extremus

It seems that virtually every new console or portable that's released has some sort of issue that holds it back from being as great as it could have been (though I have to say I think my PS3, both from a technical standpoint as well as its hard drive upgradability and free online play, may be the best-rounded console I've ever owned). With the Vita Sony is hoping that console-comparable graphical punch will be able to overcome a very short battery life and download limitations that defeat the purpose of the 3G version...and now they finally drop the BIG bomb. No, the Sony Vita is NOT a $250 portable (which already would have been priced out of many people's range in this economy); it's more like a $300-370 one once you factor in the memory card.

There's no denying that the Vita looks like a great portable, and I'm sure future iterations will better streamline things and hopefully bring down the price somewhat. But I can safely say for myself that it's just not worth it to me. WAY too much to pay regardless of the specs for a portable system, let alone one with increasingly glaring limitations and with an added $50-120 tacked on to even be able to save your games. I'm passing on this one.

@baddates77

I should have been more clear about the general timetable; I meant to say we tend to get one Square (or other "quality") PSX title every few weeks with a half-dozen filler titles thrown in between, give or take. Regardless, it's been an agonizingly and needlessly slow process.

The biggest issue I have with the North American PSN's RPG selection is they are grossly Square-centric with their releases. I mean, I've waited since the service launched for Suikoden II (in my humble opinion the best PSX RPG EVER), Vandal Hearts, the Lunar titles, and countless more including those from other genres/companies. But in the interest of maximizing perceived profit potential we get Tuesdays with maybe a single Final Fantasy or other Square title and a half-dozen games that nobody even remembers (or would want to) each and every week. No wonder the Japanese PSN lapped North America's selection literally years ago (including most if not all the above-mentioned games).

Another funny thing is how these JRPGs still "hold up" and get tons of sales for PSN Store when one gets released, and yet the genre is on life support in this console generation at the retail level. Perhaps those older mechanics aren't quite as dated and tired as flashy new games like FF XIII would like you to believe, hmm?

Yeah, DEFINITELY ahem, "inspired" by Fat Princess. All kidding aside though, it looks like fun and appears to expand on that formula somewhat.

I plan to get this game when I can afford either a Vita or a new PSP; the writer of the article is correct; games like this (or say, Valkyria Chronicles) are criminally overlooked by the majority of gamers.

Is this simply due to a shift in gamer taste, though? Perhaps to some degree, but I would argue that it has a lot to do with the rise of internet websites like JoyStiq and especially IGN. Back in the day I'd walk to my mailbox around July or August and feast my eyes on extensive coverage of EVERY game from that year's E3 (or CES before that); while there was some more extensive coverage of surefire hits like the next Mario, Sonic, or Halo, there was at least one photograph and a short description of every other game from lesser-known companies, so at least gamers could be aware of what was coming.

It may seem ironic then that with the vastly increased information capacity of the internet that we actually seem to get LESS overall coverage of the entire gaming landscape. Much of this has to do with certain sites (cough, IGN, cough) literally having daily articles and spoiler-filled blowouts of the games THEY perceive you're interested in (namely the latest big-budget FPS or third-person action game). Everything else gets the equivalent of table scraps if they are covered at all. And gaming websites are far from the only culprits; developers often show bias in favor of projects they feel will be more profitable, as Sega did with Valkyria Chronicles, barely bothering to market it in favor of hyping their next (at the time) underwhelming Sonic title. And E3 has for all intents and purposes become an annual FPS and tech add-on promotion; anything that doesn't make it onto the stage at the main presentations is lucky if they get any notice at all from the media or gamers.

The effects of all this are the decline or death of entire genre types this console generation, and games like The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky going unnoticed. It isn't that many gamers wouldn't have been interested; we just often never get a real chance to read or hear about so many deserving games anymore based solely on the fact the powers-that-be are too intent on writing the latest Call of Duty or Battlefield hype article to show objective journalism. Too many gaming journalists nowadays would better serve their readers if they were more journalist and less fanboy.

Translation: Add $100 to the base price of the Vita.

$350-$400...for a portable gaming system. Hmm, there will still be some early adopters I'm sure, but the price point of this system is going to be its undoing early on, just as Nintendo learned with the 3DS. Most folks (including myself) have a hard time justifying paying more for a portable than a console, regardless of the specs.

I guess that's to differentiate him from Robin, who DOES have the generic shaved head.

Could be worse; he could have a generic shaved head like 90 percent of this console generation's videogame heroes.

@Scuffles

No offense; I agree with you about the physical media...but the fact is that when the hardware moves on you still have something physical and tangible that you can play on your old system as you see fit for as long as you like.

The REAL problem (and I should have mentioned this in my original post) with digital content is that, regardless of hardware or any other tangible factor, what you download is only yours for as long as the service that provides it is active. Entire online communities are at the mercy of one day inevitably having their plug pulled, no matter how popular their games may have been; after that it's down to local multiplayer (IF your system allows for LAN or the game for split-screen). As for the games themselves, you may say they'll be there on your hard drive forever anyway...until said hard drive goes out and there's no longer any possible way to ever access everything you downloaded again since the service no longer exists or has moved on. The bottom line, as I said before, is that you never own ANYTHING in digital form.

And just to let you know that I'm being objective and not just a hater, I own dozens of games and downloads across PS3, XBox LIVE, and Virtual Console. This is a reality that's begun to dawn on me as I see my systems aging and discussions begin circulating about newer consoles/hardware. It'll be a reality we all have to live with, like it or not.

THIS is my greatest concern regarding the movement of videogames toward a digital distribution model. The hardware may change, but when all is said and done if anything doesn't carry over software-wise then unless you keep that old system you're out of luck. Translation: you never really "own" anything in digital form, it's just an illusion created by being able to access it on its original format/system.

Could Sony drop whole sections of their existing Store from Vita/next-gen PlayStation support and force consumers to buy stuff all over again? Why, absolutely; corporations are in business to make money, even at the expense of alienating fans and supporters to their methods of doing so. The same goes for Microsoft, Nintendo, or any other console/service provider; it's not the kind of move made out of necessity or practicality for either party, just one purely borne of greed.