• 67 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

Everyone wants smart phones these days. million run out and buy 700 smart phones and nintendo cant even sell 3ds at around 250 same goes for vita. The games are also way cheaper i mean come on 40$ for a vita or 3ds game come on no wonder they are not selling. is it really worth carrying around a hand held when your phone can do everything a desktop pc can do?

#2 Posted by Sackmanjones (4650 posts) -

I'd say this is the last time we will see a new handheld released in loong loong time( not including the slight iterations on the 3ds)

#3 Posted by Video_Game_King (35841 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

Everyone wants smart phones these days.

And we all know that smart phones can't be held in your hand. I mean, what is this; the future?

#4 Posted by Spoonman671 (4529 posts) -

3DS is selling fine.

#5 Posted by Inkerman (1448 posts) -

I wanna say no, they're not dead. Then again I don't play handhelds, but at the same time I wouldn't imagine myself doing any serious gaming on a touch screen. I like my tactile feedback. IMO handhelds maybe should be combined with phones, like Sony did, or maybe as accessories to phones, like ipod docks.

#6 Posted by Dad_Is_A_Zombie (1225 posts) -

Yes.

#7 Posted by Dagbiker (6939 posts) -

More people buy phones then Hand held gaming devices. And people don't want to buy a Hand held for the same amount they can buy a console that dose more, and costs the same. I phone games may be cheaper, but they are no where near the level of Vita games, or even 3ds Games. Yes, it is worth carrying around a Handheld gaming device that can play games.

I myself take the bus to work every morning, and bring with me my computer, my vita/3ds, my phone, my wallet, and my Ipod. My Ipod, wallet, phone, and 3ds/vita are all stored in my pockets.

#8 Posted by Phatmac (5720 posts) -

The 3DS seems to be doing fine. It's also unique enough for it to be a different beast when compared to phones. Lastly you can't get Nintendo games on phones just yet. Sony is probably done with handhelds, but Nintendo sure isn't.

#9 Posted by BigSocrates (275 posts) -

Phones and handhelds will probably merge in some way. This might not be the last gen, since Nintendo will want to replace the 3DS eventually, but 10 years from now ther probably will not be a pure dedicated handheld. Now a Sony branded Android smartphone with built in controls or something? I could see that happening. Unless touchscreen controls get much better. To be fair though, the dedicated game console is probably dead after the Wii U. Sure the Xbox720 and PS4 will play games but they will be comprehensive entertainment centers. To be fair this gen is basically there already.

#10 Posted by Sbaitso (463 posts) -

I just bought a psp-1000 for thirty bucks. It's awesome. I was playing final fantasy tactics on the phone and it was awful. Picked it up for my psp for 5 dollars, and I'm loving it. Not all games are great on traditional handhelds, not all games are great on touch based phones/devices. I think we need both.

#11 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

@Sbaitso said:

I just bought a psp-1000 for thirty bucks. It's awesome. I was playing final fantasy tactics on the phone and it was awful. Picked it up for my psp for 5 dollars, and I'm loving it. Not all games are great on traditional handhelds, not all games are great on touch based phones/devices. I think we need both.

what about this?

companies are making android hand helds now that have 1000s of games cheap or free.

#12 Posted by Daneian (1202 posts) -

I hope not! I just picked up my first Neo Geo pocket Color!

#13 Posted by Sbaitso (463 posts) -
@banishedsoul1 In my experience, knockoff systems with lots of cheap/free games consist mostly of low quality/rip off games. Even the iPhone has plenty of this.
#14 Posted by _Chad (962 posts) -

I hate iPhone games I have zero games on mine. But handhelds are getting too expensive and they don't do what a console does so they are probably pretty close to being dead.

#15 Posted by Dagbiker (6939 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

@Sbaitso said:

I just bought a psp-1000 for thirty bucks. It's awesome. I was playing final fantasy tactics on the phone and it was awful. Picked it up for my psp for 5 dollars, and I'm loving it. Not all games are great on traditional handhelds, not all games are great on touch based phones/devices. I think we need both.

what about this?

companies are making android hand helds now that have 1000s of games cheap or free.

Many != Good.

#16 Posted by NegativeCero (2973 posts) -

I thought you were literally talking about hands, in which case this topic would make no sense. On topic: I really hope not. I love handheld games as much as I love console games. I still regularly play my GBA and DS. I hope to get a 3DS is the near future too, so I guess I'm kinda part of the problem of not them not selling enough.

