News Article

Sony: Wii U Offering "Something That Vita and PS3 can do Quite Easily"

Posted by Thomas Whitehead

Ding Ding, FIGHT!

What do you get when a Nintendo system's big selling point is innovative dual screen play — with a GamePad featuring its own screen — and a competitor's handheld and home console systems also offer various dual-screen connectivity options? You get a lot of corporate boasting and big talk, that's what, and the Nintendo vs Sony battle has picked up again with Sony Computer Entertainment America VP of marketing, handhelds and home consoles, John Koller, weighing into the fight; that's a heck of a job title, so he must be important.

The potential cross-play and interaction between Vita and PS3 titles has already been proven, and Koller has spoken to engadget about a Wii U comparison and Sony's hopes of finding the right ways for its two systems to connect in more games.

We tell our PlayStation fans all the time that what the Wii U is offering is something that Vita and PS3 can do quite easily.

It's dependent on the content. So we need to make sure the content isn't force fed. And, to us, making sure that the gamer receives the right type of experience is what's most important. So we're gonna pick our spots, but that technology does certainly exist here.

Of course, an important counter-argument is that Wii U has everything you need right out of the box, and Koller was quizzed about whether Sony is contemplating a bundle of PS3 and Vita in one purchase.

As we look at the lineup, there are gonna be some opportunities to do that. Whether we want to bundle the hardware together remains to be seen.

In the meantime, you look at the Vita consumer and a very high percentage — almost all of them — own a PS3. So you see that crossover works.

One major point in Wii U's favour is that the GamePad screen and the console are directly integrated together, so it's a standard for games and a natural part of a title's development; as Vita and PS3 are two separate pieces of hardware, there are likely to be different challenges in development.

It's an interesting debate, and it's not necessarily easy to churlishly dismiss Sony's argument, even if the differences between Wii U and its rival's connectivity options are notable. What do you think about the comparison, and is it a potential threat to Wii U?


From the web

User Comments (174)



Popyman said:

Yeah, for like twice the price and a very small portion of games actually use it.



Burning_Spear said:

Of course, the PS3 and the Vita can duplicate dual-screen play. ... If you shell out the money to buy both.



GN0LAUM said:

The problem is the install base. Sure, the Vita can do most of the same things, but very few people a) have a Vita and b) no one is going to make games that use a Vita/PS3 interface in any unique or interesting way because there are simply too few consumers who possess the ability to play a game like that. Nintendo has a similar problem in the Gamecube days with the Gameboy Advance interface. Only a handful of games were made (maybe a "handful" is being too generous) to take advantage of the GBA system cable and that was it. The WiiU on the other hand will have this controller packed in from day 1, meaning all developers can design games around the two screens.

This is just rhetoric right now. They're posturing. The real question is, will people actually care about this two screen idea a few years from now? The point will be moot if the idea flops.



GTWarrior77 said:

Nintendo customers can enjoy the full experience right out the box. Not all sony gamers will be able to benefit from their ps3 Vita combo and so some gamers will be left out. Nintendo gamers wil not have that problem.
In this day and age value for money is a strong driving force and if you throw Nintendo's excellent games into the mix, you've got a winner.



Mollutje said:

The fact that you need both consoles to mimmick the Wii U experience makes me doubt whether developers are keen to experiment with it. Also, what happens as soon as that ps4 of theirs comes out, which is supposed to be on a waaaaaay different level? Wouldn't the Vita by that point lag behind it's younger home console brother too much to continue cross-play capability? Don't think this'll work..



New_3DaSh_XL said:

Seeing as how many people have preordered a Wii U I don't think Wii U is going to have any problems.



SilverSeraph said:

This is like saying the PS Move can do anything the Wii can do "quite easily". PS Move was also a commercial flop for the same reason others have already pointed out about the Vita/Wii U comparison. Developers can't count on their customer having one because it's not in the box with the PS3.



ivanmata said:

This makes Sony look like they're giving up on Vita as a standalone console...



DiaperSystem said:

Something that Sony can't seem to do quite easily, is sell their boring and unimaginative handheld.

Edit: something that Sony should do is: reinvent themselves, instead of simply upgrading the graphical capabilities of their console with each generation.



LavaTwilight said:

They're talking to their customers, who probably already have one or the other, or both consoles. That's well and good but it won't win new customers. I've given up on XBox; and Playstation aren't currying any favour from me. What Mr Sony fails to mention is that the PS3 will be outdated soon by the PS4 whereas the Wii U is starting it's life. Besides if the PS3 launch is anything to go by, the PS4 will be disrespectfully overpriced and you still can't play many PS1/PS2/PS3 games on it!
Sorry Sony, you may be able to retain your customers for a while after Wii U launches but you're not winning anyone over to your brand either! And it's only a matter of time before they see how much better Nintendo are, graphics aside.



Alesandro1UP said:

Here's what similarities and differences both have. For one the ps3 & vita both have the technology where they pretty much could do the dual screen gameplay that the Wii U is capable of, & as we've all seen in NA adds, you could transfer gameplay from the tv to the system. Now here are the differences and the major selling point of the Wii U, in my own opinion. In order to push what's on playin on the tv from the ps3 to the vita you need the necessary cables & equipment which it's not cheap & they both need to be connected to the Internet & THAT right there is what sets them apart. The Wii U's tablet does that and much more right out of the box, without the need of other software and equipment & it's also something that the consumer could understand without the extra stuff. I really hope Sony sees that and makes this whole process much easier for game developers and consumers, cause the Wii U needs that, so that game developers develop games with the dual screen functuanilty in mind & future PS4 games would be a lot easier to port to Wii U & support for the system stays strong.



NorthLightSuplx said:

"Wii U is offering is something that Vita and PS3 CAN do quite easily." The problem is they never allow the Vita to do anything it CAN do. I CAN trade it in though because they will not allow the Vita to function like it should.



