Those of you that don't bash Handheld Gaming

jkam

jkam

CAGiversary!
Feedback
258 (100%)
So with the Vita in existence I feel like Handheld Gaming has taken another leap forward and we are finally at a place where "console" quality titles are a realization.

It's been nice to play catch up on games like Metal Gear Solid 2&3 and also re-play favorites like Ninja Gaiden Sigma Plus on the Vita. It just seems like these days for me I have more time to "game" on a handheld.

I really don't understand all the bashing handhelds get as I thought Uncharted Golden Abyss was just as good as Uncharted 1 on the PS3. It did have some annoying touch screen elements but as a whole package it was pretty damn impressive.

If I had more time to sit in front of my TV and play games of course I'd rather game on the big screen but I feel like most people that bash it don't get it. They say I'd rather play the "big screen" version but for me it's when I'm not home where these devices shine.

I know there is a lot of couch playing going on as well but it seems silly to "complain" about handheld gaming in that way to me.

The thing that led me to post about this is I started playing God Of War Ghost Of Sparta (finally) on the PSP and I'm so overly impressed at how they crammed the console experience into the handheld. What games for you have made you forget your gaming on a handheld?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been gaming mostly on my 3DS lately as well.  I do generally prefer the big screen experience.  But I mostly stay at my girlfriends.  And there I just have my PS3 hooked up to my crappy old RPTV that we crammed in her bedroom--so the experience isn't great anyway.

But its mainly just I got sucked into Fire Emblem Awakening and now Pokemon Y and just would rather play those than any of my PS3 games for the time being (well FE: A is beaten and sold off now).  I'm not sure how much that trend will continue once we move in together in December and I'm back to having my new TV and surround sound set up etc. to game on though.

Vita I only have a mild interest.  I mainly like my 3DS as it gives me something I can't get on my PS3 (and later PS4)--Nintendo games.  I'm not into them enough to buy a Wii U, so the 3DS gets me that fix for cheaper (both for hardware and games).  I don't have nearly as much interest in playing things like Uncharted Golden Abyss on the small screen.  I may look into a Vita TV when those come out in the US to play P4G and some other exclusives.  I'd definitely be all over a Vita if I had gaming time/interest outside of the house more frequently though, as then I'd be much more interested in console-like experiences on the go.  But I drive to work, and when I'm not home I'm usually either working or out and about actively doing stuff, so just not much downtime outside the house.

 
It's funny you mentioned Ghost of Sparta because that's a game that made it glaringly obvious to me that I was playing on a handheld.  Everything just felt so tiny and cramped on the screen that I found it hard to see everything.  And the quality of the game was overall a step down compared to the console entries in the series.  Resident Evil Revelations on the 3DS also gave me a similar cramped feeling in terms of what was being displayed on the screen.

For me, I guess in general most console style games that get "crammed" onto a handheld end up feeling like they would be better suited to a console because the developers don't take the time to redesign the game structures so they are suited to a more compact device.

I guess one of the few console style handheld games that does stand out to me as well done was Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon.  It took the mechanics of a console game, and rebuilt them along with new environments that seemed perfectly suited to a handheld.  I think one of the reasons that game worked so well for me was that the camera was generally zoomed in more, and the environments supported that.  Conversely, most console games (like God of War) are zoomed out quite a bit to show off a lot of details in the environments, and you can't just expect to put that on a handheld and have the same effect.  Of course, that's just my preference.

 
I love handheld gaming but I hate when they try to make a big AAA console game for on the go (like God of War, Killzone, etc.).  The game needs to work well in bite-sized chunks and not have any cut scenes.  Puzzle games are my favorite.  Also, most SNES, NES and GBC games work great on the go too.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ihadFG said:
It's funny you mentioned Ghost of Sparta because that's a game that made it glaringly obvious to me that I was playing on a handheld. Everything just felt so tiny and cramped on the screen that I found it hard to see everything. And the quality of the game was overall a step down compared to the console entries in the series. Resident Evil Revelations on the 3DS also gave me a similar cramped feeling in terms of what was being displayed on the screen.

For me, I guess in general most console style games that get "crammed" onto a handheld end up feeling like they would be better suited to a console because the developers don't take the time to redesign the game structures so they are suited to a more compact device.

