Kotaku: We Were Wrong About Handheld Gaming

When Nintendo and Sony (particularly Sony) announced it was planning to re-enter the handheld market I openly poured scorn on the idea. Why? Why would you do that. Why would you force me to carry two more goddamn devices. Why? My wallet is full. I have to sit on it. It is painfully uncomfortable. These things do not fit well into my pocket. They just don't.

I don't need these bloody things any more.

I said these words to myself. I may have even said them out loud.

The year was 2012. I had just bought a tablet. A Nexus 7 to be precise. The screen was large, it was crisp. It was a device that did so much, a device I could easily tailor to my everyday needs. I'd check my email, read books, watch movies, read manga. Even write or edit my own work.

I'd play games. Good games. Very good games in fact. Rayman Jungle Run was one of my favourite games of 2012. Why would I need a handheld? Why did I need two more devices lunking around in my pocket or bag. What was the point even? Who would still buy these things.

My reasoning was relatively unsophisticated. I only have room/time in my life for one device and If I can only fit one device into my pocket/bag/purse/whatever, that device is going to be a mobile phone or a tablet. That device would never be a dedicated games console.

Besides, the potential of mobile gaming, at that particular point in time, felt stratospheric. We had smaller games perfectly suited to quick bursts of play. Games that worked brilliantly on touch screens. Mobile hardware was evolving constantly, evolving rapidly.

Two years later, the situation feels markedly different.

The 3DS, obviously, has sold in droves. Massively successful. The PS Vita hasn't garnered the same commercial success but every single person who owns a PlayStation Vita understands what it is, they understand its value. There is a respect for the niche it has carved into their lifestyles.P

I was wrong about handheld consoles. I was wrong about a lot of things.

I was wrong about mobile games. I had assumed that 2012 was the tip of the iceberg in terms of the quality and production quality of mobile games. I assumed that by 2014 we'd be playing mobile games that could match the scope and quality of, say, A Link Between Worlds on my Nexus 7 or the iPad. I assumed that trajectory would rise exponentially. It hasn't. The harsh truth is this: it has plateaued and I find myself ignoring the vast majority of mobile games being released right now.

Handheld consoles adapted. The 3DS and the Vita both found their niche. The Vita: slick, indie games on the move. The in-case-you-missed-it machine. The 3DS: home to brilliantly produced Nintendo experiences with a twist. Has Nintendo ever been as bold and inventive as it has on the 3DS? The device seems to have inspired a new lease of ideas and innovation within existing franchises. Think Super Mario 3D Land. Think A Link Between Worlds.

At one point handhelds seemed doomed to obscurity. Now, today, they feel more relevant than ever. I was wrong about handhelds. Very wrong.

SOURCE

The ultimate success of handhelds (both commercially- the 3DS is the highest and fastest selling system of the generation- and critically- both the Vita and 3DS have the best libraries of the generation, and last year's Game of the Year was a 3DS game) should shut any and all handheld naysayers up.

What happens to them in the future is anyone's guess. But as of right now, they are viable and they are awesome.

Kotaku is wrong about a lot.

When is Kotaku right about anything?

Answer is never

In summary

• 3DS - Mario + Zelda
• Vita - indiestation
• Tablets - lol

Both of us know all those generalizations are wrong :P

Charizard, comparing libraries of two handhelds that came out heading towards 2.2 years, to consoles that release a couple months ago. Flawless logic.

who the funk puts a wallet in his/her back pocket?

The funny thing? I'd still take those few month old new gen consoles libraries over the cesspool that is handheld gaming.

Cesspool? Please explain.

I'd take the 3DS over any console at this point (hopefully it continues getting good games)

But the Vita? lol

Considering the Vita shares so many games with your beloved PC, and the fact that it has some incredible exclusives of its own... why?

Pretty simple, almost all hand held games are terrible.

Why what? Why lol?

Because, as you said, it shares so many games of its games with my beloved PC which nullifies much of its existence, and it has very, VERY few exclusives worth looking into. I'd get OlliOlli, Ys Memories of Celceta (assuming it doesn't come to PC soon like the other Ys games), and I'd probably be down to get Dragons Crown and Persona 4 on it rather than elsewhere.

Four games for me in nearly 2 years its been on the market, and it's not picking up steam. The device still costs $200+, and that's not an easy pill to swallow. Not when you come from a system like the PC where there is an insanely cheap, and accessible library of hundreds of games each year.

Of course your perspective changes depending on your gaming background. If I was a console gamer all my life, or a handheld gamer, or perhaps if I traveled a lot, then the Vita might look good.

It just looks awful from my PC gaming throne though. With that said, most systems look awful from this throne except the 3DS which I believe would compliment the PC greatly. It fills in all the little holes in the PC library very nicely, and it'll be complete once an Advance Wars game releases.

It's one guys opinion. Kotaku didn't come out and say they were wrong.... Misleading title char common now....

