shuraiya said:
Smashchu2 said:
halil23 said:
Smashchu2 said:
Weird.
But this is very telling. I have said before the this E3 is very importaint, and this may prove it. Both a PS4 or 3D PS3 would be bad and signal the end is near. A PS4 means that Sony is killing the current system and moving up. This means they are moving up market and ceding the lower markets to Nintendo. This will spell their doom. 3D in the PS3 is more likely, but it means that the focus is not on Move, where it needs to be, but on a 3D PS3. This will force the PS3 upmarket and mean that Sony is going to run from Nintendo. These both could end in the end of the Playstation line.
|
Can I have some of whatever you're smoking?!? I like to try once in a lifetime a lack of illogical sense, just for the heck of it... >_>
|
Remember that I am talking about disruption. Since Nintendo is disrupting Sony, Sony has only three responses
- Growth Driven Co-Option (Jump into the new market and take the growth from the disruptor)
- Defensive Co-Option (Stop the disruptor at a teir, preventing them from moving upmarket)
- Move up market
This would be an example of giving Nintendo the lower teirs and moving to more dedicated consumers. It seems logical at first, but Nintendo will keep following them upmarket until they have no where to run. 3D or a PS4 sounds like Sony is moving up tom more demanding customers (customers who buy moe on visuals). Here is a quote from the make who wrote disruption
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.
Also, remember that disruptiong usually makes the incumbent (Sony and Micrsoft here) gone.
|
You do realize Move and 3D can not only exist together, but benefit from one another (Motion control in 3D). Using your logic, that could be Sony's attenpt to "Jump into the new market and take the growth from the disruptor"
|
Sony can't "Jump in," becuase they are preforming a Defensive co-option. This is where they just try to stop Nintendo at the current teir. Sony is giving up the lower teirs but blocking it from going further. This is perhaps why Move resembles Microsft is a Growth Driving Co-option as it is trying to go after the new customers, and absord the new market. You can tell they are doing it because Speilberg's speach was, word-for-word, Reggie's speech from E3 06.
I'm not how they exist together. All they are is stoping Nintendo. They don't work together (esspecially as they fight over the same tiers).
