By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Squilliam on 12 November 2010
Edit Thread
Khuutra said:
Squilliam said:

Thats a cool analogy. Are you wishing to become a writer?

Anyway in all fairness I have to propose a better one.

Its a three way prisoners dillemma. You have to predict the actions of not two but three parties but you lack information on what exactly each party has been offered by the police constable and it isn't clear what the goals of each party is to begin with. Furthermore the only information you have on the prisoners isn't up to date with the past two years and what they did in that time. So whilst it is possible to get it right theres too little information and a complex interplay to consider.

...Yeah, I do want to be a writer.

I think your analogy is too complicated; Killana1a isn't actually predicting anything concernign Sony and Microsoft, just whether or not Nintendo will be in first place. Even knowing everything that Microsoft and Sony will do oesn't guarantee success, of course.

More, your scenario presents binary outcomes: either each prisoner goes to the constable and betrays you, or not. Sony and Microsoft might do a jillion things. The prisoner's dilemma only really works if you include the possibility of the getting up, throttling the constable, blowing out the side of the prison with a small bomb, and fleeing into the night to wreck havoc.

An unstated premise on the article is that one of the two would be the likely number 1 console manufacturer for the next generation which is why they have to be included. However im not doing about the prisoners dillema just a variation of one. The exact details of the interaction are unknowable and so are the rules. I like it because it fits into the picture the idea that not only must Nintendo be toppled but another console manufacturer has to take its place. It still leaves multiple possibilities like for instance with this generation Sony was sabotaged by Microsoft but Nintendo went unopposed with their focused innovation. Also it leaves open the possibility of getting it right but for the wrong reasons. 



Tease.