I agree with his latest blog post about the Zerg sound. It's really bad compared to SC1
I LOVE ICELAND!
Alby_da_Wolf said:
Should I? I have no certainties, Malstrom has. Time will tell, but I'm quite sceptical I could end up being 100% right, just as I doubt Malstrom will be either. I always admitted Malstrom says a lot of right things, this doesn't make me think his rants are right too. Some of his predictions could eventually be fulfilled, maybe a lot of them, who knows. And just one more thing: when he gets mad about quality decline of some game series, well, about that I 100% agree with him, but you know, agreeing with him on many things, on some even strongly, won't ever make me accept to think with his head and blindly accept everything he says. And at least one thing he totally misunderstood about me: no, I don't trust the industry. Neither do I trust analysts. P.S. Note that I think it's worth my time answering you, LordTheNight... and, basicly almost everybody on this site, either agreeing with or dissenting from me, but there are a few people I do the mistake of answering them one or more times, then I understand they aren't worth even a fart. P.S. #2. One last note: as Wii is the ideal complement for PC gamers, and PC is the most almighty gaming platform, as long as PC thrives, Wii'll thrive too.
|
Is true what people say: the wost blins is the one that don't want to see.
Pathetic.
Haha our very own Alby_da_wolf just got owned on Malstrom's page for the world to see. I would be flattered, but also a bit embarrassed..
This was my favorite part:
"Christensen can't predict the future of companies with disruption!!1"
Malstrom: "Uh actually, Christensen has firms that do just that, and several business have paid good money for them. He also talked with Intel and when he left they started to make billions."
ouch.
Everybody's a freakin expert on the internetz...
| Metallicube said: 1. Haha our very own Alby_da_wolf just got owned on Malstrom's page for the world to see. I would be flattered, but also a bit embarrassed.. This was my favorite part: 2. "Christensen can't predict the future of companies with disruption!!1" Malstrom: "Uh actually, Christensen has firms that do just that, and several business have paid good money for them. He also talked with Intel and when he left they started to make billions." ouch. Everybody's a freakin expert on the internetz... |
So getting Christensen's consulting services guarantee not only victory, but also disruption of competitors?
And is Christensen the real architect of Intel's success?
But what if two rival companies both follow Christensen's advices and theories? A matter-antimatter-like clash with total annihilation of both and release of an immense amount of energy?
Have I inadvertently stepped inside a barmy new religion's forum?
And about two specific points:
1. Eventually we'll see if I was totally or partially wrong and Malstrom totally or partially right.
2. So has Malstrom to misquote me to prove his points? I never wrote that phrase.
Alby_da_Wolf said:
So getting Christensen's consulting services guarantee not only victory, but also disruption of competitors? It's not guarenteed, but if you read the whole post, Malstrom explains that following this method and executing it correctly results in success far more often than not. And is Christensen the real architect of Intel's success? Well it sounds like he was a part of it. But what if two rival companies both follow Christensen's advices and theories? A matter-antimatter-like clash with total annihilation of both and release of an immense amount of energy? I'm not an expert on the subject, but would it not be impossible for two companies to directly compete following the same disruptive methods? What makes disruption what it is is differenciating from the competition by appealing to new, often more simplistic values that appeals to a lower end of consumers largely ignored by the incumbents. If two companies directly competing are both using disruption against eachother, it ceases to be disruption because they are competing over the same values and there is no longer an incumbent. Or if it's a case like Sony and MS with their motion controllers where they are responding directly to Nintendo's disruption, it's known as an offensive (Natal) or defensive (Move) co-opting disruption. Have I inadvertently stepped inside a barmy new religion's forum? And about two specific points: 1. Eventually we'll see if I was totally or partially wrong and Malstrom totally or partially right. 2. So has Malstrom to misquote me to prove his points? I never wrote that phrase. Sorry, that was just me being lazy and summarizing what was said rather than quoting the entire passage directly. |
Metallicube said:
|
|
Attention hardcore gamers! It is time for your dose of Kool-Aid. You did not have the correct response to the unveiling of Sony’s “Move”. Therefore, Jesse Divinch, analyst extraordinaire, is here to serve you some Kool-Aid. Drink up! However, many knocked the PlayStation Move for being a near blue-print copy (with some extra bells and whistles) of current industry standards. My response to that is, “Who cares?” Our entire industry is based upon conformity and it has been that way for over 20 years. The Xbox played DVDs just like the PlayStation 2; the Xbox controller closely resembled the same scheme as the PlayStation 2, which was originally designed after the PlayStation 1 controller; Sega and Nintendo went back and forth for years in the 16-bit and 32-bit days; PlayStation 3 incorporated Netflix, only after the Xbox 360 did it first; Trophies and Achievements; Guitar Hero and Rock Band; Medal of Honor and Call of Duty; Dante and Kratos; and the list goes on. The point is, there is nothing wrong with replicating another’s successful original idea, as long as you evolve that idea, which is what I believe the PlayStation Move is doing. Hilarious how you have to go back over fifteen years to find Nintendo competing on the same values (with Sega). But really, PlayStation has always been an imitation of Nintendo sorta like Link’s evil Shadow.
