Not a big fan of digital purchases, but at least SONY tieds your purchases to your account so i asume you can re-download them if you buy a new one. Nintendo... well my friend bought a used 3DS and got all those embassador games for free
AppleQueso wrote:Besides, I can easily share physical games, and Nintendo doesn't seem bothered by that.
Maybe not nintendo, but don't worry companies are working on stoping that too.
noiseredux wrote:I don't lend shit and I don't borrow shit.
Omerta wrote:The Vita fits the Playstation ecosystem extremely well. If you're a PS3 gamer and/or plan on moving deeply into the PS4 realm, I'd say it's a much better choice.
A show of hands on this thread seems to put weight behind the theory that the 3DS has a better library. You also cannot escape the fact that you must continuously buy Nintendo hardware if you plan on keeping up with their massive line up of first party IPs.
...and also know that your digital purchases are tied to a system, not to an account.
That's probably to avoid people from gamesharing.
It's still lame that if I decide to purchase the upcoming Zelda 3DS XL, that I can't have my digital data on both that, and my current red system at the same time.
It's one of the reasons I'm strongly considering putting that money to far smarter use.
Between the two handhelds it's kind of hard not to go with the 3DS at the moment. There are a lot of great games out for the system and more in the pipeline. The VC is nice (though admittedly flawed) and there are some cool DSi-ware titles available too. Plus the entire DS library....
The Vita has a lot of promise and I hope it does well. Personally, I think Sony made a slight miscalculation when it went with the concept of console-style games on a handheld. I think most people don't actually want to play console style games on a handheld - that's what they have a console for. Nevertheless, there are some cool looking games out for the Vita and it looks to have more on the way.
The biggest problem(s) I see with the Vita's digital service is that many games can only be downloaded through a PS3 and then (somehow) transferred over to the Vita - that is to say that they cannot be downloaded directly from the Playstation Store. Which is fine, unless you don't have a PS3! That and they need to make more PSP and PSN titles available faster (but Nintendo needs to do that too).
Have: Sega Genesis, SNES, Atari 2600, Atari 7800, Atari 800XL, PC, N3DS XL, Wii U, GBA, Xbox One, Switch
marlowe221 wrote:
The biggest problem(s) I see with the Vita's digital service is that many games can only be downloaded through a PS3 and then (somehow) transferred over to the Vita - that is to say that they cannot be downloaded directly from the Playstation Store. Which is fine, unless you don't have a PS3! That and they need to make more PSP and PSN titles available faster (but Nintendo needs to do that too).
Which? I haven't had issues downloading everything directly to my Vita.
I know there was the complaint early on with the PSOne Classics selection, but I think they show up on the Vita side now.
marlowe221 wrote:
The biggest problem(s) I see with the Vita's digital service is that many games can only be downloaded through a PS3 and then (somehow) transferred over to the Vita - that is to say that they cannot be downloaded directly from the Playstation Store. Which is fine, unless you don't have a PS3! That and they need to make more PSP and PSN titles available faster (but Nintendo needs to do that too).
Which? I haven't had issues downloading everything directly to my Vita.
I know there was the complaint early on with the PSOne Classics selection, but I think they show up on the Vita side now.
To be honest I don't know - I was simply (and perhaps unwisely) repeating what I had read out there on the internet - always a dangerous thing to do!
But I hope it's sorted out and not true any longer (if it ever was). I think the Vita needs to be able to stand on its own as a platform in addition to having the ability to interact with the PS3/4 in order to be successful.
Have: Sega Genesis, SNES, Atari 2600, Atari 7800, Atari 800XL, PC, N3DS XL, Wii U, GBA, Xbox One, Switch
Hmm, I don't think you can fairly compare these 2 handhelds. I say they are both good, for the markets they seek. The DS and Vita are targeted at 2 different markets.. be it children and adults or sony fanboys and nintendo fanboys. I have a DS Lite and a Vita, I play them equal amounts of time.
SCEA needs to put out a Pokemon style game for Vita though.... Pokemon is a fun game! Throwing balls (giggity) at random creatures is fun.
Last edited by Sano on Wed Nov 06, 2013 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
I still much prefer the Vita. Doesn't hurt that it has a few of my very favorite series. But there is no denying that the 3DS line up has been much much stronger this year. That said, I've probably been about 50/50 with play time on each. Because as strong as the 3DS lineup is I always go back to a few of my Vita favorites. And PSP as well.
IMO, the Vita still needs that must have title. Don't get me wrong, I love my Vita and play the hell out of it on a daily basis. But, I still don't feel like it has that one AAA must have game.
Whereas, the 3DS has Zelda ALBW coming soon, Zelda OoT3D, Monster Hunter 4, Super Mario 3D Land, Luigi's Mansion, Pokemon X/Y, Shin Megami Tensei IV, NSMB 2, Fire Emblem Awakening. All of these games are amazing and must have's.
I'm not bashing the Vita (I actually own a Vita and not a 3DS), I just feel it needs some better first and third party support.
Last edited by Frag Mortuus on Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
