Vita = Console Experiences / 3DS = Handheld Experiences.

I'm a simple person.

Games are worth it or not.I want to play them and spend money on them or not.

The rationale some of you have.... wow.

[QUOTE="Eponique"]MGS3 was not well received in this review so it contradicts with what you are saying.arkephonic

All the reviews come to the same conclusion. It has major performance issues, control issues and they say it's the worst version of Snake Eater. Those are legitimate complaints. It's not downgraded because of cutscenes.

So that's not at all contradicting what I originally said. What I originally said was that it was downgraded for being a re-release of an old game which is true, along with having bad controls. I wasn't aware of the fact that it also had performance issues, that's a real issue right there.

arkephonic

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Eponique"]MGS3 was not well received in this review so it contradicts with what you are saying.Eponique

All the reviews come to the same conclusion. It has major performance issues, control issues and they say it's the worst version of Snake Eater. Those are legitimate complaints. It's not downgraded because of cutscenes.

3 against 1?

If the game has legitimate framerate and controller issues cited by multiple publications, it's a bit unfair to point the finger at its score solely on cutscenes, it just literally makes no logical sense.

3 against 1?

arkephonic

I don't even take my handhelds with me to be honest. They're simply another platform that has games I want, just smaller.Xaero_Gravity

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

3 against 1?

Eponique

So performance issues and controller issues aren't held against games anymore?

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

3 against 1?

arkephonic

So performance issues and controller issues aren't held against games anymore?

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Eponique"] 2 against 2. IGN said the same "not suitable for handhelds". Plus the other 2 played it without the CCP. The other 2 win.Eponique

So performance issues and controller issues aren't held against games anymore?

http://ds.ign.com/articles/121/1219426p1.html

"Snake Eater's story clearly stands the test of time, but everything around it isn't necessarily so fortunate. Graphics, design and control can age, exposing a game's weaknesses when compared to modern counterparts."

"Oddly enough, while Konami's implementation of 3D is quite excellent, it didn't manage to fix any frame rate issues. In fact at times Snake looks like he's running in slow motion."

"MGS 3 shows its age, albeit minimally, in elements of design, movement and control, particularly when compared to many modern action games."

"However the game isn't without its flaws. The design does have its limitations, particularly in the face of other more modern offerings. The camera, despite being fully controllable, still gets in the way, and the fact that you really need the 3DS's Circle Pad Pro accessory is a bit ridiculous. Likewise the game's cumbersome frame rate issues are a significant distraction."

http://www.gameinformer.com/games/metal_gear_solid_snake_eater_3d/b/3ds/archive/2012/02/21/snake-eater-3d-review-snake-s-least-successful-mission.aspx

"Unfortunately, the unique features of this 3DS port do more to hinder the experience than enhance it. The tilt sensor gimmicks (like balancing as you cross a bridge) feel out of place, and using the buttons to control the camera and aim is awful ? especially during boss fights. The touchscreen interface is functional but clumsy; I quickly stopped using it in favor of d-pad menu navigation, which still isn?t as elegant as previous versions. Some people may say it?s unfair to compare handheld titles to those on console, but given that Snake Eater 3D is essentially the same game as its console-based brothers, the comparison is inevitable.

The visuals look good, and the 3D effect works fine ? though the chuggy framerate doesn?t stack up to the 60 fps of the HD Collection version. The only substantial improvement here is the addition of MGS 4?s crouch walk, which allows Snake to retain a degree of cover while moving and aiming.

I?m not saying that Snake Eater is an inferior game; it?s my favorite in the series. However, this version is only worthwhile for people who have no other choice. Even then, with the $40 you?d spend on Snake Eater 3D, you could probably buy an old PS2 and the original game, or the HD Collection on 360 and PS3. If you want the real Snake Eater experience, those are far better options."

http://www.gametrailers.com/gamereview.php?id=13445

"PSP owners might be all too familiar with the problems Peace Walker faced due to the lack of a second analog stick, but now it?s time for 3DS owners to share in the pain. Yes, Snake Eater 3D supports the Circle Pad Pro, but that?s going to run you an additional $20 if you don?t already own one. Those who decide against the peripheral are left with a control scheme that?s a drag on the overall experience. Trying to control the camera or aim with any type of precision using the face buttons is a lesson in frustration. Even with the available customization types, the controls are far from optimized.