@blue_hazy_basic:

I'm finding there aren't many games I like to play on the 3DS. I'm thinking the Vita might be the same.

Which games have you been playing?

Pretty simple ALL hand held games are terrible. FTFY.

It is a hard thing to say really. I generally don't like handhelds as much as consoles or PC (both of which I like quitew a bit).

But handheld gaming soured me from the gameboy (the first real handheld in my mind, as the small minigames that hardly could be called games are not something I Count).

Tryied Again with the DS, I found that I did not care alot for the DS. More specifically the games I had for it. They seemed like a degraded version of what I might play on a console.

Then the Vita came (softbondle with a PS4 in November, Maybe it is because I did not need to buy alot of games for it (PS+ and all) Maybe it simply had games that appealed more to me. But the Vita quickly found a place. obscure games long gone from consoles, and old classics were found here and more important they playied well (an issue I always had with handhelds).

When that is said, I have begun wondering about a 3DS also, since somehow the Vita hit a soft spot.

When that is all said, the Vita does have so many issues it is not even funny. The battery life especially making it far less of a "handheld" but more of a "laying on the sofa when GF clamp to the tv like a rabid dog". Or the ocational "with me in beg when I am ill" item. Power sockets close by.

First time I have to completely disagree with you blue_hazy

The good games on PS4 and Xbone at the moment can be counted on one hand. And that is when putting both the PS4 and Xbone libraries together.

Thats my point

@blue_hazy_basic said:

Thats my point

But 2013 was great for 3DS and Vita: Zelda, Killzone, Tearaway, unique experiences as well as games that come close to console experiences.

All of that on the go, and for less than half the price of an Xbone or PS4.

surprise surprise...

this.

Looking back, I found myself disappointed with the DS and PSP. The DS had quickly become a Pokémon machine for me and the PSP had a really lackluster life cycle save for a couple games. Overall I have to say I was disappointed.

But the 3DS and Vita? Miles better. Each have solid games that take advantage of the hardware's power, and each offer unique experiences. The games are solid and I'm hopeful that Nintendo will continue pushing out good games and that Sony will keep offering unique titles through PS+ (still only purchased one retail game for the thing, though I've got a few PS Classics on it as well.)

Yup, these handhelds are glorious.

Primarily I'm a PC gamer. I don't play JRPG's or platformers. What games on handhelds would interest me that there aren't massively better versions of a PC or a console? (As for gaming while on the go, I use a laptop)

@R4gn4r0k said:

@blue_hazy_basic said:

Thats my point

But 2013 was great for 3DS and Vita: Zelda, Killzone, Tearaway, unique experiences as well as games that come close to console experiences.

All of that on the go, and for less than half the price of an Xbone or PS4.

Those really don't appeal to me tbh. I'll admit its as much taste as anything else. I grew up playing the vast majority of games on the PC so I missed out playing PS and Nintendo games in my youth.

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, the fact that you let the DS become a pokemon machine is your fault.
The DS had an absolutely fantastic library.

As for the PSP I have found plenty of games that made the PSP worth my money. That's before you take into account that with an hour of your time at most you can turn a PSP and a decent sized memory card into the best vintage gaming handheld ever.

*ahem*

@blue_hazy_basic said:

@inb4uall said:That's before you take into account that with an hour of your time at most you can turn a PSP and a decent sized memory card into the best vintage gaming handheld ever.

*ahem*

I do believe I said handheld Hazy. I didn't forget your precious PC. You really should get your eyes checked more often in your old age. :P

Unless you are hinting I'm not supposed to talk about that...

Nexus tablet? That's your problem. Apple's tablets get real, actual games like XCom.

Anything on Kotaku is best taken with a hefty lump of salt. They frequently have no idea what they are talking about.

I mostly play strategy games and JRPGs on mine. I'm in the camp that prefers console and PC gaming, but there really isn't much available on the consoles at the moment. If you like turn-based strategy, I would say that Fire Emblem: Awakening and Ghost Recon: Shadow Wars are different than the standard fare on PC and both games are really good. Fire Emblem is sort of a JRPG, but it's really more of a war game than an RPG.

I couldn't imagine a JRPG fan not owning both handhelds, as most of the best ones never make it to consoles or PC. If you don't like them, handhelds aren't as important. I would still contend that the 3DS and Vita are better than any of the next-gen consoles at this point. The only genre better on the consoles right now is FPS.

Unless its the first gen one (like i have >:( )

You said "games" but I see game......

I had pretty much the same view point, I too thought devs would jump into mobile gaming and make handhelds irrelevant. They certainly have some great games on iOS and Play store, but they don't offer the console quality gaming of the Vita or Nintendo and other interesting third party games games the 3DS has.

Infinity Blade and a couple of racing games are the only games coming close to console quality in terms of polish, but even then they lack the same gaming element the dedicated systems bring. The car games and Infinity Blade are more like an exclusive Kinect game in terms of what they offer.

