Vita PSN Game And Service Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
My unscientific theory is that reviewers are saddled with deep guilt issues with having been doritoed into giving high scores to the AAA console games and try to resolve the dissonance by slagging off lesser versions (be it Wii, 3DS or Vita). "See? I told you I was incorruptible!"

Or else they are frustrated at being given the lesser version to review and take it out on the game.
 
They were different reviewers on thesixthaxis anyway. Jeez people, you cannot compare review scores between different writers on the same site, it makes no sense.

Sometimes the conspiracy theorizing is a bit much in here, honestly.
 
In this case it was not Vita tax - the original rating was wrong, on very many sites. The reviewers however failed to see the issues with the title back then, and so didn't rank the game down. Now they're doing that in retrospect. However, in that case, reviewers should have manned up and modified their original rating as well.

Which is crap because gamers that are not GAFers will see the review, compare to the console version (naturally) and decide not to buy because it's a not a "faithful" port.

Screw the Dorrito pope and IGNorgant asses ..
 
They were different reviewers on thesixthaxis anyway. Jeez people, you cannot compare review scores between different writers on the same site, it makes no sense.

I assume there is a pecking order on these sites. Hot shot reviewer gets the 360 version, and the reviewer who gets the Vita version will be conscious of having been given the 'lesser' version to review and approach it with a slightly less charitable frame of mind.

But really, one can see bias and conspiracy everywhere. For example, it always seems to me that PocketGamer gives Vita games low marks. I also know they push iOS games heavily. I put 2+2 together.... and make 5?

As they say, you can detect everyone's bias but your own.
 
I assume there is a pecking order on these sites. Hot shot reviewer gets the 360 version, and the reviewer who gets the Vita version will be conscious of having been given the 'lesser' version to review and approach it with a slightly less charitable frame of mind.

But really, one can see bias and conspiracy everywhere. For example, it always seems to me that PocketGamer gives Vita games low marks. I also know they push iOS games heavily. I put 2+2 together.... and make 5?

As they say, you can detect everyone's bias but your own.

well I can't put a Vita in my pocket unless I have big pants .. isn't 2+2=5 a GAFer :)
 
Same shit again .. IGN has not responded to my inquiries on the rating. How do you give the console game a 9.0 but dock points off the Vita version for not having a "good and balanced" fighting system? It's the same damn system .. I repeat .. the same damn system.

top of page: get AC:L and NFSMW ...

The one thing I can say: if I was reviewing SFxT and did give it that 2/10, I'd make damn sure people knew exactly why (the DLC fiasco that will have me returning it this week if Capcom doesn't make it right tomorrow).
 
The one thing I can say: if I was reviewing SFxT and did give it that 2/10, I'd make damn sure people knew exactly why (the DLC fiasco that will have me returning it this week if Capcom doesn't make it right tomorrow).

This I can understand. A macro level issue with reviews are that it seems these types of issues and game breaking bugs are ignored. It's a AAA budget and marketed game so let's give it a pass ..

I digress .. no more review bitching from me .. until the next stupid review :)
 
I assume there is a pecking order on these sites. Hot shot reviewer gets the 360 version, and the reviewer who gets the Vita version will be conscious of having been given the 'lesser' version to review and approach it with a slightly less charitable frame of mind.

Even if this entirely ridiculous claim backed by no evidence had merit, it doesn't change that it's at the reviewer's discretion to consider the Vita version "lesser". Ultimately it's his opinion, not a grand conspiracy.

If you really want an example of a Vita port reviewing better than its console counterparts, take a gander at Rayman Origins. And this comes several months after the initial release when the hype cycle has diminished so people tend to see games in a more balanced light.

And I'd say rightfully so, as it's the best version of the game, except for its lack of co-op.
 
Even if this entirely ridiculous claim backed by no evidence had merit, it doesn't change that it's at the reviewer's discretion to consider the Vita version "lesser". Ultimately it's his opinion, not a grand conspiracy.

I concede it is pure speculation as to the reviewers mind, but if you look at Metacritic, hardly any sites have even bothered to review the Vita edition of NFS. At the time of posting, Eurogamer have not yet reviewed AC:L. So it's not speculation to say that these are considered the lesser versions.
 
And I'd say rightfully so, as it's the best version of the game, except for its lack of co-op.

Unless looking for those touch screen collectibles really floats your boat or the addition of the touch to pop bubbles made it easier for you to 100% the game, I really don't understand how it's the best version. I've platinumed it twice and own it on PC, so I've played my fair share of the game too...

