There has been a lot of discussion following Nintendo's decision to bring out a 2DS, which is essentially an entry-level tablet-like 3DS with no 3D screen. A lot of people seem completely annoyed with its design and its target audience that they've been wondering why such a thing exists. When I first saw the device and how it was advertised, I personally thought it was a good idea, though many completely disagree for a number of reasons. However, I've noticed that the most common reason (after Nintendo is Doomed) is based on how it looks, given it has no hinges and therefore isn't a clamshell design (a design we're rather used to). For what it's worth, here's my tuppence on why I believe the 2DS is a good idea.

Fundamentally, the 2DS exists to widen the demographic of those that want to experience the complete 3DS and DS library. As we know, the 2DS is essentially a 3DS without a 3D screen. There are people out there (particularly parents) who are still reserved over purchasing a 3DS for their children because of the 3D effect. Not everyone is tech-savvy minded like us seasoned gamers are, especially if they are technophobic to some extent, and while you can set the 3D slider on a 3DS/XL to 'off', it doesn't completely overrule the issue of having the 3D effect off. Children will see that slider as a switch and start playing with it, and that throws an element of doubt into those minds. We know that you can disable the 3D effect completely within the System Settings, but again, there are people out there who probably don't want to navigate through the System Settings in case they do something they shouldn't. The 2DS effectively takes that out of the equation completely. It's more a convenience for parents and those that would otherwise be concerned going about how to disable the 3D. It's a budget model without 3D, simply put. Again, it isn't for us who already own a 3DS, but introducing a new 'budget' model to add to the family of a handheld that's selling strong only diversifies the target audience. All businesses go through hardware revisions of their consoles to maximise its lifespan over a number of years, and this is no different.

Most people have bags to throw their devices into, especially when you have pouches anyway (as I do with my 3DS). Tablets don't exactly fit in your pockets, and they're considered portable. Same deal with netbooks/laptops. If you're a parent buying the system for your child, they'll most likely take it with them to school or on social activities, therefore they'll have a bag to put it in. I see that as a non-issue for that demographic. Also, the fact the system will launch alongside Pokemon X and Y makes it a great incentive for parents to buy for their children, knowing they don't have to go through the system settings to fully disable the 3D screen (note the 3D slider doesn't permanently disable the effect, it just adjusts it from off to full). Not everyone is tech-savvy, so having a failsafe approach makes things easier for peace of mind. You can't really go wrong with its asking price either (£109.99 high-retail in the UK), given many are still cash-strapped. It would be nice if you got a pouch in the box, but for that price, you're getting a 4GB SD Card, the Augmented Reality Cards, and a Charger in the box. Compare that to the 3DS XL, which costs £179.99 high-retail (and that's without the charger in the box). You're saving £70 as a result of that. New 3DS units still sell for £149.99 high-retail (with a 2GB SD Card in the system), so you're saving £40 there too. You can effectively buy a 2DS with either Pokémon X or Y for the same price as a 3DS without a game at high-retail price, which is a great incentive for parents with young children who love Pokémon.

The people it does not appeal to are those that already own a 3DS/XL, or are considering purchasing one of those models. We're rather happy with what we've got and don't see a reason to buy this unit. Those that may be of an in-between age, perhaps those who are in College or University that want to try the 3DS experience may see the 2DS as a non-viable option. However, if you want the 3DS experience without being seen with an 'uncool' device, you can find 3DS's that are pre-owned for roughly the same price or below, which effectively takes that argument completely out of the equation. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy a product that doesn't appeal to them, but to have a product that offers benefits to others and compliments the main family of hardware isn't a bad thing at all. If it isn't for you, don't invest. If however you want the 3DS experience, there are other options available.

The design of the 2DS is, let's be fair, questionable. There are some that would have rather it be a clamshell design with hinges, and others that are happy with how it looks as it is. I quite like the design of the system as it is, and the Red and White colour scheme are the original Famicom colours, a touch I personally like. If the 2DS, as an entry-level option into the 3DS gamerverse, is aimed at those aged between four and eight years of age, who may also drop the console from time to time, parents can stay reassured that the device won't break due to not having hinges. Also, having a hinged screen means the cables that run into that screen, though flexible, are delicate, and you always run the risk of breaking the handheld by dropping it. While I agree that it's seemingly ludicrous at first (due to being used to folding consoles from Nintendo these days), look at the Vita, the PSP, or indeed the GB family (not including the GBA SP). None of those have folding displays. A folding display adds to the cost and complexity of manufacture considerably, and with the 2DS, it's about scaling back cost to make the price point attractive to new adopters. This also in turn maximises your target demographic, as you're including those who may still have reservations on the 3DS line. It may not be much of a saving, but every little 1% helps.

While I do see the concerns and the shortfalls the 2DS has in front of it, including its name and how that may confuse people, maximising the range for all demographics is the perfect way to get people to invest in the product. I'm not expecting the 2DS to sell millions of units, but given how successful the 3DS sales still are, this will only add to compliment and strengthen those sales. Having an additional complimentary unit to reach out to another demograph is good for business. While it seems strange that Nintendo would relinquish the 3D effect, their main USP, on the entry-level system could indeed lead to disaster, I think the main 3D craze has been and gone. It's not as prominent as it was when some huge Hollywood films (such as Avatar) came out, and it remains somewhat niché outside of that, but people buy the 3DS for its games. Nintendo create the majority of their 3DS games to be played in 2D, with the 3D effect being as pleasing on the eye without compromising gameplay. I know that in Super Mario 3D Land, it's easier to play with the 3D effect on due to depth-perception, especially when it comes to judging jumps, but it's still perfectly playable in 2D. I enjoy playing with the 3D on, especially when watching in-game cutscenes (as in Kid Icarus: Uprising), but I find myself playing more with it off. I love the handheld for its games. For me, enjoying the 3D effect is just an added luxury.

The 2DS isn't for me personally because I already own a 3DS. I'll look to upgrade to the 3DS XL in time, but for those that still hold reservations on the 3D effect wanting a failsafe device to introduce themselves into the 3DS gamerverse (such as parents buying for their young children), the 2DS is a more than reasonable complimentary product for those people to invest in, offering virtually the exact same experience as a standard 3DS, but without the 3D effect. Because of this, I feel that the 2DS is a fine idea.

Ending on a left-wing note: If Nintendo had announced a 3DS model with the 3D effect always on at a set level, I can only imagine the internet going into a state of complete pandemonium!