#17 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

@NegativeCero said:

I thought you were literally talking about hands, in which case this topic would make no sense. On topic: I really hope not. I love handheld games as much as I love console games. I still regularly play my GBA and DS. I hope to get a 3DS is the near future too, so I guess I'm kinda part of the problem of not them not selling enough.

Do you enjoy the pc?

#18 Posted by Zekhariah (697 posts) -

I think it is to early to be sure. The phones/tablets play some kinds of games really well (strategy - turn based or even real time, JRPG, adventure) but they are kind of bad about anything that really requires input fidelity. My guess would be it would take a shift in gaming taste to really eliminate the handheld systems. And after the shift happened, even if taste changed back, nobody would bother making a handheld again.

#19 Posted by NegativeCero (2973 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

@NegativeCero said:

I thought you were literally talking about hands, in which case this topic would make no sense. On topic: I really hope not. I love handheld games as much as I love console games. I still regularly play my GBA and DS. I hope to get a 3DS is the near future too, so I guess I'm kinda part of the problem of not them not selling enough.

Do you enjoy the pc?

Of course. I'm assuming you mean for emulating games, but apart from older games I don't use them much. I'll be really bummed out if handheld games straight up go away.

#20 Posted by Animasta (14637 posts) -

@banishedsoul1: they are I killed them

Online
#21 Posted by Miketakon (513 posts) -

Handhelds are stuck in a weird zone between consoles and smartphones. At this point I think its hard to justify getting one.

#22 Posted by ripelivejam (3473 posts) -

they appeal to different markets. i think the millions flocking to iphone for gaming are too casual of gamers to consider dedicated platforms like 3ds/psp. i'll admit there's a lot of interesting things going on with iphone gaming, but none of it will be nearly as satisfying as what you can get on portables.

really enjoying my 3ds (after a couple years parted from my original ds lite), and considering trying to get a PSP on the cheap for all the great SRPGSs there, so for me it's nowhere near dead!

#23 Posted by A_Talking_Donkey (262 posts) -

I don't think they're dead. I think they're in a transitional stage though, sort of like how later arcade games relied on gimmicky peripherals instead of straight joystick and buttons. The reasons to own a 3DS are reasons smart phone can't emulate, but as soon as developers jump ship I think it could be the end of handhelds.

#24 Posted by dungbootle (2454 posts) -

I don't think so.

#25 Posted by Nightriff (4866 posts) -

For me no because I still enjoy them. Just bought a Vita and I haven't been this excited since I bought my PS3 5+ years ago. 3DS was more of an upgrade for me, I play more DS games than 3DS games.

#26 Posted by TooWalrus (13131 posts) -

Are Persona 4: The Golden and Luigi's Mansion 2 coming out soon? 
 
They're not dead to me, damn it!

#27 Posted by MAGZine (435 posts) -

So, OP attempts to make the argument that handhelds are dead because they smartphones "cost about the same" and "do as much as a desktop PC".

False, and false.

A 3DS sells for $169. A Galaxy S III Sells for $169 on a 3 year contract. 3 * 12 * $60/mo = $2160. What a steal!

Don't compare smartphones to desktop PCs. what a ridiculous statement. Are you playing Call of Duty on your smartphone? Are you even playing Lego Batman on your smartphone? What an awful argument.

The gaming experience on smartphones suck. Your smartphone, believe it or not, is not primarily a gaming platform. There are several issues that stem from this:

  • Poor Battery Life
  • Poor controls (touch and gyro only)
  • inconsistancy of hardware is a nightmare for game developers
  • smartphone games are designed for short bursts of play. Play for a few minutes, quit, play or do something else.
  • Your smartphone is a phone so if you kill the battery on your smartphone playing games, you no longer have a phone. So what, you're going to plug it in? Yeah, really portable.

There aren't really very many serious game developers looking to tell any sort of a story or invest in any sort of a game with any complexity past McPixel, Granny Smith or Angry Birds. Games designed for portable gamesystems generally have better gameplay, and gameplay that is conductive to longer playsessions. You might only pay $2.99 for a game on your phone, but if you play it for only a couple hours, how does it stack up against a pokemon game that you invested 40 hours into? You get what you pay for.

And that image you posted is a fucking autrocity. Nobody is going to carry that as a phone, and there aren't enough of those in existence to make it worth while to develop a game with hardware controls in mind.

Terrible argument. Terrible.

#28 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4328 posts) -

They're not as big as they used to be and I don't really care as long as good games keep coming out for them.

#29 Posted by A_Talking_Donkey (262 posts) -

@MAGZine said:

You might only pay $2.99 for a game on your phone, but if you play it for only a couple hours, how does it stack up against a pokemon game that you invested 40 hours into? You get what you pay for.