@PurpleMan5000: But are they as good as say Civ or total war or sins or CK2 (LOVE YOU CK2!) etc? If I'm going to pay a few hundred bucks for some hardware + games I want something on those levels and I'm going to invest 100's of hrs in. Granted consoles blow absolute chunks for strat games but thats why I use them as a secondary supplemental system.

Almost the same story here. I grew up playing console games first, but then I discovered RTS and competitve online FPS on PC and grew towards that platform more.

But handhelds can be enjoyed by any gamer, no matter the background or age. You can just jump into something like Mario Kart, Mario 3D Land or Wipeout and have fun :)

Also rolling with a first gen myself.

I wasn't speaking simply about Xcom, I was speaking about other games that are high quality and popular across many platforms (just ilke Xcom). I was speaking about all the games like Xcom, the grammar is correct. If you can't do a simple search to find those other game(s) (plural), it's more an indictment of your immediate intelligence than it is my ability to provide good examples.

Ewwww....
What you holding out for?

Ghost Recon is not. Fire Emblem is approaching that level. The amount of strategy required in not only making sure that the weakest units get the experience early so they can become badass while also not letting them die because they are gone forever is pretty deep. Not only that, but you also have to decide who you want to pair up so you get the best kids, etc. The game offers a ton of replayability. It's also really cool that every character has a birthday, and if you play the game on their birthday you will get a bonus item, etc. The game just oozes charm.

I wouldn't buy the system for just one game, though. If you don't like JRPGs (missing out, imo), or platformers, then neither system has a library quite large enough for you to be happy with it.

If you weren't speaking specifically about only xcom then you should have listed the other games. The burden of proof is not on me, I didn't make the claim Mac.

Hand held gaming is a sucky replacement most people only indulge when they don't have access to a proper gaming system, usually because they are not at home. It is also a cesspit of the most predatory business practices in gaming.

That said, it is also the future of gaming. Unless this console generation only lasts three years, you will have tablets out with more power then the PS4 long before this generation is done. It only takes an HDMI port and a Bluetooth controller to turn such a tablet into a device that can provide a console experience. The major difference being you can pick the exact same device and play it while you are away from home. Playstation pushing the concept of streaming games is actually going to help this trend develop faster.

Unless Gears of BattleDuty seventeen wants you to pay a dollar to avoid a fifteen minute timer to join the next multiplayer game, there really isn't away to avoid this. Particularly since next gen consoles have all of the long lamented downsides of PC gaming. Heck some of the biggest games on last gen consoles required hardware that wasn't sold with all consoles, installations, waiting around for day one updates, and more waiting for developers to actually make the game work.

who cares what a bunch of people masquerading as video game journalists/"pros" think? you guys are the suckers for giving any weight on anything. I always knew mobile would not have a chance on a real console or handheld. they are simply made for specific things.

lol, nothing I suppose. It just still does everything I want except Xcom...

That's actually false. My previous rhetoric requires me to do nothing you're attempting to tie to it. I can provide additional examples if you'd like them, but the idea that there are a large selection of games available for the iPad that are popular and are enjoyed across multiple platforms is undeniable. Many of these games are not available on android, or they will not look as good or run as well on an inefficient, android-powered paperweight (it's well-documented that android-powered touchscreens are noticeably less responsive than Apple's iPad screens, and even less responsive than Windows mobile device displays). Fragmentation assures that it's unlikely that many apps will be fully and completely optimized for non-Apple tablet hardware.

Tablet gaming will never replace consoles and handhelds unless people start showing a willingness to pay more than $5-$10 for a game.

It appears that you think that just because I labeled the DS a "Pokémon machine" that I ignored the library the handheld had to offer; I don't want to assume that's what you meant but it is what it seems like when you say it is "your fault."

Which goes to show the problem with assuming things. I played a large amount of titles on the DS, I did not just ignore it and purchase only Pokémon. There were some great games for it and I do still discover one that I missed and then play it on the 3DS. But I am of the belief that the quality of the DS library was a bit overstated. As for the PSP, as I said before there were titles for it that the system worth owning but overall I found this library lacking. Lacking in quality and quantity.

It would be worth mentioning that I found many of the games on both systems rough around the edges, developers needed more power and/or needed to reign it in with their ideas. I don't know why I wasn't impressed with the quality of these libraries, but it doesn't matter now as the 3DS and Vita both get a ton of quality playtime.

So you're saying that an ipad controls games better than an android device such as a Nexus 7?

Inherently, because of the underlying technology that powers both kinds of devices (unless things have changed in significant ways very recently), Apple's iDevices are more responsive which makes games like dual stick shooters more playable than similar games on android powered devices.

I can't help but feel like you're attempting to walk me into some sort of a trap, and I couldn't be happier. I haven't been surprised in this realm for a long, long time. If you've got something new and exciting, lay it on me. I do doubt it, though.