Shield Or PS Vita

[emusan]

Contrary to popular belief, Shield is shit for gaming on its own. It's just another generic Android device that can play Angry Birds.

 

Vita is quite a bit more powerful for gaming, and actually has games that take advantage of that power properly. For that reason, if you're really looking for a proper mobile gaming experience the Vita is the only option in my eyes.

 

When you say this, are you saying it because you think the shield itself is bad at gaming hardware wise or something? Or just the lack of software? Vita doesn't really have that great of a library of it's own either.

[Stonep11]

depends on your usage scenario really, do you want to invest in games for a whole new platform? if not, get the Nvidia shield. BUT the shield limits you to home usage. You have to balance it out yourself, see what you want

Shield STREAMING is limited to home usage, not the Shield itself.

[_ASSASSIN_]

Shield STREAMING is limited to home usage, not the Shield itself.

who buys a $200 machine to play android games on?

[emusan]

who buys a $200 machine to play android games on?

He never said to *JUST* play android games on it, he was giving that as an option to use when you're not at home. It can perform more than one function, I don't see why so many people here can't understand that. When you're at home you can play PC games or Android games, when you're out you can still play Android games (including emulators!).

 

Not to mention your entire point is absurd, you realize that most phones people buy cost $400+ right? Who buys a $400 machine to play android games on??

[_ASSASSIN_]

He never said to *JUST* play android games on it, he was giving that as an option to use when you're not at home. It can perform more than one function, I don't see why so many people here can't understand that. When you're at home you can play PC games or Android games, when you're out you can still play Android games (including emulators!).

 

Not to mention your entire point is absurd, you realize that most phones people buy cost $400+ right? Who buys a $400 machine to play android games on??

that's not my point, I'm saying most people who buy shield have the intent of the largely marketed portion of the entire product, the streaming. I repeat NO ONE who buys the thing is hyped to play their android phone games.

[emusan]

that's not my point, I'm saying most people who buy shield have the intent of the largely marketed portion of the entire product, the streaming. I repeat NO ONE who buys the thing is hyped to play their android phone games.

Actually when I first bought it I did not have a desktop, and I was quite happy using it as a very high-end emulation machine with tons of battery life, but perhaps that's just me. (I now have a desktop with a 660 and it has of course become a significantly better device )

[_ASSASSIN_]

Actually when I first bought it I did not have a desktop, and I was quite happy using it as a very high-end emulation machine with tons of battery life, but perhaps that's just me. (I now have a desktop with a 660 and it has of course become a significantly better device )

emulation device? that make sense, but you still aren't playing android games, you get my point?

[emusan]

emulation device? that make sense, but you still aren't playing android games, you get my point?

I do see your point, but it's still something that can be done outside my house, so I kind of lump it into "android games" when people say it's useless outside of home.

[_ASSASSIN_]

I do see your point, but it's still something that can be done outside my house, so I kind of lump it into "android games" when people say it's useless outside of home.

I guess, but that's really the only "fun" thing you can do that's not streaming

[Stonep11]

who buys a $200 machine to play android games on?

Someone who wants a console grade control and the ability to Stream PC games and ALSO play Android games on the go.

[_ASSASSIN_]

Someone who wants a console grade control and the ability to Stream PC games and ALSO play Android games on the go.

as @emusan came up with the point of emulation, it makes sense, but ANDROID GAMES? god most of them are just garbage not even worth downloading. Really casual stuff that doesn't need a controller.

[Stonep11]

Well said.

Not to mention your entire point is absurd, you realize that most phones people buy cost $400+ right? Who buys a $400 machine to play android games on??

[Whiskers]

When you say this, are you saying it because you think the shield itself is bad at gaming hardware wise or something? Or just the lack of software? Vita doesn't really have that great of a library of it's own either.

 

Yes, hardware-wise.

 

As I said before, I actually like the Shield. I think it's cool and I want one - but, I don't consider it comparable to a Vita. The gist of it is, most people already have an Android device such as a tablet or a phone. If they do, they don't need a Shield because it won't be much different. Why spend a couple hundred dollars on a new device when they could buy a controller for their current Android device and enjoy more or less the same experience for much less?

 

The Shield is cool for its ability to stream PC games over a local network. That's what I want it for. But the Vita is cool because it's a really powerful little device in and of itself which can play games outside of the house - and can be used in much the same way a Shield can with the PlayStation 4.

[emusan]

 

Yes, hardware-wise.

 

As I said before, I actually like the Shield. I think it's cool and I want one - but, I don't consider it comparable to a Vita. The gist of it is, most people already have an Android device such as a tablet or a phone. If they do, they don't need a Shield because it won't be much different. Why spend a couple hundred dollars on a new device when they could buy a controller for their current Android device and enjoy more or less the same experience for much less?