I guess one of the few console style handheld games that does stand out to me as well done was Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon. It took the mechanics of a console game, and rebuilt them along with new environments that seemed perfectly suited to a handheld. I think one of the reasons that game worked so well for me was that the camera was generally zoomed in more, and the environments supported that. Conversely, most console games (like God of War) are zoomed out quite a bit to show off a lot of details in the environments, and you can't just expect to put that on a handheld and have the same effect. Of course, that's just my preference.
Click to expand...
I do know what you are saying about Ghost of Sparta but I like that they didn't shy away from the scope of the larger titles...I feel like it's the only way "handheld" gaming will ever break the it's good "for a handheld game" mantra. I remember being impressed by Chains of Olympus too for it's scope.

I never got that feeling from Resident Evil Revelations.

I think maybe with both games I'm always looking at it from the opposite side....like look at how much they were able to cram into a handheld game! I remember some people mentioning how Sly Cooper 4 looked better on the PS3 then it does on the Vita but I feel like they are missing the fact that they can take the entire game with them. For better or worse it's the same game! That would have only been a dream years ago.

I know console will always be better than a handheld and it's not something I'd deny but I feel like a lot of people miss the point. Portability!

 
Javery said:
I love handheld gaming but I hate when they try to make a big AAA console game for on the go (like God of War, Killzone, etc.). The game needs to work well in bite-sized chunks and not have any cut scenes. Puzzle games are my favorite. Also, most SNES, NES and GBC games work great on the go too.
Click to expand...
That's just it, we are finally at a point where we can have both! Gravity Rush, Golden Abyss, etc. are console games. The God Of War titles were ported back to consoles. With the Vita's suspend mode everything can be in bite-sized chunks! I want big games but it doesn't mean I still don't love the smaller titles as well.

 
Javery said:
I love handheld gaming but I hate when they try to make a big AAA console game for on the go (like God of War, Killzone, etc.). The game needs to work well in bite-sized chunks and not have any cut scenes. Puzzle games are my favorite. Also, most SNES, NES and GBC games work great on the go too.
Click to expand...
Not to be a jerk or anything but I know you'll be grabbing the new 3DS Zelda, doubt that will be bite-sized. You've also played the older handheld Zelda titles :)

 
jkam said:
I know console will always be better than a handheld and it's not something I'd deny but I feel like a lot of people miss the point. Portability!
Click to expand...
I don't think it's that really. I think it's more that a lot of people just have no need, desire or interest for gaming outside the home (and don't have to share the TV/consoles with others in the house). So for them a portable game has to offer something special that makes them want to play it over just gaming on a console on a big screen.

I think for people who commute, travel a lot, game on a portable while kids/wives are hogging the gaming TV etc., more are like you and love getting a near console-level gaming experience in at times when they can't play on a console. For those it doesn't apply to, it's moot as it comes down to gaming on a portable when they could be gaming on a big screen--and that takes some type of game they can't find on the consoles to get them really excited.

So it's not that people miss the point of portability. It's that not everyone has any need for portability in gaming.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jkam said:
I do know what you are saying about Ghost of Sparta but I like that they didn't shy away from the scope of the larger titles...I feel like it's the only way "handheld" gaming will ever break the it's good "for a handheld game" mantra. I remember being impressed by Chains of Olympus too for it's scope.

I never got that feeling from Resident Evil Revelations.

I think maybe with both games I'm always looking at it from the opposite side....like look at how much they were able to cram into a handheld game! I remember some people mentioning how Sly Cooper 4 looked better on the PS3 then it does on the Vita but I feel like they are missing the fact that they can take the entire game with them. For better or worse it's the same game! That would have only been a dream years ago.

I know console will always be better than a handheld and it's not something I'd deny but I feel like a lot of people miss the point. Portability!
Click to expand...
I see where you're coming from, but I don't feel that cramming a ton into a game is something to praise. I think it's better for a game to take advantage of the platform it's working with. I think the "it's good, for a handheld" mantra comes more from the fact that a lot of handheld games pale in comparison to the console games they are trying to emulate. If it's not trying to emulate a console game exactly, then you don't tend to hear "for a handheld" as a qualifier.

