Digital Foundry vs. PlayStation Vita

By Thomas Morgan Published 14 January, 2012

In-depth technical analysis of Sony's latest, greatest handheld.

Page 1 of 5

Sony's PlayStation Portable redefined the state of the art for mobile gaming technology back in 2004 with its luxurious 480x272 colour screen and custom architecture that powered graphically immense titles like God of War, Ridge Racer, Gran Turismo, LittleBigPlanet and Metal Gear Solid among many others. While many argued that portable versions of home console games were not the way forward, with PlayStation Vita we find that Sony continues to beg to differ.

The support for the PlayStation Suite initiative suggests that Sony is willing to embrace the bite-sized gaming concept to some degree, but this is very much a PSP successor in form, function and ethos - reminiscent of the older machine in look and feel and launching with a range of games that would not look so out of place on a current home console. A brand new Uncharted adventure arrives with the machine on day one, and with titles like WipEout 2048 we'll actually see the exact same game launch on both PS3 and Vita, with the ability to sync progress between both consoles.

After an extended hands-on period with two Vita units, this Digital Foundry hardware review dissects Sony's new offering, our aim being to answer all the questions you may have about the new machine: how does it look, how does it feel, what can it do and how do the games play? And with Vita priced at £230 - more expensive than the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360 but a relative snip compared to the iPad - does the package offer enough to justify the asking price?

We'll be taking Vita to task on a range of aspects across a substantial review, covering off the following topics:

vitafront

Despite the familiar oval design, changes such as touch-screen controls, a larger display and adoption of solid-state game cartridges help differentiate it from its predecessor.

PlayStation Vita: The Design

PlayStation Vita Tech Specs

CPU: ARM Cortex - A9 core (quad-core)

GPU: SGX543MP4+

Dimensions: 182.0 x 18.6 x 83.5mm (width x depth x height)

Display: five-inches (16:9), 960 x 544, Approx. 16 million colors, OLED, capacitive

Other Features: Rear-touch pad (multi-touch capable), front and rear cameras, stereo speaker, microphone

Sensors: Six-axis motion sensing system (three-axis gyroscope, three-axis accelerometer), three-axis electronic compass

Location Support: GPS, Wi-Fi location service

Wireless Communications: Mobile network connectivity (3G - optional), IEEE 802.11b/g/n, Bluetooth 2.1+EDR

First impressions on unboxing the Vita are extremely positive. Placing it in our hands for the first time, it's apparent the console has a distinctly premium feel to it, reminding us of the original PSP's solid, weighty build, or even the first wave of PS3 models with their chrome finish. No compromises have been made to quality here, with the whole unit being reinforced by an oval framework with a metallic finish that gives off no creaks under firm pressure from the palms. It probably could take a fair few knocks, although obviously we'd refrain from putting this to the test.

The weight of the unit does seem to add to the sensation of material quality which was missing in the PSP's Slim and Lite range, largely as a result of the cheaper plastics it used. That said, the heft to it isn't so much that it could put strain on the wrists over long periods of play, and the two grips on the back help to keep it lodged firmly in your hands.

The overall increase in the size of the unit, measuring in at approximately 7.3 inches long, 3.3 high, and 0.7 deep, lends itself to the ergonomics of the device. The difference in grip makes it much easier to pivot the base of your thumbs into a comfortable position before landing on the d-pad or four face buttons. The positioning of the two analogue sticks also comes across as carefully measured, being deliberately pushed closer towards the screen to prevent users hooking their thumbs to meet it. As it's designed, this feels very familiar to Sony's Dual Shock controllers. Meanwhile, the index fingers wrap naturally around its form to land on the two shoulder buttons.

Actually, the Vita is a remarkably thin device, and discounting the protrusion of the analogue sticks it is marginally leaner than the PSP-2000. This is no doubt aided by the use of the thin OLED screen, and the omission of its predecessor's spacious UMD tray, but it's still impressive.

horizontal
vertical

The depth of the Vita is very comparable to the Slim and Lite revision of the PSP, with only its two protruding analogue sticks holding it back from being the more streamlined device.

Perhaps one of the most anticipated additions to the design is the second analogue stick, which has huge ramifications regarding the kinds of games that will end up being produced on the Vita. These sticks are symmetrically placed, and feel quite sensitive, in that even the slightest touch shifts them from their default position. Much like the 3DS's implementation, we can see this lack of friction as something that might take a tiny bit of adapting to, and some may prefer a little more resistance to metre out finer movements in first person shooters. But again, they are very well designed overall, and certainly a huge leap ahead of the PSP's textured nub.

The d-pad used on the Vita is perhaps the most comfortable Sony has ever produced. Each cardinal direction rolls on the pivot very cleanly and precisely, with a light click that offers a satisfying sense of feedback when input has been made. We find sliding motions in 2D fighters such as Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom to be much easier on the thumb than with any previous handheld device, helped partly by the minimisation of gaps between each button. On the right hand side, the four micro-switched face buttons are exactly as you'd expect, although surprisingly smaller than on other Sony portables - a point which is accentuated by the up-sizing of practically everything else.

"First impressions on unboxing the Vita are extremely positive. Placing it in our hands for the first time, it's apparent the console has a distinctly premium feel to it, reminding us of the original PSP's solid, weighty build."

If we were to start nitpicking here, there is an argument to be made that the distance between the face buttons and the right analogue is less than optimal. They're perhaps a tad too close for our liking, and tapping the X button often leads us to drag the right stick down with it - although again this may involve some adapting to. Less excusable is the fact that the stereo speakers are placed on our thumbs' route to the d-pad and face buttons, resulting in the speaker holes being obscured during much of the run of play, leading to a general muffling of the sound. This isn't ideal, and although the 3.5mm headphone slot at the bottom is an option, we hope it will be addressed in a future revision.

Next up, the family of menu buttons beneath the original PSP's screen have all gone their separate ways, and for good reason. The Home (now dubbed 'PlayStation'), Select and Start buttons are positioned beneath the analogue sticks, recessed into the console's front to avoid accidental pressure, while the metallic power and volume buttons protrude by a millimetre from the top side of the bezel. The contour of the unit matches your hand-size in such a way that these top buttons are easy to reach with the index fingers - only a short stretch away from the shoulder buttons.

vitaback-1
vitaback-2

The rear-touch panel is often quite difficult to navigate blind, but it's unlikely that most games will demand absolute accuracy from it. It's an experimental touch that could pay dividends in creative ideas from the development side, and we're intrigued to see what might come of it.

The excised display and sound mode buttons that once cluttered the original PSP's menu bar aren't missed at all. The Wi-Fi switch is also no more, with the Vita instead offering you the option to tweak all brightness, equaliser, and wireless connectivity settings straight from the OS menu. The choice to take this route is mitigated by the Vita's ability to pause gameplay on the fly and adjust any settings accordingly before switching straight back to the action. By replacing these physical switches and buttons with software-based alternatives, Sony has removed a lot of the clutter that the PSP has held on to for years, paving the way for a very simplified, more elegant look.

Moving on, the game cart port is located beneath a cover at the top and can be opened by dipping your fingernail underneath and pulling outwards - not the most accessible solution, but it does help avoid dust getting into the unit.

Besides this, there are no other official points of entry to the Vita - not even a battery hatch. This reluctance to give users an option to replace the battery is a disappointment. While we're actually quite happy with the Vita's battery life, the ability to carry around a spare battery "just in case" was always quite useful for the original PSP - especially so for scenarios like gaming during long haul flights. As it is, the fact that the rear-touch panel encompasses much of the unit's posterior means that there's little room for any kind of battery access anyway.

