Talk:PlayStation Vita/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Naming PSP2 vs PSP Successor
A discussion to see if the article should be titled PlayStation Portable 2 vs PlayStation Portable Successor. I'll cite WP:COMMONNAME which would go in favor of PlayStation Portable 2, its more commonly referred to in almost all of the sources as the PSP2 instead of the PSP Successor. Also given Sony's naming conventions, it may be alright to assume that they would name the next portable as the PSP2. I'm fine with both but I'm leaning towards the former for clarity, it may be unofficial but it's something most people would understand.KiasuKiasiMan 14:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'd have to agree - either is fine, but "2" probably better. It's not like the PS Move which had no clear or obvious name before it became PlayStation Move. Alphathon™ (talk) 14:46, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
"Do not put eighth"
Hi. I was just wondering what you (KiasuKiasiMan) meant by "Do not put eighth, there is no eighth generation yet" in the generation box. If you mean that there is no actual page yet, that is contrary to WP:RED, which more-or-less says red links are fine (and even encouraged) if they point to an article that will exist in the future (which is the case unless the existing articles are renamed). If you mean because the 8th-gen hasn't "started" yet, then that makes no sense since both the PSP2 (or whatever it is called) and 3DS will be 8th-gen devices (they aren't 7th gen, since that's the PSP and DS) - they don't "become" 8th gen when they launch. Both devices are 8th gen regardless of whether there is a "History of video game consoles (eighth generation)" page yet.
Just as a note, I don't really care that much either way whether it is included, I'm just trying to figure out the rationale.
Alphathon™ (talk) 07:27, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I understand where you're coming from. Too me it doesn't really matter, but even the Nintendo 3DS page doesn't use the eight generation in its infobox. It's not really umm, official I guess. Anyway I put the note there just to leave it as it is since there have been numerous edits over it. Someone puts seventh generation, then it gets changed to eight generation then it gets changed again to eighth generation then removed. So to prevent any future editing wars, I decided to leave it as blank. However, if you want to put a red link to eighth generation its also fine by me. As long as there are no constant edits to it.KiasuKiasiMan 04:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I don't think it's really going to lead to edit wars regardless though. I'm the one who changes it from "eight" from "eighth", simply because it is consistent with the naming convention for previous pages. I can't speak for anyone else, but it seems to me there isn't any conflict here, just misunderstanding.
- Basically, you create the page, presumably with text copied from the PSP article or something. IP (75.34.203.141) comes along, realises it is wrong (since the PSP & DS is 7th Gen) and changes it to eight. It appears in my watchlist and I change to eighth (due to current conventions) rather than deleting it (due to how I'm interpreting the redlinking policy). I'm not sure why Guinea pig warrior removed the infobox, but the link went with it. Then, you restored the infobox along with "seventh" (presumably just part of a blanket restore to a "good" version). It's then re-changed to eight by 75.34.203.141 and re-fixed by me. Then Sergecross73 removes it, presumably because of the redlink.
- None of that seems malicious to me, and doesn't seem to be an attempt to drive it towards one outcome. As I said, I'm not really fussed either way - blank is fine, plain text "eighth" is fine, and a redlink "eighth" is fine.
- I changed the disclaimer about the generation in the article page to match those in the Nintendo 3DS page. It's better to say that because it is not related to the existance or unexistance of an "eighth generation" but to the reaching of a consensus between "wikipedians". --87.8.242.31 (talk) 17:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Please put "eighth"
If Sony is calling Next Generaton Portable his new console, this means that they consider the future hardware a generation after the current, so it is an eight generation hardware. --87.8.242.31 (talk) 11:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- No, don't put that. There is not an 8th gen yet. It doesn't exist. Otherwise, care to explain why there is a History of video game consoles (seventh generation) but not an History of video game consoles (eighth generation) page? Sergecross73 msg me 13:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Well that argument makes no sense (there's no article therefore it doesn't exist). The article doesn't exist for the same reason that many other articles don't exist and others are stubs - because it hasn't been made yet, not because the subject doesn't exist. Even if the page doesn't exist and isn't linked, the fact that the PSP is 7th gen and this is its successor makes it 8th gen by definition. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- The 8 gen article has been deleted, I believe, like 5 times. Every time it's because of WP:CRYSTAL. Why would we tag this article with a concept that is continually deleted? Sergecross73 msg me 15:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't say it had to be linked - it can be added as plain text (i.e. added as "Eighth" rather than "Eighth"). Besides, we actually have info on both the 3DS and the NGP, so if "History of video game consoles (eighth generation)" were to be re-created now it wouldn't fall under WP:CRYSTAL (since it can be verifiably sourced and would in no way be speculation… at least about the handhelds). I'm not saying it should be created at this point, but it certainly could be and be completely legit. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 15:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, try yourself to create a similar article on the Eight Generation consoles. I support you. We'll see if the same people that said "there is no eight generation" will delete this again. Since Sony just announced the PSP as a "Next Generation Portable" this alone should be a proof of the existance of an "eight generation" after the seventh. But I can imagine that those people will delete that article again and again, only because they are well respected in Wikipedia and could impose their toughts over the editing. --87.8.242.31 (talk) 16:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't say it had to be linked - it can be added as plain text (i.e. added as "Eighth" rather than "Eighth"). Besides, we actually have info on both the 3DS and the NGP, so if "History of video game consoles (eighth generation)" were to be re-created now it wouldn't fall under WP:CRYSTAL (since it can be verifiably sourced and would in no way be speculation… at least about the handhelds). I'm not saying it should be created at this point, but it certainly could be and be completely legit. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 15:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- The 8 gen article has been deleted, I believe, like 5 times. Every time it's because of WP:CRYSTAL. Why would we tag this article with a concept that is continually deleted? Sergecross73 msg me 15:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Well that argument makes no sense (there's no article therefore it doesn't exist). The article doesn't exist for the same reason that many other articles don't exist and others are stubs - because it hasn't been made yet, not because the subject doesn't exist. Even if the page doesn't exist and isn't linked, the fact that the PSP is 7th gen and this is its successor makes it 8th gen by definition. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't think there's really enough info to justify an article at this point (and certainly not enough that I know personally). I think it should be labeled as the 8th gen in the infobox, but that doesn't necessarily mean there needs to be a linked article about it (just as there doesn't need to be a link to "Holiday 2011" or the word million in "16 million colors").
P.S. It's Eighth generation, not Eight generation - eighth (8th) means "the one that comes at point number eight in the series" (or similar); eight is just the name of the number 8.
Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 16:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- I think there is already sufficient informations to write an article summarizing the two upcoming portable consoles, but we can just wait for the release of the 3DS before starting such page on Wikipedia. But the meaning of my observations is that without a general consensus about the classification there will always be someone who will delete the words "eighth generation" from the NGP and 3DS pages.
- P.S.: I wrote "eight" instead of "eighth" because of my distraction, if you see i wrote correctly the word "seventh".
- --87.8.242.31 (talk) 17:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Fair enough about the "Eighth" thing - it's just when it was discussed before (see above) there was at least one anon editor who used "Eight" instead, so I just thought I'd make sure.
- As for the sufficient info bit, perhaps, but I get the feeling those pages are as much about the competition between the consoles as they are about the consoles themselves. Still, as already mentioned, it should probably be discussed as WP:VG, not here.
- Yes, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, but the next generation in console gaming is here, and it is represented by the Nintendo 3DS and the next Playstation Portable. But, as you say, someone here in Wikipedia still thinks that a new generation don't start if the console manifacturers don't say so (as if they had said that for previous generations, but in reality that didn't happened). These people now should be happy, because Sony just called their console Next Generation Portable, so if this hardware is "next" to the current "generation" (the seventh, I suppose... Or there are still doubt in this?) it should be logically an eight generation console. --87.8.242.31 (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- While I agree that there is now more of a basis on which to start that article (we can just go by WP:CALC), I would hold off on creating it pending discussion on the matter at WikiProject Video games. --Dorsal Axe 16:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- The way I see it, is each console and handheld needs to have three main reasons, to confirm that it’s a next generation device. The first, being is that it needs to succeed in its previous model. The second being, is it needs to have major hardware, and software improvements. (Usely for the hardware, it will be Graphics.) And third, is it needs to reveal another competitor. All of these reasons are now facts, for both the 3DS and the NGP. And for why people can't accept that we are moving forward from the 7th Generation, I can't explain. "There will always be a successor to a gaming system, regardless". CaptainMario16 (talk) 00:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- That is Original research. When you find a couple reliable sources that call it 8th generation you can add it back. Anyway how do you know it's not 9th generation? The Next-Generation Bomber was much more advanced than its predecessor. Marcus Qwertyus 05:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure what a bomb article has got to do about this discussion? CaptainMario16 (talk) 10:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- And even if it has to do with the article, the "Next-generation Bomber", when released sometimes in the 2020 or the 2025, will be a bomber of a new generation, so I cannot see how this could be in contrast with thinking that the 3DS and the NGP belongs to an another generation than their predecessors. --87.8.242.31 (talk) 19:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- The reason for why this is the 8th Generation, and not the 9th, is simple. When has there been an 8th Generation? If you take a look at the History of video games, notice how each generation separates to when a new, and improved device was release? It's all about what was released when, and what date. And for what has been released, as by far, it actually adds up.
- You could say "Gee, but what about the DSi, and the PSPgo? Surely they were ment to succeed their previous models?", well... they weren’t really much of successors at all. They are what I call, "Re-releases", because beside all the new features they added in, they were both still compatible with all the same functions, same graphics, and same e.x.
- Lets not forget about the Gameboy Pocket. It's only improvement was to just make the device smaller, yet not body said it was a successor to the original Gameboy. Take a re-read at the three main reasons I added in with my previous discussion.
