• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Borderlands 2 Vita |OT| 870 gajillion guns in your pockets

BigDug13

Member
I don't notice any difference between my two Vitas.

Play on Vita 2000 for like 6 hours straight, then immediately switch the card to the 1000. That's basically what I did since I hadn't played it on the Vita 1000 before and just wanted to see it on the OLED. What I never expected was for the framerate and controls to feel smoother on the 1000 than the 2000. And after playing on the 2000 and getting used to the wonky controls and stuttering framerates in fights, it was a breath of fresh air to be getting a slightly smoother performance.

Can others do this test as well? (obviously I'm not saying play it for 6 hours on the 2000 first, but do a play session on the 2000, then power down and switch your card to the 1000 and try again. I'm curious if others see the same difference that I do.

I'm really questioning whether to sell my 1000 now...

I actually agree. At certain points in areas, it feels like, don't judge me here, 60fps. it's crazy.

I don't know about all that, but it definitely feels closer to maintaining 30fps on the 1000 than the 2000.
 
Agreed. Does he review other console ports on handheld and say " don't bother because it's the worst version of the game"? That's not the point of making it, to be the "best version". What a stupid criteria to have when reviewing a handheld port. Of course it's not going to be as good as the console version running on far superior hardware.

Not that I particularly agree with him, but an example of a portable game being as good or better than its console brother is Killzone Mercenary. So I guess his argument is, what's the point of straight ports if they have to be cut down? Better to do a whole different game, a Borderlands actually tailored for the Vita.

I'll be buying this though, as frankly with the Vita in its current state this is as good as we are going to get in the portable blockbuster category.
 

itschris

Member
The 1000 and 2000 have the same hardware inside other than the screen, right? I don't know, maybe you're seeing the difference in response time between OLED and LCD.

I only have a 1000, so I can't compare, but I've really enjoyed the 4 hours or so I've spent with the game so far. The lower framerate compared to PS3 (the only other version of Borderlands 2 I've played) is noticeable, but it hasn't bothered me much.
 

BigDug13

Member
Not that I particularly agree with him, but an example of a portable game being as good or better than its console brother is Killzone Mercenary. So I guess his argument is, what's the point of straight ports if they have to be cut down? Better to do a whole different game, a Borderlands actually tailored for the Vita.

I'll be buying this though, as frankly with the Vita in its current state this is as good as we are going to get in the portable blockbuster category.

You can hand port jobs off to smaller studios while brand new content can't simply be contracted out as easily. AAA games are too expensive to create brand new content tailor made for a small userbase. If that's his expectations going forward, then there's going to be a lot of disappointment in his reviews. It would be too expensive for Gearbox to make a completely new experience for the Vita in the same form as Borderlands.
 

RE_Player

Member
Here's IGN's review. Similar gripe's to Jim's review.
What a garbage review. You can not like the game but this reads like a 5th grader wrote it.
The “limitations of hardware” excuse just doesn’t apply here. Killzone: Mercenary, and Uncharted: Golden Abyss both managed solid performance and stunning visuals, making Borderlands 2’s showing a disappointment by Vita standards.
Comparing it to these games which are radically different is ridiculous.
 
Kotaku's Review

Borderlands 2 on Vita is the worst version of a good game. And I really mean that—the core game is still good, funny, fun. No matter how clunky the controls and watered down the visuals, it's still Borderlands 2 in a lot of respects. But without the smooth bounce of the console/PC version, and without those versions' four-player co-op, the Vita version sacrifices too much. Despite the fact that I was playing it for work, it left me routinely questioning why I was spending time on it when I could just play the game on PC. In this case, portability's not enough.

Same old story. Reviewers doing exactly what I think we all predicted they would, and that's a bit sad.
 

UberTag

Member
If they're so predictable and just going to parrot one another, why do we need game reviewers at all? Surely some automated script could do a similar job and render all of these people unemployed so they can earn a living doing something more productive. Like podcasting.

Shame that BL2 being panned by the media will scare consumers away from one hell of a great hardware upgrade. The new Vita is really something special.
 

RE_Player

Member
After playing the game on the Vita for 10 hours or so, I have to agree with the reviewers on this one.
I've put as much time in the game and I agree with most of the points brought up as well but it's all about context. No shit the game is better on console and PC, I don't think anyone with half a brain was expecting that. But for a game as big as Borderlands 2 to be on a handheld that I use on the bus and waiting in class it is supremely impressive. Coupled with the upcoming cross-save functionality this version is going to help me get max level characters for all the classes.
 

melman101

Member
I guess it really helps when you have never played it before. I'm enjoying the hell out of it, and I haven't played it yet, so it's awesome :).

Edit: Also, I wish people would stop trying to compare the Vita to the PC / Consoles.
 

AwRy108

Member
Sony's own fault calling the Vita "console gaming on the go".