Easily one of the more innovative additions, the multi-touch rear panel is entirely coated in a smooth glossy finish, and works as an inverse to the front screen. In some ways, this could be seen as Sony's response to the 3D charge on Nintendo's side, as while the gameplay remains strictly in 2D, the interplay between the two touch panels invites play styles which involve manipulation of depth in-game. Put into practice with titles like Little Deviants and ModNation Racers (where you can raise or lower terrain in its track editor), it's difficult to know exactly where your fingers are without referring to the edges. However, this remains an enticing addition that we can't wait to see utilised properly.

Page 1 of 5

Comments (133) Latest comment 4 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • markyHD #1 4 months ago

    Great article. I really wish Sony would insist, at least to their own developers, that they stick to the native res. What is the point of a lovely high res screen when the first party big hitters are rendered sub-native.

    I really am one of those people that would rather run a game in 1980x1080 on medium than 1440x900 on high, so perhaps its just me, but I do find this slightly disappointing.

    Nevertheless, the system sounds wonderful and I can't what for the UK release :D
    Edited by markyHD at 14/01/12 @ 10:17

  • Snake_2011 #2 4 months ago

    roll on February the 22nd.
    Edited by Snake_2011 at 14/01/12 @ 10:33

  • [maven] #3 4 months ago

    I'm wondering whether lower non-native resolution of the back-buffer in Uncharted is due to memory constraints or fill-rate. Either is not really a good sign for a launch game.

  • LeChuckie #4 4 months ago

    They need to get ps1 emulation on their fast though. I want to play crash bsndicoot on it.

  • Ka-blamo #5 4 months ago

    Looks awesome!

    Edited by Ka-blamo at 14/01/12 @ 10:48

  • local_celebrity #6 4 months ago

    Tastes great with Philadelphia too.

  • Freakachuu #7 4 months ago

    I'm going to sound really petty here but surely I can't be the only one that immediately switches off the moment I hear someone use the phrase "fit for purpose"?

    *edit* Obviously people that use the phrase fit for purpose are an easily riled bunch.
    Edited by Freakachuu at 14/01/12 @ 14:43

  • FogHeart #8 4 months ago

    Wow, this article really covers every question which comes to mind! What I'm taking from this is that hardware wise there are so few niggles that it'd be churlish to say they make a difference to a purchasing decision (except maybe memory prices). Gaming starts off good and will get better, but if your primary use of the machine is the kind of thing you'd do with a tablet or ipod, look elsewhere. But if that was the case, you weren't likely to buy this device in preference to a tablet or media device anyway...

    One thing I'd say if media and browsing do make a big difference is that you should never buy a device based on what it might become - updates never seem to quite meet expectations. Instead, ensure that you're happy with what the device actually is at time of purchase. Of course, as you're reading this on EuroGAMER it looks like you should satisfied, and then some.

  • NotSoSlim #9 4 months ago

    Maybe the Uncharted resolution was due to time constraints? Pretty clear Sony wanted it as a launch title

    Vita i a gaming device first and the other stuff should be second behind this. The future update is no different to the 3DS having no store at launch. Give us a gaming device first and if needed add the rest
    Edited by NotSoSlim at 14/01/12 @ 10:56

  • CrunchinJelly #10 4 months ago

    Sub-native games at launch.

    Great precedent to set there.

  • Loneck #11 4 months ago

    "WipEout 2048 we'll actually see the exact same game launch on both PS3 and Vita, with the ability to sync progress between both consoles. "

    Do I understand it correctly that WipEout 2048 will be released on PS3 too? I didnt come across any information about this on internet.
    Edited by Loneck at 14/01/12 @ 11:21

  • Biker_Bob_1971 #12 4 months ago

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

  • Fake_Blood #13 4 months ago

    I think that those games not running in full res is more a battery issue than lack of performance from the cpu/gpu. Like they could run those games at full res, but the battery would run out after 2 hours.

  • super_monty #14 4 months ago

    I need to try one first, the PSP cramped my hands after 5 mins and ended up in the cupboard for the the rest of its life, turing me off to hands helds.

    Until I bought a 3DS last week and the games seem to be more the kind that I want on a HH. I also have a huge DS BC to buy and MC7 and zelda are amazing.

    The Vita can wait for now.

  • chaywa #15 4 months ago

    @Fake_Blood Why make a portable when you can only get 2 hours charge at native specifications then?

    Seems like a rushed production job (like MNR with barely any online features) more than anything

  • NotSoSlim #16 4 months ago

    Its clear they want to meet deadlines hence reolution as some games are full res. Due to size of the screen no one would notice.

    Think the Vita has more RAM than the PS3 so not a hardware issue

  • timewarp87 #17 4 months ago

    Nice read. Wish you had done a bit on the PS3 remote play..

  • supermaniacs #18 4 months ago

    Brilliant thorough review, proving yet again why you are by far the best gaming site.

    As a gamer first, this machine is exactly what I'm looking for..

    Bring on Feb 22!!!

  • PePe_PL #19 4 months ago

    520x408 (which is 75 per cent of the Vita's maximum 960x544 resolution) - well there is something wrong in this statement. 520x408=212k and 960x544=522k. 212k is ~40% of 522k. So either resolution or percents are incorrect.
    Edited by PePe_PL at 14/01/12 @ 12:14

  • vizzini #20 4 months ago

    From reading this article and Sony's choice of the NetFront web browser again, I've completely been put off buying the device now, and will be cancelling my pre-order(even though everything else seems great) if a proper browser announcement doesn't arrive before Feb 1st.

    Sadly for Sony I remember running far more accomplished versions of Firefox on my PS2 Linux with its minuscule 32MB of RAM and on the PS3's OtherOS. I also have a PSP Go & PS3 that haven't seen web browser updates to render normal html4 websites.

    It is ironic that even Killzone Liberation's online that needs the PSP browser, but fails to open the hardcoded website because it reports "insufficient browser memory".

    Sony's track record with web browser support has been terrible for the Playstation 3, PSP and pre-android smartphones like P800, P900, P910, p990 and P1i imo. This gives me every reason to believe that they will follow the old idea of “starting as they mean to go on”, and claimed improvements will never happen.

    There is no excuse; other than bad software support for why the PS3 doesn't have a web browser that is as good as the top 5% of PC, laptops, Macs, and the Vita has plenty under the hood to be better than every android/iOS browser by performance right now.

    I want the device for gaming, but have no interest in a premium gaming device of this quality & price if it is handicapping the web browser for being scared of people playing the odd browser game on it.

    They can just block those websites, as it is not like we couldn't just switch the device off and use a laptop for browser gaming, and it is not like the average casual consumer will know how to proxy their way around the blocked site list.


    All in all, this is a very good article. However I would have liked a little more info on whether Sony's own lossless ATRAC audio codecs are supported, or if it is another transfer music through the PC with the Media Go suite.

    I also wonder if the video support can be improved by tricking Media Go software to quickly change the video container by giving the Media Go app the video file with a changed extensions it likes(Mp4). And would also like to know if exporting and copying PlayTV files will play without conversion on the Vita, which would definitely be expected.

    edit: typos
    Edited by vizzini at 14/01/12 @ 12:23

  • memeroot #21 4 months ago

    Just not sure if im convinced...

  • jabberwoky #22 4 months ago

    So what happens when the battery needs replacing. Someone said you could, now this article says you can't. So do you send it off to sony to replace it, and hope it comes back?

  • orangpelupa #23 4 months ago

    im still curios about the game is rendered native or sub-native then upscaled to native.

    and about the AA, that powervr gpu suppposed able to give "Free AA" right?

