Not being dictated by fidelity and holding up sound on devices that you can also take on the go, is inherently favouring portability. This is also why Switch is doing so well with indies in the west. 

No it just means you need more than pretty graphics to be sold on something it's not inherently favouring anything if you're unable to come up with anything more compelling as a selling poing than fidelity it's not the market favouring a type of specs it's your lack of substance that is the problem in that situation. Indies are doing well in the west on Switch because Nintendo pushes them on the platform so? No different than what MS did during the 360 era, even MS' own Ori games and Cuphead did just as well as any indie game because they were pushed and those aren't the same as the usual high fidelity games.

Its not cherry picking or unfair. The Vita's best selling game barely passed 300k in Japan, its also a re-release. We can't compare the likes of Disgaea, Dragon Crown, Persona 4 Golden and Hiku to the far bigger titles we saw home platforms like Smash Bros, Mario Kart, 3D Mario etc. The gamecube also had plenty of niche titles. I'd also argue that many of the niche games like Hiku that flourished on the Vita would struggle far more on a home console. There's inherently different appeal to certain games and play styles, animal crossing for example excels in portable format. 

If a home console was limited to PSVita's library, it would of sold abysmally in Japan. That was the telling thing from the hardware comparison
 
As far as comparing the likes of PS2 to GBA there's obviously a limit to the kind of games a GBA/16bit device can offer, once the handhelds moved to realising 3D worlds it was a wrap. PSP was literally neck and neck with the PS2 sales wise but we can see that the inidvidual selling power of PSP games were far behind their PS2 counterparts. Japanese developers preferring to develop on portable/low spec machines doesn't negate the fact that portables have an advantage in the market, in fact it only reinforces it. The only reason why this is misunderstood is because its being perceived in a Sony vs Nintendo lens.

Minecraft sold over 1.2mil on the Vita in Japan. And according to famitsu three other games sold over 300k physical alone including P4 Golden.

The guy already wants to leave the thread, take it slow.

At the end of the day it's not a binary question, 10s of significant factors are at play in the success of a console in any region. To say it is just that games cater to the region is much too simplistic. The virtual boy might have had all the games to appeal to japan it still would've failed.

My point is that while the game library is very important, it is not true what Rol said that it is the only thing that matters. Esp. For portables, we have brand name and battery life to factor in, price, lifecycle (ex GBA was cut short by the DS), competition, etc.

Why would someone buy a 2D pixel art game on PS4 instead of the Switch? Any game that doesn't benefit from higher power spec, I buy on a portable platforms and this evident in sales across the board. Rayman Legends was a great example performing disproportionately well on PSVita compared to home consoles. As a result if you develop 2D platforms you keep those platforms in mind. 

Its clear that you are steafast in your belief that portability has no central role in how the markets have evolved. I'll leave you with that belief.

Nothing antagonistic about my post, everything is cool.

The reason why he is backed up is due to causation. Nobody will back up a dysfunctional console. It doesn't mean that his argument is bible.

The importance of a games library that is on point is absolutely undeniable. But to say it is the only thing that matters is incorrect.

For instance, the GBA had a very japan-oriented library and it sold less than its brethren. To understand why, you need to look at other factors such as competition (in this case internal competition, Nintendo itself). The GBA was cut short due to the early arrival of the DS, it dropped fast. Also, Nintendo consoles tend to follow the drum beat of Nintendo while other consoles would not have needed that in order to continue to succeed. But then there is also the question, if the GBA was the 2nd pillar, why did it not continue to thrive? The answer is related to platform competition, you couldn't at that time have software so easily released everywhere esp. due to lack of HW parity, so the library would've been split. Devs just preferred to migrate to DS.

Great questions.

Saturn

I can explain the Saturn, but in my earlier post I had sources in the footer that might interest you, of note:

The Sega Saturn in Japan: https://youtu.be/NkuD8rOndSo

The whole video is super interesting for people like you and I who are interested in japan sales, but you can start at 10:55 if you want the moment where things shifted.

What happened is that Sony had stolen Final Fantasy from Nintendo, and it made a massive impact on the perception of value in consoles in Japan. Suddenly the Playstation was the Jewel of the industry thanks almost entirely to FFVII. Here is another factor that comes into play: killer apps. They make a huge difference.

