| mortono said:
Again, the only value a 3d home entertainment system may have is in being able to show 3d images to a group of people. This is not worth 2500 bucks. With Nintendo's price, you could buy multiple 3DS systems for a family of four and still have $1500 left over for games and movies. So far, the TV industry's adventure into stereoscopic 3d has been a miserable failure. True arrogance is these companies actually thinking people are going to upgrade their TVs every two years just because a new "gimmick" has been added. Nintendo is being completely disruptive by offering this same 3d experience at a much lower price. If the 3d "revolution" is going to happen, it's going to be because of Nintendo.
|
So you compare the two mediums in price, but refuse to see the difference in the actual medium?
You're talking about 3d tv like it's 'Playstation 3D' and not 'A home entertainment system that can play 3D games on the PS3'.
Sony is not asking you to pay 2500$ for 3d gaming. They are telling 3dtv owners and possible owners that there will be 3D ps3 games for people that have 3d tvs.
The 3DS is not similar in any aspect. It plays games and may have some movies, but it's a console not a tv.
3Dtv is not a Playstation.
As far as disruption is concerned, I wouldn't be too..well..concerned about it. Disruption requires a shield. And the 3DS has no shield. There is nothing keeping Sony from making the psp2 3D. In fact, it is in their every interest to do so for the purpose of linking their brand of portable 3d to home theater 3d. While I agree it's a disruptive product. It's potential for disruption is far below the market the pre-released wii was looking at.