Nardar said:

There is a possible Wii U to 3DS cross over that could benefit Wii U even more.



Spleetal said:

Vita and ps3 could work like wii U but you pay a couple hundred for the ps3 and a couple hundred for the vita and you're already in a lot of money, the ps vita can do most of what wii u can do but there's no NFC on the vita



DrDingus said:

Sure, ps3 and vita are certainy more than capable of connecting and providing that type of gameplay. However, it's a much tougher sell to get a consumer to buy an aging console with the additional cost of an undersupported handheld system when they could just buy a shiny new Wii U for much cheaper.



New_3DaSh_XL said:

At least the Wii U isn't an exact copy of anything non-Nintendo, the PS Move is a WiiMote.

If I were you, Playstation, I'd shut up.



FlaccidSnake said:

I tried out using the vita with my ps3 a few months ago {before i sold the vita!}
It was actually a pain in the arse to set up. I doubt many ps3/vita owners a really bothering with that.



Samholy said:

sony will be bale to do it. but just not like the WiiU. and less times.
on the WiiU, its a standard for their games. every game will see it implemented and it will change the gameplay.
the the ps3, the game will be made first to be played without it for non-vita users. then a feature will be added for the vita.
this is a solid difference.

plus the combo vita/ps3 costs a little fortune for a current-gen console at the end of its life
But sony is good at taking nintendo ideas and make them either better or similar. I would hate them if it wasnt the fact the the PS3 is a wicked machine that I really love. just didnt go into the psmove cause it crap. I HATE motion control things. And also, all-star battle game is...wait...a copycat of smash brothers. what the hell. i cant believe theyre really doing this.

whatever. i like both, but the phylosophy behind companies is where sony fails the most, ots a good reason why i will get the WiiU and wait years for the ps4



rjejr said:

Since this is a Nintendo site it's only right that there is a lot of bashing of the Vita, (maybe not as much as on the Sony sites though) bu the one BIG difference - the Vita is portable. Yes, you can play WiiU games and Wiiware games and maybe Gamecube games on the Gamepad, but has anybody released distance yet? There are times when I am sitting on my couch and the Wiimote doesn't work right, I am a bit concerned that the Gamepad might have problems at even 8' away. And I just know somebody in America is going to return their WiiU b/c the Gamepad doesn't work apart from the system in their bedroom or kitchen.
I do think Sony will do bundles, but with the PS4 and Vita 2, which will probably have NFC. A $500 bundle may be acceptable for a new console bundle.



zeldazero said:

Honestly, I feel sorry for Sony and Microsoft. When Nintendo comes out with something innovative they have a problem. They have to make a choice between looking stupid and trying to make up reasons why they are better which never turn out to be truths or saying they can do better and then failing miserably at thier attempt to mimic what they just got done saying was a "gimic". I think Nintendo is using this as a strategy. Make something new forcing Sony and Microsoft to go against thier typical strategy to try to compete in an arena outside thier normal operating stances. Obviously it is working. I think Sony and Microsoft aren't giving info on new systems because they are waiting to see how the WiiU does so if it does well they can once again try to upstage Nintendo at its own game by copying its technology in a way that takes it just outside the range of blatant copying. Say what you will, PS move and Kinect are utter failures which is proof that copying is never as good as the original.



Ernest_The_Crab said:

@rjejr I do find it a little ironic that the Sony sites would bash the Vita even harder than a Nintendo site.

They could potentially do it for a more expensive price. I'd be more interested in this connectivity between their two systems if they could set it up so you could start playing between both and then leave with just the Vita and keep playing the game with no disruptive shift (and I don't mean the save transfers, I mean seamlessly transitioning the game to the Vita from the PS3).

Otherwise, it seems a Wii U/3DS combination would probably do things better.



Klinny said:

"In the meantime, you look at the Vita consumer and a very high percentage — almost all of them — own a PS3. So you see that crossover works."

The problem with this statement, though, is that while almost every Vita owner may have a PS3, this does not mean that almost every PS3 owner has a Vita. Of course I don't know the statistics, but I am personally not interested in a Vita and so this feature will never be applicable to me, despite my owning a PS3.

I also tried out the PS3 Remote Play option with the PSP, and I remember it being a huge pain in the you-know-what. While it was a good idea, it was never implemented well, and felt extremely clunky and unintuitive. Even if the PS3-Vita crossover is fabulous, that experience leaves me hesitant to try it again, and even more hesitant to spend money on it.



PinkSpider said:

You know what really annoys me about Sony they slag Nintendo off and then copy everything they do the Wii remote is made so they make the move, the Wii U comes out with its innovative controller and then they suddenly come out with the ps vita connectivity mimicking the Wii U.
Its the same with Xbox they slate Nintendo for using motion controls and being kid friendly but then realise "wait a minute that seems to be selling well" and then release the awfulness that is kinect.
I love the fact that Nintendo try different things. There not afraid to try new innovative ideas but they put there hands up when they know they have done something wrong. And look after there fans



PinkSpider said:

I personally haven't been this excited for a game console in ages.
I'm counting down the day's bring it on Nintendo prove to all the doubters that your console will be incredible.



hamae said:

Gamecube + GBA had already proven that won't work. Nintendo didn't even do it with the huge install base of Wii + DS, they had a reason.



Einherjar said:

Like many others said already: Very few (if any) developer will take advantage of the PS3/Vita combo because the playerbase who owns both systems is very slim. So, you need people who: -own a PS3, -own a Vita AND want that game. For the WiiU´...well, you just need the WiiU. Any Company could do the same, even Microsoft could just release a tablet controller, but you must consider the price of all these things, and that makes it non-profitable to "upgrade" a existing system.



