| Soundwave said: No the main difference is Sony basically just used off the shelf components for the Vita, the Vita is basically just a dated iPad 3 chip and standardized RAM. They even axed the OLED screen for the new model. Nintendo insists on highly customized hardware components along with expensive hardware gimmicks (3D screen/dual screens, touchscreen controller, etc.). Like the Wii U for example uses a very propietary CPU, and very customized GPU with heavy empahsis on low power usage ... but that makes the chip expensive because it's a very specific part, not something that uses just off the shelf components. Anyways though to the OP's point I don't think Vita is "saved". There's too many other ways for kids to play Minecraft. |
So you're saying that massive price cut for the 3DS in it's first year never happened? Even with off the shelf components, the fact that the Vita is a generation ahead of the 3DS means any first year price drop would have been accepting losses on hardware sales. Sony didn't do that. Nintendo did with their souped up N64.
As for OP's point, anyone seriously thinking the Vita is "saved" at this point is dillusional. The thread was in jest because MS officially have the biggest Vita game behind Sony's biggest title and FIFA.














