The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
[PS Vita] Your Hotline Miami and Muramasa handheld
Thing is, games make small enough margins when they aren't blockbusters.
There is very little Sony can afford to offer anyone to develop a game they'll literally see no return on.
Making NFS run just like the console version on the Vita probably cost them a farm. The mentality that them doing a superior and amazing port job should be rewarded with them not getting paid is...?
What are you talking about? If people buy just one version of the game, they'll get money. The number of people that will actually buy two versions of a game is tiny. Completely irrelevant. Go take a look at the PSP's multiplatform software sales if you want proof of this. The idea behind something like cross-buy isn't about giving a free game away, it's about providing more value to the game. It helps incentivise people that are on the fence or weren't interested in it into buying the game just because it seems like a deal. The idea that separate versions == more money is the kind of logic you'd get from a robot/accountant and doesn't really hold up that well under scrutiny.
Out of curiosity, do you complain about SteamPlay? Because Valve came up with this idea first. They sell a number of PC and Mac games as just one purchase, instead of separately.
Edit: Just as anecdotal evidence, if NFS MW were a cross-buy game, I would've bought it, despite of my problems with EA. As it is, I'm happy to wait for the price to drop significantly.
On the other hand, I'll probably buy PS All Stars and R&C FFS/QF when they come out and a large reason for that is them being cross-buy games. Same thing goes with most cross-buy games actually, aside from the ones that just don't appeal at all to me (pinball, darts, bowling, etc.). And the ones I would've bought anyway, I only would've bought for one system normally.
Wait, what?
That would probably be Blizzard. Hell, even EA was on that bandwagon pretty early on for some titles (although, annoyingly, not all).
But that's beside the point. They're both PCs with the same hardware, regardless of the OS. Releasing a game as separate PC/Mac purchases is like demanding that consumers buy one version for XP and another for Win7.
I do think Crossbuy is a nice incentive and probably works out well for some publishers, but it's hardly something I'd be upset about a game not offering. When it's there, I'll use it, but if not, eh.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
A Mac and a PC are essentially the same hardware though. I know that that is a somewhat simplistic viewpoint, but the Mac/PC relationship is much different than PS3/Vita or even PS3/360.
Of course. A PC is a PC and a Mac is one quick step away from also being a PC.
Thing is, games make small enough margins when they aren't blockbusters.
There is very little Sony can afford to offer anyone to develop a game they'll literally see no return on.
Making NFS run just like the console version on the Vita probably cost them a farm. The mentality that them doing a superior and amazing port job should be rewarded with them not getting paid is...?
What are you talking about? If people buy just one version of the game, they'll get money. The number of people that will actually buy two versions of a game is tiny. Completely irrelevant. Go take a look at the PSP's multiplatform software sales if you want proof of this. The idea behind something like cross-buy isn't about giving a free game away, it's about providing more value to the game. It helps incentivise people that are on the fence or weren't interested in it into buying the game just because it seems like a deal. The idea that separate versions == more money is the kind of logic you'd get from a robot/accountant and doesn't really hold up that well under scrutiny.
Out of curiosity, do you complain about SteamPlay? Because Valve came up with this idea first. They sell a number of PC and Mac games as just one purchase, instead of separately.
Edit: Just as anecdotal evidence, if NFS MW were a cross-buy game, I would've bought it, despite of my problems with EA. As it is, I'm happy to wait for the price to drop significantly.
On the other hand, I'll probably buy PS All Stars and R&C FFS/QF when they come out and a large reason for that is them being cross-buy games. Same thing goes with most cross-buy games actually, aside from the ones that just don't appeal at all to me (pinball, darts, bowling, etc.). And the ones I would've bought anyway, I only would've bought for one system normally.
I think the argument is that as far as incentives go, porting an entire game (and making sure it crossplays) is a pretty expensive one from a developer's standpoint.
I honestly think that crossplay is pretty darn nifty from a technical standpoint, I'm just not sure many developers besides Sony will take the extra effort unfortunately.
Why the crap did I ever make my original name "cloudeagle?"
Hate to break up the discussion, but does anyone have any thoughts on Dokuro? The IGN review (Link) was pretty good on it. There's no demo that I can see...
Thing is, games make small enough margins when they aren't blockbusters.
There is very little Sony can afford to offer anyone to develop a game they'll literally see no return on.
Making NFS run just like the console version on the Vita probably cost them a farm. The mentality that them doing a superior and amazing port job should be rewarded with them not getting paid is...?
What are you talking about? If people buy just one version of the game, they'll get money. The number of people that will actually buy two versions of a game is tiny. Completely irrelevant. Go take a look at the PSP's multiplatform software sales if you want proof of this. The idea behind something like cross-buy isn't about giving a free game away, it's about providing more value to the game. It helps incentivise people that are on the fence or weren't interested in it into buying the game just because it seems like a deal. The idea that separate versions == more money is the kind of logic you'd get from a robot/accountant and doesn't really hold up that well under scrutiny.
Out of curiosity, do you complain about SteamPlay? Because Valve came up with this idea first. They sell a number of PC and Mac games as just one purchase, instead of separately.
