/end thread.

.

It doesn't because it implies that people prefer the games on the 3ds over the games on the vita, thats it, it doesn't have anything to do with the quality of the games. (Although, it does kind of work in this case now that I think about it considering that the 3ds has higher quality exclusives than the vita as well as more exclusives)

And heres the thing... Exclusives = Reasons to get the device... A lack of exclusives = A lack of Reasons to get the device hence why the Vita is selling so low that even the wiiU is on track to pass it by either this year or 2015. All vita is, is a handheld with hardly any exclusives and a lot of multiplatform games with a sub-par gaming experience. Games like Borderlands 2, Cod and etc suffer from largely downgraded Graphics and frame rate issues as well as Ai due to the lack-luster hardware compared to the ps3/ps4 hence why those ports don't really work, so theres that too. And not to mention, the freakishly expensive memory cards in which, since Sony is trying to push digital, continues to be one of the big downsides of the Vita cause unless u get one with a big storage, you have to always delete the games.

You paid $200 + $40 for 16gb (or just $200 if you really love deleting games all the time) Memory card and you are essentially left with a handheld that lost virtually all support from its parent company in the west, sub-par multi-platform releases, virtually zero backwards compatiblity, and the only games its getting now a days are from the bottom of the barrel/niche games (which aren't all bad but compared to 3ds, its virtually no competition for most) so yes, worst gaming handheld in recent memory

LOL STFU Sony! You're such a silly goose! Vita better than 3DS? HAHAHAHAH!!! I swear PR demands lies across the board.

If anyone is ever going to disagree with that, I'll just lose all hope in this forum.

Well, "bottom of the barrel" is interesting, given in 2014, the Vita lineup was more critically acclaimed than the 3DS' despite it's parent company practically abandoning it. If bottom of the barrel and niche delivers Danganronpa, Demon Gaze, 

Minecraft and a port of FIFA 11 (in 2012) are the 2 biggest UK debuts for Vita. Exclusives are reasons to get the device, yet the 8th gen home console with arguable the lowest quality exclusive lineup is significantly outselling the competition.

Wii U has been on track to pass the Vita every year since it launched (you do realised it launched in the same year in the West right so they have had as many "holiday seasons"?), I'm amazed given that high quality exclusives (and yes, they are fantastic I love my Wii U software) are reported "all" it takes to sell a console, it still hasn't passed it given it's pretty much accepted despite the absolutely stunning first year lineup, Vita was dead on arrival. (Exclusive Uncharted, Wipeout, Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty (it was shit, but still sold over a million, crazy!), Resistance, the definitive Little Big Planet, Silent Hill, along with very impressive handheld versions of FIFA, Need for Speed, Sonic & Allstars Racing Transformed, Rayman Origins and the likes all in the first 12 months)

There's a lot of "expert" rhetoric on here as to why X is doing one thing and Y is doing another, yet if you analyse any of these hypothesis at all, there are far too many examples that completely disprove that for it to hold any water.

I mean, it bombed because it didn't have enough AAA (actually it had shedloads in the first year), then it was people want games suitable to portable experiences, while championing a cut down port of Smash Bros and a port of Xenoblade Chronicles (which is exclusive to people who buy a slightly upgraded 3DS) and loving Resident Evil: Revelations. It was too expensive with proprietary memory cards, yet then when it's far cheaper than a 3DS (and region free, and includes a power supply, and has a proper account system) it still doesn't sell.

Most "experts" of Vita's failure have never even actually had any decent experience with the system. They don't want one because it has no games, but then they express joy when these games they don't want on it are announced as being ported to PS3/PS4 because it means they no longer need to buy a Vita.

I think the reason for the Vita's failure is actually pretty straight forward, it's also eaten a significant chunk out of Nintendo's market though people seem to be trying to bury their heads in the sand over that. It's just that mobile phones and tablets, have taken away even more of the appeal the PSP had, than the DS because the DS was never really a big portable media product.

I just really hope that Nintendo's successor to the 3DS is actually a decent bit of kit because it probably will be the last dedicated portable gaming system.