So, then, by your reasoning, every classic N64 game should've been critically panned b/c they didn't have the same level of graphics as the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park? I mean, that was how Nintendo was touting their early hardware, so Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time deserve to be judged accordingly, right?
 

mr_chun

Member
Same old story. Reviewers doing exactly what I think we all predicted they would, and that's a bit sad.

Shame I didn't get my request in fast enough to get a a copy for review. I've never played it before, so I'll be approaching it from a different perspective. I literally have no expectations other than "what I've heard".
 
A bunch of us here on gaf, on reddit, and on youtube are enjoying it. That's all I can really say tbh. You can take that dive or stay safe. I feel like I got my $30 worth.

That's what's keeping me on board with buying it. I'm gonna do it. If for some reason I can't stand it, I'll just sell it.
 

lights

Member
At its best, Borderlands 2 on Vita plays like your Vault Hunter is fighting underwater with dumbbells strapped to their ankles; at its worst, it’s a nearly unplayable slideshow. Even during rare stretches where it maintains a constant framerate, it’s well south of 30, and it hitches at random like playing an MMO on dial-up.

IGN went in.
 

RE_Player

Member
Shame I didn't get my request in fast enough to get a a copy for review. I've never played it before, so I'll be approaching it from a different perspective. I literally have no expectations other than "what I've heard".
I would love to hear from the perspective of someone new to Borderlands.
 
So, then, by your reasoning, every classic N64 game should've been critically panned b/c they didn't have the same level of graphics as the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park? I mean, that was how Nintendo was touting their early hardware, so Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time deserve to be judged accordingly, right?

This is actually a brilliant comparison.

I still haven't got the Vita version (i'm in the UK) but i've been watching bits of a guy playing through the whole game on youtube on my Vita to get a feel for it, and it looks great. I've got over 5 days worth of play on just one character on 360, and I can't wait to move it over to Vita and take it on the go.
 
The reviews feel warranted to me, to be honest. I bought the bundle and this port was my first experience on my Vita and nearly made me regret buying it, until I plopped in P4G and Killzone.

So, then, by your reasoning, every classic N64 game should've been critically panned b/c they didn't have the same level of graphics as the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park? I mean, that was how Nintendo was touting their early hardware, so Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time deserve to be judged accordingly, right?

That isn't anything close to "by his reasoning" in the slightest.
 

poopninjamvc3mk

I sucked six dicks to get this tag.
The reviews feel warranted to me, to be honest. I bought the bundle and this port was my first experience on my Vita and nearly made me regret buying it, until I plopped in P4G and Killzone.

Damn if BL2 almost made you regret Vita, I'm glad you didn't play The Amazing Spider-man port.
 

Abdiel

Member
I didn't really like the first game very much, though that might have something to do with the fact that it felt like... Everything in the game is solved just by shooting it. Kinda the same problem I had with Diablo III, and why I didn't play it beyond the demo. I like skill options... So that's why I figured Borderlands isn't really my type of game. And yet, I'm tempted to buy the retail release of this tomorrow, and give it a try. The impressions from people on here, and the user reviews I've seen posted elsewhere, have all been really impressed with the quality of a port to the handheld, concessions aside.

So, for all the reviews from the big sites shitting all over it... I read through their reviews, and I found them lacking. Overly critical in an unfair comparison. Yes, it has some technical flaws, but the circumstances it presents are still fantastic for what it is. Every time someone compares a non-indie game's performance to the PC and the Vita, I want to poke them repeatedly on the forehead.
 
This one bummed me out

If they're so predictable and just going to parrot one another, why do we need game reviewers at all? .

Don't be bummed out. I played borderlands on the Xbox 360. Never finished it, but I'm now playing it on Vita and it's currently the most fun I've had on the console. The controls definitely take some getting used to. I've got the old 1001 series, and I'm considering purchasing some type of cheap grip. That said, the drop from 4 players to 2 players is a bummer, and the frame rate, naturally, isn't as good as the consoles. The frame rate issue is actually expected, the drop in co-op was disappointment.

All told, it's a fantastic experience that's a marvel to play on the go. It looks great, seriously, and plays how I remember the X360 version playing. I can actually see taking the time to finish it whereas I didn't on the big consoles, and I'd really encourage you to check it out on your own despite what the reviewers are saying.

There's a serious disconnect between the gaming press and the gamer. We're seeing it now with reviews of Iron Galaxy's, frankly, EXCELLENT port, and Spider's serviceable Bound By Flame.

I really hate deferring to Twitch.tv to form your opinions, but I really suggest checking it out on buddy's system, or just paying someone in the Buy/Sell/Trade thread for the game on the cheap.