I also disagree with the idea that consoles will always be better than a handheld. I tend to enjoy more handheld games than console games, but only when they play to the strengths of a handheld instead of maintaining a mistaken idea that everything needs to be a huge, wide-scope experience

Edit: Not that I'm saying a huge, wide-scoped experience can't work on a handheld. It just needs to be designed in a way that "fits" on a handheld, instead of simply shrinking down a concept that was designed for the TV+couch.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jkam said:
Not to be a jerk or anything but I know you'll be grabbing the new 3DS Zelda, doubt that will be bite-sized. You've also played the older handheld Zelda titles :)
Click to expand...
It depends on the game - 2D Zelda is bite sized, IMO. You can do a dungeon or side quest in like 15 minutes. Also, no cut scenes which is a huge deal to me. I couldn't imagine having to sit through a Metal Gear game on the toilet. Something like Skyward Sword would be much harder for me to get into (I did play - and not really like - the two DS Zelda games).

I do agree that the ability to "suspend" play makes a difference and opens handheld gaming up a little bit more. I play old school RPGs and stuff on my PSP all the time becuase I can just pick up where I left off. For some reason though games like God of War (which I played on the PSP) and Uncharted just don't appeal to me on the little screen. Maybe it is the 3D? I don't really know.

BTW, I'm definitely getting the 3DS Zelda - it is my most anticipated game of the year! :)

EDIT: This sums up how I feel as well.

ihadFG said:
I also disagree with the idea that consoles will always be better than a handheld. I tend to enjoy more handheld games than console games, but only when they play to the strengths of a handheld instead of maintaining a mistaken idea that everything needs to be a huge, wide-scope experience

Edit: Not that I'm saying a huge, wide-scoped experience can't work on a handheld. It just needs to be designed in a way that "fits" on a handheld, instead of simply shrinking down a concept that was designed for the TV+couch.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dmaul1114 said:
I don't think it's that really. I think it's more that a lot of people just have no need, desire or interest for gaming outside the home (and don't have to share the TV/consoles with others in the house). So for them a portable game has to offer something special that makes them want to play it over just gaming on a console on a big screen.

I think for people who commute, travel a lot, game on a portable while kids/wives are hogging the gaming TV etc., more are like you and love getting a near console-level gaming experience in at times when they can't play on a console. For those it doesn't apply to, it's moot as it comes down to gaming on a portable when they could be gaming on a big screen--and that takes some type of game they can't find on the consoles to get them really excited.

So it's not that people miss the point of portability. It's that not everyone has any need for portability in gaming.
Click to expand...
These are definitely all good points. I guess people just want different things out of these games as well. I think it's just nice that we are finally in the position where we can play a Metal Gear or Uncharted which would have seem like crazy talk not that long ago. As much as I love the bigger games I have some staples as well like Lumines and Hot Shots Golf which will probably never leave my Vita. I guess overall I just find it weird in the way people bash handheld gaming because it really has come a long way.

 
jkam said:
These are definitely all good points. I guess people just want different things out of these games as well. I think it's just nice that we are finally in the position where we can play a Metal Gear or Uncharted which would have seem like crazy talk not that long ago. As much as I love the bigger games I have some staples as well like Lumines and Hot Shots Golf which will probably never leave my Vita. I guess overall I just find it weird in the way people bash handheld gaming because it really has come a long way.
Click to expand...
It definitely has came a long way for sure.

It's just that the experience of something like Uncharted or God of War on a tiny screen can't match the experience of playing the console version on a big HDTV with a surround sound set up. I think that's where the "bashing" comes from.

For people who have a need to game on the go, share the gaming TV etc., it's definitely great to be able to experience those types of games while on the train, or while the kids are using the TV/console etc. For people who don't have those needs, and can always game on the tv/console when they have free time, it's less appealing. Why play Uncharted Golden Abyss on the couch if you could be playing Uncharted 2 on the home theater?

So it's not that there's anything wrong with portables at all, but rather that some types of games are just better experiences on the home theater since a lot of those games are as much about the graphics, sound, atmosphere etc. as they are the gameplay. Conversely, a lot of other types of games are better on portables--especially pick up and play games. I never turn on the console to play a game for 15-30 minutes, but those type of short burst games are great on a portable--and even better on smartphones we always have with us when we get stuck waiting somewhere for a bit.

