Is the PlayStation Vita worth £230?

By Fred Dutton Published 20 January, 2012

Sony's handheld ripped to pieces and costed up.

What a difference six months makes. In June last year Sony boss Kaz Hirai proudly took to the stage at E3 to announce that the Vita would retail for $250 (or $299 for the 3G version) - a figure that was generally greeted with enthusiasm by both press and gamers alike. Meanwhile, the considerably less powerful 3DS was floundering at around the same price, just a few months after its launch.

Fast forward to January 2012 and the 3DS is flying off shelves following an unprecedented pricing rethink while the Vita has got off to a miserable start in Japan, with numerous internet commentators already starting their 'cut the price' catcalls.

So, one month ahead of the machine's global launch, we've enlisted the help of technical intelligence experts UBM TechInsights and taken a screwdriver to Sony's new portable in an attempt to divine two things - whether you're getting good value for money, and whether Sony has left itself any room for an emergency price drop should the Western launch belly-flop.

UBM's VP of business intelligence, Jeffrey Brown, tells us that the total bill of materials for the 3G-enabled version of the system comes in at an estimated $159.10 - that's around £102.90. That figure breaks down as follows:

  • Display and touchscreens: $50
  • Battery: $3.60
  • Cameras: $3.50
  • Wi-Fi/BT/GPS: $3.50
  • NAND: $6.00
  • SDRAM: $9.25
  • Processor: $16.00
  • BB+XCR: $16.25
  • Non-electronic: $11.00
  • Other: $30.00
  • Supporting materials: $10.00

For more on UBM's findings, head on over to its official site.

As a point of reference, the equivalent raw material cost of the 3DS at launch was an estimated $101 per unit (around £61.76).

What's inside the PlayStation Vita 3G?

  • Display: AMOLED 5.0" 960x544
  • BatterY: Li-lon 2220 mAh
  • Cameras: 2 VGA
  • Wi-Fi/BT/GPS: 802.11 b/g/n Bluetooth 2.1
  • NAND: 4GB eMMC
  • SDRAM: 512MB
  • Processor: Sony CXD5315GG
  • BB+XCR: Qualcomm MDM6200

To work out exactly how much Sony is taking home on every system sold, we need to know the trade price that it's asking from retailers. Alas, a source within UK retail tells us that a figure has not actually been set yet by the platform holder. They speculate that this is a move by Sony to prevent the aggressive discounting that took place in the run up to the 3DS launch. If a retailer doesn't know how much it's going to have to pay for the device, it's going to err on the side of caution until it does and offer it at Sony's RRP.

Similarly, the source tells us Sony is holding back on confirming allocations for individual retailers too. Again, if a retailer doesn't know how many consoles it's going to get, it'd be foolish to discount the price if it's not going to be able to cover its customer orders.

That said, we can make an educated guess at the trade price. Tradition dictates that the margin offered to retailers on hardware is between five and 7.5 per cent before VAT has been added. If we conservatively assume it's six per cent, then the trade price for the 3G model is around £210 (given VAT of £56) and the non-3G model around £173 (given VAT of £46).

(UPDATE: Our retail source has since come back to us with Sony's official trade price - the standard model costs vendors £179.05, while the 3G model is £217.97. We've amended the figures below to reflect that.)

That means that Sony is earning around £115 on every 3G Vita sold in the UK, give or take currency conversion factors.

Of course, that's by no means pure profit. Very substantial labour, R&D, marketing and distribution costs all need to be taken into account too. Without a sneak peak at Sony's books, it's virtually impossible to ascertain exactly what proportion of the take-home is profit. However, it's worth noting that Nintendo earned about £108 on every 3DS sold at its launch price. And as we've learned since, it managed to find ample elbow room for a price cut on that margin.

Will Sony need to follow its rival's lead? It's far too early to tell, though the word from games industry commentators suggests it's unlikely to happen, no matter how the Vita performs when it launches on Western shores next month.

"I think that the Vita is a great value for the money, but it is launching at an inopportune time," Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter tells Eurogamer.

"The number of people looking for a dedicated gaming device is shrinking, and the media cards are insufficient to allow a lot of multimedia downloads.

"The price is great for what you get, but the fact is that the Vita is priced the same as the PS3. As a practical matter, someone without a PS3 would probably be happier if they bought a console first, and someone with a PS3 might look hard at the Xbox 360 at a similar price before a Vita.

"If a consumer already has a PS3, they won't really feel compelled to buy a Vita to play Uncharted, for example, but they might want to play Gears of War or Halo. Thus, although a good value, I think Vita is a tough sell. It would have been great in 2004-2006."

Pachter added that he sees the addressable market of PlayStation 3 owners looking for an additional portable console experience as around 10 million over the Vita's first couple of years.

He notes that "price drops will cause demand to rise," but suggests Sony is unlikely to go down that path.

"They likely don't have much room for a price cut at a profit, so my best guess is that they will stick with the introductory price for the wi-fi model at least for a year, and will reduce price only when the cost to build drops.

"I don't think they are going to make a very big business out of Vita, so it would be silly to chase a small market by incurring losses on each unit sold."

Screen Digest's Piers Harding-Rolls echoed Pachter's judgement in our recent Trends of 2012 feature.

"I expect Vita to get away relatively strongly at launch because of its strong content line-up but, like the 3DS, may suffer due to pricing after the initial rush has subsided. I expect Sony to be reluctant to make any significant pricing move, outside of value bundles, until at least 2013."

Only time will tell whether Sony can indeed find a significant audience for its new device. As is generally the case, its fate most likely rests not on the price of the hardware itself but on the quality of its games - not to mention how they're priced, though that's a different discussion for a different day.

As our recent Vita review explains, it's a machine with stacks of potential. In terms of its feature set, Sony has got nearly everything right - bar those awkward proprietary memory cards - and, as such, few should balk at the price tag.

Here's hoping there's enough people out there that can stomach the RRP and give third party developers suitable impetus to help Sony see its ambitious vision through. The gaming landscape will surely be healthier for it.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (196) Latest comment 2 weeks ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • TechnicPuppet #1 1 month ago

    Makes the crazy price even more bizarre. They should sell it for no profit, people will spend the extra on games.

  • Stratix #2 1 month ago

    Problem is, the amount on top is not profit, I would say "contribution" is a better term. That money is needed to cover the systems massive research and development costs, amongst many, many others.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 08:28

  • Zozzilla #3 1 month ago

    I'm sorry but I fail to believe that the RAM and processor are that cheap. If they were, why can't PC components be £40?

  • Canyarion #4 1 month ago

    Uhm this is kinda creepy (and -rep worthy), but by reading this article I remembered I dreamed about the Vita price tonight. In my dream it was €600. o_O

    Why do I dream about console prices?

  • Stratix #5 1 month ago

    Post deleted at 13:23:05 20-01-2012

  • Timbercottage #6 1 month ago

    @Zozzilla I'm sure if you went to Intel and asked to buy a bulk order of 400'000 of their processors, they'd give you a pretty hefty discount. You really imagine Sony pay street prices?

  • Greebo #7 1 month ago

    @Zozzilla - Sony don't pay retail price and they buy in enormous numbers

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #8 1 month ago

    I also find these prices hard to believe, but i guess i dont buy them in mass quantities for trade price like Sony do, but if this is to be believed the profit margin on products like the iPad and Android Phones must be absolutely massive! (As a lot of them cost more for much lower specs)
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 08:45

  • Zozzilla #9 1 month ago

    If the components cost that little to make to ALLOW Sony to buy them for $16 regardless of the fact they obviously got a lot, it shouldn't matter if they're bought in bulk or singularly. <_< Either way the manufacturer will be making a profit.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 08:45

  • UncleLou #10 1 month ago

    Makes the crazy price even more bizarre. They should sell it for no profit, people will spend the extra on games.

    Business models where games finance subsidized hardware punish those who buy lots of games. I'd rather pay more for the hardware and have cheaper games (not that that necessarily happens, but you get the idea).

  • Sodding_Gamer #11 1 month ago

    @GamesProgrammer

    Well going by the foxconn incident earlier last week was it? Apple make their products at the same factory as microsoft and Sony for peanuts. Yet Apple fans burn their money on the products.

  • TechnicPuppet #12 1 month ago

    Post deleted at 08:48:44 20-01-2012

  • jstar #13 1 month ago

    Post deleted at 08:55:21 20-01-2012

  • Kill_Crazy #14 1 month ago

    Who cares, roll on February 22nd!

  • kirankara #15 1 month ago

    Pachter talk utter bs.