Edit: Just as anecdotal evidence, if NFS MW were a cross-buy game, I would've bought it, despite of my problems with EA. As it is, I'm happy to wait for the price to drop significantly.
On the other hand, I'll probably buy PS All Stars and R&C FFS/QF when they come out and a large reason for that is them being cross-buy games. Same thing goes with most cross-buy games actually, aside from the ones that just don't appeal at all to me (pinball, darts, bowling, etc.). And the ones I would've bought anyway, I only would've bought for one system normally.
If its a good game, people will buy one version or the other, regardless. The number of people who would only buy it 'If it had crossplay' is so statistically small that they'd fit on a pinhead. The same could be said for people who will buy both, but this latter group means more money, not less, so they are the more important insignificant outlier. Even if I buy NFS on PS3 for 60$ and later buy NFS on Vita when its on sale for 15$ or something (Which I would do. I'm sure plenty of people would.) that's still way more money for them then if I simply bought NFS for 60$ and already had both.
But but but you say, ITS SO EASY ITS LIKE STEAMPLAY.
Except not.
Steamplay only exists in its current form because: Apple gave up making their own PowerPC line and started using Intel parts and similar. The guts of a PC and a mac are identical so a lot of the same optimization works across the board. The main difference between PC and Mac games? DirectX (To ease production costs!)
But so many people do it, you say! It must be easy! Hold on there, chippy. That isn't how it works. The Mac is a market people want to break into. People want their software on mac because Apple is a huge name. They eat the loss simply to move units into Mac loving households. We'll ignore the fact that only 305 games out of 1785 games on Steam run on Mac, since it should be just a flip of the switch and instantaneous money, though.
The PSV uses a completely different processor and graphics chip style then the PS3. The SDK is different. This isn't just hashing in some openGL support instead of DX like a mac port, and letting the drivers (Which use the same instruction sets and such.) do most of the grunt work. This is like... Well, you can't just bitshift Uncharted and magically have it work on the Vita. It takes a lot of time and money to make lower count models and optimize systems for use on a handheld. Its why most PC games just brute force their way through performance issues. It's easier to do that then spend the weeks optimizing code for a small increase in performance.
If Sony could somehow moneyhat people into making crossbuy games to push hardware? Keen.
Also lets not forget that things like Sly have already been confirmed to be one way cross buy, you have to get the PS3 version to get the deal. So what does this mean? A) Digital only PSV game (Some people will hate this.) You're pretty much spiting your Vita audience at this point. Hope you bought that 99$ memory card.
If you think it's a great idea, because you get to save money, that'd a perfectly valid viewpoint. From a business standpoint, there isn't much value to it. Unless it's just a discount on the vita version that basically flat pays for the porting and is made without a desire of profit, then it might have some merit as simply a way to push hardware sales, to further increase future sales. That is, if any publisher believes the Vita will actually be alive to make future sales.
I wasn't thinking nearly that deeply. A PC and a Mac are both computers. The average person doesn't really consider them "different" in the way that a handheld is different from a home console, or a PS3 is different from an Xbox.
Well, since we are deep into this debate, I will weigh in on the new developments. Like I said before, if the game is different on both platforms(Vita and PS3), it is different and should be treated as two games. I'm ok with buying it in this scenario if I must have both. If, in the case of All Star, NFS, etc, it is essentially the same game, and the cross play feature is basically me playing on my couch, saving, and then continuing right where I left off in say the car or somewhere else with my vita, then I am in essence playing the exact same game. I know this will spark a war with some people, but in the loosest sense, it's like playing at my desk on my sweet rig that I built, cloud saving with steam, then loading up the same game on my laptop at school/work and continuing. I understand, from a hardware standpoint, I'm comparing apples to oranges, and people will argue that a PC and a laptop are the same thing and the developer made only one game in this case. But I'm looking at this from a purely software POV. I don't think I will be able to swallow that fact that I am playing the same game, but paying twice for it. If I have to pay 20 extra dollars for the PS3 version to unlock the Vita version digitally or something, thats cool. But somethings gotta give for me to believe in the whole crossbuy/play thing. Because when it comes down to it, I will almost always pick the PS3 version unless it is a game that I feel warrants playing on a handheld, like lumines or some shit, OR if it isn't the same game, like Assassins Creed. Then I would make the choice between getting both or getting the one I would rather have.
I'm really excited for NFS, especially on the Vita. But first and foremost I want to play that shit on a big screen. So I'm conflicted. On the other hand, All Stars has become a day one purchase for me, not because the beta sold me on it(it did), but because it will be cross buy.
The thing is that it isn't very good business to give one version away, but at the same time I'd bet there is only a very tiny amount of people that are willing to actually buy both versions.
It kinda feels like a damned if you do, damned if you don't kinda thing. Either you're giving away a free port or you're not getting any sales, either way you're spending money and effort for little to no return.