Emaan said:

Sony used talked smack! Its not very effective. GO Reggie! Use counter argument!



Squiggle55 said:

@Mollutje Hopefully when the PS4 comes out, the connection between the PS4 and Vita will actually be better than ever. With the PS4 doing all of the processing, hopefully remote play works without a hitch. They certainly didn't really build the Vita with the PS3 in mind, but now hopefully they're building the PS4 with the Vita in mind.

Anyways, I think the PS3/Vita controller combo will be very limited to mostly first party stuff because of the install base. Hope I'm wrong though.



yobucky said:

Lawl... sony you so funny... EVERY WII U game will be able to use a second screen, whereas the number of ps3 AND ps vita users is so small that any manufacturer would be insane to make a game only work with both, it'll only ever be a gimmicky tack on to some games, like the gameboy advance connections were for most gamecube games... not vital but just something extra you could do. The gamepad on the wii u is going to be an integral part of most games, to the point where you need it to play the game properly...
And yeah as others are saying... it only costs half of what those two do... sahny... what are you doin? sahny... stahp!! (making me laugh in this case)



birthgirth said:

There is nothing better than a good Nintendo game. I've been playing video games all my life, grew up with nintendo products because they're OG obviously. But I've played games on every console, and yes there are some fun games out there for PS3 and Xbox 360...but I've always found that a good Nintendo game is always much more FUN. Nintendo brings completely different level of fun to games. So even if Sony tried to deliver the "same experience" to the few people who own Vitas, they simply cannot do it. It's not as seamless either. Which I kinda see Smartglass not being as cool either...lag time maybe?
ANYWAY, start handing out a free Vita with PS3 purchases homeboy Sony.



16bitdave said:

Can't we all just get along and sell video games side by side. There's enough room for both of them in my world.



ejamer said:

Can anyone clarify one point:
Is communication between the Vita and PS3 direct, or does it require an internet connection? If it's not direct communication, that would mean that a PS3/Vita combo CAN'T replicate the Wii U experience directly, although it could probably come close.

Outside of that one caveat, I'd bet that Vita and PS3 can replicate a Wii U experience in most ways. I'm not sure that it ever will outside of select games that Sony releases just to prove a point. In fact, I'm not sure that trying is even in Sony's best interest given hardware costs and limited returns.

Oddly, I think it would probably be a good thing for Wii U if the PS3/Vita combo does work though. Third party developers would rather release on multiple systems if possible - so if two systems can use similar feature sets then maybe Nintendo would see better Wii U support.



Kohaku said:

It might be possible according to Sony but even Sony doesn't release games which needs the Vita as extra like Nintendo has with for example SMBU.



MAB said:

Just some idiotic rambling from the competition Sony VP of marketing observes WiiU preorders selling like hotcakes, John Koller starts clutching at straws. Hey! look everybody here's our lemon



Megumi said:

It's kinda irritating that all Sony wants to do is talk down on Nintendo...And Nintendo, didn't they give ADVICE to Sony when they launched the Vita? So they wouldn't go through with what Nintendo did with the 3DS launch?

Seriously Sony...>_>



zezhyrule said:

Does this site have any news articles that aren't just meant to rile up the fanboys?



Boo_Buster said:

The interviewer should have said to the Vita owners own a PS3 comment "While yes, that is for the majority true, every PS3 owner does not necessarily have a Vita. In fact, I would say a majority of PS3 owners do not have a Vita"... Which is a fact. Less than 50% of PS3 owners own a Vita as well, while 100% of Wii U owners have the GamePad. It's a rather simple argument, and not hard to make Sony eat those words. Look, I have a PS3 and love it, but Sony tries too hard to be like Nintendo. They copy off them all the time. ALL OF THE TIME. Look at All Stars Battle Royal = Smash Bros. ripoff. It is sad. If every company was like Nintendo and was creative and innovative and went their own way, the gaming world would be a better place. Again, I am not a Sony hater, but I can see the truth for what it really is



shinpichu said:

Sony, the thing is, you need to buy two ridiculously expensive electronic things for the PS3/Vita thing to work, while with the Wii U you only need the one.



BestBuck15 said:

Eh I know I'll get shot down for this but he has a point and it seems that a ps vita will be in and around the same price as the Wii U touch screen pad. There is a lot of blind alliance to Nintendo on this discussion.



Malic said:

@BestBuck123 the wiiu touch pad comes with the system ps3 does not come with the vita and if it did it would be way to expensive just to play a few games on



Geonjaha said:

Well this newspost will bring in the fanboys - that's for sure.
(Sony and Nintendo - there's enough of both on the site..)



PinkSpider said:

@geonjaha is it not the same with every console they all have there fans.
But this is Sony once again being stuck up there again and thinking there better than everyone.
When we all know there not



hamispink said:

Like many people have rightfully pointed out, buying a ps3 and a vita will run you $200 more than the base model wii U. Granted you're getting WAY more content with the PS, it isn't commercially viable. The vita ps3 crossplay will never reach the impact that the wii U will, though I'm willing to bet that next year, We could see a $350-$400 dollar ps3-vita bundle. That could be very interesting



scakko84 said:

Also i would like to point out that ps3 + vita should use a router setup and so a little delay in input and output depending on the amount of traffic flowing on the network. Unless they connect directly the ps3 to psvita as they do with the psp, but doing that means you can no longer connect the ps3 to the internet using wi-fi and you should connect by cable.

So no, it's not the same experience and it's not as simple.



scakko84 said:

Also i would like to point out that ps3 + vita should use a router setup and so a little delay in input and output depending on the amount of traffic flowing on the network. Unless they connect directly the ps3 to psvita as they do with the psp, but doing that means you can no longer connect the ps3 to the internet using wi-fi and you should connect by cable.

So no, it's not the same experience and it's not as simple.



