[FixStory - 1] Could the PSVita have succeeded?

[Asura]

[FixStory] is a series of gaming threads where we dicuss how, if we fix history by fixing up some of the obvious mistakes or mis-steps a publisher/developer/platform holder made in a product, would that product have succeded? Or are they just excuses we make in hindsight?

This thread's topic is the PSVITA.

The Vita is generally considered, by many who owned it, to be a fantastic handheld. However, it wasn't a rip-roaring success, and people attribute that to various reasons. The reasons that are internal to Sony, that tend to come up each time this is discussed are:

• The name was poor; memorable once you know it but it was a break from the (actually quite successful) PSP
• It supported remote play from the PS4, but was missing several buttons making this awkward
• The memory cards were unnecessarily expensive and there was no cheaper option
• The 3g version was more expensive and pointless, as you could only play turn-based multiplayer games and upload leaderboard scores

So for this thread, let's re-imagine the PSVita. We would change the following:

• Rename it to something like the PSP2
• Give it L2/R2 and L3/R3 buttons to make it a fully functioning PS4 controller
• Give it an SD Card slot and toss out the proprietary memory cards
• Remove the 3g version entirely and just have wifi

However, it would still come out at the same time, to the same fanfare.

Essentially this eliminates the main hardware concerns and makes it about two things; do you think the Vita's software line-up (at least at first) was strong enough? And do you think it could ever have succeeded, or was the climate around its launch just too hostile?

[Neon Ignition]

I'm firmly in the camp that it absolutely could have been a successful system but admittedly, by the time the corrections are made you'd be effectively looking at making it an entirely different system.

The 80m sales the PSP had, the strength of the PlayStation brand, that Nintendo managed to make the 3DS work, that mobile gaming never replaced traditional gaming the way was being mooted at the time, the IP brand power Sony had/has, that Remote play is effectively another precursor to the Switch concept

I just don't buy that the handheld market imploded literally overnight in such a way that Sony couldn't make a second handheld work.

But, I feel that as amazing as the system itself was, Sony almost went out of its way to repeat the hardware mistakes of prior failed Nintendo handheld rivals and at no point resourced properly for it at a software level. It was like they lined up a first year line up then largely expected to walk away and it take care of itself. Hardware wise they went the costly way at every turn.

I'd make all the above hardware changes plus stuff like ditching the rear touch pad and (scandalously) drop the OLED out the gate.
Essentially, make it something that was more aggressively price pointed out the gate, focus on getting devices in hands which would drive more ports and games to the system - the Nintendo approach but with the Sony appeal.

[wakka]

All great points above.

The narrative at the time was very much that Sony had released the world's most premium handheld console at a time when the realpolitik approach would have been to instead start issuing F2P mobile versions of their major games.

Then Switch came along, and pretty much disproved that thesis outright (thank goodness).

With the benefit of hindsight, I think Vita could have been a success. I agree that they should have aggressively cut cruft like the rear touchpad, OLED and 3G radio, added L2 and R2 buttons, and reduced the price. I also think that one additional approach they could have taken could have been to focus more on ports of PS3 games.

This could have reduced development costs per flagship game, increased the available software more quickly, and given a clearer, more easily communicable marketing message about what Vita actually was - a portable PS3.

What do you guys think about that as an idea? I don't actually know if it would have been technologically feasible...?

[Asura]

Then Switch came along, and pretty much disproved that thesis outright (thank goodness).

The success of the Switch definitely casts a long shadow over this topic.

I had a Vita, and a VitaTV, and I absolutely loved how you could play a game on the go, continue it at home, play it on the go again... The idea that your library at home and in other places was the same was fantastic. When the Vita failed I was really concerned that this concept would fall by the wayside.

When the Switch was unveiled I was really happy, because it just felt like a smarter implementation of what I'd been using anyway.

[wakka]

I'd forgotten about the VitaTV. That wasn't a bad idea, but was outright doomed by the fact that the lead platform was already unpopular and had a mostly niche library.

A Vita that shipped with a dock, and had ports of PS3 games...now that could have been a goer, although still not to the extent Switch has been.

The success of the Switch definitely casts a long shadow over this topic.

Yeah, it pretty much defines the conversation honestly. Even if you had described the Switch to me in 2015, I would have in no way imagined that it would have been as commercially successful as it has been. The concept really captured people's imaginations in a way that I think few people would have anticipated.

