AC3:L True Console Experience on the go and more!

#111Jon TalbainPosted 11/7/2012 5:59:57 AM
Crepitant posted...
Jon Talbain posted...


The problem with going by word of mouth is that you still may have certain things wrong. If I hadn't played it for myself, I would think it was much worse than it actually is. And there hasn't been a handheld Assassin's Creed that gives you the type of control and graphics that this one has. I believe that is what the topic creator meant. Other games like Grand Theft Auto might have, but not Assassin's Creed.

I still can't believe they pulled it off, it is amazing to see and play this game. And again, if you haven't had the Vita in your hands and only judge from videos and word of mouth, it isn't the same. That is the point I am making.


Well he's arguing that since this game can't match the PS3 visually it can't be 'console level' by definition. So all he really needs to know to make that argument is that AC is on the Vita...


So this game doesn't match any PS3 game even when the PS3 first came out? People are comparing games from the PS3 right now and it has been out for years. It is the closest Assassin's Creed to the console experience, that isn't hard to see. How many Assassin's Creed games are on the PS3? And how many are on the Vita? The Vita isn't as powerful as the PS3, but it doesn't have to be.

This game should be compared to Assassin''s Creed 1, not 3. But even so, in my opinion this game is a console experience on the go, from a graphics and gameplay standpoint. And thats the thing, people will have a different opinion, which is clear from all the arguments. But it is a fact that there hasn't been an Assassin's Creed game on a handheld that can even be compared to a console game until now.
---
As long as you believe in yourself, nothing may overcome you.
#112NnamzPosted 11/7/2012 11:03:18 AM(edited)
L0L_FAQ posted...


That's one way of saying "Nnamz hasn't read the topic and I've addressed each and every single one of these points at least twice".


And I addressed what you addressed. The term is problematic, but can be helpful, and your claim that it's only used for vitassurance is narrow minded and wrong (disproven by the many, many people who claim this game offers the console experience while at the same time isn't absolutely stellar). Everyone here can see that except you apparently.

Please post more memes though if it makes you feel better.
---
PS3/Vita ID: Nnamz <-- Please message before add. Otherwise will not accept.
3DS Friend Code: 3780 - 9095 - 9402 <-- Inbox me your FC.
#113hajile12(Topic Creator)Posted 11/7/2012 11:38:52 AM
Nnamz posted...
L0L_FAQ posted...


That's one way of saying "Nnamz hasn't read the topic and I've addressed each and every single one of these points at least twice".


And I addressed what you addressed. The term is problematic, but can be helpful, and your claim that it's only used for vitassurance is narrow minded and wrong (disproven by the many, many people who claim this game offers the console experience while at the same time isn't absolutely stellar). Everyone here can see that except you apparently.

Please post more memes though if it makes you feel better.


...disproven by the many, many people who claim this game offers the console experience while at the same time isn't absolutely stellar)

Thats fair and well said.
---
Somtimes i go to dog parks even though i dont have a dog. I bring a leash though and i wear a very shifty look. =I
#114GeminiX7Posted 11/7/2012 12:16:04 PM
At first I thought he was just being argumentative, then I thought he might be trolling. Now, after reading this, I think L0L might just have reading comprehension/learning problems.

"Console" experience references the fact that in previous generations, handheld titles of a normally home console series were extremely watered down/altered to work on the handheld consoles. Some games that were 3d open world on one system might become side-scrolling action platformers(ex. Tomb Raider on PSX vs GBC). Some games might have features severely reduced (ex. DKC on SNES vs DKL on GB). Some might have severe graphical downgrades/changes in art style, or just simplified controls to make the game work in the confines of the handheld platform. At the end of the day, the handheld title was nothing like the console version, for the most part.