 
I don't think we're quite as close to console level games on handhelds at all, and I don't think that's what we really want, anyway. Games like Golden Abyss and RE:R are considerable steps down from what those franchises typically deliver, and the GoW games are all bigger, better, longer, and more attentively produced on home systems. Those are just a few examples, though there are plenty more to knock at from the Killzone, Resistance, Medal of Honor and CoD portable attempts to, not mention all the half assed sports and racing titles you get from EA. Games like Wipeout and Mario Kart have been pretty faithful, but overall, most handheld games shine as either straight remakes of older games (your Personas, your Muramasa, your Zeldas), or games that excel on a portable platform (LocoRocos, Crisis Core, Pokemon, music games, etc...).

Crisis Core as one example, it's no where near the production levels of a full fledged FF title, is it? But it's great because it's tailored to the portable experience. You can boot it up and do some 5 minute missions, the combat is streamlined, cutscenes are kept to shorter lengths, etc... Stuff like that I want to play on my couch, not a watered down, 50 hour version of FFXV with muddy textures or whatever.

I'm not sure why people want console experiences on a handheld when they should know they will always play like shitty hand-me-downs. Some console games translate well, but many don't. Just create new IPs for portables that take advantage of the hardware in the most complementary ways, or recreate franchises around the device instead low balling the same designs you made for home systems.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've used my PSP for road trips, but with the new Zelda 3DS XL coming out and me commuting more, waiting for others more, and just generally never having the time to sit down in front of a TV for a lengthy amount of time, I'm thinking the new 3DS will quickly become a major staple of my gaming diet. :)

 
I think handheld gaming is awesome, I just don't ever feel like I'd have time to play a handheld device when I'm gaming on consoles constantly. It's nothing against handhelds though, I just prefer consoles. 

 
panzerfaust said:
I don't think we're quite as close to console level games on handhelds at all, and I don't think that's what we really want, anyway. Games like Golden Abyss and RE:R are considerable steps down from what those franchises typically deliver, and the GoW games are all bigger, better, longer, and more attentively produced on home systems. Those are just a few examples, though there are plenty more to knock at from the Killzone, Resistance, Medal of Honor and CoD portable attempts to, not mention all the half assed sports and racing titles you get from EA. Games like Wipeout and Mario Kart have been pretty faithful, but overall, most handheld games shine as either straight remakes of older games (your Personas, your Muramasa, your Zeldas), or games that excel on a portable platform (LocoRocos, Crisis Core, Pokemon, music games, etc...).

Crisis Core as one example, it's no where near the production levels of a full fledged FF title, is it? But it's great because it's tailored to the portable experience. You can boot it up and do some 5 minute missions, the combat is streamlined, cutscenes are kept to shorter lengths, etc... Stuff like that I want to play on my couch, not a watered down, 50 hour version of FFXV with muddy textures or whatever.

I'm not sure why people want console experiences on a handheld when they should know they will always play like shitty hand-me-downs. Some console games translate well, but many don't. Just create new IPs for portables that take advantage of the hardware in the most complementary ways, or recreate franchises around the device instead low balling the same designs you made for home systems.
Click to expand...
I don't know why people always say Golden Abyss is a step down. It's definitely on par with Uncharted 1 and it's a very lengthy game. I start to wonder if people actually play through these games or just complain about them. Granted I played Golden Abyss after playing 1 and then played 2 but I didn't feel slighted in any way.

As for Resident Evil Revelations, scope wise it was definitely smaller than most RE games but I feel it was probably limited somewhat by launching on the 3DS. (not a knock to the 3DS). As it stands though I enjoyed it more than RE5 and RE6 since it's a much better game. I don't think it's a step down either. It combines what was great about RE4 and what was great about RE1+2 in a cohesive package. Graphically it isn't on par but again might be due to the 3DS. (again not a knock).

The God of War games were shorter but for the PSP were pretty damn impressive. If they ever release a true Vita GOW I'd imagine it to be much more in line with III length and graphics wise.

Resistance and COD for Vita were both rushed and created by the same shitty developer Nihilistic Software.

EA is just lazy with most of it's games and although I haven't played it I've heard Need for Speed on Vita is the same game on PS3 with the PS3 only inching it out in the graphics department.