- Right now, it's quite tough to find a reliable source to classifiy it as an 8th Generation machine. But all I can say now, is it all makes sence, and until someone can find a good source, thats either about the 3DS, or NGP, we can surely all agree on that this is the 8th Generation of video games. CaptainMario16 (talk) 10:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- We can all agree that it's a new generation, but unless you have a source literally calling it "8th gen", it's WP:OR. Why should we use a term that's not used by reliable sources? They all refer to them as generations, you can't argue that, but no one labels the generations in number form like that. Sergecross73 msg me 13:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure what a bomb article has got to do about this discussion? CaptainMario16 (talk) 10:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- That is Original research. When you find a couple reliable sources that call it 8th generation you can add it back. Anyway how do you know it's not 9th generation? The Next-Generation Bomber was much more advanced than its predecessor. Marcus Qwertyus 05:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- The way I see it, is each console and handheld needs to have three main reasons, to confirm that it’s a next generation device. The first, being is that it needs to succeed in its previous model. The second being, is it needs to have major hardware, and software improvements. (Usely for the hardware, it will be Graphics.) And third, is it needs to reveal another competitor. All of these reasons are now facts, for both the 3DS and the NGP. And for why people can't accept that we are moving forward from the 7th Generation, I can't explain. "There will always be a successor to a gaming system, regardless". CaptainMario16 (talk) 00:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
No, it isn't OR, since it would be a routine calculation. It would appear that there is already consensus that the PSP Go and DSi are 7th gen, just like the original model PSP and NDS. Since they are 7th gen, there hasn't been anything after them, and the 3DS and NGP are "next gen", that automatically makes them 8th gen. As far as I am aware, there is no reason for the existing generations to be labelled with numbers other than to differentiate the articles (that is, I don't think there are sources that label them as Nth generation, they are just labelled as such since they are logical parts of a chronology), so either we have to do away with the numbering system all together, or it is acceptable to use it as it has already been used for the 3DS and NGP. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I am hoping we do away with the numbering system altogether because again, it's not numbered hardly anywhere else other than wikipedia. But that's for the future and not to really be discussed here. For now though, since the 8th gen doesn't exist yet because none of the systems are out yet, WP:CRYSTAL says we shouldn't label it as such yet. I guess it'll be another discussion once 3DS/NGP are officially released... Sergecross73 msg me 15:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- What on earth do you mean? The 3DS and NGP won't magically become 8th on release, so to say there is no 8th gen yet makes no sense. There was an 8th gen as soon either Sony or Nintendo started development on their handheld (whoever was first). If you believe that the generation doesn't exist until release, why do you think that? How does something become part of a generation when it wasn't before? As for the WP:Crystal bit, It only seems to apply when something doesn't exist (or cannot be demonstrated to exist) yet, which is certainly not the case for the 3DS and NGP. It is not a prediction that they will be 8th gen, since they already exist and are "next gen" systems. To put it another way, the 8th gen has already started for the dev teams of both the hardware and the software.
- There another thing though. You seem to be suggesting that the existing system of generations should be removed and replaced with something else that is better sourced - what exactly did you have in mind? Most publications refer to the hardware as current-, previous- or next-gen, not by any specific label. We cannot base a system around that since it only works for one in the future and one in the past (in other words, what would you call the SNES/Mega Drive* generation based on that system?). Successive generations of a series can and should be labelled with logically consistent names - we cannot simply not label them (the articles need names) and they need to be able to be found. The only possible alternative I can see is giving each one an actual name (like calling the SNES/MD one the "16-bit generation") but for most of them that is no less OR than the system we have now.
- *That's Genesis if you're a North American.
- Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 15:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- Part 1:WP:CRYSTAL is indeed an issue with generations when it comes to release. What if the system never comes out? What if a decision is made to shelve it in favor of another system? Or what if it's delayed for years? If NGP is delayed until 2013, and then active until 2020, will it be "8th gen" or "9th gen"? These scenarios are unlikely, but not impossible, and arise when there's these descrepencies with what wikipedia does and what the rest of the world does. It'll be "next gen" regardless of when it releases, but the number (8) was not assigned by reliable sources, and may not apply depending on when it releases. There's more to it, I believe, but that was one of the arguments that has come up at the 8th gen article deletion discussions.
- Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 15:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- Part 2: Using Years and timeframes over "generations". Some dispute which generation the Dreamcast was, because it was active during the end of the 5th gen and only the beginning of the 6th gen". However, no one can dispute it was an active console in the year 2000. Sergecross73 msg me 17:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I think I see your point, but I don't agree with it. I think we have a fundamental difference as to how we are defining generation; you seem to be defining a generation by when a product is released, and while that does play a part, I think it is more defined by when it is developed. If the NGP is shelved before release and, as you suggested, released in 2020, it would still be 8th-gen hardware, just released during a period that would probably be dominated by the 9th or 10th gen (similar to how the PS2 is still selling but is a different gen to the PS3, 360 and Wii). You seem to be defining a generation more by what something competes with than the tech, and there is certainly something to be said for that, but I don't think it is it's generation (more which "console war" it takes part in). Of course it gets all the more complicated with things like the Wii, which is very different to the PS3 and 360 in terms of capabilities. Maybe we need a rethink of how it is all organised, since generation and "console war" are treated separately, with the latter largely based on release date, but the former being much more vague (and seemingly overlapping). Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 18:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- Incidentally, the way the current articles are used, "generation" seems to conform more with your definition than mine, so given that, it should probably be left blank until release if the current system remains. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I agree, "generation" is open to interpretation, and very reason why I don't like it on wikipedia...Sergecross73 msg me 18:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- Incidentally, the way the current articles are used, "generation" seems to conform more with your definition than mine, so given that, it should probably be left blank until release if the current system remains. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to throw my two cents in and say it should be eighth. First off, it's a new console replacing the current (PSP) console. Secondly, Sony nicknamed it the Next Generation Portable (NGP) implying it is a console for the next generation, aka the eighth generation. Right there is enough evidence to put eighth generation. The 3DS should also be listed eighth generation for the same first reason I gave since the 3DS is replacing the DS line of handhelds for Nintendo. JDC808 (talk) 23:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
- So it is. We've reached a consensus. The PlayStation Vita is an eight generation video game console, just like the Nintendo 3DS. Please confirm this before anyone edits the article.--Arkhandar (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
The next generation in video games starts 2014 or 2015 Darkened wiki (talk) 16:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Hardware Specs
http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/release/110127a_e.html
- This would be better for specs source: http://www.playstation.com/psmeeting2011/spec.html --Pavel.nps (talk) 17:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Information
I've no interest in rewriting the article, but for those that do, a live blog of the event with information on the console's capabilities, design, and announced games. The Clawed One (talk) 08:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/01/27/ps_meeting_2011/
Requested move
![[1]](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/01/sony-tokyo-event-1328.jpg){kind=link}
Infobox Source?
The main infobox lists the (system?) "memory" at 512MBs. Is there a source for these numbers? Because I don't think that information has been released thus far. James xeno (talk) 01:51, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- It has indeed not been listed in the official specs, and I can't seem to find a source either. *delete* GameLegend (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Product Renders
I know the images are copyrighted, but we previously used official renders of the PlayStation Move until a free-use image appeared. Also doesn't the render come under the use of: Non-free promotional
This is just a query by the way.KiasuKiasiMan 05:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, and we shouldn't have. Such renders would be valid if "a free image could not be created to replace it" weren't part of the conditions; while it is unlikely to happen, it is possible. As an example of such a possible free replacement, the Xbox 360 S image currently used on Xbox 360 and many other pages is based on an image that was uploaded to flickr by a journalist during Microsoft's reveal presentation. It is a free image and if any of the press present at the Sony event are kind enough to upload a free image to flickr or commons then that would be a free alternative. Unfortunately the fact that this is relatively unlikely to happen does not make it "legal" (I can't think of a better word/phrase - "within policy guidelines" or something is what I'm meaning, although legal is also appropriate given that this is a copyright discussion). Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 05:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- As a side note, the reason it was added (by me) was to prevent people who were unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy/copyright law from adding such renders, since they have been added at least 4 times since the reveal. Every time they were uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which certainly doesn't qualify for such fair-use type uploads regardless of the situation, so it was as much to prevent that as anything else. Still, as far as I can tell, the only way in which promo images can be used under such a tag is when discussing the promotion pictured or similar (such as the Mega Drive article discussing the "Nintendo do what Nintendon't" ads, which even then are debatable). Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 05:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- What about fair use? We can use those images under fair use laws. ScienceApe (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- They fail Wikipedia guidelines for fair use images since, as I said, "a free image could not be created to replace it" is not true. For some things, such as software screenshots, no free version can be made, since such a free image would not represent the actual subject in question (in other words, such a free alternative would not be an image of the software). Other examples include pictures from films (either promos or actual parts of a film), covers for games etc, company logos etc. In this case however, the image can be replaced by anyone who has a camera and access to the device. It is possible that someone at the press event has or will make any pics they took creative commons or public domain, in which case those could be used. Likewise, after it launches, anyone who buys one can photograph it and upload it. The problem here is not the law, but Wikipedia policy regarding it. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 19:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- I thought we are allowed to use those images until someone replaces them with images wikipedia users make. Since the product has not been released, it seems perfectly valid to use the official images until it's on the market, then we replace them with ones made by wikipedia users.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ScienceApe (talk • contribs)
- I don't think so, but I may be wrong. If that were the case then there would be little incentive to replace it since official products shots are designed to make the best of whatever it is in question, while most user pics are nothing more than an adequate alternative (usually). If you look at the file upload page for a promo photo, it clearly states that "You should not upload a non-free image if there is a reasonable expectation that a free image does or ever could exist". It is almost certain that a free image will exist in the future and it is possible that one exists or could be created now. However if I am missing something that says it's OK for pre-release items or something then please point me to it. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 12:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- I thought we are allowed to use those images until someone replaces them with images wikipedia users make. Since the product has not been released, it seems perfectly valid to use the official images until it's on the market, then we replace them with ones made by wikipedia users.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ScienceApe (talk • contribs)
- They fail Wikipedia guidelines for fair use images since, as I said, "a free image could not be created to replace it" is not true. For some things, such as software screenshots, no free version can be made, since such a free image would not represent the actual subject in question (in other words, such a free alternative would not be an image of the software). Other examples include pictures from films (either promos or actual parts of a film), covers for games etc, company logos etc. In this case however, the image can be replaced by anyone who has a camera and access to the device. It is possible that someone at the press event has or will make any pics they took creative commons or public domain, in which case those could be used. Likewise, after it launches, anyone who buys one can photograph it and upload it. The problem here is not the law, but Wikipedia policy regarding it. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.ðɒn/ (talk) 19:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- What about fair use? We can use those images under fair use laws. ScienceApe (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I guess it is open to interpretation. It could mean that. Although I see "does or ever could exist" as "use a free image if one exists, or could be produced". Indeed, "ever" has been removed from the criteria itself. And current no free image can be produced, so I don't think it would be a huge deal if we did use a render. --Dorsal Axe 13:07, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Reveal Date
According to the video in this link, http://www.ign.com/videos/2010/12/17/ign-daily-fix-011211 the reveal date for the PSP2 wil take place on January 26 at a Tokyo conference. Crowned jester (talk) 14:27, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
- The main page should state that the price is 'unannounced' or 'unspeculated' until a price is available. Laurie, 15:45 AEST, 27 Jan 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.231.134.2 (talk) 05:46, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Android Compabability
I read K-zone and they say that NGP is "compatible with Android games and vice versa".could it be true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by John kaiser (talk • contribs) 03:04, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- It's certainly possible, but I find it more likely that they are confusing it with the Sony Ericsson Xperia Play. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 14:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
TV Out
It was stated at E3 that the PSV wont have TV out, any confirmation on this, since the main article just mention's gamestop's game informer for information which is just a heresay magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.107.107.31 (talk) 22:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- They have a rumors section or something, but they are, in whole, a reliable source. Also, Destructoid confirms it. So it's seems true. Sergecross73 msg me 22:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Any info on the batteries & type of memory card for content other than games?
