Nintendo 2DS

[DaveTheFishGuy]

If Nintendo want us to use this Circle Pad Pro thing then they better box it with a title almost everyone will get like they did with the Wii Motion Plus and Skyward Sword.

[OkikuMew]

Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy

If Nintendo want us to use this Circle Pad Pro thing then they better box it with a title almost everyone will get like they did with the Wii Motion Plus and Skyward Sword.

They tried with Monster Hunter. And looking at it now, they obviously failed ^^; ...Now that I think about it though, they could make it compatible with the upcoming Super Smash Bros. Bundle the crap out of that would help a bit XP

Back on the 2DS subject though, a Circle Pad Pro for the 2DS will makes things ugly, already that it was for the 3DS and the 3DS XL ^^;

[Sneaze]

The Circle Pad Pro came out immediately after Monster Hunter as a solution to its horrid control scheme (which was really unavoidable), and I imagine will become a staple for any games that have the ability to control the camera.

Also, I completely agree, Dave, though that kinda screws over people who have had the Circle Pad Pro for quite some time now. Additionally, since there are multiple sizes of Circle Pad Pro, it would be kinda a pain to do.

On the upside, they're quite cheap since Nintendo kinda realized they fucked up on the design (what is with Nintendo's obsession of putting the Circle Pad and the D-pad on the same side on ALL of their products?).

[DaveTheFishGuy]

Text from Kush:

'wtf is a 2DS'

Hi Kush!

[Emp]

Originally Posted by deoxys

b. people struggling financially who would still like to be able to play the new Pokemon games.

Hello.

I was really hoping this would mean they'd be dropping the price on older models (3DS/3DS XL) but judging by the comments in this thread that doesn't seem very likely :\ Now I'm torn.

Reasons to buy
- I'll probably only be playing Pokémon on this. And Super Mario Bros. And Mario Kart.
- I have a condition left over from when I had a lazy eye fixed which makes the 3D on the 3DS incredibly blurry.
- I'm not phased by screen damage since I seem to be able to look after my phone screen just fine.

Reasons not to buy
- Smaller screen. I've played both handhelds at a game store and the XL looks a lot better.

[Tyranidos]

Originally Posted by Talon87

A minute in Google.

http://www.gamesradar.com/11-things-...youve-got-one/ (scroll down to Point #5)

Spending nine minutes more in Google, what I find is:

Pixelation: 90%+ of XL owners say it's fine, while 50%+ of 3DS owners say the 3DS looks sharper while the XL looks more pixelated. Both camps will obviously have their own biases, but since you can't go wrong with the 3DS on this point, I'd call it a point in favor of the 3DS.

Size: 90%+ of XL owners say they vastly prefer the extra screen size, and 50% of 3DS owners seem to lust after it too but content themselves with their sharp screens. (See above.) Sounds like a point for the XL.

Comfort: seems like 99%+ of XL owners and a fair chunk of 3DS owners agree: the XL is way, way more comfortable to hold in your hands for prolonged gaming sessions. Some XL fans go so far as to say that you can't hold a regular 3DS for more than 30 minutes without cramping, but I think that's a bit of a stretch, personally .... Still, I'd give this one to the XL.

Battery Life: XL. No one debates this.

Other little knickknacks: people seem to prefer the XL but no one really gives a hoot.

Pocket portability: 3DS. This is ardently debated by a small minority of proud XL owners, but most seem ready to agree that the XL is simply too big to place in a jeans pocket and walk around with. You'll need a jacket pocket or larger to make this one work. Point for the 3DS.

Overall, I guess I'd want to playtest Pokémon Y at Best Buy and decide based on that. If it looked great in both games, I'd probably lean towards the 3DS XL at this point. If it was noticeably better in the 3DS than in the 3DS XL, then I'd go for the original.

Fair enough, I guess. What I really wanted was a bigger handheld because my thumbs are extra long so while it isn't 100% comfortable, its a lot more comfortable than the regular 3DS.

[OkikuMew]

>Emp

Hmm, I see your predicament. If I didn't have my XL, I would probably be torn between the two also, as I find the 3D useless but the XL's battery life, bigger screen and the more portable form are also appealing. I think in the end what would make my decision final would be more information on the 2DS' battery life and try it out myself, see how it holds in my hands and whatnot.

