JuanMdP wrote:
Actually none of those games scored a general concensus of bad reviews. Sure, a few people didn't find the games outstanding, but on the aggregate scores, you can see absolutely everybody finds them to be anything ranging from Good to Amazing~.
CoD: D on the other hand, is a game where absolutely every single reviewer agrees that is subpar. And when you read about the game having a one hour long campaign, a handful of MP maps, bugs for getting online and extremely limited maps then you probably have to face that there isn't much to the game~.
That isn't true. Some reviews have actually judged it pretty reasonably some had given it a 3/5. Don't think for a second they didn't say everything you said but they made some good points, it shouldn't be getting lower scores than Resistance, it has a fun MP and yes it isn't perfect but anyone who has played it has said it's fun.
What I don't understand is CoD hasn't been a good single player game since it was on PC even then Medal of Honor was far better if you wanted a single player experience, so to honestly have had that much hope in CoD single player this late in the game especially on the Vita of all things, is crazy to me. I know what CoD has become and it has become a multi-player game.
Plus it doesn't help and this is not an excuse but that the Vita game cards are 4GB only right now and probably not a full 4GB's at that. I mean what could they seriously have done with that? There is no way they could have fit a lengthly single player and have a decent multi-player. I mean just look at Vita games now, a majority of the single player games the good ones clearly have no room for any type of multi-player really. I know for a fact if it was the other way around people would be complaining even more.
I mean heck I am sure AC3: Liberations would have loved to have a better multi-player, they easily couldve have done it but there is no space for it on these game cards is the problem with AC already lengthly single player.
So would CoD players rather have a long single player and a really low content multi-player which is already small enough that would be even worse, probably not now.. no. What sells CoD these days is purely it's multi-player.. Which is mainly what Nihilistic focused on and I am not saying it's the best. I don't even like CoD that much myself anymore and even with that CoD
looks like the console CoD's to me.
Another thing about journalist is I have noticed they all usually follow eachother, IGN writes one horrible review (Ragnarok Odyssey) and literally everyone follows their script, practically almost word for word.
I just think it's impractical to seriously say "In CoD: D's case, everyone says it, it must be true" Everyone says Nicki Minaj and Justin Beiber are great but I don't care what the majority says, I care to listen to people who think for themselves and not follow others and I care to make my own decisions. Sadly reviews are comparable in the same light and many journalist just straight up steal reviews not even thinking for themselves.
I seriously don't know how many RO articles I read that were all copied from IGN's, not exactly cause they could get in trouble but it's like a kid writing a term paper, journalist are no different a lot fo them get lazy and just look at someone elses review and start from there which I don't think anyone with that attitude should even be a journalist but it happens a lot.
CoD hasn't amazed me in ages anyway, so I don't get what people see so differently about the Vita CoD other than the bugs which can be fixed and lack of content which sadly all Vita games could have more. It looks like CoD to me, sure it may not have a ton of content like console versions but the multi-player sure looks and even seems to play fairly close to CoD on console.
I mean even Gravity Rush an amazing single player game was still fairly short simply because the Vita just cannot at this time store that much data on it's game cards. I am really hoping somehow that could change and we start seeing more content in VIta games but I am not getting my hopes up and personally I expect this from a handheld, I don't expect it to be the most content rich experience, I have a extremely nice PC and PS3 if I want a lot of in game content.
So yea.. I accept the fact most Vita games at this moment aren't much in terms of content. They just can't be due to the limited space and we all know CoD if anything they will release a bunch of crap later like new maps and what not that they already are keeping tabs on.. I mean every CoD does that. So the content shouldn't be a problem or the maps over time as I am certain there will be more probably.
I just think Declassified actually turned out a hella of lot better than I actually assumed it was and that is coming from someone who doesn't even play CoD anymore. I think everyone actually thought it was going to be far worse but with Nihilistic's past it seems like even if they did release a decent game people will complain about it, I mean people just don't trust them and Nihilistic has created a very biased view for themselves that clearly is not a good one.