  • theholyghost #24 4 months ago

    @timewarp87 i hoped DF woul mention that too. Enjoying my vita, but not the experience I have had so far with remote play.
    The only game I could get to work on it is Blazblue (calamity trigger I think). Graphics look ugly. Muddy and low res. More importantly, there was severe lag. Almost a second. So playing action games is a no-no at the moment. Don't mind that much about graphics, but that amount of input lag I can't put up with. I hope it's either this piece of software, or that the general remote play software can be improved, and not a hardware issue. I'd love to be able to play my ps3 games anywhere.

  • NotSoSlim #25 4 months ago

    You can replace the battery its in the manual but its fiddly

  • jonbwfc #26 4 months ago

    Every console since when has had sub-res upscaled games at launch. The last two generations of Playstation and Xbox all did. As coders get more familiar with the technology, those shortcuts disappear. It may be a reason not to buy it at launch, but it's ludicrous to suggest it means anything for a console long term.

    And buying or not buying a console due to the quality of its in-built web browser rather than the quality of the games it has? Seriously?

  • NotSoSlim #27 4 months ago

    @jonbwfc Well said!! Never understood fascinstion with browser when everyone has a smartphone anyway

  • Badassbab #28 4 months ago

    I commend Sony for trying to bring big screen console experiance to portable handhelds but too late for success Im afraid. It will do ok but will only really appeal to kids and Sony fans.

  • michaelius #29 4 months ago

    Can you guys test GPS functionality ? Does PSV come with any maps software ?

  • David_W #30 4 months ago

    Judging from the PS3 the choice of browser is disappointing. But to bring up the absence of Flash as a negative, especially for a mobile device, doesn't really make any sense. Even less so now that Adobe is switching from Flash to HTML 5 for mobile web.

    The Vita seems like such a delicious piece of hardware but unfortunately I don't use handhelds enought to warrant a purchase.

  • vizzini #31 4 months ago

    @jonbwfc

    I know that sounds extreme about the web browser, but people watch TV less than use the internet, and play games less than use the internet in any given month. Apple have understood this since the release of their first iDevice; it is the first letter in the name, and they are all competing for our money, through competing for out time. Google's TV initiative should worry people like Sony if they don't start getting the browser support right.

    In the old days of 14” CRT internet TVs with dialup modems built-in, a browsing experience like that was understandable, as they didn't have the processing like a PSP, Vita or PS3.

    But Sony's terrible track record with browsers, and knowledge the impeding browser fail to do its job; ie won't even handle the internal menus of my router to allow me to login, change settings and log out(like the ps3's and psp go's can't) make the device less convenient for me to own.

    I'll just browse (with my time) on something else like I currently do, and game as I currently do, and pick one up in 2-3years time at £100 less than this launch model.

    I'm not even opposed to paying for a browser through PSN that gets excellent lifetime support, I just have no intention of buying another wall garden device that respect the need to provide all the toys I need inside the garden.
    Edited by vizzini at 14/01/12 @ 13:32

  • David_W #32 4 months ago

    Flash IS dying for mobile web, there's no denying it. http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2011/11/flash-focus.html.

  • David_W #33 4 months ago

    http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2011/11/flash-focus.html

    Link didn't come out right.

  • David_W #34 4 months ago

    @Eurocensor Sigh, relax, take a deep breath. I never said anything about the Vita browser's other than comparing it to my experience of the PS3's browser. And how could I, I havent used it, have you

    If I had a web browser on my PC that didn't work on YouTube I'd be unhappy, yes. Do you notice the word "PC" in your post?

  • frobitz #35 4 months ago

    Webkit is open source and excellent, why they can't use that like most makers of higher end mobile devices is beyond me. Its simply ridiculous in this day and age to have such a primitive browser engine on any device. They're even making the development of their own sites more difficult / limited by using it.

  • manic_mouse #36 4 months ago

    Seriously people? Saying you're not going to buy the Vita because of the web browser? And because it doesn't support a dying, horrible and buggy standard?

    Get. A. Grip.

    If you want to browse the web use something made for doing so like a smart phone, iPad or computer. Don't refuse to buy a games console because they added a browser in as an extra. You do not buy a Vita to browse the internet, if you are you need your head examined.

    This is why I really hate gamers. All the ridiculous moaning about the stupidest most inane things.

    Next we'll be having people refusing to buy cars because the cup holder isn't big enough.

  • rock27gr #37 4 months ago

    You'd be surprised how important a properly configured cup holder is!

  • vizzini #38 4 months ago

    @Eurocensor

    Completely agree about the parallel you draw with a PC browser, although maybe the question would be, in this day and age of smartphone availability, how many people here would stick with their existing smartphone (without trading it) if their phone failed to offer a browser that worked with Amazon, ebay, iplayer, youtube, eurogamer, gmail, hotmail and even a simple pictures and text website(with the odd embedded video) forum like virtuafighter.com?

    I actually think the 3G model of the Vita is now a disingenuous product if a proper browser support experience isn't available (beyond the NetFront browser for game developer needs).

    A minimum of £15 per month data contract to browse(also) on something inferior to a smartphone makes zero business sense, so why it should make sense to any customer in Japan or the rest of the world is a bit of a puzzler.

  • God_Octo #39 4 months ago

    A very informative and through article- nice one DF. Just one question- does the music player still have a dynamic normaliser? I know it sounds petty and small, but I use my PSP as my music player, and its nice not having to constantly fiddle with the volume controls between every song.

  • manic_mouse #40 4 months ago

    Also, for those making and agreeing with the PC analogy.

    PC's are primarily designed for browsing the internet. It's what 99% of people spend 99% of their time doing on one.

    Therefore the analogy is as logically flawed and moronic as the original browser whinging.

    If you are buying the Vita as a web browsing device you are insane. Insane.

    So please, shut up about it. For the sake of everyone else's sanity. Yes the browser isn't the best, but it's pretty irrelevant, and will be barely used. End of discussion.
    Edited by manic_mouse at 14/01/12 @ 14:21

  • frobitz #41 4 months ago

    @manic_mouse You're wrong. And quite obnoxious as well.

  • manic_mouse #42 4 months ago

    @frobitz Your impeccable logic has shown me the error of my ways. I'm definitely not buying a Vita now, the browser is absolutely integral to every aspect of the device. It is completely unusable without a good one, just like the PS3.

    Apologies for being so silly and thinking the Vita was about playing games. And for thinking that there are at least three better ways of browsing the internet literally within reach of me right now, thus making the quality of the browser on the Vita pretty irrelevant for not only me, but nearly everyone that buys one.

    The browser on the Vita is clearly a massive deal, definitely worth whinging pointlessly about and cancelling pre-orders over.

    In fact, maybe someone should inform the mainstream press?

  • frobitz #43 4 months ago

    @manic_mouse If most modern smartphones can manage to have a decent browser on them so should the Vita. Your comparison of it to the PC is wrong, its mobile devices that it should be compared to.
    Edited by frobitz at 14/01/12 @ 14:43

  • quadfather #44 4 months ago

    @manic_mouse - completely agree. I'm baffled by the browser comments. And there's no "wrong" or "right", it's just whether people want a broswer or not, which is personal opinion. Personally, I couldnt give a shit about a browser on a games console.

    Pointless argument really.

  • manic_mouse #45 4 months ago

    @frobitz And, funnily enough, most people have modern smartphones with which to browse the internet. The Vita isn't going head-to-head with the iPhone or Android handsets, it's quite possible (and likely) that the people who own a Vita will also own said devices.

