600°
mafiahajeri4263d ago

Looks really bad. 4X4? Ahhh well...

Thatguy-3104263d ago

The animation and graphics look terrible :/ ohh well let's just hope that the vita shines with title like tear away.

Awesome_Gamer4263d ago

Looks like total shit, i'm getting killzone and AC3 instead of this garbage

victorGma214263d ago

Why does Killzone look so incredible (for a handheld device) and this looks like shit? I hope they will improve it.

I am getting Killzone, Little Big Planet and some other games.

raytraceme4263d ago

I think they are trying to maintain their stance on 60fps gaming so maybe that's why it looks this bad?

LOGICWINS4263d ago (Edited 4263d ago )

"Why does Killzone look so incredible (for a handheld device) and this looks like shit?"

Because not all devs have the same capabilities. Not to mention that Activision probably believes that the COD name alone will sell the game, which is a mistake. COD is a casual title, casuals have demonstrated with the 3DS(and with the Vita so far) that they aren't willing to spend over $200 on a gaming handheld anymore.

The market has changed and people have grown up. Dedicated gaming handhelds are no longer considered "cool". Even kids as little as 10 years old would rather have a smartphone as opposed to a dedicated gaming device.

Kinda funny that a few N4Gers who were telling me that this was going to be the Vita's system seller are the same ones who are bashing the game now.

tachy0n4263d ago

BRAND NEW MAPS!
*shows nuketown*

morganfell4263d ago (Edited 4263d ago )

Yet Black Ops on the PS3, 360, and PC look bad compared to other titles in the field and people snap it up.

Ju4263d ago

Looks like an old engine (like CoD HD remake crap). Going with Activision, they probably just ported that over to the PS Vita. Not sure why they can't create something which takes advantage of the HW. Looks outdated, especially when you see KZ:Merc (which runs the KZ3 engine - see Guerrilla saying that on the blog).

FriedGoat4263d ago

This better get delayed and improved. I like when he smashes through the glass it breaks into about 3 pieces.

Straightupbeastly4263d ago

maintain 60 frames? They couldnt even get black ops to run at 60 frames on PS3. This game is definite 30 frames at best.

MaxXAttaxX4263d ago (Edited 4263d ago )

Isn't that how it looks on consoles too? You know, sub-par to other games, lol

Anyway, isn't a COD game what people wanted? So as long as it plays and has multiplayer like COD, then why complain.

BattleAxe4263d ago (Edited 4263d ago )

Looks pretty disappointing. I can't understand how it is that these crappy developers like Slant 6 and Nihilistic get to work on AAA game franchises. It defies all logic. Oh well, at least Black Ops declassified looks as good as Call of Duty on the 360....

I don't own a VITA yet, but Uncharted: Golden Abyss, Playstation All-Stars Battle Royal and Killzone: Mercenary will be the first games I buy when I purchase a VITA.

jony_dols4262d ago

As long as it helps Sony shift a couple of million Vitas to the casual crowd, then I don't care about it's quality.

There is plenty of other Vita games to look forward to.

SolidStoner4262d ago

Its a Vita, what would you expect?? Looks like a very good port, I'm surprised... Vita is best handheld gaming device on market for sure!

COD graphics even on vita looks very similar :D good old engine! lmao :D

sikbeta4262d ago

*Nihilistic*

Bwahahahahahahahaa!!!!

Oh God...

mewhy324262d ago

Call of Duty on Vita may be it's saving grace.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 4262d ago
Nimblest-Assassin4263d ago (Edited 4263d ago )

They better pack a lot of content if they actually have the nerve to be the most expensive vita game 44.99? Are they joking?

I mean, medal of honor on psp looked this good

Normally this is where i say, graphics aren't everything... but this is cod... we know what to expect

SandWitch4263d ago

FIFA Football also costs 44.99 GBP on UK PS Store...

vallencer4263d ago

Its not the most expensive. Uncharted is at 49.99 in america anyway.

chazjamie4262d ago (Edited 4262d ago )

this awful game makes me wish gameloft would bring modern combat and nova to the vita, because those games look so much better than that

yabhero4263d ago

I liked how they said covert... Then showed dudes doing the opposite of stealthiness...