Arcane16 said:

I don't care I think the Ps3/Vita are awesome systems and Sony should market the Vita as it's own system instead of a Ps3 add-on, but I hate it when Sony feels the need to bash or say idiotic immature comment's towards Nintendo and Microsoft as if you can't have a strong rivalry and still be mature and humble towards your competition.



WesCash said:

Wow, that's like saying the Gamecube and GBA can do the same thing (and that sure was a success).

You need to own both devices as well as have a game that supports the function in a well-thought out and interesting way.

Whereas the Game Pad is an integral part of the console.



allav866 said:

@PinkSpider Yeah, Sony has a knack for thinking they do things better than Nintendo; PS Move, Sony All-Stars: Battle Royale, and now this. I don't hate the PS3, and I'm sure the Vita is a good system, but when the company is trying to be better than everyone else, they're more concerned with making something that already exists and make it better rather than actually producing original content.



Imagine23 said:

How about this one: PS-MOVE is offering "something that Wii can do Quite Easily"

Ball's in your court Sony...



AVahne said:

So can it do asynchronous gameplay? Can the Vita interact with a Move? Is the connection lag free all the time, EVERY TIME? I have plenty more questions, even though I already the Vita/PS3 combo cannot do everything the Wii U can do. I own a PS3 and plan to get a Vita in addition to a Wii U, but I can't see myself using that functionality very much as Wii U will do it far better and will do it with most games, instead of a small few.



Alienfish said:

Lol, nice. I read the top three comments and it seems that it's common knowledge now that Sony can, in fact, copy the abilities of the WiiU with the PSV, except for promising that every PS3 owner will have the second screen. Sony should just shut up and do something useful instead of whining about Nintendo.



AVahne said:

For now I doubt that kind of bundle can exist. Sony's already losing money on both systems separately, combining them would make things financially worse than before.



Dentyone said:

"look at the Vita consumer and a very high percentage — almost all of them — own a PS3."

Too bad for Sony that it's not vice versa.



NorthLightSuplx said:


Not if they don't do it then it does not matter.
The Vita can do remote play but it only does so on a few games. (everybody was wowed by this feature when it was first announced and sony has been moot about it)
The Vita can play all PS One Classics but it does not as of right now (NA got 9 games with firmware 1.80)

The Vita can play all PSP but it does not as of right now.

Sony needs to crap or get off the pot!



Spoony_Tech said:

I think Sony should give everyone that has a ps3 (new or 5 years old) a vita so they can go toe to toe with Nintendo. Oh wait if its not a part of the hardware like nintendos is then developers will get lazy and not even use what's there. Once again Sony is in the fail boat!



AVahne said:

That kind of bundle would mean dropping support for Vita 1 before it has even had a full life, not to mention to mention that $500 price tag would mean PS4 would be much weaker than some idiots are anticipating. Otherwise, Sony's gaming division might as well file for bankruptcy.



luminalace said:

Great for them, now let's see developers actually bother! Actually scratch that, lets see developers actually treat the Vita seriously!



zezhyrule said:

@NorthLightSuplx: My comment was simply saying that all Sony said is "the technology exists". They didn't say that the Sony/Vita would be a major competitor to the Wii U, they didn't say they would advertise the connection of the consoles as a selling point, all they said is that it exists and the experience can be duplicated easily.

Whether they do it or not is irrelevant.



Lunapplebloom said:

Yep, same old Sony. Trash talk and take no prisoners.

But to be truthful, I could see this happening. Though they need to push it or otherwise end up in the same boat as the Gamecube/GBA days.



Obvious78 said:

Sony is right. But the console is outdated. It doesnt run 1080p native.
Also the Vita is 1 expensive thing to have...then u have to buy a pS3 too. The idea is great, but Sony's stuff are always way too expensive/overpriced. Besides that, Having an expensive powerfull console/handheld is NOT the key to succes!



LittleKing said:

Anyone notice how he dodged the issue? Most players with a Vita have a PS3... but what matters is how many people with PS3's have Vitas. It's like saying if Nintendo allowed people to connect their Virtual Boys with their Wii Us it'd be a big hit since, hey, most people who bothered getting a Virtual Boy will probably get a Wii U, being big Nintendo junkies and all! Of course, this doesn't change the fact that the user base with both is very small. You're supposed to see how many people who own the device that sold the most have the device that sold the least, not the other way around. Swapping the implication to get the converse statement doesn't work. Hello converse error. >_>



nfzeta007 said:

@Gamer16 I really think they should focus on their handheld more, i think they had one good game recently that truly used all the assets the vita has and it seemed pretty cool, but now they have gone back to lining it up alongside the PS3, both with all the ports its getting and with this connectivity.



Rapadash6 said:

What about latency though? Nintendo has said countless times that eliminating lag within the stream to and from the game pad was a very difficult to achieve, but that they had done so. Considering that the method of data transfer that the Vita/PS3 combo uses is based on a WIFI connection, and that it's very unlikely Sony's engineers had not planned for heavy collaboration between the two systems, I doubt it can parity what Wii U does nearly as effectively. Could you imagine how much even the average delay between WIFI devices would effect a fast paced shooting game, similar to Metroid Blast? It just wouldn't be as good.



Moshugan said:

Great. So PS3 will get Wii U ports somewhere along the line. That's hilarious.
On a serious note, it would be very risky for developers to engineer their games from the ground up for this sort of cross-play to be required to play the game!
At most, the cross-play features are going to be optional bonuses. Nuff said.
What IS cool about PS3-Vita connectivity is the ability to play some of your PS3 games on your Vita when away from your house.



Lalivero said:

@zezhyrule Why take time to belittle what your rival offers then if you aren't even sure whether or not you plan to make use what you say 'can easily be done'? It is relevant in that sense. Don't talk smack if you don't plan to deliver.

