Why Handheld Consoles Will be Always Better than Gaming Phones

From Xfire: "Gaming phones are all the rage today. Xiaomi, Asus, Lenovo and several other mobile manufacturers have their own range of dedicated gaming phones with ascetics and design elements that go head-on against edgy gaming PC set-ups. Yet, when it comes to gaming, handheld consoles have always had an edge on gaming phones. Even in an age where gaming phones, such as the Asus ROG Phone 5, are far ahead of Nintendo Switch when it comes to raw comparable specs, the Switch reigns supreme when it comes to the gaming experience.

Today, we're here to discuss why seemingly underpowered handheld consoles will be always better than gaming phones with crazy specs?"

[Vits]

Honestly I would say the only reason is because of the games. Because everything else is more or less mitigated somehow. The price of a reasonable phone can be higher than a Switch. But it is a all around device that will offer you much more than just gaming. And the physical buttons can be fixed by using one of the many telescopic controllers out in the market. They are not as slim as something like a PSP, but in comparison to a Switch? The bulkiness is pretty close.

However when you come to new games.There isn't much that phones can do. Sometimes phones get something with a ridicolous high production value like Genshin Impact or a modern port like Monster Hunter Stories. But the vast majority of the games available are still pretty much mobile experiences.

And even though a major player trying to change that. In the form of Apple and it's Arcade featuring more console-esque experiences. They are still smaller on scale than what you can find on a dedicated console and are locked to the Apple ecosystem.

[ABizzel1]

Edit

The controls to an extent a lack of knowledge is what runs most people away. I would say games, but after thinking about it and looking at all the games I have that's not the case. People just want known franchises and there aren't any really on Cellphone, but that doesn't take away from the good and great games that are actually there.
I will say controls / controllers for phones range from meh-touch controls to solid controller support.

That being said there are plenty of good mobile games, as good as many games on handheld. The problem is it's flooded with so much shovelware, people who would even be interested don't even know where to look. If you look at anyone's top 10, top 20, or even top 50 you'll find some real handheld gems out there.

What makes phones better is the sheer diversity especially emulators. Every Nintendo platform except Switch and Wii U are playable on mobile and run better on mobile. PS2, PS1, PSP are on a cellphone. Sega systems are on a cellphone.

Add in the actual good games, a good controller (whether case controller or XBO/Dualshock), and even an HDMI cable, and you have an actual decent gaming platform (I only say decent because not every cellphone game works well with controllers).

[Vits]

I agree in parts. The issue with the library is not only that it lack known franchises, but the games that they do offer in the same genre are not tailored to the same public as a console/pc traditional game is. Most of the experiences are f2p and that alone already changes how games are played and the ones that are not f2p are normally also available on other devices like Kemco's RPG or Square-Enix's ports. What also really diminish the reason why anyone would pick a phone as a gaming platform over any other device.

I did not enter in the emulation merit. Because it's much more complex than just saying that phones are better. There are indeed phones that can run pretty much all older consoles including even the Switch. However there are also phones that can't do that with the same quality and there are Switchs and cheaper dedicated consoles that can do a lot as well.

I do agree that a phone can be a pretty decent gaming platform. Hell I would even say that it can be a great gaming platform depending on what you like to play. However because of the fundamental differences between the mobile market and a traditional console market is hard to see a traditional gamer picking it as a main platform.

[ABizzel1]

@Vits

I agree disagree with most of what you said, but a few things I'd like to clarify.

The majority of the market has gone f2p because that is the cost of entry and battle to the bottom that people have created by not wanting to pay for mobile games. Only big known AAA franchise can sell at cost and see good success, but even those games are still not being downloaded as much or making as much of a profit as plenty of F2P games. So we now have the F2P model, because of gamers not wanting to pay for games, and developers seeing games being highly successful and making millions and in extreme cases billions on the F2P model. That's the race to the bottom.

Emulation is possibly one of the best things about mobile IMO, and the cost of entry can be as low as $200 with something like a Snapdragon Galaxy S9 (usually at least 720p original settings), up to new $700 flagships likes the Snapdragon 888 phones Galaxy S21 (1080p - 4K, @ 30 - 60fps in some emulators). So improved performance is available at a multitude of prices.

I 100% agree that a mobile device will never be the main gaming platform for a traditional console gamer, but it could and should realistically be a considered a gaming platform for them, even if it's 4th or 5th on the list. We just have to get better at recommending good mobile games.

Of course, there are casual pick up and play games like Candy Crush, Clash Royale, Words, etc..., but there are also popular franchises like:
PUBG Mobile
Fortnite mobile
COD mobile
Grid
GTA San Andreas
NBA2K
Mario Kart
Sonic Racing
Minecraft
Ark
XCOM
Star Wars KOTOR
and more...

As far as mobile games go you almost have to get on a mobile client site like taptap so you can get access to all international games.

[Vits]

"The majority of the market has gone f2p because that is the cost of entry and battle to the bottom that people have created by not wanting to pay for mobile games. Only big known AAA franchise can sell at cost and see good success, but even those games are still not being downloaded as much or making as much of a profit as plenty of F2P games. So we now have the F2P model, because of gamers not wanting to pay for games, and developers seeing games being highly successful and making millions and in extreme cases billions on the F2P model. That's the race to the bottom."