The shortcomings of the control layout virtually negate the addition of the ability to walk while crouching. This new mechanic negates a lot of the difficulty since the developers didn?t really alter the layouts or enemy positions to compensate, thus making Snake Eater 3D the easiest version of the game by far. The bottom line here is that unless you?re willing to pony up the extra cash for the proper control support this game needs, you?re left with a second-rate experience that?s a mockery of what we?ve seen the series.

It is no small accomplishment getting Snake Eater to run on the 3DS, and next to Resident Evil: Revelations, the in-game models are the best showcase of the graphical power of this handheld. However, it doesn?t matter how much detail you can achieve if the game doesn?t run smoothly. Frame rate issues are abundant and frequent, especially during cutscenes and boss battles. The one bit of silver lining is the game puts the 3D effect to good use--giving it at least one advantage over the other versions. The soundtrack at least survives the conversion unscathed, but as good as it is, it?s not enough to salvage this package.

Aside from the original PS2 release, this is easily the worst iteration of Snake Eater. The lack of extras, the frustrating controls, and the overall performance issues hold it back from being one of the premier third-party games for the 3DS. Don?t be hypnotized by this snake?s gaze--this is far from the optimal way to experience this classic."

http://www.destructoid.com/review-metal-gear-solid-snake-eater-3d-223656.phtml

"The camera, however, is sure to annoy everyone. The depth of field is very hard to get just right, which iscrucialin a game that's all about being aware of everything around you. There is also no simple way to quickly reset the camera back into position behind the player. The best way to do that is to quickly hit the "aim" button, which is prettydisorienting(especially if you prefer first-person aiming).

Snake Eater 3D is also lacking technical polish. The frame rate is low throughout, and some cut-scenes are even more choppy. This didn't bother me too much, but if you feel uneasy spending time with videogames that struggle to stay smooth, prepare to feelawkward"

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-06-metal-gear-solid-snake-eater-3d-review

"Adding insult to injury, aiming feels off. The default control scheme requires aiming with the face buttons, which is hardly ideal when such pixel-perfect precision is required. Using the Circle Pad Pro add-on helps, but even this is awkward and imprecise, ranging from sluggish to jerky. The kicker is that this all could have been avoided had the game included gyroscopic aiming. This worked wonders in the 3DS version of Ocarina of Time and Resident Evil: Revelations, so it's especially disappointing that it's not included here.

Elsewhere, Snake Eater 3D falls victim to an unstable frame-rate. This is most prevalent during cut-scenes and the otherwise brilliant boss battles, and it's hugely noticeable during one of the game's best set-pieces, where you face off against a camouflaged Predator-like boss in a forest filled with traps. Aiming at your opponent in thermal vision results in devastating lag."

Shall I continue? You seem to be ignoring every problem in the world about this game. There couldn't be any way in the world that the other issues brought the score down, right? It must be solely because of the cutscenes.....

You say that the PS2 version had framerate issues, but you know what the point of a re-release on new hardware is? To fix performance issues and improve upon the foundation of the game. If you release an old game with all the problems in tact, and add more problems, expect a low score. This has nothing to do with cutscenes.

Shall I continue? You seem to be ignoring every problem in the world about this game. There couldn't be any way in the world that the other issues brought the score down, right? It must be solely because of the cutscenes.....

arkephonic

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Shall I continue? You seem to be ignoring every problem in the world about this game. There couldn't be any way in the world that the other issues brought the score down, right? It must be solely because of the cutscenes.....

Eponique

If you want to take what I said out of context, maybe. What I said was that cutscenes weren't the reason for it scoring lower than the original PS2 release, and you said it was. I attributed the lower scoring to it being a re-release of an old game, poor controls, and later found out that the game also suffers from a bad framerate.

But let's forget about the performance and control issues, because those mean nothing anyways, right? It's all about the cutscenes not being suitable for a handheld, and that's why it scored low. ;)

Also, LOL@the Gamespot review calling the 3DS version the "definitive version" like you said. You do realize that the HD Collection plays Snake Eater at 60fps in a higher resolution with no control issues whatsoever, right?

