140°
1.0

Call of Duty Black Ops: Declassified Review | PlayStation LifeStyle

Hindman of PSLS says: "The problem isn’t that it fails to replicate a console experience—that’s not the expectation of a portable—the problem is that it fails to even provide a good portable experience. The hallway-style shooting gallery provides entertainment that dwindles after a day or two. It’s fun in the same way a phone game is fun, and that’s quite frankly not enough to be on this system for this price."

And goes on to say:
"This is getting a 1 because it is a crime against gaming. It is a subtle message from Activision that it, as a company, believes that you, the game-buying public, are a bunch of extremely stupid people. This game has the first pieces necessary to become a good, well-made experience, but it was obviously rushed to the market to make that sweet, sweet Christmas money."

Read Full Story >>
playstationlifestyle.net
Akuma-4174d ago (Edited 4174d ago )

lol, i would have thought a website as "playstationlifestyle& ;amp ;quo t; would have an objectionable opinion on this game. i would love to know which 2 or few fps they think is better than this on a handheld gaming device.

i have this game and i love it. ive recommended it to a a few people who all bought it and love it and we're puzzled by the reviews. its not as good as the console versions but its good. vita devs are damned if they make a game with full on console options where areas are large and might take a bit to play a level and theyre also damned if they make pick-up and play games with bite size experiences.

to each his own, ill respect all opinions just like id like mine to be respected. it just seems like when some reviewers put ideas in peoples mind, other reviewers and gamers might begin to see things that arent there or theyll exaggerate little things. on the other hand i can say that im ignoring faults and giving out excuses but i have these games and my views are backed by majority of the user reviews and people ive recommended it to. i think the best shooters on vita in order of quality are uncharted GA, resistance , cod declassified, then unit 13

Sev4174d ago

Even Resistance: Burning Skies is better than this, and it's from the same shitty developer. This only had a 5 month dev cycle. It's a disaster.

I'm glad you're enjoying it. But still, critically, reviewers can't give it a good score when it's a mess.

4174d ago
knifefight4174d ago

Wait, do you work for Activision?

HarryMasonHerpderp4174d ago

If there's one good thing to take away from this then it's that this is Nihilistic's last game on the PS3 or Vita.
Hopefully.
They did a good job at letting gamers down as well as Sony down with crucial IPs for the Vita.
Glad to see the back of them to be honest.

knifefight4174d ago

Buddy of mine and I went back and played a few rounds of Medal of Honor Heroes for PSP after this >_>

I saw another member accurately point out that everyone's defense of it boils down to "well it has fun multiplayer though," and if that's all that you're in it for, and if that's worth $50, cool, but when examining the consumer product for what it is, here? That is indeed some BS that Activision pulled on its fans.

Like you say, "to each his own."

USMC_POLICE4174d ago

Medal of honor heroes was amazing! They need make one of them on vita. Even the maps were awsome. Best handheld fps to date even compared to vita fps games.

CalvinKlein4174d ago

I actually have a vita and you miss the point. Its not a good game regardless of platform, its not broken but its is garbage that is 40$ overpriced. You cant expect them to give a crappy half assed game a good review just because its the only COD on the VITA. bad game trancends what platform it is on when the title doesnt even come close to living up to its potential.

I know people on this site complain that COD on consoles should get a worse review and this should get better, but I think it is pretty bad. This game has almost no content and its best part is the multiplayer and that is just a tiny fraction of the COD multiplayer taht you can get for 10$ more on consoles. 6 maps and 5 game modes? Yeah that will get stale fast.

I would always rather have a campaign than this side mission crap. Unit 13 side missions were ok but would have been better as a campaign with actual variation in the levels.

Even if you hate COD try compare the content you get for 60$ with BO2 vs the content you get for 50$ with this game. Not that I expect it to be as good as consoles, but it has way less than half the content of black ops 2 and is only 10$ less.

Fact is it may not be "broken" like all you are crying but to me a broken game would get a 0, not a 1 or 2. A 1 or 2 would be a game that is a total rip off and the developers and publishers are greedy bastards that are releasing a un-finished game. They dont give the shit about theri brand I guess, only money. And for that this game deserves all the ones it gets.

I dont care if the game works. Ridge racer vita works too. It doesnt change tha fact that it is a unfinished tech demo that they are selling for maximum price.

IMO its soooooo much worse that they are charging 50$ instead of 40$. To me that just reeks of arrogance and total lack of respect for the customers on part of activision and sony. To try and charge more for an unfinished game makes me angry.

CaptainPunch4174d ago

The developers must be embarrassed at this point. I can't imagine developing a game and having everyone hate it.

dbjj120884174d ago

I'm sure they knew the quality as it came time to ship. That's why they changed their name.

TheGrimOfDeath4174d ago

It wasn't Nihilstic's fault, it was Activision's for the short deadline. Money grabbing Acti-fucking-vision.

metroid324174d ago (Edited 4174d ago )

I'll stick to off TV Play on WiiU BO2 as i never leave the house with a handheld anyway but getting a 3DS which ever version is out when MH4 hits and ive seen Smash Bros 3DS.

dbjj120884174d ago

Nihilistic needs to be shut down. I'm sorry if they got this terrible project and had to rush it, but this is beyond excuse.

TheGrimOfDeath4174d ago

It wasn't Nihilstic's fault, it was Activision's for the short deadline.

Show all comments (27)
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
cluclap997d ago

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

Amplitude997d ago (Edited 997d 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
MadLad1177d ago

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

VersusDMC1176d 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.

darthv721176d 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.

persona4chie1176d 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...

Neonridr1176d 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.

DarkZane1176d 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 1176d ago
ApocalypseShadow1176d 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.

persona4chie1176d ago (Edited 1176d 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.

Neonridr1176d ago

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

rdgneoz31176d 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.

ApocalypseShadow1176d ago (Edited 1176d 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 1176d ago
gamer78041176d 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.

persona4chie1176d 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”

gamer78041176d ago (Edited 1176d ago )

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

Knushwood Butt1176d 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.

Ulf1176d ago (Edited 1176d 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 1176d ago
badz1491176d 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

specialguest1176d ago (Edited 1176d 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 1176d ago
franwex1176d 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.

persona4chie1176d 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.

godofiron1176d 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.

1nsomniac1176d 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.

AnotherGamer1176d 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
ilikestuff1668d ago

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

isarai1668d 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.

Abcdefeg1668d 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

1668d ago