The reason why is like that, do not matter. The solo point is that the market work like that and if you are going to mobile expecting to find a plethora of traditional gaming experiences you will be disappointed. What you will find in that category is most ports of games that you can find on other places and only a couple of complete original experiences that fit the bill.

Apple Arcade is current trying to change that. Offering games that would likely be more at home on a console or PC. But they are again a small fraction of the market and only available on the Apple ecosytem.

"Emulation is possibly one of the best things about mobile IMO, and the cost of entry can be as low as $200 with something like a Snapdragon Galaxy S9 (usually at least 720p original settings), up to new $700 flagships likes the Snapdragon 888 phones Galaxy S21 (1080p - 4K, @ 30 - 60fps in some emulators). So improved performance is available at a multitude of prices."

Yes it is a nice bonus, but is not something that only mobile can do and a much more complex situation than simple getting better performance. There is a vast amount of different portable consoles that can offer you good enough emulation, better aspect ratio than most phones for a fraction of the price.

But again the point of the discussion is using a mobile phone as a gaming platform. Emulation is a nice bonus to be had. But is not the reason why the vast majority of people would pick a portable console.

"I 100% agree that a mobile device will never be the main gaming platform for a traditional console gamer, but it could and should realistically be a considered a gaming platform for them, even if it's 4th or 5th on the list. We just have to get better at recommending good mobile games.

Of course, there are casual pick up and play games like Candy Crush, Clash Royale, Words, etc..., but there are also popular franchises like:
PUBG Mobile
Fortnite mobile
COD mobile
Grid
GTA San Andreas
NBA2K
Mario Kart
Sonic Racing
Minecraft
Ark
XCOM
Star Wars KOTOR
and more...

As far as mobile games go you almost have to get on a mobile client site like taptap so you can get access to all international games."

Having popular franchises don't mean anything if the last games on said franchise don't reach the platform. That is the core issue with mobile gaming and the traditional gamer. And other than the live services titles like Fortnite that do offer parity or close to that. For the vast majority popular franchises on mobile we are dealing with either: a mobile gameplay approach (see Nintendo) or a old port (see Rockstar).

[Jin_Sakai]

Although I like some of the recently released Apple Arcade games I’d always choose a handheld console for multiple reasons.

1. Dedicated hardware > fragmented phones
2. Dedicated buttons > touch controls
3. Big budget AAA games > mobile cash grabs

[drizzom]

To this day, ever since the advent of F2P and mobile games entering the market, they still have not had an answer to these 3 points in a convincing enough manner to take them seriously. And because of that I could never use and enjoy a phone for gaming.

[Knightofelemia]

I can collect handheld games cellphone games are a time killer only time I touch a cellphone game is waiting in a doctors office and I even rarely play a game. Plus unlike a cellphone game a handheld if say I had enough of Mario for DS I can put in Sonic or even Zelda cellphone games their quality is not the same as a full fledge handheld game.

[ABizzel1]

You can play entire Nintendo console catalogs on cellphone, so that's not really a case. Not to mention Mario and Sonic are on mobile natively, and Oceanhorn (especially part 2) is a good Zelda clone. You have to even know what games are on mobile to even do a fair comparison.

[DeadManMMX]

Backbone. I can say I never took mobile gaming seriously. Until I got this thing. Fantasian, Worlds End Club, World Of Demons. Plus XCloud, PS5 Remote Play, Etc.

[TheColbertinator]

True. Whether on my console or laptop, gaming is always superior there.

Mobile is just not for me and gacha pushes me away

[BrainSyphoned]

Neither for me. I buy real games on my phone and don't play them, I only end up playing trash games.

I own every handheld and outside of playing Persona 4 Golden they just sit on the shelf and collect dust or stay docked only being played docked when a Fire Emblem approaches (kids do play the hell out of Mario maker in handheld mode though).

Attaching a phone to my Xbox controller sounds like it may have some legs for me someday but I doubt it.

[Petebloodyonion]

Huh No!
Aside from Nintendo, who's actually making money by making a portable gaming system or making games just for the Switch?
Even Nintendo made some games available on mobile before striking gold with the Switch.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Standard "buttons."

[Soy]

Buttons. Physical buttons.

[Atomicjuicer]

Just give me a form fitting razer kishi style accessory and Ill buy the gamer phone. BUTTONS for thr love of God.

[drizzom]

"Gaming Phones" lol

[Youngindy21]

I've got no problems w/ gaming phones. It's cool being able to play native games, emulators, xCloud and PS Remote Play on the go.

[DefaultComment]

well two things make a huge difference:

1.physical controllers
2. games

Controllers- There is a reason why ps5 and Xbox Series X didn't created tablet like controllers, you just can't beat the sensation of mashing buttons, it feels natural and just right!

Games - I think they speak quite for themseselves. No free to play game model from phones it's gonna ever mach triple A or double Game experience.