Sony has just announced the Playstation Vita TV, an $99 machine capable of playing Vita games on a television. This seems to be their answer to budget priced consoles in the same way the 2DS is Nintendo's answer.

Does the idea of a $99 non-portable Vita seem more or less attractive than Nintendo's strategy of releasing a 3DS with fewer features at a lower price point?

Do portable consoles need these kinds of budget options to survive in today's marketplace?

Is the 2DS now doomed in the face of the cheaper Vita TV?

Let's see what our staff has to say!

J.P. Corbran: I don't know why people keep comparing the Vita TV and the 2DS. Sure, they're both cheaper versions of existing handhelds, but they go about it in very different ways. The 2DS is just a 3DS manufactured in a way that allows Nintendo to charge less for it and get around their warnings of 3D use with young kids. The Vita TV is more Sony's answer to something like an Apple TV, taking it into a completely different sector of the market.

Alex Culafi: 2DS is great and Vita TV is great

2DS opens up the market for a wider, younger audience and allows a cheaper point of entry.

Vita TV is great because it allows you to play basically every Vita game that doesn't require a touch screen, every PS1/PSP/indie game on the store, and acts as a second console to play PS4 on if you don't want to unhook and rehook the console every time you move it around the house. It also plays PSN video content, I believe, which is cool too.

Of course, with the $99 comes with the requirement of a Vita memory card and a DS3, but if you go physical on your Vita games and already have a PS3 controller lying around, the price for 4GB is negligible. Not excusing the extra potential paywalls, but as someone who has spare Vita memory cards and multiple DS3 controllers, I would be dropping only $99 when and if it comes to the west.

Either way, I think its smart as an idea to offer a lower barrier of entry, but neither the Vita TV or 2DS is "doomed." In fact, I don't even think they're competing for the same audience mostly. 2DS is going after children, and Vita is going after the guy who wants a micro console, For the few educated gamers who are deciding between these two really different products, it really depends on what significantly gimped cheap system has the more appealing games and features.

For me, both of them are useless and unexciting, though Vita TV less so. The 2DS is just a really awful version of a system I already have, and I prefer playing in a handheld setting way more than on a TV in most cases.

Tom Malina: I'll be intrigued to see how that price translates across to the UK and wider European markets. Typically, hardware is always more expensive here (on the exchange rate from the US dollar), so I would expect it to add up to more than $99, but recent system prices for the PAL region (e.g. Xbox One) have taken that price discrepancy to an alarming new level.

As for the question at hand, the 2DS and the Vita TV are really not like-for-like, and I don't expect them to be vying for the same market share because they serve quite a different purpose. For my money, I recognise the demographic for something like the 2DS, but I am certainly not it, as I'm happy with my current 3DS, and therefore have no need for one. That said, as a cost-effective device to accompany the inevitable sales juggernaut that is Pokémon X and Y, I imagine it will do just fine in the marketplace.

The Vita TV, meanwhile, doesn't change the fact that there isn't a whole lot in the Vita's software library that I'm particularly interested in playing. No doubt that last comment will raise the ire of some of the Vita advocates on the NWR staff, of which there are are several. Sorry - it's just that most games I might consider playing on it can be obtained for other platforms I own, leaving just a handful of interesting-looking exclusives and a bunch of what seem like inferior versions of existing PS3 games. However, given that it does appear to be a system intent on trying to give a console-style experience on a handheld with many of its games, I can totally see what the hardcore userbase might get out of this TV connectivity.

Michael Cole: This Vita announcement is more like the Game Boy Player than the 2DS. If you want to play Vita games because they are good, not because they are portable, this provides a way to do so on your TV. Kind of the counterpoint to the Wii U GamePad, which lets you play console games on a handheld-like device.

This is a good move on Sony's part, since it reduces the barrier to entry for their PS Vita library. That said, I'm not confident in who this product will appeal to, since it would be a supplementary console first and foremost. Maybe Sony is hoping PS4 gamers would pick this over Wii U as their secondary, cheaper home console?

Danny Bivens: Here in Japan, home console gaming is dying. It doesn't take a genius to see that the 3DS is usually selling typically two times better or more against things like the PS3 and Wii U. The Vita TV could be a new avenue for Sony to tap into the dismal hardware arena here and get some people back into the fold. The price is cheaper than any other home console on the market and has the potential to be a big hit for people who have steered away from console gaming due to the steep barrier of entry.

