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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Vita needs permanent $169.99 price drop. Here's why.

VGKing on 26 December 2012
the_dengle said:
VGKing said:
the_dengle said:

lol. Yes, people like me. It's funny how a little over a year ago, Vita outselling the 3DS was an inevitability, and now it's "an unrealistic feat."

Of course, it is unrealistic now. Sony doesn't have to outsell the 3DS, and that's good, because they can't. What they do need is to sell well enough to stay afloat and continue receiving software support. They're not doing that right now. In order to do that, they need a price cut and a rebranding.

And sure the PS3 didn't need saving in 2006; that's why it got a price cut in 2007, right? Also note that I never said the Vita had to outsell the 3DS. It was the OP that stated Sony needs to make drastic changes to save the Vita.

That was back when Vita and 3DS were supposed to be $250. Can you blame people for thinking Vita would outsell the 3DS? If 3DS didn't do a price cut maybe Vita would have...

You should check the second article again. It was written in October 2011, two months after the 3DS price cut. And I recall at least a few VGChartz users, even after the Vita's launch, claiming it would ultimately surpass the 3DS*. As for the bolded, that's downright preposterous. The week before the price cut (25th week in Japan), the 3DS had sold over 3.5 million units. The Vita just passed that point a couple of weeks ago, almost a full year after its release. 3DS sales still would be been in the 15-20 million range at least, and it probably would have gotten a price cut regardless when the XL launched.

*And... by golly, one of the users springing to the defense of the Vita in that thread was you!

"Think of Xbox as the PSP.
The Xbox 360 as the Vita.

Be afraid. Be very afraid."

Can't imagine what you could have meant by that if you weren't claiming the Vita would be able to contend with the 3DS. And you said that not only well after the 3DS price cut, but after the Vita had launched in all major regions. I take it you are not still so optimistic?

Apart from all that, all you have to remember is that Sony themselves expected to sell three times as many Vitas as they will this fiscal year, which would have put them at least in the vicinity of 3DS's first year sales.

From the same thread you linked to. This is my comment http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4444529

"Did we learn nothing with the PSP and DS?

The most affordable console always ends up selling the most. Nintendo would have to screw up really bad or Sony would have to have some genius marketing and tons of dev support for Vita to win this gen."



Around the Network
VGKing on 26 December 2012
Ucell said:
Attoyou said:

Vita needs/should have been a lot of things

- Should have kept this look (with a few changes) 

 

- Should be $199

- Should have stolen Dragon quest or kept monster hunter 

- Should of had Naughty Dog working on a New IP for Vita (and out around launch) 

- Should have been called PSP2.  People just think its a new psp like psp go

- Should have been able to BC psp games

- Should have come out before last xmas. 

Vita would have been a hit. 


I agree with you. Why don't they put their best developers on the Vita if they want it to succeed? This is from a hardcore PS fan.

Because they can't. All the best developers are working on PS3 games or even PS4 games now.
What Sony is doing is letting their mid-tier developers make Vita games....which hasn't worked out so far. But I heard Media Molecule is working on Tearaway? Also Guerrila on Killzone?



Wlakiz on 26 December 2012

You guys aren't taking in account of other factors.

1. Can supply keep up with the increased demand if they lowered the price?
- They can definitely sell more at a a loss but what is the point? They don't have the supply to cater to market demand at that price point. When they become overstocked (due to lack of sale), its an automated process that they will do a price cut to purge their stock even at a loss but until then, the price is fine where it is.

2. 3DS and PSVita are different enough in capability that they each cater to a different demographic market (age, gamer, income-earner). Which means, if someone buys a 3Ds, it doesn't mean they won't buy PSVita and vice Versa. So 3Ds taking a massive mobile gaming market share right now should not have an effect on the life time sale of the PSVita.

3. PSMobile - Sony is pushing their PSM platform similar to google play/IOS. Until the games/Apps numbers hit critical mass, there is no reason to damage the brand, by getting more people on board to a 'lack-of-content' platform.

Sony has stated before, their strategy for vita is to for their content to be the incentive for people to buy their vita not the price.



torok on 26 December 2012
VGKing said:

Because they can't. All the best developers are working on PS3 games or even PS4 games now.
What Sony is doing is letting their mid-tier developers make Vita games....which hasn't worked out so far. But I heard Media Molecule is working on Tearaway? Also Guerrila on Killzone?