    So if someone owns a ps3 , then they won't buy a vita, as games like uncharted are there also. Ok, that's true for some, but didn't stop me buying a 3ds to play Mario and Zelda. However my Martin objection is that he then says, they might want to play gears of war though. Great, they might, but will they do that on a mobile?? Oh wait, there's no mobile Ms console. Furthermore, why wouldn't they buy a 360 , if that's the case.what's this got to do with mobile market?? If gears was on mobile, same logic would apply still. Why would someone buy a mobile console to play gears when they can play on 360??? Personally I think they might, and same still applies to uncharted, at last for some people. He personally, it's not something that will sell me a vita, but none of those home console games will hence I don't want a vita or Ms mobile console.for others though, this is exactly what they want.

  • Brownstudy #16 1 month ago

    I don't really fancy Vita's chances, I'm afraid.

    I'm not one of those idiots that likes products to fail; it's always a shame for the customers who have invested and I can't stand fanboyism, but who's going to buy vita? A small subset of core gamers, maybe, and tech enthusiasts.

    In this age of convergence, not many people carry two devices around. And core gamers often have smartphones which are getting better at providing cheap mobile gaming.

    Also, do people really want to play core games in public? I would find that quite embarrassing, personally.

    I'd love Vita to succeed; it looks amazing. Here's hoping I'm wrong.

  • kenichi-san #17 1 month ago

    "The price is great for what you get, but the fact is that the Vita is priced the same as the PS3. As a practical matter, someone without a PS3 would probably be happier if they bought a console first, and someone with a PS3 might look hard at the Xbox 360 at a similar price before a Vita.

    What about those that have all current consoles?

  • kirankara #18 1 month ago

    @Stratix add to that transport, marketing etc etc. and id be surprised to see them making any profit at all. Where eg's comparison to 3ds cost/sale price ratio fails spectacularly, its that the 3ds cost less to make, so they have more room to cut prices.
    Sony has never really worked on basis of making huge profit on consoles, preferring to make money on software side of things, whereas Nintendo is renowned for doing so.

  • vizzini #19 1 month ago

    I very much doubt the CPU cost can be accurately predicted even to within £20 based on the way ARM manufacturing and customization works.

    But the only problems I can see with the Vita so far for the first year's target audience at that price, is that they've sent out the wrong message using a NetFront browser again, instead of adopting a mainstream smartphone browser like Firefox or Opera. This would certainly sure up confidence in device's longterm secondary feature usefulness and current perceived value.

    Uncharted has been set at the wrong RRP imho and Modnation needs an announcement saying it will offer online multiplayer via post release patching, and the features absence was because of Vita card storage, to enable people not buying an extra Vita memory card to play the game(can some confirm if it does need one anyway?).

  • Brownstudy #20 1 month ago

    kenichi-san

    Maybe quite a few EGers own all current consoles but, I'd guess pretty rare amongst the general population.

  • Brownstudy #21 1 month ago

    Does anyone want to know what my David objection is?

  • photoboy #22 1 month ago

    While I'm sure Sony didn't scrimp on R&D for the Vita, I'd be willing to bet the use of ARM CPUs and PowerVR graphics means it was much cheaper for Sony to develop the Vita than the PS3. Just bung a couple of off-the-shelf components on a reference dev board and you're well on your way.

    By comparison the Cell was designed in-house at Sony and they had to build their own factory to fabricate it. Conversely, there are plenty of fabs out there making ARM cores for all the iPhones, iPads and Android devices.

    Sony have played it smart this time and designed a device that will be easy to develop for, is very power efficient and is quite well future-proofed. Now if they would just release one in Orange...

  • berelain #23 1 month ago

    @kenichi-san "What about those that have all current consoles?"

    They might wait around and see what will be announced at E3. Or they could be waiting for a Wii-U... maybe :s

    Anyway, Vita. I want one. I think it's a great piece of kit. But I can't justify the price of it; its not far off the price I paid for my Asus EE Pad Transformer tablet, and that can do a damn sight more than the Vita can. And for those about to decry "but it can't play games;" yes, it can, and you can plug a controller in or connect to a wireless controller and play some actually very good games for a lot less money than they'll cost on the Vita. Okay, so there's no Uncharted, and more importantly for me, no WipEout (the main reason I want a Vita right now) but I'll settle for being able to do lots of other things with the machine and stick to playing WipEout on the PS3 for now.

  • danhese007 #24 1 month ago

    I'm sure people are going to see this and conclude "Sony is ripping people off" and to that I say "dumbass". Cost of components isn't where it stops at, there are many other things.

  • Notorious_LRO #25 1 month ago

    @TechnicPuppet Can't really see why people are negging you. I agree that a hefty price drop is the only thing that can save this - admittedly pretty - dinosaur.

  • roz123 #26 1 month ago

    I think people complaining about the current price being too high are being a bit unreasonable because its a powerful machine with tons of inbuilt gadgets like gps, gyros and the touchscreens. I am only put off buying one because none of the current or future software appeals to me at all and its too large. I think its a shame it doesn't have a small amount of inbuilt memory as those memory card prices are wallet rape (markup on those must be huge).
    It would be a massive risk for Sony selling the Vita at a loss because there is always the chance it will be hacked and piracy could destroy software sales.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 09:07

  • vizzini #27 1 month ago

    photoboy: By comparison the Cell was designed in-house at Sony and they had to build their own factory to fabricate it. Conversely, there are plenty of fabs out there making ARM cores for all the iPhones, iPads and Android devices.

    If I remember correctly Sony said they were custom cores similar to the Cell's SPUs in the Vita's ARM9 to enable easy porting of SPU and/or the 360's Xenon multi core code for developers. Which probably means a Power instruction set with vectorized floating point support and possibly even bi-Endian operation that won't be cheap inclusions like a standard ARM chip.

  • mcwildcard #28 1 month ago

    " If a consumer already has a PS3, they won't really feel compelled to buy a Vita to play Uncharted"
    Proof if it were ever needed that analysts don't 'get' gamers.

  • Mr_interesting_2011 #29 1 month ago

    I really hope the Vita is a success and really want one...

    The only thing stopping me pre-ordering is the cost of the Memory Cards and the lack of the availability of the 32Gb one over here. I don't really want to pay £40 for a 16Gb one that will be filled almost immediately.

    My main concern though, is that in the West at least, the PSP was never as successful as it should have been and was overall a bit of a disappointment. It had lots of power, a great screen and a few really great games but it was pretty expensive (at least initially) and never did amazingly.

    It doesn't really seem though that Sony is positioning the Vita any differently to the PSP and with the popularity of smart phones, the cheaper price of the 3DS, the world recession and the fact that Monster Hunter is now available on the cheaper 3DS I don't really see the Vita doing as well as it should here or in Japan.

    Also, with rumours circulating about the new 'Next Gen' consoles, will people soon be looking ahead to them over the next few months and perhaps questioning whether they want to spend nearly £300 on a handheld to play current gen games, albeit in a portable form?
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 09:31

  • Vanmunt #30 1 month ago

    "I think that the Vita is a great value for the money, but it is launching at an inopportune time," Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter tells Eurogamer.

    Lost all interest in article when you mentioned that bell end..... you might as well say.

    "We asked a tramp that smelled a bit of piss his opinion"

    Still, I won't give my local shop much grief about the price of console when I pick it up..

  • weedar #31 1 month ago

    +Manufacturing costs, transport, R&D etc... I don't think Sony can sell it cheaper without losing money.

  • jonbwfc #32 1 month ago

    "The price is great for what you get, but the fact is that the Vita is priced the same as the PS3. As a practical matter, someone without a PS3 would probably be happier if they bought a console first, and someone with a PS3 might look hard at the Xbox 360 at a similar price before a Vita."
    Remind me again, where do I plug in my 360 on the tube?

    I hate these type of articles. Absolutely hate them. They are a perfect example of The Internet Stupid. The parts that go into a Ferrari 599 don't cost £220,000. The parts that go into a hamburger don't cost £2. A pint of beer is ninety something percent water and water certainly isn't £3 for a pint, unless you're buying some bizarre spa water in which case you're an idiot. But somebody attempts to add up the cost of components of some gadget, then posts an article on the internet claiming they're being ripped off. No. In every other area of the world other than gadgets, people recognise that the cost of production of a product is largely unrelated to the cost of the components in the product. They know there are many people involved in the long process that puts a product in our hands, that they all need to be paid for their labour and some of them are quite clever, so therefore charge quite a lot for their effort.

    These articles have been utter knob work ever since they started popping up on the internet. I am rather dismayed to see that EG has decided to jump into this particular cesspit of internet moronity when they should (and, frankly, used) to know much better.

  • tossum #33 1 month ago

    "a Power instruction set with vectorized floating point support and possibly even bi-Endian operation"
    I've just gone from 6 to 12 o clock

  • riceNpea #34 1 month ago

    what a ridiculous article. raise your standards EG.