Sorry for the rant but you made me do it once you said the whole "every single reviewer says it" thing, which actually isn't true I just got carried away. I am not defending it I just think bashing the game because of it's lack of content for the most part is kind of harsh considering I myself have noticed that with most Vita games they all lack something in some way simply because of the limited space on the cards.
Me not liking CoD.. I have just been holding off on it, but I feel if people here or the OP actually likes console versions which it sounds like he/she has played them and enjoyed them, I see literally no reason why he/she wouldn't enjoy CoD.. as to me it seems to give that same experience online except portabl from what I have seen.
I would actually like if no one qouted or even responded to this, as I am really not trying to turn this into another one of those threads. I just thought it was a little unfair it's getting way lower scores than Resistance which was way more awful.. and the fact one should not just believe something just because everyone says it or because most review sites say the same thing.
JuanMdP wrote:
ProfessorGerbik wrote:Square Enix has touched the Vita, Lord of Apocalypse.. of course it's only in Japan atm but they showed it some love, just not over seas love.
http://www.siliconera.com/2011/09/21/behold-the-fi
rst-demonic-screenshots-of-lord-of-apocalypse/ PSP and Vita.
That's not entirely accurate, Square-Enix published Lord of Apocalyse (and the prequel, Lord of Arcana) but it didn't develop it, the development is made by Access Games. Same thing happened with The 3rd Birthday, unlike the two initial entries of the series (Parasite Eve 1 & 2), it was developed by a different company (HexaDrive) but published by Square Enix~.
Publishing and development aren't the same thing, so unfortunately, Square Enix still has to do anything for the PSV~.
Did I ever mention the word development? They published the game and it's on the Vita hence they have done something with it.
That was the point mainly.
I've played the game. It's terrible.
What you say about the space on the cards, makes a bit of sense, but how is it that the PSP Medal of Honors, and the PSP games made by Sony Bend are all far better than Declassified? How is it that you've got games like Need for Speed, LBP Vita, and the upcoming PS Allstars that are literally console games, on a 4GB card? Space may be an issue, but I think the majority of the problem is the overall competency of the developer. Some float, while others sink.
And on top of everything is the fact that the game is just lazily done. You can't blame the MIA story on space constraints. You can't blame poor controls on space constraints. Heck, the jump function of the game is useless, as there's nothing to jump on, and they seem to have forgotten the simple ability to jump over things. The game is just sloppy.
They did make some nice menus though.
johngie wrote:
You make a reasonable argument with a number of good points Professor, but I'm a petty person who has to respond to it, so:
I've played the game. It's terrible.
What you say about the space on the cards, makes a bit of sense, but how is it that the PSP Medal of Honors, and the PSP games made by Sony Bend are all far better than Declassified? How is it that you've got games like Need for Speed, LBP Vita, and the upcoming PS Allstars that are literally console games, on a 4GB card? Space may be an issue, but I think the majority of the problem is the overall competency of the developer. Some float, while others sink.
And on top of everything is the fact that the game is just lazily done. You can't blame the MIA story on space constraints. You can't blame poor controls on space constraints. Heck, the jump function of the game is useless, as there's nothing to jump on, and they seem to have forgotten the simple ability to jump over things. The game is just sloppy.
They did make some nice menus though.
I agree as I don't own the game at all simply because I generally don't like what CoD is now period but that is another story. Everyone knew Nihilistic wasn't going to deliver and it's far from perfect but is it better than Resistance, can you say that at least? I can, the demo was awful just from the demo alone I knew I wasn't even giving it a chance which is sad when I had more interest in Little Deviants...
I know about the few games that are very well done but I made that a point as I said a majority of the games, not all of them. The difference is I wasn't saying you can't get a console quality experience out of Vita games but mainly the fact no matter what it is it's usually lacking content even NFS was a cut down version and I am in no way saying they didn't do an excellent job of translating that over to the Vita but still.