Yeah, and I get that side of the argument from everyone taking that side. I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing, or trying to make people see my way. I just wanted to state(originally) that it would be nice to have NFS be cross buy, as I'm sure I will feel the same for many upcoming games that play similarly on the vita. I was just thinking out loud that I would buy the fuck out of that game for that reason alone. But otherwise, I feel like I won't. I know it sounds stupid, because I say I want it. But it's like, I only really want it because I can play anywhere I am. But if I have to pay double for that feature, I kinda lose all interest.
But I totally see that it in a way screws the hard working people who made it, but it is companies like EA and their greed that make me think this way in the first place. Who knows, I may still buy one of them, or both. And maybe some companies will jump on the cross buy bandwagon and surprise us. I will remain cautiously optimistic.
Did anyone in PAL-land pick up Frobisher Says! at any point? It's been out there for something like a month, I think, and I haven't really seen anything for it, feedback-wise. I figure for the price of Free, I can't -not- download it, but it probably would be nice to get some opinions anyway.
Not to mention one of the PSP's main problems (as Sony officials have admitted) was that the games didn't really distinguish themselves from the console versions. While the crossplay tech is neat it really, really doesn't help that problem.
Why the crap did I ever make my original name "cloudeagle?"
Well, since we are deep into this debate, I will weigh in on the new developments. Like I said before, if the game is different on both platforms(Vita and PS3), it is different and should be treated as two games. I'm ok with buying it in this scenario if I must have both. If, in the case of All Star, NFS, etc, it is essentially the same game, and the cross play feature is basically me playing on my couch, saving, and then continuing right where I left off in say the car or somewhere else with my vita, then I am in essence playing the exact same game. I know this will spark a war with some people, but in the loosest sense, it's like playing at my desk on my sweet rig that I built, cloud saving with steam, then loading up the same game on my laptop at school/work and continuing. I understand, from a hardware standpoint, I'm comparing apples to oranges, and people will argue that a PC and a laptop are the same thing and the developer made only one game in this case. But I'm looking at this from a purely software POV. I don't think I will be able to swallow that fact that I am playing the same game, but paying twice for it. If I have to pay 20 extra dollars for the PS3 version to unlock the Vita version digitally or something, thats cool. But somethings gotta give for me to believe in the whole crossbuy/play thing. Because when it comes down to it, I will almost always pick the PS3 version unless it is a game that I feel warrants playing on a handheld, like lumines or some shit, OR if it isn't the same game, like Assassins Creed. Then I would make the choice between getting both or getting the one I would rather have.
I'm really excited for NFS, especially on the Vita. But first and foremost I want to play that shit on a big screen. So I'm conflicted. On the other hand, All Stars has become a day one purchase for me, not because the beta sold me on it(it did), but because it will be cross buy.
Hell, I'll go a step further and say that game licenses should be entirely console independent. This probably won't happen anytime soon because it isn't even remotely compatible with how the market works, and it may never happen, but the way I see it, the consumer ideal would be to buy a game from a publisher and then be able to use that game on and and all platforms the game is compatible with. Like, if you buy Assassin's Creed VII from Ubisoft, you should be able to use it on Steam, your Xbox 1080, PlayStation 4, Vita II, and Wii-Nee without buying it multiple times. And all DLC and saves would be cloud-based and would be compatible across all platforms.
But that won't happen. I'm sure some people will say that that's asking too much. I personally don't think it is. I just think the nature of the gaming market would have to fundamentally change for that to happen.
I feel the same way about videos. Like what Apple did with their mp3s - getting rid of the DRM - should be the same for the videos they sell. Assuming the hardware could handle it, I should be able to buy movies on iTunes and play them on my Vita, or from the PS3 store and play them on my iPhone. Content should be platform-independent barring hardware limitations.
I do think Crossbuy is a nice incentive and probably works out well for some publishers, but it's hardly something I'd be upset about a game not offering. When it's there, I'll use it, but if not, eh.
I don't think it's a necessity, but it's heading in the right direction. We're currently heading in the wrong direction, with retailer-exclusive game content and console-exclusive content as well. (Assassin's Creed III has PS3-only missions, same as Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood did). That's just crap, in my opinion, and it all wraps into the same mentality. Not a fan of timed exclusives, either. Microsoft and Sony work very hard at segregating content. And while I can understand it, I don't like it, and it certainly does not serve the consumer's best interests.
Anyway, isn't Liberation an entirely different game? I have both the PS3 limited edition preordered and the Vita game preordered. Different characters and everything, no?
Anyway, isn't Liberation an entirely different game? I have both the PS3 limited edition preordered and the Vita game preordered. Different characters and everything, no?
Did anyone in PAL-land pick up Frobisher Says! at any point? It's been out there for something like a month, I think, and I haven't really seen anything for it, feedback-wise. I figure for the price of Free, I can't -not- download it, but it probably would be nice to get some opinions anyway.
It's pretty good, especially for free. I've spent a good few hours on it.
I think the easiest solution is for games to come with incentives to buy them on the Vita/PS3. Like, you buy game X on the PS3, and you get:
A. A discount on a Vita purchase of Game X.
B. Exclusive DLC for the Vita version.
C. Something you can unlock by having both versions? Like special missions or weapons or whatever.
Basically it would be really hard to push people into picking up both versions if the biggest benefit is 'you can take it with you'. I think the average gamer is happy enough playing it on one system or another.