  • Mr_interesting_2011 #35 1 month ago

    I do think it is disingenuous to quote the Vita price as £230. A PS3 can be picked up for around £190 but that includes a 160Gb HD!

    Anyone who wants to get the most out of a Vita, from game downloads, demos and other media will have to invest at least another £40 in a Memory Card (which is a paltry 16Gb) and if you are going to carry it anywhere your are going to need a case and/or screen protectors etc.

    All this brings the price much closer to £300.

    In comparison, the 3DS includes a memory card and takes standard ones anyway. Also, its clamshell design protects the screen and negates the need for an expensive case.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 09:46

  • StooMonster #36 1 month ago

    @Sodding_Gamer Apple make their products at the same factory as microsoft and Sony for peanuts. Yet Apple fans burn their money on the products.

    Audi make their products at the same factory as VW and SEAT and Skoda for peanuts. Yet Audi fans burn their money on the products.

    That's capitalism!

  • Whitster #37 1 month ago

    @Brownstudy I think you've got some hang ups about your hobby you need to deal with.

  • PoorMaryBellows #38 1 month ago

    I have no interest in buying a Vita, but even so I concur wholeheartedly with the people pointing out that this article is extremely ill-judged and pointless.

    1. Companies need to make a profit otherwise they wouldn't exist. Or at least they wouldn't be able to pay people to develop lovely new products.
    2. As others have said, the cost of components is really just a small part of a product's overall development and construction costs.
    3. Finally, for me, a product's worth is all about how much time and pleasure I anticipate I'm going to get out of it.

  • BigDannyH #39 1 month ago

    The 230 doesn't bother me that much but I can't see many parents forking out for it. At least that means it might be a genuine, grown-up system.

    The extra 40 for a piddly 16gb memory card is a bit of a kick in the teeth. I'm hoping some retailer will offer it bundled for 250.

    I think we're all agreed that the 3G version is a waste of space though.

  • telboy007 #40 1 month ago

    Is there custom firmware yet? Hmm?

  • Brownstudy #41 1 month ago

    @Whitster

    Not at all, I just look like a knob when I'm concentrating.

  • FogHeart #42 1 month ago

    "...someone with a PS3 might look hard at the Xbox 360 at a similar price before a Vita...they won't really feel compelled to buy a Vita to play Uncharted, for example, but they might want to play Gears of War or Halo."

    Tell me if you disagree, but I'm not convinced that I'd want to 'get at' 360 exclusives before 'getting at' quality handheld gaming. That's not disparaging the 360 or its exclusives but...well, put it this way. If someone said you could never eat on the move again but you could have an extra meal at home each night, would you take that offer?

  • jetsetwillie #43 1 month ago

    its not so much the £230 for the hardware that puts me off. i don't mind paying that.

    its the £40 a game and the fucking memory cards that make the PSV a absolute no for me.

  • vizzini #44 1 month ago

    @BigDannyH

    I was initially tempted by the 3G version(with the GPS sensor) especially as I saw it new pre-order for £245 online, but the imminent roll out of 4G(in the UK) combined with the camera's being fast frame rate but low resolution Playstation Eyes make the geo-tagging unimportant. The device doesn't ship with Sat Nav software so the GPS sensor has no real obvious benefit, and the ability to tether to a smartphone via Bluetooth 2.1 means that even if 3G or GPS have some use down the line, the smartphone can provide 3/4G and GPS info.

    And until they get serious about the web browser experience and choices of browser, paying +£15 extra a month for a data contract for the device seems a little pointless.

  • Big-Swiss #45 1 month ago

    fuck this article and fuck everyone who likes it!

  • Brownstudy #46 1 month ago

    Fogheart

    I've also never quite understood the multiple consoles thing myself. Although I did buy a 360 and and a Wii (I know, I know, I was drunk) so forget that.

    As you were.

  • aidey6 #47 1 month ago

    No one queried the cost when Sony were selling the PS3 at a loss, if a supplier has the skills to make a games console and sell at a profit good on them, Nintendo have been the masters at this for years.

    Apple component costs are well below the RRP if people can stump up the cost of buying it sim free direct from Apple, yet no one minds to use their premium handsets

    Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Apple all have to factor in advertising, marketing, initial research, testing, packaging. I bet none of this is quantified

  • tomjoadsghost #48 1 month ago

    @Canyarion: It kind of looks like your subconcious has allocated the vita the same launch price as the 3Do.

    God only knows how you'd go about interpreting that kind of dream.

  • abigsmurf #49 1 month ago

    It's not exactly fair to say that as the cost above raw materials is £108, similar to a 3DS, that they've got the same wriggle room on pricing.

    The margins needed to make money on a product scale with the raw costs. For example, if the raw parts were £5000, a margin of £108 would be appauling and you'd expect a company making that sort of margin to fold quickly.

    There are also lots of additional things not taken into account. The licences and patents for 3G and multi-touch are significant costs and the sheer amount of components in the Vita compared to the 3DS (two analogue sticks in addition to the other controllers, the touch screen on the back, the 3G modem) push up assembly costs.

  • Brownstudy #50 1 month ago

    Bit harsh.

  • CaptainKid #51 1 month ago

    It costs Sony $3.60 for a battery while I can pick any smartphone battery up for €2 on Ebay?

  • LegendarySins #52 1 month ago

    @kenichi-san those with both consoles will take a look at the overpriced ridiculous decision memory cards required and think... Nah.

  • rivuzu #53 1 month ago

    I will be buying a Vita - but not on launch day.

    Nor launch week.

    Nor launch month, launch quarter or launch half-a-year.

    The 3DS burned me with its sudden massive price drop - I had that on launch day, with its horrendous launch line-up, and as soon as that cut came was pretty outraged.

    Vita is definitely on my to-buy list, but only when the price agrees with me, not the other way around. £230 for a Wifi only model, with £40 games on top of that of which only one actually interests me, and I have that already on console? No ta'!

    I'm happy to lag behind the crowd and pick it up on the cheap, rather than pay extortionate nonsense for a tool which I'll probably use more in the home than elsewhere, thus defying the logic of buying it in the first place!

  • super_monty #54 1 month ago

    What a joke of an article i stopped read it because it failed to add design, development, research, patents, manufacturing shipping and online functions to the cost.

    It's not just about the bits in the casing! Eurogamer is becoming the Daily Mail of the gaming press. 'No news' lets print something that's just made up against a tiny shred of truth!
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 10:45

  • Coopster5 #55 1 month ago

    I like the PSV alot, especially with its 2 sticks! Something of a nirvana for handhelds.

    230 is the launch price, and whilst Sony would like to keep the price up there, it will be forced to make a price cut within first 6 months. Why ?

    Well they have made the same mistake as last time being 2nd to market. Nintendo will be in a better position to bring out a revised 3DS at a cheaper price, pretty soon after PSV launch.

    This is the same mistake that Sony made with the PSP. So if they want market share, they will be forced to cut the price, especially as Nintendo has already done so.

    Expect PSV sales to stall after initial launch, to persuade Sony Mgmt of an imminent price cut.

  • skinrush #56 1 month ago

    I think the article is fairly balanced in its assessment of Vita costs, and the need to question the RRP being payed by consumers.

    For what you're getting plus the various associated costs to produce and distribute, the Vita would seem to be a reasonable price.

    It looks like a nice piece of hardware and as a gaming enthusiast, I would quite like to own one.

    Having said that, I very much doubt that I'd even consider a Vita at its current price. I'd not consider it if it were £100 cheaper either. The problem for Sony is that a large proportion of people now own smart phones, ipod touch, ipads and other tablets, and games for those gadgets are cheap and don't require that you pay for additional memory cards in order to play them. Because I always have my phone with me, I'm much more likely to play mobile games on my phone than I would be with a Vita. At home, I would always prefer a large screen experience with a PS3 than a Vita.

    In my opinion, full console games maybe worth the £20 to £40 asking price, but small screen games ought to be much cheaper. iOS/Android have the right idea, price wise. The mobile games landscape has changed a great deal since the first psp was released, and Sony don't seem to have come to terms with that.

  • Toothball #57 1 month ago

    I would have been going got the 3G version, but I've got car bills that I've been putting off for too long. I'll be there in a few months no doubt, with or without a price cut.

  • Biker_Bob_1971 #58 1 month ago

    Post deleted at 16:59:10 06-02-2012

  • Syrette #59 1 month ago

    I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV. I don't need a PSV.

    If I keep telling myself this, maybe one day I'll believe it.

  • anthonypappa #60 1 month ago

    "I don't think they are going to make a very big business out of Vita, so it would be silly to chase a small market by incurring losses on each unit sold."
    but if sony chase profit at the beginning and consumers don't take to it, it's gonna dive bomb pretty quickly and may struggle to come back up. then developers will shun it and sony have a dead system on their hands...

