Forums - Sony Discussion - Why did the PS Vita fail?

Leynos said:
People who say it had a bad library must not be Switch owners. The switch is getting a lot of the same games and same kind of game Vita got from 3rd parties. A number of them are direct ports. Others are remakes of Vita games. Vita had a good library, it just didn't have that 1st party support Switch has. It did lack those killer 1st party games. Still a good system for RPGs. Some action games. Shooters. Shmups and indies and yes also Visual Novels

I must have missed when Vita got Skyrim, Crash N. Sane Trilogy, Crash Nitro Fuel, DOOM, Wolfenstein, Dragon Quest 11, Snake Pass, etc. I get a lot of those games came out after the Vita was relevant, and there are a number of titles which were on the Vita but weren't good ports (like for example Borderlands 2), but the point still stands. It's a little silly to act like Vita had some really good library comparable to the Switch, then to explain later on that it had a lack of killer first party titles. Ok ... then it didn't have a comparable library? Even if we're just talking third party, there's a number of reasons why the third party on the Switch is more attractive than that on the Vita. Even putting aside major third party exclusives, the Switch's third party games are just generally bigger and more successful. Especially because they emulate consoles much more closely (which is important for games like Borderlands). Also, good first party titles kind of act as a gateway for consoles, especially handhelds where bigger publishers (especially western ones) and bigger games from said publishers are not coming out right out of the gate. 

Like sure, you have a lot of the same genres that are popular on both systems, and you even have a lot of junk on the Switch, but that doesn't particularly matter because it doesn't answer what games are on the system, which is more important than just a broad generalization of what kind of games are on it.. And coincidentally a lot of the best selling third party games are in genres that the Vita didn't cover or didn't cover well. So in conclusion, it's really not a jump in logic to say that the Vita has a bad library, but the Switch doesn't. There are a number of very valid reasons that could lead to such a conclusion. 



Around the Network

There's not much else I can add that's not been mentioned many times already but doing the proprietary memory card thing is something you'd expect from Nintendo, not Sony; although given the fact that Sony has gone down that route several times previously with the PSP and PSP Go, we expected them to learn. Especially with the rising popularity of the near universal microSD cards at the time, a format the 3DS/2DS handheld family and Switch uses alongside the smartphones and tablets.



I guess you could say it had no life, that is was deat on arrival...

I'll see myself out.



Sony should consider making PS Vita titles available through PS Now.

OT: Price, lack of compelling software, and the mobile market.



Memory cards. Expensive hardware at launch with a shitty and unnecessary 3G model. Complete lack of true system sellers, even if now that it's all said and done Vita's library is very decent all things considered. And even though the hardware is fantastic it wasn't good enough for the whole console gaming quality on the go yet. It was lacking buttons and power, leading to some awful PS3 ports on it. And in some games that you can transfer your save it's a convoluted mess (like in the MGS HD collection where you need two copies of the game and two consoles to play with the same save). And then there was the 3DS, the growth of the smartphones market, and the bad first party support due to Sony focusing on the PS4.



Around the Network

Bad timing. A lot of what it offered was at a time when smart phones felt like the future of mobile gaming. Somehow we were convinced that "Console gaming on the go" was a bad thing and that people only wanted bite sized gaming.

And, at the time, I think they were right. I had both the 3DS and the Vita (even pre-ordered the latter) but I found myself always playing stuff like Angry Birds and Candy Crush.



mZuzek loves Smeags. 😢

Vita was one of only two major gaming systems since the Atari 2600 that I did not own. Primary reasons for that were total cost of ownership (absolutely insanely expensive memory cards that were obvious cash grab), and a lack of must have games.

Frankly, the memory cards were so ridiculous that they just turned me off to the system right away. I never gave it serious consideration. I would analogize it to a home console coming with a controller that was known to be crappy, and the manufacturer also selling the only compatible good quality controller for $200.



I see a lot of mention about memory cards and I agree with that, as well. No Vita game allowed us to save without an expensive card. I paid $100 on day one for a 32GB card and when that thing was full (after about a year), I never bought another Vita game. And that's with almost all of my Vita games being physical versions. Apps, PS1 and PSP games burned up that memory in no time.



mZuzek loves Smeags. 😢

d21lewis said:
Bad timing. A lot of what it offered was at a time when smart phones felt like the future of mobile gaming. Somehow we were convinced that "Console gaming on the go" was a bad thing and that people only wanted bite sized gaming.

And, at the time, I think they were right. I had both the 3DS and the Vita (even pre-ordered the latter) but I found myself always playing stuff like Angry Birds and Candy Crush.

Isn't that currently still the case, relatively speaking?  The 3DS and Switch presumably aren't much more than a blip on the radar of mobile gaming.  That blip is obviously large enough that there's money to be made, but that's because the mobile gaming space is gigantic.  

To be clear, Switch is a big seller. But do we know how much of that is truly for mobile use?  

Anyway, I agree with the underlying point here.  Portable dedicated gaming devices had basically run their course by the time Vita came out.  3DS was relatively successful, but it at least offered something unique.



Lack of GTA. It would have become a success if it had an exclusive GTA.