Sony’s advantage is three fold: it can leverage factories and ‘technology’ to make its own console (Nintendo owns no factories), it can leverage other entertainment to its game console like music and movies (Nintendo is only games), and Sony opened the floodgates to third party software (which Nintendo restricted often for quality reassurance reasons). The PlayStation was supposed to be on the SNES after all. The analog stick Sony took from Nintendo. The rumble Sony took from Nintendo. Aside from the Eyetoy (lol there), has Sony done anything on their own? The answer is no. The “Move” is such a blatant copy. Divinch says it being a copy doesn’t matter because it didn’t matter before in the past. But stay a while, reader, as I prove this wrong. This generation is obeying different rules than the previous generations (those previous generations are what I call the “Console Wars” Era). Perhaps we can call this the “Expansion Era” since now generations are going to be defined by companies stretching out to new markets rather than fighting over one (so haha you hardcore gamers. Your days are over). I fully enjoyed Ping Pong with the Wii MotionPlus, but there was an additional element of excitement playing nearly the same game on the PlayStation Move. The PS3 version removed the Miis and had richer graphics, and it just felt more mature; it felt like something I wouldn’t be embarrassed playing when my friends come over, which is why my favorite feature of the PlayStation Move has nothing to do with the peripheral itself, but rather the console it is designed for. And that is one of the reasons the PlayStation Move will succeed, because it does evolve motion based gaming – maybe not from a technical perspective, but it certainly allows developers to introduce motion based gaming into environments not capable on the Wii. Provided these are the analysts’ genuine opinions (and not junk spewed out to try to influence public opinion), it is very easy to point to where they are going off track. They are assuming competition between the consoles based on the premise that their values are similar. In the past, this was so. Each console was pursuing identical philosophies so they all tended to be like one another. The SNES and Genesis were very similar. The PlayStation, Saturn, and N64 were very similar. The PlayStation 2, Dreamcast, Gamecube, and Xbox were very similar. And now the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 are battling over the same exact values. But the Wii is something else. What differentiates the Wii from the HD Twins? Instantly, people say the motion controller. But tell me this, is the motion controller responsible for Wii Fit’s success? No. Wii Fit uses a different controller than the Wii Mote. Is the motion controller successful for Super Mario Brothers 5 success? No, the game uses motion controls only in a very limited way. And Mario Kart Wii, which has outsold Grand Theft Auto IV, doesn’t even need motion controls. Analysts are confusing motion controls with the values of the Wii. So if Sony or Microsoft use motion controls, then they are competing with the values of the Wii. This is definitely not the case.
The above is Atari responding to the NES. The controller definitely imitates the NES controller… yet it gets the values wrong. While the 7800 is a cool machine, it is not a NES and cannot compare to the NES. The NES was a revolution. The 7800 was Next Generation of your dad’s console. Back then, there were people who thought the NES lost its advantage because of that controller. And the Atari 7800 had backwards compatibility with the awesome 2600 (hell, the PlayStation 3 doesn’t even have that with the PS1/PS2 games!).
