Try running it on the Vita 1000. I swear it feels smoother, and it defies all logic that it does so.
I actually agree. At certain points in areas, it feels like, don't judge me here, 60fps. it's crazy.
Try running it on the Vita 1000. I swear it feels smoother, and it defies all logic that it does so.
I don't notice any difference between my two Vitas.
I actually agree. At certain points in areas, it feels like, don't judge me here, 60fps. it's crazy.
Agreed. Does he review other console ports on handheld and say " don't bother because it's the worst version of the game"? That's not the point of making it, to be the "best version". What a stupid criteria to have when reviewing a handheld port. Of course it's not going to be as good as the console version running on far superior hardware.
Not that I particularly agree with him, but an example of a portable game being as good or better than its console brother is Killzone Mercenary. So I guess his argument is, what's the point of straight ports if they have to be cut down? Better to do a whole different game, a Borderlands actually tailored for the Vita.
I'll be buying this though, as frankly with the Vita in its current state this is as good as we are going to get in the portable blockbuster category.
Here's IGN's review. Similar gripe's to Jim's review.
On console or PC, Borderlands 2 uses every button available,
Here's IGN's review. Similar gripe's to Jim's review.
What a garbage review. You can not like the game but this reads like a 5th grader wrote it.Here's IGN's review. Similar gripe's to Jim's review.
Comparing it to these games which are radically different is ridiculous.The limitations of hardware excuse just doesnt apply here. Killzone: Mercenary, and Uncharted: Golden Abyss both managed solid performance and stunning visuals, making Borderlands 2s showing a disappointment by Vita standards.
Borderlands 2 on Vita is the worst version of a good game. And I really mean thatthe core game is still good, funny, fun. No matter how clunky the controls and watered down the visuals, it's still Borderlands 2 in a lot of respects. But without the smooth bounce of the console/PC version, and without those versions' four-player co-op, the Vita version sacrifices too much. Despite the fact that I was playing it for work, it left me routinely questioning why I was spending time on it when I could just play the game on PC. In this case, portability's not enough.
Here's IGN's review. Similar gripe's to Jim's review.
Kotaku's Review
Same old story. Reviewers doing exactly what I think we all predicted they would, and that's a bit sad.
I've put as much time in the game and I agree with most of the points brought up as well but it's all about context. No shit the game is better on console and PC, I don't think anyone with half a brain was expecting that. But for a game as big as Borderlands 2 to be on a handheld that I use on the bus and waiting in class it is supremely impressive. Coupled with the upcoming cross-save functionality this version is going to help me get max level characters for all the classes.After playing the game on the Vita for 10 hours or so, I have to agree with the reviewers on this one.
I really don't know if I should buy it now.
I really don't know if I should buy it now.
Sony's own fault calling the Vita "console gaming on the go".
Same old story. Reviewers doing exactly what I think we all predicted they would, and that's a bit sad.
A bunch of us here on gaf, on reddit, and on youtube are enjoying it. That's all I can really say tbh. You can take that dive or stay safe. I feel like I got my $30 worth.
At its best, Borderlands 2 on Vita plays like your Vault Hunter is fighting underwater with dumbbells strapped to their ankles; at its worst, its a nearly unplayable slideshow. Even during rare stretches where it maintains a constant framerate, its well south of 30, and it hitches at random like playing an MMO on dial-up.
I would love to hear from the perspective of someone new to Borderlands.Shame I didn't get my request in fast enough to get a a copy for review. I've never played it before, so I'll be approaching it from a different perspective. I literally have no expectations other than "what I've heard".
So, then, by your reasoning, every classic N64 game should've been critically panned b/c they didn't have the same level of graphics as the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park? I mean, that was how Nintendo was touting their early hardware, so Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time deserve to be judged accordingly, right?
So, then, by your reasoning, every classic N64 game should've been critically panned b/c they didn't have the same level of graphics as the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park? I mean, that was how Nintendo was touting their early hardware, so Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time deserve to be judged accordingly, right?
The reviews feel warranted to me, to be honest. I bought the bundle and this port was my first experience on my Vita and nearly made me regret buying it, until I plopped in P4G and Killzone.
Kotaku's Review
Same old story. Reviewers doing exactly what I think we all predicted they would, and that's a bit sad.
The comical thing about this is that I watched the embeded video of the game in the Kotaku review and it seems to me like it ran just fine.
The menu did look quite laggy in that video though.
This one bummed me out
If they're so predictable and just going to parrot one another, why do we need game reviewers at all? .
The menu did look quite laggy in that video though.
I can't agree with you there. The game looked like it was running around 20FPS most of the time. Just look at the motion of his thumbs to realize how un-smooth the game looks.The comical thing about this is that I watched the embeded video of the game in the Kotaku review and it seems to me like it ran just fine.
I really wish these "professional" review sites would get someone who has never played the game before so that it can be judged on it's own merits/issues and not just compared to the PS3/360/PC version of the game.
I just bought it yesterday. It's fun but... my god is that framerate atrocious.Damn if BL2 almost made you regret Vita, I'm glad you didn't play The Amazing Spider-man port.
Slightly off topic but you know it's crazy how MGS3D got a lot of good reviews but the framerate and controls(if you didn't have a CCP at least) were waaay worse than BL2vita port. Game was inferior to the original PS2 release in every way possible except crouch walking and tps aiming. Different reviewers, years, and games but still.
Slightly off topic but you know it's crazy how MGS3D got a lot of good reviews but the framerate and controls(if you didn't have a CCP at least) were waaay worse than BL2vita port. Game was inferior to the original PS2 release in every way possible except crouch walking and tps aiming. Different reviewers, years, and games but still.
Yes. I remember this exactly. I ended up selling the game because it didnt even run as well as the ps2 version
I really wish these "professional" review sites would get someone who has never played the game before so that it can be judged on it's own merits/issues and not just compared to the PS3/360/PC version of the game.
Kotaku's Review
Same old story. Reviewers doing exactly what I think we all predicted they would, and that's a bit sad.
Also - why is there so often an assumption in reviews and on here that everyone owns a capable gaming PC? As if the option between playing a game then playing it at 60fps on some monster rig is always there.
I can't agree with you there. The game looked like it was running around 20FPS most of the time. Just look at the motion of his thumbs to realize how un-smooth the game looks.