The Weekend Debate: At Home VS Not At Home

it depends how you play to be honest.

i for one mostly play my portable consoles at home so see portable gaming the same way as i do console gaming so games like uncharted are fine for a portable console.

however on the odd occasion i did take my psp out and about i liked games like street fighter which i could have a quick blast of before i reached my destination.

a vita version of mgs4 for example may be a bad thing for someone who never plays at home as you will get to where you are going by the time a cut scene finishes lol

i think what is happening with the vita is the best idea offer all types of games, you have your console type games for people like me and you have your quick type games like little deviants for your out and about gamers so win win.

plus if games offer on the fly saves i see no reason that both game types cant have great success in the portable space

Im not gonna sit at home playing the vita..
If it has the same game choice, id choose ps3.

just to add for some reason some games do seem better on a hand held and i cant for the life of me put my finger on why, the one example that springs to mind for me is disgaea myself and many others just think it works better on a handheld.

dont get me wrong i loved the ps2 and ps3 versions but the handheld versions just seemed better and its my MOST anticipated game for vita

sorry for ANOTHER post but all in all the most important thing is fun factor, if a game is fun it should not matter what you play it on

For me, it always comes down to the save system. All to often when playing a game on a handheld device I find myself reaching the end of the line for my journey and not being able to save.

Not enough consideration is given to how the game will be played. It’s fine at home, I can play till I reach the next save point but that isn’t always convenient on the move. The PSP Go’s pause capability was an excellent idea. It doesn’t have to be a full save, a temporary one use only save would do me just nicely.

i like my portable console to be very connected, lots of wi-fi options and features that interact with other devices, the vita has struck it right, its a home console style experience on the go with great connectivity for on the move. If remote play supports more games and there is no lag it could be brilliant, also cross play is another fantastic idea, i mostly play the portable consoles at home but i also have a lot of travel time to fill.

I also havent heard anything about the PS suite for a while, Sony should use this as a tool to get more casual games on the vita at low prices to compete with the app market

A good PSP game is a bad PS3 game, not because of graphical differences or gameplay mechanics, but due to pacing. A great example of this is MGS Peace Walker. This is viewed by many as the best game on PSP, yet its reviews as part of the MGS HD collection were lower that its original reviews. This is because Kojima designed it with PSP players in mind, so missions were short, and the game was intended to be played in short 10 minute bursts. This didn’t translate well to PS3 as players played the game for sessions of 1 hour plus, so the missions ended to soon and you seemed to progress through the game far too quickly. In a similar fashion, imagine playing Skyrim on PS Vita. By the time your bus journey was over you wouldn’t have even had enough time to equipt your character.

It’s not so much the game type, but how it is put together – for a mobile device, you probably want discrete blocks of 10 minutes or so of content. You should be able to do something meaningful with a couple of minutes of time, be it practice something, get a level of a platformer done, solve a puzzle etc.
Home gaming tends to be in larger chunks, if more easily paused.

It is a lot less of a concern for example to be playing a game on PS3, and need to go out, pause the game and off you go, intending to continue when you come back, than it is to pause a game on a portable device and think that it will have enough power in the battery in a couple of hours to allow you to continue.

So the game type doesn’t matter, just the size of the chunks it is consumed in.

@biotec

chains of Olympus and ghost of sparta would like a word with you as they worked great as both a psp and ps3 title, also liberty/vice city storys.

liberty/vice city storys on ps2 that is

hey hey

for me this is about 2 deciding factors.

Firstly its the time constraint. Portable gaming is drop in / drop out. Quick loads and diving straight into the action. then after the quick fix you can exit at any point with zero consequence. No major boss battle, no epic quest to find a save point not highscore chain being broken; just power off and stick it back in your pocket.

Secondly its all about the look and feel of the game. Consoles huge immerse environments with intense graphical detail with jaw dropping effects. I want to sit in awe, with beer, friends and pizza. I wanna dedicate all my time and effort into the game being drawn deeper into the labyrinth and get lost until 1am

PSN games are very much drop in and drop out and will work superbly on the vita.

