Playstation oriented websites giving a Sony game 10? No way!
Its like different people with different opinions are reviewing games. Fucking bullshit.
5.5 is a completely broken game that doesn't function half the time.
My guess is the game is somewhere between a 6 and an 8, but being the best looking handheld game ever and finally managing to create a decent fps on a handheld is what makes some sites bump the score 1-3 points.
As good as his older brothers, as fun as Liberation in PSP, the game is absolutely stunning graphically, intense and well crafted gameplay wise. Killzone: Mercenary is the kind of handheld title that the Vita deserves, one game that shows its power and posibilities. It doesn't bring anything new to the genre, but is the best FPS seen in a portable space with a short but replayable campaign and a multiplayer fun and robust.
The freedom our character has in the story mode is a wise choice. Helghast fans will be pleased without any doubt, but the main character could have been better crafter. An AAA game, undoubtely, and a title that will push the hardware ot its limits. This is the path Vita's catalog should follow, because it's what the system and it's users are asking to the companys: titles that are an example of what the hardware can fulfill.
Playstation oriented websites giving a Sony game 10? No way!
I think that's unfair. I'd definitely see it more as an 8 than a 6.
You have to take into account you can't create a console game on the Vita. There will be limitations to what you create and what matters is how the developer handles the limitions. In Mercenary's case they did a great job. Yes, there's only 8 people in MP at a time, but the maps are just the right size for 8 people, have great design so you don't go minutes before finding someone, yet have enough room to hide and avoid attackers if need be, for instance. Things like that deserve praise, not marking down imo.
Campaign is pretty short? (one review said 4 hours?)
Oh well, I'm sure they were playing on easy and not getting objectives. I'm not too bothered by campaign length on handhelds. I'll be getting it for the evergreen nature of the multiplayer sort of like LBPV and PSABR I still play those games to this day).
I'm sure I'll enjoy the campaign, and replay it, in spite of the length.
Like, it's an FPS on a handheld, no big deal.
Control works great
Graphically very impressive
Console worthy experience
Multiplayer is the extension of the singleplayer
I like how Nowgamer gave it an 8/10 for graphics and the popular multiplayer a 5/10. Sounds like the reviewer just kept getting his ass handed to him and made a rage review.
Yes, it's 9 chapters that personally took me 3 hours (on normal) to beat.
It has those types of contracts though, that means you can replay the mission and have some requirements to meet (ie kill a number of enemies with this type of weapon and do it fast). It's an interesting idea, but the campaign's length is really, really disappointing.
You really do have to wonder what is considered a 9/10 or 10/10 graphics Vita game.
non-generic art
Sub 5hr campaign means wait till bargain bin. What a disappointment.
I like how Nowgamer gave it an 8/10 for graphics and the popular multiplayer a 5/10. Sounds like the reviewer just kept getting his ass handed to him and made a rage review.
I think that's unfair. I'd definitely see it more as an 8 than a 6.
You have to take into account you can't create a console game on the Vita. There will be limitations to what you create and what matters is how the developer handles the limitions. In Mercenary's case they did a great job. Yes, there's only 8 people in MP at a time, but the maps are just the right size for 8 people, have great design so you don't go minutes before finding someone, yet have enough room to hide and avoid attackers if need be, for instance. Things like that deserve praise, not marking down imo.
But then i always think.. sure its admirable what they can do with the limitations. But why should i accept them? If i can get the real deal better on a console. I always find it such a shame and waste of time when a developer makes a game like this. Vita has too short of a battery life to play a game like this outside (these types of games are made for long play sessions, since you want to immerse yourself into it). And when im inside... well why should i play the killzone with limitations when i can play the 'full' game on my console? I really like handheld gaming (im talking about vita/3ds not mobile) but i like the type of games who dont try to be a console expierence.
Yes, it's 9 chapters that personally took me 3 hours (on normal) to beat.
It has those types of contracts though, that means you can replay the mission and have some requirements to meet (ie kill a number of enemies with this type of weapon and do it fast). It's an interesting idea, but the campaign's length is really, really disappointing.
.
But then i always think.. sure its admirable what they can do with the limitations. But why should i accept them? If i can get the real deal better on a console. I always find it such a shame and waste of time when a developer makes a game like this.
This game is great and all, really impressed but my most important thing here is online multiplayer.
What I found is that there are so many "cheap" stuff in the game.
Flying drones, Portable shields, rockets shooting down from the sky, etc.
The gun on gun aspect is perfect, it's just that I'm concerned about the other stuff. It's game breaking for me.
non-generic art
non-generic art
See, to this, I think "Why should these types of experiences be tethered to a TV?" I travel a lot, I realise I'm probably in a minority with preferring handhelds but I couldn't be happier with this kind of stuff being on the Vita. Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate Nintendo's bite-sized approach, too, and I've loved a lot of those experiences on 3DS as well as Vita. But I do welcome someone doing something a bit more ambitious too. I do feel Vita can't win in situations like this. It's either not ambitious enough, or too ambitious and gets marked down accordingly.But then i always think.. sure its admirable what they can do with the limitations. But why should i accept them? If i can get the real deal better on a console. I always find it such a shame and waste of time when a developer makes a game like this. Vita has too short of a battery life to play a game like this outside (these types of games are made for long play sessions, since you want to immerse yourself into it). And when im inside... well why should i play the killzone with limitations when i can play the 'full' game on my console? I really like handheld gaming (im talking about vita/3ds not mobile) but i like the type of games who dont try to be a console expierence.
Vita's Killer App
Confirmed.
As if we needed confirmation.
Eh, I'm no great fan of Metacritic myself, but in my experience "killer apps" don't usually sit in the mid-70s. That's quite poor actually.
When some of those low reviews are simply bagging on it for being a handheld game like LOL IT'S ON VITA, SMARTPHONES DUR DUR CANDY CRUSH ANGRY BIRDS you really have to reexamine the stock you put into metacritic ratings.Eh, I'm no great fan of Metacritic myself, but in my experience "killer apps" don't usually sit in the mid-70s. That's quite poor actually.
Eh, I'm no great fan of Metacritic myself, but in my experience "killer apps" don't usually sit in the mid-70s. That's quite poor actually.
Get used to it. It will be very rare for a retail Vita game to ever average above an 85 on metacritic. Sites constantly slam the vita and joke about how little they play it, now when forced to do a review I am to expect a fair review? Ha, expect Tearaway to get all over the place reviews when it comes out as well, and reviewers get stuck with another Vita review.