Are handheld games a worthy replacement for console games?

I've thought about this for a while. I have a Wii-U and while I haven't played a Wii-U game in a couple of months (Mario 64 and various Wii games not withstanding), I play on just the Gamepad 99% of the time. It may as well be a home-based handheld to me. Now, considering the 3DS has a great catalogue of games, would anyone argue that you can get a similar (or better) experience from games by going handheld-only?

I can't see myself playing my Wii-U until the new Xenoblade Chronicles comes out, but having only played Super Mario 3D Land on the 3DS, can anyone here vouch for the "meatiness" of Nintendo's handheld?

Not at all, I find that I get the most out of handheld games that I can play in smaller chunks, preferably on the train to work, plus I feel that the lesser power/slightly worse controls stop it from reaching the heights of my favourite console games. If anything I'd be more likely to ditch the handhelds.

For me both are essential and independent. Yes, you can play handheld games on your home console, but no, you can't play your home console games on your portable; well, not as they are meant to be played (seen) anyway.

I'd say no. You can certainly get by going handheld only - many of my favourite games are handheld titles - but I think you'd lose something in the process. Andy mentioned that a handheld game would struggle to reach the heights of his favourite console titles, and I agree with that statement. I'd take a new Super Mario Galaxy over a new Super Mario 3D Land every day of the week.

Handheld games aren't intrinsically worse, the technology just isn't there yet. At the moment, because handheld machines don't have the same graphical heft and quality of control, there are games you can play at home that you can't play on the go, but in the not too distant future that difference is going to be so negligible as to not matter.

I'm going to lean closer to Drunka on this one. If you can reasonably fit the entirety of Xenoblade Chronicles into a teeny tiny cartridge, the gap between handhelds and home consoles could be argued to be shrinking. They do, however, different enough jobs that we should not be ditching one for the other just yet.

ZeroJones wrote:

I'm going to lean closer to Drunka on this one. If you can reasonably fit the entirety of Xenoblade Chronicles into a teeny tiny cartridge, the gap between handhelds and home consoles could be argued to be shrinking. They do, however, different enough jobs that we should not be ditching one for the other just yet.

It's funny you mention Xenoblade, as that's the game that's splitting me. Considering Majora's Mask, Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate and Xenoblade Chronicles were all released a few months ago on 3DS, while the Wii-U received Mario Party 10, Kirby and Splatoon, it actually feels a bit backwards. The quick-fix, shorter experiences have been on console rather than portable. Yoshi and Super Mario Maker also don't particularly interest me.

Am I the only one who has found the Wii-U to have less "full experiences" than previous Nintendo consoles?

The power thing to me doesn't that much, it's all about game play and if you gave me Pokémon Colosseum or Pokemon Ruby. I know which one I would play Ruby and at the time PC would of looked far better.

But games on a console are getting bigger and bigger in various ways that hard to get that sort thing on a handheld but like Drunka says there getting closer all the time as the VITA runs likes of Borderlands 2 yes very badly but still runs it, my phone could run Bioshock and Final Fantasy XIII that the gap is closing that a handheld that comes out could be like a gen behind a console.

I've probably always preferred playing handheld to home console, although I obviously play a lot of both. I don't know why, but I think it's easy to get immersed in a handheld game.

masofdas wrote:

But games on a console are getting bigger and bigger in various ways that hard to get that sort thing on a handheld but like Drunka says there getting closer all the time as the VITA runs likes of Borderlands 2 yes very badly but still runs it, my phone could run Bioshock and Final Fantasy XIII that the gap is closing that a handheld that comes out could be like a gen behind a console.  

Surely you'd be limiting your experience of those console games by playing on a tiny screen compared to whatever your home TV is? That's a unavoidable limit of handhelds in my eyes.

What an odd question.  The two provide entirely different experiences, and while there is some crossover, I don't think either could replace the other.

A home console can, for me, deliver a measure of immersion that a handheld simply can't (sorry OR).  That's not just about power, although obviously that helps: it's as much about having a bigger screen and decent speakers.  (EDIT: Like Jay said just before I posted!) They all help suck me in.  I play games on the TV most of the time if I can help it, rather than the gamepad.  A home console is much better for grand swooping adventures.  

But you wouldn't want to play a five-minute burst game on a home console.  It wouldn't be worth the length of time waiting for it to load!  Games like puzzlers are better suited to your handhelds.  Similarly, a game like Phoenix Wright, with its frequent save states, and where most of the immersion is delivered through writing rather than environment and atmosphere.  And of course, the biggest advantage of the handheld: you can't play the Wii U on a bus!

