@angleslam @IndianaPwns39 I don't think so. Capcom said they have no plans to bring Monster Hunter 4 to Vita "for now". If it was licensed to Nintendo they probably would have just said so and been done with it.

This is why I think Sony needs to put some money down. Monster Hunter sold significantly better on the PSP and I'm sure Monster Hunter 4 would help move the Vita. Personally, I think that's really all the Vita needs: must have games to big franchises.

We'll wait and see. Capcom has a habit of creating an exclusive just to port it later on, such as RE4.

Oh, here's the link to Capcom discussing MH4 not being on the Vita "for now".

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/08/25/capcom-coo-no-monster-hunter-4-vita-plans-for-now/

I just bought one and so far I'm loving it. I would like to see more support from bigger devs, and Sony really needs to bust out their check book and get things like Monster Hunter on it to move the system more.

Couldn't you buy FIFA and the PS4 and it still cost less than the Xbox One anyway?

@Dovahkyon AAA means the game has a monstrous budget, it doesn't necessarily relate to how the game actually turns out but rather how much money was sunk into it.

@TumblinDice @IndianaPwns39 You're right on several accounts but it's mostly because big name publishers (EA, as stated in the article, and others such as Ubisoft and Activision) have been very outspoken about releasing new IPs late in a generation.

TLoU had plenty of hype sure, but it's success is something that publishers should look at and realize that gamers are willing to try something new and different instead of just going for sequel after sequel.

I mean, the piss poor sales of God of War: Ascension and Gears of War: Judgment should also tell them that but whatever.

@TumblinDice It isn't about the game's own innovations though. It's about the fact Sony/Naughty Dog took a risk by releasing a brand new IP so late in the console's life. It's about how it plays differently than most stuff on the market (is it wholly unique, no, but we rarely, rarely get something like this from the mainstream publishers). More so, it's about the fact that it was a success.

@jophy He isn't necessarily discussing the actual game but rather what it represents. Big publishers often put out sequel after sequel late in a console's life cycle and often refuse to test new IPs because they believe it won't sell among already established franchises. Sony and Naughty Dog not only released a new IP, but it was also a survival game that went against the grain of the power trip fantasies that flood the market right now. The fact it was a commercial success deserves to be talked about not because of how great the game itself is, but rather because it proves gamers want new experiences regardless of competition, new consoles, and so on.

Also, if you read Tom's review he outlines the issues he had with the game while praising it for reasons many other critics did. 8 is hardly a "meh" score anyway, especially considering he's a bit more critical with the scale.

@BLaverock @Psycho_Hands So it's been leaked to the public by now then?

@Geminon @IndianaPwns39 Her getting bit has nothing to do with her womanhood...

As a character, she was shown to be tough, resilient, and aggressive. Hell, she was basically bossing Joel around at the beginning of it all.

@SJet11 If Tess didn't get bit she would have protected Ellie in the same capacity I'm sure. In fact, it was shown that she was just as tough, if not tougher, than Joel anyway.