Skyrim on a handheld just wouldn’t cut the mead.

For me I find that rpg’s are better played on a portable as I find it hard to play them type of games on console where I have to stay sat up the whole time. Where with racing games I’d rather play on my Ps3 as it’s fast pace & I want the advantage of a big screen & better controls.

for me every game is best suited for a home console except for RTS.

I, personally, would never take a portable game system out and about with me. Mainly because I fear that doing so would make me a target for thieves. So I do all my gaming, portable or not, at home (or friends house). It makes little difference to me which has what type of games. Partly why these ‘out and about’ features on the Vita are doing nothing to encourage me to change my mind about getting one. Yes, you read that correctly, I’m not interested in Vita.

One word, quicksave. As long as there’s a quicksave option, I don’t mind playing Skyrim or whatever on the go.

That being said. I think games without too much story fits portable gaming best. Or simple addictive games, the games you just have to play one more time, to beat your highscore. But I like to play simple games on console too.

I love the idea of playing the same game on console and on the go. But I rather see the portable one adding something, and not just being the same.

The line between the two or blurring like never before, a few years ago I would have said that games that work on home consoles wouldn’t work on handheld’s. But that was more due to handheld’s lacking power, yeah the PSP was great and I loved GOW and Kingdom Hearts on it but once the PS3 came out it was lacking what it’s big brother was offering.

The same will be the case for Vita the next Playstation will offer more but what the Vita is offering for the first time in handheld’s is perfect control schemes and that’s the game changer. For the first time FPS’s won’t feel clunky and awkward same goes for third person, Golden Abyss is astounding in what it offers.

So now we have a powerful and usable piece of kit, so now for the first time if a game was coming out for both PS3 and Vita I’d be very tempted for the Vita version unless there was a noticeable difference. So to answer the question I don’t think it matters any more but at least the two are willing to play with each other.

To my mind, there is no distinction. A great game is great regardless of whether it’s on a portable console or tethered to your TV.

Sometimes you want – or only have time for – short bite-sized play, sometimes you want to get engrossed in an epic. It shouldn’t matter whether that’s on PS3 or Vita.

Important features of portable games – short load times, the ability to save frequently, immediately accessible gaming – should all be standard for home console games too.

And for longer gaming sessions, one key feature of a portable gaming device is a good battery life and a long charging cable.

When I get the Ps Vita I have no plans to take it out & about with me, just when I go away. My iphone does everything I need while I’m out. In all the years I’ve owned a PsP I’ve never wanted to take it out with me, I guess it comes down to how people like to use their portable consoles & what type of gamer they are.

I play psp to/on work 5 days minimum 2 hours a day.

to be honest there’s not much difference between vita & ps3. Vita’s graphical capability looks incredibly good as PS3 tho Vita has cool features and also when you’re playing at home on your PS3 you’re much more concentrated on doing what your doing while playing the Vita outside you also have to be aware of what’s happening around you . Said all this i can’t wait to play uncharted golden abyss

i would say the console would always take up more of my time, reason being the same as having a portable tv or watching it on a bigger screen allowing u to appreciate the game more, portable is for the odd occasion, the big , vast and graphically amazing games are on the console

I enjoy handheld just as much as console gaming, and have a fairly significant collection of UMD’s for my old PSP to prove that.

If only I could bring over those games to my PS Vita with a “proof of ownership” scheme such as in Japan… Guess the EU doesn’t quite deserve that priveledge

No one will disagree with the game world being diverse, especially with the new AR games coming out, and as diverse as the game world is, so is the gaming community.

This is not a black-and-white question, it’s subjective to peoples opinions, and a bunch of factors dictate what makes a good portable/home console game. While there’s no exact recipe for a successful game, there are some often-seen similarities.

