VanceIX said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Hey, its not my fault that people stuck in their own assumptions can't explain their own opinions well.
In the OP, I clearly stated what would convince me of abandonment, a clear outlining of Vita support declining over its lifetime. Instead, I get the same rehashed arguments expecting me to simply accept the opinion without any valid evidence to support it.
Is it really that hard to consider both sides of the argument? |
You seem to think that Sony not directly impeding devs from releasing games on the platform = supporting the platform. That is the fundamental problem. Just because there are a lot of indie ports released compared to launch from third-party devs does not mean Sony supports the system. Sony supporting the system would mean them releasing good games consistently for it, which they absolutely are not (look at Rol's links).
You are simply fundamentally wrong in assuming that third-party support means straight up support from Sony. Sony has, at this point, started advertising the Vita as more of a companion machine than a dedicated handheld, a vastly different reality than what they promised starting out. Do you think early adopters wanted a steady stream of ports and indies? No, we I expected many AAA games, from both Sony and third-party, that took advantage of the handheld. Instead, Sony stops making games for it, and third-party devs only do ports and indies, with the occasional JRPG coming our way (which, half the time, is also a port).
Your expectation of "support", in the end, makes no sense. What, did you expect Sony to just cancel the Vita? Nah. If you want to see an example of the lack of support, just look at shelf space. Very few retailers even carry Vita games anymore, and those that do carry only a few, if even. That's a stark example of how far Sony has let it fall, when the majority library is digital indie releases that play better on different consoles.
|
Look, let me make myself clear.
Since we are now moving the goalposts from adequate support to adequate software support, let me once again specify what will convince me: Show me the amount of software releases declining from 2011 to now. That and only that will provide sufficient evidence. For everything else. i'll address it briefly.
If Sony is encouraging indies to support the system, it might not be good enough for you but different people have different preferences.
Goal posts have now been moved from providing game as support to providing good games consistently as support, how are you defining good games?
Why is encoraging 3rd parties to support a platform not count?
Circumstances change, how is attempting to pair the device with one that is selling hotcakes not supporting the system and trying to sell it? Just because they didn't keep their promises? Not to mention a big thing advertised about the Vita was that it was console like play on a handheld, wouldn't Cross-Play and ports support this vision? Especially since every single game on the PS4 has a mandatory cross play requirement.
What qualifies you to speak on behalf of all the Vita owners/Early adopters? Why does being a port or indie automatically mean the game is not of quality or good? Why does a AAA game automatically be considered good? Again why is it only "Good" games that count as support?
What's stopping Sony from making a Vita game in the future?
Why does Sony rebranding and remodlelling the device not count as an attempt to address a different market and subsequently increase sales resulting in greater incentive to support the platform? Isn't that supporting the software prospectives of the platform?
Why is it Sony's fault that retailers won't order more consoles because its not selling well enough? What IP could the Vita possibly have to compete against anything the 3DS has let alone Smartphones?
I'm not disagreeing just for the sake of disagreement, I'm opening the floor to change that of my own opinion. The issue is my concerns aren't being addressed, they are being avoided.
