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

Forums - Sony - PSVITA.TV just announced!!!

Rogerioandrade said:
Seriously, what the heck is that ?
Is it aimed to be a substitute for the PS4, for people who can´t afford it?
What about the games that use touchscreen controls ?

The idea of making a handheld that works as a home console seems nice, but this is kind of weird.

If they´re looking for a way to save Vita, they should launch a cheaper version of it. Simple. This TvVita is something just too excentric to be successfull (I may be wrong, but time will tell)


It's already done: PS Vita 2000 with LCD screen and 1GB internal memory.



Persona 5 on PS3, I won't need next gen!

Around the Network

Well good bye handheld vita and hello ps vita tv. Not even sony wanted to keep that thing going.



I don't see it selling huge numbers, but it's certainly cool. Could help the Vita out bit.



Zekkyou said:
I don't see it selling huge numbers, but it's certainly cool. Could help the Vita out bit.


It's an idea that honestly seems something more up Nintendo's alley.



I think it's a good idea, but poorly implemented.

If what kowen has posted is true and its $150 for the device+controller, then it's way to close to what PS3 costs.

Had they gone with only 1 model for $129 that includes the device plus a new controller with touch surfaces to allow every Vita game to be played as well as allowing the DS3 to used as a secondary pad to play PS1 multiplayer games, then I could see strongs sales for it. The way it is now, I think it won't do much.



Please excuse my bad English.

Former gaming PC: i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Current gaming PC: R5-7600, 32GB RAM 6000MT/s (CL30) and a RX 9060XT 16GB

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

Around the Network
techhunter80 said:

Well good bye handheld vita and hello ps vita tv. Not even sony wanted to keep that thing going.

PS Vita 2000 with LCD screen and 1GB internal memory was announced at the same event.

ps: I'ts a portable console.



Persona 5 on PS3, I won't need next gen!

Soundwave said:
Zekkyou said:
I don't see it selling huge numbers, but it's certainly cool. Could help the Vita out bit.


It's an idea that honestly seems something more up Nintendo's alley.

I imagine it wasn't really an option for the 3DS. Blowing up a 240p image onto a large TV would look pretty aweful o.o The Vita can mostly get away with it.



This whole thing seems kind of superfluous and pointless. The $99 doesn't come with a controller, so consumers who don't already have a PS3 or PS4 will have to buy the $150, which is only $50 less then the PS3. So, for another $50, a consumer can get a system with much better graphics, a MUCH better library of games, 1080p, and a blu ray player. Why would anyone buy the Vita TV over a PS3? Or an Xbox 360 for that matter?

Then there's the PS3/PS4 gamer, the person who can buy the $99 version. According to Wired, this thing won't be compatible with all Vita games, specifically the ones that use the touch controls and camera:

"Sony points out that the device will play, at launch, about 1,300 games. That’s because it can play all of the PSP and PSone games that are currently available to download via the PlayStation Network digital games service, plus many of the games that have been released so far for the PlayStation Vita platform. Sony said in a press release that the PS Vita TV cannot play all PS Vita games, since many of them use the touchscreen, motion sensors, camera and other inputs that are only available on the handheld unit."

So in other words, games like Tearaway and Gravity Rush, some of the Vita's few killer apps, won't even be compatible with this thing. Most of the Vita games that DON'T require these sorts of controls are already available on PS3 anyway.

Honestly, the most attractive thing about this device is it's ability to stream PS4 games onto another television. I could see myself owning a few of these things to spread around my house so that I never have to move the thing. But unfortunately, this feature won't even be available at launch anyway, as it is something promised in a future update.

Finally, there is the developer incentive: why would ANY developer work with this thing? It's not as if the Vita has much of a userbase yet. It's essentially just a cheaper, smaller PS3: any game a developer would make for this, they would also make for the PS3. Leaving this thing with few exclusives and leaving consumers with little incentive to buy.