Media Molecule is doing Tearaway. Guerrila has two teams, one working on Killzone Mercenary and the other on a new IP (or Killzone 4).



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

HappySqurriel on 26 December 2012
Wlakiz said:
You guys aren't taking in account of other factors.

1. Can supply keep up with the increased demand if they lowered the price?
- They can definitely sell more at a a loss but what is the point? They don't have the supply to cater to market demand at that price point. When they become overstocked (due to lack of sale), its an automated process that they will do a price cut to purge their stock even at a loss but until then, the price is fine where it is.

2. 3DS and PSVita are different enough in capability that they each cater to a different demographic market (age, gamer, income-earner). Which means, if someone buys a 3Ds, it doesn't mean they won't buy PSVita and vice Versa. So 3Ds taking a massive mobile gaming market share right now should not have an effect on the life time sale of the PSVita.

3. PSMobile - Sony is pushing their PSM platform similar to google play/IOS. Until the games/Apps numbers hit critical mass, there is no reason to damage the brand, by getting more people on board to a 'lack-of-content' platform.

Sony has stated before, their strategy for vita is to for their content to be the incentive for people to buy their vita not the price.

That may be their strategy but it clearly isn't working ...

If Sony had 3 or 4 years to fumble around without any negative consequences they could probably make the PS-Vita successful with this strategy, but the problem is that there are consequences to their current sales level so Sony doesn't have 3 or 4 years to execute that plan. As projects get completed for a wide variety of platforms publishers are re-allocating these teams to projects that won't be released for 2 to 3 years; and it is hard to justify supporting the PS-Vita with sales at its current level. With publishers choosing from the 3DS, PS-Vita, PS3, XBox 360, Wii U, PS4, "XBox 720", PC and mobile devices as potential platforms for future development you really don't want to be one of the few platforms people are questioning the sales of



Around the Network
the_dengle on 26 December 2012
VGKing said:
the_dengle said:
VGKing said:
the_dengle said:

lol. Yes, people like me. It's funny how a little over a year ago, Vita outselling the 3DS was an inevitability, and now it's "an unrealistic feat."

Of course, it is unrealistic now. Sony doesn't have to outsell the 3DS, and that's good, because they can't. What they do need is to sell well enough to stay afloat and continue receiving software support. They're not doing that right now. In order to do that, they need a price cut and a rebranding.

And sure the PS3 didn't need saving in 2006; that's why it got a price cut in 2007, right? Also note that I never said the Vita had to outsell the 3DS. It was the OP that stated Sony needs to make drastic changes to save the Vita.

That was back when Vita and 3DS were supposed to be $250. Can you blame people for thinking Vita would outsell the 3DS? If 3DS didn't do a price cut maybe Vita would have...

You should check the second article again. It was written in October 2011, two months after the 3DS price cut. And I recall at least a few VGChartz users, even after the Vita's launch, claiming it would ultimately surpass the 3DS*. As for the bolded, that's downright preposterous. The week before the price cut (25th week in Japan), the 3DS had sold over 3.5 million units. The Vita just passed that point a couple of weeks ago, almost a full year after its release. 3DS sales still would be been in the 15-20 million range at least, and it probably would have gotten a price cut regardless when the XL launched.

*And... by golly, one of the users springing to the defense of the Vita in that thread was you!

"Think of Xbox as the PSP.
The Xbox 360 as the Vita.

Be afraid. Be very afraid."

Can't imagine what you could have meant by that if you weren't claiming the Vita would be able to contend with the 3DS. And you said that not only well after the 3DS price cut, but after the Vita had launched in all major regions. I take it you are not still so optimistic?

Apart from all that, all you have to remember is that Sony themselves expected to sell three times as many Vitas as they will this fiscal year, which would have put them at least in the vicinity of 3DS's first year sales.

From the same thread you linked to. This is my comment http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4444529

"Did we learn nothing with the PSP and DS?

The most affordable console always ends up selling the most. Nintendo would have to screw up really bad or Sony would have to have some genius marketing and tons of dev support for Vita to win this gen."

