I've been thinking a little bit about handheld systems lately, mainly due to Sony's Vita release. Handheld gaming has changed a lot over the years in technology, but I'm not sure the gamer's personal goal in handheld gaming has really changed at all. Culturally speaking, I think Sony took a bit of a gamble with the Vita, positioning themselves in a way that they could either destroy the market share Nintendo has had for so long, or destroy themselves.
Let me start off by saying I really like the Vita. I think the high price tag is the only thing that really kept me from making the investment. It is totally stacked with cutting edge tech, game quality and graphics look phenomenal, and all the inter-connective features on it (PS3, web, etc.) really add some depth to gaming that has been absent from even home consoles.
We have seen in the past, however, that technical proficiency does no equate to sales dominance. For me, this is no better represented than by Sega's GameGear. Poised in perfect position to really show Nintendo what for, the GameGear boasted a larger color screen, a comfortable button layout, and (for it's time) cutting edge features, such as a TV tuner adapter. Why did Nintendo's little grey box with it's puny monochromatic display succeed?
Nintendo (deliberately or not) met the needs of the 'gamer on the go'. As fantastic as of features as the GameGear had, it wasn't addressing the main needs of the travelling player. Nintendo exercised a sort of, 'form follows function' mentality when designing their unit. It was compact, efficient, and it scratched that gaming itch all at the same time. The GameGear was large, required ample power to run, and it ignored the cultural need of it's time - who needed to watch TV wherever they were at? Nintendo won out because they were more aware of the cultural 'need' (I use that word very lightly...).
As a quick segway, let me defend Sega's decision here... they were attempting to become the emergent technology. Sometimes the culture dictates the need and technology responds, sometimes the technology emerges and the culture embraces it. The iPad, for example... There wasn't a very strong need for tablet computers, they had existed for a while, but the iPad found a way, through a mixture of redesign and marketing, to make their product a cultural solution. Sega just didn't do that...
Back to the Vita, and this is what I'm curious what other people are thinking on this too. Is the Vita meeting a need, or is it trying to fill in an unnecessary gap? It's features are very close to that of a smartphone, so much in fact that it even includes social media apps, and game information sharing features. I'm very impressed by the ability to bring Uncharted with me wherever I go, but is that really what I want out of mobile gaming? It's the free games and simple games that make the smartphone gaming market so lucrative, so how do you convince a million Angry Bird addicts to pony up 400 bucks for this new thing and a couple of games?
That might be a little unfair, but it is the truth of the market we are currently in. Nintendo has kept up their success thanks to their share of first party titles (surprise, surprise...), but with them the risk is the opposite. If they don't stay more culturally relevant, then they risk becoming old news, a console lost in the piles of old toys from yesteryear. I think the risk for them is real too - I have a 3DS, and as much as I love it, the marketing focus on the 3D technology was a mistake. I play it all the time, but I never use the 3D.
Anyone else have a different experience with this stuff? Most of this is written based off of my own experiences, but I don't think it's that far from the truth... I basically stopped playing my GameGear because I was always tethered to a wall outlet. That isn't exactly what I imagined when I wanted to go into "mobile gaming."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you raise valid points and I apologize if I come across slightly frustrated (it's genuinely not targeted at you...just gaming journalists in general). I'm just tired of this spin.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about the Game Gear. I got one for 20 bucks at a garage sale well after they "died." While I do feel that you're correct in assuming some similarities between the Game Boy and Game Gear vs 3DS and Vita. I don't think the playing field is the same or at least the Vita isn't making the same decisions the Game Gear and Sega made in general.
I got a Vita Friday as a surprise present from my wife for my birthday and I can say with absolute certainty, to me, that this is the greatest and best handheld I've ever played. Period. Let me explain why.
Not all gamers want bite sized versions of games. I understand what portable gaming means and why handhelds exist, but in all my gaming life I've never considered mobile gaming to be something to be "eaten" in 5-10 minute bites. I've never had a daily train commute or bus ride. I don't travel by plane often. I eat lunch at work with a large group of people. I, personally, don't have these small chunks of time that every person that derides the Vita or PSP seem to have ample amounts of. Maybe everyone lives in the city but me?
When I play games I play them at home in front of a TV. I game at home. In front of my tv. In my gaming chair.
With my Vita I now game at home curled up on my couch. On the toilet. In my bed.
I enjoy everything the Vita offers because it compromises so little on what consoles have. It has shoulder buttons, d pad, 4 face buttons, 2 analog sticks, 2 touch screens, sixaxis a mic and 2 cameras. What more could you need?
I realize that it seems a little "everything, but the kitchen sink," but there really is no game that the Vita can't play. Nothing....nada.
Being a self admitted Trophy/Achievement junkie even gets a nod on the Vita. The trophies I earn count towards my overall trophy level on my PS3.
What was it that the PSP constantly got bashed for? Oh yeah. If only this thing had 2 sticks! Then I'd really play some games on it! Now we have a very powerful handheld with 2 sticks and people are griping because Angry Birds is 99 cents. Well you know what? Fuck Angry Birds! I love actual video games with real tactile input. An engrossing gameplay experience measured in good graphics and sound with excellent controls.
ReplyDeleteTry playing Uncharted or Escape Plan or Rayman on the 3DS or an iPhone. Try playing any modern game on any mobile device other than a Vita and see if it sacrifices itself in some way to make up for a smaller screen, weaker hardware specs or most obviously...a lack of better controls through a DEDICATED 2nd analog stick.
Also, I understand the games are a tad pricey and the somewhat hidden fee of the memory cards is lame, but how much did the 3DS cost when it launched? That's right....250 bucks. Why did it plummet in price? Because the Vita was announced at that same price point with ridiculously better specs at E3.