    ... and i don't think it is strongly positioned all things considered. if it done phonecalls it would have been in a stronger position... although talking into something with analogue sticks protruding from it would look retarded :lol:

  • Sniper_007 #61 1 month ago

    I guess the next article will be.... 'Are Games worth £40.... the cost of DVD, case and booklet is 79p. Rip off!!

    Surely we all have more common sense than to believe a product is only worth the sum of it's component parts? It's not like we need people to put these together for us, distribute them around the world, not to mention marketing, licensing, research & development, system support, continual development, etc. etc.

  • dadrester #62 1 month ago

    err... R&D?! Distribution?! Marketing?!

  • rivuzu #63 1 month ago

    Also, what is the point of the 3G model, when a great deal of phones (especially Android Smartphones) are able to act as WiFi hotspots themselves? You can just connect your Vita to your phone and boom, only one data contract to pay.

  • RobTheBuilder #64 1 month ago

    Still, Sony not losing money on the machine is a big change from past releases. They've left themselves room to move this time, which is very sensible.

  • Zephro #65 1 month ago

    @vizzini "If I remember correctly Sony said they were custom cores similar to the Cell's SPUs in the Vita's ARM9 to enable easy porting of SPU "

    You remember incorrectly. It's a multicore ARM A9 cortex, it is very similar to an iPad chip and basically nothing like a PowerPC chip. So it'll cost peanuts like most other Arm devices.

    However I note the article and the price spec make no mention of the GPU (presumably system on a chip with the CPU) however that GPU did have custom work done on it by Sony unlike the CPUs. I suspect that the pricing for that "processor" ought to be a bit higher.

    This is all on Wikipedia btw.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 11:06

  • UKwoods #66 1 month ago

    These articles always seem to be written with a westerners perspective. When Monster Hunter is finally released on Vita, Sony may have a hard time keeping up with demand in Japan. I've always suspected that one day, Japanese and western markets will look almost indistinguishable from each other. So long as we still get the cream of the crop (Dark Souls ect) I'm not too worried. My point is, I'm 100% sure Vita will be a big success in Japan.

  • Mindstorm #67 1 month ago

    "substantial labour costs"

    Make those Chinese drones work until they vomit blood! let them die! I need my freaking toy CHEAPER!!!!

  • Toothball #68 1 month ago

    @rivuzu

    Having 3G in the Vita instead of tethering it to your phone means you're only draining one battery instead of two. I like a bit of redundancy with my devices for that reason. I carry around an mp3 player as well as my phone as it means I can still listen to music if one of them runs out of juice.

  • Subdominator #69 1 month ago

    Hey Pachter, for every two pounds you give me I give you one pound back. Because that's really great value for your money, right?

  • Subdominator #70 1 month ago

    @RobTheBuilder Not a change, they did the same thing with PSP. When management decided to enter the handheld business they had one simple rule for the department: Be profitable with the hardware from day 1.

  • vizzini #71 1 month ago

    @Zephro

    I couldn't find the original sound bite I read months back about it being a bespoke ARM, but according to this article the ARM9 is by the STI group like the Cell BE, so I think it is heavily customized with PPC tech as I already thought. But I agree the Wiki suggests it is an off the peg ARM9.

  • Wobbler #72 1 month ago

    @GamesProgrammer Apple's gross margin on the iPhone is slightly over 54% at the moment, according to some maths done on their quarterly reports (http://www.asymco.com/2011/11/30/in teractive-charts-for-apples-product-lines/)

    (i.e. a £500 unlocked 16Gb iPhone 4S bought in an Apple Store is actually £416 before VAT. And then with a 54% gross margin, that means that the cost of goods must be around about £191.)

    And I don't see the "rip off" claims. It's not like you *have* to buy a Vita or iPhone: In capitalism, the price of something is based around what people are willing to *pay* for it, rather than what it costs to make. And without making a profit, the company will eventually go bust and stop making cool stuff completely.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 11:38

  • Subdominator #73 1 month ago

    @StooMonster Just one point: Audi = leather interior, Skoda = plastic interior. That's just one of the things that makes the difference.

  • Brutal_Zen #74 1 month ago

    Actually, what probably is more important is the question: Do I (a consumer) think it is worth to spend 250/300 euros on a Vita?

    And my answer is 'Hell yes'. Judging by the games that are going to be released and already are released; the Vita is worth every penny.

  • dmss #75 1 month ago

    @UncleLou +1 for the avatar!

  • Zephro #76 1 month ago

    @vizzini Erm that's the same article which suggests its just an ARM9. It is just an ARM A9. All ARM chips need to have a group do the chip layout, it doesn't imply they have done any custom work.

    Applying PPC tech to an ARM9 would be insane. They are completely different. The cost and performance hit would be awful.

    A9s can have NEON units for SIMD which are similar in function to SPUs in terms of vector processing, maybe that's where you were confused.

  • Whitster #77 1 month ago

    I love the way people are applying the same, Sony can't compete with smartphone/tablet gaming logic they applied to the 3DS before launch, completely ignoring the fact the 3DS now seems to have got past the issue ok.

  • Sildur #78 1 month ago

    I'm less concerned about the console price than the games prices. Honestly, even if I could afford the console - which I just about can at the moment - £40 per game is too steep for me to even consider getting the device.

  • Wobbler #79 1 month ago

    @Subdominator Yeah, but if Audi=leather & Skoda=plastic that doesn't break @StooMonster's point: Similar things made at the same factory aren't actually the same. If Foxconn make the iPhone & Vita they are no more alike than an Audi and a Skoda.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 11:44

  • MARKIV #80 1 month ago

    I'm pretty sure the demand for the Vita will drop off pretty soon after launch in the UK, prompting a major price cut later on in the year. After being burned by the 3DS, I'm in no rush to buy the Vita.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 11:59

  • NotSoSlim #81 1 month ago

    Why is the game prices a issue when they are the same as 3ds prices?

    They even start at £10. Reasonable given content of the games and who pays full rrp now anyway?

    Memory cards are vaild reasons but game prices scream another reasobn to be negative about device

  • Ka-blamo #82 1 month ago

    This reminds me of the $249 skateboard that got sold as an accessary for the robot dog AIBO, a complete and utter waste of money that was not asked for and not needed.

  • kangarootoo #83 1 month ago

    This thread is amazing.

    Some people in here are the same people that complain about spending £1.50 on a cup of tea is a heated, lit, staffed cafe on the high street.


    Good to see the general trend in pos/negs is to neg down the stupid stuff though. My faith is somewhat restored.

  • jetsetwillie #84 1 month ago

    @Whitster but the 3DS has a USP the vita does not

  • callum9999 #85 1 month ago

    Like others have said - it's the memory that bothers me.

    I pre-ordered it at the Hut as it was only £195 for a while just in case, but I reckon I'll cancel it before release. Unless someone manages to develop a microSD to Vita adapter in that period of time! (Assuming the vita card is physically capable of containing a microSD card inside it and that the copyright stuff doesn't mess it up - I'm not holding my breath!).

  • myms1ps3 #86 1 month ago

    Give me the Metal Gear HD Collection and i'll buy it.

  • Machetazo #87 1 month ago

    I am looking for confirmation of certain titles coming to Vita, before deciding to buy it. Unfortunately, those confirmations seem non-commital, missing, or perilously vague. Software ---> Hardware. No good the second, without a good sound ladling of the first.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 12:36

  • Machetazo #88 1 month ago

    @Whitster and, completely overlooking the potential from PlayStation Suite...Much like Sony seems to have, come to think of it. :( Their priorities, and levels of commitment leading, basically, to finding themselves with too many plates to be kept spinning at once - another reason to exercise caution where Sony platform is concerned. If I choose to support that platform, (for how long) is it likely to continue supporting my interests and the type of games I want to play?
    Edited by 2 at 20/01/12 @ 12:44

  • NotSoSlim #89 1 month ago

    @callum

    Problem is Sony can probably disable those through firmware update. They need to get sandisk on board to make cheaper alternative
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 18:17

  • Rens11 #90 1 month ago

    You have to. Remember that if/when cod comes out on this kids will go mad for it being able to play on lunch breaks possibly carrying on their stats from their ps3 game. People said the 3ds would fail and now its selling in mega numbers thanks to Mario zelda monster hunter etc. I'm sure cod FIFA and battlefield games with multiplayer will do the same to vita

  • ubergine #91 1 month ago

    I don't have a PS3 or handheld at the moment but lost interest in Vita when I read the initial cost does not include a proprietary, and must have, rip-off-priced memory stick. Essentially, their "price" is not their real price at all. I'd expect they'll be bundling the memory in for "free" almost immediatly, a stealth price-cut to their stealth price.