What TC and others are trying to explain is not that this game "proves" that Vita = console gaming on the go, or that "This is the best game EVAR!!!". They are simply saying that this game is one of the first(I'd say the PSP GoW titles, GTA Stories, and RE:Revelations really were the first, or some of the first) to truly emulate the style and feel of the console games. Rather than just sectioned off "levels" or "zones" like Bloodlines, this game features full sized cities. It uses the same combat engine as the console title it is tied with. Movements feel just about as fluid as they feel on the console versions as well. They even made attempts to differentiate themselves from the console versions in a way that was productive rather than reductive(the Persona system).

I like the game, but Im more than willing to acknowledge it's faults. I personally hate the Lady Persona. The multiplayer is both confusing and extremely lackluster. The story could have been put together better, and the framerate lags in places. If you aren't a fan of the series or the genre, it'd be easy to think of reasons not to pick this game up. But all that aside, theres no way you can deny the closeness of the game to the console titles(compared to other handheld games) and therefore there's not much argument against the belief that this game provides a "console-like experience".
---
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
#115NnamzPosted 11/7/2012 12:23:29 PM
GeminiX7 posted...
At first I thought he was just being argumentative, then I thought he might be trolling. Now, after reading this, I think L0L might just have reading comprehension/learning problems.

"Console" experience references the fact that in previous generations, handheld titles of a normally home console series were extremely watered down/altered to work on the handheld consoles. Some games that were 3d open world on one system might become side-scrolling action platformers(ex. Tomb Raider on PSX vs GBC). Some games might have features severely reduced (ex. DKC on SNES vs DKL on GB). Some might have severe graphical downgrades/changes in art style, or just simplified controls to make the game work in the confines of the handheld platform. At the end of the day, the handheld title was nothing like the console version, for the most part.

What TC and others are trying to explain is not that this game "proves" that Vita = console gaming on the go, or that "This is the best game EVAR!!!". They are simply saying that this game is one of the first(I'd say the PSP GoW titles, GTA Stories, and RE:Revelations really were the first, or some of the first) to truly emulate the style and feel of the console games. Rather than just sectioned off "levels" or "zones" like Bloodlines, this game features full sized cities. It uses the same combat engine as the console title it is tied with. Movements feel just about as fluid as they feel on the console versions as well. They even made attempts to differentiate themselves from the console versions in a way that was productive rather than reductive(the Persona system).

I like the game, but Im more than willing to acknowledge it's faults. I personally hate the Lady Persona. The multiplayer is both confusing and extremely lackluster. The story could have been put together better, and the framerate lags in places. If you aren't a fan of the series or the genre, it'd be easy to think of reasons not to pick this game up. But all that aside, theres no way you can deny the closeness of the game to the console titles(compared to other handheld games) and therefore there's not much argument against the belief that this game provides a "console-like experience".


Perfect.
---
PS3/Vita ID: Nnamz <-- Please message before add. Otherwise will not accept.
3DS Friend Code: 3780 - 9095 - 9402 <-- Inbox me your FC.
#116hajile12(Topic Creator)Posted 11/7/2012 12:24:05 PM
GeminiX7 posted...
At first I thought he was just being argumentative, then I thought he might be trolling. Now, after reading this, I think L0L might just have reading comprehension/learning problems.

"Console" experience references the fact that in previous generations, handheld titles of a normally home console series were extremely watered down/altered to work on the handheld consoles. Some games that were 3d open world on one system might become side-scrolling action platformers(ex. Tomb Raider on PSX vs GBC). Some games might have features severely reduced (ex. DKC on SNES vs DKL on GB). Some might have severe graphical downgrades/changes in art style, or just simplified controls to make the game work in the confines of the handheld platform. At the end of the day, the handheld title was nothing like the console version, for the most part.

What TC and others are trying to explain is not that this game "proves" that Vita = console gaming on the go, or that "This is the best game EVAR!!!". They are simply saying that this game is one of the first(I'd say the PSP GoW titles, GTA Stories, and RE:Revelations really were the first, or some of the first) to truly emulate the style and feel of the console games. Rather than just sectioned off "levels" or "zones" like Bloodlines, this game features full sized cities. It uses the same combat engine as the console title it is tied with. Movements feel just about as fluid as they feel on the console versions as well. They even made attempts to differentiate themselves from the console versions in a way that was productive rather than reductive(the Persona system).