Also if Sony wants to move more Vitas they need to keep mentioning the fact that not only does it have beautiful games and graphics, but that its also basically a tablet (with some limitations) as well.
I'm not getting Assassin's Creed 3 for the PS3 but I might get AC: Liberation for the Vita. However, if there was a $60 digital deal that got you both games, I'd definitely buy it.
Not to mention one of the PSP's main problems (as Sony officials have admitted) was that the games didn't really distinguish themselves from the console versions. While the crossplay tech is neat it really, really doesn't help that problem.
Never really thought of it this way. Since I already have the system, I stop seeing it as a struggling system/market for sony. But I always do this. That's a good point. Games that are the same on both really don't help them differentiate the Vita, or put it in the spotlight enough to push hardware/software sales. So I guess the reason I want NFS or anything else to be cross buy is actually a bad one for the longterm survival of the Vita...weird.
Well, since we are deep into this debate, I will weigh in on the new developments. Like I said before, if the game is different on both platforms(Vita and PS3), it is different and should be treated as two games. I'm ok with buying it in this scenario if I must have both. If, in the case of All Star, NFS, etc, it is essentially the same game, and the cross play feature is basically me playing on my couch, saving, and then continuing right where I left off in say the car or somewhere else with my vita, then I am in essence playing the exact same game. I know this will spark a war with some people, but in the loosest sense, it's like playing at my desk on my sweet rig that I built, cloud saving with steam, then loading up the same game on my laptop at school/work and continuing. I understand, from a hardware standpoint, I'm comparing apples to oranges, and people will argue that a PC and a laptop are the same thing and the developer made only one game in this case. But I'm looking at this from a purely software POV. I don't think I will be able to swallow that fact that I am playing the same game, but paying twice for it. If I have to pay 20 extra dollars for the PS3 version to unlock the Vita version digitally or something, thats cool. But somethings gotta give for me to believe in the whole crossbuy/play thing. Because when it comes down to it, I will almost always pick the PS3 version unless it is a game that I feel warrants playing on a handheld, like lumines or some shit, OR if it isn't the same game, like Assassins Creed. Then I would make the choice between getting both or getting the one I would rather have.
I'm really excited for NFS, especially on the Vita. But first and foremost I want to play that shit on a big screen. So I'm conflicted. On the other hand, All Stars has become a day one purchase for me, not because the beta sold me on it(it did), but because it will be cross buy.
Hell, I'll go a step further and say that game licenses should be entirely console independent. This probably won't happen anytime soon because it isn't even remotely compatible with how the market works, and it may never happen, but the way I see it, the consumer ideal would be to buy a game from a publisher and then be able to use that game on and and all platforms the game is compatible with. Like, if you buy Assassin's Creed VII from Ubisoft, you should be able to use it on Steam, your Xbox 1080, PlayStation 4, Vita II, and Wii-Nee without buying it multiple times. And all DLC and saves would be cloud-based and would be compatible across all platforms.
But that won't happen. I'm sure some people will say that that's asking too much. I personally don't think it is. I just think the nature of the gaming market would have to fundamentally change for that to happen.
I feel the same way about videos. Like what Apple did with their mp3s - getting rid of the DRM - should be the same for the videos they sell. Assuming the hardware could handle it, I should be able to buy movies on iTunes and play them on my Vita, or from the PS3 store and play them on my iPhone. Content should be platform-independent barring hardware limitations.
I totally agree with you on this. It would be nice if you basically unlocked any form of the game that has been released for any system with a singular purchase. Because I tend to buy games for the console, and much later(usually when Steam rapes the hell out of the price) re-buy it for PC.
The whole mp3/video argument is another beast I can't stand, especially in regards to apple controlling it. I love my iPods, but I refuse to buy any media content from apple for the limiting use they allow for it. The only things I may have are the free digital copies I get through itunes from retail DVDs/BDs. Digital Distribution is so corrupt. You basically don't own anything, not outright at least. If I have 100 iDevices, I should be able to put all my shit on all of them. I know it is hyperbole, but if you bought something, they shouldn't tell you what to do with it. Well, that's how I feel I guess.
So uh... Street Fighter X Tekken comes out tomorrow.
You mean a half-year-late port of a game with utterly broken balance, a terrible gem system that no one ever wanted, garnered massive ill-will on consoles due to locking 20 on-disc characters already 100% finished behind a pay-gate, and a dead community?
The whole mp3/video argument is another beast I can't stand, especially in regards to apple controlling it. I love my iPods, but I refuse to buy any media content from apple for the limiting use they allow for it. The only things I may have are the free digital copies I get through itunes from retail DVDs/BDs. Digital Distribution is so corrupt. You basically don't own anything, not outright at least. If I have 100 iDevices, I should be able to put all my shit on all of them. I know it is hyperbole, but if you bought something, they shouldn't tell you what to do with it. Well, that's how I feel I guess.