Dat Gamespot credibility, it's flawless.

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Shall I continue? You seem to be ignoring every problem in the world about this game. There couldn't be any way in the world that the other issues brought the score down, right? It must be solely because of the cutscenes.....

arkephonic

If you want to take what I said out of context, maybe. What I said was that cutscenes weren't the reason for it scoring lower than the original PS2 release, and you said it was. I attributed the lower scoring to it being a re-release of an old game, poor controls, and later found out that the game also suffers from a bad framerate.

But let's forget about the performance and control issues, because those mean nothing anyways, right? It's all about the cutscenes not being suitable for a handheld, and that's why it scored low. ;)

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Shall I continue? You seem to be ignoring every problem in the world about this game. There couldn't be any way in the world that the other issues brought the score down, right? It must be solely because of the cutscenes.....

arkephonic

If you want to take what I said out of context, maybe. What I said was that cutscenes weren't the reason for it scoring lower than the original PS2 release, and you said it was. I attributed the lower scoring to it being a re-release of an old game, poor controls, and later found out that the game also suffers from a bad framerate.

But let's forget about the performance and control issues, because those mean nothing anyways, right? It's all about the cutscenes not being suitable for a handheld, and that's why it scored low. ;)

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Eponique"] This is a circular argument since you were the first one to bring up MGS3's critical acclaim ;)Kaze_no_Mirai

If you want to take what I said out of context, maybe. What I said was that cutscenes weren't the reason for it scoring lower than the original PS2 release, and you said it was. I attributed the lower scoring to it being a re-release of an old game, poor controls, and later found out that the game also suffers from a bad framerate.

But let's forget about the performance and control issues, because those mean nothing anyways, right? It's all about the cutscenes not being suitable for a handheld, and that's why it scored low. ;)

Is an 8/10 not well received?

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Eponique"] This is a circular argument since you were the first one to bring up MGS3's critical acclaim ;)Eponique

If you want to take what I said out of context, maybe. What I said was that cutscenes weren't the reason for it scoring lower than the original PS2 release, and you said it was. I attributed the lower scoring to it being a re-release of an old game, poor controls, and later found out that the game also suffers from a bad framerate.

But let's forget about the performance and control issues, because those mean nothing anyways, right? It's all about the cutscenes not being suitable for a handheld, and that's why it scored low. ;)

Gamespot also said that it's the definitive version of Snake Eater, when the HD Collection that runs it with no control issues at 60fps exists.

So are we going to keep listening to Gamespot? Gamespot's text is law, right? :P

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

If you want to take what I said out of context, maybe. What I said was that cutscenes weren't the reason for it scoring lower than the original PS2 release, and you said it was. I attributed the lower scoring to it being a re-release of an old game, poor controls, and later found out that the game also suffers from a bad framerate.

But let's forget about the performance and control issues, because those mean nothing anyways, right? It's all about the cutscenes not being suitable for a handheld, and that's why it scored low. ;)

arkephonic

Gamespot also said that it's the definitive version of Snake Eater, when the HD Collection that runs it with no control issues at 60fps exists.

So are we going to keep listening to Gamespot? Gamespot's text is law, right? :P

Is an 8/10 not well received?arkephonic

>Gamespot also said that it's the definitive version of Snake Eater, when the HD Collection that runs it with no control issues at 60fps exists.arkephonic

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Eponique"] That's a reason it scored lower on GS as it says right in the review.Eponique

Gamespot also said that it's the definitive version of Snake Eater, when the HD Collection that runs it with no control issues at 60fps exists.

So are we going to keep listening to Gamespot? Gamespot's text is law, right? :P

And everyone else in the world has reasons for calling it the worst version. But if today is puppet day, I guess I can play along.

And everyone else in the world has reasons for calling it the worst version. But if today is puppet day, I guess I can play along.

arkephonic

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

And everyone else in the world has reasons for calling it the worst version. But if today is puppet day, I guess I can play along.

Eponique

I never gave my opinion. I just simply stated that every other review of the game I've come across has stated that Snake Eater 3D is the version to pick up if it's your only option, but the HD Collection, and even the PS2 version, are better options.

