Top
The story is too old to be commented.
Godchild10202010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

I want this to be true. I would love to play this on the Vita while on the go and then on my big screen when I'm at home. I can't wait for an official word from Sony themselves.

@Sinncross, really?? Was that on tonight. That's great news. Thank you so much!

sinncross2010d ago

It was announced on GTTV.

Uncharted2Vet2010d ago

@Sinncross, i swear GTTV loves sony. sony always has the exclusive content on their show always

raytraceme2010d ago

YAY!!! I Can't wait for this game. I got the hd collection on my vita and am very excited for this!!! Sony is bringing out their big guns and I can't wait for the nuke that they are going to blast on Microsoft at e3. A nuke of exclusive games that is ;)

NewMonday2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

Wasn't getting it for the PS3, to many backlogged games at home, but want it now for on the go play

Hope Soul Sacrifice goes the other way to the PS3

raytraceme2010d ago

Correction... HD Collection on my PS3 ;) lol I made myself look like a fool on my previous post :P

VsAssassin2010d ago

@Clemins50, though I find that to be mostly true, I think the reason why GTTV always covers PS3 exclusive games is that PS3 floods the gaming industry with exclusives. To put it short: The PS3 these days is the only console that announces new games, both sequels and new IPs.

gaffyh2010d ago

Transfarring enabled! :D

TheLastGuardian2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

I just hope they have a bundle with both versions of the game for a discounted price. Otherwise I'll just buy the PS3 version.

Check out N4G's Official Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time Thread.

http://forums.n4g.com/tm.as...

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2010d ago
Christopher2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

Here's my thought on this: Why the hell would I pay $50 to play it on a portable device when I can pay $60 to play it on a large screen TV? More to the point, why are we being asked to pay twice to play the game on a portable PS3?

Sony, you really need to start selling a bundled option where you get both games for $10-15 more than the $60 price or something similar.

labaronx2010d ago

got ps3 and vita version for $80 bucks instead of $100... a great deal that they may implement further

Jio2010d ago

It's just me, but I'd rather play it on the go on a smaller screen. I'm more immersed because I can be anywhere and more comfortable than sitting in front of the TV.

J_Cob2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

"Here's my thought on this: Why the hell would I pay $50 to play it on a portable device when I can pay $60 to play it on a large screen TV?"

You answered your own question. You're paying for a PORTABLE CONSOLE EXPERIENCE. That $60 game that plays on a large TV isn't going to be very handy on the road or plane.

"More to the point, why are we being asked to pay twice to play the game on a portable PS3?"

It's a separate system. Just think of it like this; you would still have to buy two copies of the game if you wanted it on two PS3s. The only difference, like you said, is this version is portable.

A few of my own questions: You mean to tell me you didn't expect this to happen? Did you not see the launch lineup for the PSVita?

Believe it or not somebody actually said the same thing about the Vita version of MGS:HD Collection. He felt he should get a discount since he bought the PS3 version.

EDIT: Also what labaronx wrote. It's a possibility with future Sony titles, but don't expect it with third party games.

Christopher2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

@labaronx: If they do the same thing here, that should already have been announced. That type of thing is something you want to lead with and you want to continue to do with as many of your games as possible.

I mean, imagine if CoD came to PS Vita and you could pick up and do cross-leveling from PS Vita multiplayer and PS3 multiplayer. This type of marketing of the two devices with the level of integration possible will sell both devices like hotcakes, IMHO.

***It's a separate system.***

Which is stupid to have it competing with one of your own existing systems. Sony already has to compete with Nintendo and Microsoft, why would they compete with themselves?

***You mean to tell me you didn't expect this to happen? Did you not see the launch lineup for the PSVita? ***

I don't see where I said I didn't or thought I didn't. What I expected was for Sony to not try and sell two completely different systems with the same games. This _did not_ happen with the PSP. The games were primarily unique to the device, not duplicates of the games on the PS3.

This is not true with the Vita.

***Believe it or not somebody actually said the same thing about the Vita version of MGS:HD Collection.***

And why not? He is supporting both of Sony's systems. Why shouldn't he be able to buy both for a lower price since he's supporting both? This is only beneficial to Sony as it will encourage more people to buy for both systems rather than choosing one over the other.

cpayne932010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

Well I can see why someone would want to get the same game for 10 bucks cheaper AND for that game to be portable, but honestly I don't care about this being on Vita. We need new ips and spin offs for vita, not straight ports. A few of them is fine but the vita having its own identity as a system instead of just a portable ps3 is a priority for its success.

Otherwise, most consumers would look at the ps3 and the vita and say, "Why would I want both? If they mostly play the same games, I only need one. I wouldn't need to buy a whole new system just to play the same games on the go."

I want the Vita to have its own games to convince me to buy it, not ps3 games. Spin-offs are fine, but it shouldn't turn into a port machine.

GraveLord2010d ago

Sony can't push cross platform play too much. The Vita needs to stand on its own. It can't rely on the PS3.

You aren't being asked to pay twice for the game. It's just an option if you're on the go a lot.

Christopher2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

***Sony can't push cross platform play too much. The Vita needs to stand on its own. It can't rely on the PS3. ***

Thinking like this will spell doom for the Vita since Sony doesn't have enough money to pay third-parties to develop more expensive, longer to develop games on the PSVita, which also has a much smaller market share, when they're making enough money with lower costs on the 3DS/DS with the larger market share.

In order to sustain itself, Sony has to sell the two devices together. They've already been doing that with the cross-play capabilities. They need to carry it through so that for almost any major release on the PS3, there's a reason to get it for the Vita.