Not to nitpick or anything... but all the music sold on iTunes has been DRM Free for years now.
(You are correct about DRM on the Movies, TV Shows, etc.)
I was excited for SFxT, but then I sorta forgot about it entirely. Still, there's a half dozen other fighting games that I would pick up before it now.
I remembered that Assassin's Creed III is getting a Wii U release that has the possibility of coming out on top of the other console versions, so I may go ahead and pre-order Liberation to get my Assassin's Creed fix to hold me over til next month (or however long it takes to get a hold of a Wii U).
So uh... Street Fighter X Tekken comes out tomorrow.
You mean a half-year-late port of a game with utterly broken balance, a terrible gem system that no one ever wanted, garnered massive ill-will on consoles due to locking 20 on-disc characters already 100% finished behind a pay-gate, and a dead community?
The whole mp3/video argument is another beast I can't stand, especially in regards to apple controlling it. I love my iPods, but I refuse to buy any media content from apple for the limiting use they allow for it. The only things I may have are the free digital copies I get through itunes from retail DVDs/BDs. Digital Distribution is so corrupt. You basically don't own anything, not outright at least. If I have 100 iDevices, I should be able to put all my shit on all of them. I know it is hyperbole, but if you bought something, they shouldn't tell you what to do with it. Well, that's how I feel I guess.
Not to nitpick or anything... but all the music sold on iTunes has been DRM Free for years now.
(You are correct about DRM on the Movies, TV Shows, etc.)
Really? like, you can put it on more than 5 devices now? If so, that is awesome and I will admit to being somewhat wrong about apple. If not, they still suck and my point remains unchanged...haha. But it was a more general DRM on digital purchases rant. So I think you got my point. If not, apologies for being a cheap consumer who wants what I pay for to be all mine.
As for all the SF x Tekken talk, I'm with you guys, I was hyped a lot at the beginning, then lost interest because I wanted the Tekken x SF version instead and was disappointed that it wasn't a simultaneous release. Then I thought, maybe I'll get the Vita version instead when it comes out. But amid a constant stream of new releases(including a standalone Tekken game) and sales on everything else I've been wanting or waiting on, my interest has also sizzled. So I am with you guys on this one too.
I just wanted an expanded version of SFIV, which it tried really hard to be, and everything sounded great on paper. Seems like it fell pretty short, but I'm hoping they make another attempt.
Corpse Party on PSP. What more can you say about it? In my previous PlayStation.Blog entries, I’ve likened it to horror classics such as Clock Tower and Fatal Frame. I’ve talked about how it’s one of the creepiest, most effective horror games I’ve ever played, and how its unique visuals, its 3D binaural audio and its storytelling methods help give it an uncomfortable, unforgettable atmosphere. And you, fair players… you agreed with me. You played it late at night with headphones on, just as I suggested, and it kept you awake. It haunted your nightmares and made you jump every time your house creaked or your neighbor’s kids smacked the wall… until you realized, wait a minute, I don’t have any neighbors!
And then you were never heard from again…Presumably because you were too busy getting every wrong end in the game, of course. It’s hard to resist the charm of those horrible, horrible deaths, after all! Call it morbid curiosity if you will, but we all know you, like Morishige, get a certain sadistic thrill out of seeing (or, more often, hearing) these characters you’ve come to know and love get killed, slowly, in the most creatively twisted ways imaginable.
But then, some of you reading this might not have the slightest idea what I’m talking about, because you’ve committed the ultimate sin of never having played Corpse Party. Well, fear not! You can make up for it on the cheap, since Corpse Party will be available on the North American PlayStation Store for $9.99 – half off its regular price! – from tomorrow’s Store update until two updates later on November 6th.
But wait, there’s more! Not only is Corpse Party cheaper than ever, its sequel Corpse Party: Book of Shadows has officially been announced for digital release on PSP in North America this winter (with a European release planned for sometime shortly thereafter). So you’d best get familiar with the denizens of Heavenly Host Elementary School now, as they’re going to be coming back full-force in a just a few short months!
…Ah, Corpse Party: Book of Shadows. I’ve been translating that game for the last couple months, and I have to say, it is one hell of a sequel. It’s divided into eight chapters, each of which tells its own self-contained short story. Some of them help fill in the blanks of what happened during crucial off-camera scenes from the original game. Others go into the back-story of various characters, helping to flesh them out and make their roles in the series mythos a bit clearer. Still others ask “what if?,” presenting an alternate version of events from the first game in which characters who previously died are kept alive and given a fleeting chance to stay that way. And the game’s wonderfully-titled final chapter, “Blood Drive,” serves as a true sequel, focusing on two of the first game’s survivors as they venture somewhere even deadlier than Heavenly Host Elementary School in order to dig up some answers.
The whole game is presented in a first-person point-and-click adventure game style, and is much heavier on dialogue- and narrative-driven cutscenes than its predecessor (even venturing into visual novel territory at times). The spooky atmosphere is as thick as ever, though, and the gameplay is aided by fast-forward and message log features, as well as the ability to open the menu and save at absolutely any time (even during cutscenes).
