If 3DS had gone the same way as Vita, Weaste would be bumping this thread on a daily basis to have a little gloat
Gaming Nintendo 3DS vs PS Vita thread.
- Thread starter Devil_forever
- Start date
Well as with the 3DS ,Wii, 360 and most recently (and rather spectacularily) Halo 4 (amongst lots of others) anything Weaste says is shit will end up performing extremely well.
I'm still not sure if it's a wind up, or he really is that much of a Sony bum boy, but it's amusing either way. And at least he knows there is at least 1 other Vita owner to play Cod with, though the servers must be like the Sahara
I'm sure he's just waiting to put it all in a "It's not looking good for the Vita" thread. Hmm, maybe not
I don't even play CoD myself, never have. VITA is great because its hardware and OS software is great, anyone trying to dispute that is an idiot.
I'll dispute that.
What's makes a games machine great is the games on it. Duh.
White text surely not needed, but added to save you a rant Weastey
It's not that though is it? Hardware limits what the software can do. What is the goal of software here? We can't do on an Atari 2600 what we can do on a VIC20, what be can do on a C64, Amiga, etc.
The one thing I don't understand is this CoD thing. Why would Activision give that licence to a third rate developer for VITA? Surely it would have made more sense to say, OK Sony, this is the base design, give it to Sony Bend (give it to Naughty Dog), go for it! It would have been in both company's interests if done that way. It will sell well in any case due to the name, but......
I'm a software engineer, and I really think that this software argument needs to be dropped. Really, software can only do what the hardware allows. The entire idea that hardware is irrelevant is quite frankly preposterous. If you think along those lines, go and play some of the great ZX Spectrum games..... Head Over Heels is a decent start!
Someone from Naughty Dog said they aren't interested in making Vita games (or something along those lines).
I think that kind of view is one of their main problems TBH.
Yeah, but Sony owns Naughty Dog, and they have two teams now. If the boss says jump, they should fecking jump.
Well yeah they should, but for whatever reason don't seem to like putting their main studios on their handhelds. Whether it's because they don't think they're as important, don't have much faith in it, or for some other reason, it seems like they're going to keep doing it.
It might help change some third parties' minds too, if they saw some of Sony's big teams working on something for the Vita.
Ok, but BEND are not second rate, why didn't Sony say to Activision: "Look lads, we'll do it for you properly"? It makes no sense to me. All Activision have done is weaken the CoD brand to a certain degree. They know that it will sell due to the name, but there is no reason that VITA cannot run BLOPS2. You would have thought that Sony would have offered them their own studios to do the job. A full blown quality CoD on the VITA would have done the machine a lot of good.
Maybe they also assumed that it would sell based on it's name and thought that was enough.
Or maybe they genuinely thought that Nihilistic would do a good job.
Or maybe they genuinely thought that Nihilistic would do a good job.
The problem with Sony handheld is that developers are too concerned with making the games look great but the actual game play leaves a lot to be desired.
I think most of the time, you can't dispute a console's overall power that much (although people will always debate the Nintendo hardware). But the fact is, Nintendo has its own software that will sell shit-loads, the likes of Zelda, Mario, Pokemon etc will out-sell near enough everything other than Fifa and CoD, so they don't need to go overboard with the actual machine.
PS Vita is a great piece of kit, but Sony keep making the same mistakes as well. You can't just make the fecking dogs bollocks of a machine then release games for it that feel like they've come out of another part of a dog. Also, even if they're making a loss on each console sold, the price was/is still too high for most consumers to bother paying. To me, I just see little point in making a kitted out console and losing money on it when your software is never ever going to be good enough to sell enough consoles.
It's as if they thought: "Oh, the PSP didn't do as well as we wanted it to, let's do the exact same thing with the Vita. Success is surely guaranteed!"
Heck, in Japan, new games are still being released on the PSP and not getting a Vita version (which would surely be better). You just can't defend Sony when it comes to their handheld strategy, I honestly don't see why they even bothered trying to cut into that area. Only Apple can make their mark and that's because they sell cheap as chips games that are for the most part horrendous but stupid people still buy them anyway.
PS Vita is a great piece of kit, but Sony keep making the same mistakes as well. You can't just make the fecking dogs bollocks of a machine then release games for it that feel like they've come out of another part of a dog. Also, even if they're making a loss on each console sold, the price was/is still too high for most consumers to bother paying. To me, I just see little point in making a kitted out console and losing money on it when your software is never ever going to be good enough to sell enough consoles.
