
- Final famtasy Type 0 (if it ever gets released)
- GTA portable ( cell shaded like the GTA4 loading screens ^_^)
- Morrowind Port (wishdull thinking but it would the only game of its kind on a handheld and there are tons of skyrim fans who i think would want to pick this up)
- Little Big Planet
- FF5 (more likely to appear on 3DS)


Japan-
- Final Fantasy Type 0 re-release
- Final Fantasy X HD
- Kingdom hearts HD collection which was rumoured before E3, mayb revealed at TGS.
- Soul Sacrifice
- Big Anime game (one peice, gundam, naruto etc)
- Grand Turismo
- FF 5 remake
- Monster Hunter

No game alone will sustain high sales but a good selection of them within 2/3 months will give the system a enough momentum to change peoples perception of it. For this reason it baffles me that sony put money into Resistance and the upcoming Killzone game, the budget of both games should have been put into getting the games that matter to appear on the Vita.



Around the Network
teigaga on 24 June 2012
SunofKratos said:
Funny at the people who said that a Gran Turismo, Uncharted and God of War game would not push sales.

When a niche game like Gravity Rush push vitas why should a God of War Game not push hardware?
Gran Turismo 5 sold over 7,7 M, Uncharted 2 sold over 6 M and God of War 3 sold over 5 M and now there are people who think those games would sell systems. Sure they havent the selling power like a Mario Game but combined they have a huge fanbase. And the reason i bought a PS3 are Gran Turismo and God of War 3.

And the reason i bought a vita were Uncharted Golden Abyss and Gravity Rush. So we can easily say that Uncharted moved vitas. This was the only reason why most people get a vita at the beginning. If Uncharted wouldnt be a launch title i haved buyed the vita some monts later.

And Soul Sacrifice has the potential to become really big. Even a monster hunter game has need time to become big. Bundling, good advertising, good reviews can make this game the monster hunter for the vita.

Uncharted Golden Abyss is essentially uncharted before it became great. I thinks its important that the games which are brought to the system stand on their own and not through the franchise name. For me at least Uncharted  GA lacks the key features that made me love the series such as the brillaint writing and cinematic set peices and large scale campaign. A game like GT can be put on the Vita easily without sacrifice, it doesn't require the same team who make the console version whereas a franhcise like uncharted does (writers, directors).



teigaga on 24 June 2012
Khuutra said:
Dodece said:
Khuutra said:

Sounds like a good strategy for a console game killer app.

Sounds like a terrible strategy for a portable game killer app.

The Vita needs portable-specific games that appeal to huge segments of the market, not experiences which are demonstrably better in every way that counts on consoles. Positioning the Vita as a console stand-in will only lead to ruin.

The problem is that everyone does exactly what you suggest. You have Nintendo, Laptops, Smart Phones, and Tablets all offering the same experience. What we have now is a glutted market that also happens to be a buyers market. Since everyone is giving about the same experience the one with the better priceing, or the one that serves as multiple devices will have the decided advantage. Unless the Vita can distinguish itself by pushing some envelope the others are not able to do, or cannot do effectively.

The way I see things is Sony can have a particular game, but the competition can sometimes have three or four answers to that game. What Sony needs are games the competition cannot answer, and have a long enough play life to offset the costs. What Sony needs is games that equal out to three or four games on any of the other platforms. I am not saying they dump the candy, but they need to offer up more of a main course.

For the price Sony is charging the Vita does need to be more like a console then your typical portable. If someone on the go is going to fork out that kind of hard cash. They are going to expect a premiere experience to be available. One typical game is not going to offset the price differential. Unless that game is so huge in its approach that it can offer up a solid hundred hours. Hell Sony needs games that big to offset the library size differential.


This is a sound idea except that portable games must be portable. The most successful portable games are always games where significant progress can be made in the space of minutes, even if they're many, many hours long (Pokemon being the best example of this). The only portable phenomenon I can think of off-hand that didn't meet this criteria was Monster Hunter, and it benefited from ad hoc local multiplayer functionality, which is still an intrinsically portable feature in this day and age.

The PSP was positioned as a console replacement at the start of its life in the West. It didn't help then, and I have trouble believing it will help now.

Everyone tends to support this arguemnt but I actuall question it. Look at the best selling games across the 3DS/DS, the most important factor is not how "portable" they are but how much casual appeal they have and the only  games selling big numbers on the 3DS are selling the same amount on the wii (mario kart, zelda, mario 64). The psp was a big success and has sold more copies then both X360 and ps3, its couldn't match rhe DS's sleas becaus it appealed to a smaller demographics. The DS outold it not because its games were more "portable" but because its key games reached out to broader dempgraphics with incredible marketing campaigns;  Nintendogs, Brain training, Animal Crossing and Professior Layton.

Also most games can be enjoyed in short spurts (RPG's tend to be the exception), but I think success is more a case of attractive marketing and appealing to the mases. I actually doubt that majority of portable gaming in the west is done on public commute as opposed to in the living room, in the garden and in ones bed or car. This is just based off my own experience, Even at the hight of its success, i rarely saw anyone in public with a DS. And I know that when I bought one, the big selling point was actually being able to play games confortably anywhere and not having to segregate myself in my room in front of my TV. I've rarely ever played any of my handheld systems on public transport ( I find it uncomfortable and would rather just listen to music) but I have on long car and coach jouneys.

