Pacher Explains Why He Predicts WiiHD Believes Will Will Lose MarketShare

[Alby_da_Wolf]

Smashchu2 said:

Alby_da_Wolf said:

Smashchu2 said:

Alby_da_Wolf said:

Metallicube said:

The Move has a CHANCE to be successful, but it's going to come down the the games released. Those people who are just looking at the Move and saying "well.. Wii has motion controls and IT'S successful, now PS3 does, so that means IT will now be successful!!1" don't understand the true roots of Wii's success..

I'm not a Sony hater by any means, but IMVHO MS and Sony's motion controls for this gen are just to stop falling behind Nintendo and let themselves and 3rd parties start grasping the concepts and their practical applications ASAP. They can't harm PS3 and XB360, they can even benefit them, but it's too late to fill the gap from Wii.

About 3D with glasses I totally agree: I won't ever spend a cent on it. When 3D TV will be made WITHOUT any gadget to wear to watch it, I'll start considering it.

BTW parallax barrier 3D screens too, despite being glasses-free, are not very practical for multiple users, as 3D effect is enjoyable only at a limited distance interval from an ideal point, so it's not a tech living room-ready.

They can't eh?

As disruptive attackers follow their own sustaining trajectories, they make inroads into the low end of the market or begin pulling less demanding customers into a new context of use. What happens when the disruptive entrant begins to make inroads? A good way to visualize what incumbents can do when faced with a disruptive attack is to consider how humans respond to a perceived threat. Our body immediately reacts. We produce adrenaline. Our heart rate goes up. Our respiration rate goes up. Blood flow redirects from nonessential areas to critical areas. Our body is prepared for one of two actions: fight or flight.

Fight? That's sounds like Sony and Microsoft releasing motion controls.

Now, hear Reggie

They will see our results, and they'll see how much of a challenge and dogfight this new era of gaming will be

Now, what is disruption. Here is what happens (remember, Nintendo is disrupting the industry with motion controls)

-First is the ‘aggressive growth’ phase by the disruptor. Second is the ‘counterattack’ by the incumbents. Third is the fallout from the counterattack. Most of the time, the counterattack is unsuccessful and the incumbents are made *gone*.

Counter attack. Like making their own motion controllers. Sound familiar.

Don't doubt it. Nintendo's aim is to make Sony and Microsoft gone.

They can't harm, meaning that although they cannot reverse the situation, they are an addition to PS3 and XB360 capabilities, in the worst case they'll add a few games and a few users.

That appears as a counterattack, but is it? Isn't it too late this gen? Wii already won it. Sony and MS cannot ignore it, so this gen they may now look aggressive, but maybe their main goals are to just stop falling behind and prepare for next gen.

The other choice for Sony and MS would be to flee, yes, but does it make sense?

Obviously Nintendo will have something new besides motion control for next gen, but motion control is the real first big thing appeared in gaming during the last decade, for MS and Sony developing their versions is an unescapable choice.

And, I'll write it again: next gen nothing can grant Nintendo will be able to release something with the same disruptive potential of Wii, surrendering to Wii2/Zii/Whatever without fighting and before even knowing what it will be and whether it will be successful or not doesn't make sense at all, it's just the wet dream of Sony and MS haters. And maybe of Steve Jobs.   

BTW the incumbent is Nintendo, now.

You do not understand disruption.

Nintendo is not the incumbent. The incumbent is the market leaders of sustaining innovations. They control the market. The disruptor is the one with the disruptive innovation who plans to cut up market and take over the makret. Nintendo's goal, as a disruptor, is to make Sony and Microsoft gone.

Nintendo can very well hurt the HD twins by taking away customers from Sony and Microsoft. Motion Plus was announced before Microsoft's conferese. Reggie talking a lot about attacking at E3 09. Zelda will be a key to moving upmarket. But ask yourself: Why are Sony and Microsoft making motion controls. They had no interest in the new market before, what makes you think they want to make inroads now. They really don't, but they have to stop Nintendo or Nintendo will take over their market. Heck, Speilberg's speach at E3 09 during Microsoft's conference was ver batem, the same as Reggie's in 06.

In other words, Nintendo is making the Wii remote better and making more indepth games which will take customers some Sony and Microsoft. These customers don't like the standard Wii Remote, but they may like motion plus as it is better, and closer to their demand (the higher the tier, the more demanding the consumer). Nintendo will make deeper games based on the new values (feel over sight) and will make inroads upstream.

And, I'll write it again: next gen nothing can grant Nintendo will be able to release something with the same disruptive potential of Wii, surrendering to Wii2/Zii/Whatever without fighting and before even knowing what it will be and whether it will be successful or not doesn't make sense at all, it's just the wet dream of Sony and MS haters. And maybe of Steve Jobs.

This paragraph makes no sesne. You never say why Nintendo can not release a disruptive console again. Why can't they? Why would they make a Wii 2? It makes no sense and you never say why.

Remember this: So long as Nintendo is disrupting, the end result will be the same and Sony and Microsoft will be made gone. This is why they have motion controls. To fight Nintendo. But usually, it is the disruptor (Nintendo) who will win. E3 2010 is the turning point of the industry. Either they stop Nintendo now or Nintendo will goar them.

So Alby has no idea of what he is talking about, but mai gets it. He has been right so far.

Not.

I understand disruption, but I don't adore it like a divinity.

And I must not prove Nintendo won't be disruptive a second time in a row because I just didn't state that, can't you read? I just wrote that nothing can grant it, it's quite different. Giving to my words a wrong meaning to prove your point proves yourself wrong, not me.

Usually the disruptor wins. Usually doesn't equal unerringly. And even this high likelyhood needs the disruptor to keep on devising and following the right strategies (and developing and releasing the right products!) to be achieved.

So there are still a lot of doubts. And E3 2010 will remove a lot of them, but not them all.