• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

asmith906

Member
Oct 27, 2017
27,392
Thought the proprietary cards were designed in part to make up for the cost of the hardware. Doubt they ever actually considered putting an SD slot on it, that could have just been for dev purposes.
Yeah Vita at $249 looked like a good deal next to 3ds which was also at $249 until 3ds massively slashed their prices. Vita probably should have gotten rid of the back touch and oled. I doubt it would have made that big of a difference in the long run since there are a lot of people who will not buy a handheld not made by Nintendo.
 

anexanhume

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,913
Maryland
A few things to point out (having worked on a launch Vita game and having seen this - and other - prototypes for NGP.

1. Original intention was going to be the sliding design but the poor sales of the PSP Go made Sony turn away from it, and go with the original PSP-style design that we saw with the Vita.
2. SD cards were never guaranteed for retail, it's a dev kit remember so it's handy for builds, getting crash dumps etc
3. HDMI out was planned for retail, but there were some issues with the video-out chip over heating. We never saw that issue though in the studio I worked at.
Did Sony tout the proprietary memory cards as an anti-piracy measure?
 

Dache

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,129
UK
I could buy the proprietary memory partially being an anti-piracy attempt, but also remember that Sony fuckin' loooooves to create their own bleeding-edge custom memory storage whenever they can. It's a core part of their business. Betamax, Memory Stick, Minidiscs, UMDs. They've co-designed/developed many other bits of tech (CD, Blu-Ray, S/PDIF), but they've never had anything to do with SD card creation. If you look at it in that light, from their business perspective, it makes sense.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,844
That was definitely part of it. But it was mainly how they they planned to turn a profit on machines they were selling at a loss for $250. It's why they never buckled on lowering the price of those cards all through the Vita's slow death.
Vita had a massive software attachment rate. Sony definitely made money on every Vita sold even ignoring memory cards. Don't think for a second Sony didn't know that card prices were holding back many consumers from buying the hardware, and also vita owners from buying games. You can bet they'd have lowered the card prices if they could. Notice also how the very expensive 64GB cards were never sold outside Japan. Why leave all that profit on the table? If you consider the poor sales of the Vita, you should be able to understand how the low volumes of custom memory cards would have impacted individual costs. I'm sure Sony were expecting sales volumes closer to PSP, but they never got there.

Of course, none of this makes the decision to go with proprietary cards anything but a mistake in hindsight.
Seriously though, for those just tuning in: one has next to nothing to do with the other. Nintendo made the SD card security of 3DS pretty solid, it got a few snafus, but these took quite long to figure out while everyone abused... more abuseable aspects of 3DS. Besides, PSP's Memory Sticks had a proprietary extension for DRM by Sony already.
A lot of hacks are tricky at first, taking sometimes years to get to an easy to use state, but once they're found, they never go away.
Sony at least held off Vita piracy for most of it's lifetime, so in that they succeeded, but at the cost of the platforms potential lifetime. :'(
I could buy the proprietary memory partially being an anti-piracy attempt, but also remember that Sony fuckin' loooooves to create their own bleeding-edge custom memory storage whenever they can. It's a core part of their business. Betamax, Memory Stick, Minidiscs, UMDs. They've co-designed/developed many other bits of tech (CD, Blu-Ray, S/PDIF), but they've never had anything to do with SD card creation. If you look at it in that light, from their business perspective, it makes sense.
But if you think about it - those cards were obviously not an attempt at bleeding edge.
Unlike the Memory Sticks - these were branded with VITA. They were never targetted at any kindof mass market/multi-product usage. License fees is where the money from proprietary media comes from. But there's zero indication Sony were aiming for that.
 
Last edited:

Syriel

Banned
Dec 13, 2017
11,088
3. HDMI out was planned for retail, but there were some issues with the video-out chip over heating. We never saw that issue though in the studio I worked at.

Even the final dev kits could get pretty warm after awhile. Nothing hardware breaking, but you'd notice it compared to a Test Kit/Retail unit.

I was disappointed that Sony never opted to enable it on the Slim.
 

test_account

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,645
I wish Sony got their heads out of their ass and fixed it with the Slim version.
The most logical explainaton is that they wanted it to fail. Period.