Will it have removable batteries or not? Will it use Pro Duo cards we heard its not but no time on the release or names of these new cards. These are two very important things that should be included in this and i searched all over the place and cant find the awnser to them so hopefully someone in the know can post the awnsers to these questions. ChesterTheWorm (talk) 07:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC) ChesterTheWorm
Its confirmed the PS Vita WILL NOT have a removable battery instead it will be "The entire handheld is sealed like an iPhone" and since my spelling is horrible someone else please put this in there. Here is the link about the PS Vita Battery " http://kotaku.com/5744675/yes-ive-played-with-sonys-new-gaming-portable-the-ngp " ChesterTheWorm (talk) 18:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC) ChesterTheWorm
Prices
I'm not sure that I agree with this edit.[4] The price of a gaming system is a key aspect (among others) in how well a gaming system performs in the market place. Consider how the Neo Geo and 3DO failed in the market place due to their high price point while the Wii has been a huge success in part because of its affordability. The edit summary cites WP:NOPRICES but that guideline says "Product prices should not be quoted in an article unless they can be sourced and there is a justified reason for their mention. In general, if mainstream media sources (not just product reviews) provide commentary on the price of an object instead of just passing mention, this is an indication that its price may have encyclopedic significance. " This clearly qualifies as reliable sources are cited and are providing commentary about the price. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say it clearly qualifies. Take another look at the part where it says: "In general, if mainstream media sources (not just product reviews) provide commentary on the price of an object instead of just passing mention, this is an indication that its price may have encyclopedic significance." Commentary is the really important part here - if a site says "this costs $X", then it is not providing commentary it is mentioning it in passing. However, if it says "this costs $X, which is Y% higher/lower than the competition/predecessor, so is likely to do better/worse in sales" or something like that, then that probably would constitute commentary. The point of that policy is that prices in and of themselves aren't encyclopædic content - they only become relevant when they have an effect on other things.
- For example, at launch the PS3 was significantly more expensive than the Xbox 360, especially in PAL regions, and as such failed to gain momentum in the marketplace initially. The commentary (price difference effecting sales) is encyclopædic and as such mention of the prices of both consoles is useful. If it hadn't effected it, then people might have commented on it saying that it was doing well despite the difference, which would also be notable.
- As it is at the moment I don't think there can be an commentary around the prices beyond speculation of how well it will do at market, and, at a push, between the 3G and non-3G versions. (This is simply the nature of pre-release products.) Bear in mind though that simply the fact there is a difference doesn't make it notable - that requires some kind of 3rd party commentary on the subject (which also needs to be shown if it exists).
- The prices listed are/were also sourced from gaming media, not mainstream media, although that is a minor point and probably irrelevant given the context.
- I hope I've been clear enough.
- Oh, I forgot to mention, I highlighted the not just product reviews bit, because most of what is in the gaming press at the moment is pretty much previews/re-worded press release, so would likely be considered under similar criteria (as a preview rather than a review). Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 23:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- I disagree. I was under the impression that it's acceptable for prices to be in there as part of an article paragraph, and not, for example, part of an list article like "List of PSVita games" where there's a price for every game listed. A passing mention in a paragraph seems like it should be fine, and isn't anything like a catalogue or directory listing... Sergecross73 msg me 23:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe - that's just my interpretation, so if we get some kind of consensus I'll go with it either way. That said, my view seems (again, interpretation) to be supported by the sentence: "Product prices should not be quoted in an article unless they can be sourced and there is a justified reason for their mention.", which I don't think there really is… not at the moment any way (the Neo Geo/3DO/Wii examples above wouldn't have been notable on their own either - it's the commentary about their commercial failure/success that makes them so). Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 00:30, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- The price of a gaming system is a key aspect (among others) in how well a gaming system performs in the market place. I'm sure commentary can be found. See WP:PRESERVE. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 01:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
You're both correct actually. The price of the Vita is notable because of various industry quotes from publishers etc praising Sony on the price point and saying that they thought it would be higher. Launch prices can also be notable because of where the console fits into the whole market picture against its rivals. Also correct is Alphathon though, in that prices are not, in general, published in WP; except where they are notable. eg, Not notable would be Tesco selling it cheaper than Asda in general day-to-day sales. But - Tesco and Asda having a long term price war on the Vita price, which in turn boosts the console to exceptional sales is notable. - X201 (talk) 08:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- That's kinda what I meant - I didn't know places had mentioned it as being lower than expected, and if they have then that would of course make it notable. If it is though, the reason why it is notable (i.e. the lower than expected price) should be mentioned along with the prices themselves (it is due to cost $X, €Y and ¥Z,[1] a lower price point than many expected[2][3] or something like that), rather than just saying it is due to cost $X, €Y and ¥Z[1] (at least IMHO). Hence "However, if it says "this costs $X, which is Y% higher/lower than the competition/predecessor, so is likely to do better/worse in sales" or something like that, then that probably would constitute commentary." Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 11:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
The ref provided for the price infobox (and several other in-article refs that I've checked) only give dollar and euro prices yet the box has sterling prices also. Is there a ref for these? danno 21:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Want a photo of the PSV?
At Gamescom this year, August 15 to August 22, Sony has invited me to -among other things- check out the PlayStation Vita. The product render that's up now looks really nice, but I just wanted to know if there would be a preference for an actual photo. If so, I can take a photo of it and share it as a free-image. GameLegend (talk) 16:57, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia would be very grateful if you posted a photo on this article. *Side note: Hope you have a good time spending $300 + monthly fees on a handheld console ;) --Arkhandar (talk) 17:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'm just invited to try it out. Not getting it ;) GameLegend (talk) 17:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hope you enjoy it! ;)
- Sony is in a very tough position right now with the Vita, especially after the 3DS price cut. Sadly the handheld market is being poisoned by you know who xD --Arkhandar (talk) 18:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a forum, Arkhandar. Sergecross73 msg me 22:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'm just invited to try it out. Not getting it ;) GameLegend (talk) 17:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- I dare you to get quality like this. « ₣M₣ » 19:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Much as I'd love to accept that dare, my camera's not that fancy :P I'll try and make the best of it, and then just see if you think it's good to use. GameLegend (talk) 19:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- >_< "It's not allowed to take pictures of the PlayStation Vita, since it is not yet the final version of the hardware". Ah well, it was interesting experience still. GameLegend (talk) 23:55, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- Much as I'd love to accept that dare, my camera's not that fancy :P I'll try and make the best of it, and then just see if you think it's good to use. GameLegend (talk) 19:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
How does Sony pronounce the word Vita ?
We are told that the name was chosen because "Vita" means "Life" in Latin, but I don't know how vita is pronounced in Latin. Maybe Sony disregards the Latin pronounciation. There could be at least 3 ways of pronouncing Vita: Vee'tuh as in cheetah, Vy'tuh as in vital, and Vay'tuh rhymes with beta and theta. Greensburger (talk) 15:53, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Whenever I've seen a Sony representative talking about the Vita, it's been pronounced Vee'tuh. Chimpanzee Us | Ta | Co 11:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
- Likewise, although I think it'd be better transcribed as Vee-tah, not Vee'tuh. Regardless though, I have reverted your (Greensburger's) edit since pronunciation guides on Wikipedia follow a standard format - they are written in IPA (like the pronunciation guide in my sig) and placed after the word being pronounced (which in this case would be alongside the Japanese name). See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (pronunciation) for more info. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 15:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
- Also, since it is debatable how it would actually be transcribed, it should probably be discussed more thoroughly first anyway. As far as I can tell, it is pronounced as it is in Italian rather than in Latin (where it is pronounced "Wee-tah") so it would probably be transcribed as "ˈvita". See Wikt:vita#Italian. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 15:23, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Investment Protection
From what I can tell this device doesn't have end-user investment protection, especially for existing games. While it provides backward compatible games, it is only for those Sony provides on its Playstation Network. Thus all of a person's investment in existing games dies. Additionally should something happen to the Playstation Network, as it already did, users would be out of luck in updating or restoring their games or other paid content. Diginal only download doesn't seem a good deal at all for end-users and end-users should avoid unit that only support such games and content. The ONLY exception are MMO games, such as Final Fantasy XI, WOW, Final Fantasy XIV, etc. ---Bmoshier (talk) 19:51, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- WP:NOTAFORUM. This isn't the place to share your opinions and viewpoints on the item itself, but rather how to improve the article. This isn't the place to write an editorial or start a discussion on investment protection. Sergecross73 msg me 21:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Release date
The release date for NA and EU says it is TBA in the infobox, but the Wiki code has the correct info with citations. What is going on there? Can somebody please fix it? 69.110.78.39 (talk) 02:55, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Never mind, it shows up now. 69.110.78.39 (talk) 02:56, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Perfomance compared to other systems
I believe it is important for a gaming console article, especially these days when every once in a while another variation of a gaming system comes out, to have information about its overall gaming experience compared to other systems. I mean, I remember back in the day, when people asked me how good the PSP was, i said it is almost like PlayStation 2, which I still believe so. Meaning, I gave the console a grade or scale to let people know about its general power and graphics. I think it's vital to give this info. I have yet to put my finger on how well PSV will be, compared to PS2 or PS3. I'm sure that it wont be like the PS3, but will it be better in technical terms and in how the games will look and feel, than PS2? Wii? GameCube? The latter examples may not be relevant, but i think comparing it to PS2, a strong brand and milestone of its own family, is to be expected, similar to how comparison was made between the PSP and PS2. It is also possible to state how technologically advanced the PSV is, by stating (with facts, preferably)that it has superior abilities to the PS2 (if it indeed does), and saying on that note that within approximately a decade, Sony managed to create a console equivalent or better than the PS2, along with a touchscreen, WiFi and 3G - all while being smaller than the PS2 and portable. In any case I hope that a comparison between PSV and any PlayStation product is made, because it is only good, in order to help readers know how to map it in the PlaySation world (in terms of computing power, graphics etc) , or even in the entire gaming consoles world. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.46.235 (talk) 03:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- Personal opinion: It's looks like PSV is like half way between a PS2 and a PS3, much like how the PSP seemed to be half way between the PS1 and PS2.