And yet...

"I think Vita has a chance  to outsell the 3DS. Not now, not in 6 months. Let's see where Vita sales stand in 18-24 months compared to 3DS."

"The point is that if Sony could sell ~60million PS3s(and counting) with such a horrible launch and high price, an $80 difference between Vita and 3DS won't be as much of an obstacle as the high PS3 price.  Vita is affordbale despite many people asking for a price cut."

"Vita could outsell 3DS; the price isn't a huge obstacle" is a pretty big change from "the most affordable console always sells the most." And although it is only 8 months later, it is pretty clear where the situation will be in another 12. Optimistic suggestions for 2013 Vita sales are in the 6-7 million range, while pessimistic suggestions for 3DS sales are in the 13-14 million range. The sales gap by the end of next year will easily be in excess of 30 million units.

It was not my intention to turn this into a personal attack on your position. I'm just trying to show that it was SONY fans, and in fact Sony themselves, who set the expectations for Vita sales as equal to or better than the 3DS -- NOT Nintendo fans. As evidenced by the OP claiming that Sony needs to make "drastic changes" to compete with the 3DS.



VGKing on 27 December 2012
the_dengle said:
VGKing said:
the_dengle said:
VGKing said:
the_dengle said:

lol. Yes, people like me. It's funny how a little over a year ago, Vita outselling the 3DS was an inevitability, and now it's "an unrealistic feat."

Of course, it is unrealistic now. Sony doesn't have to outsell the 3DS, and that's good, because they can't. What they do need is to sell well enough to stay afloat and continue receiving software support. They're not doing that right now. In order to do that, they need a price cut and a rebranding.

And sure the PS3 didn't need saving in 2006; that's why it got a price cut in 2007, right? Also note that I never said the Vita had to outsell the 3DS. It was the OP that stated Sony needs to make drastic changes to save the Vita.

That was back when Vita and 3DS were supposed to be $250. Can you blame people for thinking Vita would outsell the 3DS? If 3DS didn't do a price cut maybe Vita would have...

You should check the second article again. It was written in October 2011, two months after the 3DS price cut. And I recall at least a few VGChartz users, even after the Vita's launch, claiming it would ultimately surpass the 3DS*. As for the bolded, that's downright preposterous. The week before the price cut (25th week in Japan), the 3DS had sold over 3.5 million units. The Vita just passed that point a couple of weeks ago, almost a full year after its release. 3DS sales still would be been in the 15-20 million range at least, and it probably would have gotten a price cut regardless when the XL launched.

*And... by golly, one of the users springing to the defense of the Vita in that thread was you!

"Think of Xbox as the PSP.
The Xbox 360 as the Vita.

Be afraid. Be very afraid."

Can't imagine what you could have meant by that if you weren't claiming the Vita would be able to contend with the 3DS. And you said that not only well after the 3DS price cut, but after the Vita had launched in all major regions. I take it you are not still so optimistic?

Apart from all that, all you have to remember is that Sony themselves expected to sell three times as many Vitas as they will this fiscal year, which would have put them at least in the vicinity of 3DS's first year sales.

From the same thread you linked to. This is my comment http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4444529

"Did we learn nothing with the PSP and DS?

The most affordable console always ends up selling the most. Nintendo would have to screw up really bad or Sony would have to have some genius marketing and tons of dev support for Vita to win this gen."

And yet...

"I think Vita has a chance  to outsell the 3DS. Not now, not in 6 months. Let's see where Vita sales stand in 18-24 months compared to 3DS."

"The point is that if Sony could sell ~60million PS3s(and counting) with such a horrible launch and high price, an $80 difference between Vita and 3DS won't be as much of an obstacle as the high PS3 price.  Vita is affordbale despite many people asking for a price cut."

"Vita could outsell 3DS; the price isn't a huge obstacle" is a pretty big change from "the most affordable console always sells the most." And although it is only 8 months later, it is pretty clear where the situation will be in another 12. Optimistic suggestions for 2013 Vita sales are in the 6-7 million range, while pessimistic suggestions for 3DS sales are in the 13-14 million range. The sales gap by the end of next year will easily be in excess of 30 million units.