This is my opinion, of course. I think Sony's greatest issue in the last decade has been how segregated it has made itself. You don't want to do the same with products that were made to be used alongside each other. Sony needs to start selling their products and services as a package, not as individual products.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2010d ago
Akuma-2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

I'm buying this first day. To each hos own bit this is why I support playstation because they have a lot of games. The ps vita will do great imo because Sony have a lot of software for it. I can't wait to buy this first day. I wonder if there will be some sort of co op option where someone could play on a vita with a friend on ps3. It would be amazing and i cant wait to see more of this game.

Playstation is the future and thr future is playstation

ginsunuva2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

Actually, I feel like Sony is doing it wrong again. People don't want a short SP-only game on the go, especially when its better ps3 version is out at the same time.

Handhelds need games with no real "end" to them, like fighters, MP shooters, racers, music, and rpgs - lots of replay value. We need PS Battle Royale, Twisted Metal, LBP karting, and some ps3 RPGs on the Vita. Also those cheaper PSN games that feel strange playing on the ps3 and a large screen would be perfect for Vita; tell sony to release those for Vita. Those games often feel made for handhelds - often iOS ports.

I'm betting this game will be no longer than 12 hours, so there's really no point in having a vita version to carry on a save. Long rpg's and multiplayer games and the ones mentioned above are the type of games that need simultaneous handheld and console releases.

But on the other hand, it would be great if Sony brought all the ps3 exclusives to Vita, because I'm going off to college and could just bring a vita instead of the whole ps3.

slixshot2010d ago

Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy Approve!

StraightPath2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

"thieves in time"

Another platformer and game based on time travel. Not very creative as the time travel theme used in games has been done to death.

Remember Crack in time anyone? or the 100s of games and platformers before using the time theme :D

but anyway a new game for vita and that all that matters.

badz1492010d ago

But we still get a new FPS every here and then, right? So, what's the problem of this? And have you ever played Crack in Time? It's not based on time travel at all and it has the best time manipulating puzzle ever imo!

showtimefolks2010d ago

great more games need for VIta and sony will deliver

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2010d ago
Abash2010d ago

Pretty cool, still getting the PS3 version despite owning a Vita

pr0digyZA2010d ago

Thats great, wonder if the hd collection will ever go on.

Regent_of_the_Mask2010d ago ShowReplies(1)
--Onilink--2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

mmm i would have definitely prefered a unique Sly Cooper game for the Vita, not just a port of the PS3 version

--Onilink--2010d ago

still trying to figure out why someone would prefer a port over a unique game... well this is N4G.. i guess i should have seen the disagrees coming a mile away just for making a very slightly negative comment about something Sony related

xursz2010d ago

"This version of the game will release alongside the PlayStation 3 version of Sly Cooper Thieves in Time Fall 2012 and will also feature cross-play functions."

This^ is probably why you got disagreed. To be honest I'd rather them focus their attention on ONE game for BOTH systems rather than 2 different games with no cross play, less features and overall effort.

stevoman752010d ago

It's not that people wouldn't want a unique game. if it was possible they would definately prefer that. In this case, if they didnt port it to the vita then there would be no sly cooper on the vita. What I don't get is why are people mad when they bring ps3 ports to the vita... Its not like there is a unique game to take its place if the port wasnt ported. this just lets more people play the games.

MasterCornholio2010d ago

It it bothers you so much just think of it as a multiplatform title. Anyways devs in the best have said many times that it's extremely easy to bring PS3 titles to the Vita which is why you see a lot of unique games and PS3 ports for the Vita.

XperiaRay

Christopher2010d ago

I'm with you --Onilink--.

Instead of paying $110 to play the same game at home or on the go, I would rather pay $110 to play two entirely different games. All the "on the go" version does is get you through the experience faster, which isn't all that great unless there is a ton of replayability. If this is anything like other Sly Cooper games, that won't be the case. They'll be good games, but other than collecting some chest rewards, you won't want to play through the story multiple times in a row.

StanSmith2010d ago

@Onilink

Got to agree with you and cgoodno. I hope this is just a one off. It's devaluing the Vita as a product by the system not having it's own unique games. They're also making their handheld console become direct competition with the PS3.

It seems pointless and I don't think it will get Sony many sales by just copying games over from PS3. I would have preferred new games using the existing franchises like they did with Uncharted Golden Abyss and with God of War on PSP.

It makes no sense buying the same game twice, but to each there own.

Christopher2010d ago

***They're also making their handheld console become direct competition with the PS3. ***

Another great point on this.

Arnon2010d ago (Edited 2010d ago )

How are people disagreeing with you? There's really no logic behind releasing the same game on two different platforms at the same time if it's not a bundle.

And while I own a vita (nifty defice), I would much rather prefer it on the big screen at a much higher resolution.

And MARIOFTW makes a good point. This is almost tarnishing the Vita's library. It's neat that it can run on the vita, but where's the vita specific Sly game? They're literally making their $250 portable compete with their $250 home console.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2010d ago
Godchild10202010d ago

It's not a port of a game that is already out. It's also expanding the sales. There may not be that many people that have both the PS3 and a Vita, so this does help those that wanted the game but only own a vita.

I'm happy this happening becuase I get to play this game on the go and at my house.

Also how we so sure this is a port and not being built from the ground up along side the Ps3 version?

--Onilink--2010d ago

Well i never said it was a bad thing its coming out, i simply said i would have prefered a new game, since the port will still take tine and money from another developer that could have been used for a new game.

But still, i guess something is better than nothing, ill just stick to the ps3 version