I guess I'm just not sure what people expect when it comes to handhelds...I mean even when a game can truly shine or pretty much could have been a PS3 game like Gravity Rush people still expect more. I feel like people are just unrealistic when it comes to handhelds.

What about games like Guacamelee is the PS3 version better because it's on the big screen when the Vita game is the same exact game? I feel like people would still say it's inferior which is insane when you think about it.

I'm not saying bite sized games aren't good but I'm saying both can exist in the same space. Maybe I'm more niche in my attitude towards handhelds than I thought.

 
I really do agree with you, OP. I honestly only play my Vita at home -- if I had a longer commute to work I would take it with me, but I'm always crammed into a train car where I barely have room to stand and the whole trip takes fifteen minutes anyway so it's not worth it. And my 360 is sitting in my room right in front of me, hooked up to my nice sized TV. But honestly these weekdays I don't have the time or energy to play the Xbox for longer than 1-2 hours and the games I have really demand more commitment, so I can only really play it on like a Saturday night at 10 PM.

My Vita though... pick it up and play, exactly where I left off. Gorgeous screen and impressive graphics. No start-up screens, minimal load times and the levels are in convenient chunks so I can complete one or two while I sit in bed. It's fantastic.

The games that blew me away were Gravity Rush (just... across the board, console quality) and the Killzone beta (literally the best handheld shooter in history, bar none -- don't even LIKE FPSes but I loved that beta.) Golden Abyss was definitely a technical marvel though and a good game.

Slightly different note but... I was actually really really impressed by how much they crammed into Zelda: Spirit Tracks on DS. That's a really underrated game. Don't let the trains turn you off. There's more to explore in that game than you would ever believe.

 
Also, the Rayman games have always been BEST on Vita. Both Origins and Legends on the Vita came with more content than any other version on any console. 

 
JustinEdible said:
Slightly different note but... I was actually really really impressed by how much they crammed into Zelda: Spirit Tracks on DS. That's a really underrated game. Don't let the trains turn you off. There's more to explore in that game than you would ever believe.
Click to expand...
I like spirit tracks... except the parts where I have to blow into my 3DS (can you bypass that?)

 
GBAstar said:
I like spirit tracks... except the parts where I have to blow into my 3DS (can you bypass that?)
Click to expand...
Haha not that I'm aware of. I didn't have TOO much trouble with it, but I can see how some people do. Try testing your breathing in the Mic Test until you figure out the best way to blow?

I used to really dislike blowing to fill up my balloons in Mario Kart, but at least they let you use the Y button or something.

 
JustinEdible said:
Also, the Rayman games have always been BEST on Vita. Both Origins and Legends on the Vita came with more content than any other version on any console.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this at all.

The Vita version of Origins has the extra medallions you can find by touching that reveal the murals, but that's about it. It lacks the ability to play multiplayer though. The game looks gorgeous and plays pretty much perfectly when compared to the versions on other platforms, though it's much easier to achieve the goals for the levels due to the touch to collect ability for lums.

The Vita version of Legends is currently the worst of any of the ports, at least until the patch Ubisoft is supposedly working on is released (and is the reason I will not currently buy the game). If you discount the recycled content from Origins and look at the brand new content for Legends, the game is missing over 25% of the content (I think it's higher if you don't count the Return to Origins levels in the overall calculation) without the Invasion levels. Futhermore, depending on your preferences, a console version other than WiiU (PS3, PC, x360) could be considered superior if you're not into the gimmicks of the Murfy levels. I still maintain that the Vita version would be definitive if (1) the patch for Invasion levels is released and (2) that patch also gives an option to play the Murfy levels as if they were being played on a console (i.e. no touch/gyro/etc.). Until then, the PC version or Wii U version are the definitive versions depending on your preference.

Sorry, it's a touchy subject for me. I was a huge advocate of Rayman Origins in general, ranting about it's awesomeness to everyone who would listen. I bought something like 8 copies of the game. So when Legends came out and the version I wanted (Vita, of course) was the worst of the bunch, I took it rather poorly.

 
corrosivefrost said:
I don't agree with this at all.