    Having a web-browser on the Vita (or 3DS) is superflous. I couldn't care less how good/bad the browser is because that's not what I'll be using the device for. Same as what most people buy it for.

    I have my iPhone, iPad and computer for browsing the net. They all do it wonderfully. I'm buying a Vita to play games. Which it looks to be wonderful at. Hooray.

    EDIT: And this is my final post on this matter. It's inane to the extreme. These comments should not be dominated by talk about the merits and importance of the browser on the Vita. There are plenty of more important and relevant things to discuss. If the browser is a big deal to you then you're absolutely right not to buy a Vita, you'd be better off saving a bit more and getting an iPad. But lambasting the Vita for not being something it never claimed to be is stupid.
    Edited by manic_mouse at 14/01/12 @ 14:54

  • frobitz #46 4 months ago

    @manic_mouse Yes, and I'm buying a Vita to play games on it too. But if Sony have gone to the trouble of putting a browser on it they could at least have made it one that isn't mediocre.

    This is 2012. There is no excuse for any device having a bad browser engine when there are free open-source source engines that are excellent.

    But hey, no biggie. You seem to be quite angry for some reason and getting me mixed up with everyone else who recognises this to be a shortcoming.

    I'm certainly not saying it will stop me buying one, just that its a stupid decision on Sony's part to deliver a bad bit of software in an otherwise cool device.

  • misterdoctor #47 4 months ago

    I just recently purchased the Vita - I am in India, where products such as this tend to seep through the market - and so far it has been quite the device. I have only Uncharted, and it looks tremendously beautiful. In fact, the screen in general is a beautiful thing. The ghosting issue of the PSP had been quite an annoyance, and its departure is most welcome here.

    My only gripe is that I cannot download anything because it is a Japanese model and I do not have a Japanese account, although that is not the handheld's fault.

    As for the article: fantastic. The most concise Vita article I have read so far.

  • makeamazing #48 4 months ago

    Browsing the web on the Vita is on the bottom of my list to be honest. I appreciate some people *might* want to.. but its primary use is for gaming right. It does have a browser that works, its just not the best of breed.

    Most families have multiple devices to do multiple things, so i don't think its a big problem on the whole. Yes of course if i was sat in bed playing games then suddenly had a need to surf the web, and the Vita cannot display the page that i want, but seriously how often is that going to actually happen?

    Now if it had a top of the range browser and crap games, thats when i would worry :D

  • vizzini #49 4 months ago

    @quadfather

    I think you are under playing just how hard it is for any device that just plays games to survive in the long run while trying to command 30x the price for it games. A good browser is now just an entry fee for future survival of this type product, and I fear without a quick change of heart before launch the device could be back pedalling on price even if they rectify the stupidity in the first three months.

    @manic_mouse

    People don't like wasting their phone's battery life if a less critical device could do the job better on a better screen with better performance.

    The inclusion of the browser is primarily provided so that support could still get anyone with just their PSP/PS3/Vita and broadband online. A scenario I've previously listed that neither the PSP or PS3 browsers could have achieved at my house based on their inability to handle the simple menus of the last 3 routers (from different manufacturers) I've owned.

    Assuming people have other devices, is an assumption that a sale of another product to do something this device should do, won't diminish your customer's interest in using the device you've sold them and spending money on it.

  • NotSoSlim #50 4 months ago

    Also Sony got blasted for not stating what original PSP was for now the have with Vita...its a games console.

    Everything else has to be second. Games are priority

    @MistetDoctor

    Use a english account from the 15th/22nd Feb

  • manic_mouse #51 4 months ago

    @frobitz

    I'm not saying it wouldn't have been better to have a webkit browser. Just that it's not worth the kind of whinging we've seen in this thread. Someone above DID say they were cancelling their preorder over it.

    And it's exactly that kind of whinging that makes me angry. It's immature, it's stupid and it shows a complete lack of critical thought or empathy. It's pathetic that comments are always filled with that kind of garbage, it's little wonder the mainstream think gamers are idiots. A very vocal number of us are total idiots.

    @vizzini

    Why are you on Eurogamer? No game device fullfils what you seem to be demanding. If you're refusing to buy the Vita because of it's browser then clearly you've refused to buy any other console ever made. Maybe you should head over to macrumors and post there, after buying an iPad, which seems to be the device you want.
    Edited by manic_mouse at 14/01/12 @ 15:22

  • Paranoimia #52 4 months ago

    "I won't buy Vita because it won't browse the web as well as my phone."

    Well, you bought a phone that won't play games as well as Vita and didn't bat an eyelid.

    Yes, I have an Android phone. And yes, 99% of the games suck.

    What I find funny is that when PS3 first arrived with all its media playback options, all the nay-sayers said you didn't need all that, it just had to play games.

    Now you've got people saying they won't buy a games machine because it won't browse the web 'properly'.

    I guess some people will just pick at anything, just for the hell of it.

  • KopparbergDave #53 4 months ago

    As far as the web browser argument goes, I think the main point is simply the frustration people are having with Sony for yet again putting a browser on one of their devices which is simply out of date and not up to the task. Sure it's a games console but if, with the tiniest bit of effort, you could put a great web browser on it which would work fantastically with the nice big touch screen then why not do it. All these mega hardcore gamers spurning the thought of having a decent web browser on their device... I don't get it. We have a console with a great screen, a touch screen, plenty of horsepower, it could be a great device for sofa web browsing for those people who maybe don't have expensive iPads or smartphones, why deny people this and feel proud about this situation cos you're a hardcore gamer.. grow up, it's Sony who is clearly in the wrong on this, and need to step up their game severely cos why not give your users the best most multi-purpose device you can, it's the kind of thing that might prevent some people opting for an iPad or iPhone when they know their shiny PS Vita can do much of the same thing AND play great games with physical controls! Why is that so dirty an idea to some of you?!
    Edited by KopparbergDave at 14/01/12 @ 15:24

  • IvorB #54 4 months ago

    God, gamers are so blinkered. Of course the browser is important and people have a right to be disappointed. Does Sony advertise a substandard web browser or a web browser? It's fair for users to expect a decent browsing experience. PS Vita is a convergence device, like it or not. Otherwise they should have just left browser and music player etc out of the spec.

    I'm on the fence on getting this. Seems like a great piece of kit but just bought a Galaxy Note and not sure there is room for two monster portable devices in my life. Wish I travelled more. Also qHD resolution screen is disappointing now that cell phones are shipping with full HD. Though more Uncharted is a win although not by Naughty Dog is possible fail. We'll see...
    Edited by IvorB at 14/01/12 @ 15:45

  • manic_mouse #55 4 months ago

    "Why is that so dirty an idea to some of you?!"

    Well for a start the Vita has a lower screen resolution and shorter battery life than the iPhone or iPad. So from a hardware POV it is physically incapable of being a better web-browser than both those devices.

    Secondly (from a software perspective) clearly there are limited resources being pumped into Vita development. I would rather those go into doing what the device is designed for (playing games) than trying (and most likely failing) to be a better "convergence" device than smart phones or tablets.

    Sony simply looked at how people will use the device and decided (rightly) that web browsing wasn't a priority. Why is that such a dirty idea to some of you?
    Edited by manic_mouse at 14/01/12 @ 15:40

  • quadfather #56 4 months ago

    @vizzini - Possibly. I'm just viewing it as a personal opinion and I'm not that bothered about it. I guess some people will either want it/use it, or people have come to expect everything at their fingertips nowadays. It's not as if it doesn't work though, it just sounds like it's not as optimised as it could be. Someone has just said that with a tiny bit of effort they could have ironed it out - which I have to agree would stop all these posts about it, I guess :-)

  • Uncompetative #57 4 months ago

    You can't do Word Processing on it, so don't compare it to the iPad.
    Edited by Uncompetative at 14/01/12 @ 15:39

  • manic_mouse #58 4 months ago

    @Uncompetative You're right, it doesn't have a word processor. Totally cancelling my pre-order now. Sony are a total fail!