Anyway its 2012 and i think its pointless trying to focus on a audience who only want a 5min distraction on their way to work, Smartphones now dominate that market and there is no way to compete with them.

Bringing a strong selection of big titles is what Sony needs to focus on. It will secure them 40-50m unit sales of the PSVita in the next 5 years.



Khuutra on 24 June 2012
teigaga said:
Khuutra said:


This is a sound idea except that portable games must be portable. The most successful portable games are always games where significant progress can be made in the space of minutes, even if they're many, many hours long (Pokemon being the best example of this). The only portable phenomenon I can think of off-hand that didn't meet this criteria was Monster Hunter, and it benefited from ad hoc local multiplayer functionality, which is still an intrinsically portable feature in this day and age.

The PSP was positioned as a console replacement at the start of its life in the West. It didn't help then, and I have trouble believing it will help now.

Everyone tends to support this arguemnt but I actuall question it. Look at the best selling games across the 3DS/DS, the most important factor is not how "portable" they are but how much casual appeal they have and the only  games selling big numbers on the 3DS are selling the same amount on the wii (mario kart, zelda, mario 64). The psp was a big success and has sold more copies then both X360 and ps3, its couldn't match rhe DS's sleas becaus it appealed to a smaller demographics. The DS outold it not because its games were more "portable" but because its key games reached out to broader dempgraphics with incredible marketing campaigns;  Nintendogs, Brain training, Animal Crossing and Professior Layton.

Also most games can be enjoyed in short spurts (RPG's tend to be the exception), but I think success is more a case of attractive marketing and appealing to the mases. I actually doubt that majority of portable gaming in the west is done on public commute as opposed to in the living room, in the garden and in ones bed or car. This is just based off my own experience, Even at the hight of its success, i rarely saw anyone in public with a DS. And I know that when I bought one, the big selling point was actually being able to play games confortably anywhere and not having to segregate myself in my room in front of my TV. I've rarely ever played any of my handheld systems on public transport ( I find it uncomfortable and would rather just listen to music) but I have on long car and coach jouneys.

Anyway its 2012 and i think its pointless trying to focus on a audience who only want a 5min distraction on their way to work, Smartphones now dominate that market and there is no way to compete with them.

Bringing a strong selection of big titles is what Sony needs to focus on. It will secure them 40-50m unit sales of the PSVita in the next 5 years.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to acknowledge an argument that hinges on the idea that Mario Kart and 3D Mario are "casual" properties



teigaga on 24 June 2012
Khuutra said:
teigaga said:
Khuutra said:


This is a sound idea except that portable games must be portable. The most successful portable games are always games where significant progress can be made in the space of minutes, even if they're many, many hours long (Pokemon being the best example of this). The only portable phenomenon I can think of off-hand that didn't meet this criteria was Monster Hunter, and it benefited from ad hoc local multiplayer functionality, which is still an intrinsically portable feature in this day and age.

The PSP was positioned as a console replacement at the start of its life in the West. It didn't help then, and I have trouble believing it will help now.

Everyone tends to support this arguemnt but I actuall question it. Look at the best selling games across the 3DS/DS, the most important factor is not how "portable" they are but how much casual appeal they have and the only  games selling big numbers on the 3DS are selling the same amount on the wii (mario kart, zelda, mario 64). The psp was a big success and has sold more copies then both X360 and ps3, its couldn't match rhe DS's sleas becaus it appealed to a smaller demographics. The DS outold it not because its games were more "portable" but because its key games reached out to broader dempgraphics with incredible marketing campaigns;  Nintendogs, Brain training, Animal Crossing and Professior Layton.

Also most games can be enjoyed in short spurts (RPG's tend to be the exception), but I think success is more a case of attractive marketing and appealing to the mases. I actually doubt that majority of portable gaming in the west is done on public commute as opposed to in the living room, in the garden and in ones bed or car. This is just based off my own experience, Even at the hight of its success, i rarely saw anyone in public with a DS. And I know that when I bought one, the big selling point was actually being able to play games confortably anywhere and not having to segregate myself in my room in front of my TV. I've rarely ever played any of my handheld systems on public transport ( I find it uncomfortable and would rather just listen to music) but I have on long car and coach jouneys.

Anyway its 2012 and i think its pointless trying to focus on a audience who only want a 5min distraction on their way to work, Smartphones now dominate that market and there is no way to compete with them.

Bringing a strong selection of big titles is what Sony needs to focus on. It will secure them 40-50m unit sales of the PSVita in the next 5 years.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to acknowledge an argument that hinges on the idea that Mario Kart and 3D Mario are "casual" properties

Casual in their appeal, they appeal to casual gamers. This is a fact! Don't assume it to be an insult.



Khuutra on 24 June 2012
teigaga said:
Khuutra said:

It is difficult, if not impossible, to acknowledge an argument that hinges on the idea that Mario Kart and 3D Mario are "casual" properties

Casual in their appeal, they appeal to casual gamers. This is a fact! Don't assume it to be an insult.

Except that they also appeal to people who play them in a hardcore way. I just finished beating Special 8-Crown in SM3DLand yesterday - ended up beating it three times. It is a very difficult achievement in the context of 3D platforming games.

What you are describing isn't a "casual" design philosophy but a portable one. Games that can be picked up, enjoyed for a few minutes, and then set back down are intrinsically portable experiences. There is nothing necessarily casual about that.