The low price is the only thing capable of maintain alive this aberration.

Sometimes I love your comments.  Only sometimes.

What about the camera? Some games use it, like AC Liberation.

My opinion is that the target is the PS4 buyer.  Unless there are seriously PS Vita customers that want to play only some of their games on a large screen TV.

Like I said elsewhere, they should have marketed this as a PS4 Extender and just muttered under their breath that it'd play PS Vita games.

As a PS4 Extender, it's a brilliant idea and it builds hype for the PS4.  As a part of the PS Vita family it's a WTF moment, imho.

Do you think this was the rumored $500 ps4 vita bundle, because if it is the bundle just went from super cool to extremely lame.

No. Buying a PS4 and PSVITA.TV separately would cost $500. In a bundle they'd have to drop the price or throw in an extra.

So Vita TV is for people 1) who don't own any seventh generation consoles, a computer, or a smart TV, 2) really want to play Vita games, and 3) don't have an extra $100 in disposable income to buy a real Vita?

That's not much of a target audience.

An extra $50, actually. Keep in mind the $100 version doesn't even come with a controller. It also can't play some of the Vita's best games.

And the "gaikai" cloud service some people are now using to vindicate this thing won't have a particularly large market in America. You need a spectacular broadband connection for cloud gaming. I've got Comcast broadband that supposed to get something like 50 MBPS, and the thing typically struggles to maintain the kind of connection (15 MPS, I believe) a cloud service like OnLive needs. I can't even play Sonic 3 on the damn service without constant hiccups. Though who knows, maybe OnLive just sucks.

Cloud gaming is all about the ping, not the bandwidth. 3 Mbps with a 5ms ping is way better than 30 Mbps with a 50ms ping. Back when I had a ping of 0, onlive worked FLAWLESS. Couldn't even tell it wasn't running locally.

hope ps2 games come to VT-TV in the next yr. or 2.