And that image you posted is a fucking autrocity. Nobody is going to carry that as a phone, and there aren't enough of those in existence to make it worth while to develop a game with hardware controls in mind.

Terrible argument. Terrible.

3 dollars divided by a couple (2) is 1.5. You get 1.5 hours of play per dollar. If you pay full retail for a pokemon game (60) and get 40 hours out of it, you get 1.5 hours of play per dollar. They're actually equivalent to each other as far as experience per dollar spent.

#30 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5797 posts) -
@BigSocrates said:
Phones and handhelds will probably merge in some way. 
This seems like the most reasonable outcome imo. 
#31 Posted by Xomero (62 posts) -

Well when it comes to smart phones you have a device that can access the internet, make calls, browse, etc. So it's not that hard to just play a game on it.

Hand helds, I don't think are dead quite yet as both the Vita and 3DS are still selling and people still want to buy the games that come out on each system since smart phones don't really support it. Things like The World Ends With you though was a great shocker to me because it was (to my knowledge) the first hand held game to go on a smart phone. Currently though I think smart phones mainly focus on games that you can play through touch like Temple Run for instance. I tried playing Marvel vs Capcom 3 on a smart phone and it was just horrible to try and play since there were no physical buttons so inputs were a fail and I could not really play it on the go, I needed a table or something to try and stick it down and play. On the vita however, it feels really nice like I'm playing it on the PS3.

I don't think hand helds are dead yet, I'm not saying it won't happen, but then they'll start being multi-purpose device like how they're currently going. The vita and the DS both take pictures, browse the web, you can save your own pictures and put music on it and the vita even has skype and a 3G ability. I'm sure the next step will be like face time equivalent or their own phone serve on them. Sorry about the rant there.

#32 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

i would say no. i do think that they are dieing, well smartphones. nintendo is probably going to release a phone with their games or get their games on the phone with some carrier.

#33 Posted by Xomero (62 posts) -

@MAGZine: I read what you said after I typed mines up and I agree with what you say. However, I think smart phones are expanding as well as hand helds. The difference between them is what their primary purpose is, but I won't be surprise when they try to cross over as some have already tried like the Vita with that 3G skype essentially making it a phone (not a very good one though...) or the iphone with The World Ends With You (Which I invested 200+ hours on the DS and was disappointed to here it on apple...).

#34 Posted by Korolev (1694 posts) -

Dead? Nah. They're facing stiff competition, however.

But the main problem is the cost of making them. In the past, handheld games were cheap and quick to make. But these days, with the 3DS and Vita packing considerable hardware, developers feel the need to make hand-held games that are very close to games produced for the main consoles. So you will get development times and development costs similar to what we see in mainstream console and PC releases. This slows down development and increases the price of the game.

Handhelds like the Vita and the 3DS need to think carefully about what audience they are trying to reach, and what function they serve. There is little point in making hand-held games that are almost exactly like console games, when more people have consoles and are more likely to want to play them on their TV screens.

It's as others have said - handhelds are becoming too much like the main consoles.

#35 Edited by SexyToad (2760 posts) -

Nope. First of all phones will not take over. They are not cheap. An iPhone is 500+ if you do not want a contract. With one is 200 but you will still have to pay each month. Which can be pricey. Then the games aren't what you can get on a 3ds. You can't get Pokemon or Mario on the go with a phone.

#36 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11423 posts) -

@FancySoapsMan said:

@BigSocrates said:
Phones and handhelds will probably merge in some way.
This seems like the most reasonable outcome imo.

Sorry guys. The NGage already exists.

Online
#37 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

To me handhelds are a console replacement. The idea of replacing them with a phone is absurd. (though phone games are probably underrated themselves)

#38 Posted by MAGZine (435 posts) -

@A_Talking_Donkey said:

@MAGZine said:

You might only pay $2.99 for a game on your phone, but if you play it for only a couple hours, how does it stack up against a pokemon game that you invested 40 hours into? You get what you pay for.

And that image you posted is a fucking autrocity. Nobody is going to carry that as a phone, and there aren't enough of those in existence to make it worth while to develop a game with hardware controls in mind.

Terrible argument. Terrible.

3 dollars divided by a couple (2) is 1.5. You get 1.5 hours of play per dollar. If you pay full retail for a pokemon game (60) and get 40 hours out of it, you get 1.5 hours of play per dollar. They're actually equivalent to each other as far as experience per dollar spent.