- Wikipedia opinion: If someone wants to gather the specifics with sources and whatnot, I'm sure that could be included somewhere. Sergecross73 msg me 12:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Clocking
How is the ARM Cortex-A9 MPCore clocked?--91.15.80.34 (talk) 19:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
no official data, and speculation is done on forums Markthemac (talk) 00:13, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Cost of the unit
Why is there no Canadian Dollar currency in the cost of the unit? This is unacceptable. Please fix this ASAP! Once again this is unacceptable to omit the Canadian Dollar. If you want to omit a dollar value, omit the useless US dollar! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.210.208 (talk) 15:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- Be bold and add it yourself. Just remember to include a reference to a reliable source (note that retailers aren't reliable sources). Chimpanzee Us | Ta | Co 15:42, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- I personally don't see any reason to add the Canadian dollar since most if not all gaming consoles are usually the same price in both countries. The only reason I could see them being listed sepertely would be if there was a significant pricing difference between the two countries. Also IIRC no video game console has a seperate Canadian price listed.--199.91.207.3 (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
File:PlayStation Vita Portable Charger.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
|
An image used in this article, File:PlayStation Vita Portable Charger.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:28, 2 December 2011 (UTC) |
PHL Release Date
got the source but it only says January 2012, and was it even reliable? 122.55.95.226 (talk) 07:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CAMERA RESOLUTION IS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phineasflin89 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
The new estimated release day is Feburary 22nd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murph146 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
GPS
If the GPS is only available with 3G doesn't that mean it's likely to be AGPS? Anyone have any references for this? 81.97.166.238 (talk) 18:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- I too had assumed that the Vita uses aGPS but haven't been able to find a reference for it. I had another look just now and couldn't find anything. Funnily enough, Googling "vita agps" returns a forum post from me! :) Chimpanzee Us | Ta | Co 22:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
PlayStation Vita system software
I think now with two recent firmware updates and many more which will come is time to create section like psp, ps3, xbox, wii, nds, etc. already have, and will cover software updates and their changelogs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.161.24.221 (talk) 01:56, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
- Is there really much to be said yet? Sergecross73 msg me 02:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Now I think it is. There already have been 4 updates released: 1.50, 1.51, 1.52 and 1.60. Each have its own changelog. Sure more updates will be released soon. (US and EU launch is coming.) I suggest someone make this section now and add existing updates info. Then when new updates are released we will just update page with info and new changelogs.
- Has anything notable been changed? Sergecross73 msg me 03:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Removing price chart
I believe the launch price chart should be removed, per WP:NOPRICE, and this prior discussion. It's okay to mention the price in regards to how it affects the system, but just listing off prices in a chart violate WP:NOPRICE. (Not to mention people keep on packing more and more regions in there, making it cluttered, and you'll see that articles like Playstation 3 do not have such charts either, and that's a system where one could argue price has been very relevant to it's performance. So there's no precedent for this.
Anyways, it's okay to mention prices in prose, saying why it's important, but not charts. Sergecross73 msg me 17:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
not fully backwards compatible
not every psp game is available on the vitas version of ps store — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.162.19 (talk) 03:27, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- The article says in numerous places that it's only compatible with PSP games on PSN. Are you saying there's a difference between the PSP games available on PSN whether if someone is using a Vita or PSP? Or are you just saying that not every PSP game is on PSN? The first one would be important to note, though I haven't heard anywhere before. The second is already pretty well known. Sergecross73 msg me 14:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
for example, the 2 psp games i downloaded from the "welcome back program" after the psn fiasco last year, killzone liberation and modnation racers(original psp version) are not available on the vitas version of the store. however, downloading them onto my ps3, i was able to manually transfer killzone, but not modnation, using the vitas content manager. point i was trying to make was the device is not FULLY backwards compatible with every psp game at US launch, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.162.19 (talk) 05:04, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Merger proposal
Having removed all the unsourced information from LiveArea it seems clear that a separate article for the Vita's interface is unnecessary. I'm suggesting that it's merged into PlayStation Vita although this won't really be necessary as the information is already better-covered in this article. Most of the LiveArea article discussed it being the "successor" to the XMB but I've found no evidence of this (eg. Sony announcing they'll be using LiveArea in all their TVs, Blu-Ray players and consoles moving forward).
Any objections to the merge? Chimpanzee Us | Ta | Co 10:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Support - For the reason's stated above. There's not enough there to support it's own article, and the Vita article isn't that big either... Sergecross73 msg me 17:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Metacritic Chart - Games
So I wanted to see people's thoughts on this. I don't recall seeing info like this on other system's articles. Does it belong here? Would it be better at the "List of Vita Games" article? Should it be removed outright; it's basically just ripping info off the Vita section on Metacritic. Should it just stay at Metacritic? Thoughts? Sergecross73 msg me 17:15, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
- You're right, they don't belong there. Rukario-sama ^ㅈ^ -(...) 07:42, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
PSOne Classics Compatibility
The article appears to be incorrect; the Vita, as I understand it, does not currently play PSOne Classics. (This is a capability that Sony is claiming they will add in the future.) However, I can't find any sources explicitly saying this. I did have a FAQ from Sony that did not say it supported this (but did say it supported PSP games), but I lost the link and cannot seem to find it again. Cjs (talk) 15:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Maybe try these and see if any are acceptable sources:
- http://playstationedge.com/ps-vita/sony-playstation-vita-will-not-run-game-archives-at-launch/
- http://community.us.playstation.com/thread/3910423?start=0&tstart=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjs (talk • contribs) 15:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- From what I understand, there seems to be confusion based on the way Sony has announced things, and I think that leads people to edit it wrongly. It was initially revealed to be able to play PS1 Classic, but then later changed to something along the lines of "It has the ability to do it, but it won't actually be able to until an update occurs someday in the future". I'll try to find sources that verify this. Messageboard forum posts can't be used as sources, and I'm unfamiliar with the "Playstation Edge" website you gave... Sergecross73 msg me 18:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
You can't play PSOne classics directly off the Vita, but you can connect to your PS3 and play them on your Vita through Remote Play. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.68.229 (talk) 17:54, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
No SD?
What was wrong with SD cards? The decision to go without SD seems strange and inconvenient. --JBrown23 (talk) 09:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- In Sony's eyes, much of the piracy of the PSP came from the fact that people could upload hacks and illegal games and whatnot on an SD card. The new memory cards have more anti-piracy measures, which is why they cost more. If the article doesn't express these ideas yet, it probably should... Sergecross73 msg me 11:40, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
sony is a multi-armed beast, they haven't had a profit in years it's fully understandable they launched a special ram card for the vita like Microsoft has done with the HDD's on the xbox360. Markthemac (talk) 23:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Add pictures that show the sizes of Vita cards
Some pictures demonstrating the physical sizes of the cards used by the Vita would be appreciated, like a photo of the cards next to a penny, SD card, and microSD card. Some physical size specifications put in the article as well would be nice, if someone can find a source for them. - 199.80.222.227 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Proprietary memory card format pricing
Some current retail pricing for 4GB cards
Memory Stick Pro Duo: $29.99 [5]
Memory Stick M2: $34.99 [6]
Vita Stick: $19.99 [7]
So why the incessant insistence on saying Vita cards are "more expensive" when they are in fact cheaper than cards for the PSP and PSPgo systems it is a successor to? Also, no other wiki page for consoles using a proprietary memory format from the PS1 to DC to GCN to PS2 etc etc etc bother with such nonsense that their memory formats were "more expensive". It is entirely subjective. No one ever said that Sony HAD to use established memory card formats for their system. Comparing it to anything is comparing apples to oranges. --Nogib (talk) 17:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Have you really done much research on this? It looks like you're taking retail listings from one particular retail store, at one particular size. I think the main flaw in your examples is that 4GB was more useful of a size with smaller PSP downloads; 4GB doesn't get you very far with the size of Vita downloads. Once you get into the higher sized cards needed for bigger downloads, it gets more expensive.
- But beyond our personal examples, there's a ton of reliable sources backing up the "expensive" aspect of these cards. Did you bother to check the source you keep on removing? It clearly states "significantly more expensive -- a 32 GB MicroSD card will set you back about $30, versus the $100 you'll spend on Sony's equivalent storage media.". It's from Engadget, a reliable source on such things. Look at all of these reliable sources that comment on the expensive aspect of Vita memory cards.
As far as your arguments on "no other system articles discuss this", I don't think there's ever been much of a backlash/reaction to prices of them before, that's why. But if someone could prove that there had been, it would be fine, if it could be backed up by reliable sources, like it can be here. Sergecross73 msg me 17:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
The problem with any of those, yes including Engadget, is that they compare the Vita card to microSD. Why? The Vita memory card format itself is a derivative variant of the Memory Stick Micro M2 format but with different pinouts and other security features Sony has not disclosed. Making the comparison to microSD is therefore grossly inaccurate as it loosly implies that the Vita was going to or should have used microSD which Sony never once stated it would. Logically it only makes proper sense to compare it directly to it's Memory Stick heritage as a memory card format and not other mediums that Sony's handheld consoles have never used. That's why the "reliable source" like that is in fact completely UNreliable given such an indirect comparison. --Nogib (talk) 17:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- But, both the sources, and the statement you keep removing in the article in the article, just say that the memory card are expensive in comparison to other memory cards. No one is comparing it to, or arguing about, the PSP memory cards except you. Everything is just saying they're expensive in the world of memory cards, which is verifiably true, as per all the sources I've presented. And it's clearly a valid point if all of these reliable sources are writing about it. Sergecross73 msg me 18:02, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Both are valid comparisons. Comparing them to Memory Sticks is completely relevant, as is comparing it specifically to the storage used in the PSP line. However, since SD is so prevalent, comparing it to SD (and thus storage used in most other devices, such as smartphones) is also a valid criticism of the PS Vita. It is however a criticism that may also be levelled at the PSP and other Sony products (digital cameras etc) for their use of Memory Sticks. (I'm certainly aware of the PSP having been criticised for its use of Memory Stick in the same way as the Vita has been with its cards, although probably not to the same extent, likely because Memory Stick was a pre-existing format. As such, if it isn't already it may be worth adding to the PSP article, assuming it can be adequately sourced of course.) I haven't read the relevant part of the article recently, but if this distinction isn't made clear the wording should probably be changed to do so. Alphathon /'æɫfə.θɒn/ (talk) 18:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- The last version read as "The PS Vita is incompatible with standard memory cards, such as SD cards, and instead stores data on more expensive proprietary PS Vita memory cards, which are available in sizes from 4 GB to 32 GB so the wording was pretty clear; nothing about PSP was said. The stuff that was actually being said, was correct and sourced. Sergecross73 msg me 18:23, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Aww :( And here I thought my edit was pretty darn good lol. I think the implication of the "incompatible" part lent itself to being interpreted that the Vita, at some point in its development, could have used a format such as microSD and its removal from the line warranted as the system was never designed with any memory from the SD Association in mind. And the change of "more expensive" to just a more broad "expensive" removes any overtly negative connotation to the segment leaving it to stand on purely its own merits and nothing else. --Nogib (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- The last version read as "The PS Vita is incompatible with standard memory cards, such as SD cards, and instead stores data on more expensive proprietary PS Vita memory cards, which are available in sizes from 4 GB to 32 GB so the wording was pretty clear; nothing about PSP was said. The stuff that was actually being said, was correct and sourced. Sergecross73 msg me 18:23, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
SD picture
Slight problem with the text. I'd just fix it if I could get access but the page has been locked. the page is labled wrong for left and right. figured you might as well fix it since I can't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iseriad (talk • contribs) 03:54, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
"LiveArea" screen should be labeled "The PS Vita's Home screen" or "LiveArea Home Screen"
The name of the screen on the Playstation Vita where you launch an application or game is known as the Home screen. From there you are taken to the LiveArea screen. And then the application screen. Here's an image from the Quick Start Guide included with the system: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/36932874/Web%20Images/ViTa-guide.jpg; Alternatively a link to Sony's online Vita help site, where you find The screen description page. Mestinkbad (talk) 06:37, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Quote: "PS Vita primarily competes with the Nintendo 3DS, as part of the eighth generation of gaming."