Despite the Wii U being able to do the whole dual screen thing natively and having some other tricks the current competition doesn't, the Vita/PS3 crossplay does have 'some' potential...but points have already been made as to why it wouldn't be cost-effective, etc.



Sforzando said:

I am of the opinion that it helps. Think about it, if this dual screen...thingy only worked on WiiU, "Mainstream" developers would ignore it. But with the SmartGlass app and the PS3/Vita double team, they can develop a dual screen interface that can be used on all 3 consoles.



zezhyrule said:

@Chriiis: Actually Sony said that, not me. Sony talks smack all the time while hardly ever delivering anything, but it doesn't mean every time they do there should be a new NintendoLife article on it.

@bezerker99: Exactly

Anyway, it's not like there will be more than one or two games that have an optional feature to use both consoles in some un-innovative fashion. There's no news here.



Doge said:

can the ps3 take pictures?
does it have a suscreen?
does ps3 gyro controls?
huh? huh? HUH?!



Doge said:

but really... they just know wii u cant be beaten... so there making bad reviews, it happens all the time



Lalivero said:

@zezhyrule Haha, I didn't mean you. I guess it's just funny to see the competition make a remark on 'your stuff' and then see the reaction of all those who are potentially on your side. Some people post constructive things...but usually it's just a bunch of backlash. :



zezhyrule said:

@ItsInRealLife: The Vita can take pictures and the PS3 can as well (with a PS Eye), and both the DualShock 3 and the Vita have motion stuff. No idea what a suscreen is but Sony probably does that too.



Otto-Soq said:

I prefer Nintendo. Still waiting for a Sony platform game with the same x-factor as
Donkey Kong Country or Mario.



TheRegginator said:

I'd rather just get a superior Wii U instead of buying a $250 handheld (with no games to boot), a $250 console (with a library I hardly care about because I have a PC), and two copies of every game just to get a lesser experience.



zezhyrule said:

"I'd rather just get a superior Wii U"

Who's the fanboy here? I've said absolutely nothing fanboyish in this article's comments. I guess any comment not absolutely praising nintendo and hating on Sony will be counted as fanboyism :/



TrueWiiMaster said:

"In the meantime, you look at the Vita consumer and a very high percentage — almost all of them — own a PS3. So you see that crossover works."
The reverse, however, proves opposite. The vast majority of PS3 owners don't have Vita's. The question is would it be worth including cross play support when it only appeals to such a small group? I really don't see this taking off for Sony. It's too expensive, there aren't enough Vita's out there, and it'll never be as substantial as the Wii U's built in support.



dirtyplastic said:

I love my vita, It is the best handheld gaming machine which has ever been on the market, but this will never happen, Sony can't even get remote play to work with every ps3 game. The vita is so much more than a ps3 add on or controller, and sony should treat it as such. I think this time next year the vita and the Wii U will both be dead.



Nintenzo said:

When Wii U is released, we'll just see how many minutes it takes for Sony to rip it off.



hYdeks said:

I think the vita/ps3 offer alil bit of a different deal than the Wii U does. Not all games for the Wii U will be able to play on the screen itself either, but it's just a gamepad for the system itself. PS3/Vita is alil different, Vita is a portable on it's own, that can do the remote play thing like the Wii U GamePad, slight difference. Personally, I would get a Vita, but that's because I want one and I already own a PS3, so it works out great for me, but for Nintendo fans, Wii U is better deal right out of the box.



FluttershyGuy said:

Interesting. He tries to claim that the PS3 & Vita together can do what the Wii U can, when the two individual pieces if hardware are separated in release by over half a decade and would cost perhaps TWICE what the Wii U does if bundled. Then, following this flawed argument, he doesn't point out perhaps the only advantage the 3DS/PS3 combo would have, that the GamePad doesn't double as a standalone handheld. Of course, that argument goes down the tubes if Nintendo turns 3DS into a Wii U controller, which could happen. For a head of marketing being paid presumably good money, he's not presenting a very good argument here logically, and fails to seize upon other openings.

That's one thing I love about Nintendo. They maintain their own identity, regardless of what anybody else is doing. They are the trendsetters and innovators in gaming. As we further see in pieces like this where the competition tries to claim that mismatched pieces of their technology are just as capable. Or they outright copy Nintendo later on, as with motion controller technology. I never hear Nintendo say, "me too." They do their own thing, which often hasn't been done before.



Malkeor said:

"One major point in Wii U's favour is that the GamePad screen and the console are directly integrated together, so it's a standard for games and a natural part of a title's development; as Vita and PS3 are two separate pieces of hardware, there are likely to be different challenges in development."

You hit the nail on the head with this. I mean it's retarded for them to say that because first of all it's ridiculous to assume you can compete using two separate pieces of hardware to achieve the same thing.
Absolutely dumb. Sony you fail.



WarioPower said:

This is why I can't stand Sony. They bash Nintendo about something, when they either have it inferior or it's a blatant rip off of Nintendo's idea!



dew12333 said:

This is what I hate about Sony, they always miss the point.




MeloMan said:

The Wii U will still get the better of that deal though as no one will have to worry about getting two separate pieces that won't really be integrated all that much. The Vita connecting to the PS3 makes about as much sense as the GBA did with GCN... it's "works", but to "get it working" is expensive and involved. Can't blame Sony, Nintendo is a rival and of course they want to steal N's thunder as much as possible.



moomoo said:

No developer will put out a game that requires a connection between the two devices. The install base is incredibly limited, and then you have to factor in that there's no way that entire install base will buy the game anyway.

The only game that really required the use of a GBA connector on the Gamecube was Pac-Man Vs., and that was included with other games. And there were a lot more people with GBAs and Gamecubes than PSVitas and PS3s.



SuperMinusWorld said:

"In the meantime, you look at the Vita consumer and a very high percentage — almost all of them — own a PS3. So you see that crossover works."

