Because it's what Indians invented for Englishmen who couldn't even handle the spiciness of a tikka masala.

(Reply) (Thread)

I'd heard that, but I always assumed it was just a slightly more creamy korma, not actually *sweet*. Yech.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Tikka masala was actually apparently invented in the 1960s for a Glaswegian who asked for some gravy on his chicken tikka, whereas butter chicken was invented somewhere between the 1500s and 1800s.
Those facts aside, tikka masala is still more delicious, but some butter chicken is fairly nummy. I find that Tulsi's butter chicken is far too sweet, though. It's meant to be rich and delicious.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Yeah, it was a Tulsi one.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I stand corrected and substitute "korma" in my original Brits-can't-handle-anything-not-boiled-to-death-stereotype snark.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

You had bad butter chicken. I've only had good butter chicken at 2 places. One is Shamhain or however it's spelt that is in food courts and the other is at Marharajas (sp again) in Petone. Oherwise, ew. Try elsewhere.

(Reply) (Thread)

I think I may be sticking to korma from now on! I may make an exception for the places you suggest though. I probably *should* try a decent butter chicken before forming my opinion.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Stuff butter chicken. Chicken korma all the way.

(Reply) (Thread)

I fully intend to stick to tasty tasty korma from now on. My strayin' days are done.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

TIKKA MASALA IS YOUR GOD NOW.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I DEMAND A TOTALLY SCIENTIFIC COMPARATIVE TASTE-TESTING. FOR SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES. SCIENTIFICALLY.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)