jarrod said:
I say the divide seems pretty self-evident historically, though I'd also say there's definitely some crossover. Television and feature film co-existing for decades in largely separate markets sort of emphasizes that... fundamentally the experience there is different. I guess one could make a similar argument for "living room" versus "handheld", but there's also not near the period of sustained co-existance as compared to public vs private, and there's indications that handhelds may in fact cannibalizing more "central" home entertainment as well. That's actually already happened to some degree in some sectors and industries (laptops versus desktops, the music industry, Japanese games market, etc). I think something like the iPad is a baby step, but sort of charts where we may be headed in the future (individual screens at home, shared screens in public). |
Yeah sorry, stealthy edit :) I'm just a bit slow, really.
I agree with you. My only criticism is that you might be thinking more like Sony (market trends) rather than Nintendo (how unique and amazing is the actual experience, which sets the trends).
I mean, if someone invited me over to play Killzone 3 in 3D on their 60 inch TV, let's just say I would be extremely punctual. And I don't even particularly like Killzone 
I don't think having a 3DS would change that for me, either. But I could be wrong. We'll see. A lot of it comes down to the actual quality of the experiences, and whether you want to have them more than once.
The difference right now is that I'm not going to pay thousands of dollars for Killzone or GT, whereas I will definitely pay whatever Nintendo's reasonable asking price for their handheld is. I mean, it's a whole next gen handheld on top the 3D stuff. I almost feel like I should pay them extra 