  • Schmoke-n-a-pancake #59 4 months ago

    @manic_mouse

    "It's immature, it's stupid and it shows a complete lack of critical thought or empathy."

    WTF? If someone is cancelling their pre-order because this machine is lacking a feature that is important to them, then that's well within their rights and shows a considerable amount of thought about their purchase. Anyone as genuinely upset by another person's purchasing choices, as you appear to be, is frankly rather weird.

    Empathy? It's not a charity. Are we supposed to feel sorry for Sony because they can't do a browser?

    Personally it wouldn't influence my purchasing decision. There are plenty of other reasons to pass on Vita at this point in time for me.

  • TrevHead #60 4 months ago

    I think sony allowing non fixed res is actually a good thing. As it allows devs to drop the res instead of the game having slowdown and low FPS

  • vizzini #61 4 months ago

    @manic_mouse

    Like everyone else my views will evolve over time and I love new hardware, and still have it pre-ordered. But at this point in time, I think it is a fair expectation that the Vita(& PS3) should have a best in class browsing experience, or very close to it.

    In the last 24 hours it has been confirmed no online multiplayer for Modnation(the game I've pre-order), Monkeyball release now in the summer, even though I had it as an early march purchase(according to shopto), and here I find out that the browser situation I'm already unhappy about in the PS3 is going to be repeated.

    Is this not very similar to the same type of idiotic thinking that led to the demise of Walkman with DRM to protect Sony Music's IP?

  • Arwin #62 4 months ago

    Good article!

    As for the browser, may be worthwhile to note that this browser, while not optimal, certainly beats the PS3 and PSP browsers by a healthy margin. It scores as 99/100 on ACiD3 tests, and it appears to be a build of webkit after all:

    http://community.eu.playstation.com/t5/PS-Vita-General-Discussion/PS-vita-web-browser-a-few-details/td-p/14477729

    However, there are currently still several HTML5 features missing, such as sound etc.

    If you compare the browser to the one running on Experia Play (which of course has Android behind it which is optimised to run and render browsers), then one of the things I'm guessing is that currently, the browser is set to a mode that preserves memory as much as possible. As you can seen, no framebuffer seems to be preserved beyond what is actually rendered on screen, which is why it needs to re-render everything all the time.

    Check this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLq6GBfHaYY

    As the browser is currently not yet runnable next to a game like some of the other apps, my guess is that Sony simply haven't made the decision yet whether or not to give the browser all the memory it wants, or make it run as light as possible but allow it to run next to games.

    Personally I do want a good browser and/or good apps on the Vita, even if only because it simply has a much better screen than anything we own currently (2 iPhone 3GS and 1 iPod Touch 3G).

    Final word on the battery: it turns out you can actually replace the battery yourself. Also, there are some external battery solutions available already.
    Edited by Arwin at 14/01/12 @ 16:17

  • Sharzam #63 4 months ago

    The most important thing is whether the base hardware is solid.

    You can always tweak and improve failings from software (eg browser) but you cannot change the hardware (eg analog sticks). So in that regards the Vita is a success as every review i have seen has said the actual device is great. Including Bramwell in the podcast even said that he cannot see how could improve the hardware. Any negativeness in reviews has come down to the software such as the browser or things such as video codec support.

    If Sony want to they can fix all these things via firmware updates.

    Of course should never review on 'future possiblitys' as nothing is for sure. But it is important to focus on the hardware as this will not change without a major overall. Something which cannot change overnight.

    Regarding all the comments on the browser itself and some even going as far as say wont buy one. Quick question do you Boycott the 360 for not having a browser?

    Yes it is a nice extra but in this day and age its hardly restricted to desktop PCs. It is very easy to get onto the internet and to have a browser device. Hell my Zune has one (althourgh pointless on such a small device). In a way it is nice to have such a dedicated device which is good at what it does such as games. For one i would rather the 360 was more a games consoles than a everything box.

    This is one area Nintendo has always gets right as they are a game company and dont pretend to be anything else. Althourgh admittly a bit different for Sony but still the Vita is a focused device and knows what it wants to be.
    Edited by Sharzam at 14/01/12 @ 16:38

  • vizzini #64 4 months ago

    @Arwin

    Well that certainly looks good and a lot more promising(even if Firefox on my Play is my browser of choice), however I don't trust Sony choosing to use another NetFront browser regardless of the speed/memory benefits it currently shows, because it isn't even in the list of browsers people would choose(Firefox, Opera, Chrome, Safari, IE) and therefore means that its support is whatever Sony think is strategically advantageous to them later down the line (as it is the case with the defunct PS3/PSP browsers).

    I'm patient enough to handle a slight delay for page loading as the vita ages, but support for popular browser features is ultimately the thing which will consign the browsing experience to the grave eventually. And NetFront browsers I've used have a history of cutting devices a drift,

  • ElNino9 #65 4 months ago

    I couldn't care less about the web browser, it's a games console for fuck sake.

  • DodgyPast #66 4 months ago

    Browser is a shame as more and more stuff has wi fi based control built in.

    But you'd want both a decent browser and to be able to switch between a game and the browser effortlessly.

  • Bobbus74 #67 4 months ago

    How long before it's hacked? Looking forward to custom firmware already ;)

  • Biker_Bob_1971 #68 4 months ago

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

  • Dismiss #69 4 months ago

    Yes, it's all about games and this little beauty looks set to deliver. However, convergence is important for a mobile device and the absence of .avi files support is attrocious. Heck, even .mkv support should be a given in this day and age, but hey. I really hope Sony are planning to introduce some sort of an app store for general purpose apps but I won't hold my breath.

    On the other hand, the lineup looks very promising and I really hope that devs who have already embraced the PS Store will make the minimal effort required to port over the many undemanding titles that can be found there. I mean, Magic DOTP 2012 was made for a touch screen and Outland would be an ideal mobile game.

    Launch titles look good enough. Uncharted and Wipeout are more or less a given, and fighting games should be right at home here. Here's hoping Gravity Rush and Escape Plan turn out well.
    Edited by Dismiss at 14/01/12 @ 17:35

  • NotSoSlim #70 4 months ago

    @Biker_Bob_1971 Does the battery life hinder the 3ds? Also some non console ports available via PSN but they are not getting the media exposure.

    Wonder if the Vita was 3ds price would this issues even be raised as 3ds had the exact same issue at launch just with a shite load worse software.

    Lastly:

    http://www.examiner.com/video-game-in-national/oddworld-munch-s-odyssey-hd-announced-for-ps3-vita-more

    Totally fine with this port
    Edited by NotSoSlim at 14/01/12 @ 17:38

  • Torkin #71 4 months ago

    I have a PSP and a PS3 and never used them for browsing the web. I actually own a 360 too, and even if Microsoft added a borwser I wouldn't use it anyway. I access internet at work, at home on my PC, and on my phone, I don't care about the browser in the Vita, don't need another gadget to read Eurogamer, Facebook or GameFAQs, I don't even care about many of the apps, for 5 years I've never listened to music on my PSP, MP3 players and now smartphones have served me much better. This whole discussion is a bit ridiculous, really. I understand that someone can find it useful but 99% of people won't use it.