For home console games, most players like a very deep experience, with many possibilities, where they can put hour upon hour into the game. Something like “The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim”

For portable console games, many people prefer the “pick up and play” type of game, that you can easily access, perhaps during a bus ride, or when taking break at work. Something like Angry Birds.

Other gamers, like me, like both types of games, on any console, home OR portable.

So I think you hit the nail right on the head James, with the word “diverse”, I believe that diversity is the cause of – and the solution to – this question.

Despite what we might expect, I think a handheld game has a much stricter set of guidelines which it must fulfil. For a game to be successful on handheld consoles, it should ideally have a pick-up-and-play design that does not demand that you sit down for an hour to play. Therefore, a game like Skyrim would have to be heavily altered before it could ever be realised on the PS Vita or PSP. Skyrim insists that you “get-into” the game on a very personal level, taking the character as your own and building a consistent storyline based on the character you have decided to be. A five or ten minute go on the game is not long enough to ever develop any sort of connection with the character.

Any game that is narrative driven, or relies on you forming a relationship with the characters is not suited to a handheld console, compared to regular console versions. Any successful handheld game should be quick to get into, and allow the gamer to leave the game alone for weeks or even months at a time, and be able to jump back in immediately.

Yes there is a huge difference. I much prefer the way Nintendo do their portable games as designed to be portable with short missions and graphics easily visible on a small screen.

You need to offer your game in small, snack-like bites if you want it to be portable. Small levels, small rounds, you need to be able to turn it on and off at leisure, without missing anything. Casual games have really picked up on this. If you need to reserve time for it, it’s better off on a console. You also need to be able to communicate with other handheld systems in order to truly use the potential of the system to interact with the world around you. Sharing is caring.

A console game however is usually played for longer periods of time. That means you can build tension. But singleplayer games tend to be kind of lonely. If you can combine the two (say, send screenshots from the console to the handheld) you can share more easily what you are doing in the game. This works even better if games on console and handheld interact with eachother.

I don’t think there is a “better” way of making games, but they can complement each other pretty well.

Simple answer is there is no such thing in my opinion :p basically a home console is stuck in one place whilst you’re using it; and obviously packs more power (usually anyway)- mainly because of the cost that seems to come with making things smaller and work with lower power etc. Personally I find that handhelds are great for using when at home aswell now if you’re on a train or a bus then usually short mobile games are useful as you can start quickly, and just stop as soon as you need to; that said as a gamer I personally enjoy larger experiences like uncharted, or resistance:retribution, MGS Peacewalker and KH: Birth by sleep to name but a few I enjoyed on the psp: now lots of people say things like “why would you use a handheld at home… blah blah blah”- (tbc)

basically as an example of why my ps3 is currently broken my little brothers however isn’t so I use that from time to time when he’s not on there; and isn’t being difficult :p but what if I want to play games when he is on there I could buy my 3rd ps3? but why bother when theres a perfectly good working slim a few rooms away, and some people have theirs connected to main tvs; what to do when others are using it or watching tv and what if you want to play a game in bed or whilst “watching tv”? that’s where handhelds come in as really the little mobile games aren’t much use in these situations so handhelds are perfect if they have a mixture of big AAA games, little mobile games and the various social apps people like these days and the home consoles need big AAA games primarily but

provided the hardware can take it any game can be on any system it’s just down to your preference of where you’d want to play the game which version you’d buy. oh and you know what a full section on the ps store of PS2 classics that can be played on ps3 or ps vita would be a brilliant sample of games great on whether they’re being played on a home console or a handheld

Wheres the ps blog gone,? i was looking for it but i seem to have ended up in a forum full of physiology students, and a professor or two. Seriously impressed with the comments i seen so far.
My handheld gaming has only consisted of a golf game on my mobile. Which though is meant to be pick up for 10 minutes then put back down hasn’t allways been true, I mean i have sat indoors with the latest triple a i in my ps3, and spent a few hours on the golf game, so as was said it just horses for courses. Btw its sad that people have to worry about becoming a scumbags victim by playing outdoors. Though also a sensible attitude to have, unfortunately.