Fans of the first game are virtually guaranteed to love Corpse Party: Book of Shadows, and fans of survival horror and horror fiction in general (especially Japanese horror) who haven’t already given this series a try are strongly encouraged to do so, since it really is among the best at what it does.
Specific information on pricing and release timing will be available in the coming months… and in the meantime, that first Corpse Party is calling your name, quietly and mournfully, in the voice of a child. A dead child. And how can you possibly ignore the voice of a dead child?
How, indeed…
0
minor incidentyou can't swim whenyou've been dead a hundred yearsRegistered User, Transition Teamregular
So uh... Street Fighter X Tekken comes out tomorrow.
You mean a half-year-late port of a game with utterly broken balance, a terrible gem system that no one ever wanted, garnered massive ill-will on consoles due to locking 20 on-disc characters already 100% finished behind a pay-gate, and a dead community?
The whole mp3/video argument is another beast I can't stand, especially in regards to apple controlling it. I love my iPods, but I refuse to buy any media content from apple for the limiting use they allow for it. The only things I may have are the free digital copies I get through itunes from retail DVDs/BDs. Digital Distribution is so corrupt. You basically don't own anything, not outright at least. If I have 100 iDevices, I should be able to put all my shit on all of them. I know it is hyperbole, but if you bought something, they shouldn't tell you what to do with it. Well, that's how I feel I guess.
Not to nitpick or anything... but all the music sold on iTunes has been DRM Free for years now.
(You are correct about DRM on the Movies, TV Shows, etc.)
Really? like, you can put it on more than 5 devices now? If so, that is awesome and I will admit to being somewhat wrong about apple. If not, they still suck and my point remains unchanged...haha. But it was a more general DRM on digital purchases rant. So I think you got my point. If not, apologies for being a cheap consumer who wants what I pay for to be all mine.
Yep, they're totally unprotected files. You can put them on your Android phone, Vita, whatever. No limits to how many computers/phones/audio players whatsoever. All that DRM got dropped like 4 years ago.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
0
minor incidentyou can't swim whenyou've been dead a hundred yearsRegistered User, Transition Teamregular
And people, buy Corpse Party. It's fucking great. Wear headphones and play it alone in the dark.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
I have the official Vita headphones. I'm not sure if that's been a good investment or a bad one.
You mean the headphones with a built in mic too? I have those. There's +- on using it over a bluetooth headset (diference in that audio comes in both ears, but both game and speech audio come in the same place compered to speakers for game and voice chat from headset). As actual heaphones they work well enough to use with my iPod/etc.
So I've heard enough about Corpse Party that I'm curious about it now. I loves me some horror games, love 16bit RPGs but... I hate point and click adventure games with an unholy passion. I'd play Madden before I'd play one of those crap games and I would die before I'd play Madden.
And people, buy Corpse Party. It's fucking great. Wear headphones and play it alone in the dark.
I love anything where the only rules are 1. Wear headphones, and 2. Play in the dark.
Sounds awesome. I hope it is super cheap!
It will be $10, which I would say is an awesome price for the game! Seriously excited the Corpse Party will be on sale just so more people have a chance to pick it up.
So I've heard enough about Corpse Party that I'm curious about it now. I loves me some horror games, love 16bit RPGs but... I hate point and click adventure games with an unholy passion. I'd play Madden before I'd play one of those crap games and I would die before I'd play Madden.
So is it still worth a look?
It has the atmosphere and story of a horror game, the aesthetic of a 16-bit RPG, and the gameplay of an adventure game.
Well, really, the gameplay is like a 16-bit RPG if there were no battles. Just finding keys, clues, items, etc, and walking to different parts of the map to interact with stuff. It's not so much of the typical adventure game pixel-hunt/moon-logic stuff.
So, take that how you will.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Posts
Wait, what?
That would probably be Blizzard. Hell, even EA was on that bandwagon pretty early on for some titles (although, annoyingly, not all).
But that's beside the point. They're both PCs with the same hardware, regardless of the OS. Releasing a game as separate PC/Mac purchases is like demanding that consumers buy one version for XP and another for Win7.
I do think Crossbuy is a nice incentive and probably works out well for some publishers, but it's hardly something I'd be upset about a game not offering. When it's there, I'll use it, but if not, eh.
Of course. A PC is a PC and a Mac is one quick step away from also being a PC.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
I think the argument is that as far as incentives go, porting an entire game (and making sure it crossplays) is a pretty expensive one from a developer's standpoint.
I honestly think that crossplay is pretty darn nifty from a technical standpoint, I'm just not sure many developers besides Sony will take the extra effort unfortunately.
If its a good game, people will buy one version or the other, regardless. The number of people who would only buy it 'If it had crossplay' is so statistically small that they'd fit on a pinhead. The same could be said for people who will buy both, but this latter group means more money, not less, so they are the more important insignificant outlier. Even if I buy NFS on PS3 for 60$ and later buy NFS on Vita when its on sale for 15$ or something (Which I would do. I'm sure plenty of people would.) that's still way more money for them then if I simply bought NFS for 60$ and already had both.
