By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Is 3DS a direct attack on Sony?

How much is the 3DS?

Then we can talk.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
Around the Network
freebs2 said:

Not really as much as a company who can afford to dump their products for years to gain market share or advertise them on biggest sports events for decades...Nintendo is not nearly as dangerous as sony, it's just smarter.

3DS is of course a direct move agaist sony since they are the only direct competitors....but I don't see how the Wii was a move agaist sony at any level, different target, different price, different features, different controls, different type of games.....If ever it's Microsoft going direclty against ps3 releasing the conlose one year before, with a more competitive price, offering similar features, stealing exclusives....not to mention that both Microsoft and Sony are the ones going directly against Wii with Move and Kinect.

For your first paragraph:  Nintendo actually has billions of dollars in reserve.  And by that, I really do mean "just sitting around."  I once heard that Nintendo could stop releasing even one product, continue to pay all of its current employees their current salaries, and still operate without a hitch for several years.  Nintendo's worth more than Sony (it was the number two company in Japan for a while).  They wouldn't be stupid enough to burn money for marketshare, but if they wanted to, they completely could.  Don't buy into the myth!

 

For your second paragraph, I've got some light reading you can look into, if you have the time and inclination to learn more about how the Wii really was a direct move against its competitors.

psrock said:

How much is the 3DS?

Then we can talk.


Six Hundred U.S. Dollars!



noname2200 said:

For your second paragraph, I've got some light reading you can look into, if you have the time and inclination to learn more about how the Wii really was a direct move against its competitors.


I would like to, but not now...there are still some other intersting things I want read around and it's almost bedtime for me.



noname2200 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:


But disruption means using the blue ocean to start disruption, and then moving in.


I'm pretty darn confident this is not accurate: the two concepts stand alone, although they can be used in combination.


Blue ocean stands alone, but you can't disrupt by going after what you competetor already has a lock on, which is the red ocean. So to start disruption you need to go after the blue ocean by default.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

noname2200 said:
freebs2 said:

Not really as much as a company who can afford to dump their products for years to gain market share or advertise them on biggest sports events for decades...Nintendo is not nearly as dangerous as sony, it's just smarter.

3DS is of course a direct move agaist sony since they are the only direct competitors....but I don't see how the Wii was a move agaist sony at any level, different target, different price, different features, different controls, different type of games.....If ever it's Microsoft going direclty against ps3 releasing the conlose one year before, with a more competitive price, offering similar features, stealing exclusives....not to mention that both Microsoft and Sony are the ones going directly against Wii with Move and Kinect.

For your first paragraph:  Nintendo actually has billions of dollars in reserve.  And by that, I really do mean "just sitting around."

psrock said:

How much is the 3DS?

Then we can talk.


Six Hundred U.S. Dollars!


I demand to know how you can quote twice



Tag:I'm not bias towards Nintendo. You just think that way (Admin note - it's "biased".  Not "bias")
(killeryoshis note - Who put that there ?)
Switch is 9th generation. Everyone else is playing on last gen systems! UPDATE: This is no longer true. 2nd UPDATE: I have no Switch 2. I am now behind

Biggest pikmin fan on VGchartz I won from a voting poll
I am not a nerd. I am enthusiast.  EN-THU-SI-AST!
Do Not Click here or else I will call on the eye of shining justice on you. 

Around the Network
killeryoshis said:
noname2200 said:
freebs2 said:

Not really as much as a company who can afford to dump their products for years to gain market share or advertise them on biggest sports events for decades...Nintendo is not nearly as dangerous as sony, it's just smarter.

3DS is of course a direct move agaist sony since they are the only direct competitors....but I don't see how the Wii was a move agaist sony at any level, different target, different price, different features, different controls, different type of games.....If ever it's Microsoft going direclty against ps3 releasing the conlose one year before, with a more competitive price, offering similar features, stealing exclusives....not to mention that both Microsoft and Sony are the ones going directly against Wii with Move and Kinect.

For your first paragraph:  Nintendo actually has billions of dollars in reserve.  And by that, I really do mean "just sitting around."

psrock said:

How much is the 3DS?

Then we can talk.


Six Hundred U.S. Dollars!


I demand to know how you can quote twice


Copy or cut the quote. It isn't that hard.
Add in the next one.



 

LordTheNightKnight said:


Blue ocean stands alone, but you can't disrupt by going after what you competetor already has a lock on, which is the red ocean. So to start disruption you need to go after the blue ocean by default.

On the contrary, you can disrupt without ever entering the Blue Ocean.

Think of the example of the steel mini-mills.  They disrupted the established steel industry, but they did not begin by finding customers who didn't use steel, or who were underserved (i.e. Blue Ocean tactics).  What they did instead was find established consumers of steel, and offered them a cheaper way to purchase a low-end product (in this case, rebars).  Again, these consumers were not new: they already purchased rebars from the established steel mills.

Because the profit margin on these was so low, the established mills were okay with ceding that area to the mini-mills. The problem is that those mini-mills then gradually moved up the product chain until they became the new kings of steel. To sum, the upstart disruptor can succeed by going after the competitor's established territory, as long as it targets an area that the competition possesses but does not care enough for to engage in a sustained competition.

Disruption only requires that you offer a new value, not that you find new customers.  It may be easier to start when you're unopposed (Blue Ocean), but it's not necessary to do so.



noname2200 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:


Blue ocean stands alone, but you can't disrupt by going after what you competetor already has a lock on, which is the red ocean. So to start disruption you need to go after the blue ocean by default.

On the contrary, you can disrupt without ever entering the Blue Ocean.

Think of the example of the steel mini-mills.  They disrupted the established steel industry, but they did not begin by finding customers who didn't use steel, or who were underserved (i.e. Blue Ocean tactics).  What they did instead was find established consumers of steel, and offered them a cheaper way to purchase a low-end product (in this case, rebars).  Again, these consumers were not new: they already purchased rebars from the established steel mills.

Because the profit margin on these was so low, the established mills were okay with ceding that area to the mini-mills. The problem is that those mini-mills then gradually moved up the product chain until they became the new kings of steel. To sum, the upstart disruptor can succeed by going after the competitor's established territory, as long as it targets an area that the competition possesses but does not care enough for to engage in a sustained competition.

Disruption only requires that you offer a new value, not that you find new customers.  It may be easier to start when you're unopposed (Blue Ocean), but it's not necessary to do so.


Okay, but in this case, Nintendo got back on top with the blue ocean, and are now going upmarket.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

It all makes sense now. Gunpei Yokoi invented a time machine in the early 1990s by duct taping two Game Boys to a radioactive capacitor. Through this monochromatic portal, he saw the Sony 3D Death Machine coming, he had to do something. He invented the Virtual Boy in a bid to battle the Bravia blitz that was to be.

You might ask, why didn't he see the Virtual Boys failure and his own demise in an automobile accident with his Time Boy? Quantum interference from Blast Processing, that's why.

But he still fought the good fight. RIP Gunpei



LordTheNightKnight said:


Okay, but in this case, Nintendo got back on top with the blue ocean, and are now going upmarket.


That, we can agree on!