Well stated, TC. Been saying the same thing since the 1st year titles were 1st announced for each system. It's really identical in terms of "console experiences" and what not. You said it better than I probably could've though.

My meaning of a handheld experience is one that feels old-school, not many cut-scenes pretty much just gameplay, like SNES and stuff, arcade-like stuff. Or JRPGs like Megaman Battle Network or Pokemon. Stuff that I CAN pick up and play, but probably won't because I use handhelds in my house. Also, just original stuff like Gravity Rush or that 3DS samurai game (download-able). I also feel like I'm the only one who sees Kid Icarus:Uprising as a Handheld-type game Its very arcade-like, from its controls to its pacing, but I haven't played it yet, don't have a 3DS, so maybe things will change, but it just seems very "handheld" to me.

Of course there are exceptions, like Street Fighter, Uncharted, or Ocarina of Time, And yeah I'd play them, but it isn't what I will get a handheld for. Except maybe OoT because it has better controls, I'm not doing the Water Temple on Virtual Console, oh no. Also, Master Quest, something not offered on the original cartridge.

Man was picking up FF IV DS a disappointment when it was riddled with cut-scenes and in-your-face with its story, FF III DS was much better.

tc is so defensive.. also TL;DR at op

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

MGS3 got well received on 3DS and it has long cutscenes. You seem to think that a game needs to be 10-15 minute play sessions or bust for a handheld, and that's just laughable.

I read that interview in a game magazine which I still have, I might dig through them but I have hundreds of them. It was an interview concerning the creative direction of the game and the changes they made to it throughout the development process towards the beginning.

I'd love to sit here all day and go in circles, but I have some errands I need to run but I'll be back later.

arkephonic

IIRC, most reviewers didn't have the (lol) Circle Pad Pro when reviewing the game, which more than soiled the experience.

I agree both systems offer both types of experiences so to call one out is being hypocritical. The systems are still in their infancy -especially Vita- so it's best to wait until next year to see how the libraries grow and what titles are confirmed.

Last gen PSP was basically a broken console experience whereas DS perfected what handheld gaming means, now Sony learnt a lot and Vita in addition of having 2nd stick which imo makes a world of a difference also has touch controls that make it unique to console experiences, same with 3DS.

Besides console experience can be replicated perfectly with the power of these devices so it's not a negative like it was last gen.

14 pages already? Thank you for making this topic, btw. I've been wanting to make this point for a long time. Nintendo handhelds have always been full of 'console' experiences.

What I've never understood about the original DS/PSP debate is how handheld games were apparently not meant to be played for more than 15 min before they were 'console' experiences, but 5 hours of battery life was somehow not enough. Moreover, if you're not going to play a game for more than a very brief duration of time, then why do you need the handheld in the first place? It doesn't sound like a satisfying experience. There are plenty of lengthy JRPGs on the DS. You're telling me you're only going to spend up to 15 min and be satisfied? You would only need one game for the rest of your life. Unless, of course, you were actually putting more time on the handheld and need that 5 hour battery time because you spend longer durations of time on games. Games that more often than not are emulations of what were once console games.

The whole thing is ridiculous and inconsistent.

[QUOTE="Xaero_Gravity"]I don't even take my handhelds with me to be honest. They're simply another platform that has games I want, just smaller.DarkGamer007

The Vita having console experiences on the go is a good thing and honestly I would prefer it to having a NDS experience in 3D.

your trying to hard

As others have pointed out, Nintendo handhelds tend to get a certain type of game that isn't seen on home consoles very often. For example, the isometric Zeldas from the DS generation, or the countless Castlevania games. Yes, they originated on consoles, but their type of game play on that type platform has since died out, leaving handhelds as the sole bastion for them.

The argument is similar to the PSP vs. DS one--on PSP you get a bunch of games that you can or should have seen on consoles. The DS, on the other hand, had a much more diversified library of games that are never going to be seen on consoles (in any large number, at least). Same goes for the GBA--despite being 32bit like the PS1, it's less powerful graphics resulted in significantly different games.

That's the consolve vs. handheld experience. Yeah, we'll get some ports of console games for on the go, but a lot of the draw is the unique games that are a result of having a massive buyer base mixed with a less powerful system.

Same with the Wii--people didn't buy it to experience 360/PS3 games. They bought it for the type of games it had to offer, and part of that was a result of it being a weaker system.