It's definitely on par with the console games and the lack of co-op vs the touch screen stuff could come down to reviewer preference; the performance hiccups, however? Any version of a game with performance problems, no matter how slight, is worse than versions of those without it.
 
Unless looking for those touch screen collectibles really floats your boat or the addition of the touch to pop bubbles made it easier for you to 100% the game, I really don't understand how it's the best version. I've platinumed it twice and own it on PC, so I've played my fair share of the game too...

It's definitely on par with the console games and the lack of co-op vs the touch screen stuff could come down to reviewer preference; the performance hiccups, however? Any version of a game with performance problems, no matter how slight, is worse than versions of those without it.

It's the best version because, as you said the touch screen stuff is a well-implemented, smart, and completely optional addition, and also the Vita's d-pad alone pretty much makes it the definitive way to experience the game.
 
It's the best version because, as you said the touch screen stuff is a well-implemented, smart, and completely optional addition, and also the Vita's d-pad alone pretty much makes it the definitive way to experience the game.

No argument on the touch screen stuff being well implemented, but the game is fine without it. D-pad is also a preference. :P
 
As far as I am concerned, reviews dont need a score at the end.
I read reviews for games so that I can glean any new information that might help me personally decide if I will be willing to put down my own cash, as any score given will be in the OPINION of the reviewer, which seeing as how many of them appear to complete dunces and klutzes, renders it null and void.
Basically, I wouldnt need any reviews at all if the press releases for all games were of a higher quality/covered more stuff.
If only the rest of the world worked this way.
 
I assume there is a pecking order on these sites. Hot shot reviewer gets the 360 version, and the reviewer who gets the Vita version will be conscious of having been given the 'lesser' version to review and approach it with a slightly less charitable frame of mind.

But really, one can see bias and conspiracy everywhere. For example, it always seems to me that PocketGamer gives Vita games low marks. I also know they push iOS games heavily. I put 2+2 together.... and make 5?

As they say, you can detect everyone's bias but your own.

well I can't put a Vita in my pocket unless I have big pants .. isn't 2+2=5 a GAFer :)
Who summoned me? lol

Imo some recent vita games are inexplicably underrated.

PS:
For the ones who don't know what 2+2=5 means:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_+_2_=_5
 
Yes

And 20% discount for plus members, so $6.99

Nice. Too many games!


Actually looks somewhat fun. The game still looks more like Gameloft's Modern Combat games than CoD because of its framerate, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I actually enjoyed one of the Modern Combat games MP on iOS. The problem is even that game had 5v5 MP. lol
 
lulz

a Vita is doomed garbage thread would help, I think. I have no problem with people dooming and glooming but it's stupid that a new thread for the same thing pops up every few days.

Why scrub it all at one place and let it slowly die. Clearly it's way more fun being on the other end!
 
Man, only $6.99 for When Vikings Aatack with Plus? That's an easy purchase. I figured it would be $14.99 like a lot of PSN games these days.
 
Another Vita Death thread huh? :
They will continue until the trajectory of the unit alters. It really isn't terribly healthy.

Fortunately, Sony are nothing if not tenacious so those of us that enjoy our Vitas can look forward to ongoing support of varying quality. Even if the device never 'takes off' its not going to get Dreamcasted either.

It's easily my favourite handheld ever. Fucking love the thing.
 
They will continue until the trajectory of the unit alters. It really isn't terribly healthy.

Fortunately, Sony are nothing if not tenacious so those of us that enjoy our Vitas can look forward to ongoing support of varying quality. Even if the device never 'takes off' its not going to get Dreamcasted either.

It's easily my favourite handheld ever. Fucking love the thing.

Asked in the GT thread, but never got an answer. How was GT PSP without the analogue triggers?
 
Asked in the GT thread, but never got an answer. How was GT PSP without the analogue triggers?
It worked. Not ideal by any means, but it worked. For some reason on the handhelds I prefer to use face buttons for accelerate and brake. Something weird about digital triggers.

Man, the handling on GT PSP was sublime. Might have to reinstall that bad boy for when I'm done with Most Wanted.
 
It played great.

It worked. Not ideal by any means, but it worked. For some reason on the handhelds I prefer to use face buttons for accelerate and brake. Something weird about digital triggers.

Man, the handling on GT PSP was sublime. Might have to reinstall that bad boy for when I'm done with Most Wanted.

Hmm is the face buttons analogue by any chance? ... I just don't know, playing MW it just feels too arcady to have the exact same model for GT.

Then again, I have yet to play GT PSP and the impressions seems positive.
Bleh I should just buy it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom