| jneul said: looks like I'm wasting my time |
What did you expect? You have a history of defending anything Sony promotes. I perfectly remember last time you claimed that Sony invented cloud computing\gaming with it's PS Cloud. People won't take you seriously.
The "Sony PS2 Motion Controller 5 years ago" video is merely a proof that Sony was interested in idea. Hardware companies do this kind of research on regular basis, patent a lot of things constantly (just in case) and in great majority of cases top-managers never give green light to the ideas. If we will be consistent we may as well claim that motion-sensing first came with Power Glove ~20 years ago, and Natal is a ripoff of Sega Activator ~15 years ago (they even do have common catch phrase: "You're the controller!") etc etc etc getting more and more ridiculous. And who knows how many potentially good stuff never saw the light of day?
All these things are irrelevant. The one thing that's relevant are business decisions, i.e. decisions made by top-managers, since all these stuff - Power Glove, Sega Activator, Wii Remote and PS Move - are meant to be competitive on free market thus we don't count intentions, ideas, blueprints, prototypes and even bad executions, but we do count good executions that are influantel, have an impact on the business, i.e. on competitors. Engineers may invent hardware but that's barely a 10% of success, in gaming industry 45% of success comes from software support and another 45% from marketing.
For those in denial, here's simple metaphor. Who discover the Americas? Obviously Columbus. Why not Leif Ericson or native Americans discover themselves (they definitely did it first)? Because Columbus discover Americas for the rest of the world. Simple as that. Every first in smth has dozens of predecessors: "Nolan Bushnell didn't start gaming business with Pong, Ralph Baer did with Odyssey", "Wolfenstein 3D and Doom weren't first first-person shooters, arcade Battlezone is the first", "PS Move isn't inspired by Wii Remote, it predates Wii Remote" - totally ridiculous statments, aren't they?
Dixi.
UPD: What infamous prof. Christensen has to say about this, few quotes on that matter:
|
Clayton M. Christensen in "Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave" (Harvard Business Review, 1995) said: The research shows that most well-managed, established companies are consistently ahead of their industries in developing and commercializing new technologies - from incremental improvements to radically new apporaches - as long as those technologies address the next-generation performance needs of their customers. However, these same companies are rarely in the forefront of commercializing new technologies that don't initially meet the needs of mainstream customers and appeal only to small or emerging markets. |
|
Clayton M. Christensen in "The Innovator's Battle Plan" (Harvard Business School, 2004) said: Incumbents pass over what in retrospect turn out to be multibillion-dollar opportunities because attackers take advantage of asymmetries of motivation. When people say "flying beneath the radar," they really mean "taking advantage of asymmetries of motivation." Disruptive markets start among customers that appear to the incumbent to be either undesirable or nonexistent. The initial absolute size of a disruptive opportunity is generally too small to justify any substantial amount of investment or even management attention. |