I hate to say it, but this thing is borderline pointless for ANY consumer. Sony itself offers better alternatives. PS3 is a MUCH better value and much more affordable. Vita has more functionality and can be taken on the go. To top it all off, the Vita TV can't even play all Vita games, and these superior alternatives can be had for a mere $50: cheaper then a new PS3 game. At best, this thing seems like a PS4 peripheral. It won't be a particularly useful (or successful) standalone system.

I can't believe this thing is getting a better reception around here then the 2DS, when at the very least the 2DS was compatible with all of the 3DSs games and had an actual market.



JEMC said:

I think it's a good idea, but poorly implemented.

If what kowen has posted is true and its $150 for the device+controller, then it's way to close to what PS3 costs.

Had they gone with only 1 model for $129 that includes the device plus a new controller with touch surfaces to allow every Vita game to be played as well as allowing the DS3 to used as a secondary pad to play PS1 multiplayer games, then I could see strongs sales for it. The way it is now, I think it won't do much.

It should be fine for now at that price. Chances are a lot of the people who will be getting this will already own a PS3, and the non-controller version costs $95. Also, the $150 is the Vita TV, a controller and an 8GB memory card i believe, so there is room for them to take the price down.



nuckles87 said:
This whole thing seems kind of superfluous and pointless. The $99 doesn't come with a controller, so consumers who don't already have a PS3 or PS4 will have to buy the $150, which is only $50 less then the PS3. So, for another $50, a consumer can get a system with much better graphics, a MUCH better library of games, 1080p, and a blu ray player. Why would anyone buy the Vita TV over a PS3? Or an Xbox 360 for that matter?

Then there's the PS3/PS4 gamer, the person who can buy the $99 version. According to Wired, this thing won't be compatible with all Vita games, specifically the ones that use the touch controls and camera:

"

Sony points out that the device will play, at launch, about 1,300 games. That’s because it can play all of the PSP and PSone games that are currently available to download via the PlayStation Network digital games service, plus many of the games that have been released so far for the PlayStation Vita platform. Sony said in a press release that the PS Vita TV cannot play all PS Vita games, since many of them use the touchscreen, motion sensors, camera and other inputs that are only available on the handheld unit."

So in other words, games like Tearaway, Soul Sacrifice and Gravity Rush, some of the Vita's few killer apps, won't even be compatible with this thing. Most of the Vita games that DON'T require these sorts of controls are already available on PS3 anyway.

Honestly, the most attractive thing about this device is it's ability to stream PS4 games onto another television. I could see myself owning a few of these things to spread around my house so that I never have to move the thing. But unfortunately, this feature won't even be available at launch anyway, as it is something promised in a future update.

Finally, there is the developer incentive: why would ANY developer work with this thing? It's not as if the Vita has much of a userbase yet. It's essentially just a cheaper, smaller PS3: any game a developer would make for this, they would also make for the PS3. Leaving this thing with few exclusives and leaving consumers with little incentive to buy.

I hate to say it, but this thing is borderline pointless for ANY consumer. Sony itself offers better alternatives. PS3 is a MUCH better value and much more affordable. Vita has more functionality and can be taken on the go. To top it all off, the Vita TV can't even play all Vita games, and these superior alternatives can be had for a mere $50: cheaper then a new PS3 game. At best, this thing seems like a PS4 peripheral. It won't be a particularly useful (or successful) standalone system.

I can't believe this thing is getting a better reception around here then the 2DS, when at the very least the 2DS was compatible with all of the 3DSs games and had an actual market.


Haven't you watched the video? PS Vita TV PLAYS Soul Sacrifice in after about 15 seconds from video start, aren't you a bit superficial here?

(sorry I offended you)

I hope SONY will do UNIVERSAL adaptation patches for most games (it can be done in my opinion, because a lot of games uses touch controls in a similar way between each other) so developers shouldn't care about compatiblility, let's hope. :-|

ps: developing for PS3 isn't cheap, someday there won't be ports to ps3 anymore IMHO.

ps2: I THINK it works with portable PS Vita as a controller, more buying options.



Persona 5 on PS3, I won't need next gen!