I think I got the term right, because I just saw it being used today. Unless that person was using the wrong term... in which case, I'm 100% A-OK with that.

"Console experience" sounds like a perfectly fine term that pretty much fits what I've been saying.

I thought people actually did like Metroid Prime Hunters.  I never played it, so I wouldn't know.  

I personally think it's a difference in priorities in rating handheld games.  It's really hard to actually determine the "quality" of the game.  It is also hard to know how much someone liked the game as well, so it would be difficult to say exactly what's going on unless someone outright says it.

Some people did. I was not one of them. Also, I think some people do have different standards based on platform. And I try not to be one of them, either.

Personally, when I'm playing a game I don't even think about it that way.  What I have been looking for in games have more often been in handhelds than console titles.  I think part of it comes from the fact that handheld games are made so that you don't have to ever go on playing in long stretches before you can stop.  I have encountered way too many problems with this in the past.  Such as unplanned events cutting into my gaming and I have to lose all the progress I made in a game because of it.  Or another one being a sudden power outage that wouldn't occur to someone playing on a handheld.  These things happened to me a lot so I appreciate handhelds for this quality.

I think the first time I saw the term was in a print ad for Gargoyle's Quest on the Gameboy. I bought that game and I could tell it wasn't like the other Gameboy games I owned.

I believe it stems from the tech that produces the game. A megadrive game was console tech in the early 90s. The ds/3ds ca produce similar results now.

A game can be good quality and not fun. The same way a game can be of poorer quality and more fun.




It is not right to hold up a handheld game to the standards of a console game. It will always be at a disadvantage, The DS had touch screen so that had to be thought of. Consoles i general have the potential to create better games. That is a fact.

I thik it would be correct to assume that may people who prefer handhelds are

1: Out doors too much to enjoy console gaming
2: Prefer Japanese style games by a large margin. (Handhelds are king in japan)

Consoe quality is not a knock on handhelds at all. What about all you people who bash on mobile gaming?

I hope my point has come across. But as usual a sensbile posts gets skipped

To me its about scale, production value and/or modes. Most handheld games feel light or stripped down. Arkham Origins vs Black gate. Assassins Creed III vs Liberation

What are Arcade games? What about handheld and console games? Story or gameplay driven?

Console quality in this respect sounds like story driven designed games.

Don´t worry. This is just dumb fanboy logic. Handhelds are consoles after all. It´s just that they fit different types of games and different experiences. You can skip the therm "console quality" and use "cutting edge" when making reference to a high quality game in any given platform

It's nothing more than a marketing buzz word.