I'm beginning to think portables should be treated as separate from consoles and have their own "portable generations". After all: The release dates for consoles all line-up within 1-2 years of one another, but the portables arrive on the scene seemingly random & often right in the middle of console generations. ---- Theaveng (talk) 21:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
The point you raise is good but I doubt it will be possible to change it now it's down to 8 or so. CHCSPrefect (talk) 17:14, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
PlayStation Vita NOT compatible with ALL PlayStation Portable titles?
I know this crosses the line of "official support" but given the technicalities, all PlayStation Portable titles should be compatible with the PlayStation Vita since UMDs only contain ISO files of the games themselves (custom firmware and/or homebrew software on the PlayStation Vita likely allow ISO files of games to be played, as in the PlayStation Portable). Even if it's illegal, this should be verified because while it may not be possible through official and/or legal means, it does not mean that it is a technical limitation per se. I can't do it myself because I do not own a PlayStation Vita. 85.246.161.70 (talk) 14:31, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well, on Wikipedia, we go by what can be verified by reliable sources. As such, we should stick with what's currently in the article, which is Sony's official word, and not unofficial/unverified/illegal scenarios. Sergecross73 msg me 14:59, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
As a PlayStation Vita owner I can tell you the backwards compatibility to my knowledge is the PS portable games that are available on PlayStation Store are the only ones that can be purchased and run, this thing definitely has no UMD slot and the games themselves are about the size of a PSP Memory Stick. I can upload a picture of one of the games if it would help? CHCSPrefect (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
- No, none of that is necessary, no one needs proof of any of that. The original comment wanted to add "hypothetical" information regarding hacked units, which isn't appropriate. The things you said are rather common knowledge and not being questioned. Thanks though. Sergecross73 msg me 18:23, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Compatibility Questions sorted (hopefully)
http://playstation.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3795/~/supported-playstation-vita-game-formats Straight from PlayStation's helpdesk, a list of the backwards compatibility for the Vita. I've checked each of these myself and they all work. Can someone stick this information into the article please? CHCSPrefect (talk) 17:13, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure Wikipedia is really the proper place to list such a thing. Wikipedia is not really a "how to" website or anything... Sergecross73 msg me 23:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Criticism of proprietary memory card?
I've seen a lot of criticism of Sony's choice to use an expensive proprietary memory card in the Vita across the Internet. Could anyone try to dig up reliable sources regarding this criticism and add it to the article? Assuming that there are reliable sources to be found, but given how widespread the negative reactions have been, I can't imagine that there aren't any sources for it, I just don't have the energy (or Wikipedia editing experience) to track them down. 67.160.33.119 (talk) 21:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- Well, for starters, the source for the memory card part of the article, http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/13/playstation-vita-review/ - criticizes it. There's others too, as a prior discussion involved someone challenging that anyone was really criticizing it, which I found to be very untrue. Sergecross73 msg me 23:23, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Price?
Why is there absolutely no mention at all of the price of the console? Come on Wikipedians, I expect more out of your irrational attention to detail! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.180.224.100 (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- Prices can be found here, and the holiday bundle prices can be found on practically any search engine available. In the future, if you're looking for something you think should be here and you can't find it, try adding it yourself instead of passing the buck. Trut-h-urts man (talk) 18:29, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- Only launch prices of the system and its various bundles should be included, not the current price. --GSK ● ✉ ✓ 00:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Cross-buy?
There's no mention of cross-buy at all on this page. Any ideas on how to integrate some info on this? unless (talk) 09:33, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Clock Speed
Alright, after several edits and reverts, I think it's time to open up a discussion. Obviously PS Vita doesn't run at 2 GHz, but has anyone of you had luck finding an exact number, or even an approximation? I can't find anything other than the constantly-mentioned "it won't run at 2 GHz because it will set fire to your pants" information. Instead of completely removing it, an approximate number (or even an exact number) would be best. --GSK ● ✉ ✓ 04:57, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- From what I've observed, there seems to be a recent trend of lesser-powered systems not having official numbers released on this type of thing (3DS, Wii, etc) and I think this is one of them. Officially, regarding Wikipedia policy, I don't believe there's a number we can rightfully put there. There's typically these unofficial, random bloggers/fansite people who "figure it out", but they wouldn't consistitute as a reliable source. Sergecross73 msg me 12:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- I was the one who originally added the info, but my reasoning behind it was that the Vita is capable of 2 GHz clock speed, and not that it ran at 2 GHz constantly, which is why the original edit said "up to 2GHz etc...". If anything should change, the "up to" should come back. I don't think removing it completely is necessary. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 17:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- I never noticed the "up to". I agree with adding it back in. It's, at least, some information as opposed to very little information. --GSK ● ✉ ✓ 18:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps a note of sorts could be placed in there, like a reference, explaining this all. (It seems all parties are right, it's just a matter of showing these sides of it.) Sergecross73 msg me 18:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- A note would work well to clarify that the Vita is capable of 2 GHz, but that it actually operates at an unknown clock speed lower than 2 GHz to increase battery life and keep the device from overheating. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 03:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps a note of sorts could be placed in there, like a reference, explaining this all. (It seems all parties are right, it's just a matter of showing these sides of it.) Sergecross73 msg me 18:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- I never noticed the "up to". I agree with adding it back in. It's, at least, some information as opposed to very little information. --GSK ● ✉ ✓ 18:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- I was the one who originally added the info, but my reasoning behind it was that the Vita is capable of 2 GHz clock speed, and not that it ran at 2 GHz constantly, which is why the original edit said "up to 2GHz etc...". If anything should change, the "up to" should come back. I don't think removing it completely is necessary. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 17:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
ifixit/source discussion
I have started a discussion on whether or not "ifixit" is a useable source by Wikipedia standards here at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Ifixit - Feel free to contribute. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 15:20, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Sales POV issue
So, with looking over the Sales section, the coverage seems kind of lopsided. It seems to cherry-pick random weeks where Sales spikes occur. Reading it as it appears now, would lead the reader to interpret it as having some big comeback in sales. However, as someone who has been keeping an eye on this since launch, this is sadly not really true, as it just seems to have sales spikes here and there.
Anyways, I think we need to go in one of two directions:
- Trim it down to quarterly/years figures like we typically do for video game console articles.
- Give a wider view, either showing how the spikes were temporary, or more general trends. (For example, maybe showing that Vita sales averaged closer to 5,000 in 2012 and more like 15,000 in 2013, assuming that to be true.)
Thoughts? Sergecross73 msg me 12:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Regarding video output
Regarding the original PCH-1000 series PSVita model having an identical 1080i resolution scaler to the PSVita TV, I included a Japanese-language source which involves an interview with a few of Sony's engineers (Sony Director of the Second Division of Software Development Muneki Shimada, Hardware Planning Division Manager Kiyoto Shibuya). For verifiability purposes, I am going to leave an English translation here for the most important part of the interview.
- Q: Vita TVの映像出力解像度は?
- What is Vita TV's display resolution?
- 島田： 1080i(インタレース)ですね。ゲームとしては元々964×544です。
- 1080i. Game will be rendered at 964 x 544.
- 島田： 実は既存のVitaにもスケーラーは入っています。964×544のものを引き延ばして表示することもあります。ビデオなどは問題を生みやすいので、720p のフォーマットなら720pで流す、といったことをしています。
- To be honest, the original Vita already had scaler built in. Sometimes images are even stretched from 964×544. For video contents, which tend to have problems, it goes 720p for 720p sources.
- Q: 新しく特別なスケーラーを乗せたわけでない、と?
- So there is no new scaler installed this time?
- 島田： はい。今回は。
- Well, there is not, at least for now.
- Q: ということは、元々Vitaでは、インターフェースさえあればテレビに映るはずだったわけですか?
- Wait, does that mean, the original Vita only just required cable interface to shoot images to TV display?
- 島田： そうなりますね。
- Yes. Of course.
- 渋谷： PSPの時、PSP-2000の段階でテレビへの接続に対応しましたよね。その時にも思ったのですが、モーションなどを使う機器の背中からケーブルが生えて、テレビにつながっている状態が本当にいいのかな、という疑問がありました。そういう内部議論の末に、「ポータブルのVita2000」と「Vita TV」に分けるのがいいだろう、という結論に至りました。
- With the PSP, connection with a TV was available since the PSP-2000. At that time there was a discussion on whether it was good to have a cable attached to the back of the console going to the TV with motion controls... At the end of that internal debate, we decided that splitting between the “portable Vita 2000″ and the “PS Vita TV” was the ideal solution.