DOMination-4263d ago

Looked bad but I also though AC Liberation looked fairly poor graphics wise. Ah well at least the latter looked like it could still be a good game though

HammadTheBeast4263d ago

AC Liberation from what I've seen looks pretty cool, environments are nice and textures work, and animations are good.

This is sh*t. Resistance Burning Skies blows this away. They reused Black Ops maps, the guns and animations look ugly, and it just seems lame.

It's a shame. I hope Soul Sacrifice is shown at Gamescom.

WeskerChildReborned4263d ago

Yea but AC Liberation will be the first open world game on PS vita i think. You could just run around and assassinate people if you wanted too.

rpd1234263d ago

@WeskerChild

Gravity Rush was open world, but it isn't nearly as big and not very interactive when it comes to the environment. Instead of traversing the city by rooftop you just fly over it.

daggertoes834263d ago

Im not sure who watched the actual conference? But watching this on this website the game does look horrible. But I watched the conference and the gamed looked great. Not sure why it looks bad here.

StanSmith4263d ago

I watched it and The game looked bad on the conference too. Its a terrible looking game.

AnotherProGamer4263d ago

Medal of Honor Heroes 2 on the PSP had like 32 player multiplayer

TheFirstClassic4263d ago

Yeah what's up with this and Resistance only having 8? Socom did 16 online I think.

Tony-A4263d ago (Edited 4263d ago )

It's a Nihilistic Software game..

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like they learned much from Burning Skies. 4VS4?? How can you have such a powerful device at your disposal and still manage to make matches so frustratingly small? The game looks terrible..

Thanks to GG for saving the day with Killzone: Mercenary on the Vita. That looks much better. After reading the details on COD, it sounds like Burning Skies with a Call of Duty skin. Not. Impressed.

Soldierone4263d ago

Nihilistic Software needs to quit touching games, they suck. Honestly ruined Resistance and now this crap.....

racer14214263d ago

can a mod please swap the link for this youtube link please: http://youtu.be/wp55U3f7QSY

Most of us on mobile want to see what cod vita looks like also, but judging by your comments I think Activision ruined another title.

Haha1234263d ago (Edited 4263d ago )

Same developers as that sh*tty resistance burning skies, what would you expect

But ohhwell doesnt matter the COD fanboys will eat this game up and save teh vita lulzzz

TheDivine4263d ago

Why did they give their big fps games to the shittiest developer available? Is sony contracting out to the lowest bidder or something? And activision didnt care enough to make this or at least get a decent developer. Ds games have had higher player counts and this is next gen? I mildly enjoyed Burning Skies until the novelty wore off and i was left with shitty graphics, a horrible story, and a shooting gallery to play. Online was fun but far too basic, too few maps, and a low ass player count. This will be a reskinned Resistance. Yay?

abzdine4263d ago

no problem as long as the game plays well. COD on PS3 looks like a PS2 game. It's not new with the franchise.

Unexpecta4263d ago

I agree, it looks terrible. It's got a modern coat of the Resistance Burning Skies visuals. Ugh, do better guys.

AzaziL4263d ago

Kotick: How can we make a new CoD for vita for the least cost?

Dev: We can do like we do for all games, take CoD4, port it, and add new textures, skins, maps, and we're set.

Kotick: brilliant

Mustang300C20124263d ago

Would have been better than what the hell they have just shown so no that conversation didn't exactly go like you described.

AzaziL4263d ago

yeah, they probably took CoD3 or 2 instead..

swansong4263d ago

I say we all leave our complaints and concerns and suggestions at there website. http://www.nihilistic.com/i...

DarkHeroZX4263d ago

"Developed by the team at Nihilistic Software"

hmm.....

Muffins12234263d ago

Ive seen iphone with better graphics than this...wtf

asmith23064262d ago

Depends on how big the maps are. In my opinion multiplayer with less players are more competitive, Gears of War was a good example of that.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 4262d ago
DontShoot-Me-Bro4263d ago

LOL why does it look so bad graphically?, Look at Resistance on Vita, or even the Killzone trailer, and then this....WTF :S

I think they just don't want it to look on par with the console version, as that would be embarrassing, so they dumbed it down or something.

PersonaCat4263d ago

Honestly, I wasn't expecting much since their console games look terrible, but lol this looks like a PS1 game.

ddurand14263d ago

the quality does look poor. im hoping theres just something up with the video.

HammadTheBeast4263d ago

Hey reused Nuketown straigt from Blops.