[Yougirasu]

Originally Posted by Sneezey12

The Circle Pad Pro came out immediately after Monster Hunter as a solution to its horrid control scheme (which was really unavoidable), and I imagine will become a staple for any games that have the ability to control the camera.

Hi. I've had Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate since its UK release and I don't own a Circle Pad Pro. I simply use the lock-on feature for the majority of the monsters, the exception being things like Ceadeus and Jhen Mohran which are too large when it centre's but generally slow enough for me to use the touch screen camera controls. For anything else, I can easily manage with the touch screen control.

But that said, I haven't played it for a solid amount of time for a good while because it's a huge time-sink and I don't feel up to sinking some time into a new set of G-Rank armour.

[Sneaze]

Lock On is okay, but really gets screwy when you're under something gigantic and twitchy that blocks your view from most angles. *shrug*

[phoopes]

Originally Posted by Shuckle

I thought this was a troll thread.

I would vastly prefer it to be a troll thread.

I thought it was a joke too. The ad is laughable, though after reading the thread I can see why Nintendo thought it might be a good idea.

Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy

Text from Kush:

'wtf is a 2DS'

Hi Kush!

Literally my exact same reaction when I saw the thread title.

>Circle Pad Pro

Never heard of it. I've owned a 3DS for a little longer than Mario Kart 7's been out... so almost two years?

[Amras.MG]

This thing is gonna sell hotcakes. Very very smart move for Nintendo. It's a shame that they've blocked themselves into some bad marketing situations ("Does the 2DS play 3DS games?" is something electronics people will be hearing a lot), but that's been a recurring problem for them this gen, and I can't really see how they'd get around that.

This thing is going to do exactly what they want it to, they're going to get people to drop $170 to play Pokemon.

[jolteonjak]

Originally Posted by OkikuMew

Hmm, I see your predicament. If I didn't have my XL, I would probably be torn between the two also, as I find the 3D useless but the XL's battery life, bigger screen and the more portable form are also appealing. I think in the end what would make my decision final would be more information on the 2DS' battery life and try it out myself, see how it holds in my hands and whatnot.

This is me. I'm obviously buying a 2/3DS(XL) just for Pokémon. Like others, I'd probably get Mario games (there are two now right?) too, as well as PMD. I was all set to buy a 3DS XL, and then I saw this announcement.

[Talon87]

I think I speak for all of us non-3DS±XL owners when I say this:

If it has better battery life, a better screen (same resolution, I realize), feels more comfortable, and is cheaper than any of the other two, I'll probably spring for the 2DS and those of you who are hating on its looks are all just haters.

If it has equal or worse battery life, an equal or worse screen, feels just as comfortable or less comfortable, and is just as pricey or is more expensive than either of the other two, then there's no way I'll get one.

Of these four, we already know the price, and it's in favor of the 2DS. All we're really waiting on now are side-by-side comparisons for the screens, battery life tests by trusted gaming journalists, and comfort (or discomfort) testimonies by those same trusted sources. These will pretty much make or break the 2DS, I dare say, for 99% of us. And since none of us can know what these are yet, I don't think any of us are able to rule in or out the 2DS yet.

I am disappointed by the lack of portability the thing will have, but it's not necessarily a deal breaker. With the 3DS XL priced at around $210, the 3DS priced at $180, and this newcomer priced at $130, we're talking:

1. a 3DS XL and Pokémon Y
2. a 3DS, Pokémon Y, and $30 towards a second game
3. a 2DS, Pokémon Y, a second game @ $40, and a third game @ $40

Because really, at a certain point, you're paying for snobbery and a clam shell with that XL purchase. You're basically saying "I am content to take the money that would have gone towards two game purchases and redirect it towards this fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine clam shell and this fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine 3-D slider." If that's worth it to you, especially if you're rich, great! If you're on a tight budget, then it's kinda clear which is the better investment. Nintendo gets $250 out of you either way, but in the one case you get a console which performs no differently (we hope!) than its brothers and you get three games, while in the other case you get that same console (different cosmetics) and fewer games.

But again, I say all you're paying for is the clam shell and the 3-D slider and that may simply not be true. We don't know the battery life yet. The 2DS's battery could be some costs-saving P.O.S. And we don't know how comfortable it is to hold either. Could be better than the 3DS XL! Could be worse than the 3DS.

[Amras.MG]

Originally Posted by jolteonjak

This is me. I'm obviously buying a 2/3DS(XL) just for Pokémon. Like others, I'd probably get Mario games (there are two now right?) too, as well as PMD. I was all set to buy a 3DS XL, and then I saw this announcement.

