Rumours of metal gear solid crossbuy might be what psvita needs. The problem with vita is android and IOS, not the 3ds. Moga, project shield might kill psvita.

In the UK the RRP launch price of the Vita was the equivalent of $370 for the Wi-Fi and $450 for the 3G without a game or memory card.

Importing you still have to pay the VAT + postage etc so work out about the same.

I am somewhat dismayed by the fact that nobody found fault with my logic or presented a rebuttal to my premise. If I were a proponent of this platform I would be seriously alarmed. Posters on these forums have routinely sighted a price cut as the panacea that will cure the ailing Vita, and I just seriously questioned the medical effectiveness of this cure, and all I am still getting is what amounts to the Placebo effect. Worse yet I got a lot of responses along the lines of the patient isn't terminal.

Look I know install bases don't come up in conversation in these forums much anymore. Which probably has a lot to do with the fact that the older platforms actually reached critical mass ages ago, but when a platform hasn't reached that threshold it is incredibly relevant. With few exceptions the best any game on a platform can expect is a sell through of twenty percent, and it is usually in the single digits for most games. So unless a platform garners a install base that is large enough. It will in fact become cost prohibitive to develop for.

The Vita doesn't seem to have a option to just limp along for one, two, or even three more years. Probably sooner rather then later third party developers are going to throw in the towel when it comes to this platform, and move their efforts to more verdant pastures. Chances are that a number of smaller developers have already aborted the idea of developing for this platform already.

I just want someone to explain to me how a price cut can overcome the obstacles that this year is going to present. There was some validity to the argument last year, but now it seems to be without any merit. A serious price cut would put the Vita one step closer to getting over the hump, but the increased competition is going to push it two steps back. At a time when the Vita needs to sprint to get enough users to ensure third party support.

The closest anybody seems to have gotten is to put forth a combo strategy, and that frankly takes a greater leap of faith then placing the emphasis on price cuts alone. If Sony hasn't gotten the price to where it needs to be on the portable, and its accessories this long after launch. Why should anyone have faith that Sony is going to have what it takes to get the right first party titles on the platform. Let alone get third parties to bring their crown jewels to the platform. It isn't just hard to see happening. There is actually evidence to the contrary. Sony let Nihilistic handle Call of Duty, and their own major franchise Resistance. I hate to say it, but that studio has a track record for mediocrity at best. Just go look up the meta ratings for their previous games.

At least try to address the main problem before you throw the kitchen sink at the thing. A price cut is fundamentally the simplest thing Sony can do, and everything else is much harder. So we kind of need proof that Sony can crawl before it can run a full length marathon. The price cut kind of has to work on its own. Before a combo strategy should even be considered. A price cut is what gives you the momentum, and if I am right in that there isn't any momentum to be had out of it. Then you kind of have to prove me wrong.

The problem with the Vita, and Sony hardware in general, that without 3rd party support, the product is not really that attractive. In the case of the PS3, it's much better and Sony were able to address that problem (even with the decline of the GT series). However, Sony haven't really produced a worthy handheld game that can push hardware, and unfortunately, it doesn't seem that will change.

The 3DS on the other hand was able to push itself out of its slump with big titles, and it still has its trump card yet to be released (Pokemon). It has loads of other options as well with titles like MH, Pokemon, DQ, Mario spinoffs, Zelda, and other first party IP.

I'm just gonna look at the PSP's biggest games:
GTA LS: 7.45 mil
MHF:U : 5.35 mil
MHF 3 : 4.81 mil
GTA: VCS : 4.75 mil
Daxter: 4.06 mil
Ratchet and Clank: 3.64 mil
Midnight Club: 3.57 mil
God of War: Chains of Olympus: 3.09 mil
Crisis Core : 3.06 mil
GT : 2.91 mil

Most of these games were more of software selling well from the large hardware base rather than the opposite (with the exception of MH. Even GTA was somewhat more of the former). And I say that because people bought the PSP initially not because of the compelling software, but because of the Sony brand and the promise of mature handheld games etc. What's noticeable is that the best selling games are mostly pre 2008 (except for MH, but Japan was a different story). The audience in the west really grew out of the PSP, and the brand was hurt from that. Now this would be ok if Sony was able to fix it by releasing its own first party software, but honestly franchises like Daxter and Ratchet have declined, and won't sell nearly as well as they did on the PSP (and I don't think anything else would sell well for them on a handheld except for God of War). The push the Vita needs has to come from somewhere, and right now there's nothing that shows that it will have it. It's looking more and more like it will keep caught in its landslide unfortunately.

And whats 3ds' demographic? pre-teens? Not being seen with a gaming device is an American Cultural thing. In Japan and Hong Kong, I've seen middle-aged men playing pokemon on trains and in shopping malls.

so, I am assuming you are trying to make these points:

1. Price Cut won't solve PS Vita's problems.
-That depends what exactly are you trying solve? Lack of sales? Supply and Demand logic dictates that a price cut will garner a greater demand. Exhibit A: HP TouchPad. Just do a massive price cut, and your device instantly becomes a top seller.

2. Vita needs critical mass install base to get third party support.
- What are you smoking? If this logic is even remotely true, why do  third party developers even bother making games for Xbox and ps3? Wii completely owned the market share when it came out. By your logic, all the developers should just abort their Xbox and PS3 game projects and jump ship to Wii.

Why are you talking about solutions when you have yet to identify Vita's problems. What performance numbers are you expecting from VIta? Sony making money? Vita having more sale than all other consoles combined? Vita having more games than the entire PS2 collection? What will satisfy you?