There’s a big difference
Some games are just suited to the bigger screen
also i find the grip on the controller better then any portable (yet)
the difference is also the controls and the power required to run it
which usually then the game would be cut down to fit on the portable device
sometimes the portable version is just not the same
then the mighty console

i think there’s a big difference in game design for developer’s who really focus on bringing a portable or home console experience, though there are many who just use it as an excuse to make a slightly stripped down version of the same home console game as a spin-off, though that’s not necessarily a bad thing, it worked out great for those PSP God of War games.

One of my favourite portable games is a Japanese GBA game called Mother 3, as a portable game it was very easy and fun to pick it up and play for a short or long while and even though it had a fantastic and well told story for a game that could be picked up and played the story was never made overly complex yet no part was forgettable. On home consoles I think they’re typically more intended for longer playtime each session and as such can more easily be more complex in their plot or game mechanics.

MGS Portable Ops for PSP is a great example of good portable games imo, it broke the game up into missions and though gameplay was stripped of some depth the level design was really well setup to compliment its stealth gameplay.

When I play a home console game I want to play longer and get a ‘big screen’ experience, when I play portable I want something I can pick up for a short time or a long time , preferably something that’s easy to learn but has enough depth to keep it interesting when playing it on and off too.

With the quality of PSVita though the line between home and portable console games is becoming blurred, honestly if you gave an HDMI-out I’m sure many would use them as an alternative to the PS3. The portable technology is catching up with the home stuff now

I would personally say that there is quite a large difference between the two. I see portable gaming as more of a precise quick fix of gaming that needs to have pick up play capabilities.

For instance metal gear solid in its traditional format wouldnt really have worked going portable, which is why when it did the format was changed into much smaller missions with clear objectives and some clever rpg elements, this meant that player were able to jump straight into a mission which they were able to understand and enjoy and jump back out within a small time period.
Whereas the homegrown metal gear solid franchise is alot more cinematic, character and story driven meaning it can take hours to feel the same progression level, which only takes minutes in its portable sibling.

This is a good thing, it means that gaming can spread its target audience, with the portable consoles aiming at more casual gamers who enjoy small compact fun games. While consoles can attract the more die hard fans with much longer encounters.

However with the release of the vita, the distinction between the two playing styles is beggining to shorten.

Overall though i would say portable gaming is likely to always be one step behind console gaming, mainly due to the restrictions on how much tech you can fit into such a small sleek package. Both will continue to progress with the console being one step a head.

@33

i fear this is why the vita is not supporting tv out as sony dont want to lose ps3 customers as like you many people could possibly ditch it in favor of the option you mention

I believe there is a huge difference between home gaming and portable gaming. Portable gaming should be about quick bursts of gameplay. Home gaming should be a more immersive time-sink. I personally love PSP games that have a great story, but the ability to jump in and out of the game quickly is paramount. However much I would love PS3 games on the go, I think that this is only part of the solution. For example, on my PSP I play more story-based games like Resistance, but then switch to WipeOut or Virtua Tennis when I only have 5 minutes to play. When you are on the bus or waiting for someone, you don’t have the time to really get immersed in story and just need that quick fix of entertainment. I personally like the mix the Vita is coming with, although a focus on multiplayer could be a mistake, as the vast majority of play time for any of my portable devices is single player.

the vita is an answer to a long term problem ive had. we have one simple rule in the house. tv first, PS3 second. so if someone wants to watch tv then the PS3 is switched off. the PS3 is in the livingroom so we can watch bluerays and access lovefilm and Netflix. with the vita coming out it allows me to continue playing when someone wants to watch tv. add to that, that some of the games have cloud saves and crossplay then it is a perfect solution to my problem. plus I also get the benefit of having a portable divice for long train journeys or when I am on holiday. but mostly it will be used in the house.

where is ea,s skate4

we want ea to do skate 4

I don’t care about cross-play, but remote play is a key feature for me in deciding whether to go and buy a Vita. Sony initially promised that PS3 games would be playable on the Vita through Remote Play (a feature also promised on the PSP, but never truly delivered), but later retracted that promise, saying PS3 game developers had to enable the function.