(島田 = Muneki Shimada; 渋谷 = Kiyoto Shibuya)
Regards, --benlisquareT•C•E 16:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- So, let me see if I've got this straight: Is this saying that the Vita 1000 had the ability to basically be a Vita TV, or rather, it would have, if they would have released a respective cord to hook it up? But now the Vita 2000 can't do that anymore? Sergecross73 msg me 17:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- That's pretty much what I've gathered from the interview. For whatever reason (not profitable compared to releasing a separate console model dedicated for TV for $100? who knows), Sony chose not to allow video output for the original Vita, even though it was fully designed with such capability. Shimada essentially confirms that the functionality was removed from the new Vita model. --benlisquareT•C•E 17:29, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
"and in Australia on February 23, 2012"
Is this extra separation within the lead paragraph (and infobox) really necessary? Currently the lead paragraph reads "it was released in Japan on X, in blah, blah, blah and blah on Y, and in Australia on Z". I think the extra separation for Australia is useless and messy, and should be merged into the rest of the February 22, 2012 release countries. Speaking as an Australian, when it's 5 January in Hamburgerland, CCTV-cameraland and Merkelsreich, it's 6 January in Kangarooland. The releases essentially happened at the same time, and there really isn't any good reason to separate them. --benlisquareT•C•E 03:17, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed. I'm sure there will be some random IP to re-add it randomly some time, that's just how things seem to work here with things like release dates, but I agree with what you're saying, and it'll be good to (assumeably) have a consensus to point to with this discussion as well. Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Infobox for PCH-2000 model?
Rather than just a paragraph dedicated to the PCH-2000, can we add an infobox for it? --Bronyman87 (talk) 01:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
- Well, infoboxes should only summarize info already in the article, so it shouldn't be used as a replacement. Sergecross73 msg me 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Sales
This hasn't been updated for over a year now its probably well over the 4 million units sold by January 2013 thats currently listed. 74.103.250.78 (talk) 04:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- The problem is, we do not have access to newer reliable figures, as official records or trustworthy third-party numbers are not available. We will have to wait until the next time Sony Computer Entertainment releases their yearly financial report, or if another reputable source gives accurate data. We cannot use vgchartz as a source, because their figures are essentially guesstimations with no concrete reliability, and many of their sales figures have been proven to be incorrect in the past. --benlisquareT•C•E 04:16, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Sales POV issue
So, with looking over the Sales section, the coverage seems kind of lopsided. It seems to cherry-pick random weeks where Sales spikes occur. Reading it as it appears now, would lead the reader to interpret it as having some big comeback in sales. However, as someone who has been keeping an eye on this since launch, this is sadly not really true, as it just seems to have sales spikes here and there.
Anyways, I think we need to go in one of two directions:
- Trim it down to quarterly/years figures like we typically do for video game console articles.
- Give a wider view, either showing how the spikes were temporary, or more general trends. (For example, maybe showing that Vita sales averaged closer to 5,000 in 2012 and more like 15,000 in 2013, assuming that to be true.)
Thoughts? Sergecross73 msg me 12:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
- Dragged this out of the archive. Its been a year and this still hasn't been addressed. Will probably start trimming away soon unless a valid counter-point is brought up. Sergecross73 msg me 02:13, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Variants
What to do with this information? Should this information be used or not?
| PCH-1000 series |
|---|
|
Standard models (anything that is not black are Japan exclusive releases).
Note that PCH-**00 would represent the Japanese region; for the United States and Canada, this would be PCH-**01 (e.g. PCH-1001 ZA01 for the US region black colour original Wi-Fi model). Australia/New Zealand is PCH-**02, UK/Ireland is PCH-**03, EU is **04, South Korea is **05, Southeast Asia is **06, Taiwan is **07, Russia and the CIS is **08. Also note that developer kits follow the numbering of PDEL-100* (e.g. a US version would be PDEL-1001). |
| PCHJ-10000 series |
|
Japanese limited edition models. (I ain't translating all these moonrunes)
|
| PCH-2000 series |
|
Standard models (most are Japan exclusive colours, I have no idea what's currently available in the west)
|
| PCHJ-20000 series |
|
Japanese limited edition slim version models. (I ain't translating all this)
|
| VTE-1000 series |
|
Japan-release PS Vita TV models. Model numbers may change when the PS TV is released in the west.
|
The above is taken from the Japanese Wikipedia. --benlisquareT•C•E 02:50, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- Per this source, the PCH-1000 series "Ice Silver" colour was only released in Asia (Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, etc), and according to these two sources, "Cosmic Red" and "Sapphire Blue" were only released in Japan. Apparently the Phantasy Star Online 2 limited edition bundle released in Japan was also "Ice Silver", but I haven't found a reliable source for this yet. --benlisquareT•C•E 03:58, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- It seems a little too detailed/overwhelming to be used in its current state. Sergecross73 msg me 15:09, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
PCH-1000 Status
At PlayStation Vita#PCH-1000 discontinued, the article states, "As of January 2014, the PCH-1000 series is no longer being manufactured." but IMO the cited reference fails to state an effective date:
UPDATE: Sony’s senior product manager Ben Law has confirmed a few extra details for us: that £180 price tag will be a suggested retail price, so it’s likely to be lower in places, the old system is now no longer being manufactured, and they’ll be working with retailers to create bundles in an organic fashion.
They also confirmed that the UK would only see the black model for now.
Several Google searches failed to locate corroborating sources; even Sony's US PlayStation site omits specific PCH-1000 ending dates. I leave this issue for more experienced editors. – Conrad T. Pino (talk) 18:27, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- In my experience, on Wikipedia, editors are quick to say "There's a new model and I can find the old one. Must be discontinued." I'd remove the comment until we have an official word from Sony. Sergecross73 msg me 19:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- I'd support its removal, not been able to find any other sources, at least nothing concrete. Яehevkor ✉ 19:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
"PCH-1000 being discontinued" is incorrect
I just recently noticed this edit, and would like to clarify something. The PCH-1000 is still being sold, brand new and freshly manufactured, in Japan. See here, here, here and here: The Japan-exclusive "Crystal Black Super Value Pack" (Sony product code PCHJ10019, includes a console, memory card, cases and various other accessories; 21,578 yen incl. tax) doesn't hit shelves until July 24, 2014, however it contains an original non-slim Vita with an OLED screen.
I would like to implore everyone, please do not re-attach anything stating that the original Vita has been discontinued, as that would be false information. There is still demand for the PCH-1000 in Japan, because the PCH-2000 has a shitty yellowy-blur piss-filter LCD screen that discourages Japanese consumers, and so the PCH-1000 isn't going away any time soon. It might be a different situation in the west, however stating that the old model has been put out of production altogether is a stretch of a statement. As of present, any website claiming that the old model has been discontinued is doing so based purely on speculation; we need a statement from Sony to confirm anything like this. --benlisquareT•C•E 15:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Future direction of Vita
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-07-09-how-strong-exactly-is-playstations-2014-line-up
See last paragraph. Worth mentioning, and this seems to be best articulated, to avoid the "console wars" type NPOV issues/arguments. Sergecross73 msg me 15:23, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/12/sony-the-future-for-the-ps-vita-remains-unclear
Here's another. Not sure where/how, but I definitely plan on working this in somehow... Sergecross73 msg me 12:43, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Player statistics and console figures
Famitsu has published a special coverage report for the PS Vita, with one page covering statistics and demographics. I'm not sure where this goes in the article, so if anyone cares, feel free to use this.
- In Japan, most users of the Vita are aged between 15 and 29 years old. Penetration amongst children aged 10-14 years are significantly lower. Penetration sharply drops off beyond 44 years of age.
- A total of 526,810 units were sold in Japan during January-June 2013. A total of 671,170 units were sold in July-December 2013. A total of 639,730 units were sold in January-June 2014.
- Sales of the Vita consoles in Japan had three anomalous (non-standard) sales spikes during the periods January-June 2013 and January-June 2014. In March 2013, 229,632 units were sold; in January 2014, 166,022 units were sold; and in March 2014, 161,273 units were sold. Excluding these unusual spikes, the average sales were about 68,000 consoles per month.
- Witin the same time periods as above, an average of 11 games were released each month in Japan. The lowest is January 2013, with 5 games released, and the highest is March 2014, with 20 games released. Note that these figures include both download-only and retail package games, however exclude limited edition versions of games.
- 60 different titles were sold in Japan during the first half of 2013; 77 titles were sold during the first half of 2014.
- Of software sold in Japan, action games form the largest category, accounting for over one quarter of Vita games. This is followed by "adventure games" (note that in Japan, this genre overlaps with Visual novels), with just under one quarter. Following those would be, in descending order: traditional RPGs, simulation RPGs, action adventure games (these are what Americans actually call "adventure games"), simulation games, rhythm games, action shooter games, and lastly puzzle games.
- Source: 2014, なぜ、いまPS Vitaがオススメなのか？ PS Vitaのデータを、ハードとソフトの両面から、分析してみよう, Famitsu
- Archives: WebCite archive, Wayback Machine,
archive.today/r3swM, imgur
Regards, --benlisquareT•C•E 08:17, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Federal Trade Commission issues
We need to get up a section about Sony's settlements regarding false advertising. Official FTC statement
- Probably not a whole section, but a sentence or two? Sure, go for it. Sergecross73 msg me 17:04, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
- In case secondary sources are being sought after, there's this. --benlisquareT•C•E 07:27, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Launch Vita titles for the People's Republic of China
The Vita officially launches in the People's Republic of China on January 11, 2015, and here is the list of launch titles for that region. Once a proper news article comes along, a slight 1 or 2-sentence mention within a subsection might be warranted. --benlisquareT•C•E 13:29, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Why do you keep deleting my updates that VITA has 9.1 Million Units Sold as of Nov 2014?
I posted a link that proved the VITA is at 9.1 Million Units Sold as of Nov 2014, but someone keep deleting it & posting 4 Million Units Sold? That is False information & some troll must be running this page? That is less than half the units it has sold worldwide atm. What is going on with this page? Why is it not allowed to be updated with current information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.55.221 (talk • contribs)
- If you look at the article history here (or the "View history" tab at the top of the article) you can see the reason given: "VGChartz is not a reliable source." This is correct, VGChartz has questionable (or even unknown) methods for generating statistics and a consensus has been reached on Wikipedia that it is not a reliable source. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources#Unreliable sources for more information. Яehevkor ✉ 11:08, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, this is exactly correct. 4 million is likely out of date, but Sony refuses to post official numbers, so it's all we can use. VGChartz is not s reliable source. Sergecross73 msg me 11:38, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- And it has been community consensus for a very long time that Vgchartz is unreliable, as Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources#Unreliable sources shows. Vgchartz essentially resorts to pure guesstimation when formulating numbers, and then revise their past numbers once newer information arises. That website is not to be trusted. --benlisquareT•C•E 12:53, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- VG Chartz also lists higher numbers than the companies do! They list the PS1 at over 103 million, while Sony listed it at just over 102 million, and haven't increased, so if VGC was reliable, it would agree with Sony official numbers- same goes with Nintendo, they have higher numbers than Nintendo released for a consoles entire lifetime!2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:69DB:2543:93C5:F71D (talk) 06:53, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, this is exactly correct. 4 million is likely out of date, but Sony refuses to post official numbers, so it's all we can use. VGChartz is not s reliable source. Sergecross73 msg me 11:38, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
?!?!...