Also depends on if you plan to carry it in your pocket. I usually carry my 3DS XL around in a pocket on my backpack, so it doesn't affect me, but a lot of people are pretty butthurt about the lack of a hinge on the 2DS. This definitely seems like something you'd leave around the house or need a backpack/purse to carry it around comfortably all day.

[Tyranidos]

Originally Posted by Amras.MG

Also depends on if you plan to carry it in your pocket. I usually carry my 3DS XL around in a pocket on my backpack, so it doesn't affect me, but a lot of people are pretty butthurt about the lack of a hinge on the 2DS. This definitely seems like something you'd leave around the house or need a backpack/purse to carry it around comfortably all day.

Since it doesn't fold, keeping it in a backpack might fuck up the screens if you have other items in said backpack (keys, pens, etc). Portability might be a real issue if this thing doesn't come with some sort of case to protect the screens.

I also have a 3DS XL and have carried it in both my backpack and my pocket with no problems.

[Talon87]

Originally Posted by Tyranidos

Since it doesn't fold, keeping it in a backpack might fuck up the screens if you have other items in said backpack (keys, pens, etc). Portability might be a real issue if this thing doesn't come with some sort of case to protect the screens.

You didn't make it all the way through the trailer, did you? ^^; Forty seconds in.

[Tyranidos]

Originally Posted by Talon87

You didn't make it all the way through the trailer, did you? ^^; Forty seconds in.

I didn't watch it at all. But that doesn't necessarily mean it comes with a case, you might have to buy it separately.

[deoxys]

Yeah, I just read the case is going to be $12. Not too bad, though.

[Muyotwo]

Originally Posted by Shuckle

I thought this was a troll thread.

I would vastly prefer it to be a troll thread.

I thought that it was a tongue-in-cheek thread about the original DS. It's not April 1st, Nintendo, you're a bit late.

[Talon87]

Ars Technica reports on Nintendo's missed opportunity to have the 2DS be a "gaming tablet" akin to a Nook or Kindle.

Dayum. Yeah. Had they released this instead, y'all woulda been drooling over the 2DS instead of har har'ing at its design. "I wish my 3DS was a tablet with one enormous touchscreen ... ;(" Missed opportunity indeed.

The fact that someone came up with this (and a major technology journalism outlet was reporting on it) less than 24 hours after the big unveiling of the 2DS means one thing: Nintendo, you need to fucking QUIT IT with what is apparently your COMPLETE LACK OF ANY MARKET RESEARCH BEFORE YOU COMMIT TO A HARDWARE MODEL! -.-; Ugh. All they would have had to have done was tell the public, "Hey. Here's a design concept. No promises! But what do you think? :o" back in May or June and we could've fired back, "Hey! :o Could you maybe make it one large touchscreen instead of two separate smaller screens, of which only one is a touchscreen?"

You wanna know the really sad thing? If you read the article, you'll find that ...

the 2DS "actually features a single large screen in its center, not two separate ones." Yes, apparently the new system is built on top of one big LCD display that's partially covered up (on the bottom half) by the system's plastic shell, creating the appearance of two distinct screens in the standard 3DS ratios and sizes.

[Amras.MG]

I could see them covering up the lower screens for software reasons, Talon. It's not like the whole screen would be touch-capable, and if it was, then 2DS games wouldn't be playable on 3DS systems...

[Talon87]

If it's one screen -- which we're being told it is -- then it would have to be either all or none touch-capable. Making two separate screens is the entire point of saying "I'd like half to be the more expensive touch technology but not the other half." As far as I know, screens are all made in the factory in one way. Like ... there's never been a TV screen that had partial touch sensitivity. Same for a cell phone or other mobile device. The devices which have two separate screens (like the DS) have done this, but when it's all one screen, the entire range of the pixels on the screen are the same.

Ironically though, one large touchscreen turns out to be cheaper than one small touchscreen and one small 3-D screen, Ars points out. And the truth is in the numbers: by agreeing to sell what is functionally "a 3DS body with a tablet's touchscreen" for the price point of only $130, Nintendo is basically admitting that it'd be cheaper to make the DS Tablet than it would be to make the 3DS original by about $30 to $40. This just goes to show you how expensive those 3-D capable screens on the tops of the 3DSes are. Relatively speaking, that is.