I like the game, but Im more than willing to acknowledge it's faults. I personally hate the Lady Persona. The multiplayer is both confusing and extremely lackluster. The story could have been put together better, and the framerate lags in places. If you aren't a fan of the series or the genre, it'd be easy to think of reasons not to pick this game up. But all that aside, theres no way you can deny the closeness of the game to the console titles(compared to other handheld games) and therefore there's not much argument against the belief that this game provides a "console-like experience".


I agree 100%.
---
Somtimes i go to dog parks even though i dont have a dog. I bring a leash though and i wear a very shifty look. =I
#117CrepitantPosted 11/7/2012 4:59:02 PM
I think he's just trolling tbh.
#118L0L_FAQPosted 11/7/2012 8:35:38 PM
John Talbain | #107
That also makes your point about Nnamz not reading everything in this topic moronic as well.


How so? In one case, someone is trying to argue against something he simple doesn't even care to read? On the other hand, I'm not arguing that assassin's creed is a good game or not but that the term "console experience" being applied his is idiotic. I don't need to play the game to know this, the same way I don't need to listen to Tears In Heaven to know it's not Gangster Rap.

If you haven't played it for yourself, how can you have a valid opinion? That doesn't even make sense. From the way you argue every point to gamers who have actually played it, one would think you put 100 hours or more into it. But you haven't even played the game and shouldn't even be here.


Maybe if what I was doing was judging the game.

Guess what I'm doing? Hint: Not judging the game.

From: Jon Talbain | #109
The problem with going by word of mouth is that you still may have certain things wrong. If I hadn't played it for myself, I would think it was much worse than it actually is. And there hasn't been a handheld Assassin's Creed that gives you the type of control and graphics that this one has. I believe that is what the topic creator meant. Other games like Grand Theft Auto might have, but not Assassin's Creed.

I still can't believe they pulled it off, it is amazing to see and play this game. And again, if you haven't had the Vita in your hands and only judge from videos and word of mouth, it isn't the same. That is the point I am making.


And there's "never been a handheld GTA that gives you the type of control and graphics that this one (LCS) has" either, This doesn't make it a "console experience". The only thing you've proven is that you can take an extremely specific criterion and try to make it the only criterion for declaring a game a "console experience". It plays like the console games, but there's nothing inherently "console" or positive about that. Moronic reasoning; I know that this game isn't a "console experience" mainly from the fact that it's on a handheld. It's a handheld experience with graphics and gameplay that you may like very much. This term "console experience" is a buzzword and holds no purpose except to be used as vitassurance.
---
http://i.imgur.com/vpXc3.png http://i.imgur.com/lljy5.jpg
"L0L_FAQ is one of the reasons I even read the forums any more" - CJayC
#119L0L_FAQPosted 11/7/2012 8:36:51 PM
From: Jon Talbain | #111
So this game doesn't match any PS3 game even when the PS3 first came out? People are comparing games from the PS3 right now and it has been out for years. It is the closest Assassin's Creed to the console experience, that isn't hard to see. How many Assassin's Creed games are on the PS3? And how many are on the Vita? The Vita isn't as powerful as the PS3, but it doesn't have to be.

This game should be compared to Assassin''s Creed 1, not 3. But even so, in my opinion this game is a console experience on the go, from a graphics and gameplay standpoint. And thats the thing, people will have a different opinion, which is clear from all the arguments. But it is a fact that there hasn't been an Assassin's Creed game on a handheld that can even be compared to a console game until now.