Anyway, he's absolutely right, the Vita annihilates the 3DS in every single damn way possible. Apart from Pokemon and sales. Though the sales mainly came from inferior (exclusive) versions of home console games (the things that don't sell Vita), Monster Hunter, and Pokemon.

WhiteEaglePL said: LMAO Vita better than 3DS? The only thing it's better at is the higher resolution and just above power of NN3DS...... and that doesn't make it better than 3DS in general. It's fairly obvious Sony gave up on Vita. No point getting it if most of it's games are Not Must -haves (at least, compared to 3DS VAST library.) and when they are also on PS3/4....

I think it's a tad disingenuous to describe the power gap between the Vita and N3DS as "just above" :p The gap has obviously been shrunk, but they're still worlds apart (hardware wise, i completely disagree with him that the Vita is a better handheld). If i remember correctly the Vita still has twice the RAM, and a much better CPU (4xCore 800Mhz vs 2xCore 266Mhz). Can't remember the specifics past that, but you get the idea.

There aren't many titles than use the Vita's hardware effectively, so it's a moot point in some regards, but i felt the need to point it out. I'm can be a stickler for wording (ironically, given i'm dyslexic..).

Nintendo has its console moments but for the most part, you're right.

loooool what are they meant to do , praise the competitions product above their own, course not its pr people move along

Okay so first of all... Lets see this whole, it was more critically acclaimed thing... So you gave two examples, Danganronpa (80? I believe thats what it has unless I am looking at the wrong one) and Demon Gaze (70) vs Bravely Default (85) and Kirby Triple Deluxe (80) so give me more games please. Oh and Danganronpa was a psp port I believe.

The reason why the ps4 is selling so high is because virtually every game that people want look and perform better for the ps4. Its "higher" graphics on virtually all third party games is an exclusive in on of itself since both the x1 and ps4 will have a ton of the same third party games, the ps4 will have the better version in almost everytime. And lets not forget that the last year of the ps3 had some epic exclusives such as The Last of Us, it also had Infamous SS as a key exclusive and Sony did announce some awesome exclusives that are coming to the ps4 like Bloodborne, Uncharted 4.

The wiiU does have some great exclusives but mostly for the second year, for the first year on the other hand, it was plegged with Delays, a shit ton of platformers and hardly anything else, tons of bad press, no advertising and the list goes on so its quite easy to see why its not selling very well. So no, the wiiU did not have a stunning first year. It had one of the worst first years ever! The games lacked varity in the sense that most were either niche or from the same genre, as well as third party pissing all over with by having bad ports or getting missing DLC and again, so many games had delays. And yes, it did launch on the same year in the west but Japan is big on handheld devices so its not exactly like it was only a small boost and the vita had like 6+ months worth of sales anyway in the west.

I don't get how the 3ds was more expensive than the vita when u include the memory card? The 3ds was $250 at launch and it included the AC adapter and a 2gb memory card, the Vita costed $250 at launch and it didn't include any memory card so u had to buy one whether u wanted to or not and lets not forget, a 32gb microsd card costed $20-$30 but a 32gb Vita memory card costed $100... Like, how do you even say that it cheaper? And region free is and always will be an extra feature rather than a must have feature cause for most, the import fees and the shipping fees cost a lot!

And I did have a Vita but I sold it, I can show u pics if u need proof.

And yes, of course they are happy when it gets ported to the ps3/ps4 cause heres the thing. Before the Vita came out, a shit ton of people had a ps3 so if most of the games that were coming out for the vita were multiplatform, why should a person that has a ps3 spend $200+ to get a vita when he can just save it and play the game on his ps3? And Sony is obviously showing a lot more support for the ps4 than they ever did for the vita so of course the people will be glad when ports come to the ps4 cause when they want to upgrade from the ps3, they can play the games without needing a vita cause it doesn't have any support.

And not really... Games sell hardware, not the other way around... You can have top of the line hardware till the cows come home but if it doesn't have any games that people want or the hardware doesn't justify the price compared to the competition, then it just wont sell...