But but but you say, ITS SO EASY ITS LIKE STEAMPLAY.
Except not.
Steamplay only exists in its current form because: Apple gave up making their own PowerPC line and started using Intel parts and similar. The guts of a PC and a mac are identical so a lot of the same optimization works across the board. The main difference between PC and Mac games? DirectX (To ease production costs!)
But so many people do it, you say! It must be easy! Hold on there, chippy. That isn't how it works. The Mac is a market people want to break into. People want their software on mac because Apple is a huge name. They eat the loss simply to move units into Mac loving households. We'll ignore the fact that only 305 games out of 1785 games on Steam run on Mac, since it should be just a flip of the switch and instantaneous money, though.
The PSV uses a completely different processor and graphics chip style then the PS3. The SDK is different. This isn't just hashing in some openGL support instead of DX like a mac port, and letting the drivers (Which use the same instruction sets and such.) do most of the grunt work. This is like... Well, you can't just bitshift Uncharted and magically have it work on the Vita. It takes a lot of time and money to make lower count models and optimize systems for use on a handheld. Its why most PC games just brute force their way through performance issues. It's easier to do that then spend the weeks optimizing code for a small increase in performance.
If Sony could somehow moneyhat people into making crossbuy games to push hardware? Keen.
Also lets not forget that things like Sly have already been confirmed to be one way cross buy, you have to get the PS3 version to get the deal. So what does this mean? A) Digital only PSV game (Some people will hate this.)
Anywho.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/363968/ps3-and-vita-cross-buy-potential-is-limited-sony-admits/
If you think it's a great idea, because you get to save money, that'd a perfectly valid viewpoint. From a business standpoint, there isn't much value to it. Unless it's just a discount on the vita version that basically flat pays for the porting and is made without a desire of profit, then it might have some merit as simply a way to push hardware sales, to further increase future sales. That is, if any publisher believes the Vita will actually be alive to make future sales.
PSN: astronautcowboy 3DS: 5343-8146-1833
I have Sega, Nintendo and Xbox games and systems for sale. Please help me buy diapers.
I'm really excited for NFS, especially on the Vita. But first and foremost I want to play that shit on a big screen. So I'm conflicted. On the other hand, All Stars has become a day one purchase for me, not because the beta sold me on it(it did), but because it will be cross buy.
3DS: 1118-0304-5441 | PSN: b1rdman385 | steam:b1rdman385 | BattleTag(Diablo 3): Marticus#1981 | NNID: b1rdman
It kinda feels like a damned if you do, damned if you don't kinda thing. Either you're giving away a free port or you're not getting any sales, either way you're spending money and effort for little to no return.
But I totally see that it in a way screws the hard working people who made it, but it is companies like EA and their greed that make me think this way in the first place. Who knows, I may still buy one of them, or both. And maybe some companies will jump on the cross buy bandwagon and surprise us. I will remain cautiously optimistic.
3DS: 1118-0304-5441 | PSN: b1rdman385 | steam:b1rdman385 | BattleTag(Diablo 3): Marticus#1981 | NNID: b1rdman
Hell, I'll go a step further and say that game licenses should be entirely console independent. This probably won't happen anytime soon because it isn't even remotely compatible with how the market works, and it may never happen, but the way I see it, the consumer ideal would be to buy a game from a publisher and then be able to use that game on and and all platforms the game is compatible with. Like, if you buy Assassin's Creed VII from Ubisoft, you should be able to use it on Steam, your Xbox 1080, PlayStation 4, Vita II, and Wii-Nee without buying it multiple times. And all DLC and saves would be cloud-based and would be compatible across all platforms.
But that won't happen. I'm sure some people will say that that's asking too much. I personally don't think it is. I just think the nature of the gaming market would have to fundamentally change for that to happen.
I feel the same way about videos. Like what Apple did with their mp3s - getting rid of the DRM - should be the same for the videos they sell. Assuming the hardware could handle it, I should be able to buy movies on iTunes and play them on my Vita, or from the PS3 store and play them on my iPhone. Content should be platform-independent barring hardware limitations.
I don't think it's a necessity, but it's heading in the right direction. We're currently heading in the wrong direction, with retailer-exclusive game content and console-exclusive content as well. (Assassin's Creed III has PS3-only missions, same as Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood did). That's just crap, in my opinion, and it all wraps into the same mentality. Not a fan of timed exclusives, either. Microsoft and Sony work very hard at segregating content. And while I can understand it, I don't like it, and it certainly does not serve the consumer's best interests.
Correct.
It's pretty good, especially for free. I've spent a good few hours on it.
A. A discount on a Vita purchase of Game X.
B. Exclusive DLC for the Vita version.
C. Something you can unlock by having both versions? Like special missions or weapons or whatever.
Basically it would be really hard to push people into picking up both versions if the biggest benefit is 'you can take it with you'. I think the average gamer is happy enough playing it on one system or another.