PS: All-Stars is a little different as well as it isn't the most graphically intense game and the maps are fairly small which means it should have plenty of space to spare. Of course there are developers really putting work in their games I see that, there have been some exceptional games this month and some more coming.
Again I wasn't making excuses for Nihilistic at all really about the space and yes they could've have put more time into it but it seems like they had this bundle planned and they had a deadline regardless if they wanted to take the time or not, they probably really coudln't as everything seemed to be motion already for CoD: Declassfied. I know they could have done more obviously that shows in everything they have made but all odds where against them either way and sadly that is just how it was.They knew CoD fans only really care about multi-player and they at least put more work into that which many are enjoying, even though it's mindless which CoD has been for a long time now for me.
Now maybe they did have more time, I honestly am not Sony or Activision and I don't think anyone would really know officially how much time they truly had but knowing the bundle has been advertised for a while, it just seems like there was no taking extra time, it is what you give them because it has to be in that bundle and it has to be sold along this time. Who knows, maybe that is making excuses for them..
I mean people were taking huge dumps all over the game bad way way too early which I hate to see and even knowing the poor work Nihlisitc has done.. I know that hurts and for sure didn't make them want to even try.. I know I wouldve just said screw it with all that negativity they had, I seriously probably wouldn't even had finished the game but they were probably contracted to.
They probably just made the game as a FU and I am leaving type of thing.. I mean to have your work to just be completely and utterly trashed like that sucks for anyone, it just does. Yea it's their fault of course but just saying, what did anyone expect? I didn't expect it to be that amazing at all, I thought it was going to be much worse but it seemed to turn out better than I honestly thought it would, it even looks better than I thought it would compared to how horrible it did look when those first screen shots were shown.
Yea I am gonna shut up about CoD though, I just feel if you enjoy shooters and can look past all the bugs and problems that could probably be fixed over time and the lack of content which will also probably will be added later. It shouldn't be that bad of an experience online at least in the sense of what CoD is.
I had mentioned that about Medal of Honor also and how it has always focused purely on the epic single player experience it brings, so to me it's just a slightly unfair comparison for CoD.. CoD's single player was better at one time but it to me at least was still never as good as Medal of Honor even when it was on PC and Consoles, so I am just saying I surely didn't expect the Vita to blow me out of the water with CoD especially it's single player.
CoD to me is a mindless shooter for what it has become and to me that is what the Vita version looks like a interpretation of, that aspect of CoD.
johngie wrote:
You make a reasonable argument with a number of good points Professor, but I'm a petty person who has to respond to it, so:
I've played the game. It's terrible.
What you say about the space on the cards, makes a bit of sense, but how is it that the PSP Medal of Honors, and the PSP games made by Sony Bend are all far better than Declassified? How is it that you've got games like Need for Speed, LBP Vita, and the upcoming PS Allstars that are literally console games, on a 4GB card? Space may be an issue, but I think the majority of the problem is the overall competency of the developer. Some float, while others sink.
And on top of everything is the fact that the game is just lazily done. You can't blame the MIA story on space constraints. You can't blame poor controls on space constraints. Heck, the jump function of the game is useless, as there's nothing to jump on, and they seem to have forgotten the simple ability to jump over things. The game is just sloppy.
They did make some nice menus though.