Where are you paying $60 for a pokemon game? Amazon has black version 2 on preorder for $35. I'd also say my argument wasn't such that experience changes linearly with cost per hour, but more that a longer game will generally yield a more fulfilling experience then one you only play for a couple hours total, and only in few minute bursts. Besides, time spent can vary wildly. I played short through cut the rope... did only the minimum required and was done with it. Pokemon I've restarted multiple times... my last game I had 50 some hours, and my most current one I have 15 hours. My buddy has clear of 90 hours on his current file and he restarts a couple times a year. Replay value!

#39 Posted by StarvingGamer (7919 posts) -

No, wtf

#40 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

@Miketakon said:

Handhelds are stuck in a weird zone between consoles and smartphones. At this point I think its hard to justify getting one.

Honestly I think people can't decide what they want out of a handheld. Which makes it difficult to market one.

#41 Posted by Sbaitso (463 posts) -
@MAGZine

@A_Talking_Donkey said:

@MAGZine said:

You might only pay $2.99 for a game on your phone, but if you play it for only a couple hours, how does it stack up against a pokemon game that you invested 40 hours into? You get what you pay for.

And that image you posted is a fucking autrocity. Nobody is going to carry that as a phone, and there aren't enough of those in existence to make it worth while to develop a game with hardware controls in mind.

Terrible argument. Terrible.

3 dollars divided by a couple (2) is 1.5. You get 1.5 hours of play per dollar. If you pay full retail for a pokemon game (60) and get 40 hours out of it, you get 1.5 hours of play per dollar. They're actually equivalent to each other as far as experience per dollar spent.

Where are you paying $60 for a pokemon game? Amazon has black version 2 on preorder for $35. I'd also say my argument wasn't such that experience changes linearly with cost per hour, but more that a longer game will generally yield a more fulfilling experience then one you only play for a couple hours total, and only in few minute bursts. Besides, time spent can vary wildly. I played short through cut the rope... did only the minimum required and was done with it. Pokemon I've restarted multiple times... my last game I had 50 some hours, and my most current one I have 15 hours. My buddy has clear of 90 hours on his current file and he restarts a couple times a year. Replay value!

This man knows what he's talking about. And I agree.
#42 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

@MAGZine said:

So, OP attempts to make the argument that handhelds are dead because they smartphones "cost about the same" and "do as much as a desktop PC".

False, and false.

A 3DS sells for $169. A Galaxy S III Sells for $169 on a 3 year contract. 3 * 12 * $60/mo = $2160. What a steal!

Don't compare smartphones to desktop PCs. what a ridiculous statement. Are you playing Call of Duty on your smartphone? Are you even playing Lego Batman on your smartphone? What an awful argument.

The gaming experience on smartphones suck. Your smartphone, believe it or not, is not primarily a gaming platform. There are several issues that stem from this:

  • Poor Battery Life
  • Poor controls (touch and gyro only)
  • inconsistancy of hardware is a nightmare for game developers
  • smartphone games are designed for short bursts of play. Play for a few minutes, quit, play or do something else.
  • Your smartphone is a phone so if you kill the battery on your smartphone playing games, you no longer have a phone. So what, you're going to plug it in? Yeah, really portable.

There aren't really very many serious game developers looking to tell any sort of a story or invest in any sort of a game with any complexity past McPixel, Granny Smith or Angry Birds. Games designed for portable gamesystems generally have better gameplay, and gameplay that is conductive to longer playsessions. You might only pay $2.99 for a game on your phone, but if you play it for only a couple hours, how does it stack up against a pokemon game that you invested 40 hours into? You get what you pay for.

And that image you posted is a fucking autrocity. Nobody is going to carry that as a phone, and there aren't enough of those in existence to make it worth while to develop a game with hardware controls in mind.

Terrible argument. Terrible.

poor battery life? you mean like 3-5 hours on 3ds is good? you can use blu tooth controllers with android devices. Oh and yes you can pretty much do anything on a smart phone as a pc. Unless we are talking about heavy duty rendering or something there is an app for it. Omg i can't play call of duty whats a loss.

#43 Posted by RazielCuts (2911 posts) -

PC gaming is dead.

#44 Edited by Abendlaender (2736 posts) -

I hope not. There really aren't that many good iPhone games, at least for me. Angry Birds is fine and all but after five minutes I had enough of the game for the next few days and I really don't care about Infinity Blade. I personally think even the eShop has better games but that's probably just my taste

#45 Posted by believer258 (11565 posts) -

@MAGZine said:

So, OP attempts to make the argument that handhelds are dead because they smartphones "cost about the same" and "do as much as a desktop PC".

