So that's what the inside of a Vita looks like.

@OP.Agreed. And that core strategy is what drives the decisions, and hence the sales.

Which strat works best? Not sure. /sarcasm

They are correct in that Sony seems to be banking less on producing or securing quality software for the handheld system exclusively as they are trying to build it as a extension of the PS home console and device to play digital software.

In a way, it makes sense, the PSP only thrived in Japan based on Monster Hunter and other Japanese developers providing cheaper software for it rather then trying to gamble with investing into a heavy HD projects. Sony can't really bank on lighting striking twice especially given the 3DS is far closer to the Vita then the DS was to the PSP and closer to the budget range Japan seems to prefer. This also means there might be hope for the system to do well outside of the Japanese market provided people take the bait of being able to play their PS3 and PS4 games on the go.

He's wrong. There's no strategy for PSV.

I have to disagree when it comes to Nintendo first party tittles. Most of their games can be played in a short session. You can do a couple of 3D Land levels, a couple of courses in Mario Kart 7, a single mission in Fire Emblem (or definitely more than one if you are doing overworld missions), a course in Kid Icarus (aside from the fact that it will be uncomfortable to play outside), while waiting for the bus. Sure it's not as simple as playing Angry Birds but they are not heavy enough to be compared to a AAA game.

Now most 3rd party games do indeed have more heavy gameplay which are not very suited for small sessions.

I just don't see how this is "fundamentally different" from being able to knock out a quick pact in Soul Sacrifice, do a mission in Gravity Rush or Unit 13, a race in Wipeout, etc. Lots of games on home consoles have that kind of design, so it's not peculiar to handheld games anyway.

There used to be a marked difference between what consoles could do and what handhelds could muster, so handheld games really were different out of necessity, but we've reached the point where handhelds can do just about anything their big brothers can, albeit uglier. This similarity, and I think the desire to justify $40 games vs. 99 cent or free smartphone games, has led Nintendo to increasingly blending their console and handheld line-ups to the point that the 3DS really is just a console in your hand. At this point, I'd say only smartphones really do what Scott Moffitt thinks Nintendoes (but really Nintendon't anymore).

Not that I think this is necessarily a bad thing. There are some games I certainly wouldn't want to play in small bursts - something really immersive like, say, survival horror - but for the most part sleep mode solved the issue way back in the previous generation. To me, it's kind of like arguing that you shouldn't read a book on a bus and should stick to reading flyers and brochures instead.

That may very well be so but I'm from the old school. I remember when Nintendo almost never replied to or mentioned anything the competition did. Only once did they reply to Sega (via print ad) and twice did they reply to Sony and Sega Saturn (Starfox 64 preview and N64 ad). I don't think I like Nintendo talking about the competition these days. I lowers them in my eyes. I like the quiet, stoic Nintendo. They made my panties wet.

Oh yeah? Well, did Mario Kart DS outsell Nintendogs? DID IT?!

Then shut the hell up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRGd0gD0QNE

Ermm, not really. Sony and Nintendo visions were initially the same but suspiciously all of the key contributors to the PSP (capcom, square enix) magically vanised and become 3DS exclusive. Can you say money hat?