The Console Wars are defined by the game consoles having symmetrical values. The first Console Wars came during the Atari Era with consoles like the Intellivision or Coleco-vision. But the NES was never competing against any game console. It was competing against disinterest. There was such a rich diversity of how to play games on the NES that I have not seen equaled in a console until perhaps the Wii. There were so many different controllers for the NES. I loved them all. And it was great fun to experiment different controllers to different games. The next Console War Era began not with the Sega Genesis (as Sega was already competing with the Master System) but began when Nintendo made the SNES to ‘go after Sega’. As Nintendo and Sega fought in the red ocean, a greater threat of Sony was watching both of them and would devour one of them in the end. Console Wars are boring both for the consumer and for observers. Symmetrical values always hold the incumbents winning in the end. Symmetrical values hold that technology and sustaining upgrades will win. What makes the Wii generation so interesting to me is that competition is now based on asymmetric values. The Wii is a totally different philosophy than the HD Twins. The motion controller of the Wii is only a symptom of those values. It is not the value itself. People did not buy the Wii purely for motion control. People bought the Wii to play games in new ways they never did before. No one wants to play the same old games but in High Definition. This is why the PlayStation 3 failed right out of the gates. And this is why Move is going to fail right out of the gates. There is no value to a consumer if you say, “This is the same game but in HD!” Yawn. It is not correct to say that the Move is PlayStation 3’s response to Wii’s motion controls. It is the second response. The first response was the SIXAXIS. I would love Divinch to tell us why ‘Move’ will excite gamers for motion controls in high definition when PlayStation 3 already has a bundled motion controller with the system once called SIXAXIS that didn’t excite anyone except cheeze-it eating game journalists looking for conflict somewhere.
‘Move’ is not the first Sony motion controller response to the Wii. It is the second. Incredibly, everyone has forgotten about this but not ol’ Malstrom here. I remember all. Of course, the primary reason the PlayStation Move will succeed commercially is that consumers are infatuated with motion-based games. This industry went to the point of insanity with the Wii, DS, Wii Fit, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, and dozens of other products with unique controls that reached mainstream status. Personally, I remember waiting in-line for a Wii Fit on launch day and I rushed home to play as if it was a new Final Fantasy title. In retrospect, I must have been crazy, because why the heck would someone like myself, who avoids breaking a sweat at all costs, wait in-line for a Wii Fit? Yet there I was swinging that imaginary hula hoop for hours on end—when no one was looking of course. Wii Fit was new. Wii-mote was new. Motion Plus was new. And Vitality Sensor will be new. But Move is not new. There is nothing fresh about it. And the games mimic what is already on the Wii. Nevertheless, people will still buy it; we have to, we are just too mesmerized by the possibilities of motion-based gaming. And so why didn’t people buy PlayStation 3’s other motion based games? Why did the SIXAXIS fail? Anyway, I am tired of all this Kool-Aid. Slurp it up, hardcore gamers, and parrot it throughout the message forums. Say, “Jesse Divinch, master analyst, says blah blah blah…” Do try to forget that your Kool-Aid is spiked with DRM.
|
|
Good stuff. Love the article. Sent from my iPhone -Jesse Divninch iPhone you say?