It is certainly an interesting device and is definitely on my radar. For the normal consumer, though, it's going to be a tough sell. Memory cards, Wi-Fi and streaming games? That, and unlike the West, particularly North America, where streaming video options like Netflix and Hulu are extremely popular, nobody really cares about streaming media (Hulu is one of a very small handful of choices). A lot of hardcore gamers, particularly those who have avoided picking up a Vita due to price (like me), see this as an attractive alternative to owning a more expensive Vita unit. Will this take away from 3DS sales in Japan? Not likely. Monster Hunter 4 is out in a few days and the strong line-up of titles are being eaten up by everyone here.

Guillaume Veillette: I see Nintendo selling the 2DS mostly to a new audience thanks to the lower price point. The missing features don't make it appealing for current 3DS owners. It's not a step up, it's an entry-level system.

The PS Vita TV, on the other hand, I see as selling mostly to current Vita owners who also want to take their games to the television on occasion. Assuming the thing will not come with a Dual Shock 4 (which would make it compatible with games that use touch controls such as Gravity Rush), and adding the cost of a memory card, it is way too expensive to be considered a cheap option to play Vita games.

Aaron Kaluszka: The Vita TV and 2DS are comparable only at a surface level -- they're lower cost repackagings designed to expand the audience. As for the effects, I think the Vita TV may actually cause more damage to the Wii U. The Vita TV is a home console with a very attractive price point. It may not have Wii U-level graphics, but it's still significantly better than the Wii and ships with a large library. It duplicates much of the non-game functionality of the Wii U (Netflix, et al.).

The overlapping features and relatively low cost combined with its game console advantages make it attractive vs. Roku, Apple TV, Ouya, and other various Android TV devices, but also the higher end consoles. Where it may cause the most damage to Nintendo is the low end, their latest avenue of expansion.One of the Wii U's current selling points from the developer side is the ease of development access. Both Nintendo and Sony have been courting indie devs as of late, and the Vita TV blunts the Wii U's already limited attractiveness, assuming limited dev resources.

A Vita game that is automatically available to both mobile and fixed consoles is attractive to smaller devs. For instance, right after the announcement, WayForward opted to add Vita to their engine base. Prior to the announcement, Nicalis had already moved Yatagarasu from 3DS to Vita. In the future, Sony could even couple a Vita and Vita TV combo to create a Wii U-like dual-screen experience for a price equal to Nintendo's (after the upcoming price drop), but with the benefit of true handheld capabilities. It's interesting seeing the wide variety of angles Sony can take with Vita TV. In the end, it will depend on consumer demand and whatever Sony can do to stoke those flames.

Andrew Brown: As someone who usually ignores Sony products (my last of their systems was a PS2 for the Fatal Frame and Castlevania games), and has very little shelf space leftover due to last and current-gen consoles clogging my TV cabinet, this actually has a decent amount of appeal for me. I keep hearing of all the classic titles I missed out on gracing the PSN store, and this seems like a great opportunity to get in some retro gaming.

As for the Vita compatibility issues, I can see Sony putting out some kind of touchpad-controller to use exclusively on this, so that the rest of the Vita library is playable. DualShock 5 Touch Pro, only another $99.95. "The Vita that can't play Vita games, only compatible with Vita TV on your TV. Yo."

Carmine Red: What is the PS Vita TV? A GB Player for Vita? Microconsole? Android Box? Media streamer? Something designed to sell more expensive dual shock controllers and vita memory cards?

I'm sure it'll be impressive, but right now I find it a little difficult to grasp the many functions and unproven market niches it fulfills.

Why not just build it into the PS4 console? If Nintendo releases a 3DS player I hope it's an accessory for the Wii U, not an entirely different piece of independent hardware.

Kimberly Keller: I agree with Carmine, it really should be a part of the PS4 console. I never owned a Vita, but I don't view this as a replacement since it isn't capable of playing games that utilize the features that make the Vita unique like the rear touch pad. Sure it streams from video services and utilizes other internet services, but so does every other hardware I own nowadays. I think I'll just save my money for getting the real deal instead.

Nintendo's 2DS equally puzzled me, but I've seen a huge response to it in terms of parents buying it for their younger kids, so I can see the logic behind that marketing move.