[fuse]

At launch:

• Uncharted (the public bloody love this!)
• wipEout
• Lumines
• Everybody's Golf
• Gravity Rush
• Virtua Tennis
• Katamari Damacy
• Blazblue
• Marvel vs Capcom

First party support further down the line is another subject, but it came out of the gates incredibly strong. I'll agree that the memory card situation was not great, but I don't buy that the name or the presence of a 3G model is that big a deal.

Personally think the question here should not be "what did the Vita do wrong" but rather "how do you placate the chaos of public opinion". The Vita didn't fail us, we failed the Vita, and so on.

[gunrock]

The memory card was a massive issue. The cards were (and still are) really overpriced and actually not very reliable.

3g version was ****e simply because it had a download cap on the Vita itself, so you couldn't download a game from PSN, even if you had the data allowance.

A lot of great games, but also a lot of shovelware. The boxes for the physical games are so cute. Having played the switch a lot, the larger screen means the ports of older PS2/PS3 era titles works well, the Vita screen is a bit too small for that to work.

The UI was simple to the point of being noddy and a step back from the PSP and PS3 style crossbar.

[wakka]

I think the name and the 3G are emblematic of an unfocused design and the inevitable corollary of unfocused marketing. Like the WiiU or the Xbox One, it had a diluted message that made convincing potential buyers an uphill battle. If you look at the most successful consoles, they tend to be designed around a clear primary selling point, and supported by marketing that strongly emphasises it.

[QualityChimp]

It'll always be an enigma to me why the Vita didn't succeed, especially when I look at Nintendo.

They keep releasing consoles and put loads of shovelware on them with a few AAA titles every couple of years.
Then they undo the UI of each console (3DS to 2DS, Switch to non-switching Switch Lite) and they still feel like they're marketed to kids (or at least adults that think it'll create some joyous family-bonding gaming sessions).

That's not me bashing Nintendo, I'm saying I know nothing, don't understand the market and am sad Sony quit the handheld racket with a device that should have been all-conquering.

Imagine if the Xperia Play was still a thing - bridging the mobile and gaming markets.

[wakka]

Yeah, it's why it's fascinating to discuss. Making a hit console is devilishly difficult, whoever you are. Even the industry titans like Sony, Nintendo and MS still eff it up on the regular. And the all-conquering empires of Google and Amazon, who can normally soak up any market they choose, struggle to break in.

[Neon Ignition]

Lack of curation was painful. Uncharted is a good example, it's a really solid recreation of a console pushing experience. However, once you've done it, you've done it. That's not unlike the console versions but on handheld you are then faced with a void. They needed to have Golden Abyss 2 and 3. Sony's IP's sell well but they're not evergreen like Nintendo's. I think the second year or so saw some decent third party bits pop up but the slide into JRPG haven began fairly quickly.

JRPG's landsliding onto a handheld are akin to the vultures circling above line up wise *shivers recalling the Nintendo Direct*

[Asura]

Imagine if the Xperia Play was still a thing - bridging the mobile and gaming markets.

In a sense, though, the Xperia Play might've been part of the problem.

In a relatively short time, Sony released the PSPGo, XperiaPlay, PSP-3000 and E1000 and the PSVita. Arrayed in the window of a videogame shop in new boxes, it diluted the brand. Especially when you have weird halfway houses like the Vita having a 3G version, but not being able to make phone calls.

[wakka]

Yeah, there are echoes of Sega at the height of their add-on mania in the early/mid 90s. ****loads of hardware, none of which plays particularly well together and each of which is being marketed with a different message. Basically a lack of a cohesive overall strategy. I think that's part of the overall story with the Vita's failure, for sure.

[Asura]

Will admit though, Sony did one thing really well, which has caught on.

Sony required all Vita games that came out physically to be available on the PSN store too. I think some publishers really disliked this, because they had relationships with retailers that this jeopardised (I know for a fact that Gamestation sold the PSPGo reluctantly; one of their staff after closure told me that they got them in, and sold them, but only in small numbers and more out of an obligation to keep Sony happy - they didn't really push them all that much because every PSPGo meant they would sell fewer games).

[wakka]

It was the first console to mandate that? Interesting.