Yes, but what he chose not to mention was that a very low percentage of PS3 owners own a Vita; this crossover doesn't work as well as he has led us to believe. When you take into account all of the PS3 owners who don't plan to buy a Vita (a good amount, wether they be 'casual' or 'core') but want to play a game that may require (or just overall be better with) a Vita as the controller, then it's really a staggering difference.

Nintendo wins. Again.



a_binfahad said:

Nintendo is and ALWAYS will be better than Sony, Sony video game consoles are still living just because they have big third-party support, if any major problems happen to the third-party supporters of Sony, They're done for, while Nintendo basically has it's own Huge first-party support, that means if Nintendo lost Third-party support, they could still keep on going, thanks to Mr.MiyamoTo



TornadoX7 said:

HECK NO...i mean dont get me wrong here PS3 and Vita's connectivity thing is all nice probly quite fun to play but the Wii U offers it and expands that concept making almost all its games so far have assymetric gameplay honestly I think what Sony's doing is just a expensive spin-off. It may be becuz my friend has both of the systems but still it wont bother Wii U if it does it wont be significant.



nasachi said:

a rival for Nintendo?... don't really think so, Sony's exklusive games are too mediocre in terms of quality and attention to detail



Neram said:

Sony is just trying to cover all their bases, but the problem here is that it's not seamless. Just because the hardware exists doesn't mean that developers will make games that expect people to have both platforms, that's one huge thing they're overlooking. Also, another aspect is that the GamePad is more suited for long hours of game time with the more comfortable form and more complete analog sticks, whereas the Vita is a bit cramped so it doesn't seem as intuitive, at least not to me.

I like to call this another one of their "tacked on" efforts.



FonistofCruxis said:

@Zezzy This seemed kind of fanboyish to me:
"Hey guys. They can do it. And better. That's all that matters."
I don't see how anyone could support argument of Sony doing this better. You have to buy two separate consoles for asynchronous gameplay with Vita/PS3 whereas the Wii U is designed for this and everything you need for this sort of gameplay comes with the Wii U and will be an essential part of the gameplay in some Wii U games but it will just be an option in certain PS3/PSV games that not many are likely to use.



StarDust4Ever said:

LOL, anybody ever played Pacman VS? GBA/GC split screen right out of the box, and years before PS3/Vita existed, LOL! They should definitely remake Pacman VS for the Wii-U, or at least tie it in with one of the next Pacman outings.



Vehemont said:

Sony really needs a price drop on the Vita IMO. Especially if they are going to go this route........



CaPPa said:

If the Vita/PS3 can do everything that the Wii U can 'easily' then why isn't it already? I know that you can use the Vita as a PS3 controller and that you can play PS3 games remotely, but I've yet to see any signs of asymetric gameplay or panoramic viewing. It seems more akin to a WiiU/3DS combo (as they can do crossplay on games such as Monster Hunter).

Maybe Sony should concentrate on what the Vita was supposed to do originally rather than pretending that it is a WiiU.

The only thing that Sony does better than Nintendo is in spewing out BS (self aware games on PS2, 4D graphics on PS3 etc).



Zombie_Barioth said:

One not so little problem here, the Vita's install base isn't very big. Not very many people own a Vita and those that want one are going to get for the games not crossover. So even if most vita owners have a PS3 the install base isn't big enough. A PS3($250-$300))+vita($250-$300)=$500-$600 without tax plus another $20-$100 for Vita memory, compared to a $300-$350 WiiU. Thats a lot just for crossover.

They also don't seem to get the point of the WiiU, they talk as if they think its all about having two screens. What about asymmetric gameplay, panoramic view, or motion control?



kyuubikid213 said:

Um... Goodbye, Sony. I respected you when I had my PS1 and PS2, but now, it's just getting sad... I'll buy your other hardware like...televisions and stuff, but your games? No. Never again.



Bankai said:

Man the traffic on this website would explode if NintendoLife could get Apple to admit that it already does what the Wii U is offering with AirPlay.

Unfortunately for NintendoLife Apple doesn't give two hoots about throwaway quotes.

Anyway, Sony's right. The PS3/ Vita combo can indeed do what the Wii U is offering.



grimbldoo said:

@zezhyrule #87
It actually is superior to the PS3 and there is no argument there.
You have to understand that you did not give the best of first impressions with your comments
1: "Hey guys. They can do it. And better. That's all that matters." Nothing was used to back up the statement.
2: "They didn't say that the Sony/Vita would be a major competitor to the Wii U" Sony is stating that the Wii U isn't special because Sony can already do what it does, that is being competitive.
The problem here is that you made ignorant comments without anything to back them up. One can only assume that you are a fanboy otherwise you wouldn't have taken a side with such limited knowledge.



allav866 said:

You know when a company is worried about being out-shined by their competitor when they start to say things like "Yeah? Well, we can do that too!"



Drewroxsox said:

Like many already said, the vita/ps3 combo is capable of doing dual screen functions, however, it's not as smooth or flawless as the Wii U. My only problem with the Wii U is what happens when Sony/Microsoft release a new system that doesn't have a tablet. Wii U will just be used for ports, and there won't be any innovative games, unless they are made by Nintendo or an exclusive to the Wii U. (Just my thoughts)



Chunky_Droid said:

I have both a PS3 and a Vita, but the purchase had nothing to do with cross-controller functionality, the fact that very few games support it, and I'm willing to bet very few games in the future will support the feature too (unless it's Sony developed).

This guy makes the PS3/Vita and Wii U sound like the same thing, to put it simply they're really not.



allav866 said:

@Andrewroxsox I think that depends on the company who makes the port. Batman: Arkham City is being ported to the Wii U with added features to implement the Game Pad, so who's to say that other companies won't do the same thing?