    I'll wait some months until the Vita has more games to get one, but will do it. I think the games are actually the only thing that I care when buying a new console, and while the launch line-up is good, only Wipeout catches my interest, but sure more quality games will follow!
    Edited by Torkin at 14/01/12 @ 17:39

  • _LarZen_ #72 4 months ago

    As a gadget fan and as a gamer 22 feb cant come fast enough...im especially excited for the possibilities Little Big Planet has on the device.

  • michaelius #73 4 months ago

    @Biker_Bob_1971 Last time i checked playing PS3 in subway was kinda difficult :)

  • onezeonx #74 4 months ago

    BUY ME! :D

    [img]

  • TazerFan #75 4 months ago

    Great writeup. I just still don't see how a portable gaming device fits into my life.

  • scaramanga10 #76 4 months ago

    Sony seriously needs to fix the browser by dumping Netfront.

    A 5" screen is a perfect browsing device, it can replace a lot of what I use my iPad for, but without the basic functionality of a browser this isn't even worth consideration. More so with the 3G version of the Vita.

    Being that Webkit browsers are so easy and open-sourced (with ARM variants) I'm not sure why Sony chooses to stick with such an inferior browser such as Netfront.

  • Biker_Bob_1971 #77 4 months ago

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

  • Bagpuss #78 4 months ago

    As nice as it is, there is no way i'm paying £230 for a handheld combined with top games at £40+ a time...

    Sorry...i admire the technology, but as always with Sony, the launch price is a rip off.

    Maybe when its in the £125-150 price bracket....

  • GamesConnoisseur #79 4 months ago

    Very interesting ready, already put down half the cost of Vita via trade in at local Blockbuster and delighted my iPhone 4S tethering wireless will be a great boon.

    Clearly won't be using Vita for browsings as iPhone will do that sufficiently, FAQs included. But certainly pissed at the one PSN account at a time as my US PSN expenditures quite high and almost 50% to UK PSN.

    No way buying second Vita, so will use the format/reset process, but should eventually a jailbreak software pop up, I m gonna be very sorely tempted. Won't be surprised if by Sony's policy of insisting one user per Vita will result in some lost sales. As they adopt a very different position on PS3 and PSP. The start of a new one user per Sony's device?

    No thanks.

    Sub Vita HD resolution? Ah so here we go again, as I m sure we ll see it again and again, but I have no issues if the Vita games looks neat and plays smoothly. Full res would be great but if only works sub native HD res, fine with me. Afterall, we still apparently regularly play retro games with an antiquated resolutions but what the heck no PS1 software emulation at launch?! Hopefully fixed in future updates, Playstation Suite I hope not, as already purchased good numbers of PS1 games in both US and UK PSN accounts and pay again via Playstation Suite?

    Whatever happens, I know will be holding onto my dual US and UK PSN set PSPs. Looking forward to the Vita games as that the main reason for Vita, to play an exclusive and portable games!

  • Timotei #80 4 months ago

    @Biker_Bob_1971 Dick.

  • pantherjag #81 4 months ago

    Im a gamer so im buying a vita to play proper games and watch movies during boring nightshifts at work. 2 things it does extremely well by all accounts. That il be able to browse the net and take photos are just added bonuses.

    Alongside my vita i will have my current smartphone which is a HTC desire HD which is extremely good for browsing the net and taking photos during those boring nightshifts but in my opinion is crap for games and limited by screen size for watching movies.

    As far as im concerned both vita and HTC will help those boring nightshifts pass considerably quicker than one device alone would

  • jjolley #82 4 months ago

    I do have a couple of questions for anyone who has a vita at the moment:
    1. The article states that the touchscreen is needed to interact with the main menus of the vita. As a blind user, is it possible to start a game by inserting it? In other words, does the cart load automatically or do you have to initiate it by tapping an icon?

    2. Still on the touchscreen side, do games allow you to use the directional buttons to navigate menus or do you need to still use touch controls. I really hope not as it'll be a lost sale for me.

  • anss123 #83 4 months ago

    @scaramanga10 Netfront is a webkit based browser, or at least it is on the 3DS.

  • mr2ange #84 4 months ago

    Post deleted at 21:02:16 14-01-2012

  • Cataferal #85 4 months ago

    @jjolley
    1. Once you insert a game like Uncharted the Vita will immediately scroll to the game's dedicated button in the menu (where-ever you've placed it), which will be bouncing unlike the others. There's no auto-play option yet, so you do need to tap the icon for it to load.

    2. The use of touch-screen really does vary by title. UMvC3, Virtua Tennis 4 and Everybody's Golf are three of the games I've tried, and each use purely traditional controls to navigate menus (D-pad and X/O). Others, like Uncharted, insist that you make scrolling motions with your hand to do this, with normal controls being completely inactive.

    Probably not the news you wanted to hear, but I hope that helps.
    Edited by Cataferal at 14/01/12 @ 21:57

  • beep #86 4 months ago

    Nice review. Very likely to get one but I can't help think the PSVita lacks a killer app, with nothing likely foreseeable either :(

  • JumpinJackFlash #87 4 months ago

    I've got zero interest in the Vita. There are so many things wrong with the handheld:

    1) It's too expensive at £229.99.
    2) Battery life is a joke.
    3) No Multi Account system.
    4) The system uses expensive proprietary memory cards.
    5) £30/40 a game is laughable, portable gaming has changed and nobody wants to pay that much anymore for gaming on the go, especially if you have a Android/iOS device.
    6) It's only a games system, it doesn't do much more than play games. I expect more from a £200+ device these days.
    7) The tech will be outdated within 12 months as smart phone/tablet GPU/CPU's are advancing so quickly. It won't be long until you see games that are on Vita appear on Android/iOS devices.

    There are more points but i don't have the time nor patients to be bothered to list them.

    The Vita shouldn't even exist as there is no need for the system. There are more negative points than positive and i'll be damned if i'm going to pay £200+ for such a device.

  • Timotei #88 4 months ago

    1) It's too expensive at £229.99.

    Agreed.

    2) Battery life is a joke.

    Nope, considering the visuals it can pump out, not at all.

    3) No Multi Account system.

    Yeah, that sucks.

    4) The system uses expensive proprietary memory cards.

    Yeah, that also sucks.

    5) £30/40 a game is laughable, portable gaming has changed and nobody wants to pay that much anymore for gaming on the go, especially if you have a Android/iOS device.

    Nope, new DS/PSP titles are generally priced within that bracket. At least with the Vita you could be getting a game that lasts between 10 & 15 hours.

    6) It's only a games system, it doesn't do much more than play games. I expect more from a £200+ device these days.

    It's supposed to be a game system, not much else. You wont find games that the Vita will run on anything else when it gets in to full swing.

    7) The tech will be outdated within 12 months as smart phone/tablet GPU/CPU's are advancing so quickly. It won't be long until you see games that are on Vita appear on Android/iOS devices.

    Nope. Seen many PSP games appear on Android/iOS? nope.
    Edited by Timotei at 14/01/12 @ 22:54

  • jjolley #89 4 months ago

    @Cataferal That is a shame, I suppose my partner could get a game going and I could at least try.

    I'm not really all that happy for the lack of auto play, I hope this gets added in later revisions.

  • Jmog #90 4 months ago

    @JAGUARCD32x

    "I think its expensive also,regardless if the vita gets a price reduction I will never ever pay 40 pound for a game.I never pay 40 pound for a console game ,35 is the absolute highest I pay"

    Since the Vita has different prices for different games and 40£ is the MSRP of the most expensive Vita games, you will in all likelyhood find it difficult to find an online retailer that charges more than 30£ for a title. Most games will probably cost 25£.

