[iceatcs]

Is it normal to be blurry?

[Hero]

Wow at the corporate apologists in this thread. that shit is inexcusable, stop defending that.

Dude, it's Capcpom. Gotta defend everything they do.

[2&2]

Half-assed? Why the hell would you ever want to assign buttons to the touchscreen? All of the necessary buttons to play the game are available on the Vita there is no reason to tack on extra "cheat buttons" via the touchscreen. Terrible terrible idea. The touch mode is bad enough and should remain separate from the game proper. Fighting games have no business using a touchscreen unless there is no other form of input available (ie - iOS).

Go back and read why. I explained it. It's not difficult to understand.

[dark10x]

Go back and read why. I explained it. It's not difficult to understand.

I think cross buttons are bullshit, personally.

I don't think the lack of them indicates a lazy port.

[Mammoth Jones]

Dude, it's Capcpom. Gotta defend everything they do.

At $2.99 it defends itself.

You get what you pay for.

[2&2]

I think cross buttons are bullshit, personally. I don't think the lack of them indicates a lazy port.

It is when the result is a less functional control scheme than the console versions with the means to do so.

Vita=6 buttons (no additional buttons, real or virtual)
Consoles=8 buttons (all able to be configured)

BBCSE allowed mapping to the Vita's r-stick to make up for missing buttons, for example. It's significant on a portable or for a fighter on a pad. Capcom had the screens or right stick to make 2 "virtual' buttons, but did not. Again, it's not mapping Motions+buttons. That is too much.

Whether you like the concept of button mapping to unused buttons is another issue, but it's been a fighting game staple since the beginning of home ports. If you use a stick it's a non-issue, but not everyone does, and you can't on a portable.

[sixteen-bit]

At $2.99 it defends itself. You get what you pay for.

nah, you get less.

[Cheebo]

How did SNK a company with way less resources put out an amazing in-depth fighter with King of Fighters-i but Capcom can't do the same?

[Htown]

At $2.99 it defends itself. You get what you pay for.

You can get way better games at $2.99

[Mammoth Jones]

You can get way better games at $2.99

I'd just like to imagine that there'd be better production values if the game was sold at a higher price. I personally would have paid $15 for a perfect port of this game on my phone.

Just my wishful thinking.

[matics]

How did SNK a company with way less resources put out an amazing in-depth fighter with King of Fighters-i but Capcom can't do the same?

Capcom have put out an amazing fighter in Street Fighter Volt.
Doesn't look like the same amount of time/care went into releasing this, however.

[dark10x]

Capcom have put out an amazing fighter in Street Fighter Volt. Doesn't look like the same amount of time/care went into releasing this, however.

Volt is not amazing. It uses ugly 2D versions of 3D assets and runs at a low framerate.

Any amazing fighter would AT LEAST run at 60 fps if nothing else.

[matics]

Volt is not amazing. It uses ugly 2D versions of 3D assets and runs at a low framerate. Any amazing fighter would AT LEAST run at 60 fps if nothing else.

To each his own I guess. I thought it was handled really well.
Does KOF-i run at 60 fps?