Maybe the refresh rate of the OLED screen makes a big difference, but this game looks and plays wonderfully on my Vita 1000.
 

whitehawk

Banned
The comical thing about this is that I watched the embeded video of the game in the Kotaku review and it seems to me like it ran just fine.
I can't agree with you there. The game looked like it was running around 20FPS most of the time. Just look at the motion of his thumbs to realize how un-smooth the game looks.
 
I really wish these "professional" review sites would get someone who has never played the game before so that it can be judged on it's own merits/issues and not just compared to the PS3/360/PC version of the game.
 

mauaus

Member
I really wish these "professional" review sites would get someone who has never played the game before so that it can be judged on it's own merits/issues and not just compared to the PS3/360/PC version of the game.

Still even if you have played it you should be able to see what an impressive feat it was to get this huge game into the vita. No matter how many times you have played the console/pc versions.

I played BL2 on PS3 and im finding it just as exciting the second time around solely due to the fact im playing it on a
fucking
portable
 

OmegaZero

Member
My main disappointments with this port are the framerate drops and audio glitches.
I'd be interested in seeing a Digital Foundry article on this game as it runs nowhere near the "28-33 fps" as advertised. Hopefully a patch can address this and all the bugs but I'm not holding my breath.

Ah well, the game is fun either way. I'm not regretting my purchase at all.
 

poopninjamvc3mk

I sucked six dicks to get this tag.
Slightly off topic but you know it's crazy how MGS3D got a lot of good reviews but the framerate and controls(if you didn't have a CCP at least) were waaay worse than BL2vita port. Game was inferior to the original PS2 release in every way possible except crouch walking and tps aiming. Different reviewers, years, and games but still.
 
Slightly off topic but you know it's crazy how MGS3D got a lot of good reviews but the framerate and controls(if you didn't have a CCP at least) were waaay worse than BL2vita port. Game was inferior to the original PS2 release in every way possible except crouch walking and tps aiming. Different reviewers, years, and games but still.

Yes. I remember this exactly. I ended up selling the game because it didnt even run as well as the ps2 version
 

mauaus

Member
Slightly off topic but you know it's crazy how MGS3D got a lot of good reviews but the framerate and controls(if you didn't have a CCP at least) were waaay worse than BL2vita port. Game was inferior to the original PS2 release in every way possible except crouch walking and tps aiming. Different reviewers, years, and games but still.

Yes. I remember this exactly. I ended up selling the game because it didnt even run as well as the ps2 version

There is a media bias against ports on the vita, games that aren't ports usually do well
 

OmegaZero

Member
Yeah, I've been mentioning that in my posts in this thread.
I enjoyed MGS3D just fine, despite the consistent sub-30fps. Then again, I use a CPP.
 
I really wish these "professional" review sites would get someone who has never played the game before so that it can be judged on it's own merits/issues and not just compared to the PS3/360/PC version of the game.

You should talk to all the people that say only fans of a specific genre or series should review a game. Have a little pow wow.
 

Ollie Pooch

In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
I think the lesson here is to treat reviews as just another persons opinion - not to say they have no validity, the points on framerate hitches are bang on and it has some performance issues (none deal breaking IMO).

I have thought at some points 'surely they could have reduced some texture detail or complexity here to lift the frame rate' - puzzling that it wasn't done in more (any?) places to ensure it is smoother - but as a hugely addicting game with tons and tons of content that I can suspend and resume at will, it's unbeatable and frankly kind of amazing. perhaps too ambitious but the fact it's released at all with the current state of the Vita is pretty sweet.

The comment about the game performing at it's best like your character is underwater is just straight up trolling bullshit, though. And touchpad controls work right for me 100% of the time. I haven't had a single issue in that regard.

It's a shame that these reviews are doing their best to sway people from picking this up but I'm having an absolute blast - your mileage may vary, of course.

Disclaimer - while I do notice frame rates I'll happily play something like Marvel Heroes on my surface pro with stuttering frame rates in the high teens so clearly, these things don't really turn me off games ;)

Also - why is there so often an assumption in reviews and on here that everyone owns a capable gaming PC? As if the option between playing a game then playing it at 60fps on some monster rig is always there.
 
I can't stand the comparisons to Killzone Mercenary. KZM was made specifically for vita, every sound, texture, physics calculation, the game is made to run on nothing else. Look at the minimum specs for BL2 on PC, that's what Gearbox believed would run the game acceptably. Iron Galaxy are gods, if you ask me.
 
I'm really torn on this one. I just bought sportsfriends and have Wolfenstein later in the month. Is it worth the full price of admission with all the performance issues?
 

PAULINK

I microwave steaks.
Also - why is there so often an assumption in reviews and on here that everyone owns a capable gaming PC? As if the option between playing a game then playing it at 60fps on some monster rig is always there.

Borderlands 2 for the pc is pretty well optimized, my laptop gpu is capable of playing the game at 1080p 60fps pretty easily. It's not a gaming laptop either.
 
Top Bottom