Unexpecta4263d ago

To be honest, graphically speaking Resistance was BS. Everything felt very linear and blocky. Burning Skies truly burned the franchise.

asmith23064263d ago

Its from the same devs as Resistance on Vita as well. Makes you wonder why the graphics aren't up to scratch.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4263d ago
SonyNGP4263d ago

I've seen iOS games that look better than that :/

StanSmith4263d ago

Agreed. Modern Combat on ios looks a lot better than this and thats on Ipad 2. Vita can do better than this crap, as Killzone proved.

Typical Activision.

DoomeDx4263d ago

Modern Combat on my Galaxy S2 looks even better..

Organization XII4263d ago

Bounce on my Nokia 3310 looks better than this. What are you thinking Sony?

BattleTorn4263d ago

This is what I came to say.

I have Call of Duty on my iphone that looks better!

portal_24262d ago

I think in its current form, the only way I'd get it is if it used this cross-buy promotion and I get it free with BOPS2PS3

Mustang300C20124263d ago

I thought I was watching the Modern Combat game for IOS. That looked bad and now we see why they held off for so long to show it.

-Alpha4263d ago

Knew itd be a weak throwaway by Acti. 4v4 with what I think was Nuketown. Pretty much Blops 1 gameplay. Lets hope it sells to the masses for Sony's sake

DontShoot-Me-Bro4263d ago

Agree, this was meant to be Sonys killer game this year for the Vita. I just hope that the gameplay from the trailer is no where near the final product, but it probably is :(

Show all comments (153)
90°

Was Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified Really That Bad?

PP: Was Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified really that bad on the PS Vita?

Read Full Story >>
pureplaystation.com
cluclap989d ago

In comparison to its console counterparts at the time? Yes. Yes it was. In comparison to DS versions? It was god like

Amplitude989d ago (Edited 989d ago )

I got tons of fun out of it.

Killzone was better, yeah. Heck even Resistance online was better. But CoD Resistance and Modern Combat and such were all fun to change it up a bit when you've grinded too many hours into Killzone.

If i had to review them, yeah, all those games would get a low af score except Killzone. But i had fun plowing through the Resistance campaign and playing online and goofing off with CoD online while travelling. Not everything has to be a masterpiece but they were all fun enough for what they were lol

250°

Why The PS Vita Ultimately Failed (And How The Switch Did It Right)

How is a system so loved within its community considered a commercial failure, and how did the Nintendo Switch take its idea and run with it?

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com
MadLad1169d ago

Highly overpriced proprietary memory, and Sony showing it little support, themselves?

VersusDMC1169d ago

Agree with the support but the overpriced memory was always overblown. The switch is an handheld charging 60 for games instead of 40 as they always had before...yet that cost hike is fine.

darthv721169d ago

As someone with both a Vita and PSP GO, it really made me curious why Sony felt the need to make a dedicated memory card when they already had one that was more than adequet. The M2 format (that the Go uses) is virtually the exact same size and shape as the vita... just flipped. It would have made things so much easier for people to buy into it, especially if they were able to insert their existing memory card with their purchased games on it.

I really like the vita, I also think they had a huge missed opportunity with not having TV out. I like to pop my Go onto the TV dock and play some games now and then (doing the switch thing before the switch). Doing that with a vita would have been awesome, especially with full DS4 support.

persona4chie1169d ago

The only thing is the Switch isn’t a handheld, it’s a hybrid of both. So there isn’t really a “cost hike” sure you get an overall lower quality or “handheld” quality when playing portably, but you do get better quality and performance when playing in “console mode”

And yes I know people are gonna say “bUt thE sWitCh iS wEAk” and compared to the PS4 and XOne absolutely, but it’s still console quality games. And the quality is much higher than on any handheld before.

The Vita was a great system, but people’s expectations were too high. It was definitely a capable system, but not as capable as people thought it would be. I don’t remember if Sony said this, but it was said that the Vita would be able to deliver PS3 quality games and it ultimately couldn’t.

And yes the memory cards were definitely an issue. There are countless complaints about it. Nobody wanted to pay $120 for a 32gb memory card https://www.gamespot.com/ar...

Neonridr1169d ago

I mean compare the scope and size of a 3DS game (Link Between Worlds) and compare that to Breath of the Wild and tell me that the additional price doesn't warrant itself.