Also if Sony wants to move more Vitas they need to keep mentioning the fact that not only does it have beautiful games and graphics, but that its also basically a tablet (with some limitations) as well.
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire,
Never really thought of it this way. Since I already have the system, I stop seeing it as a struggling system/market for sony. But I always do this. That's a good point. Games that are the same on both really don't help them differentiate the Vita, or put it in the spotlight enough to push hardware/software sales. So I guess the reason I want NFS or anything else to be cross buy is actually a bad one for the longterm survival of the Vita...weird.
I totally agree with you on this. It would be nice if you basically unlocked any form of the game that has been released for any system with a singular purchase. Because I tend to buy games for the console, and much later(usually when Steam rapes the hell out of the price) re-buy it for PC.
The whole mp3/video argument is another beast I can't stand, especially in regards to apple controlling it. I love my iPods, but I refuse to buy any media content from apple for the limiting use they allow for it. The only things I may have are the free digital copies I get through itunes from retail DVDs/BDs. Digital Distribution is so corrupt. You basically don't own anything, not outright at least. If I have 100 iDevices, I should be able to put all my shit on all of them. I know it is hyperbole, but if you bought something, they shouldn't tell you what to do with it. Well, that's how I feel I guess.
3DS: 1118-0304-5441 | PSN: b1rdman385 | steam:b1rdman385 | BattleTag(Diablo 3): Marticus#1981 | NNID: b1rdman
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
You mean a half-year-late port of a game with utterly broken balance, a terrible gem system that no one ever wanted, garnered massive ill-will on consoles due to locking 20 on-disc characters already 100% finished behind a pay-gate, and a dead community?
Not to nitpick or anything... but all the music sold on iTunes has been DRM Free for years now.
(You are correct about DRM on the Movies, TV Shows, etc.)
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
You know, at one point in the distant past, I was going to pick this up. I can't say I feel the same at this very moment, though.
I remembered that Assassin's Creed III is getting a Wii U release that has the possibility of coming out on top of the other console versions, so I may go ahead and pre-order Liberation to get my Assassin's Creed fix to hold me over til next month (or however long it takes to get a hold of a Wii U).
Steam - Wildschwein | The Backlog
Grappling Hook Showdown - Tumblr
Really? like, you can put it on more than 5 devices now? If so, that is awesome and I will admit to being somewhat wrong about apple. If not, they still suck and my point remains unchanged...haha. But it was a more general DRM on digital purchases rant. So I think you got my point. If not, apologies for being a cheap consumer who wants what I pay for to be all mine.
As for all the SF x Tekken talk, I'm with you guys, I was hyped a lot at the beginning, then lost interest because I wanted the Tekken x SF version instead and was disappointed that it wasn't a simultaneous release. Then I thought, maybe I'll get the Vita version instead when it comes out. But amid a constant stream of new releases(including a standalone Tekken game) and sales on everything else I've been wanting or waiting on, my interest has also sizzled. So I am with you guys on this one too.
3DS: 1118-0304-5441 | PSN: b1rdman385 | steam:b1rdman385 | BattleTag(Diablo 3): Marticus#1981 | NNID: b1rdman
Steam - Wildschwein | The Backlog
Grappling Hook Showdown - Tumblr
Also, the sequel has been confirmed as coming to the US.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2012/10/22/corpse-party-book-of-shadows-coming-this-winter-corpse-party-sale-tomorrow/
Yep, they're totally unprotected files. You can put them on your Android phone, Vita, whatever. No limits to how many computers/phones/audio players whatsoever. All that DRM got dropped like 4 years ago.
I love anything where the only rules are 1. Wear headphones, and 2. Play in the dark.
Sounds awesome. I hope it is super cheap!
So, yeah, if that doesn't get you all hot and bothered, there's just no hope for you.
PSN: astronautcowboy 3DS: 5343-8146-1833
I have Sega, Nintendo and Xbox games and systems for sale. Please help me buy diapers.
To this day I still think that purchase was entirely worth it.
PSN: astronautcowboy 3DS: 5343-8146-1833
I have Sega, Nintendo and Xbox games and systems for sale. Please help me buy diapers.
I use a pair of Samsung bluetooth headphones for the Vita. If I'm playing a game, the last thing I want is cords.
But for Corpse Party I made an exception. I needed the giant ear encasing speakers.
You mean the headphones with a built in mic too? I have those. There's +- on using it over a bluetooth headset (diference in that audio comes in both ears, but both game and speech audio come in the same place compered to speakers for game and voice chat from headset). As actual heaphones they work well enough to use with my iPod/etc.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
So is it still worth a look?
It will be $10, which I would say is an awesome price for the game! Seriously excited the Corpse Party will be on sale just so more people have a chance to pick it up.
It has the atmosphere and story of a horror game, the aesthetic of a 16-bit RPG, and the gameplay of an adventure game.
Well, really, the gameplay is like a 16-bit RPG if there were no battles. Just finding keys, clues, items, etc, and walking to different parts of the map to interact with stuff. It's not so much of the typical adventure game pixel-hunt/moon-logic stuff.
So, take that how you will.