Lol damage control brought to you by Sony

LOL, yeah, you need to buy two consoles to do what the other can do alone. *clap clap*

The idea is that PS3 owners only need to buy a Vita instead of a Wii U to have the same experience. It's cheaper and "the same." (Not really the same for a number of functional reasons, but that's what Sony is trying to get at).

I can do it yet it doesn't do it

If ps3 and vita can do what wii U is doing with COD, like instead of split-screen one person have the tv and the other have the vita way doesn't Sony do it, right now Sony is a bark and no bite.

I don't understand if sony can do quite easily, I had ps3 can I play uncharted series in vita? if so, I'm gonna buy Vita this morning.

SO, lets see the games you've got making primary use of a vita like a gamepad...


ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND there's none.

What Sony is saying is obviously insane. But from a tech stand put? Not really crazy, they have had that remote play function for some time, and i imagine that the Vita does expand on that, now will Sony actually do something with it and put it into practice??? I doubt it

I thought that Nintendo's recent WiiU conference would have put an end to these claims.  The Vita is a handheld game system; obviously it's a much more capable device than a WiiU controller by itself.  However, Sony claiming that PS3/Vita can do what WiiU can do quite easily?  Hmmm...

Can PS3/Vita cross controller play display Little Big Planet 2's full screen PS3 graphics on both the TV and the Vita simultaneously?  Nope.

Can Battle Royale run on both the TV and the Vita with only one copy of the game?  Nope.

Now, can WiiU display COD: BO2, Nintendoland, and Rayman full screen on both the TV and the controller simultaneously and run with one copy of the game?  Check!

Conclusion:  If PS3/Vita functionality can replicate this, Sony sure hasn't proven it yet.

There's probably around 35-40 million Wii consoles with motion plus, if not more.

Win.