The Playstation Vita Catch-All

EverythingsTentative wrote:

Have any developers of the cross buy games ever stated how difficult it is to port from the Vita to the PS3, or vice versa?

The reason I ask is, would it be completely unreasonable for Sony to require all PS4 games to have a Vita port with Cross-Play/Save/etc.? If making a port was cheap enough, could it happen?

Might be that one of the things that Sony is working on in the PS4 architecture is making that kind of porting easier.

Yes, that would be completely unreasonable. They can make it as easy possible, and strongly encourage it, but the moment they require a second version of a game from a third party is the moment they cede more third party support than the PS4 can afford to spare.

Blind_Evil wrote:

Yes, that would be completely unreasonable. They can make it as easy possible, and strongly encourage it, but the moment they require a second version of a game from a third party is the moment they cede more third party support than the PS4 can afford to spare.

I think calling it completely unreasonable is....completely unreasonable. I would instead call it highly unlikely. If the burden on the developer is low, then it is certainly possible. It all depends on how easy they make it for a third party to conform. Unfortunately, that's something not many of us can accurately gauge yet. Perhaps the next version of Sony's tool chain will make it easy to build a PS4 and Vita version from a single code base. Maybe they will offer support to offset the extra cost of testing and distributing the Vita version. As always, the limiting factor is the cost. The more they require of a developer, the more they will have to offer in exchange for those requirements. I'm not sure the Vita is popular enough for that kind of compromise to benefit either Sony or their partners.

That said, I think it's more likely that they will either push more developers to consider remote play, or build support it into the console. It wasn't a big part of the PS3, but I'm sure they've now got access to some talent via Gaikai that they likely tapped to make remote play a bigger deal with the next console. Nintendo's already shown that streaming a game to a hand held is possible. I think that Sony is in a good position to perfect it, especially if rumors of touch technology in their controllers is true. I'd personally prefer this approach for the simple fact that in the scenario where both versions are run natively, the PS4 version would likely suffer due to the 'least common denominator' factor that cross platform developers have run into forever.

I could see a slightly modified version of the console experience brought to the handheld. I am looking at Lego LOTR for an example of this. The Vita version lacks the whole open world concept between levels that exists on the PS3, but they have the same episode content. I could see them existing with a shared save existing on the cloud where you can unlock level content on the go with the Vita then return home to explore on your PS4.

The other concept is a pairing a function of the game to a handheld that isn't as demanding of the hardware. I have always wanted a way to play a JRPG on a console but have the ability to grind my characters on the handheld. This way I can maximize the value of the time spent on my console by doing the grinding busy work while commuting or waiting in the lobby of my doctor.

There is no limit to the dollar amount I would bet against Sony requiring Vita ports of all PS4 games. I would bet every money.

Remote play is an odd proposition. I don't want to speak out of turn, because I'm totally unclear on how it works, but here goes: if they handle Vita/PS4 remote play like the Wii U, where you use both interactively to play a game, I would be tentatively interested. If it's just playing a PS4 game on my Vita, that's not really something I see myself using. No reason not to just play it on my TV if I'm at home, and remote play outside of the house is almost a total nonfactor because it requires a wifi connection.

More importantly though, the importance of the second screen will almost never be as important as it is with the Wii U. That's just how it goes with games that require peripherals, and the Vita is a damned expensive add-on.

Maybe they go all out and bundle the handheld with the PS4, but I don't see it happening. Hopefully we'll get some idea of their direction on February 20th.

Blondish83 wrote:

I could see a slightly modified version of the console experience brought to the handheld. I am looking at Lego LOTR for an example of this. The Vita version lacks the whole open world concept between levels that exists on the PS3, but they have the same episode content. I could see them existing with a shared save existing on the cloud where you can unlock level content on the go with the Vita then return home to explore on your PS4.

The other concept is a pairing a function of the game to a handheld that isn't as demanding of the hardware. I have always wanted a way to play a JRPG on a console but have the ability to grind my characters on the handheld. This way I can maximize the value of the time spent on my console by doing the grinding busy work while commuting or waiting in the lobby of my doctor.