Sorry, but no.  The reason for the decline in sales is that it became stupidly easy downgrade and just about everyone had a CFW PSP.  I had a CFW PSP but I purchased all my games.  Most people are just thieves.  There were four people at my work who had a CFW PSP and didn't own any games, just played ISOs.

I actually have three CFW PSPs, was four.  Even the 3000 and Go have CFW now.  I use my Go on my tv with my PS3 controller.

Vita already got a huge (unofficial) price cut. It's € 120 less than 10 months ago.
I'm getting sick of repeating this.

There's loads of Vita deals in the UK. Even GAME (which tends to be on the pricey side) has it for £179.99 and I think that was a bundle. I've seen Vita on sale for as low as £164.99! What price drop is being proposed? Free?

@Wlakiz

Well at least you tried which is more then I can say for some. You didn't do well, but I acknowledge the effort. As for your first comment. Your example isn't universal, and that is all that really matters. If you want me to take you seriously you should use some device that is relevant to this particular market. You have dozens of main brand devices to choose from. I am sure that at least a few of them share parallels with the Vita. Find one and then you will have my attention on this.

As for your second comment. Firstly market share and install base aren't the same thing. A install base is basically the number of consumers who own a product, and thus can purchase software for that product. Basically a product with a small market share can still gain support from third parties as long as it has a large enough install base to fund software development, and offer up the real possibility of profit. Further more a smaller install base can multiply its attractiveness to prospective third party developers by having a high attach ratio. Which refers to the average number of games each user will buy for that platform. Are you with me so far. This is why the 360/PS3 were able to get titles in spite of not having the biggest market share. They had enough users to create a critical mass of consumers to sell to, and their users bought more games on average. That is aside from the point though, but I wanted you to understand that. Since your seemed to have been confused.

In the case of the Vita. While developers might take the risk on a new platform which doesn't have a critical mass yet at launch. They can bet that it will obtain it in short order, and in the mean time early adopters skew sales in their favor. With fewer titles to compete against, and consumers with a need to build a library. There is a time frame in which developers can expect dramatically higher then average sales, and in arriving early they even enjoy longer sales windows. Launch titles get to have long legs. A term that means they will sell well for a longer period of time. That period of time for the Vita is drawing to a close. Now we are well into the period of time where sales should reflect the accepted norms.

If that all was a bit much for you. We are basically out of the grace period. The portable should no longer get the benefit of the doubt. Developers have to cover the costs of development, and that means they are reliant on a certain number of sales. That aren't going to benefit from a recent launch. If a developer wants to make a AAA game for the platform, and they need to sell a million copies of that game to break even. Then at its current install base that game would need to sell through to twenty five percent of current owners, and keeping in mind what I said earlier it is extremely rare for any game to sell above twenty percent. That means the developer would most likely lose money on the venture.

Even a higher platform software attach ratio wouldn't help in this situation. Not that the Vita even has that high of a attach ratio to begin with, and if my memory serves me right. The platforms current attach ratio is two and a half titles per user, and that is benefiting from the platforms launch. Bundling and digital downloads might even hurt it more moving forward. Anyway back on point. Right now the platform isn't a beacon for AAA game development unless it is subsidized by Sony. Something which Sony has sneered about their competition doing with their products, but beyond that the low install base and the low attach ratio. Actually conspire to make the platform less profitable for even less ambitious games. Which might only reasonable expect to have a sell through in the single digits, but never the less may need to sell a few hundred thousand units.

Which brings me to your last comment. It isn't about satisfying me, satisfying the third party developers, or even Sony for that matter. The whole point of this thread is that there is a logic that a price cut will save the platform. This isn't about levels of success. It is about whether the Vita can actually survive. Retailers don't carry gaming platforms that don't have games, and if they stop carrying the device. Then Sony can't keep making the Vita. There might be some unknown way for Sony to move the Vita without losing money on the enterprise, but that isn't the point.

There is a accepted logic on these forums that says when the price of the Vita gets cut by Sony. The sales are going to shoot up in a serious way, and as I said it my original post. There are a lot of reason why it shouldn't happen like that. Namely that there will be more high quality desirable things that are coming to the market this year. That are going to far outshine a portable that has been on the market for over the year with a poor reputation, but just got a price cut.

You tell me which way you would swing if you could only have one. Would you pick up a Vita, or would you pick up a PS4. Would you pick up a Vita, or buy four of the AAA titles coming out in the first half of this year. It really doesn't matter if the price of the Vita goes down if your wallet is going to be committed elsewhere, and if you had the money to splurge. Why would you have sat on the fence for so long waiting for a price cut.

Thanks for the acknowledgment but really there wasn't really much effort on my part.  Whether or not you take me seriously is irrelevent, tablet/phone platforms share near exact parallelism with game console. They are both high-end durables that sales are content and feature driven. The fact that you claim that my example is irrelevent without proof of irrelevence or counter-example, just shows that you're bias. Can you give me an example of a consumer durable that did not increase in sales when the price got reduced?

Market share and support is is a chicken-and-egg problem. If we think for a second. If all the developers ditched the Xbox -PS3 and went for the wii. What would be the attached-rate/marketshare for PS360?  The answer is ziltch. The developers create games and console grow in installbase/marketshare, higher marketshare result in more development, which result in further growth of console's market (As seen with P4G, where the sales of VIta increased as game launched). So initally why are there even developers developing for a console with low marketshares to begin with? The answer is capturing the entire market. Even if the marketshare is one sided 80/20. Any smart developer would still develop for the 20 because they would no doubt beat out the developers developing only for the 80. WIth Vita's marketshare still growing, I am not concerned that developers would ditch Vita.

In regards to your question to me, I would pick the Vita. I don't know what games the PS4 will have, and I have no time or interest in buying the 4 AAA games that'll never get to.