potato_hamster said:
PS Vita's release price: $249 |
PS Vita release the 3G version is 300 USD not include the Memory card and it's expensive as hell
PC gamer tend to do benchmark rather then playing and most of PC gamer care is just FPS and hardcore gaming.
HollyGamer said:
PS Vita release the 3G version is 300 USD not include the Memory card and it's expensive as hell PC gamer tend to do benchmark rather then playing and most of PC gamer care is just FPS and hardcore gaming. |
That's like saying a PS4 Pro costs $499 because the special 500 million edition that was just released cost that. That still doesn't change the fact that there was a $249 model that was only missing 3G connectivity and was far, far more popular. The 3DS also didn't come with a memory card. I don't see how you can sincerely act like the Vita was considered to be a "super premium price" when the real price difference was the difference in the cost of a memory card. So comparing a 16 GB Vita memory card at the time to a 16GB SD card the 3DS took was about $30. Sorry, that is still not "super premium". It's not even the cost of one game for either system.
PC Gamers do more benchmarking than playing games? Are you just trying to annoy the PC hardcores around here with statements like that? Complete nonsense.
potato_hamster said:
That's like saying a PS4 Pro costs $499 because the special 500 million edition that was just released cost that. That still doesn't change the fact that there was a $249 model that was only missing 3G connectivity and was far, far more popular. The 3DS also didn't come with a memory card. I don't see how you can sincerely act like the Vita was considered to be a "super premium price" when the real price difference was the difference in the cost of a memory card. So comparing a 16 GB Vita memory card at the time to a 16GB SD card the 3DS took was about $30. Sorry, that is still not "super premium". It's not even the cost of one game for either system. |
And how come limited edition of PS4 are equal to PS Vita 3G??? And also 3DS market segment for DS gamer and dedicated Nintendo market , while Vita early sales are targeting games that are coming to iOS and Google Store. And from the build quality like the screen and the build are targeting premium one.
I am a PC gamers, and active in gaming forum, they are different in terms of gaming habit.
HollyGamer said:
And how come limited edition of PS4 are equal to PS Vita 3G??? And also 3DS market segment for DS gamer and dedicated Nintendo market , while Vita early sales are targeting games that are coming to iOS and Google Store. And from the build quality like the screen and the build are targeting premium one. I am a PC gamers, and active in gaming forum, they are different in terms of gaming habit. |
They're not equal. That's my point. Just because a more expensive version exists doesn't mean that the cheaper versions cease existing. No one is claiming the PS4 Pro costs $499, and and no one should be claiming the Vita cost $299 on release. Because it never. The vita was targeting smartphone users and not the 70+ million PSP owners? What makes you think that? Was it the fact that the Vita played PSP games and not smartphone games? Was it the fact that the vita never ran Android or iOS? Was it the fact that there was only a handful of apps that were ever made for the Vita, like twitch and neflix, and not things like facebook, twitter, instagram etc? There's no reason to think it was targeting towards iOS/android users. The 3G model was for playing vita games in online multiplayer on the go, and little more. This is clearly obvious. Just ask KBG, he actually tried to use that thing as a phone.
I'm a PC gamer also. I've never run a benchmark. Stop stereotyping people. Your comments about them might actually be something the mods would moderate you on.
potato_hamster said:
They're not equal. That's my point. Just because a more expensive version exists doesn't mean that the cheaper versions cease existing. No one is claiming the PS4 Pro costs $499, and and no one should be claiming the Vita cost $299 on release. Because it never. The vita was targeting smartphone users and not the 70+ million PSP owners? What makes you think that? Was it the fact that the Vita played PSP games and not smartphone games? Was it the fact that the vita never ran Android or iOS? Was it the fact that there was only a handful of apps that were ever made for the Vita, like twitch and neflix, and not things like facebook, twitter, instagram etc? There's no reason to think it was targeting towards iOS/android users. The 3G model was for playing vita games in online multiplayer on the go, and little more. This is clearly obvious. Just ask KBG, he actually tried to use that thing as a phone. |
That's not how the stereo typing work, i am said " not all but most of them " because it's a fact . And it's not just a bench mark but their habis is different from consoles and ghandled gamer.
Just read this https://gadgets.ndtv.com/games/news/ps-vita-2-smartphones-sony-nintendo-switch-1755504
| potato_hamster said: The 3G model was for playing vita games in online multiplayer on the go, and little more. This is clearly obvious. Just ask KBG, he actually tried to use that thing as a phone. |
A small correction: the 3G model wasn't intended for online multiplayer games... you needed Wi-Fi for that in most cases. Only a few games offered online multiplayer via 3G.
3G was mainly used for non-gaming stuff (internet browser, E-mail, GPS navigation,...) and for cloud syncing savegames.
HollyGamer said:
That's not how the stereo typing work, i am said " not all but most of them " because it's a fact . And it's not just a bench mark but their habis is different from consoles and ghandled gamer. Just read this https://gadgets.ndtv.com/games/news/ps-vita-2-smartphones-sony-nintendo-switch-1755504 |
Most PC gamers don't even know what a benchmark is. Most PC gamers couldn't even tell you what the specs of their system is off the top of their head. You're confusing PC Gamers with PC Gaming enthusiasts.
I know why there is no Vita 2. Handheld consoles have more or less fallen out of favor as people would rather play games on their phones rather than carry around a dedicated handheld gaming device. How does that mean that the PS Vita was supposed to compete with smartphones? And if it was, how then are Nintendo handhelds also not competing with smart phones?
Conina said:
A small correction: the 3G model wasn't intended for online multiplayer games... you needed Wi-Fi for that in most cases. Only a few games offered online multiplayer via 3G. 3G was mainly used for non-gaming stuff (internet browser, E-mail, GPS navigation,...) and for cloud syncing savegames. |
Fair enough. That's not exactly an iPhone killer though, and that was my point. You can't send text messages, you can only call people using Skype. It's got some basic PDA functionality compared to a Vita. Let's not pretend that Sony made this thing to take sales away from Apple and Android phone makers (of which Sony themselves are one).
Last edited by potato_hamster - on 05 September 2018
No, a gaming phone would be a waste of time. Normal flagship phones are plenty powerful.
There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'
No they only have to concentrate on the console market because that market is where they can shine and are successful
REQUIESCAT IN PACE
I Hate REMASTERS
I Hate PLAYSTATION PLUS
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