I’m beginning to suspect these analysts go to some backroom and make deals saying, “Who is going to say the kookiest thing to get a rise out of Malstrom?” “My turn! My turn!” says Pachter, jumping up and down. “No, it is my turn this time,” says Divnich. |
|
That is the first thing I thought when I read the following: Nintendo Co., Ltd. (Minami-ward of Kyoto-city, President Satoru Iwata) will launch “Nintendo 3DS”(temp) during the fiscal year ending March 2011, on which games can be enjoyed with 3D effects without the need for any special glasses. “Nintendo 3DS”(temp) is going to be the new portable game machine to succeed “Nintendo DS series”, whose cumulative consolidated sales from Nintendo amounted to 125 million units as of the end of December 2009, and will include backward compatibility so that the software for Nintendo DS series, including the ones for Nintendo DSi, can also be enjoyed. We are planning to announce additional details at E3 show, which is scheduled to be held from June 15, 2010 at Los Angeles in the U.S. Nintendo would only make such an announcement, and not have it for the E3 show, only to pre-empt a competitor. For example, Nintendo did this with Motion Plus before Microsoft’s Press Conference in E3 2008. You should also remember that due to competitors, Nintendo never fully unveils everything. So the real feature of 3DS is not yet revealed. I suspect Nintendo might be trying to take a play from its own history when it announced the DS had ‘two screens’ while leaving out the touchscreen. “Why is there two screens?” Analysts did respond that the DS and its two screens was the Crazy Ivan response to the PSP. The 3D is only the visual output. We still do not know about the input. And since 3DS is the temp name, I suspect the full name talks about whatever is the true unique nature of the 3DS. If it is not about pre-empting a competitor such as Sony about to unveil their own PSP 2 type plans, I have another theory of why Nintendo is doing this. I believe Nintendo is intentionally creating a mirage that 3d visuals are going to be totally what the DS 2 is going to be in hoping its competitors will take the bait and ‘compete’ by making a huge 3d handheld. I KNOW that Nintendo isn’t revealing the true coolness of the device because they wouldn’t want competitors to steal it. Nintendo is volunteering information of their new system well a year away. Now, why would they do this? It is because the information they are putting out is probably not for us. It is for their competitors. It feels like I am watching business poker being played, and Nintendo is putting up some intentionally misleading moves. Will Nintendo’s competitors fall for it? Probably. Look at how eagerly they copied the Wii-mote and the Miis. |
|
What a pathetic joke of a website. I’ve talked to these ‘Apple analysts’ (or rather fanboys), and they are obsessed over the DS. All they can see is Apple gadgets replacing the DS. Even though sales data shows DS sales completely unaffected, these Apple people ‘imagine’ Nintendo in big fear. What a joke. Do you know what triggers new hardware from Nintendo? It is Sony. Nintendo will move to checkmate whatever Sony is doing. Remember when Sony announced the PSP at E3 2005? Immediately, Nintendo churned up the DS and had it ready to show at E3 2006. And it looked pretty bad. The DS phat didn’t get much better aesthetically. But it shows the DS was pretty rushed. Remember, the DS was originally billed as ‘third pillar’ because it was designed as a response to the PSP. It wasn’t originally seen as the successor to the Gameboy Advance. Some guys at NOA tried not to abandon the GBA. They don’t work there anymore. Remember when Nintendo announced the Wii price cut? They did so right in the middle of Sony’s press conference at the Tokyo Gaming Show (or whatever you call it). The Wii launching immediately beside the PlayStation 3 was not a coincidence. If Sony comes out with new hardware or is about to come out with new hardware, Nintendo will put out new hardware. When will the Wii successor come out? Well, when the PlayStation 4 does or when Sony puts out new console hardware. 3DS being a response to Apple? What are they smoking over there? These Apple clowns who are obsessed over the DS do not even realize the internal guts of the DS are almost six years old now. Six years is around the common console cycle time. Everyone is asking the wrong question about what is Nintendo doing. The right question is, “What is Sony doing?” Sony must be doing something to cause Nintendo to stir. Iwata swore he would never let Sony release a system a year ahead of Nintendo as he believes that is what caused the N64 and Gamecube to get left behind in the dust from third parties. |
|
Dear Mr. Malstrom,
I do not understand why Nintendo is releasing another handheld console so soon. The DS broke several sales records in 2009, and a new DSi model is being released in North America this month. You said recently in your blog that you think that they are trying to pre-empt Sony, but I don’t see why Sony is even a serious threat anymore. Every thing they’ve done for the past several years has been made of fail. The PS3 took them from first place to last place in home console sales. The PSP gets fewer games every year, and the PSPGo is a total joke. The PS Move is going to alienate the few customers they have left. On the other hand the DS is still selling like no tomorrow. It seems like the biggest threat to Nintendo’s success is Nintendo itself. Why would they announce a new handheld while people are still buying the DS in droves? Wouldn’t they benefit more from waiting an extra year or two?