The Vita version of Origins has the extra medallions you can find by touching that reveal the murals, but that's about it. It lacks the ability to play multiplayer though. The game looks gorgeous and plays pretty much perfectly when compared to the versions on other platforms, though it's much easier to achieve the goals for the levels due to the touch to collect ability for lums.

The Vita version of Legends is currently the worst of any of the ports, at least until the patch Ubisoft is supposedly working on is released (and is the reason I will not currently buy the game). If you discount the recycled content from Origins and look at the brand new content for Legends, the game is missing over 25% of the content (I think it's higher if you don't count the Return to Origins levels in the overall calculation) without the Invasion levels. Futhermore, depending on your preferences, a console version other than WiiU (PS3, PC, x360) could be considered superior if you're not into the gimmicks of the Murfy levels. I still maintain that the Vita version would be definitive if (1) the patch for Invasion levels is released and (2) that patch also gives an option to play the Murfy levels as if they were being played on a console (i.e. no touch/gyro/etc.). Until then, the PC version or Wii U version are the definitive versions depending on your preference.

Sorry, it's a touchy subject for me. I was a huge advocate of Rayman Origins in general, ranting about it's awesomeness to everyone who would listen. I bought something like 8 copies of the game. So when Legends came out and the version I wanted (Vita, of course) was the worst of the bunch, I took it rather poorly.
Click to expand...
That's fair. I didn't realize the patch hadn't come out yet for Legends. I had heard that game would have all of the content every other platform has (not just what's exclusive to that platform) so I was like HELL TO THE YES! I haven't actually bought Legends yet though. Damn, I really do hope they include the invasions soon...

But while you're right about there not being co-op on the Vita versions of both games, you're forgetting that Origins has medallions, the unlockables that the medallions earn AND an exclusive ghost mode, so it definitely has more content than the other versions. Technically it has the most content, especially since co-op just uses the levels that are already there.

 
corrosivefrost said:
I don't agree with this at all.

The Vita version of Origins has the extra medallions you can find by touching that reveal the murals, but that's about it. It lacks the ability to play multiplayer though. The game looks gorgeous and plays pretty much perfectly when compared to the versions on other platforms, though it's much easier to achieve the goals for the levels due to the touch to collect ability for lums.

The Vita version of Legends is currently the worst of any of the ports, at least until the patch Ubisoft is supposedly working on is released (and is the reason I will not currently buy the game). If you discount the recycled content from Origins and look at the brand new content for Legends, the game is missing over 25% of the content (I think it's higher if you don't count the Return to Origins levels in the overall calculation) without the Invasion levels. Futhermore, depending on your preferences, a console version other than WiiU (PS3, PC, x360) could be considered superior if you're not into the gimmicks of the Murfy levels. I still maintain that the Vita version would be definitive if (1) the patch for Invasion levels is released and (2) that patch also gives an option to play the Murfy levels as if they were being played on a console (i.e. no touch/gyro/etc.). Until then, the PC version or Wii U version are the definitive versions depending on your preference.

Sorry, it's a touchy subject for me. I was a huge advocate of Rayman Origins in general, ranting about it's awesomeness to everyone who would listen. I bought something like 8 copies of the game. So when Legends came out and the version I wanted (Vita, of course) was the worst of the bunch, I took it rather poorly.
Click to expand...
Hey CorrosiveFrost, did you see Ubisoft announced the Invasion levels are being added next week? I just saw that on Joystiq and thought of you. I'm pumped!

 
Haha I know, I ended up getting a PS+ renewal, which was like 49.97 or something obnoxious, so I just bought the cheapest random app I could find for a dollar just to get the ten points. I'll probably never play it. But at least I can use these points on a free BF4 upgrade on PS4.

 
Just want to chime in on the handheld discussion. Up until this year, I had been a console gamer starting with the NES. But now that I have a family, I can't devote the time I once did to planting myself in front of a TV and playing a game.

My Vita allows me to replay some of the favorites of my youth (Final Fantasies, Xenogears, Castlevania, etc.) while enjoying the most beautiful handheld device ever made.

Without my Vita, my gaming would be nonexistent. With it, I can enjoy Muramasa while my son sleeps in his crib and wife catches up on her shows.

Handheld gaming is the only feasible way for me to play at this point. In fact, my excitement for the PS4 stems only from remote play with the Vita, not from seeing games on my big screen.
 