Edit: Wrote "Fair" when it should be fail.
Nah, they wouldnt have bothered pouring more resources into the Vita and making the slim version in the first place if they wanted the Vita to fail. But going for Micro SD card wouldnt have saved the Vita either way. Maybe it would have sold a bit more units, but the problems were bigger than that. Price and game selection being the biggest factors.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
1,844
What does it have to do with piracy? Psp also had proprietary memory card.
Memory Sticks were Sony's version of SD card. PCs and many other devices had interfaces to directly plug them in and directly manipulate files.
The only way to put data onto a Vita memory card was through a PSVita using Sony's Media Manager software. ie. you couldn't directly manipulate the contents or put whatever you wanted on those cards.

Games(even old psp emulated titles) that were discovered to have vulnerabilities were completely removed from sale on PSN until new, safe builds of said games could replace them.
 
OP
OP
Inugami

Inugami

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,995
Games(even old psp emulated titles) that were discovered to have vulnerabilities were completely removed from sale on PSN until new, safe builds of said games could replace them.
It might seem pedantic, but they never once released a fixed version of a PSP game on Vita, the games were removed until the Vita firmware was updated with a routine to check that certain game's save and/or patching the PSP kernel exploits that were being used.

That said, that's all smoke and mirrors... Since you could modify and write data to the Vita through the content manager it didn't matter what format the cards were in or that there weren't easy external readers. The part that kept people from reading, modifying, hacking, etc were the encryptions used on the games and saves which would have been just as secure on a cheaper medium.

I don't believe Sony ever once put forth their memory cards were for there as an anti-piracy measure. The excuse I remember hearing was that that was the only way they could guarantee performance to developers. While there IS some mild amount of sense to this, it would have been just as easy for Sony to release an app that benchmarks SD cards to let the end user know if they needed a faster performing one.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,844
It might seem pedantic, but they never once released a fixed version of a PSP game on Vita, the games were removed until the Vita firmware was updated with a routine to check that certain game's save and/or patching the PSP kernel exploits that were being used.
Yeah, you're right - I remember now. Still, removing legitimate PSP software because it could be used to exploit Vita's emulator to run unauthorized code - still locked within the PSP Emulator shell shows how active they were in protecting the Vita - even when they weren't making big games for it anymore.
That said, that's all smoke and mirrors... Since you could modify and write data to the Vita through the content manager it didn't matter what format the cards were in or that there weren't easy external readers. The part that kept people from reading, modifying, hacking, etc were the encryptions used on the games and saves which would have been just as secure on a cheaper medium.
You could put files onto the Vita through the content manager - but not freely. It was far from the PSP situation where the launch firmware would run anything you put in the GAME folder. Games could be backed up and restored - and obviously that's going to be controlled through encryption.
I don't believe Sony ever once put forth their memory cards were for there as an anti-piracy measure. The excuse I remember hearing was that that was the only way they could guarantee performance to developers. While there IS some mild amount of sense to this, it would have been just as easy for Sony to release an app that benchmarks SD cards to let the end user know if they needed a faster performing one.
Anti-piracy measures, particularly ones that bump up costs, are NOT great PR talking points. Sony have no reason to mention this publicly.
"Performance" certainly sounds better from a PR point of view - even though the cards have never been shown to have great performance compared to cheaper SD cards on the market.
 

zoodoo

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,746
Montreal
PSP used a card that was used in more than just the PSP. It was used in cameras and other devices. It was what helped hackers break the system so Sony locked it down with a card that only works in the Vita.
??? no
The original psp crack came from the battery. What are you guys talking about? The memory card was just used to store the data to modifying the psp firmware but the security failure never came from there
 

Rran

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,512
I was always under the impression that the Vita memory cards were created to help combat piracy. Huh.

Enlightening thread (no sarcasm).
 