It's as if they thought: "Oh, the PSP didn't do as well as we wanted it to, let's do the exact same thing with the Vita. Success is surely guaranteed!"
Heck, in Japan, new games are still being released on the PSP and not getting a Vita version (which would surely be better). You just can't defend Sony when it comes to their handheld strategy, I honestly don't see why they even bothered trying to cut into that area. Only Apple can make their mark and that's because they sell cheap as chips games that are for the most part horrendous but stupid people still buy them anyway.
It's not true though, it has some really good games.
That's a bit nonsense, hardware is nothing without software. What good does the power do when there are no games that make the best of it? It's a two way street.
Vita has good software though. I have 7 games for it and all of them are 8/10 or better. I have a great football game in FIFA, one of the best platforming games in LittleBigPlanet, a decent shooter in Unit 13, good racing games in Wipeout and NFS Most Wanted and two fantastic adventure games in Uncharted and Assassins Creed III. It's a fantastic line up and there are obviously going to be more.
Who are you arguing with here? I was semi joking (hence the white text).
However, since you've brought up something else, the 'software' argument needs to be dropped? I've said it before and I'll say it again, you don't understand games. Making them and their purpose is nothing like the software engineering you are used to doing, at all. From the planning (or lack there off), to development and execution are completely different, and trying to justify more powerful hardware to make better games is clearly tosh.
Games are an artform, just like artists still work with a pencil and a piece of paper and musicians still work with centuries old instruments, games are not defined by hardware. Hardware is merely a tool to convey the idea, it's not (or shouldn't be) the driving force.
What a load of total bollocks. You say that because (as you have admitted yourself) you're a shite programmer. The point is that you cannot do the open world, you cannot do the immersion without modern hardware. It's impossible. Look at the first Grand Theft Auto and look at the new. Don't talk shite!
WTF! PSP has sold over 70m units. To say that the PSP didn't do well is ridiculous in terms of hardware sales. It didn't do well in software sales because it was hacked to feck early in its life, unlike the PS3. VITA will sell eventually, when they bring down the price, but they are being stubborn with that and playing the long game. Sony as a whole is in serious financial trouble and may not survive, which is such a shame, because the stuff they make really is top notch, or at least was...... Consumerism on the cheap. I have a 25 year old Sony HiFi of separates and they work as well now as they did the day they were bought and are of a far better quality than anything you could buy now less than 800 quid.
When have I ever said I'm a shit programmer? You underestimate me obviously, and should have a little more respect. Programming has never been my first love, but single handly getting published console games entirely programmed by myself through both Sony and Nintendo, in 3-4 months with feck all to change (other than some naughty cheat codes), suggests I at least have the aptitude and intelligence to get the job done does it not? And if I was a shit programmer like you say, surely more power would make it easier to do these things would it not? Or is it because I've talked api' more, which isn't to do with talent, it's to do with time, money and pressures? I consider you very knowledgeable on both programming and hardware and I give you respect for that, always have, but I also know people exactly like you in the games industry, I've worked closely with one particular guy even you'd be impressed by, and despite his extreme knowledge of hardware and assembly, do you think he got the chance at the PS2 properly? Of course not.
Crafting of games and worlds matters to the hardware or course, but only in the sense you tailor your vision to them, you talk open world games and cite them, but are they now the only games any good? Are they the only things brought to us by future hardware? GTA 1 and 2 were excellent games btw...
It's also amusing how you talk about being a good programmer and wanting more powerful hardware, actually my experience was it was much more problematic and testing of abilities working on the AGB than any other console I've been hands on with. But obviously that was shit too. Obviously I don't know what I'm talking about
Maybe they should do a Nintendo and stick to their limits then. Did the Vita need to be so expensive and powerful? No it didn't. You might argue otherwise, but it could have been half as powerful, a lot cheaper and some better thought out games, and it would be more of a rival to the DS/3DS.
I don't want an Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Google, Facebook future, I like companies that think outside of the box.
None of these think outside the box?
Not really, no!
Lets look at it. Apple nicked the WIMP paradigm from Xerox, Microsoft ripped off CPM and were in the right place at the right time, Zuckenberg nicked the idea for Facebook, and Google copied other search engines such as Webcrawler and improved it with adverts!