So you think that a fair comparison would be to compare it to the worst Assassin's Creed? Alright then. Better gameplay than AC1. Nobody argued that. I didn't even argue that. What I'm saying has nothing to do with gameplay. Graphics wise? I don't recall AC1 running at woeful sub-SD resolutions and having framerate breakdowns when you start moving fast (i.e. one of the main appeals of Assassin's Creed). And if you think it looks as good as the original AC, I don't think you've played the original AC. That game didn't look amazing, but this game doesn't look quite as good. It doesn't have the multiplayer of Brotherhood or 3 either, but I guess we're leaving that out of the console experience, since those ones aren't console games, right? It's only valid to compare it to the first because that's convenient for the Vita fans.

From: Nnamz | #112
And I addressed what you addressed. The term is problematic, but can be helpful, and your claim that it's only used for vitassurance is narrow minded and wrong (disproven by the many, many people who claim this game offers the console experience while at the same time isn't absolutely stellar). Everyone here can see that except you apparently.

Please post more memes though if it makes you feel better.


No, where has it been proven wrong or narrow minded? What about this gameplay makes it a console experience and not a "PC experience"? What part of this game is inherently "console"? So far, you've just repeated the same crap I've been striking down this entire topic. I posted "memes" because you addressed absolutely nothing I haven't already responded to. I'm not taking responsibility for your own laziness.
---
http://i.imgur.com/vpXc3.png http://i.imgur.com/lljy5.jpg
"L0L_FAQ is one of the reasons I even read the forums any more" - CJayC
#120L0L_FAQPosted 11/7/2012 8:37:06 PM
From: GeminiX7 | #114
At first I thought he was just being argumentative, then I thought he might be trolling. Now, after reading this, I think L0L might just have reading comprehension/learning problems.

"Console" experience references the fact that in previous generations, handheld titles of a normally home console series were extremely watered down/altered to work on the handheld consoles. Some games that were 3d open world on one system might become side-scrolling action platformers(ex. Tomb Raider on PSX vs GBC). Some games might have features severely reduced (ex. DKC on SNES vs DKL on GB). Some might have severe graphical downgrades/changes in art style, or just simplified controls to make the game work in the confines of the handheld platform. At the end of the day, the handheld title was nothing like the console version, for the most part.

What TC and others are trying to explain is not that this game "proves" that Vita = console gaming on the go, or that "This is the best game EVAR!!!". They are simply saying that this game is one of the first(I'd say the PSP GoW titles, GTA Stories, and RE:Revelations really were the first, or some of the first) to truly emulate the style and feel of the console games. Rather than just sectioned off "levels" or "zones" like Bloodlines, this game features full sized cities. It uses the same combat engine as the console title it is tied with. Movements feel just about as fluid as they feel on the console versions as well. They even made attempts to differentiate themselves from the console versions in a way that was productive rather than reductive(the Persona system).

I like the game, but Im more than willing to acknowledge it's faults. I personally hate the Lady Persona. The multiplayer is both confusing and extremely lackluster. The story could have been put together better, and the framerate lags in places. If you aren't a fan of the series or the genre, it'd be easy to think of reasons not to pick this game up. But all that aside, theres no way you can deny the closeness of the game to the console titles(compared to other handheld games) and therefore there's not much argument against the belief that this game provides a "console-like experience".


And I've stated and proven with examples that games before this were not only capable of mimicking the "scale" and the gameplay of console games (GOW Chains Of Olympus and ghosts of Sparta, GTA LCS and VCS, Monster Hunter games, the Prince Of Persia games. Wipeout Pulse and Pure, I can list a plethora more just from the PSP library). I'm also sure that games that play really great without actually even being from a console series will be heralded as "console experiences", as Soul Sacrifice is already being called on this board. There is nothing inherently console about any of this. If you want to compare it to a console game that came out alongside it, why not compare everything? If you do, you see that it's not up to par with it's console counterpart. Period. It's not a "console experience", it's a deep and involving portable game. Why does it have to be anything more at all?
---
http://i.imgur.com/vpXc3.png http://i.imgur.com/lljy5.jpg
"L0L_FAQ is one of the reasons I even read the forums any more" - CJayC