I had a Vita preorder but canceled it. The price is too high after accessories and the game lineup is just not that good. I'll reconsider when it has 5 or more games I "need." Right now the only one on the horizon is Persona 4, and even that is a port (I just have no interest in playing it on PS2).
The face that it can play stuff like UMVC3 and Rayman is impressive, but I already have a PS3/360 for that. The system needs original software, and lots of it.
Owen? No credit to the man who wrote the article, Tom Bissell?
Well, you were saying that they shouldn't get it early ("If the maps are ready, why not just release them for everybody at the same time"), but besides that. It's happened before. Fallout 3 DLC comes to mind. The DLC didn't come to PS3 until the GOTY edition, which was like 7 or 8 months after the first piece arrived on 360.
How have people been outsmarted, if they are paying for content they plan to use in games they like to play.
Uhh the Elite members get them early because they are Elite members.
Activision wants people to sign up for their shiny new service. Shocking, I know.
I'm not sure how old you are or where you live, but most people don't carry around a backpack everywhere they go. Not to mention the fact that, let's say you do, do you really want another opportunity to lose/misplace a $300 device?
A lot of people glommed onto phone gaming because they "must" own a phone, and carry it with them everywhere. It's about convenience. A dedicated handheld machine just does not fit into someone's life in the same way.
Yes obviously a gamer (like yourself, or I even) will take the dedicated handheld system every time. But that is not where the market is going. Hardcore gamers can't sustain a console.
Well, game design on the handhelds are advancing, and advancing quickly. It reminds me of XBLA - when that launched on 360, it was Geometry Wars and a bunch of early-1980's arcade ports. Now we got stuff like Trials, Meat Boy, Bastion, etc. Really high quality awesome stuff that has gone far beyond what everyone thought the platform was going to be.
It's like that with iOS IMO. I mean, seriously - could anyone have thought an iPhone would be hosting a legit Grand Theft Auto 3 back in 2007? No way. Even if Zenonia and Chaos Rings don't measure up, the next round of stuff will. It's happening, and fast. More and more top developers are getting in on it. There's too much money and too many games - competition is too fierce.
Infinity Blade came out only last year, remember. I really do think that people will continue to be satisfied by the offerings on the platform, at least to the point where they will not feel that a $250+ other device is worth getting.
It's not really about whether or not the Vita has advantages as a gaming machine - it obviously does. It's more about if those advantages are worth dropping hundreds of dollars and kind of ruining the convenience of a handheld device in the first place (I already have a phone in my pocket, but I also have to carry around this other device).
Same. I wish this thing had the PSP Go's form factor. That system really is criminally underrated - I think it's the best PSP Sony made (and I have owned all the PSPs, with the exception of the new E1000 of course).
I'll get a Vita after it has a 5 or so games I want. SFxT and Persona 4 are 2. So it needs a few more. But I am an outlier - I don't think the system will do well.
The problem with this argument is that those people can get the "real", "hardcore" games at home. They have a PS3, 360, or a PC. They play the real games there. When they are sitting in a dentist's office they play Angry Birds or whatever.
I've not met many people who feel the need to play some close approximation to the games they have at home, at least they don't feel that need strong enough to drop $300 AND carry around an extra device AND deal with the trade-offs (it's not really that close of an approximation, the battery life sucks, etc.).
It's worth noting that many of these arguments came around when the PSP was being released. Well, the GBA and DS are kiddy devices and people want real games on the go. The problem is... they don't.
p.s. there ARE substantial games on iOS. Lots of them. There are many hardcore RPG's, both in the Japanese and American style. Square has put Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy, and Tactics on it. These games are also updated with tons of FREE content, not season pass and $2 costumes (I am playing Saints Row 3 now, great game but that DLC - horrible).
Some people would feel that white girls are more attractive than Asian girls, yea. And it's not really a big deal either, white knight.
No, Microsoft bought Bungie outright.
And it's not true that 99% of the characters were created by Miyamoto or R&D1. All the Pokemon characters are from Game Freak. The Kirby characters are from HAL Laboratory. Star Fox characters are from Argonaut. In fact, the relationship between Nintendo and companies like Game Freak and HAL is more like what you describe than Sony's relationship to these studios (they literally own most/all of them).
I don't like the idea of a Sony mash-up game because a lot of these characters are stupid and generic and Sony's games are not character-driven in general. It has nothing to do with the business relations to the makers.