I do have to mention power.  Even in an era where XC can be played on a handheld, although it's a halfway-through-a-generation mongrel, there's no way that XCX could be.  It and the new Zelda are the two games I'm most excited about, and neither could work on a handheld.  I don't think I'm a powermonger, but I do like my large environments!

So, no.  No they're not.

I don't get the defence regarding Xenoblade, it's a decent port but I'd play it again on the Wii over the 3DS any day. Borderlands 2 on Vita can only function with 2 players and it doesn't work that well then either. If you're having to place limitations on that the games suffer for it.

@Balla and then we see Zelda U is for NX and it's a hybrid.

@Andy I did say Borderlands 2 is bad on VITA but I think FFXIII runs rather well on a phone and that's a phone not something made dedicated for gaming that like Drunka says gap is closing that you could likely get on a handheld of the not far off future something on par with consoles.

But I agreed with everyone about screen size etc, I barely touch my 3DS as I don't use it as a handheld on the go, just at home where I soon play on my TV.

Balladeer wrote:

A home console can, for me, deliver a measure of immersion that a handheld simply can't (sorry OR).  That's not just about power, although obviously that helps: it's as much about having a bigger screen and decent speakers.  (EDIT: Like Jay said just before I posted!)  They all help suck me in.  I play games on the TV most of the time if I can help it, rather than the gamepad.  A home console is much better for grand swooping adventures.

See, I think the bigger screen is countered by the separation between it and you as a player. With console games you're very definitely in a room looking at a screen on the other side with a controller in your hands. With a handheld the game world is right there in front of your eyes, up close with no distractions around it or between you and the screen. I think the fact you are holding the game world has some effect too, although I can't really explain or justify it. With the correct setup a home console game can be very immersive, but to do so requires more effort in my experience. Turning off the lights, shutting the curtains, sitting close to the screen and ensuring there are no distractions. In contrast I can be playing a handheld in the middle of a room full of people, or on a bus, or in the back of a car, and be completely lost to the world and absorbed by the game itself. This is especially true of any game with a lot of text - give me reading text on a close handheld screen over a faraway TV any day (probably the same argument applies there as to reading a book).

As for speakers, a good pair of headphones can solve everything. Nothing beats Hotline Miami on Vita with headphones plugged in, for example.

Personally for me that would be a no, like a few have already mentioned the experiences between consoles and handhelds are so different & should never look to replace each other.

I want a quick fix (around an Hour) on hand held games even games like MH4U are designed for quick hunts (even though I typically don't do that) here and there but when they try to deliver a "home" experience on a portable they just don't work for a number of reasons.

masofdas wrote:

@Balla and then we see Zelda U is for NX and it's a hybrid.  

Then surely it'd end up being a very different game from what we have seen so far.

I thought it was worth mentioning exactly HOW poor Borderlands is though. Regardless the Vita has proven that the handheld just isn't a home console, otherwise it would be in a much better place right now.

Yeah the VITA does prove that people don't want a handheld that tries to be a home console with top a tier game like Uncharted Golden Abyss.

But doesn't having likes of FFXIII on a phone/tablet must of took a while to get to run that there must be a marketed for it or square wouldn't both doing it. And the PSP sold over 80m SKUs and that had some console quality games.

@Jas I was pulling Balla's leg as it's something he wouldn't want.

From a Nintendo perspective, I think the gap has been bridged quite a bit in this generation. There's a handful of Wii U exclusives that I think could be done similarly well on New 3DS, like Captain Toad Treasure Tracker, Mario Party 10 and Game & Wario. I'm still a bit puzzled as to why Kirby and the Rainbow Curse is on Wii U - surely it's a much more natural fit on New 3DS?

All things considered though, the sort-of ports of Lego City Undercover: The Chase Begins and Sonic Lost World from Wii U to 3DS illustrate that handheld isn't always a great substitute for the home console experience, and not always a worthy replacement. Then of course there's Super Smash Bros. - the 3DS version is a brilliant accompaniment to the Wii U version, but I wouldn't ever consider it as a replacement if I was to shift my Wii U.

Interesting debate, guys. I think it's true that there's less difference in terms of the available technology (with your fancy iPhones and whatnot, as well as the 3DS/Vita) and even console games seem to be designed more and more for dip in/out-ability. However, for a personal answer, I always find that gaming in front of a telly or computer is more comfortable. Therefore, I can't replace them with handhelds.

mas wrote:

@Jas I was pulling Balla's leg as it's something he wouldn't want.

I know you were but I still had to point that out.

