Christhor said:
leper-apostle said:
Christhor said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
I mean it's fine to have a disagreement, but his arguments clearly hold no ground and it seems like he's realised that and fucked off, could of at least been honest and said "maybe I was wrong" or something. Oh well, I guess it doesn't really matter anyway.
|
Pardon? I took my leave because I knew that I wouldn't get anywhere. When all that is done from one part, is call the other a troll, you can be sure that it will just be trading barbs.
As for your other post, which I just saw: I do agree that Golden Abyss is an enjoyable experience (I have played most of it with a friend), but the overall experience just isn't as great as that of Uncharted 2 or 3. It's not as fun due to the lack of set pieces and such. Because of this, I don't really see the need to get a Vita to play these games, like the ones mentioned in the title, when there are usually as good, if not better, entries of the series on the big platforms. Even more so when the stories are usually filler in the portable installments, and can be easily passed by without losing anything story-wise. If you have a Vita, then sure, have fun with the games, but the quote in the title of this thread just seems a bit silly, all things considered.
And at that other guy, the one who is constantly calling me a troll: Rayman is not as good on the Vita, due to lack of co-op, and the two other games you've mentioned I've never played. I was talking more about the big titles here, those are the ones that will more than likely be worse than their console counterpart.
Big bad internet tough guy troll - out
|
The trend shows vita games are equally as good as the Ps3 versions.... Fact. You'r wrong. maybe play some games on vita befoe spewing ignorant bS. You are saying tey will be worse thatd total speculation and without merit. Already vita games are on par with ps3. Wipeout playing online against vita and ps3 players is identical to the ps3 verison, as is sony's flag ship baseball sim, you can even share saves between them.
The story in golden Abyss is of the same quality as all Uncharteds, as is the gameplay, keep spreading BS. Again, The vita is NOT a PSP, and games are no longer striped dpwn versions pon Vita. MLB the show, Uncharted, Resistance, unit 13 , Wipeout alreayd show this. Thats launched titles, they get better as thime goes on. You are equating because the PSP was like that vita will, simply not true. vita has the hardware to be feature complete wit the Ps3 versions and games already have. I gusess Uncharted, Wipeout, The show, Unit 13 Resistance are not big games to you LOL.
You cnanot Bring your Ps3 with you, nor can you play games like Gravity Rush, Ruin, and the plethors vita only games, it's not rocket science.
|
Hello again, compas.
Did you read my post, or are you just quoting me to call me a troll? I clearly said that I was talking about the kind of games that are in the title of this thread. Big ones, not some niche sci-fi racer or a niche baseball simulator. If I wanted to play niche games, I would get a much more affordable and portable smart phone.
If you didn't noticed, I stated that I had tried out Golden Abyss, but if that's not good enough for you:
Golden Abyss metacritic score: 80
Uncharted 3 metacritic score: 92
Uncharted 2 metacritic score: 96
If personal experience doesn't matter, then surely the reviews must? Golden Abyss is in no way, shape or form the same quality as either Uncharted 2 or 3. It's not even as highly rated as the original Uncharted.
And sure, the games CAN be as good quality as the console installments, but why would they be? Why would Activision spend a lot of money making CoD Vita as good as CoD 360, or even Ps3, when it more than likely won't sell anywhere near the same amount of copies? The same goes for Ubisoft and Assassin's Creed. Resistance might be as good as the Ps3 installments, but that is by far the smallest of these three series. Please stop bringing up niche titles when I am talking about the blockbusters (and Resistance). 
|
That's great. But you said "my Ps3 can already play supperior versions of all those games". Golden Abyss is not on PS3. Uncharted 2 or 3 is not Uncharted: Golden Abyss. Just because there are higher rated games in the same franchise doesn't mean this game isn't great and totally worth playing.
And why don't we look at another example?
Resistance 3 metacritic score: 83
Resistance: retribution metacritic score: 81
Only a 2 point difference.
MGS4 meta score: 94
MGS peacewalker: 89
5 points, hardly significant. And I'll bet you reavengence (fuck that name btw) will score lower than 89.
Anyway, this is going besides the point, which is that these games (e.g. U:GA) are perfectly worth the playtime and can be brilliant games, whether they are better or worse than the console versions is irrelevant if the game is still a good experience, as these aren't ports, they are original games with original stories to tell.
Will The AC on VITA be as highly praised as AC3? Probably not. But if it's still a great game, with an original story to tell, than it's totally worth a play.
Games don't become better by throwing money at them, if the devs working on the COD VITA are passionate about what they're creating, have some great ideas and are talented they can create a great game on a much smaller budget than the COD on 360. Not that they need a budget anywhere near as big btw since the development costs for the VITA are much cheaper than developing for the PS3/360/PC.
These games also have a major advantage over the home console versions and a unique selling point. They are portable, and many people, despite what you may think about them, like doing what these handhelds are partly intended for, taking their games on the road. You can't play MW3 on the bus or in a plane, but you can with COD on VITA.
And we don't even know what these games are like, this is a brand new platform with plenty potential and powerful hardware. Maybe we should wait and see the games before jumping to conclusions.