http://www.vgchartz.com/ is a unreliable source! Also what do you mean 4 Million units sold is probably out of date? lol The VITA is at 9.1 Million units sold worldwide, simple fact. The same site has PS4 at 14.4 Million units sold worldwide and Sony-PlayStation just announced last week that PS4 was over 14 Million units sold worldwide. Yet you claim the site gives unrelaible sales numbers?!. It is obvious to me that someone in charge of this page must be a fanboy & is deliberately trying to hold back sales numbers. The reason I said fanboy is because nothing else makes sense to me. I'm 35 & love all gaming including Nintendo, PlayStation, XBOX, Steam! I guess I'm done trying to help get this page on track, smh. It seems useless. ='( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.55.221 (talk • contribs)
- Your unhelpful ad hominem accusations are rather ironic, since many of the people involved in improving and maintaining the article are Sony fans themselves, the "fanboy" monicker you're throwing at everyone doesn't make sense. Yes, the very outdated sales figure from early 2013 is a problem, however that does not mean that we can settle for non-quality sources, and upholding Wikipedia policy on verifiability and reliable sourcing is not "fanboyism". If you want to know more about vgchartz, read the Vgchartz article, and read the Wikipedia community discussions linked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources#Unreliable sources; it has been proven time and time that vgchartz is unreliable. --benlisquareT•C•E 02:50, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- VGChartz is not a useable source. We only use official numbers. If you've got updated numbers from Sony, we'll update it. Until then, we're stuck with 4 million, the last figure they released. Sergecross73 msg me 03:07, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- It's ESTIMATED by different groups about slightly less than 10 million taking different results reported by NPD, and other media sources, which themselves estimate, because they don't literally track every single store. It's like Nielson, and how they do in their ratings/sales/etc.2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:69DB:2543:93C5:F71D (talk) 06:55, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- As mentioned earlier, if anyone wants to update the sales figure within the infobox, a reliable source must be provided, per Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Based on community consensus, Vgchartz is not considered a reliable source. This is as far as anything goes, and no amount of bargaining will change the pre-existing policies that are in place. Wikipedia is not an anarchy where you can do whatever you want, the existence of all encyclopedic content here is based on rules, policies and guidelines. --benlisquareT•C•E 12:05, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- Exactly this. Technically, we could poot a sentence about it in the "2014 onward" section, where its clearly stated as speculation. (ie IGN speculated sales to be around 10 million because of x comment Sony made" or whatever. But the units sold section is strictly for confirmed sales figures, and cannot be updated until we get new figures. Hound Sony about it, not us. They're the ones not releasing figures. (They're perfectly capable, they have no problem giving frequent PS4 sales updates.) Sergecross73 msg me 13:38, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- As mentioned earlier, if anyone wants to update the sales figure within the infobox, a reliable source must be provided, per Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Based on community consensus, Vgchartz is not considered a reliable source. This is as far as anything goes, and no amount of bargaining will change the pre-existing policies that are in place. Wikipedia is not an anarchy where you can do whatever you want, the existence of all encyclopedic content here is based on rules, policies and guidelines. --benlisquareT•C•E 12:05, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- It's ESTIMATED by different groups about slightly less than 10 million taking different results reported by NPD, and other media sources, which themselves estimate, because they don't literally track every single store. It's like Nielson, and how they do in their ratings/sales/etc.2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:69DB:2543:93C5:F71D (talk) 06:55, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
China Launch
The Vita Launch in China has been delayed along with the PS4. 74.103.250.78 (talk) 11:34, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Regarding "region-free" Vita consoles in mainland China, and the larger controversy
Based on this source, the PS Vitas sold in mainland China are not region locked in the sense that they are able to play game cartridges from any region, however in accordance with local regulations they can only be paired with a Chinese PSN account, and cannot use PSN accounts from other regions.
I've been planning to expand the article based on the latest controversies, but I haven't had the time. The Chinese Wikipedia has an article at zh:中国大陆PlayStation系列延迟发售事件 (Mainland China PlayStation series sale delay controversy) which describes the whole issue in greater detail, and if I finally get the time, I'll translate it over.
The story goes that the PS4 and Vita were scheduled to be officially released in mainland China on January 11, 2015, however just one week prior, at the very last moment, the release was delayed. Sony Computer Entertainment China already had announced that both PS4 and Vita would be region-free, and that the Chinese consoles can play any games. All sorts of rumours buzzed around Chinese forums such as Baidu Tieba speculating on the reason for the delay (e.g. a commonly spread claim accuses that disgruntled Microsoft China employees made a formal complaint to the government, since Xbox One bombed hard in China), and in the end, it turns out that a man named Liu Ruizhe tipped off the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Culture that the PS4 and Vita were not region-locked. Hence, sales had to be delayed while the government investigated, and Sony negotiated some kind of compromise deal out of it.
China has very strict videogame censorship laws, and it is often the case that some sort of region-lock is implemented in order to meet with government requirements. Xbox One in China is region-locked in line with Chinese government policies and laws, and as of today, only has 10 or so games (most of them shitty kiddy PG-13 games like Rayman and Forza Motorsport) which is why nobody wants to buy it, especially since the domestic Xbox One costs more money than to purchase a parallel imported Xbox One from the black market. Often, games which are deemed "violent" are banned from sale in China, which is why Chinese Xbox One consoles cannot play Call of Duty.
The man who tipped off the authorities, Liu Ruizhe, wrote to them complaining that the PS4 and Vita were not region-locked, which means that "they can play games such as Grand Theft Auto V, which advocates drugs, violence, crimes, killings, promiscuity... these of which may seriously affect the construct of Chinese culture". It's argued that children can potentially play these violent videogames and introduce the American disease of degeneracy into Chinese society, and so the sales of such consoles needed to be banned. However, the man who made the tip-off ended up being doxxed, with his personal details, home address and contact details posted publicly online, and was hunted down by angry Sony fans. Based on claims from online forums, his personal details were leaked by a disgruntled government employee, while another claim is that based on his social media profile, the man was actually a Nintendo fan attempting to stir up trouble. A more far-fetched claim is that the man was tracked down in real life and severely beaten by a Chinese police officer who happened to be a Sony fan, however this claim is largely unverifiable since there has been no news coverage of said police beatings.
Eventually, Sony and the government negotiated some kind of compromise deal, and the PS4 and Vita were officially released on March 20, 2015 with approval from the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television. I might write up a basic summary of these events for the aricle, but I'll need to search around for references and double-check my information. This shouldn't be too hard, since the PlayStation delay was heavily covered in the Chinese media, and there are plenty of online articles to choose from. --benlisquareT•C•E 03:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Region codes?
Is it safe to say that it's the same with the PSP or PS3? If so, why isn't there a similar table? Or maybe just reference the table/s on the said pages..? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cerbera LM (talk • contribs) 01:15, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Proposed merge with LiveArea
LiveArea is not independently notable in reliable sources. Makes more sense to incubate it in its parent article (a section about the software, which includes the interface) and if it needs to spin out summary style then so be it. – czar 14:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- LiveArea is the successor of XrossMediaBar; the former is used in PS Vita and PS TV while the latter is used in PSP and PS3. As XrossMediaBar has its own article, I do think LiveArea could have its own article too. --Cartakes (talk) 14:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- As it goes, other stuff exists. It doesn't mean there's a reason to keep the status quo. What does XMB say that couldn't have been said more succinctly in the PlayStation series article? How do most of its sections possibly abide by the video game trivia guidelines. Most of it's unsourced because it's stuff that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia but some other reference guide. – czar 14:53, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm honestly rather surprised Cartakes is trying to defend the article in its current state, when its short, doesn't cover the subject well, is largely unsourced, and makes no attempt to meet the WP:GNG. I strongly agree with a merge unless/until a major overhaul in content and sources happens. Sergecross73 msg me 15:16, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sergecross73: What I was trying to say is of course that the LiveArea article, when in its *fully developed shape*, could likely perfectly fit in an encyclopedia like Wikipedia if the article XrossMediaBar does. XrossMediaBar (XMB) has become a popular mobile user interface used in Sony devices, having its own name, and is used in both PSP and PS3 (just like LiveArea which is used in both PS Vita and PS TV). The Microsoft layout engine Trident (layout engine) has its own article beyond Internet Explorer, and for encyclopedia purposes the articles for XrossMediaBar and LiveArea could exist too. The LiveArea article, in its current state, only belongs to Stub-Class (obviously). A merge may be fine because of (for example) this reason. But as you suggested the article could in fact exist perfectly fine when a major overhaul in content and sources happens. --Cartakes (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- By the way, User:czar has deleted a massive number of articles surrounding game consoles' operating system and software at the same time. He did pointed to a discussion (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_99#Category:Game_console_operating_systems), which is however over 2 years old. I wonder why the move (only) takes place now, not to mention it has also been questioned by another user (see Talk:Xbox One#Removal of software info). Articles for details surrounding a game console's operating system have been updated quite frequently over these years to reflect new changes etc, and it's all too sudden for them to be deleted completely now. -Cartakes (talk) 16:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- That "another user" agrees with the edit. Also this is an off-topic red herring. If you contend that LiveArea needs its own article, please show reliable sources that explain how it's notable apart from being part of the system software. – czar 16:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Obviously you are not quite right. The other user tried to used Afd ([[8]]) instead of sudden removal of contents by you just now (it is not about whether they agreed with merge or not, but about sudden removal of all these articles). It is not off-topic in that you tried to remove ALL content in LiveArea (before this discussion) in the middle of removing the contents of these articles. In the mean time, I will try to show more sources for LiveArea. --Cartakes (talk) 16:53, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- ... the other user withdrew the AfD and said they agreed! But again, this is off-topic and should be collapsed. Re: the conspiracy you're raising, WP policy is to be bold. I've been around a while and sort through a whole lot of trash here. Redirecting this article isn't an attack, especially on you. If you care for the article's well-being, source its claims to reliable sources and build it summary style in the parent article. Done deal. If there's enough sourced material to split out in the future, be my guest. – czar 16:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Here are some sources specifically dealing with LiveArea: Live Area: The PS Vita's User Interface, LiveArea™ Screen for Settings and LiveArea™ screens for games. As the article PlayStation Vita system software no longer exists, there are currently in fact two parent articles for LiveArea, the PlayStation Vita and the PlayStation TV articles, since both of them use LiveArea (similar for the "sharing" of XMB in PSP and PS3). --Cartakes (talk) 17:24, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Those are all primary sources. To stay its own page, this topic needs significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) A company can produce reams of press releases and manuals on their product—we as an encyclopedia only care about whether the reliable, secondary sources find it as important. – czar 17:42, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- The first source (Live Area: The PS Vita's User Interface) is not a primary source. Other independent sources include for example Welcome Home PS Vita. Your Look At The Vita's Start Screen. and the book "My PlayStation Vita" by Bill Loguidice, Christina