As we’ve seen in videos from the hacking scene, many PS3 games can be made playable on the Vita, and if Sony doesn’t enable those, it is a commercial decision, not a technical one.

So, there is really no excuse on not allowing full support of remote play of all PS3 games on the Vita, which would make the device an instant buy for me, an adult gamer, who has to fight for the right to use the home TV set.

If Remote Play turns out to be crippled like it was on the PSP, it is worth nothing, and will be a mayor reason for me to NOT buy a Vita.

For me, the Vita is just an extra screen for the PS3, and therefore the ‘weekend debate’ question is not that viable.

Give me Remote Play, and I am a happy puppy!

One more thing is lag!!!! It is my absolute hate and my question would be is playing on a vita through 3G against ps3 players going to make the game unplayable online?

@PeppermintShore: you’re going to be disappointed. So far, there are only a couple of games that will allow Remote play, which will allow you to play your PS3 games on the Vita.

The Playstation Vita is really starting to blut the lines between home and portable gaming.

It now comes down to how long it will take you to complete a task. On GTA: Liberty City Stories, the missions were deliberately shorter to suit a portable platform.

Games like Little Deviants or Frobisher Says may not suit a home system due to their shorter level structure but, depending on the control system, I dont see many genres not being able to move to a handheld.

I believe that a game on the Vita will attract more on the go customers but if your at home youd rather use PS3 no offence Sony but Remote Play isnt ideal with a PS3 in the same house btw have a great weekend Oh & thx for Lockwood update in Home Love the free items

@couch-tattie

you dont have to worry about lag over 3g in multi player, multi player is only over wifi connection

Remember the key difference between a console and a portable. By definition you can take the portable one with you. Portability coupled with connectivity (to the Internet and PSN) allows us gamers to interact with a game in different ways compared to those offered by a home console. Location-based interaction is possible (e.g: I’m in this location so I get to unlock this level / watch this content); augmented reality gets a lot more interesting (e.g. I point the camera at some object in my current surroundings and can use it in the game).

We’re only just starting to see what’s possible with such new possibilities for user interaction in games. This is what is most important about the PS Vita and it will ultimately make or break the device depending upon: what the developers can come up with; and how the public will respond to it.

“Is there any difference between a game best suited to a home console and one best fitting a portable, or is the whole gaming world too diverse to try and make a distinction?”

I hope there wil be a difference, one example is Little Big Planet. Im buying that game just to be able to make some games where I can use the toutch controlls and the camera to take photos.

And from what I have seen on videos the whole prosses in making a game is now possible with just toutching the screen.

And games like Uncharted Golden Abyss, I like that it gives me the option to use more ways to interact with the game.

As I see it I hope there wil come games that are coming on the PS3 on the PSV. But I hope they wil have some enhanced fetures on the PSV that I can chose to use if I want to.

Mostly I probably wil pick the alternative option becaus im after a “new” experience with the PSV.

I realy hope you add remote play on all PS3 games, so I can play them on the PSV when the tv is taken.

Cant wait for the 22 feb to come!

ps3 rules, but that vita is interesting

I think to find out, it has to be tested and with the Vita being basically a mini PS3 you can definitely tell which game is best suited for what gaming machine if you have a version of each or even trying it out on remote play.

Two perfect examples are Uncharted and ModNation Racers. Uncharted: Golden Abyss appears to be a fantastic game (and I’m sure it is) but honestly I think any Uncharted is a game for the big screen whereas MNR Road Trip is shaping up to be the perfect portable racer. Vita/MNR compliment each other very well, the touch screen track creation is just to name one of features which makes this version better than the PS3′s MNR.

Before the Vita was shown off, I honestly thought putting big titles on a portable system was kind of a waste but now I think it’s fantastic and cannot wait for the 22nd.