Also I don't know if it would look that much different if Zelda U was delayed for NX and it was a hybrid the Wii U isn't that powerful, the Galaxy Tab S is likely more powerful then a Wii U, Fronk once came up with reasonable specs for hybrid.

I'm not really talking about how the game looks but the fundamental design of the game, that would be a big change as it'd need to work in a portable setting..........anyhow don't want to take this off-topic more than we have so I'll stop before I take it too far.

I feel my view on this is on two fronts, so I'll cover it over two fronts.

The first, games themselves.  Portables have, in complete honesty, reached a point where home consoles offer nothing major over them besides sparkles and individual hair mechanics.  There was a specific generation of home consoles that came along, and ever since then gameplay has ceased to evolve in any really noticeable way.  That was the Ps2, Gamecube, and Xbox generation.  Since then outside the increase in internet connectivity (which portables have kept up with anyway) home consoles as far as actual game design have stayed the same, or have in some cases actually gone backwards (shooters for example, Perfect Dark still offers more potential than any of the current gen fps, and it's a freaking N64 game).  In fact I honestly can't name a game I've played on the ps3 that I felt couldn't have been done on the ps2, they wouldn't have looked as pretty, true, but the actual design, gameplay, and all that?  Yeah, that could have been done on the ps2.  

Portables started to cross in to that specific generation with the 3ds reaching between dreamcast and gamecube levels, and the Vita reaching around ps2 levels.  On top of that both of them boast all the online connectivity that has become standard in electronic devices in the modern age.


The second, screens.  There's a very distinct change in atmosphere and feel between a portable and a proper big tv set. The tv provided its positioned right holds attention better, can fill more vision, and a bunch of other things that ultimately make it easier to get immersed in compared to a portable screen.  

For me it's really easy to compare this, as jrpg's nowadays hold no real differences between the handheld and home console in terms of what they offer.  In a couple of cases I've even gone from playing the same rpg on both formats.  And in every single case I found myself easily drawn in to the game more easily than the portable offerings.



Now I've got those views out of the way I can get on with my main one, the one that addresses this question specifically.  To put it simply, I think home consoles are obsolete in what they do.  Handhelds have caught up enough that home consoles have been reduced to offer only superficial advantages.  The key difference between them is the screen.  The screen however does give home consoles one niche, because home console games nowadays are so focussed on glitz and glam and flashy shows, something the tv enhances dramatically and that handhelds actually decrease in impact.

Ultimately, as far as the actual games are concerned?  Yes, I believe we're at the stage where we no longer need a home console.  As far as the presentation goes however home consoles still provide a unique and exclusive presentation for games that portables can never match because of their inherent design of being a handheld screen.

I agree with some what your saying as we know the 3DS has had ports of PS2 games and even a Wii game if you count the New 3DS that it could very much be playing DC (6th gen as well Athrun), Cube, PS2, Xbox and Wii games that it's not far behind.

Same with the VITA which I think has far better looking games then the PS2, it has had a few PS3 come to it and likes of Uncharted: Golden Abyss is lovely.

But I disagree that console games have not innovated, yes some have stayed the same as take your shooter Halo to me was the nest shooter in long line of things like DOOM or Goldeneye that innovated and yes it's not really changed since the OG Xbox but it worked but take a Gears of War it invented a whole new genre in stop & pop and was different then everything tried to copy it.

But I think the biggest example of a difference of the 6th gen and either the 3DS or VITA to the 7th gen (can't really say about the current gen as still yet to get going but open worlds seems to be the thing from likes of Wither, Batman eg) and that's the Mass Effect Trilogy, yes bioware had great games on the 6th gen and I still think Jade Empire is possibly there best single game. But could the MET really work on a handheld and would you play it on a handheld to me that's a big NO due to it's vast worlds, choices and almost cinematic nature of it which yes you could say is the glitz and glam but thanks to that you can have things like the MET or The Last of Us where to me the gameplay is just okay but the story and how it's presented is superb that just wouldn't translate to a handheld.

Which Jas actually brought up about Zelda U if that was delayed for NX and NX is a hybrid would from what we know, would that feel and scope work on the go maybe but I reckon you would sooner play it on the TV.

So that to your point Athrun a home consoles biggest weakness glitz and glam is also it's biggest positive if used in the correct way and you get a Last of Us our of it.

Athrun888 wrote:

Portables started to cross in to that specific generation with the 3ds reaching between dreamcast and gamecube levels, and the Vita reaching around ps2 levels.

The PSP was PS2 levels. The Vita is more like PS3.

Just look at MGS: Peace Walker or Daxter on the PSP, and Uncharted or Gravity Rush on the Vita.