 

The Shield is cool for its ability to stream PC games over a local network. That's what I want it for. But the Vita is cool because it's a really powerful little device in and of itself which can play games outside of the house - and can be used in much the same way a Shield can with the PlayStation 4.

Then I'm sorry, but you are flat out, factually wrong. The shield hardware is actually superior to the Vita. Both are quad core ARM processors clocked similarly, however the shield features a more recent architecture (ARM A15 vs A9, which ARM claims has about a 40 percent increase in performance). The GPU on the shield is probably the best you can possibly get for a device of that size.

 

Don't get me wrong, the Vita isn't weak or anything, but the Shields problem isn't lack of hardware, it's the lack of decent software to back it up (but that is changing with time).

 

I also own an android phone, but the Shield crushes it in terms of performance. Not everyone has the very latest phones... For example my shield can run a good number of PSP games relatively well, whereas my phone would be lucky to get 1 frame per minute.

[Whiskers]

Then I'm sorry, but you are flat out, factually wrong. The shield hardware is actually superior to the Vita. Both are quad core ARM processors clocked similarly, however the shield features a more recent architecture (ARM A15 vs A9, which ARM claims has about a 40 percent increase in performance). The GPU on the shield is probably the best you can possibly get for a device of that size.

 

Don't get me wrong, the Vita isn't weak or anything, but the Shields problem isn't lack of hardware, it's the lack of decent software to back it up (but that is changing with time).

 

I also own an android phone, but the Shield crushes it in terms of performance. Not everyone has the very latest phones... For example my shield can run a good number of PSP games relatively well, whereas my phone would be lucky to get 1 frame per minute.

 

You're correct, in terms of the hardware's outright power the Shield has a more powerful CPU. The GPU is a tricky one to nail down though - also of interest to note is that the iPad 4's GPU beats the Shield in quite a few benchmarks. But I'm absolutely certain that the Vita will always achieve better results. The Shield is running Android which is an instant limitation in my eyes, and has a higher resolution screen - the level of graphical complexity and fidelity achievable will probably be lower than that of the Vita, or at best relatively similar.

 

And even if the Shield is more powerful, so what? As I mentioned before, it's an Android device. How many games on Android take advantage of a modern device's power properly? How many take advantage of the Shield's power? How many were developed for the Shield? My point was and is if you have a relatively new Android device such as a Galaxy S4, HTC One, Motorola Moto X, Nexus 5 or Note III then you'll almost assuredly have an identical experience. Until games are being developed for the Shield itself it's not going to be any different.

 

And another point of interest - if the NVidia Shield's hardware is capable of running impressive games why have they not shown any tech demos? Every video they've shown thus far is exclusively related to the streaming functionality and not the device's ability to natively play games.

[applebook]

The Shield is the answer to a question that only 1% of the gaming public asked. 

 

The selling points of PC games are high-resolution (much higher than 720p) and keyboard/mouse control. Why would anyone want to play an RTS or a shooter on a gamepad, tiny screen device?

 

The selling points of Android games are portability and quick, no investment play sessions, all of which are best done on your smartphone because I'm certainly not carrying a Shield along with my phone. 

I'm not the type of person who dismisses and hates on products that aren't designed for me when they clearly have a large audience that appreciate their merits. For example, I don't care for ultrabooks, but I can see why they are useful for a lot of people. I see few practical reasons for the Shield other than for those who enjoy toying with new gear. 

[Panda of the Shadow]

The vita because Sword Art Online Infinity moment.

[nixproducer]

depends on what your going to use it for but personally i choose the Nvidia Shield because i have a nvidia gpu and that is only one plus of having one, but again its mainly personally preference.

[buggs]

if u have the right gpu and you can stream pc games to your shield than get it but if you dont have a gtx 650 or higher get a vita

[old reece frost]

The Vita, because Tearaway for that is incredible.

And let's be honest, the only reason you'd get a shield is for streaming because Android games aren't that good

[Oshino Shinobu]

Shield because why would you want a Vita?

[applebook]

Because the Vita has games on it that you can't play on anything else. 

 

The Shield offers nothing that you can't play on PC, a tablet/phone. 

[Camul]

If it's only out of those two I'd go for the Vita, because really what the hell is the point in the Shield? It's just an overpriced controller that only works if you have a Geforce card? No thanks. However, if I were to recommend a handheld console then I would choose the 3DS.

[emusan]

If it's only out of those two I'd go for the Vita, because really what the hell is the point in the Shield? It's just an overpriced controller that only works if you have a Geforce card? No thanks. However, if I were to recommend a handheld console then I would choose the 3DS.

 

Funny, mine works just fine without a geforce card. In fact for the first few months I had it I didn't own one! Maybe it's broken

[Camul]

Funny, mine works just fine without a geforce card. In fact for the first few months I had it I didn't own one! Maybe it's broken

I thought the streaming feature was exclusive to GeForce card owners?