  • Machetazo #92 1 month ago

    If the next console parade could start a build-up soon towards arrival perhaps next year, is now the best time to be weighing up a new hand-held? I'm honestly not sure...Software's a huge part of it, and I just don't feel Sony are saying enough, the cards are not being shown with enough boldness. and I read the machine is released next month. :|

  • Eregol #93 1 month ago

    I wanna know how much those proprietry memory cards cost to make.

  • rivuzu #94 1 month ago

    @Toothball
    True point re: Battery, but consider how much of your battery life is wasted mostly because of things such as the screen, recognising inputs, and so forth. I often tether my phone to my laptop for extended periods whilst travelling. One example would be on a three hour stint on my HTC Sensation, I lost 15% battery. Not what I'd call a great loss to be honest, and for the sake of saving some money and not being tied into another contract, I'll happily burn that power cell a bit brighter.

  • phatb0y #95 1 month ago

    More EG derponomics. Please stick to the games.

    There are a myriad of costs to figure into any product besides parts and labour.

    'That means that Sony is earning around £108 on every 3G Vita sold in the UK, give or take currency conversion factors.'

    WAT? I'd be surprised if Sony is making even half of that. The profit margin in consumer electronics aren't very large at all. Just because something costs a lot doesn't mean theres a huge amount of profit in it for the manufacturer.

  • vizzini #96 1 month ago

    @Zephro

    No, the article clearly states customization for performance reasons.

    From a technical perspective, the Playstation Vita is of great interest because it is the first portable computing device (apart from laptops) to incorporate a custom quad-core ARM-based processor. Sony has apparently turned to IBM once again for a customized processor to maximize its quad-core graphics processor. With the selection of a quad-core powerhouse, Sony hopes to differentiate itself not only from other gaming consoles.

    According to the ARM wiki the Advanced SIMD(NEON) doesn't support 128bit wide in a single instruction in the optional ARM9's Neon units, which would hamper ease of cross platform development imo.

    The initial impression I got from the sound bite months back, was that ARM had been chosen because it is a good starting block for power efficiency in single core operation for the Vita, while being completely open to customization and extension through co-processors, and thereby providing the STI team with a place to take much of their fabrication improvements on the Cell and technologies like the SPU's blackbox mode (that has thwarted widespread PS3 piracy). It doesn't really make sense to me for them to use IBM for such work if they weren't after something a bit special, and just wanted a cheap ARM9.

    I have tried to find more info on the STI teams work on the Vita CPU but have been able to find anything.

  • Rodster #97 1 month ago

    "I think that the Vita is a great value for the money, but it is launching at an inopportune time," Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter tells Eurogamer.

    "The number of people looking for a dedicated gaming device is shrinking, and the media cards are insufficient to allow a lot of multimedia downloads."

    I absolutely agree with this, that's the problem Sony will face. ^^^^

  • Fozzie_bear #98 1 month ago

    TechnicPuppet

    Makes the crazy price even more bizarre. They should sell it for no profit, people will spend the extra on games.

    To summarise: cost of bits estimated at 103.
    Amount Sony gets per console sold: 108.

    That leaves 5 profit, out of which R&D, distribution etc have to be paid.

    Looks like they are selling it for no profit and looking to make money on the games. Which bit are you finding "crazy" or "bizarre"?

  • Zephro #99 1 month ago

    @vizzini No they are just off the shelf A9 cores, having seen the actual developer spec docs. Also once again the PowerPC portability is just madness. Also considering all the PPC PPU code needs to be shifted to ARM, the ability to port SPU code is a waste of time.

    The custom work is on the GPU which happens to be on the same chip. Note how the article makes no mention of the GPU which is also a quad core custom job, that they have extended. That's what IBM will have been brought in for.

    Also I imagine the buses are probably custom or modified to allow higher throughput.

    Oh and the point about NEON was that they perform a similar architectural role to ease porting of engines, not that they have the same instruction width so you don't need to recompile. Because again that would be insane.

    EDIT: For further clarity the SPU doesn't do SISD on 128bits either only SIMD instructions like the NEON. :-S
    Edited by 2 at 20/01/12 @ 13:26

  • beercr8te #100 1 month ago

    @Big-Swiss I agree 100%

  • Britler #101 1 month ago

    @Rens11 I think you're absolutely right, especially in regard to CoD in particular. The notion of getting in a few rounds in between classes or whatever will appeal to a *lot* of people in the western market. All they have to do is include a few multiplayer game types that can be finished in 5 minutes, and portable CoD would be a phenomenon.

    Come to thin of it, it'll be interesting to see how... whatever it's called, that Vita FPS that I think is a launch-day title in the west... anyway, it'll be interesting to see how that does. If they can work even a quarter of CoD's addictive mass-appeal into their multiplayer, it could be the runaway hit of the Vita launch. Which would get people talking-about/frothing-at-the-mouth-over the impending release of CoD, priming it to move a bajillion Vitas when it does.

    Throw in a Monster Hunter game for the Japanese Market, and the Vita will be more than fine.

  • DrDamn #102 1 month ago

    VAT is 20% of the price before it's added on not after. So VAT @ 20% on an item costing £230 at retail is not £46 it's £38.33.

  • NotSoSlim #103 1 month ago

    Idea for COD Vita would be to have bots to gain xp then update profile when you sign in.

    360 owners get the maps early so Sony need a way to get Vita owners who have a 360 to want PS3 vers.

  • BonzoBanana #104 1 month ago

    These estimates of manufacturing costs are likely to be wrong but then they don't appear to factor in all costs anyway related to transport and marketing so perhaps it ends up at the right figure by pure chance.

    Companies in China are knocking out dvd players for a few dollars to sell in the uk from £15 sometimes less. Such analysts would probably estimate the manufacturing costs of such units at $40 or more what with such units having memory, dvd drive, cpu, case, display, psu etc.

  • RobTheBuilder #105 1 month ago

    @Subdominator My mistake, I'm sure I read that a while ago, must have been incorrect!

  • JumpinJackFlash #106 1 month ago

    No, it's not worth £230. The handheld has so many ambiguities. The PSV should be free, with Corn Flakes...

  • mastablasta #107 1 month ago

    Drop the price to £179 and I will buy it.

  • Marshall2008 #108 1 month ago

    @Stratix You hit the nail on the head. No one really knows how much the R & D cost and the period it was spent over. This could be a massive sum that has to be factored in to the cost of the device.

  • Snake_2011 #109 1 month ago

    compared to what others charge this is a breath of fresh air.

  • Britler #110 1 month ago

    @NotSoSlim The general preference for the 360 when it comes to CoD would definitely be the biggest thing holding CoD Vita back, and by extension its power to move systems. On top of the legitimate reasons there's always this brand loyalty nonsense, which I frankly don't understand, so I can't really predict how it would affet things.

    All that said, even though 360 owners are unlikely to switch to PS3 this late in the generation just for Vita CoD connectivity, I wonder about the effet it could have when people are deciding whether to go with PS or Xbox when the next generation rolls around. It seems to me that, even if one owned and loved their Xbox360, the notion of playing CoD on the go with the same account they use at home would convince a significant number of people to choose Sony next time around.

  • geoneo123 #111 1 month ago

    even more of a reason to wait for the inevitable price drop.

  • CaLeDee #112 1 month ago

    I used Amazon's trade-in process to sell a bunch of textbooks I won't be needing any more and netted myself a nice £152 gift card. That will make it much easier to go ahead and buy one at launch.

    I'm not even a handheld gamer but there's something about the Vita that grabs me. I just hope the software support will be there for many years to come, and that Sony cave in and allow for something like an app marketplace on it.

  • ZombieJFK #113 1 month ago

    Jesus Christ, someone needs to cut their horrible yellow long finger nails. Who's taking the thing apart, Gollum?

  • rootovallevil #114 1 month ago

    I think the price for the system is good considering power of it, however I am still pretty pissed at the memory card prices and the gimmicky cameras.
    Toys R Us have the Vita (Wi-fi) up for pre-order at £215 right now and Game have a bundle up for £270 that includes the Vita (again Wi-fi) Uncharted, the pre-order pack and a 4gb memory card.

    I'll probably pre-order as I need my Uncharted fix and I no longer have a PS3.

  • Lunatic4ever #115 1 month ago

    So if the high price is needed to cover the costs of developing the Vita, a price drop can be expected when that stage is over right? And that is the time when I wll purchase the Vita.

  • Bander #116 1 month ago

    I don't understand something. The PSV and 3DS both have the same RRP at launch, and both provide an estimated £108 profit margin, according to the article. But the PSV costs £102.90 to make and the 3DS costs £61.76... Where did the £41.14 difference go?