False, and false.

A 3DS sells for $169. A Galaxy S III Sells for $169 on a 3 year contract. 3 * 12 * $60/mo = $2160. What a steal!

Don't compare smartphones to desktop PCs. what a ridiculous statement. Are you playing Call of Duty on your smartphone? Are you even playing Lego Batman on your smartphone? What an awful argument.

The gaming experience on smartphones suck. Your smartphone, believe it or not, is not primarily a gaming platform. There are several issues that stem from this:

  • Poor Battery Life
  • Poor controls (touch and gyro only)
  • inconsistancy of hardware is a nightmare for game developers
  • smartphone games are designed for short bursts of play. Play for a few minutes, quit, play or do something else.
  • Your smartphone is a phone so if you kill the battery on your smartphone playing games, you no longer have a phone. So what, you're going to plug it in? Yeah, really portable.

There aren't really very many serious game developers looking to tell any sort of a story or invest in any sort of a game with any complexity past McPixel, Granny Smith or Angry Birds. Games designed for portable gamesystems generally have better gameplay, and gameplay that is conductive to longer playsessions. You might only pay $2.99 for a game on your phone, but if you play it for only a couple hours, how does it stack up against a pokemon game that you invested 40 hours into? You get what you pay for.

And that image you posted is a fucking autrocity. Nobody is going to carry that as a phone, and there aren't enough of those in existence to make it worth while to develop a game with hardware controls in mind.

Terrible argument. Terrible.

You haven't read many of this guy's threads, have you? You'd hear a better argument from a flamingo.

@ArbitraryWater said:

@FancySoapsMan said:

@BigSocrates said:
Phones and handhelds will probably merge in some way.
This seems like the most reasonable outcome imo.

Sorry guys. The NGage already exists.

You're not wrong, but let's be fair: The N-Gage was a bit ahead of its time. There weren't many, if any, smartphones back then, and they definitely weren't anywhere near as widespread as they are now. The idea of gaming on your phone wasn't really something that had been introduced. That's not to say that N-Gage couldn't have done something better, but I'd bet that part of its failure has to do with that.

But then:

This is fairly new.

#46 Posted by Bell_End (1208 posts) -

the games that my iphone offer me, whilst not quite as good as those offered by the vita or 3DS, are fine for my mobile gaming fix.

currently im playing Ghost Trick, Scribblenaught, Beneath a steel sky etc all great.

sure the control are not great on some game, but work just fine on others. and this has taken away any need for me to burden myself with a dedicated gaming device.

both the 3DS and Vita are to big to be concidered portable, both require me to carry a bag around with me.

and when im at home id much rather game on my proper gaming machine like my PC or PS3.

so to me yes dedicated handhelds are dead.

#47 Edited by crusader8463 (14412 posts) -

The problem that I have with handheld games is that they are way too expensive for what little game you get out of most of them, I hate the tiny screens, the poor battery life, and after having an R4 cart for my DS where I could literally keep hundreds of games on it to fire up and play at any time I wanted it's impossible to go back to needing to lug around a bunch of stupid carts to play my games or be limited to only playing the one game I keep in the system. If they released one with a nice big screen, I have not see the XL's in person yet so these may be what I'm looking for, could give me an option to just keep the games on an SD card in the system, had a battery that lasted longer then 2-3 hours, and knock the games down to $10-$20 a pop rather then $40-$50 I would be playing on my handhelds all the time. Until then though, I have no interest to play them. Also, anyone want to buy a 3DS?

That said, I don't own a cellphone and the few times I have got to play around with one and play all of these "amazing" cellphone games that are on it I have always walked away feeling really let down. Maybe it's because I grew up in a time before cellphone games and all I can see these things for is the shitty free flash games of yesteryear that they are and can't wrap my head around the idea that people are now paying money for them.

#48 Posted by aurahack (2264 posts) -

@believer258 said:

But then:

This is fairly new.

That phone is a chunk of shit, though. Certainly better than the N-Gage in terms of "I can actually hold this and use it and not look like an asylum escapee" but its performance is awful. :|

#49 Posted by onarum (1998 posts) -

It will be the greatest bummer if that actually happens, I have a galaxy SIII and it's awesome, it has some neat little time wasters in it but playing on a phone, simply put, fucking sucks....

#50 Posted by EXTomar (4453 posts) -

Maybe? The thing that is a challenge for handhelds this "generation" is the tech is moving much faster than before across all groups. A phone that is bleeding edge today will be superseded in months instead of years. How is that going to work for the traditional portable system?