it'll still be cool if it was, RE revelations looked good, if 3DS could handle AC, i'd buy it. I kno Vita is more powerful and can handle, im not denying that jus saying it'll be good if on 3DS!

I'm enjoying ACIII:L now and I will surely buy the next AC on Vita. I won't buy Liberation again, so this is the reason why Ubi makes the sequel. They already have the engine and experienced staff to make the sequel, so the dev costs will be much lower, hence even if the game sells the same numbers as ACIII:L, the profit will be higher.

They could release the game later than this Christmas though, to give us a bit more time and a different AAA game to play in between the two, but on the other hand that's not really that necessary. As long as 3rd parties support Vita with AAA games I'm happy and buying their games :)

I wonder if their yearly AC games will also be on Vita as well as consoles.

It really amuses me how many times you keep raising the RE:R argument when talking about AC on 3DS, just to get the same responce every time. RE:R = tight corridors, AC = an open world sandbox with a huge living city and tons of NPCs. I don't even want to try to imagine just how bad that game would look.

i never said it'll be on it (i get the RE tight corridor+AC open world) but if you think it'll look all that bad then just stop there. I know Vita specs are >>>>> 3DS but dont diss 3DS cuz it wont be as good as Good looking as Vita. Its your opinion, Ex Xenoblade chronicles is awesome but comparing it to FF is obviously gonna lose. Get me?

It's the graphics, the CPU, but as I've told you yesterday - it's also the controls. AC with just one analog stick? The whole experience would be underwhelming. This would be reflected in the reviews and marks the game gets. Couple that with the fact that the number of people interested in such a game on 3DS is rather small in the first place and I seriously doubt it's worth the hassle for Ubi. Also your example isn't valid, since Xenoblade > FF XIII ;) But in this case we would have the same game on Vita and 3DS, but the 3DS game would be extremely dumbed down in terms of graphics and it all just wouldn't be as impressive as it should be, since AC is an experience created with current gen home consoles in mind and Vita just happens to be on that level, while 3DS is not.

@Axumblade - no, you're wrong, that's not what he said. He brought up the argument that RE:R looked good to defend the idea that AC would look good as well. And he has just done it for probably the third time in just two days in different topics and every single time got hit with the same answer. Cause the facts remain the same, AC on 3DS would look painful, cause open world and tight corridors are very far apart. This won't change no matter how many times he raises this argument :P

AC: Bloodlines for PSP didn't looked "painful", and, considering 3DS is more powerful than PSP, AC should look quite a bit better on 3DS than Bloodlines did on PSP. But, of course, Vita would do a much better AC graphics-wise than 3DS, but I think we all already know that.

Considering we're in 2013, the next gen is entering the market as we speak and the way ACIII:L looks, I think that AC:Bloodlines does look painful. If the 3DS game looked close to that, the sales would be painful as well.

AC3 is selling beacuse of the huge install base of PS3/360. Liberations isn't because of the tiny install base. New games convince people to buy a system, not old ones, regardless of how good they are. This early in the Vita's life cycle, its more about keeping a healthy relationship with Sony than making profits.

Since the Dreamcast I became unable to find any 3D game released after 2000 looking "painful", but I understand your point.