For handheld gaming to work it has to be the right game. It can't just be a console game thrown on a handheld. I enjoyed killzone for Vita, it looked like a console game and it's online was just as good as a console game. The single player and online worked well. I didn't enjoy the god of war games.....on psp, it didn't look very well. The pinball games...those have been absolutely golden. I wish I could get a PAC man game on the vita. Also soul sacrifice has been really fun on the vita. I'm thinking about getting this Zelda 3ds XL combo. I'm in the mood to play a Zelda game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thomas96 said:
For handheld gaming to work it has to be the right game. It can't just be a console game thrown on a handheld. I enjoyed killzone for Vita, it looked like a console game and it's online was just as good as a console game. The single player and online worked well. I didn't enjoy the god of war games.....on psp, it didn't look very well. The pinball games...those have been absolutely golden. I wish I could get a PAC man game on the vita. Also soul sacrifice has been really fun on the vita. I'm thinking about getting this Zelda 3ds XL combo. I'm in the mood to play a Zelda game.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this at all.

Plenty of ports from console games work fine and are great fun on Vita such as: Spelunky, LIMBO, UMvC3, BBCS2E, SFxT, Lone Survivor, Sine Mora, etc.

Czak said:
Just want to chime in on the handheld discussion. Up until this year, I had been a console gamer starting with the NES. But now that I have a family, I can't devote the time I once did to planting myself in front of a TV and playing a game.

My Vita allows me to replay some of the favorites of my youth (Final Fantasies, Xenogears, Castlevania, etc.) while enjoying the most beautiful handheld device ever made.

Without my Vita, my gaming would be nonexistent. With it, I can enjoy Muramasa while my son sleeps in his crib and wife catches up on her shows.

Handheld gaming is the only feasible way for me to play at this point. In fact, my excitement for the PS4 stems only from remote play with the Vita, not from seeing games on my big screen.
Click to expand...
I agree, right now, the only reason I'm interested in a PS4 at all is the remote play on Vita aspect. But even then, there aren't really any games for it that demand I purchase a $400 accessory for my Vita. ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
corrosivefrost said:
I don't agree with this at all.

Plenty of ports from console games work fine and are great fun on Vita such as: Spelunky, LIMBO, UMvC3, BBCS2E, SFxT, Lone Survivor, Sine Mora, etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's plenty of indie and 2D console games that can work well on a handheld. It's mostly just the visually complex or cinematic 3D games that tend to have some trouble transitioning to a handheld.

 
corrosivefrost said:
I agree, right now, the only reason I'm interested in a PS4 at all is the remote play on Vita aspect. But even then, there aren't really any games for it that demand I purchase a $400 accessory for my Vita. ;)
Click to expand...
There we go. That's a good way to look at it: PS4, the $400 accessory for my Vita!
 
corrosivefrost said:
I don't agree with this at all.

Plenty of ports from console games work fine and are great fun on Vita such as: Spelunky, LIMBO, UMvC3, BBCS2E, SFxT, Lone Survivor, Sine Mora, etc.

I agree, right now, the only reason I'm interested in a PS4 at all is the remote play on Vita aspect. But even then, there aren't really any games for it that demand I purchase a $400 accessory for my Vita. ;)
Click to expand...
But he's absolutely right if Vita wants to succeed. No one is going to buy a Vita to just play ports, especially not miniaturized, amputated versions of games they can play "for real" on a big screen. That's why the Vita is struggling right now (only indie ports and bad franchise spinoffs) and that's why the PSP never came close to the DS. The DS (and now the 3DS) succeeded because generally the games on there are unique, built from day one for that system and also incredibly solid, fun games. Of course there are your Mario Karts and your Pokemons that are basically repeating the old formula each time, but both formulas were created with simpler graphics and on a smaller scale (Super Nintendo and Gameboy) and so they work every single time on handhelds -- and even when they repeat, they build on what came before. They're not shoving stuff like Resistance on there, slapping a new can of paint and some awkward touch controls on there and calling it a day.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Vita is the best designed handheld in history and I love some of the games I've played on there. And the indie support is a genius move by Sony that is paying off. But the "big boy" developers need to step up too, with BUILT-FOR-VITA games, or the Vita will never take off.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top