Bankai said:

With Cloud saves, I think the real strength of the cross-compatibility of Vita and PS3 in the future will be the ability for people to take their PS3 game on the go with them, and then play it at home on the big TV - that's something the Wii U can't do.

Furthermore, as I said before, the Wii U is simply doing the exact same thing AirPlay offers, but using different technology (otherwise Apple would likely have a patent and sue anyway). I lol when people think that Nintendo is being innovative with this one. Adding buttons to AirPlay is not innovation.



lanabanana said:

Yeah they might be able to do the same but you have to pay $600 at least & + there's not many games that have PS3-Vita gameplay ...



DarkNinja9 said:

@GN0LAUM you bring up a good point seems like sony is trying to say "hey we have the same tech as the wii u why buy them when we already offer the same game play style" but yeah as you mentioned gc has the gba being used to connect as a controller and all darn sony just trying to get attention from the media just look at there new super slim ps3 .-.



scrubbyscum999 said:

Sony, just face it, it costs too much money and there is going to be no games for this feature. This is actually sad, Sony nowadays just resorts to cheap attacks on Nintendo because they know their house isn't in order. Shakes head in pity



kdognumba1 said:

It's like some sort of sick time warp. Replace Vita with PS Move....

Seriously though, the fact of the matter is, just like motion controls, the Wii U pad comes with the system meaning people won't have to purchase 2 separate consoles or sets of controllers to take full advantage of it. The PS3 + Vita combo IS possible but won't be used much by developers for the same reasons the PSMove wasn't.

The Vita is $250-$300 + $100 for 32 gigs of proprietary memory.
The PS3 starts at $250
This makes the entry price a minimal of over $500 including tax
That entry price will scare off most publishers who may be considering the control scheme

Okay, now let's look at the Wii U.

The entry price is $300-$350 and comes with 8 and 32 gigs internal memory respectively
Allows cheap standardized solutions for more memory
Comes with the pad controller offering a second screen right out the box
The second screen is seamlessly integrated into the system and is what most games will be built around
Is already getting a lot of support form 3rd parties

This argument / topic is just a rehash of the very similar one regarding the PSMove, which ultimately became victim to pitiful 3rd party support and Kinect's dominance due to Kinect daring to do something different with motion controls then what has already been done.

Let's look at the comparison between the Move and the Wii though. First the PSMove.

PSMove entry price is $100 + $50 per wand and + $30 per navigation controller (which isn't included)
$300-$400 for the PS3 at the time of the Move launch.
Some games use 2 wands to get the full experience and some 4 player games require the wands and navigation controllers
The advertisement for it was more of a secondary controller choice rather then a system within a system (like Kinect)
All of this was saw right through from developers and didn't get any real support.

Next the Nintendo Wii.

The Wii's entry price was $250
Every Wii came with a remote
Separate remotes were $40 and nunchucks were $20
Every developer who made a game on the Wii used this basic controller scheme meaning it had a lot of support

Again, you see the comparison. If it doesn't come right out the box, have a practical entry price, and/or isn't something actually new and different, you might as well forget it.



danschemen said:

the biggest problem with sony's statement is that not a lot of ps3 owners own the vita, but the Wii U comes with the gamepade, sony is just going to face the same problem with their motion control stuff.



emiru69 said:

Sony you better focus in getting your online modes for the Vita straight. If you are curious about how to do a great online mode in a portable check Mario Kart 7 and Kid Icarus (you welcome Sony!)



Ernest_The_Crab said:

@OlympicCho At the same time the 3DS and Wii U combination can do the same thing as noted by some of Capcom's information about Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate.

It's actually pretty easy to argue in this case, that due to the higher 3DS sales than the Vita and the correspondingly high Wii sales there are a lot more people out there with both a 3DS and a Wii.



Henmii said:

So we can assume that if the Wii u becomes a succes, then Sony will release a lot of games that use PS3/PSVita connectivity?



Bankai said:

@TheSolarKnight That's nice. I never said the 3DS/ Wii U couldn't. Sony and Apple cam first though.

So innovative, Nintendo, huh. Coming third and all.



TechnoEA said:

I love both Nintendo and Sony equally, both have a ton of games to offer.

What a company says to irk the competition isn't any surprise, the fact that fanboys are getting their pants in a bind only means what Sony said is working.

It's called psychologically teasing the competition to annoy them and get them to retaliate, Nintendo does it all the time, stop getting butthurt when another company does it to them.



FyreeTSG said:

Sony--SHUT UP, apparently you guys forgot that the only reason you even DID the whole "Playstation" thing was because you were working with Nintendo at the time, but THEY went with Philips behind your backs, did the whole CD-i FAIL, and you launched the PSX, and went on to end the 90's "Console Wars" single-handedly...
you were great for like 10 years, until the PS3's early success(thanks due to Blueray sales as a marketing strategy)--which soon tanked, and Wii took the top spot, and went on to be the best-selling Nintendo console--

The Vita has only sold like 3 million units world wide, a number the 3DS hit in it's first few months in 2011...and unless you consider bundling the Vita(which is still outsold by the PSP every quarter) with the PS3, or drop the price, of have games that ACTUALLY are new, and not re-re-releases, then LEARN to bite your tongues, Sony...

Your systems aren't as good as you think, graphics can only sell so well, and without the SOLID "insurance" of a KEY 1st Party lineup, like Nintendo's had since the NES, then you'll always be the answer to:
"What Company tried TOO hard?"



Zombie_Barioth said:

@OlympicCho I agree on their strength being cloud saves. While cross-buy seems to be getting a lot of hate I think its a nice solution to having to re-buy games, with PS+ being a way to solve that for cross-platform games that don't have it.