    Ridge Racer is 18£ on Amazon. Wipeout, Everybody's Golf, Katamari, Little Deviants, Modnation - they are all 30£ or less. I think that's pretty reasonable for handheld console games.

  • ROCK-NYC #91 4 months ago

    (*In THE ROCK's voice) F I N A L L Y sony gaming has come back to CROSS GAME PARTY CHAT!

  • DrDamn #92 4 months ago

    @Article and Everbody's Golf
    "The game is based on the PS3 version's characters and courses"

    I thought it was 6 new courses and all 12 characters are new too. PS3 version content will be available as DLC.

  • SuperTaiyaki #93 4 months ago

    @DrDamn: Yep, all the content is new. There might be a character carried over, I haven't unlocked them all yet.

    Regarding profile switching: The first time I did it it went as the article says, without wiping the memory card. The next time I may have done something differently - I didn't get the deactivation prompt at reset, then selected 'I don't have an account' during startup, and it wouldn't let me use my memory card without formatting it. I haven't experimented with it further.

  • Mchief22 #94 4 months ago

    @Biker_Bob_1971 If that's your opinion why even comment? seem's so petty and childish!!

  • Mchief22 #95 4 months ago

    @supermaniacs I'm the same, cannot wait!! I'm actually taking a couple days off work!!

  • Mchief22 #96 4 months ago

    @vizzini Do you not have a smart phone? I hear the browser's are quite good on them. It's a gaming device first and foremost, the browser is a secondary feature! patience is a virtue my friend they'll sort the browser in time.

  • Mchief22 #97 4 months ago

    @jabberwoky Probably do the same thing as apple?!

  • Okamiwolf #98 4 months ago

    @JumpinJackFlash The 3DS suffers from every one of those same problems, every one, yet people bought them by the truckload over Christmas, especially in Japan.

  • gamerBOB #99 4 months ago

    I would personally love to this become a device that offers the types of apps you see on iOS, Android etc as well as all the great games the vita is designed for. This would help justify the price of the memory card as well as the device itself, being cheaper than the next best equivalent for apps and tablet-based gaming.

    If they do go ahead with this they need to get the pricing right, unlike Windows Phone which offer games that have been out for months and charging double the price if not more. I hope MS sorting the pricing out and the selection of games they offer on WinPho 7 as I really like the OS...might have to pick one up again

  • Dewin #100 4 months ago

    Good article. Although i would have liked more info about the Remote Play feature.
    As for all the whining about the webbrowser, i just think Sony are being careful. The PSP was hacked to death. In can't blame them for being conservative. Same as for the battery which is hard to swap. It was used as an exploit on the original PSP so don't blame Sony, blame all the twits that hacked the damn thing. I will use my Vita for playing games, and i'll use my iPad for browsing the web. Manic_mouse said it very well.

  • Widge #101 4 months ago

    @JumpinJackFlash

    1) There is no comparable portable gaming experience for that price
    2) I'm sure we can deal
    3) This is a major pisser
    4) Not sure why I'd care
    5) I have an iOS device and am happy to pay more for proper gaming experiences with depth, budget and polish
    6) I want a device that plays games, my phone is for music, net and apps
    7) Doesn't stop the input method of said devices being absolute bobbins for high grade gaming, also high grade gaming = requirement for higher budgets = higher prices, which would start to negate your point 5)

    Of all the things an iOS device does, playing games is possibly the thing it does the worst. It most likely excels past the Vita on other things but thats why you get a Vita.

    I want a Vita for games, I also want an iPad for net apps and music creation (certainly not games though). They all have their niche.

  • Vixremento #102 4 months ago

    Nice article - was a good read. Unfortunately my fear of a handheld just gathering dust in a dark place somewhere (my poor original PSP) still hasn't faded...if we didn't have tablets for that quick on the go gaming experience then I may have considered this (so it would really need an outstanding browsing experience and superior media playback functionality for me personally).

  • peterfll #103 4 months ago

    Great article. The only thing holding me back from buying one day one is the price, but I will get one eventually. Perhaps at a slightly lower price when I'm in the US in June.

    Interesting point about the media playback.. I think a lot of people forget that even the ubiquitous iPad requires iTunes to manage content, and it doesn't support just any old codec either. That said, its a shame the Vita browser isnt better. I wonder why Sony didn't licence something like Opera?

  • Ryze #104 4 months ago

    Excellent kit, but I want a tablet, and this would be the Android Tablet I'd buy, if they made one with a big screen, that was an Android Tablet as well.

  • vizzini #105 4 months ago

    @Mchief22

    I didn't realise I would want to vent with the Vita's launch (when customer influence is highest); but I'm probably having a delayed vent about the (extra £250) hit I took on a new slim for the PS3 linux kit fiasco, and just starting to realise they've set a precedent with me for the Playstation brand of being potentially untrustworthy on features.

    If it isn't listed on the box, they could just as easily remove features as add them is the PS3's legacy, so they need everything I want in the ”small print” if they want me as an early Vita adopter now.

    The choice of the useless NetFront web browser in the PS3 is an insult to our intelligence, yet they refuse to improve it, and refuse access for Mozilla, Opera, Google to offer an alternative with update support in that walled garden.

    At present my placed pre-order is hanging by a thread, and yet I was excited to get one before the Modnation news about no head-to-head online play hit the other day.

  • kooi1980 #106 4 months ago

    @Dewin - I have looked for some info on the remote play feature online, but there's not much available yet. From what I found, I think the remote play feature currently is limited to what already was possible on the PSP:

    Remote Play games for original PSP (these seem to be compatible with Vita as well, just in a crappy way)

    This was a feature I think a lot of people didn't even know existed on the PSP, and to be honest it didn't work that well. There was quite some input lag and graphics were blurry and washed out. I tried playing PixelJunk Monsters this way myself, but it was just a pain to use. All complaints and compatible games for the Vita seem to be the same, so I guess we'll have to wait for a software/firmware update before seeing stuff like this:

    YouTube video with Killzone 3 on Vita Remote Play

    Once Remote Play will actually allow for the above, it should be a great feature. Can't wait :)

  • JumpinJackFlash #107 4 months ago

    @Widge

    Regardless of your points, i think the Vita will bomb mainly due to the points i listed above.

  • dagas #108 4 months ago

    I'm surprise that some games can't run at the native resolution even with near PS3 specs. I hope it's just launch games and that it won't happen when games become more optimized for the new hardware.

    I was not interested at all, but after reading this I get the same sense of "playing games on that must be awesome" as I got back when the PSP came out.

    Those pictures of MGS Peace Walker really shows the low resolution of PSP games, it really looks bad. It makes me want a Vita, but I don't have the cash to spend that I had back when the PSP launched...

  • JumpinJackFlash #109 4 months ago

    @Okamiwolf

    Yeah, but such an argument doesn't mean it'll apply to the Vita too.

  • secombe #110 4 months ago

    I'm still very much on the fence, 'proper' games on a handheld have never really worked for me personally. I have one of those Blaze Mega Drive handhelds crammed full of games I happily spend hours on at home on my actual Mega Drive in front of the TV, but the handheld just doesn't get used.

    I find that 99% of my portable gaming (including sofa gaming when the TV is occupied) is on the iPad, for all the mocking of the lack of controls, when a game is built properly for the device it does work superbly well. The key factor is that most games are designed as portable experiences, i.e. short levels, easy to drop in and out of etc. Uncharted looks lovely, and as I'm not a PS3 owner I would love to experience it, but does it really work as a handheld title?

    £150 would be cheap enough for me to give it a try, but as it is I'm out for now...I think.