    If it was possible to tell from the article what the UK prices are for the Vita with and without 3G, and which of the two it's talking about, and what component in UBM's breakdown is responsible for 3G, it might help. It looks like Sony are being less greedy than Nintendo (pre-3DS price drop), just going by the numbers, yet the words say something else. I don't get it.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 14:45

  • gamefan #117 1 month ago

    Pointless article takes no account of distribution, shipping, warranty, marketing, salaries, etc. etc that buiness have pay to make, sell and ship goods

  • Britler #118 1 month ago

    @Bander I wondered about that myself. I figured it was a mistake, but people in the comments keep referencing it... are we missing something?

  • alcides #119 1 month ago

    and someone with a PS3 might look hard at the Xbox 360 at a similar price before a Vita.
    Yeah, and then say DERP and grab that Vita! All Vita buyers won't be PS3 owners. Not that people can't be interested in the Xbox, but Pachter is being a fanboy. He can sneer all he wants, he's queer for Microsoft, dissmissive of SONY and hates Nintendo.

    He's lazily applying his WiiU logic to the Vita, that people don't want to buy new consoles (3DS says hi) so they'll HAVE to flock to the Xbox as the only atlernative.

    Xbox vs. Vita. One is a sleek, futureproof portable from a company that actually makes games, the other is a clanky 6 years old reliable (lol) console with no upcomming exclusives. They will potentially have very similar versions of the same games running on them in the near future. Mind you, in the near future, the Xbox will have become inconsistant.

    What would motivate a PS3 owner to ever consider (or even have considered) buying the same console with less games, and hidden costs like proprietary accessories and paying online is beyond me, again, as a PS3 owner - and it's only my opinion.
    "If a consumer already has a PS3, they won't really feel compelled to buy a Vita to play Uncharted, for example, but they might want to play Gears of War or Halo. Thus, although a good value, I think Vita is a tough sell. It would have been great in 2004-2006."
    It would have been IMPOSSIBLE in 2006, how inconstitent can a statement get? His basically trolling that any Sony effort is invalid by suggesting ideal standards impossible to meet. The PSP was a succes and sends a big screw you at this guy. Uncharted is one among many titles. And it's not the same fucking game as the PS3 titles. The main incentive for me buing a Vita is that the next WipEout from the makers of WipEout comes out on it.

    But granted, I bought a Wii two years ago and it's only starting to pay off now. So, I guess I'll be waiting, not for a price drop on the Vita, but on those fucking expensive flashcards.

  • JumpinJackFlash #120 1 month ago

    Anyone who pays £230 for the PSV needs their head examined! The handheld will bomb because no one outwith your hardcore Sony fanboy will buy it.

    It's already doing fucking gash in Japan. The PSP's strongest market...

  • Machiavellian #121 1 month ago

    I also find these prices hard to believe, but i guess i dont buy them in mass quantities for trade price like Sony do, but if this is to be believed the profit margin on products like the iPad and Android Phones must be absolutely massive! (As a lot of them cost more for much lower specs)

    So now you know why Apple and some Android phone companies are making a killing.

  • UkHardcore23 #122 1 month ago

    No is it fuck worth that amount, Sony are ripping the erse out of things now! PS3 now this!

  • swills #123 1 month ago

    @GamesProgrammer
    the profit margin on products like the iPad and Android Phones must be absolutely massive!
    This page suggests that 10 months ago an iPad 2 costs about $320 to make. It's probably closer to $250 now.

    So yes, Apple do make a LOT of money on their hardware sales I am sure.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 16:08

  • steviepunk #124 1 month ago

    If the build cost is £102 - which I would assume does not include VAT cost (since the cost comes from US$ without VAT)

    So claiming that Sony make £108 based on a trade price of £210 - including £56 VAT - is misleading. Sony would be making £52 per unit, with the government making £56 per unit.

  • KongRudi #125 1 month ago

    @CaptainKid This lithium battery, is pretty good.
    It charges from flat to full, in only 1.5 hours if you plug it in the wall - takes abit longer if you're using USB.

    That's twice as fast as the 3DS, and a hour faster Iphone, for comparison's sake.

    Also it holds more charge than your smartphone, if you're using a 3D-model game, it will last more than twice as long as the Iphone (test done with Uncharted, and Infinty Blade).

    So, it might be, extra cost for better performance.

  • Diomedes #126 1 month ago

    This article is pure BS. No way 768Mb or Ram and Edram is only 16 dollars, no way the 4-Core CPU and GPU is 16 dollars.

  • trebellk #127 1 month ago

    I can't believe someone above is trying to argue why you should choose this not 360 or vice versa?

    wtf, why does everything have to become a retarded console war?

    stop doing big companies marketing work for them and let people buy what they want for gods sake.

  • AgentCool #128 1 month ago

    @Sniper_007 I've heard more than a few people use that line about the physical cost of DVDs vs. retail price to justify internet piracy lately. That's a totally different debate of course but similarly involves idiots without any common sense.

  • KongRudi #129 1 month ago

    "If a consumer already has a PS3, they won't really feel compelled to buy a Vita to play Uncharted, for example, but they might want to play Gears of War or Halo."

    This dosn't make any sense.
    Seems like someone get commision for mentioning said games at every opportunity.
    PS3 owners like myself, would definately feel compelled to enjoy Uncharted at every opportunity, including Vita.

    It's like saying Manchester United-fans, wouldn't want some Chelsea-players on their team, because they allready have players of similar quality.. But they might want some Sunderland- or Everton-plaeyrs.

  • AOFanboi #130 1 month ago

    *sigh* When a newspaper prints these stupid "cost breakdown" articles, I can quip back something like: "Oh, okay, then I want to pay just the cost of the paper and ink next time I buy your newspaper." But what do I reply when a supposedly knowledgeable gaming site pushes the same useless kind of article?

    Hint: The device price is the income, this is supposed to cover the expenses - including stuff like research, design, transportation, management etc.

  • bladdard #131 1 month ago

    I can't believe anyone would pay Pachter for the bullshit he pedals. How many people do you know who will buy an xbox 360 for portable gaming, the guy has lost the tiny bit of credibility he never had.

  • bladdard #132 1 month ago

    Also for those saying it's a rip off, I bet many of you have happily shelled out £500 for an iPhone which technologically isn't very different to the 3G PSV.

    The PSV looks like a fantastic console and when compared to similar devices is very fairly priced.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 16:59

  • Bonders99 #133 1 month ago

    @UkHardcore23 You sound like one of those perpetual moaners who would whinge even if it was given away for free.

  • manic_mouse #134 1 month ago

    @jonbwfc

    "In every other area of the world other than gadgets, people recognise that the cost of production of a product is largely unrelated to the cost of the components in the product"

    This.

  • Edz72 #135 1 month ago

    I have absolutely no issue with any of sony's pricing for the vita, although I do think they should have included a 2gb mem card like the 3ds.

    The only thing Sony didn't account for is the fact that the majority of gamers are as thick as a brick.......

  • Snake_2011 #136 1 month ago

    why do all the xbox boneheads troll everything Sony with there crap this site is terrible for it.

  • Britler #137 1 month ago

    @Snake_2011 If you think Eurogamer is terrible, you clearly don't spend much time at IGN. Try it out. 5 minutes and you'll run back here screaming.

    Eurogamer is by far the *best* place around in this regard.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 17:37

  • patchbox360 #138 1 month ago

    HELL NO!

  • bladdard #139 1 month ago

    @spacedelete

    I don't think there was any reason to personally abuse me because of an opinion I gave.

  • NotSoSlim #140 1 month ago

    http://www .game.co.uk/en/hardware/ps-vita/

    Game are giving free memory cards with bundles so expect every other retailer to follow

  • dadrester #141 1 month ago

    @myms1ps3 Give me the Metal Gear HD Collection and i'll buy it.

    Announced for November I believe. Shame it's not closer to the PS3/360 launch, as I think it could easily drive hardware sales.

    I'm planning to get a launch console if I can afford it, but for me the killer app will be a portable LBP with all the social and creation features of LBP2 (plus I suspect a whole lot more - not least the touch controls).

  • Chufty #142 1 month ago

    Most of what Pachter says is nonsense anyway, I don't quite understand why he gets quoted so much in the gaming press.

    Still, I hope the Vita does well. I love having decent games on my smartphone, but the touchscreen interface limits the type of game you can reasonable play.

  • WJF #143 1 month ago

    'Pachter'? Who's he?

    Oh yeah! Now I remember. He's the guy who said that the 3DS launch price was too low and that Nintendo would have stock shortages thanks to how cheap it was!