[QUOTE="DarkGamer007"]

[QUOTE="Xaero_Gravity"]I don't even take my handhelds with me to be honest. They're simply another platform that has games I want, just smaller.campzor

As others have pointed out, Nintendo handhelds tend to get a certain type of game that isn't seen on home consoles very often. For example, the isometric Zeldas from the DS generation, or the countless Castlevania games. Yes, they originated on consoles, but their type of game play on that type platform has since died out, leaving handhelds as the sole bastion for them.

The argument is similar to the PSP vs. DS one--on PSP you get a bunch of games that you can or should have seen on consoles. The DS, on the other hand, had a much more diversified library of games that are never going to be seen on consoles (in any large number, at least). Same goes for the GBA--despite being 32bit like the PS1, it's less powerful graphics resulted in significantly different games.

That's the consolve vs. handheld experience. Yeah, we'll get some ports of console games for on the go, but a lot of the draw is the unique games that are a result of having a massive buyer base mixed with a less powerful system.

Same with the Wii--people didn't buy it to experience 360/PS3 games. They bought it for the type of games it had to offer, and part of that was a result of it being a weaker system.

Vraeth

Yeah, Nintendo handhelds generally do offer experiences that aren't on current generation home consoles, but were popular in past generations of home consoles, like 2D Castlevania, isometric Zelda, side-scrolling platformers, things like that. These experiences are a direct result of them being weaker than current gen home consoles, and them being able to faithfully replicate home console experiences from past generations.

So a lot of these "handheld experiences" people are referring to on Nintendo handhelds are actually home console experiences, it's just that they're home console experiences from past generations due to the handheld's hardware limitations. The Vita's biggest criticism is that it's playing current generation home console games, but when you really stop and analyze the situation, that's a great thing. Handhelds have always been handicapped by controls and graphical limitations, but they aren't anymore with the 3DS, and especially the Vita.

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="DarkGamer007"]This. 99% of the time I play my 3DS inside on my couch or bed.

danish-death

Yeah, I've never seen that either. Here in America, no one really uses dedicated handheld gaming devices in public. In Asia, you see them everywhere. Housing is generally smaller in certain parts of Asia, and that's one of the main reasons handheld gaming is so big, people want to take gaming with them outside of the house. That mentality is just a staple of Asian culture, and they even bring it with them wherever they go. I work with a guy who just moved over from Korea, and even though he has a big house, he is a handheld only kinda guy and plays PSP and PSVita. He loves games, but he refuses to buy a home console because he says he doesn't like playing games inside a house. It's just a normal mentality over there.

My only disappointment with vita is how I can't play resistance at cousins. Saying i need a nat type 2 instead of 3. He has qwest dsl like I dop4s2p0

My only problem with Resistance Burning Skies is that it's at a 58% on Gamerankings.com. That's uncharted territory for me when it comes to buying games. Is it really as bad as reviewers say?

[QUOTE="p4s2p0"]My only disappointment with vita is how I can't play resistance at cousins. Saying i need a nat type 2 instead of 3. He has qwest dsl like I doarkephonic

My only problem with Resistance Burning Skies is that it's at a 58% on Gamerankings.com. That's uncharted territory for me when it comes to buying games. Is it really as bad as reviewers say?

[QUOTE="p4s2p0"]My only disappointment with vita is how I can't play resistance at cousins. Saying i need a nat type 2 instead of 3. He has qwest dsl like I doarkephonic

My only problem with Resistance Burning Skies is that it's at a 58% on Gamerankings.com. That's uncharted territory for me when it comes to buying games. Is it really as bad as reviewers say?

Yeah, I watched the IGN video review of Resistance: Burning Skies, and it seemed like his complaints were nit picking. Then when he got to the gameplay segment of the review, he was like, "and THIS is where the game really shines, I don't have many complaints at all with this part of the game". He was complaining about how his finger would accidentally slip off of the right joystick and inadvertently hit the touch screen for melee attacks, and it's like, are you serious dude? The gameplay is fine, but you accidently hit the touch screen and you give it a 5.5?

Might have just been a bad review, but when a game scores that low, I expect it to be broken and borderline unplayable.