The only thing I'm tired of is the way Sony comes off a lot of the time. Nintendo usually comes off more as the cocky protagonist with their trash talk while Sony come off more as the obnoxious antagonist, think Ash vs. Gary, Yugi vs. Kaiba ect. Instead of saying "well, we have that too" they should be saying "I bet you can't do this on your WiiU" in other words focus on what the competition can't do, something that if I want I have to go to Sony.



Void said:

@OlympicCho But didn't you say that the iPhone/iPod deliver a completely different experience from an iPad? Which seems to me the only difference between the Vita as a controler and the Wii-U GamePad.



SanderEvers said:

This was true if there were only 5 WiiU games like ever, but we ALL know that's not the case.

Also, I really don't know how to get Cross Play working on my Little Big Planet 2... I know for a fact that I will not have any problems getting my new WiiU to work.



Mandoble said:

Probably Sony/Vita combination is more flexible than WiiU system. In the case of Vita for cross play, the game or addon runs on the Vita, so it doesnt overload the PS3, and there is no technical limit on the number of Vitas that potentially can play together with a PS3. Now it is up to Sony to exploit it of its full or not.



BJQ1972 said:

The PS3 hasn't got enough RAM to enable cross-game chat, so how could it possibly do what the WiiU can do. Not to mention that no developers would ever develop a game that required two different machines to use.



Malkeor said:


Well if I was going to wrestle with the competition I wouldn't say something as stupid as that. That's all it really is. Stupid.
Just think for a moment what was said.

I own Sony and Nintendo platforms too...but when you see stupid, there's really no other word for it.



ajcismo said:

Sony can't do the one thing that I want to do with a Ninty console: Play Nintendo property games with an interface that doesn't suck.



Lalivero said:

@TechnoEA Yeah, Sony fans definitely never get in a bind/wrapped up with Nintendo comments; They keep peace of mind and just let it go by, completely un-'butthurt'...

Oh wait...



ianmage1 said:

Sure, when you start selling the Vita and the PS3 together for a price that isn't over $350, call me.



NintendoLand said:

For only 600 dollars you can get a Wii U experience compatible with not ONE but TWO Games!!

*Gyroscope, NFC and HD screen not included!



portealmario said:

Now lets look at the downsides of Nintendo. Hmmm, lets see...nope can't think of any, all sony does is make gimmick consoles, with gimmick software, for a hugely expensive price.



Vincent294 said:

@dew12333 That's just as blind as what Sony said. I kinda want one, and some people at my school do too. Heck, a few even have one. It's just that the entire PS3 user base doesn't want one, and no one will get the PS3 + Vita combo over the Wii U for what the Wii U does. I wish Sony would be more mature and said "If you are a loyal fan of ours and have both a PS3 + Vita, than you can do almost everything a Wii U can." Instead they try to market it like the Wii U, which is stupid. They shouldn't go beyond this: If you have a PS3 or Vita, you can upgrade for slightly less than a Wii U, and get the added bonus of having a portable.



Vincent294 said:

@zezhyrule They can do it, but not better. I think you meant more, as in get a portable too. It's just that unless you already have a PS3/Vita, it costs more to get both instead of a Wii U.



GamerZack87 said:

So, it appears that Sony is trying to replicate Nintendo's innovation early.

In the end, it all boils down to the chestnut that "Sony is trying to pick a fight with Nintendo, but Nintendo has the common sense to not retaliate".



gundam00 said:

The PS3+Vita combination is the same thing as the GameCube+GBA combo without the wire. This is not Wii U! But I do foresee Sony making a Wii U knock-off.



FJOJR said:

That's awesome Sony. Now if only I knew another human being that owns a Vita. Seriously I have no friends or family members that have one.



SaKo said:

Sony always talks about the features that they already have... they never talk about what they DON'T have...



Enzo_V said:




Araknie said:

Nobody noticed that this means they admitted that PS3+PSVita = Wii U.

They pratically are saying that on Sony systems you need two consoles and on Nintendo systems you need only the Wii U to do all that plus the 3DS adds even more.
Thank you Sony! LOL



Grodus said:

Yeah, except the Wii U has games that use it's awesome feature, where as the Vita + PS3, well, no games, and about 1 out of 100000000... people even know what a Vita is.



WaxxyOne said:

Nice pipe-dream there, Sony. Even if they would consider bundling the PS3 and the Vita — which they never will — the problem is the same. A developer making a game for the PS3 or the Vita cannot expect that the player will have the other system, and so they can't target that as a primary platform. Yes, some developers could take the initiative to make cross-platform titles which take advantage of the setup, but it will never be their prime focus and will always be a feature ripe for snipping off if the budget starts running over.

Think about it. The Gamecube could link with the GBA to allow one or more of the players to use the handheld as their private screen. How many games used it? The Nintendo DS has the same capability with the Wii. Do any games at all do it? Every single game on the Wii U will be built to use the gamepad as a second screen. It's really not rocket science at this point. The feature is the core of the Wii U, and an afterthought on PS3/Vita.



ToastyYogurt said:

This is what makes me dislike Sony's Playstation arm. They're too busy dissing Nintendo to realize that the PS3 is struggling behind Wii and 360 in terms of sales, and developers hardly use Move and Vita-PS3 connectivity. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if the list of games that support Vita-to-PS3 connectivity isn't as long as the PSP-to-PS3 connectivity games' list.



Trikeboy said:

The Legend of Zelda: Four Sword Adventures. Hook your GBA up to your Gamecube and have dual screen gaming. The game was released in 2004. The PS3 was released in 2006 and the Vita in 2011.

Wii U - £250
PS3 + PS Vita - £350
Sony claiming they can do something amazing but failed to realise that Nintendo did first anyway, priceless.



BulbasaurusRex said:

Since when does the Vita have motion controls or that one feature that Skylanders uses? The Wii U GamePad is more than just an integrated second screen.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...