OP
OP
Inugami

Inugami

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,995
PSP used a card that was used in more than just the PSP. It was used in cameras and other devices. It was what helped hackers break the system so Sony locked it down with a card that only works in the Vita.
No, what helped hackers was Sony completely forgot to enable DRM/check if software was digitally signed or not in the original 1.0 firmware released in Japan. It literally gave people the ability to install software right out of the gate. Then when they released it stateside, the 1.50 firmware's protection was active, but so badly implemented that all it took was having 2 folders with the same name to by-pass the check. No matter what proprietary format they had used the issue would have been the same since Sony allowed you to transfer data to it.

Mind you, again, that both DSi and 3DS had standard SD cards and it took a lot longer to crack them than it did the PSP (but don't think that makes Nintendo's team better since Nintendo also used the exact non-random key password for the DVD drives of both the gamecube and Wii, insuring the Wii was hacked almost immediately).

Bad security practices are what make systems vulnerable, not whether they use proprietary or not storage.
??? no
The original psp crack came from the battery. What are you guys talking about? The memory card was just used to store the data to modifying the psp firmware but the security failure never came from there
This is also incorrect. The battery ('pandora battery' not really the battery, but semantics) hack on the original PSPs let you put the PSP into service mode, which let you get around the protections of the system, but that didn't come till much later.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,844
No, what helped hackers was Sony completely forgot to enable DRM/check if software was digitally signed or not in the original 1.0 firmware released in Japan. It literally gave people the ability to install software right out of the gate.
Yeah, Sony fucked the PSP themselves. But how did people get unsigned code onto the device? By just plugging the card into any old card reader.

Something Sony made impossible with the Vita Cards.

By controlling what could go onto the card the limited access to system files as well as the ability to put corrupted files onto the system to look for exploits.
 
Last edited:

zoodoo

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,746
Montreal
No, what helped hackers was Sony completely forgot to enable DRM/check if software was digitally signed or not in the original 1.0 firmware released in Japan. It literally gave people the ability to install software right out of the gate. Then when they released it stateside, the 1.50 firmware's protection was active, but so badly implemented that all it took was having 2 folders with the same name to by-pass the check. No matter what proprietary format they had used the issue would have been the same since Sony allowed you to transfer data to it.

Mind you, again, that both DSi and 3DS had standard SD cards and it took a lot longer to crack them than it did the PSP (but don't think that makes Nintendo's team better since Nintendo also used the exact non-random key password for the DVD drives of both the gamecube and Wii, insuring the Wii was hacked almost immediately).

Bad security practices are what make systems vulnerable, not whether they use proprietary or not storage.

This is also incorrect. The battery ('pandora battery' not really the battery, but semantics) hack on the original PSPs let you put the PSP into service mode, which let you get around the protections of the system, but that didn't come till much later.
You are right. Pandora came later but the memory card format used had nothing to do with psp getting hacked
 

stan423321

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,676
What a bomb of a syntax.

At any rate, not really. Nintendo's virtual SD filesystem is a nice compromise, but if Sony was afraid people would mess with that, they could put an entire encrypted filesystem of their own on a standard card instead (like Wii U did with HDDs). Would prevent people reading files until past breaking the system, wouldn't affect storage supply.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,844
What a bomb of a syntax.
Whoops. Think I started typing before quote got inserted... Fixed now.
At any rate, not really. Nintendo's virtual SD filesystem is a nice compromise, but if Sony was afraid people would mess with that, they could put an entire encrypted filesystem of their own on a standard card instead (like Wii U did with HDDs). Would prevent people reading files until past breaking the system, wouldn't affect storage supply.
To be fair, Sony avoided external storage support while other companies got on board, instead opting to have replaceable drives that are encrypted.
The first step on inserting a new drive was that the whole thing had to be formatted.

I think it's apparent in everything the company has done since the PSP era that they are incredibly wary of giving users access to data on their systems.
 

Chettlar

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,604
Physical game saves work as you'd expect them to.
It's just a small save file on the mem card.

Very frustrating that they're combined on digital games.

Well I guess at least most of my digital games are PS+ games anyway, but that I'd incredibly stupid.

I do not understand how the Vita was riddled with decisions like this.
 

Stefarno

I ... survived Sedona
Member
Oct 27, 2017
893
HDMI out would have been so great in enabling sites/streamers to capture stuff without the awful 'camera pointed at a screen' stuff we got until the PS TV came out.