DarkZane1169d ago

The overpriced memory was not overblown, it's the only reason why the Vita failed.

You had 4, 8, 16 and 32GB cards, but anything below 32GB was too small and a 32GB was $100 at launch, which was way too expensive. A SD card of the same size was like $25.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1169d ago
ApocalypseShadow1169d ago

$249 was a great price for the OG PSP. PS Vita launching at $249 years later for what it did was a steal compared to PSP. Nintendo dropped their price because it made 3DS seem expensive against it for inferior hardware. It worked.

Yeah. The cards were expensive. But look at the flip side. Many gamers stole games on PSP by downloading them from online. Just like they did with PS1 and PS2 games. And we see how DRM gets cut through in software so fast that that wouldn't have been enough. SD Card would have guaranteed theft immediately. They tried something different. Didn't work out.

The games were coming. Problem was, gamers weren't supporting it like they were with PS4. Gamers either complained the games were expensive or that the games were hand me downs or lesser than console like Uncharted. And with mobile phones powerful enough to play games that looked just as good as portable consoles for cheap or free with ads, something had to give. Sony even gave gamers the ability to stream PS4 games at home or anywhere in the world. Even that wasn't enough for some.

Nintendo has ruled the mobile market for decades. It's why they can weather the storm of challengers and mobile. And with new customers being born all the time, Nintendo rides its same properties like Disneyland. But new in house IPs are almost non existent.

The only thing Switch did was have no opposition. No competitor. Microsoft was too cowardly to try ever and Sony gave it a shot. TWICE. Now, if we flip the article around, we can ask how Sony had been successful with PS4 and PS5, while Nintendo failed at dedicated home consoles and ran to mobile.

persona4chie1169d ago (Edited 1169d ago )

Except they didn’t run to mobile? They’ve always had “mobile” devices, and they’ve proved in the past, gimmick or not that they can have a hugely successful system.

They literally just took the best part of the Wii U and made it independent. The Switch is a home console as well as a handheld, not just a handheld but people like that as an added option.

And while Nintendo has definitely had a few poor selling home consoles they haven’t failed by any means, “mobile console” or not it’s still successful.

Plus money is money. It doesn’t really matter if Nintendo is making it with a home console or a handheld. Just like Sony saw the handheld wasn’t viable so they dropped it to focus more on PS4.

Neonridr1169d ago

they failed once, with the Wii U... so you could say that but you'd be reaching Apocalypse.

rdgneoz31168d ago

@persona4chie "And while Nintendo has definitely had a few poor selling home consoles they haven’t failed by any means"

What would you call the WiiU? Nintendo ditched that pretty fast and went to a new console after a few years. WiiU (came out Nov 2012) had 13.56 million sales as of December 31, 2019. Switch has around 80 million and it came out just under 4 years ago.

That said, they learned from their utter failure with the WiiU and came out with the Switch.

ApocalypseShadow1168d ago (Edited 1168d ago )

Nintendo has failed more than once. Home and portable consoles. But name a portable console competitor to the Switch? I'll wait...still waiting...still waiting...

What some fail to mention, is that Nintendo has/had no direct competition to Switch. Zero. They also fail to see that Nintendo has been the dominant portable console maker since Gameboy. Not one portable has won against Nintendo since then. Targeting Vita is foolish as the market leader has always been Nintendo.

As for home consoles, Nintendo basically abandoned the formula of building a dedicated home console. They built a hybrid that's really a portable that replaced 3DS and happens to connect to a TV. But we all know its use and tech specs is mobile. Trying to spin that it's a home console is ridiculous when it can't even play certain games on home consoles. That's why it's streaming certain games. Why? It's a mobile platform. That just happens to have no competition. And Nintendo has been riding on underpowered products while selling the same properties without new IPs for years. At least we can say with Sony, they make new franchises EVERY GENERATION. Something Nintendo doesn't do.

