Hey guys, if you pay £720 over two years then the iPhone is cheap!

I would choose a 4S over both the vita and 3ds combined, for gaming alone.

Android Phones are underapreciated i see. (even though the IOS games are quite better, and theres more of them. but i think a lot will also come for Android, just look at Dead Space. o: !)

.. the thing is both 3DS and Vita NEED a lot of smaller 5> games in the respective stores to succeed, aswell as 20-40€/$ Games in order to set themselfes apart from Phones, since the latter simply bashes the 2 Handhelds in almost everything else.

I seriously don't get some of the snob comments about phones not being a "gaming device". I mean what does that even mean?

Wether people like it or not a gaming device is something that plays games. Games on phones have been evolving a lot faster then traditional console games have.
Any of you who had a phone in 1998 probably had a Nokia and probably played Snake. You remember that being the most known game on a phone back then. It was just a few digits on a screen that got bigger whenever you got nearer other digits. Very simple, not even 8 bit!

Look at the height of gaming in 1998 and you see that the biggest game didn't even come out on a console. Half Life. The height of console gaming then was probably Resident Evil. Roll on 10 years and have console games really changed much? The thing that has got better is the graphics and how much detail can be put on screen at one-time. The game to sort of change things was GTA3 and that didn't come out for another three years.

The exact same thing has happened with phones/tablets. The difference is that gaming with phones has evolved in line with digital distribution while consoles have stayed the same. Look at Vita and 3DS. You need a cartridge to play it. They have been around since the NES era 30 years ago.

The problem with phones/tablets are the controls. This is the stick (or lack of) they will get beat with. HOWEVER if you play GTA3 on iphone your see rockstar have done a good job with the controls. They have an analogue stick to move about and they have a selection of on screen buttons that are all in the right places. Point being that these games can be done when developers can be bothered to do it.

I have all three of the products and in terms of originality and new things to try I see more of that on the phone. Mainly because they are a lot cheaper to produce and a lot cheaper for people to buy. Plus the cycles are about 2 years.
The new ipad will get announced next month and the momment that has been announced it's specs will destroy that of the Vita. You will have better looking graphics, faster processor etc on the next gen phones (Iphone 5) then you will have in the Vita. That is the market right now. Things get upgraded fast.

But people think that because it doesn't have traditional buttons means it isn't a gaming device....things evolve.

iPhone wins in both sales and customer satisfaction.

For cell phones, of course! For gaming, nope.

The most significant game of 1998 was Zelda: Ocarina of Time, whose significance stands higher than Half Life by most measures (though HL may have sold more. Uncertain)

How does the iPhone win the games category? by sheer volume?

How can iPhone win the price category when iPhone owners generally all upgrade to the next iPhone every year? You're buying a new device every year on top of the monthly contract that runs ~$100 a month. My wallet certainly doesn't think it wins the price category.

Not necessarily true.  A lot of factors contribute to high sales, including smart marketing and hype.  That's mainly the reason why me, and many of my friends and family bought a Wii early on.  I can tell you for a fact that most of us are not satisfied customers, given the lack of quality games and the short-lived fad of motion control gaming.  My Wii has been collecting dust in my basement for more than a year.