It was not my intention to turn this into a personal attack on your position. I'm just trying to show that it was SONY fans, and in fact Sony themselves, who set the expectations for Vita sales as equal to or better than the 3DS -- NOT Nintendo fans. As evidenced by the OP claiming that Sony needs to make "drastic changes" to compete with the 3DS.

Look at when I posted that comment. February 28. That's like Vita launch week. Do I still think Vita can outsell 3DS? No. Things change, who could have predicted Nintendo would drop the price. Anyway I love how you left out the second part of that second comment:

"Vita will probably struggle until the holidays. After the holidays word of mouth will be really high and the install base will be high enough to satisfy 3rd party developers."

That was my prediction and it seems I was spot on, at least the first part. Holidays sales are much better than earlier in the year, but still not at healthy levels like I thought.

I take no offense in you disagreeing with me, you looking up my posts for way back in February is borderline stalking...but I'm good.

So here's my new prediction. Feel free to bookmark for next year:

Vita will continue selling poorly until it receives a price cut especially in Japan. Games are obviously a must as well. I don't expect any game to be a Killer-App next year or to single-handedly revive the Vita, but I do expect a combination of mid-tier games to really help the Vita hype once word of the price cut is in full effect. I can't predict its sales, but I can predict it won't outsell the 3DS, not that it needs it to be successful though.



BuckStud on 27 December 2012
ibrahimman0 said:
Actully ur totaly wrong ! , i wouldnt buy a console over the other for like what 80$ difference and btw 3DS XL is 200$ so 50$ difference, the reason i got 3DS not Vita is cuz 3DS has alot of good games 1st and 3rd party , but vita doesnt really have any games except few of them like P4G , Gravity Rush......

 

I have all the game systems currently out. For my mobile gaming, I use my iPad 2 the most, but use my 3DS far more than my Vita. I tend to play PSP Minis on the Vita more than my Vita games. If I want to play a long console game, I want to do it on my 60" tv. Mobile is just that, mobile. I don't want to log 50+ hours into a game that I use when I'm out. As for Gravity Rush, I really don't see why that is on the top of all Vita fans list. I've played it and it wasn't anything special.


Stop hating and start playing.

BuckStud on 27 December 2012
Wlakiz said:
You guys aren't taking in account of other factors.

1. Can supply keep up with the increased demand if they lowered the price?
- They can definitely sell more at a a loss but what is the point? They don't have the supply to cater to market demand at that price point. When they become overstocked (due to lack of sale), its an automated process that they will do a price cut to purge their stock even at a loss but until then, the price is fine where it is.

2. 3DS and PSVita are different enough in capability that they each cater to a different demographic market (age, gamer, income-earner). Which means, if someone buys a 3Ds, it doesn't mean they won't buy PSVita and vice Versa. So 3Ds taking a massive mobile gaming market share right now should not have an effect on the life time sale of the PSVita.

3. PSMobile - Sony is pushing their PSM platform similar to google play/IOS. Until the games/Apps numbers hit critical mass, there is no reason to damage the brand, by getting more people on board to a 'lack-of-content' platform.

Sony has stated before, their strategy for vita is to for their content to be the incentive for people to buy their vita not the price.

1. Sony would be more than happy to produce (and very capable of having them produced) 1m Vita's a month if they thought that they could sell them. They even projected that the first full fiscal year that they would sell 16m of them, then dropped it to 12m then again to 10m. They're going to be lucky if they sell 5m.

2. Your competition selling a similar product to yours always has an effect. Every young person who gets a 3DS for Christmas is another person helping your competition. Some of them may eventually get a Vita, but that isn't enough.

3. Sony looses money on every Vita sold but makes money on all software after cost. They can't afford to lower the price of the Vita by much, otherwise they would have already. Printer companies have sold their printers at a loss for years, then make the money back on the ink they sell. It's similar, but they were typically able to recoup their cost quickly as ink cost pennies per unit and next to nothing to develop, where as the bigger Vita titles cost many millions to develop. The low number of Vita's currently sold is very harmful to their bottom line. Anyone who believes that the Vita has been an overall money maker for Sony, truly doesn't understand business.



Stop hating and start playing.

shiackz on 27 December 2012

I would buy one if it was cheaper
I would love to play persona4 and gravity rush