Some of that happens already, and it hasn't caught on in a big way. You can transfer all your stuff back and forth from the Vita and PS3 versions of MLB 13: The Show (unfortunately I can't stand the actual game), and you will be able to use the same character data on Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate on Wii U/3DS. Phantasy Star Online 2 will supposedly let you play your account on both Vita and PC.

I wonder if you might see something like a free Vita app that lets you level your familiars in Ni No Kuni. Nintendo's done some experimentation like that, with the Pokewalker a few years back and Pokemon Dream Radar last October. I think that kind of development is nontrivial though, which is why Nintendo has charged a bit for each (the game that came with the Pokewalker was $5 more than most DS games, Pokemon Dream Radar cost $3).

Blind_Evil wrote:

There is no limit to the dollar amount I would bet against Sony requiring Vita ports of all PS4 games. I would bet every money.

Remote play is an odd proposition. I don't want to speak out of turn, because I'm totally unclear on how it works, but here goes: if they handle Vita/PS4 remote play like the Wii U, where you use both interactively to play a game, I would be tentatively interested. If it's just playing a PS4 game on my Vita, that's not really something I see myself using. No reason not to just play it on my TV if I'm at home, and remote play outside of the house is almost a total nonfactor because it requires a wifi connection.

More importantly though, the importance of the second screen will almost never be as important as it is with the Wii U. That's just how it goes with games that require peripherals, and the Vita is a damned expensive add-on.

Maybe they go all out and bundle the handheld with the PS4, but I don't see it happening. Hopefully we'll get some idea of their direction on February 20th.

Oh, I'm sure there's a limit on the dollar amount, but I agree that it's unlikely they'll require anything of the sort. I'm suggesting, however, that with the PS4 Sony is positioned to make it much easier for ports to happen. Even if that means 1/2 the games, that still a deal more than we're seeing now.

As for remote play, that's how it works on the PS3, but I don't think it needs to work that way on the PS4. I was trying to draw a parallel to the Wii-U. The arguments you just made are pretty much exactly what we all heard about the Wii-U when it was revealed, but it's turned out to be a bigger deal people were willing to give it credit for. The latest conference call had mail that echoed what I've heard a lot lately - being able to continue playing a game when you're kicked off the console/TV/whatever for some reason is a juicy proposition for a lot of people. It's not going to appeal to everyone, but if they can provide the right features, they would certainly get my attention. As for the cost of the Vita, I'd say it's not far off from matching the price Nintendo's asking for their tablet if it's bought separately. I wonder if we'll see any PS4 packages that include a Vita along with the standard controller.

We'll find out soon I hope!

Christ, this blizzard must have driven me stir-crazy. I used the word important three times in one sentence. Ick.

By the by, Nintendo isn't selling Wii U Gamepads separately yet. My point is more this: developers (usually first party, but alas) can do a lot more with the Gamepad if they know every customer will have one because they don't need to worry about splitting their potential market. If every PS4 doesn't come with a Vita, it can't possibly have the same impact. And if the controller rumors are true, why would they need both the screen on the controller and the Vita?

Blind_Evil wrote:

Christ, this blizzard must have driven me stir-crazy. I used the word important three times in one sentence. Ick.

By the by, Nintendo isn't selling Wii U Gamepads separately yet. My point is more this: developers (usually first party, but alas) can do a lot more with the Gamepad if they know every customer will have one because they don't need to worry about splitting their potential market. If every PS4 doesn't come with a Vita, it can't possibly have the same impact. And if the controller rumors are true, why would they need both the screen on the controller and the Vita?