    And yet he still keeps popping up on games sites. Again and again.

  • greentango #144 1 month ago

    far too expensive for me, with the 3ds around £135 mark the vita has to at least be under £200 to compete.

    I will be awaiting the price drop in a month or so time before i pick it up, first console i will have not bought on launch in 10 years!

  • -Mew- #145 1 month ago

    I'm a PS3 owner, plus gaming PC + DS + Android.

    What they didn't take into account that I don't have a PSP. So I will enjoy PSP,PS1 maybe PS2 and Vita games on my Vita.

    And I really think theres a lot of people out there who wanted to buy a PSP but never did because of the UMDs or price point or the fact that the Vita was announced. Or maybe they just never got around to buying it.

  • smelly #146 1 month ago

    Yes eurogamer.. this is totally how much the machine costs...

    Lets ignore disctribution/manufacturing/advertising/r&d/marketing/develo pment of games/etc etc etc.

    Sheesh.. What a completely bullshit nonsense article.

    (and i have no intention of buying a vita either before anyone acuses me of being a fanboy)

  • JumpinJackFlash #147 1 month ago

    PMSL at all the Sony fanboys marking down every comment that has a bad word to say about the PSV. Bawbags...

  • Hunam #148 1 month ago

    They had me at Persona 4.

  • Snake_2011 #149 1 month ago

    @Britler The Sixthaxis is my favourite site very mature there, love EG as well just tired of the hate that comes with it.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 20:08

  • smelly #150 1 month ago

    Can someone point me towards any time that Pachter has actually been right with his predictions on something?

  • Retro_ #151 1 month ago

    For me, the Vita is worth £230 but the £40 price for the 16gig card gains Sony the 'naughty card'

  • callum9999 #152 1 month ago

    @smelly "Of course, that's by no means pure profit. Very substantial labour, R&D, marketing and distribution costs all need to be taken into account too. Without a sneak peak at Sony's books, it's virtually impossible to ascertain exactly what proportion of the take-home is profit."

    How about you and the million others on here moaning learn some basic comprehension skills.

    The article CLEARLY states it doesn't include that and that it's an additional cost to them.

  • Falkano #153 1 month ago

    Totally not worth it. The rest of the world is paying a lot higher prices to cover it being cheaper in the US. Your article doesn't even cover the full costs.

    £230 for the cheapest Vita. Then you need a memory card if you actually plan on playing games, seeing as it is a games console then obviously your going to need it. That is £39.99 for the lowest priced one. Then on top of that you need a game. So say you want Uncharted thats at minimum £29.99. So on day of release your paying £300.

    However you wish to look at it paying £300 to play an Uncharted game is a complete rip off. It is no surprise to see it doing so badly in Japan and that is in the busy part of the year. Soon as we hit feb/march which is the quiet part of the year sales wise numbers there will be dreadful.

    £300 today is so much money. Few people will have that money just lying around in this financial climate. Add to that the rise of tablet/smartphone technology makes you think a lot harder about it then you used to. In the UK more people would pay that extra bit of cash and pick up and Ipad 2 or the rumoured 3 that is iminent.

    Sony ignored what happened on the launch of the 3DS and have gone into it even more expensive. They will need to cut in the UK at least to around £149.99 WITH a memory card or it will be dead on arrival. You can't justify basically paying double the price of a 3DS to get it.

  • NotSoSlim #154 1 month ago

    Post deleted at 21:06:06 20-01-2012

  • eddiehitler #155 1 month ago

    Its too expensive when you factor in that they are charging double for the compulsory memory cards and that the 3ds can be bought for almost £100 less with its included 2gb SD card.

    Also 3ds games are cheaper by almost £10 including the two mario's and both resi's.

    When you tot it up in the end a vita and a game is almost double the price of a 3ds and a game.

  • NotSoSlim #156 1 month ago

    All the comments about it being expensive compared to 3ds and whatever else. Simple solution wait for a price drop. Sure Sony wont be happy but i am sure they just want to buy the machine if not now then sometime.

    As for posts saying it will cost £300 to get it with a game and memory card. Visit Game.co.uk is clearly not that price.

    Also the game price argument in ridiculous when only one game is actually £44.99 and you can get that for £35 which around £3 more than Resi Revelations. Game prices cheaper if you shop around..what a shocker.

    3ds is a great piece of kit and if your happy with it great but some people are actually looking forward to buying a Vita and shock horror they may own a 3ds as well
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/12 @ 23:14

  • smelly #157 1 month ago

    @callum9999 : Its still akin to saying - "are games worth $60?", then showing that blank dvds only cost 5p each.... Wow - loadsa profit there!

    In other words - complete and utter nonsense.

  • Anaardvark #158 1 month ago

    What a load of crap. I want a good console to play games on if I'm not at home. Just because I have a PS3 or an XBox, doesn't mean that I won't want one on the move. Infinity blade 2 is ok, but even that has time limited appeal.

    Bring on Vita, can't wait.

  • Power_n_Glory #159 1 month ago

    It's not convenient for me. The main price is something I can get around, but I can't justify £30 - £40 for a game I'll only play for a short 15 - 20 minute burst for my journey to work.

    Had a PSP and DS and I don't use them. Some great games for them but gaming while on the move isn't for me.

  • Kamata #160 1 month ago

    I think Sony have nailed it with Vita, I understand its a slow burner in Japan..but in the US/Europe i think it will come good...This is a mobile experience with huge potential, I'll be getting one and hand helds have never really appealed to me until now.

  • RandomTerrain #161 1 month ago

    I'd happily pay double if it guaranteed the people in the factories making it actually got a decent wage.

  • smelly #162 1 month ago

    Im going to do a "Pachter" and make a prediction.. But i bet mine comes true. The Vita will do incredibly well in the uk, but not the rest of the world.. Same as the psp did.

    Now is someone going to pay me money for that analysis?

  • MrMarbles #163 1 month ago

    Thus, although a good value, I think Vita is a tough sell. It would have been great in 2004-2006.
    Buuuuuh?

    It depresses me that Pachter likely earns considerably more than me to say stuff like that.

    In other news: a copy of Grays Sports Almanac: 1950-2000 would have been great in 1955.

  • FluffyTucker #164 1 month ago

    "no"

  • CaptainKid #165 1 month ago

    @KongRudi
    Hmm still sceptical.
    You're saying Sony invented a battery which is MUCH better then what the competition has..

  • Schmoke-n-a-pancake #166 1 month ago

    Cost and worth are two completely different terms.

    This is an article about cost, not worth, so why does the headline read "Is the Playstation Vita worth 230"?

    I honestly expected an article covering the value proposition of this machine when I clicked on this. Not a run down of how much the components cost.

  • ROCK-NYC #167 1 month ago

    I still have a in good condition PSP 1000 with some good games so I might just get a xbox instead. Always wanted to to play Gears of War anyways...

  • onezeonx #168 1 month ago

    @ROCK-NYC

    errr thanks for the info

    I'd rather play on a vita myself

  • avillager #169 1 month ago

    And how much did they spent on vita development?

  • BonzoBanana #170 1 month ago

    The Vita and 3DS are practically a generation apart in performance. While the 3DS is in dreamcast/PS2 territory the Vita is in the area between the original xbox and PS3/360. It seems with portable gaming performance there are often other factors like battery life that is important but in this rare instance the Vita also beats the 3DS with longer running time and faster recharging. Not only that but Vita has a superior input method with dual sticks etc. The most important thing it needs though is great games and lots of them to sell the Vita but Sony has got most things right with regard the Vita hardware.

    Personally I would have held back for a simultanous worldwide september launch this year at a slightly lower price and with a wide range of top games ready to go with the launch to make it the christmas 2012 big hit. I think this would have been a better option. Also I would have included a small amount of gamesave memory in the console like 64 megabytes so you weren't forced to buy additional memory cards to play your first few games.

  • AgeOfChaos #171 1 month ago

    People dont like to be told they're being ripped off.

    Sort it out, Eurogamer!

  • NotSoSlim #172 1 month ago

    @BonzoBanana

    Couldnt give 3ds even bigger lead. Expect a price cut years end probably around COD to try n shift units

  • White_Westie #173 1 month ago

    sad as it seems, I think this is a fail from start,

    they need to be looking at integration for the future, not stand alone devices.

    for example, phones and satnav are now hand in hand, phones and games are now hand in hand...

    Could this somehow have been integrated in to a quad core phone, (yes they are coming) with satnav, and also with in car entertainment, etc too...

    could it have seemless integration into your ps3 so you could remote play games (think ps3 online service to linked to this would have been a good selling point)


    perhaps a clip on / clip off style game pad ala the asus transformer style would have been more beneficial.... with a quad core phone...

