By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mmmfishtacos on 09 October 2012
Edit Thread
Pokemonbrawlvg said:
Mmmfishtacos said:
Pokemonbrawlvg said:
Mmmfishtacos said:

Pokemonbrawlvg said:
 

Rumble

1. Why in the world would I put a controller in my pocket? For what purpose? To get a boner? Why not my hands?

2. Directing to the playing directly from the dualshock, doesn't that get rid of the purpose of the Vita/PS3 combo?

3. How wants to put an add on on a handheld, just to use rumble? How is that even possible? You mean like the Rumble Pak for DS? That's buying  accessory to something a controller does already.

4. It is important for some people to get into the game. Adds intensity into the game. Not required, but people like it.

Screen

1. How is playing on the Gamepad a disvantage? It's just the game on the screen. It's not stuffed together on the screen.

2. So having a small screen is an advantage (Gamepad's screen is bigger than Vita's)? I thought you said having the bigger screen was the advantage? You just contradicted yourself.

Black Ops Declassified

1. Why are you using this game as your example? That's possiblity the wrose example you could use. At least Black Ops 2 has something people want.

2. Declassified has 30 fps, gimped multiplayer, small maps, no zombies, and is being made by a developer with a bad track record. I'm not a Call of Duty fan, but I would rather play Black Ops 2 than this game.

 

I'm using Declassified my my example to show that having the same size screen would yield no advantage to any player. Playing split screen where one is using the game pad and one using the big TV will gain the big screen user an advantage. I was spit balling ideas on how you could have Rumble on the vita, nothing more. it's seemed like plain English to me. Don't understand what's not to understand.

 

@D21lewis, Maybe it wasn't quite clear enough. I wasn't asking why split screen was important, but why it's important to split the users between the game pad and TV. It's only logical that the TV user would have an advantage over the game pad user. I'd never want to play split screen like that. It would be down right horrible for the pad user. This can't even be argued. You're talking to a guy who played call of duty for years. I started out on a small 19 inch computer monitor. I felt then it was fine, most of the time i did okay. But after I bought my first 32 inch I started kicking it into high gear, like that very night. I'm always in the top 3 and have gone as high as 50-0 and when i stopped playing Black ops my kill to death ratio was 10-1 I wouldn't have been able to achieve those scores on that 19 inch. Screen size is a huge advantage plan and simple.

Sorry, I didn't understand it very well and I still don't see how the Vita's screen is an advantage when you said the Gamepad's screen wasn't. Wouldn't that be the other way around simply because the Gamepad's screen is bigger? Or am I still missing something here?

No, it's not that the vita screen is better against the Game pads screen. It makes no difference between the two. 2 inch's is hardly anything to scoff about. That's what i was trying to say in my earlier post in this discussion. Same size screen equals fair, 42 inch VS 7inch unfair. Does that help?

Ok, fine, but that's something for eyes to judge. I'm sure on either screen is just fine IMO otherwise we'll hear reports about people complaining about playing console games on the Gamepad and Vita (which I haven't heard yet).


It's because you haven't had a situation where it matters yet. Having to spot a sniper half a map away on a 7 inch screen while they basically have a magnifying glass on to see you is going to matter.

Well just have to wait and see, I'll have my WiiU day one. So don't think I'm hating on it. Just being real.