Here's an explanation people often forget why Declassified is the way it is on Vita:
Nhilistic Call of Duty Black Ops Declassified development Cycle/contract = 5 months
Treyarch's World at War, Black Ops, Black Ops 2 development cycle/contract of each = 2 years per game
(Infinity Wards COD game will fill in the odd year a COD Treyarch game is not released)
Infinity Ward's Modern Warfare 1, 2, 3 development cycle/contract of each = 2 years per game
(Treyarch's COD game will fill in the odd year a COD Infinty Ward game is not released)
Yep... I expect Nhilistic's COD game to be on par of the console versions down to the T [/sarcasm]
Do people see the development time difference? It's hugely different, OF COURSE the Vita game is not going to be as good as the console versions! Activision gave Nhilistic the worse development cycle known to man for a Sony platform, Sony wasn't better - as they gave Nhilistic the same type of 6 month contract ordeal for Resistance. The turnaround is obvious that more development time would warrant a better game. Some don't realize this, Nhilistic might be actually a good developer, they just are never given a game with even a year or two worth of development. Look at all the games they have developed... 8 months, 7 months, 6 months, 5 months - wth!? Who in their right mind can develop in such a short amount of time unless you are a cell phhone/tablet game developer.
Nhilistic produced miracles on the Vita and appreciation stopped at the door when they were released. Short Single Player mode in Declassified is because of the media and review sites - people complained that Resistance Burning Skies had too long of levels and wasn't "handheld bitesize friendly" - so they produced the 5 - 10 minute bouts we are complaining about for Declassified, short levels WANTED by the industry (and yet they still complained, can't make anyone happy now a days) which obviously would affect the length of the SP campaign. They probably saw this and asked activision to provide the SP COD Roads to Victory as an added bonus for those craving more SP, especially since you can't buy Roads to Victory on the Vita Store as of this moment.
Nhilistic also heard complaints about the Burning Skies multiplayer and tried their best to make the multiplayer much better by trying to incorporate everything known by the COD Franchise (perks, kill streaks, leveling, etc.) Seeing as COD is known more for the Multiplayer and probably noticing they had alot of time after developing the SP Campaign in Declassified, they focused most of their attention on Multiplayer which is pretty fun in my opinion and many others. Bugs are of course apparent but they were at a time crunch already probably and QA was probable the least thing on their mind in trying to stay on the strict schedule they were on. They probably thought that it was good enough and that if there was any bugs or problems, the vita allowed them to do patch releases easily - which is currently the case that is happening right now with a first patch already out and the second one coming out soon.
Yes, this game is not perfect but do you even see why above, how the hell could it! How is it even playable in the first place - 6 months of development time remember! I'm not trying to stick up for them, I'm just trying to exlain why Declassified is in the state it is. Few appreciate the fact that the multiplayer is almost as good as their console counter part and being able to play the COD multiplayer on the go is fully realized on the Vita is an astonishment to a few who look at it this way. Alot hate COD in general and that stigma from Resistance Burning Skies has stuck permanently for many people's hearts to the point that it influences their thoughts on how Declassified is. Many expected Nhilistic to fail anyhow and when they didn't deliver the exact experience of COD [in the 5 month development time people don't realize was given to them compared to Activisions 2 year development time given to their own developers. How would the console titles fare with a 5 month cycle, probably like Declassified], people jumped all over them with pitchforks and hammers ready to pick and hammer on them for everything.
Nhilistic probably is a competent developer given time contraints to make them fail as often and as soon as possible. No wonder they are going to the mobile and web game industry, time is not a problem and the turn around rate is much better.
As well, this is just out of curiosity, but where was it found that Declassified had a short development time? I seem to have missed that. Again, this is purely out of curiosity, nothing more. Links would be appreciated.
johngie wrote:
I threw everything you said out the door after you put "Nihilistic" and "competent" in the same sentence.
As well, this is just out of curiosity, but where was it found that Declassified had a short development time? I seem to have missed that. Again, this is purely out of curiosity, nothing more. Links would be appreciated.
Whoops you are right - Declassified was NOT developed in 6 months...
More like 5 MONTHS?! (Edited my post above to fix my error)
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1678707/black_ops_dec
Will stop now, neogaf was going to be my next link but seeing how this thread is biginning to go back to the users groups "Hate Nhilistic"
"Hate Declassified" thing again, I'll just drop out, especially we are going off-topic. May stick to my own thread from now on in this forum... Sony needs to release some more PSOne games again for the Vita store purchasers in the US T.T
Support
Corporate
Community