  • AnotherIdiot #111 4 months ago

    Post deleted at 16:05:14 15-01-2012

  • Jmog #112 4 months ago

    @AnotherIdiot

    And the 3DS is just another DS and the Wii is just another Gamecube and the PS3 is just another PS2.

    So what's your point?

  • gudnikristinn #113 4 months ago

    HD resolution?
    Lowest form of HD is 1280×720. Can someone please explain to me why Vita has managed to change the world wide standard of lowest HD resolution to 960x544??

  • Lunatic4ever #114 4 months ago

    Is it possible to play the titles in the psn store on the vita as well?

    Just curious

  • Coughthulu #115 4 months ago

    @Loneck
    From what I've seen from the development diaries, WO2048 includes some of the WOHD tracks, so you can play MP with people on PS3 using those tracks.

    I don't think 2048 is actually coming out on the PS3 as well, certainly not seen anyone say that anywhere.

    If someone could clarify that, this'd be good, cause it's one of the things that has me sitting on the fence over pre-ordering a Vita!

  • AnotherIdiot #116 4 months ago

    Nobody is talking about gaming experiences, probably because they have low standards these days, as most gaming related purchases are about the buzz of getting something new, and not because they are any good. People move from one game to the next, leaving a stack of unfinished games, because they are addicted to the marketing, it's all about what's next, what's new. This device is a massive hit for the shopaholics here, but it is unjustified as a gaming machine.

  • Edz72 #117 4 months ago

    @AnotherIdiot
    Totally disagree, IMO it's more than justified as a gaming machine. Finally a handheld than replicates what a lot gamers currently have under their tv's.

  • CernaML #118 4 months ago

    "While many argued that portable versions of home console games were not the way forward,"

    Probably because handhelds had gimped controls for the longest time... Couldn't stand the way you had to browse through the quick menu in Kingdom Hearts for the DS.

  • CernaML #119 4 months ago

    @gudnikristinn Might want to put on those reading glasses. They referred to it as a QUARTER HD resolution.

  • callum9999 #120 4 months ago

    Probably sounds a bit ridiculous but no PS1 support is a serious negative for me. If it can emulate PSP games perfectly, I really can't see where the issue lies with PS1 games - even the PSP does it really well...

  • CernaML #121 4 months ago

    @JAGUARCD32x So are you implying that you intend to use your Playstation Vita as a phone as well?

  • Miths #122 4 months ago

    @gudnikristinn I might have missed it, but where did you see any mention of "HD" in relation to the Vita? In the article the term "qHD" was used a few times, which refers to the 960x540 resolution amounting to a quarter of the pixels of full HD at 1920x1080.

    I've also seen qHD used about mobile phone screens.

  • Arwin #123 4 months ago

    I think they're redoing PS1 emulation on the PS Suite platform, so that it supports all the new inputs that the Vita has properly as well as play nice with all PS Suite supporting phones, and be able to be distributed similarly across all platforms. Clearly they've still to put the finishing touch on that, but I'm sure they'll get there.

  • sweatyBallacks #124 4 months ago

    @vizzini A hardcore handheld gaming console and you're not buying it because it has a poor web-browser?? Get outta here idiot.

  • mukki #125 4 months ago

    good article
    but sorry not interested for my mobile gaming need I will stick my iPhone even though I often wish it had analog controls...

  • TheBusterMan #126 4 months ago

    Shame about no PS1 classics capabilty.No Final Fantsy 7,,8 0r 9,or Front Mission 3,etc.Hopefully they'll rectify this soon.

  • vizzini #127 4 months ago

    @sweatyBallacks

    You don't seem to have read my posts in this thread with my reasoned argument. Or if you have, then we fundamentally disagree on the reasons for being early adopters of consoles and gadgets.

    I still haven't cancelled my pre-order, but I rarely buy a new console at a premium price just for the games. I invest at a premium price as much for the features and/or convenience it might offer ahead of time. My original (£350)PS3 was bought for the OtherOS feature primarily, backwards compatibility upscaling, Blu-ray and web browsing(on the TV), GT Concept was excellent and for the promise of games like MGS4 certainly made it a good purchase price.

    But I'll repeat again; the web browsing choice in the Vita is a bad omen (imo) for the Vita as a repeat of the PSP/PS3 browsers which are now useless. That naturally alters my perception of my need for the product at this price point; not my need for the device ever.

  • Eregol #128 4 months ago

    @vizzini Here's a question. What version do you have on pre-order currently?

  • vizzini #129 4 months ago

    @Eregol

    For my needs either with a good browser choice(and smartphone styled browser support) would be adequate.

    Why? does it make any difference to the validity of my comments if I only pre-ordered the Wifi model £10 cheaper than the 3G model from gamestop?

  • EGOmega #130 4 months ago

    I feel like Sony is being given undue credit here. I would not consider the Vita an "enthusiast" platform. I would call it a mainstream platform, which is where Sony hangs their hat now. Believe it or not, the two terms are not synonymous.

    Another litmus test for this review that shows it's perhaps a bit too biased is that they speak about the promises offered by firmware updates to lacking features:
    Don't kid yourself. Sony's track record on this is abhorrent and is enough to make buying the Vita a definite "no" for me (if not also for the garbage titles they're attracting). If you don't believe me, try to browse the internet on your PSP or PS3.
    Sony hasn't put a shred of effort into maintaining firmware except to lock the systems down further.

    If after all is said & done you aren't convinced - at the very least the Vita's "true" price is enough to sour impressions. At a minimum $250 plus at least $50 for a worthwhile *proprietary* storage card, you're looking at at least $300 plus any local taxes just to acquire the handheld.

    Honestly...I'm curious to see how the Vita's release will affect 3DS sales.

  • Eregol #131 4 months ago

    @vizzini Well, it would be telling.
    If you pre-ordered the 3G model, then fair enough (sorta).
    But if you pre-ordered the Wi-fi only model, when you're at home you'd most likely have a PC capable of using th einternet at home, and on the go, you'd probably tether your vita to a Smartphone to use 3G. In which case, why wouldn't you just use the smartphone to browse the net?

  • razzafazza #132 4 months ago

    i still dont get the appeal of a portable shooter platform (unfortunately the game line up sure looks very heavy on shooters), i mean the best part of shooters is multiplayer and thats bound to suck when on the bus/train/plane alone because of connection issues. at home where you have better connection you also have a huge screen and that - the small screen - is my second biggest question mark regarding portable shooters. seriously, as nice as 2nd analogue stick is .... i think not having one was the least problem shooters faced on handhelds ....

    anyway, i cancelled my mental preorder for now but thats because i expected it to be sort of a tablet replacement with a focus on gaming capabilities .. but didnt think it would be that hard for Sony to include a proper browser and streaming capabilities - something available on pretty much any smartphone or tablet. since there s already some decent tablet/smartphone friendly controllers out (iControlpad for example) and more and more games support them i think i ll pass and see what the next generation of tablets, controllers for tablets and android games has to offer instead.

    ...but VITA could still impress me with some games. heck if Ruin / Warriors Lair is a proper handheld Diablo that alone s enough reason for me to buy one. But thats a big *IF* considering the hype is mostly about twitter & facebook integration for the 14-24y olds who have to tell everyone about their every single fart ... and very little info about its gameplay.

  • Ryze #133 4 months ago

    NetFront

    *sigh*

    Sony should really be spoiling their early adopters - it's criminal that they've not announced an offer such as 20 free game downloads from their own UMD collection.

    The issue with this would be that everyone would just sit and play PSP games on their Vita, instead of buying the launch titles.