    Price does come into it too, £50 yes i'd buy!, but for £150+ I need to be asking myself, do I need to have TWO devices on myself permanently, or a decent phone with decent games on.... i'd be going for ONE device - its more convienient
    Edited by 1 at 21/01/12 @ 13:10

  • funkateer #174 1 month ago

    But the Vita is hardly just a bag of random components, is it?

    Similarly if you only consider the raw resources, the Vita is probably worth less than 1 euro: A little bit of silicon (sand), a spoon of oil (to make the plastic), a few gram of metal, etc.
    ...which of course is also a silly oversimplified way of seeing it...
    Edited by 1 at 21/01/12 @ 13:59

  • Uncompetative #175 1 month ago

    Sony have succeeded in making something too expensive to risk taking outside of the house.

    People may as well stick with a regular console.

  • bladdard #176 1 month ago

    @Uncompetative
    Most peoples mobile phones cost more than 230 but they take them out of the house.

    Yes it isn't cheap but it's a serious bit of kit and Sony deserve success for taking a chance, if this was an apple product everyone would be creaming their duds.

    The price is the price and the only mistakes Sony have made for me is lack of onboard memory and unrealistic game price structure.
    Edited by 1 at 21/01/12 @ 16:08

  • dawguk #177 1 month ago

    @White_Westie More convenient, but neither of them is as good as two dedicated devices. As considering that the Vita is angled towards people that are serious about their gaming, this is where the difference is made.

    I play games on my Xperia Play, but they are pretty much throw-away games - I turn them on, I play them, I turn them off. The Vita can and will be a much more serious bit of gaming kit.

  • dawguk #178 1 month ago

    "The price is great for what you get, but the fact is that the Vita is priced the same as the PS3. As a practical matter, someone without a PS3 would probably be happier if they bought a console first, and someone with a PS3 might look hard at the Xbox 360 at a similar price before a Vita.
    Sorry, I very much disagree with this. The Vita and the PS3 aren't even competing consoles. I own an Xbox360, but have not got myself a PS3 because it either doesnt offer much more than the Xbox, or what it does offer most of the time isn't as good.

    However, with the Vita, I am getting a handheld console that I can use anywhere. Even if the titles are nearly identical to those on the 360, I would still considering purchasing them, because I can take my Vita on holiday with me. And that's the difference folks.

    Pitching the Vita against the PS3 is mindless.

  • Snake_2011 #179 1 month ago

    Uncompetative lol feel sorry for all the people who own smart phones then they must all carry knifes.

  • drSchiwago #180 1 month ago

    It would be interesting to know how they estimated the production costs, my understanding is that you would need access to the contracts. The price depends heavily on quantity and negotiation power, so guessing the price could be inadequate.

    It's also very difficult to estimate/predict whether the Vita will be a success or not, because the definition of success can be complex:

    - Sony's overall costs compared to income from hard- and software sales over time
    (all factors (e.g. unit production costs) vary over time)
    - Profit & market share expectations
    - Soft factors (staying in the mobile market, strengthen the Sony brand [hopefully])

    All analysts seems to think that the times of dedicated mobile gaming devices are over. I guess that's only true if the expectation is to sell them in numbers like mobile phones or ipads. The core game market may be relative small in comparison, but the absolute size could be big enough to keep the business going.

    I assume Sony has done its market research homework BEFORE releasing a new device.
    Edited by 1 at 22/01/12 @ 03:11

  • Arwin #181 1 month ago

    One thing that may be worth considering, is the average spent on games by those who buy a Vita versus others. What if over the lifetime of Vita people buy 6 titles with an average of $30, and, say, a few more PSN titles (but relatively few). That could total over $200. How does that compare to spending on iOS games at the moment? Do you know anyone who is spending even remotely that kind of money on iOS games?

    I currently average perhaps 8 euro a year on iOS games since I got an iPhone, tops. Of course, there's still a lot of money to be made on iOS/Android, since there are way more people who own a smartphone, but there's not going to be a large market for people who buy big titles. And with 3DS and Vita around, people who do, are still better off with a 3DS or Vita for now.
    Edited by 1 at 22/01/12 @ 13:23

  • MichaelDark #182 1 month ago

    Playstation Vita = Total absolute failure. They can't even sell it in Japan! Japan! They love both gadgets and Sony there. My advice: Stop production, call it a failure, admit Nintendo is 1000000 better than you, bow to Nintendo, go home to your mamas and cry. Ninty beats you again! AGAIN!!! With another machine that costs half of your super-handheld. With much less third party developers support. How lame is that? S

  • Lamb #183 1 month ago

    Sony did a good job on the Vita consumer price considering the Samsung Galaxy IIS was £500 at release. But the games are still enormously expensive considering this is a handheld. With a majority of Android games going for less than £5 thats a lot of competition.

    Still a well made game, with no silly dumb downed plot or blocky graphics or out of place flourescent colors should have a healthy market among older gamers.

  • TexMurphy01 #184 1 month ago

    @jonbwfc 'should to'?

  • Zeydlitz #185 1 month ago

    Processor $16 -- unbelievable. 2-cores AppleA5 cost is $15. So all of this calculations are speculative, and real cost of vitas components could me much bigger.

  • Widge #186 1 month ago

    MichaelDork

    LOL

  • Bangaioh #187 1 month ago

    Give me a Dark Souls for Vita and I'll pick one up on day one.

  • White_Westie #188 1 month ago

    @dawguk

    Yes I know what you are saying, that it is more of a hardcore item, but I still think its going to fail.

    I know I've a few negs from stating the fact, that I dont believe it'll be a big seller and that it will probably fail in the long term but its already out there on the sales numbers...

    To Quote:
    But for the week ending Jan, a month after its Japan release—the PS Vita had fallen to 18,361 units sold.

    Not only is that far less than the 325,000 sold in its opening week, it's EVEN LESS THAN THE PSP is selling, according to the numbers published by Media Create.

    (The PSP moved 22,538 units in the same week ending last Friday).

    Andriasang notes that Vita's slide looks like this, week to week:
    week #1 324,859
    week #2 72,479
    Week #3 42,648
    Week #4 18,361. (with the original psp selling 22,538 units)

    I know its too early to call that a flop but it could be that the PS Vita is running into some of the problems behind the 3DS' underwhelming release, or people are reluctant to adopt early because of what happened there...

    I appreiate what you say about hardcore gamers, however I'd rather part my cash for something revolutionary, not just yet another itearation of the same platform with a few improvements. Something that is going to be groundbreaking.

    it just feels "samey" ... lets see something fresh, integrated and one portable device, including phones, satnav, media hub, etc. Something that lets you continue and link up to any game you play on your home console, for example an OnLive / RDP service, directly linked to your console, that you can access via your touchscreen device - whether its a phone or a tablet... to carry on your gaming.. not proportioned down, utilising cloud saves, etc...
    Edited by 2 at 23/01/12 @ 18:01

  • SlackMaster #189 4 weeks ago

    The system looks nice but if rumours are correct the RRP for Vita games may be as much as £49.99. Now I know retailers won't sell them for that but still, over £29.99 for a handheld game is more than I'm willing to pay.

    Another sticking point for me is battery life. If it's only 4-5 hours tops then I'd mostlikely be playing it at home, which if I'm doing this I may as well be playing on the PS3 or 360.

    I know that it may suit some people but I can't see there being a massive market for this console and as with the PS3 and PSP Go, I cannot see Sony adjusting the price anytime soon to make it more desirable.

    I hope it does well as competition is good, but it has a lot going against it atm I think.
    Edited by 1 at 24/01/12 @ 08:53

  • Sutorcen #190 4 weeks ago

    One of the few times I absolutely agree with Pachter. Wrong time to release the Vita. This is what the PSP should have been like (without the back touch surface).

  • alexbulluk #191 4 weeks ago

    I just wish they'd slapped in a 32gb NAND memory chip. I mean seriously, that would've been great, and I bet would cost next to nothing.

  • johnson81 #192 4 weeks ago

    I think people in Japan were burnt by the 3ds price drop and are unwilling to fork out until a price drop. I know thats what im gonna do when its released over here.

  • -Mew- #193 4 weeks ago

    @alexbulluk They're going for 40% cheaper games on PSN, they're trying to combat retail with this. If you're going to buy like 5+ games you're already getting money back. Or so they'd like you to believe.

  • travis66 #194 2 weeks ago

    It is worth every $$

  • Geoff900 #195 2 weeks ago

    I would say it's not worth the price, until more games come out, and if you wait you will get it cheaper anyway.

  • Geoff900 #196 2 weeks ago

    @Zozzilla Don't compare PC components to a hand-held counter part.

    Size is one factor, plus another is it's new hardware so cost is always much higher until about a year when there enough units out there.