Summary: Nintendo has always been portable market leader for years. And now, they have no competition. Not even from 3DS. So, of course Switch is going to sell unopposed. Vita would have been destined to be second fiddle to Nintendo with portables regardless. Even if Sony would have stuck with Vita.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1168d ago
gamer78041169d ago

No first party support, end of story, they set it up to fail. I still have mine but after launch there was third party support only. They left it to die.

persona4chie1169d ago

Yeah I had a vita on two separate occasions, and I loved it. But like you said, they created this great system and then said “alright go die”

gamer78041169d ago (Edited 1169d ago )

@persona. Right I really liked the system. I even bought the pstv thingy to play my vita games on the tv too

Knushwood Butt1169d ago

It did get a lot of first party support for the first couple of years, but what happened is that third parties didn't know what to do with it. Toned down ports on the cheap, or risky new IPs or AA spinoffs,

They all held back and waited to see someone else take the plunge but it never happened and sales of the Vita didn't pick up, leaving Indies and slowly dwindling first party support.

Name the big third party games on Vita. Assassins Creed Lady Liberty? That CoD game?
Nothing from Capcom.
Nothing from Konami.
Koei Tecmo supported it well but all ports.
Bandai Namco had Ridge Racer that got slammed due to weird content behind paywalls.

Also didn't help that the media slammed anything that wasn't breaking new ground. Strange how the Switch gets a free pass on that.

Anyway, it did get Darius Burst CS, which is also on PS4, but is portable shmup excellence.

Ulf1168d ago (Edited 1168d ago )

This isn't true. There were a ton of (very well done) first-party Vita games in the first couple years -- Unit 13, Killzone Mercenary, Uncharted, Little Big Planet, etc.

They did choose to cater to an older audience, which may have been a mistake.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1168d ago
badz1491168d ago

Nope. Games. Plain and simple. It didn't even have the games like the PSP did. Such a shame for such a wonderful hardware

specialguest1168d ago (Edited 1168d ago )

Even today people are still not willing to accept that what you stated with the overpriced memory and Sony showing little support was a big factor leading to the Vita failure. I remember wanting to a Vista, but was really turned off by the proprietary memory price. Sony abandoned the PS eyetoy on the PS2, the Vita, and PS Move. The PSVR got more support, but Sony could definitely do more

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1168d ago
franwex1169d ago

Pretty much Sony ditched it to focus on PS4. Can’t say I blame them, but it is disappointing. If Nintendo can manage to put out games for handhelds and main consoles-I would assume Sony could too.

persona4chie1169d ago

Oh definitely and the Vita would have been the perfect system for it. The PSP sold how much? 80m? That’s really damn good. If the vita 1. Had more first party support from Sony. 2. Had cheaper memory cards or used SD cards (the 32gb card cost and eye watering $120 at launch) and 3. Maybe launched at a cheaper price, maybe $50 cheaper it would have easily been a success.

godofiron1169d ago

I personally skipped the vita because memory was just so damn expensive - then eventually, Sony gave up on supporting it.

it got nowhere near the love that the PSP got, which is an absolute shame cause it paired pretty well with the PS4.

1nsomniac1169d ago

The only thing Sony cared about was protecting its image against piracy. They were willing to destroy it for the sake of saving face to its investors after the PSP. Same approach they took with not allowing external storage on the ps5.

AnotherGamer1169d ago

The overpriced memory cards easily.

Show all comments (45)
90°

10 PlayStation Vita Software Missed Opportunities

VGChartz's Adam Cartwright: "Many would argue – and I wouldn’t really disagree – that the PlayStation Vita never really had a killer app. There wasn’t that one piece of software that helped change the console’s fortunes. The closest we got was arguably Persona 4 Golden, an early release that received huge critical acclaim, but it was part of a niche series and as such its sales impact from a hardware perspective was muted.

There were missed opportunities along the way, as certain titles had the potential to change the Vita’s fortunes, but the way the final product was delivered (if indeed it was delivered at all) left a lot to be desired and so they didn’t reach their full potential. It’s these games I’m aiming to look at this in this article – 10 games that were missed opportunities on Vita. I’m not saying that every release I’ll be talking out here had the potential to be a “killer app”, but if they had been executed a little better they would have undoubtedly been a key factor in helping the console reach a wider audience."

Read Full Story >>
vgchartz.com
ilikestuff1661d ago

Still thinking about the that last of us 2 multiplayer missed opportunity

isarai1660d ago

My soul still aches over the idea of making 3D Dot Game Heroes a Vita series never happening after the dev studio expressed interest in doing so. Could've been a flagship for it, or at least carried it a bit further.

Abcdefeg1660d ago

The vita contributed to the ps3 having less support from Japanese devs. I hope sony keep focusing on one console at time like they are now in the future

1660d ago