I hear you, that's totally valid. What I'm thinking is that if the controller rumors are true, it's possible that whatever functionality they build into it could also be used on the Vita. My point on this isn't that the developers would do more with anything - I think that Sony alone could provide a lot of added benefit to the consumer without requiring the devs to do anything. Sony seems to be positioning the Vita/PS as a matched set. They will have to do something to bring more value to the Vita, and building automatic support in would be a very effective way to do it. I agree that the more they ask of the devs, the less we'll see things like that happen. But if it's all just part of the echo system, horray for us!

Valkyrie Chronicles 2 and it's DLC is $15. Worth it?

I'm going to buy that, so can someone run me through the process of moving stuff onto the Vita through the PS3 that I can't download directly onto the Vita? RNG?!

I've enjoyed the bit of VC2 that I played. I haven't played much, it's burning a hole in my backlog, but it's as solid as VC was on PS3.

So you want to do the following Blind:

1 - Download onto the PS3. DO NOT INSTALL THE GAME ON THE PS3.
2 - Connect your Vita, Content Manager, PS3 -> Vita (duh).
3 - Go into the PSP Games section, you should see it there available to copy.
4 - Profit

That's how I remember it working when I copied VC2 onto my Vita. Pretty straight forward.

Why is there a Valkyria Chronicles 2 DLC Pack 2 but not a DLC Pack 1?

Also, is this a sale or permanent price drop? If it's permanent I might as well wait to see if I like VC1 first.

The last time I checked the price it was $40 for the two. That was in December though.

EverythingsTentative wrote:

Valkyrie Chronicles 2 and it's DLC is $15. Worth it?

YES, IT IS.

Dammit. I just repurchased VC2 a couple of weeks ago so I'd have it on my Vita.

Would you have to play the original VC to enjoy VC2? And, this does appear to be the new permanent price now. This is the list of games Sega dropped in price.

Crazy Taxi: Fare Wars – PSP Game (now: $4.99 original price: $9.99)
Crush – PSP Game (now: $6.99 original price: $9.99)
Sonic Rivals – PSP Game (now: $6.99 original price: $9.99)
Sonic Rivals 2 – PSP Game (now: $6.99 original price: $9.99)
Super Monkey Ball Adventures – PSP Game (now: $4.99 original price: $9.99)
Valkyria Chronicles 2 – PSP Game (now: $9.99 original price: $19.99)

When I transferred all the VC2 DLC to my Vita, it only appeared as if the main game was installed. Is there a way to check to see if the DLC is there?

Blondish83 wrote:

Would you have to play the original VC to enjoy VC2? And, this does appear to be the new permanent price now. This is the list of games Sega dropped in price.

No, other than mechanics (which are improved in VC2), the games are linked only in the most superficial of manners.

And now I'm sad again that VC3 isn't getting localized.

I would have loved VC if the voice acting, character design, and narrative didn't prevent me from playing lots and lots of strategy battles.

RoughneckGeek wrote:

And now I'm sad again that VC3 isn't getting localized.

It's a tragedy Sega has no plans to do so, but it's still being localized regardless. When they do finish their translation I have to assume you'll need a PSP setup with homebrew software capabilities.

psoplayer wrote:
RoughneckGeek wrote:

And now I'm sad again that VC3 isn't getting localized.

It's a tragedy Sega has no plans to do so, but it's still being localized regardless. When they do finish their translation I have to assume you'll need a PSP setup with homebrew software capabilities.

Bookmarked. I'll swap and tote the PSP around with me for a while instead of the Vita to play that.

SuperDave wrote:

I would have loved VC if the voice acting, character design, and narrative didn't prevent me from playing lots and lots of strategy battles.

Yeah, the voice acting was quite off putting in the original. I still kind of liked the game, might have to go back to it one day.

EverythingsTentative wrote:

remote play

I wish more games supported remote play. Especially RPGs.

I just tried that and it didn't work. Europe only? Need some kind of hack?

Whoa, that's cool.

Bah, custom firmware. I was hoping I could watch all the NBA All Star festivities tomorrow and finish off NNK at the same time, but I guess not.

A man can dream.

A man should note whether he's posting officially available features or stuff 95% of the audience can't/doesn't want to use.