Thanks in advance for any reply you give.
The most vulnerable time for a console manufacturer is during transition. And what always happens is that if a new console is released a year after a competitor, then that means the competitor has had a year to get third party development used to the system. They will be less likely to get used to your system. When SNES came out, Genesis was already years into its existence and had most third party development used to the system. It made it extremely difficult for the SNES to catch up. If it wasn’t for Donkey Kong Country (a poor substitute for Super Mario Brothers 5), SNES would have likely lost to the Genesis. The N64 was delayed while the PlayStation came out. Being behind gave Sony the advantage in third party development. The Gamecube came out one year after the PlayStation 2. In that one year, developers got used to the PlayStation 2 and didn’t really get into either the Gamecube or Xbox. But the time Gamecube and Xbox came out, PS2 games were being cranked up. Since console sales are avalanche based, Gamecube and Xbox could never hope to keep up. It is a standing ‘order’ from Iwata to never release a console late when a competitor does. So why were the N64 or Gamecube ‘late’? It is probably because Nintendo thought that since with that extra year, the N64 and Gamecube would be ‘better graphics’ and would blow away the PlayStations. This ended up not the case. And it taught Nintendo that graphical superiority doesn’t matter. Microsoft understands the issue of timing which is why they unceremoniously dumped the Xbox and made sure the Xbox 360 came out a year before the PS3. From the Microsoft perspective, that worked since the 360 is the prime ‘HD’ console where most games are developed for. It may appear Nintendo is throwing away sales of an already perfectly good DS. But these Japanese companies think far ahead in the future than we do. From their perspective, billions of dollars are at stake. If they don’t launch when their competitors do, Nintendo might end up with another Gamecube or N64. |
^^
Just to pick a random thing I agree with Malstrom about: copying the Miis is plain dumb. Actually I'm biased, as I can't stand the original rickety freaks, let alone their copies.
Copying Wii-mote, as M says, is defensive co-optation, M says it will fail, I think let's wait and see, at a first glance Move looks done a lot better than all those Mii wannabes we see around.
BTW FarmVille too copied the Miis...
And BTW while Move can't beat Wii and Wiimote with their mass adoption (even if done perfectly, and we still can't say anything about it, it comes too late to worry Nintendo), with its built-in higher accuracy it can at least counter-disrupt Nintendo's profitable business of selling WM+ separately.
| Alby_da_Wolf said: ^^ Just to pick a random thing I agree with Malstrom about: copying the Miis is plain dumb. Actually I'm biased, as I can't stand the original rickety freaks, let alone their copies. Copying Wii-mote, as M says, is defensive co-optation, M says it will fail, I think let's wait and see, at a first glance Move looks done a lot better than all those Mii wannabes we see around. BTW FarmVille too copied the Miis... And BTW while Move can't beat Wii and Wiimote with their mass adoption (even if done perfectly, and we still can't say anything about it, it comes too late to worry Nintendo), with its built-in higher accuracy it can at least counter-disrupt Nintendo's profitable business of selling WM+ separately. |
Bold makes no sense. What in the world is a counter disruption, and how does move cut into the M+? Also, how can Move compete with Motion Plus when the Move is inferior to the standard Wii Remote? It just doesn't make any sense.
Also, on Malstroms 3DS post
GET OUT OF MY HEAD CHARLES
^^
When Malstrom says "disrupting the disruptor", you could call it counter-disruption, the meaning is roughly the same.
In that particular case I'm talking about disrupting Nintendo pricing strategy for WM+, but WM+ would keep its leadership, its lead is too big and Move is too late. It would cost Nintendo some bucks, though.
Edit: about 3DS I agree, Malstrom rightfully bashes some quite outlandish claims, when he's right, he's right.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