The video explains that, up until 1997, the Saturn was enjoying near-parity w PS in Japan due to a high-volume of 2D japan-centric games and almost everything else common between the two consoles except for difficulty to develop for the Saturn. As of FFVII, everything changed.

Vita

I have two more posts to make before I feel comfortable giving a definitive reply, but what we know about the Vita is that it had almost unanimous 3rd party support in Japan, except for Sony 1st-party games. This propped it up as it ended up selling a 5.86M Japanese of 16M worldwide (36%) (source).

However, in this case, competition is very important to consider. Even though the Vita had a plethora of games coming out for it, being the favorite platform for Devs who were used to finding green pasture outside of Nintendo consoles, it still failed to push out stronger sales. This is because the 3DS absolutely dominated Japan with 24.66M of 75.94M (32%). So while the two are good portable consoles with a vast library of games appealing to Japan, the 3DS was cheaper, had Nintendo's 1st party support which attracted the Japanese, and Sony was not supporting its own console. The Vita also had memory card pricing issues, other things the 3DS did not have to deal with. Also, Nintendo secured a killer app with Monster Hunter. That was a disastrous move for the Vita. Monster Hunter had been the killer app of the PSP, and now it was on the 3DS.

This again proves that you can have lots of games that cater to the japanese, it doesn't guarantee success there. How did the 3DS beat the Vita when it had so much 3rd party support? The answer is that, by that time, Nintendo's 1st party lineup had become popular after the Wii/DS generation, the 3DS' launch schedule was decent and had decent 3rd party support, and it had killer apps and was better priced.

Had the 3DS not existed, the Vita would've performed nicely.

Yeah, Switch Lite (smaller and cheaper portable) sold more than Switch and Ring Fit Adventure (requires TV screen) sold terrible, said no one ever.

Great questions.

Saturn

I can explain the Saturn, but in my earlier post I had sources in the footer that might interest you, of note:

The Sega Saturn in Japan: https://youtu.be/NkuD8rOndSo

The whole video is super interesting for people like you and I who are interested in japan sales, but you can start at 10:55 if you want the moment where things shifted.

What happened is that Sony had stolen Final Fantasy from Nintendo, and it made a massive impact on the perception of value in consoles in Japan. Suddenly the Playstation was the Jewel of the industry thanks almost entirely to FFVII. Here is another factor that comes into play: killer apps. They make a huge difference.

The video explains that, up until 1997, the Saturn was enjoying near-parity w PS in Japan due to a high-volume of 2D japan-centric games and almost everything else common between the two consoles except for difficulty to develop for the Saturn. As of FFVII, everything changed.

Vita

I have two more posts to make before I feel comfortable giving a definitive reply, but what we know about the Vita is that it had almost unanimous 3rd party support in Japan, except for Sony 1st-party games. This propped it up as it ended up selling a 5.86M Japanese of 16M worldwide (36%) (source).

However, in this case, competition is very important to consider. Even though the Vita had a plethora of games coming out for it, being the favorite platform for Devs who were used to finding green pasture outside of Nintendo consoles, it still failed to push out stronger sales. This is because the 3DS absolutely dominated Japan with 24.66M of 75.94M (32%). So while the two are good portable consoles with a vast library of games appealing to Japan, the 3DS was cheaper, had Nintendo's 1st party support which attracted the Japanese, and Sony was not supporting its own console. The Vita also had memory card pricing issues, other things the 3DS did not have to deal with. Also, Nintendo secured a killer app with Monster Hunter. That was a disastrous move for the Vita. Monster Hunter had been the killer app of the PSP, and now it was on the 3DS.

This again proves that you can have lots of games that cater to the japanese, it doesn't guarantee success there. How did the 3DS beat the Vita when it had so much 3rd party support? The answer is that, by that time, Nintendo's 1st party lineup had become popular after the Wii/DS generation, the 3DS' launch schedule was decent and had decent 3rd party support, and it had killer apps and was better priced.

Had the 3DS not existed, the Vita would've performed nicely.