1)do you even know what vita is capable of? Vita proved that when someone gives a shit it can handle ps3 games very well, many ps3 ports(games that were made with a powerful home console in mind, not with all the limitations of a handheld) are relatively on par or even better on vita(considering that those vita versions run at the maximum resolution while on ps3 not), vita can do effects very well, in fact some KZ:M effects are amazing even for a ps3 game.
2)in my previous post i was talking about "versions" in the sense of versions of the same game, like NFS:MW on wiiu and vita, but you didn't get the point so i'll follow your reasoning, maybe this time i'll be more lucky.
I didn't do cherry picking with the RE:R vs RE:R2 comparison, RE:R2 on vita looks bad all the time with very low framerates.
In theory it's a fair comparison, think about it, they are one the sequel of the other and they run on the same engine, in theory RE:R2 on a more powerful hardware should look a lot better than RE:R on a weaker hardware, that's what happens on all console except on vita, as you can see RE:R looks way better than RE:R2, does that mean that Vita is less powerful than the 3ds or that RE:R2 looks worse than RE:R? No it just means that the vita versions of RE:R2 is bad, that comparison is totally useless because RE:R2 can says absolutely nothing about vita.
You are used to think that a comparison between console x vs console y versions of the same game is fair and in general it's true because they are usually made with the same efforts so the final result depends on the hardware power, but vita got some very cheap/lazy/whatever ports, if you use those as a scale for vita's power it would be at the level of a gameboy, if you ignore that vita got some very bad ports to be almost unplayable then you clearly don't know what you are talking about.
Vita got some very good ps3 ports, again games made with a powerful home console in mind, not the limitations of a handheld, whoever played even just one of those knows that vita can do way better than RE:R2 and that developer's skills and efforts are the most important factors for the final result.
I don't know what Vita kool-aid you've been drinking, but I'd like to try some.
Now YOU'RE making flawed comparisons. Just because a ps3 game has been successfully ported over to Vita without any noticeable downgrades, it doesn't mean that the Vita is as powerful as the ps3. We know they're not comparable because the disparity in hardware specs between the Vita and ps3 is too great. However, many times, a developer will compensate for this disparity by inventing new tricks to help approximate a similar look between platforms (Shin'en did this when they ported games from Wii to 3DS).
Anyway, the basis of your argument is not unique to Vita. It is the nature of multiplatform development. You say that on consoles, if there are multiple versions of the same game, they typically receive the same amount of effort. First of all, this is patently false. There are multiple factors that can determine the effort invested into of a multiplatform project, typically with market potential and hardware disparity being the two biggest factors.
If it is perceived that the product won't sell as well on a certain platform compared to another, or that the return on investment of a product won't be very good, the effort invested into the respective platform will be less. Case in point, many multiplatform games on Wii U. In fact, many of the Wii U versions got cancelled simply because the publishers felt that pouring any more money into the development of the Wii U version wouldn't be worth it. If games sold well on Wii U, developers would just make a special version that played to the Wii U's strengths instead of doing a straight port. However, they don't do this, because they don't believe the extra effort would be worth it.
Even in a hypothetical scenario where the effort is equal between consoles, the disparity between consoles may prevent the developer from fully utilizing the performance of the more powerful consoles. Considering this, a game that looks the same on both platforms is still not a fair comparison of power between consoles, because the power of one of those consoles isn't really being fully utilized.
Case in point, Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward.
3DS version:
Vita version:
They look nearly identical, save for the 3DS version having stereoscopic 3D and the Vita version having a higher resolution output. Regardless, this is STILL NOT a fair comparison of power between the platforms, as we know that their performance is not the same.
Also, the point in bringing up cherry picking wasn't to say that that's what you were doing, but to say that, essentially, any deliberate example shown for the purpose of comparing the performance potential between platforms that neglects to present an accurate and fair comparison of said platforms is a form of cherry picking. In the case of the 3DS/Vita Resident Evil example, the cherry picking would be choosing a game where the 3DS version looked better than the Vita version and arguing that 3DS was more powerful, while neglecting to choose a game where the Vita version was superior, despite many examples being available.
Ultimately, you've gotta stop this Vita persecution complex. There is no ps3-like potential hidden inside the Vita that the developers are just too lazy to use. Sometimes it gets the short end of the stick because it's not a very successful product, and hasn't appreciably penetrated the market, so developers aren't gonna put much effort into it. But the same can be said about Wii U, and to a lesser extent Xbox One.
Exclusives are where these systems will shine, but don't expect great results for a version of a multiplatform game that's on a platform that doesn't perform well on the market.