It's about taking an idea that is good and making it popular. All those companies have more than achieved that.
I agree. But how exactly do Sony do that? Yeah the EE was clever, the Cell even more so, but neither really have pushed past the standard really have they? The Vita copies plenty of the ds ideas, move, and you can be pretty damn sure they'll try and rival kinect and/or the Wii-U controls on the PS4.
Besides, the 3DS is surely more out of the box? It's a well built machine that innovates enough with the 3D screen alone, let alone the dual screens and touch of it's predacessor. The Vita is an immense machine, but it isn't really defined is it? Slightly worse graphics than the ps3, slightly worse games and the inevitable money grabbing sloppy ports.
It's a shame, it really is. As much as Sony have gone right down in my estimation after what they did over here, unlike you I think competition is definitely needed. I get your point about apple, maybe even M$, but Nintendo and PC gaming drive the industry in various ways and a gaming world with just Sony in it would be very souless indeed.
Besides, the 3DS is surely more out of the box? It's a well built machine that innovates enough with the 3D screen alone, let alone the dual screens and touch of it's predacessor. The Vita is an immense machine, but it isn't really defined is it? Slightly worse graphics than the ps3, slightly worse games and the inevitable money grabbing sloppy ports.
It's a shame, it really is. As much as Sony have gone right down in my estimation after what they did over here, unlike you I think competition is definitely needed. I get your point about apple, maybe even M$, but Nintendo and PC gaming drive the industry in various ways and a gaming world with just Sony in it would be very souless indeed.
Nobody is arguing for a Sony only gaming future, and we know this next round of consoles will probably be the last anyway, thus PS Mobile and XBox moving to support other devices, yet still under the XBox brand. I think that we can confidently say that the dedicated handheld gaming devices is dead as a concept outside of Japan. I wasn't really making an argument for Sony in the gaming space anyway, just expressing my concerns for them as a company as a whole. As an innovator they have changed almost all fields of electronics from music to video to gaming more than any other company ever has. Their death, or rather breakup , which is probably now inevitable will be a sad loss. It's a lesson for all conglomerates that6 bigger does not mean better. Sony is going to end up as a bank! 
Here we are arguing about hardware, when soon enough we won't even get our hands on it. It's a bleak future
It is a modern phenomena that less is more, convenience over quality.
Indeed it is. It's sad for the hardware, sad for the software and can you imagine growing up without tapes, floppies, cartridges, cd, dvd, bluerays? Where all you know is a menu accessed by gesture and short dumb games you pay for by level? Uggghhhhh *shudders*
I'm glad I stockpile hardware.
Paper Mario Sticker Star is pretty damn good
One of the better games for the 3ds
One of the better games for the 3ds
Yeah I want to get it, looks good. I've got quite a few games to buy though, so I need to figure out which ones to buy first.
How come?Nobody is arguing for a Sony only gaming future, and we know this next round of consoles will probably be the last anyway, thus PS Mobile and XBox moving to support other devices, yet still under the XBox brand. I think that we can confidently say that the dedicated handheld gaming devices is dead as a concept outside of Japan. I wasn't really making an argument for Sony in the gaming space anyway, just expressing my concerns for them as a company as a whole. As an innovator they have changed almost all fields of electronics from music to video to gaming more than any other company ever has. Their death, or rather breakup , which is probably now inevitable will be a sad loss. It's a lesson for all conglomerates that6 bigger does not mean better. Sony is going to end up as a bank!
Because there is nowhere left to go with it on any sensible level that will require a separate box. It-s software and services all the way now.
To be fair mobile devices still can't produce games upto the standard of 3ds. Yes a lot of them are free or very cheap but there are no games that I have played on a mobile device that have had much longevity bar a few. Also as long as there are Nintendo games, a system will continue to sell. Or are you talking about Sony only?
How does it compare to the others? The N64 and GCN ones were great and very RPGish, but the Wii one went all platformer. I'm hoping it's more like the first two.
I'd think the next logical step for consoles after the next generation would be 3D gaming or would that be too soon?
It's very much like the first two, it'll be a day one purchase for me. I played it at an event already and have had it on pre-order for months xD
That's cool. I've got it preordered! Just a couple of weeks more! Been looking to get a new game for a while.