The Vita WILL NOT sell as much as the 3DS so please.....stop saying it will sell shit compared to the 3DS. I know this. Grandma and Little Joey don't give a flying fuck about real games. And lets not forget the laughable launch of the 3DS.
But for me, a seasoned and incredibly well versed gamer, the Vita is the handheld I've been waiting for my entire gaming life.
This is Sony's 2nd handheld. What number is Nintendo on? As much as Sony may like to think they'll grab up a bunch of casuals they won't. The Vita is an entirely different, and in my opinion better, beast.
So keep your Pokemon and Mario Kart and rereleases of old games that are literally the best games on your system and I'll play my Vita. A system with better graphics, functionality and controls. One that blurs the line between console and handheld and does it incredibly well.
P.S. An actual full fledged Call of Duty game (coming later this year) will absolute stun the pants off of gamers on the Vita and will move a lot of systems. I'm calling it now.
Here's a good article that hits along the same lines I do. Smart phones are replacing small, cheap point and click cameras, but not DSLRs. Same as smart phones can't replace real games. http://vita.ign.com/articles/121/1219380p1.html
ReplyDeleteWell you've clearly answered my question on "what people want" out of mobile gaming, I do hope for Sony's sake that a majority of the people agree with you. The PSP turned the same type of heads when it was the new kid on the block, and over the last few years the only games it had coming out for it were the expected sports titles, and one or two obscure RPGs.
ReplyDeleteWhat you said is true - these are "real games", not bite sized portions to take to the crapper. As exciting that is, (and I'll follow through with the food analogy) my question still stands - are we a gaming generation that's ready to bring a steak dinner from the kitchen to the bedroom? or the couch? or the toilet? In other words, will the Vita be able to convince XxHardCoreGamer666xX to swap out his comfy gaming chair, wireless controller, and surround sound headset, and 46" plasma for a comparable experience on a handheld? (Unless there was no gap between the two... that would be awesome if you could pick up and go where you left of with no seams... doubt it though.) These might be real games, but it is still a handheld experience.
I have a 3DS and like it a great deal, but I have tried to remain neutral in my opinions on the Vita. I'm actually more worried for Sony's sake. As I work in game retail, it's tough to see one-sided competition. Healthy and active competitors are crucial to making a better product, and as gamers we just rake in all the benefits. Sony's final year with the PSP was anything but active... maybe all the developers were secretly working on Vita stuff, but I saw that "upcoming title" list crumble long before the Vita had a dev kit.
Amongst my online reading, I found a few sources that seemed to have quoted common industry analysts, and they suspect that a price drop could happen with the Vita post COD. It'll probably stay costly throughout the holiday, but that's an interesting concept... lowering your entry cost to get more sales. I'd be very tempted to buy one if that "analyzed" $180 price point were true.
I realize that it may seem a little silly to play the thing as much as I have and play it like a console when I'm at home, but....that's just the way it's been for me.
ReplyDeleteI think that the PSP was a good system, but that Sony didn't back it as well as it should have and I think they're on a good path of backing the Vita really well. They've got 3G and a great online store ready at launch and what has been argued by many as one of the best launch line ups...ever.
I'm very excited for the future of the Vita as it truly mashes all my "buttons" for what I want out of a handheld.
And you're right about competition being good for the gamer.
It is also important to remember that the Vita has a good number of more bite sized games out there (and more coming), but that it can play big boy games as well.
As far as games that have fallen off I personally don't know of any. I've heard rumors, but of course Sony is denying them. I do remember seeing a list of canned games for the 3DS though after its sluggish start.
Oh well, Sony has enough exclusive developers (more than Microsoft and Nintendo) in its back pocket to satisfy most gamers anyway.
Also, the saving your game on the console and then picking it up on the Vita later in the same spot already exists. Obviously, it's limited to specific games, but it works.
ReplyDeleteI know that exists, I was thinking of some more direct connectivity between playing on my Vita, and playing on my home console... almost like pausing the game, then continuing to stream what I was just doing (multi, SP, etc.) on the handheld.
ReplyDeleteSir, you may be in the market for a WiiU!
ReplyDeleteI've read that Sony is interested in doing more stuff like that. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with because they could, in theory (and according to some youtube videos, already can), do what the WiiU is already selling itself on.
Time will tell.
WiiU? Good one. Nintendo has me in it's grip with Zelda, but I've never bought a console for one game. That's gonna be a tough sell.
ReplyDeleteAll the selling points aside, I think remote play with next gen titles needs to happen for the Vita. All the other additions and innovations the Vita has to offer are natural progressions - the result of better, cheaper, more streamlined tech getting added to a formula that developers know. Impressive to be sure, but nothing really unexpected. Being able to stream my home console, wherever I am, with no real lack of quality... now that's a step forward.
Nintendo has gotten in this habit of keeping their handhelds and home consoles separate, which is a little confusing as they were on the cutting edge of that about 8 years ago. I think it's silly that the accounts on my Wii and DSi/3DS can't be linked to share purchased products. Why the heck can't I buy Super Mario World for my 3DS? They already know all I want to do is play/buy games I've already purchased years ago, so why can't I do it in two places at once...
I goofed around with remote play on the Vita a short while. It is cool because you can connect via a private network in your home or using the internet from literally anywhere.
ReplyDeleteThere's even an option in the PS3 to be able to turn your console on and off remotely from the Vita. It's pretty damn cool.
But unfortunately it's limited as to what it can stream. Some PSN games and all PSOne games. I guess that's good if you don't want to eat up precious space on the memory cards, but I would love to be able to stream Mass Effect to the Vita. Pant wetting would ensue.