Isn't this very, very old? We were told invizimals was coming a long time ago.
Bundi.
Shut it.
Kthx.
*Insert sexual joke about 'peaking' here*
Apparently, this game has elements of Zelda, and ICO. If it truly is a mix of those, I'd be more hyped, than I already am for this game. And if it doesn't have those elements, I'm still very damn hyped!!
I agree. Ignorant review here. Probably only played the first 5 minutes.
[USA]
Anyone disappointed in the recent "re-downsizing" for the Vita PS+ games? It used to be PSP/horrible indie games (Not even the good indie games were on Plus for Vita), then for like two weeks we got like, Sonic All-Stars and Soul Sacrifice, now we're back to arcade-y shoot-y games for the Vita's Plus selection. As someone who doesn't own a PS3, I'm quite unhappy with how far this Plus membership had gotten me so far...
Agree 100%
But you know... Haters gonna hate.
Um. This was posted DAYS ago...
In my opinion, it's because they don't have the flexibility that other, non-movie games do. They have to follow/incorporate much of the movie itself, for the most part, while pure "games" can be created from scratch, with limitless creativity. Sure, you can 'add' more creative things to the movie-games (Like the Spiderman games for example. They add things - Like in Spiderman 3 the game, for the PSP, at least, they added the Lizard and other things), but overall, you...
This isn't a confirmation though. It's a "Fingers crossed for it to be out on Friday" thing. Title needs a change.
This is a duplicate article. Seriously guy; obey the rules of the site. Reporting.
Kotaku and IGN = Ignorant reviewers...
They have a habit of poorly reviewing Vita titles (Look at the GoW collection, for example.)
They're stupid. It plays very well on the Vita. Anyone who says other wise are either trolls or ignorant idiots who've only played the first 2 minutes of the game.
Let me add in:
The reason I'm so harsh with my words against IGN is that they're really screwing over the company who ported the game, as well as Sony. They're pretty much...
So? Your point being?
That doesn't mean anything.
This review sucks. I've been playing the game since the 6th, and beat it twice (two different characters). Everyone I talk with love it as well. Also, look at the Metacritic reviews, for example, or hell, even watch the gameplay.
This review is pure ignorance. In actuality, they've probably only played for 10 minutes, and stopped. If you're going to write a proper review, beat the game with at least one freaking character. Because if you HAD played past the first ...
That last part's debatable. PS3 remote play's not the greatest. Also, the fact that the image is worse, streaming from PS3, I'd have to say, that personally, I think the Vita version looks better than the streamed PS3 version. However, with that said, the PS3 version definitely looks better. Not by much though!
Crap review.
Valkilmer, while I appreciate your username, this article spreads MUCH false information. I've beaten the game twice on the Vita. (Yeah, I pretty much no-life'd it.) and there are some bugs, but NO gamebreaking bugs. You're spreading false information and you're over-exaggerating, quite heavily. I (along with a few others I know of) have beaten this game on the Vita with little-to-no issue, at all.
Please don't submit false articles. You're making a ph...
My brother isn't having any issues either. Sure sanctuary is a bit frame-rate-issue-y, and sure there are bugs such as that, but the child who wrote the article is HEAVILY exaggerating. He probably only played for 10 minutes, got fed up with some sort of framerate and went off, exaggerating. Like a lot of kids on the net. And no, there aren't any bugs. You know why? Because I've finished the game twice on my Vita, and my brother's pretty far in his first play-through, without ...
Oh. Neat! Never was a fan of the games, but I'm sure many are.