Which device is actually the better gaming machine? You may believe the Vita will blow the iPhone 4S out of the water, but you may be surprised...
Charles Cecil has revealed that the the team at Revolution need a couple more months to finish work on the project.
Balance the needs of a futuristic city with the wants of its people as you take control of an AI behind the scenes in NeuroNet: Mendax Proxy.
Microtransactions have gotten ridiculously overpriced in recent years, with titles now offering cosmetic skins worth more than some games.
The elephant in the room tho is personal accountability. It’s easy (albeit basic) to blame the big, bad corpo, but microtransactions wouldn’t be where they are if gamers didn’t spend money on them. As it stands the MTs usually make more than the game. Publishers know raising game prices will cause backlash, so they do MTs to compensate. But the adult conversation is consumers determine the success of products with their wallets. So if MTs are a huge thing, it’s because we as consumers told them we like them by giving them a lot of money for them. So if you don’t want them to be a thing, convince your fellow gamers to stop buying them and expect that games will be decently more expensive. You all can disagree all you want, but reality is a bitch, and eventually you have to live in it.
Trying to convince people is the least realistic thing. If we are trying to be adults, actual action is what changes things not "convincing campaigns" on platforms owned by the people 'you' are going against. It's madness and idealistic.
Easier said than done. I've told gamers for years to not buy micro transactions, expensive dlc, etc. Gamers bought it anyway. Didn't fit on a DVD that would have fit on a Blu-ray disc.
I also told some gamers to not pay for online like Xbox Live because it would force the rest of the industry to only offer playing online if you pay for it. Told them not to support a broken console that Red Ringed. To not support Xbox One because Microsoft tried to take away game ownership and how you play your games. To not pay for a console by one manufacturer where a, now 3 trillion worth, didn't make enough games at the level of Nintendo or Sony who are worth less money.
How much of that did you support anyway with your money then go back and read your comment again.
yeah that was like telling people not to do drugs or alcohol, these game companies invested a lot of money in researching about how to make people buy MTs, from creating mechanics like loot boxes, purposely make the game grindy, all the way to menu designs and what color and sound effects played when gamers bought MTs.
It was specifically engineered to take advantage of vulnerable and prone to addiction people.
@z2g
People always struggle with issues like drinking, drugs, and gambling. But in games, especially those played by kids, microtransactions are another way companies take advantage of them. It's a problem that needs addressing.
I recommend everyone read this article.
My suggestion is to name these transactions, what they ARE: Hidden-fees.
There never was, the only time I paid for a microtransaction was on Blacklight Retribution (PS4) and it was because I enjoyed the game a lot so I felt the devs should get something for all that entertainment (€5 "membership")
The devs wouldn’t get that though, that shit goes straight to the higher ups who do f*** all let’s be honest.
Probably, but I wasn't as cynical back then and €5 wasn't a big ask to get the guns with grinding instead of renting them, and the game was good (still is on the PS5/4)
I couldn’t believe what Blizzard charged for horse armor and cosmetics in Diablo 4…
I remember back in the day when a season pass was $15 and you got everything included in it. Now, I see them at $60 and you still don’t get everything.
That's just Blizzard. Unlike Bethesda's $0.99 horse armour, Blizzard's first microtransaction, Sparkle Pony, cost $15.
Bethesda out did themselves a few years back with 76. They released a Xmas bundle for half price on day of release! So, was meant to sell for only $12 from day 1, but tried to convince everyone it was half price, by marking it at $24!
As soon as gaming wasn't deemed nerdy anymore, and reached the casuals this happened. We're smart, but casuals play mobile games and other stuff, and don't really have anything to compare. They think gaming is supposed to be like this and pay for in game purchases.
If you post on N4g compare those two devices for games, not for other things.
If you think an Ip4S has better games than a Vita or a 3DS, i think it's a joke.
For a system that is more powerful and cheaper and has more games, the iphone still win ? Really ?
I think not.
This article is really bad, because it shows that people prefer a device that is heavily expensive, with less power and a very retricted and average base of games to play on it.
Did they add controls to the iPhone 4S recently?
Or double the number of CPU and GPU cores maybe?
I'm thinking... no.
Also the battery comparison? Completely bogus. The Vita lasts 3-5 hours WHILE GAMING. The iPhone 4S lasts about 1.
Also... the guy seems to have forgotten that the Vita can play over 1000 PSP and PS1 games in his games comparison. It absolutely destroys the iPhone's library, from day 1.
I have an iPhone 4s and will be getting a PS Vita ^^
What a stupid article, on so many levels!
Pretty stupid comparison.
Anyways when it comes to the Vitas main function which is gaming it completely destroys the iPhone4S.
Yeah apple fanboys the iPhone 4S sucks for games. Long live the Vita and the 3DS.
Xperia.