If you read the article, Ars speculates that Nintendo didn't do this (assuming they thought about it themselves first) because they didn't want to fragment the market the same way they did when they launched the DS during the GBA's life cycle. Remember how Nintendo kept stressing back in 2004 that the DS was not intended as a replacement for the GBA and that it was in fact simply a second device they were putting on the market for consumers who were interested? They ended up scrapping that corporate line about one year into the DS's life cycle when it became clear that everyone had abandoned GBA's ship. That's what Ars is saying that Nintendo likely wanted to avoid here. They didn't want to release a tablet DS, assure everyone "IT'S STILL THE 3DS'S LIFE CYCLE, DON'T WORRY! ^_^;;;;;", and then piss off millions of 3DS customers when it became clear that 99% of developers were more interested in writing for the DS Tablet than for the 3DS.

So basically ... the 3DS fucked us out of getting a Nintendo tablet. Great.

[deoxys]

Considering it only plays 3DS and DS games, there would be no such thing as "2DS games". Having one large touch screen wouldn't affect past nor future games at all. Even so, the point that it's all one screen with the bottom being touch shows it is possible to make the lower half touch responsive only.

This actually would have been much more ideal and yeah, I might have even wanted it. I've always looked at the DS' two screens as together being one large screen and getting rid of the barrier would have been drool worthy. Many games even take advantage of both screens as if to show they were one connected piece with no barrier during cinematics and such (Metroid Prime Hunters and Mario Kart DS come to mind).

[Amras.MG]

It's a shame that a Nintendo tablet and traditional handheld Nintendo device can't coexist in the current gaming market. Would be interesting to see what Nintendo could do on mobile (though also maybe soul-shattering?). I have a feeling that if they really wanted to do something on mobile it would quickly destroy the competition. All they'd need is a Mario or Pokemon free to play game, or a tower defense game, or a racer, or whatever...

Also, I wouldn't want a one-screen touch device, but that's just because I like how portable-y the 3DS currently is, even though I do all my gaming at home. I'm used to the two-screen set up. I'm not used to tablets (or even smartphones). Get off my lawn.

[Talon87]

Originally Posted by deoxys

Considering it only plays 3DS and DS games, there would be no such thing as "2DS games". Having one large touch screen wouldn't affect past nor future games at all.

If I were the sort to say "lolwut", I'd say it here.

1. The reason it's been billed as only playing 3DS and DS games is precisely because it is just a 3DS in the end. Not because it couldn't have been more, but because it was shackled from being more.
2. The Game Boy Color played Game Boy games ... and it also had some GBC exclusives.
   The Game Boy Advance played Game Boy Color games ... and it also had many GBA exclusives.
   The Nintendo DS played Game Boy Advance games ... and it also had many DS exclusives.
   The 3DS played ... look, I think you can see the pattern.
   
   So there's no reason to think, none whatsoever, that the 2DS couldn't have had "2DS-only" games had it been marketed like the DS originally was -- "I'm not here to replace the GBA! I'm here to co-exist alongside it!" The DS's own history is proof enough of this.
3. I think you may have utterly missed the part where many first-party games for the DS that were launched after the DSi featured gameplay elements that only DSi owners could access. This only worsened with DS games released after the launch of the 3DS. If you look at Pokémon Black, White, Black 2, and White 2, for example, there are features that showed up in commercial advertisements for the games which are invisible (and inaccessible) when you play the game on a DS or DS Lite. Like, half of the stuff you can do with the Xtransceiver. If you had a camera (DSi, 3DS, 3DS XL), you could do all of this camera-related Street Pass stuff. And if you had a 3DS, there were bonus features to the Xtransceiver (mostly minigames) that can't be found when playing on a DS or DS Lite. So to say that the presence of bonus technologies on a later iteration of the hardware won't have any effect on the games is just downright wrong based on the games we already have. While none of those things I mentioned are game-shattering, there's no reason why 2DS-only features would be out of the picture either. "Having one large touch screen wouldn't affect past nor future games at all," you say, but I just don't think that's the least bit true. If they had had the 2DS be a DS Tablet, it very likely would have led certain developers to want to make games that made use of the large, single touchscreen and locked 3DS and 3DS XL owners out of the room.

I dunno. I don't want to be mean about this but your comment just seems really, really incorrect to me so I have to say something, especially since it was addressed to me. :\