thekin said:
The reason the wii was judged differently, was because it was never marketed as a power horse that could do 720-30fps, if you remember the old wii commercials they were not about graphics, it was about having fun playing games, that was why wii games were reviewed based on the amount of fun you could get out of the titles. But that was not the case for PS360, their main marketing point was that they could do pixel shedders, 720p and constant 30 fps. So when the game could not fulfill these marketed expectations, the games got reviewed poorly. It is the same when you look at the indie market, best example are AMY and JOURNEY, AMY- was marketed as AAA indie horror game that could compete with the likes of silent hills. JOURNEY – was marketed as a game of exploration and discovery. You see in JOURNEY’S case, the dev did not market the graphics of the game as a selling point so when people played the game the main thing they focused on was “exploration and discovery”. But in AMY’S case the game was compared to other AAA horror games because that was what it was marketed as. That is the same problem the vita is having now, Sony and a lot of Devs keep saying and marketing the system as a PS3 but portable, so when people are reviewing games on it, they compare it to what it was marketed as, which is a Portable PS3.
|
well,right there is the problem.
Some years ago When the last gen was "the next gen" nintendo used to say "we are part of next gen-just different"-though they said so they were not treated the same as ps360,as people knew:"no power house"
Right now Nintendo is saying :"Wii U is next gen"-though in terms of power it is far behind the ps4/x1.I still haven't seen a game that is superior to wipeout 2048 on vita.(though w101 is a masterpiece in style and good graphics,but only achieved by using isometric perspective)I'm 100% sure the Wii U will be judged differently again,though Nintendo said. We are next gen.
Now we see sony saying:vita is portable ps3(that's just marketing because ps3 is a well known name and Vita unknown)While they(and I mean reviewers,not common gamers)are judging the nintendo consoles in a reasonable way,they do not do it with vita.
What makes me really angry is:They are able to differ between consoles of the same gen ignoring Nintendos marketing,but they won"t differ between a console and a handheld because Sony said so?If you differ between consoles you'll have to differ 5x between handheld and console.
Correct me if i'm wrong,but i guess I'm not
I don't expect objectivity from dissapointed ps3 fanboys with no sense for reality and less from nintendo fanboys defending and praising their wii(u) for the same weakness they condemn the vita but a reviewer .
btw-Sly 4 and nfs are as good as on ps3 and Rayman even better,but noone appreciated this.
