By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DemoniOtaku said:
SunofKratos said:
Well i am not a fan of the Assassins Creed Series ( part 1 was boring inb my eyes) but i haver bought now Assassins Creed 3 and Assassind Creed Vita. And with that said i can undertsnad that just some reviewers give the game lower scores because if can not match the quality of Assassind Creed 3.

But the real question is should Assassind Creed Vita be compared with Assassins Creed 3?Reviewers seems to forget that it is a mobile game. The problem the vita has right now is that there games will always be compered with there console counterparts instead of seeing it as a mobile experience. You guys can blame Sony for tghat because they made an handheld with such beautiful and stunning graphics that reviewers automatically think they played PS3 games.


Even Ragnarok was compared to Monster Hunter.. but it say that is boring and repetitive because the grinding.. the same thing that make Monster Hunter a great game.. I don't like to compare games even on the same genre.. each game should be judge by it self.. was fun? No ok is bad for you... Is like compare Gravity Rush with infamous.. open wolrd, super owers, strange people arround you and a fallin world (more literally on gravity XD).. Would be fair?


What make me angry is  say Soul Sacrifice is a Monster Hunter like



PS4 - over 100 millions let's say 120m
Xbox One - 70m
Wii U - 25m

Vita - 15m if it will not get Final Fantasy Kingdoms Heart and Monster Hunter 20m otherwise
3DS - 80m