And it's not true that 99% of the characters were created by Miyamoto or R&D1. All the Pokemon characters are from Game Freak. The Kirby characters are from HAL Laboratory. Star Fox characters are from Argonaut. In fact, the relationship between Nintendo and companies like Game Freak and HAL is more like what you describe than Sony's relationship to these studios (they literally own most/all of them).
I don't like the idea of a Sony mash-up game because a lot of these characters are stupid and generic and Sony's games are not character-driven in general. It has nothing to do with the business relations to the makers.
Just for the record most of those characters mentioned aren't sony characters. Sure sony bought the rights to said characters, but their in-house studios had little to do with them.
Eh? It doesn't matter what Sony's in-house studios did or did not do. They are Sony characters, they didn't "buy the rights", they got a developer to make the game and they own all IP related to the game.
Besides, all those characters, off the top of my head, either were created when the company was a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony, or the company is one now.
I agree that Sweet Tooth is no match for Link or Mario but that's hardly a function of what the legal relations between the first-party and the development house is.
Eh? It doesn't matter what Sony's in-house studios did or did not do. They are Sony characters, they didn't "buy the rights", they got a developer to make the game and they own all IP related to the game.
Besides, all those characters, off the top of my head, either were created when the company was a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony, or the company is one now.
I agree that Sweet Tooth is no match for Link or Mario but that's hardly a function of what the legal relations between the first-party and the development house is.
Those arcade games are shit anyway.
No thanks. Check out Perfect Dark on 360. It's honestly... awful. So awful. Unplayable.
Console FPS games from the late 1990's and thereabouts have not aged well.
Console FPS games from the late 1990's and thereabouts have not aged well.
It's capitalism in hyperdrive. You can't be content with what you have - that is garbage! Get the new shit!
Companies don't make any money if you play what you have. Hell they would rather you just keep buying games and sticking them on your shelf (backlog?).
Companies don't make any money if you play what you have. Hell they would rather you just keep buying games and sticking them on your shelf (backlog?).
I've used Goozex. It's nice, but ultimately, if I get 12 games through Goozex or 12 games new it is still 12 games I will never play to satisfaction.
Who the hell cares? Are you really serious about scoring a point on this?
If it's not Square's "top franchise", it is a close #2. And even if it is "just" a close #2, the validity of my statement holds. Square doesn't put DQ games on systems unpopular in Japan.
According to former Square Enix developer Takehiko Hoashi, the company's been working on DQX for the past six years. If the title is released next year, that means it's taken seven years to release the title."
... which, of course, doesn't make anything I said wrong.
If it's not Square's "top franchise", it is a close #2. And even if it is "just" a close #2, the validity of my statement holds. Square doesn't put DQ games on systems unpopular in Japan.
According to former Square Enix developer Takehiko Hoashi, the company's been working on DQX for the past six years. If the title is released next year, that means it's taken seven years to release the title."
... which, of course, doesn't make anything I said wrong.
Just buy less games. Wait until they are on sale. Stop falling for the hype.
Look, I've been there. I've bought every game I was interested in, over and over, for years. And you know what? It kind of sucks. Because I never have time to play them all, and some end up on the shelf forever, and others I kind of rush through to "work on my backlog."
That's not fun. That's not gaming.
My idea of gaming is what I did as a kid - I'd get a game for my birthday and one for Christmas and play them nonstop for the next year. Was it Super Mario Bros. 3? Yes, and it was an awesome year. Was it... Bart Simpson vs. the Space Mutants? Yes, and it was not so awesome. But I still played the shit out of that terrible game.
Of course I missed dozens of awesome games. So what? Did I enjoy what I did have? Yes. And that's the most important thing IMO.
Look, I've been there. I've bought every game I was interested in, over and over, for years. And you know what? It kind of sucks. Because I never have time to play them all, and some end up on the shelf forever, and others I kind of rush through to "work on my backlog."
That's not fun. That's not gaming.
My idea of gaming is what I did as a kid - I'd get a game for my birthday and one for Christmas and play them nonstop for the next year. Was it Super Mario Bros. 3? Yes, and it was an awesome year. Was it... Bart Simpson vs. the Space Mutants? Yes, and it was not so awesome. But I still played the shit out of that terrible game.
Of course I missed dozens of awesome games. So what? Did I enjoy what I did have? Yes. And that's the most important thing IMO.
I don't care about any of the games listed. Most of them are overhyped junk.
It's not impossible.
The question is whether or not the time spent will be beneficial. Time spent working on splitscreen is time not spent on other features.
The question is whether or not the time spent will be beneficial. Time spent working on splitscreen is time not spent on other features.
