As mentioned earlier, 3DS was selling more than 2X VITA is selling now at the same price point. And it took a price cut of 30% plus two major first party titles plus MH3G as well as a stream og third party titles to get it back on track.

Does Sony have the ability to cut the price for 30% and two major first party titles as strong as Mario that will be released before this Christmas?

triple post Spurge..?

triple post Spurge..?

triple post Spurge..?

One MH game can push momentum for a long time; see the 3DS and PSP releases. 

Also, Playstation Allstars could help the Vita.

PSP got a lot of software after MH that continued to ride that wave and kept hardware sales at a respectable level.  It wasn't MH alone.  And that notion that it was MH that pushed 3DS alone while ignoring the other two games of the trinity (Mario Kart 7 & Super Mario 3D Land) is short-sighted.  Playstation Allstars isn't going to do anything.  You're just wishful thinking now.

I didn't mean MH alone as in "no other games" but as in "only one MH game."

And Allstars could have an effect if it rides the success of Smash. Obviously it won't be even close to as big as Smash, but by offering a worthwhile alternative it could be successful. 

Yeah, I don't think All Stars is gonna bomb at all.  I just don't see it moving units (for either PS3 or PSV).  It's nice fan service for existing PS fans but it won't move hardware like a Smash Bros. game would. 

If it were exclusive to VITA then maybe.

*turns brain off*

Sony releasing games on both the Vita and PS3......it's almost as if......they want both experiences to compliment each other, as if.....they had cross play or something O_o like, it's targeting owners of the PS3, like maybe... that was the whole point......nahhhh Sony would never do that, they clearly want the Vita to be a 3DS, and targeting Mario lovers and fucking 4 year olds, that makes, so much more sense

*turns brain back on*

so that's what's it like, Jesus, I now understand

Why get Vita to play games on PS3 when you can just...play your games on PS3.

It's not really a great incentive, so trying to act like a smartass isn't making you look good.

Everyone knows about the "smartass" portion. (hehehe, I have to Logic56 you write heated stuff)

I think you misunderstand though. Vita can play games and media on PS3 through remote play, which is the most useful if you can set it up so you can play anywhere you have an internet connection. (great for vacations, those overseas, stuff like that)

These games though are for each system with the Vita version being cheaper than the console one ($40 as opposed to $60?) and in some cases, and I hope in most, they come free with that $60 purchase of the PS3 title. Not all titles apply, but you get what I mean, it's advantageous to have both. Handheld games have traditionally held cheaper price points than consoles, so you win out buying the handhelf version.

That's not all, cross play is essentially those playing PS3 and those playing Vita are playing the same game and can compete against eachother in online multiplayer. So essentially it won't matter what console you own PS All Stars on, you can play with your friends.

Another point since you ask why not just play games on your PS3 is that the Vita is a portable system, you can take it out of your house pretty darn easy and don't have to bring a tv. The Vita is rather amazing, quite powerful, and while it can't handle all of the PS3's dance moves the Vita  is much younger and devs are just getting used to it. As I've told other, I bought a Vita because its better than a PS3, PS3 2.0 if you will. It's a ton smaller and has a built in display. Cross game chat, better browser, more control inputs, and more apps. Unless someone is planning on tackeling a backlog of PS3 games, I'd recommend them get a Vita over a PS3 hands down.