T. Loguidice. --Cartakes (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, those are better, and the type of things you want to use to write a Wikipedia article. But even if there were 20 third party sources provided, unless someone actively intends on bettering it, it'd still be a valid merge candidate. There's no reasonable reason to expect it to naturally expand into a better state over time, considering its been a stub or a redirect for virtually all of its 4 year existence. Sergecross73 msg me 18:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- The first source (Live Area: The PS Vita's User Interface) is not a primary source. Other independent sources include for example Welcome Home PS Vita. Your Look At The Vita's Start Screen. and the book "My PlayStation Vita" by Bill Loguidice, Christina T. Loguidice. --Cartakes (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Those are all primary sources. To stay its own page, this topic needs significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) A company can produce reams of press releases and manuals on their product—we as an encyclopedia only care about whether the reliable, secondary sources find it as important. – czar 17:42, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Here are some sources specifically dealing with LiveArea: Live Area: The PS Vita's User Interface, LiveArea™ Screen for Settings and LiveArea™ screens for games. As the article PlayStation Vita system software no longer exists, there are currently in fact two parent articles for LiveArea, the PlayStation Vita and the PlayStation TV articles, since both of them use LiveArea (similar for the "sharing" of XMB in PSP and PS3). --Cartakes (talk) 17:24, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- ... the other user withdrew the AfD and said they agreed! But again, this is off-topic and should be collapsed. Re: the conspiracy you're raising, WP policy is to be bold. I've been around a while and sort through a whole lot of trash here. Redirecting this article isn't an attack, especially on you. If you care for the article's well-being, source its claims to reliable sources and build it summary style in the parent article. Done deal. If there's enough sourced material to split out in the future, be my guest. – czar 16:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Obviously you are not quite right. The other user tried to used Afd ([[8]]) instead of sudden removal of contents by you just now (it is not about whether they agreed with merge or not, but about sudden removal of all these articles). It is not off-topic in that you tried to remove ALL content in LiveArea (before this discussion) in the middle of removing the contents of these articles. In the mean time, I will try to show more sources for LiveArea. --Cartakes (talk) 16:53, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- That "another user" agrees with the edit. Also this is an off-topic red herring. If you contend that LiveArea needs its own article, please show reliable sources that explain how it's notable apart from being part of the system software. – czar 16:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- By the way, User:czar has deleted a massive number of articles surrounding game consoles' operating system and software at the same time. He did pointed to a discussion (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_99#Category:Game_console_operating_systems), which is however over 2 years old. I wonder why the move (only) takes place now, not to mention it has also been questioned by another user (see Talk:Xbox One#Removal of software info). Articles for details surrounding a game console's operating system have been updated quite frequently over these years to reflect new changes etc, and it's all too sudden for them to be deleted completely now. -Cartakes (talk) 16:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sergecross73: What I was trying to say is of course that the LiveArea article, when in its *fully developed shape*, could likely perfectly fit in an encyclopedia like Wikipedia if the article XrossMediaBar does. XrossMediaBar (XMB) has become a popular mobile user interface used in Sony devices, having its own name, and is used in both PSP and PS3 (just like LiveArea which is used in both PS Vita and PS TV). The Microsoft layout engine Trident (layout engine) has its own article beyond Internet Explorer, and for encyclopedia purposes the articles for XrossMediaBar and LiveArea could exist too. The LiveArea article, in its current state, only belongs to Stub-Class (obviously). A merge may be fine because of (for example) this reason. But as you suggested the article could in fact exist perfectly fine when a major overhaul in content and sources happens. --Cartakes (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm honestly rather surprised Cartakes is trying to defend the article in its current state, when its short, doesn't cover the subject well, is largely unsourced, and makes no attempt to meet the WP:GNG. I strongly agree with a merge unless/until a major overhaul in content and sources happens. Sergecross73 msg me 15:16, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- As it goes, other stuff exists. It doesn't mean there's a reason to keep the status quo. What does XMB say that couldn't have been said more succinctly in the PlayStation series article? How do most of its sections possibly abide by the video game trivia guidelines. Most of it's unsourced because it's stuff that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia but some other reference guide. – czar 14:53, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Kotaku source in reception
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PlayStation_Vita&type=revision&diff=704690726&oldid=703955555 - An IP keeps making this edit. Can someone explain what he's getting at? The source is deemed useable/reliable per consensus at WP:VG/S. The link works, the direct quote appears correct and in context. I'm not sure I follow what the issue is here. Sergecross73 msg me 02:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- Kotaku is basically a joke. I'm not a heavy "gamer" but even I know this. and there are many who could back me up. If Kotaku says something it doesn't make it true. As an example I present to you this article:
- As you can see pretty bad, now don't just read that link and think "what is this nonsense" actually click and start reading, I promise you you'll see what I mean. Kotaku is often mocked and people post links to archive.org (the way-back-machine) to avoid giving them page views.
- http://imgur.com/gallery/mPbop2v for example (notice the comments and popularity of the image) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.50.134 (talk) 05:36, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- ADDENDUM: I read the specific line and I don't think Kotaku is a valid reference to that specific bit. So I removed the reference. Some things you of course cannot get wrong. That is why I removed one not all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.50.134 (talk) 05:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- I'll admit that article is bizarre...but that's not how we determine usability/reliability on Wikipedia. As I showed in my link above, the current consensus is that Kotaku is a reliable, usable source. Unless you start a new discussion at WP:VG overturning that decision, it's usable. That's how we decide things, it's not based on whether you or a comment section agree with it personally (especially when we're talking about opinion pieces.) Your argument is also flawed in that you keep talking about a source on trackpads - that is not the same article or author being used in this Vita article, and there is nothing bizarre about the actual Vita source or the quote used in the article - it's a common sentiment of reviewers that, despite its poor sales, it's pretty solid hardware...
- Unless you've got something else, your argument just isn't valid on Wikipedia unless/until you change the current status of Kotaku. Sergecross73 msg me 14:37, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- As you can see pretty bad, now don't just read that link and think "what is this nonsense" actually click and start reading, I promise you you'll see what I mean. Kotaku is often mocked and people post links to archive.org (the way-back-machine) to avoid giving them page views.
Source for future reference
- http://www.gamespot.com/articles/e3-2011-sony-playstation-vita-inside-and-out/1100-6317468/ - lots of details on its announcement here. Sergecross73 msg me 14:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
- http://www.polygon.com/features/2015/10/29/9409697/playstation-vita-successor-changed-sony-shahid-ahmad-ps4 - retrospective info. Sergecross73 msg me 13:02, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
- http://toucharcade.com/2016/04/07/rpg-reload-presents-the-history-of-handheld-rpgs-part-eight/ - Source for background in handhelds. Sergecross73 msg me 02:58, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on PlayStation Vita. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/01/24/psp2_details/
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://awards.t3.com/categories/gaming-gadget-of-the-year/sony-ps-vita
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Source
- http://gamingbolt.com/ps-vita-crosses-5-million-units-sold-in-japan Sergecross73 msg me 00:36, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Font
How do i change font. Shocase (talk) 07:34, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
- You can't, unless you mean text formatting like bold or italics. For more info on doing that sort of stuff, see MOS:TEXT. FYI, if you're asking in regards to making changes here at the Vita article, your question is fine, but if you're just asking general questions, you'd be better off asking them here at this link. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 12:34, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Shocase: Also, if it was a question about using the Vita itself, you could try asking at WP:Reference desk. But in all honesty, you would be better off with a specialist source, like a support forum or user forum dedicated to Vita users. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 22:31, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Reception Sources
- http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-01-29-ps-vita-could-be-the-first-post-retail-system
- http://www.gamesradar.com/why-ps4-can-and-must-save-playstation-vita/
- http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-playstation-vita-pch-2000-review
- http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps3-vs-ps-vita-face-off Sergecross73 msg me 20:39, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Sales in the infobox
For future reference, I thought I would explain this edit.
Both the Xbox One and the Vita have the same basic issue: official sales figures ceased to be released after the first year or two of the 6+ year lifespan, leaving us with either very outdated sales figures, or third party estimates that were unofficial and sometimes conflicting.
An RFC was started up on how to handle this in infoboxes at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Xbox_One#RfC_about_the_inclusion_of_third_party_values_in_infobox
The consensus that arose from the discussion was that, rather than settling for outdated figures or unofficial estimates, a link to the sales/reception section should just be used, where a full explanation of the situation can be explained, including the official figures, the discontinuation of official figures, and the context related to the various estimates.
I've implemented that here, considering the situations are identical. This can be disregarded if, by chance, someday Sony decides to release a more official figure, which could happen in a more retrospective manner. (They announced the 80 million number for Playstation Portable around the time of its official end of its production run, for example.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:25, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
2018 sources
- https://kotaku.com/sony-ends-production-of-physical-vita-games-1826060406
- http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2018/05/23/playstation-boss-says-sony-portable-gaming-could-return.aspx Sergecross73 msg me 00:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
File:PlayStation-Vita-1101-FL.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:PlayStation-Vita-1101-FL.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on August 21, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-08-21. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:45, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Did the name hurt its sales?
Just curious if anyone thinks the "Vita" name itself could have contributed to the system's lukewarm reception. To me it gives associations to something healthy that may not appeal to typical gamers, in addition to words like "vitamins" and "vitality" we here in Norway have widely advertised stuff like the health foods chain "Vita Helsekost", the omega-3 margarine "Vita Hjertego" and the anti-oxidant/snake oil "VitaePro". So when someone releases a console with "Vita" in the name, I'd immediately think of activity-based games like Wii Fit, Pokemon Go, DDR and the Kinect, and further of a generally "ultra-casual" image like what damaged the Wii's reputation among hardcore gamers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.166.65.129 (talk) 03:09, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
- I’ve never seen any reliable source assert that, no. Sergecross73 msg me 03:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
PS Vita CPU clock speed
This article does not display the CPU clock of the system, maybe we could add it? I've read here it is 444 MHz https://www.tweaktown.com/news/47804/sony-underclocked-ps-vitas-cpu-frequency-444mhz/index.html Tomrow (talk) 00:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Source
- https://www.usgamer.net/articles/sony-epitaph-for-the-vita Sergecross73 msg me 22:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Unreliable sources
IPs keep trying to reintroduce unreliable sources to the page. To clarify:
- N4G is not a reliable source per WP:VG/S.
- You can’t use images uploaded to file sharing or image sharing websites per WP:USERG.
Please stop adding these sorts of sources to the article. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 15:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)