3 ms·

That is strange. If people hadn't formed an emotional attachment maybe they would have been more willing to buy a new one every couple of years and maintain it

by 7952 12y ago

That is strange. If people hadn't formed an emotional attachment maybe they would have been more willing to buy a new one every couple of years and maintain its viability. Perhaps we need heavily subsidised electronic pets that have in app purchases to enable different behaviours. After all isn't it just a mobile platform with a speciliast UI?

vertex-four 12y ago
People buy these with the intention of forming an emotional attachment with them, so that wouldn't work at all.
- thret 12y ago
  There's money to be made in ordinary pet accessories, so I'm sure if Sony tried they could create a range of toys and such for these pets too.
tajen 12y ago
They should act limping so the owner knows they need to replace a leg, a tail, an ear... so after a few years the whole body is renewed and the viability of the species maintained.
TeMPOraL 12y ago
> If people hadn't formed an emotional attachment maybe they would have been more willing to buy a new one every couple of years and maintain its viability. That actually made me think of a different point of view on the topic. When you're building a "pet" that you know people will get attached emotionally to, you are playing god. And when you make it so that it just breaks after few years, then you basically suck at being god. You are responsible for the feelings of loss and suffering people will experience because the design wasn't good enough (and if you go the planned obsolescence way, you're an evil god). > Perhaps we need heavily subsidised electronic pets that have in app purchases to enable different behaviours. Now this sounds like something straight from Black Mirror. I hope I'll never live to see it happening, it's wrong on so many levels...
pjc50 12y ago
heavily subsidised electronic pets that have in app purchases A robot that guilts you into spending money on it? That's probably the worst possible outcome of this.
gkya 12y ago
> pets that have in app purchases This very phrase made me unable to think for a while.

by 7952 12y ago

vertex-four 12y ago

People buy these with the intention of forming an emotional attachment with them, so that wouldn't work at all.

thret 12y ago
There's money to be made in ordinary pet accessories, so I'm sure if Sony tried they could create a range of toys and such for these pets too.

tajen 12y ago

They should act limping so the owner knows they need to replace a leg, a tail, an ear... so after a few years the whole body is renewed and the viability of the species maintained.

TeMPOraL 12y ago

> If people hadn't formed an emotional attachment maybe they would have been more willing to buy a new one every couple of years and maintain its viability. That actually made me think of a different point of view on the topic. When you're building a "pet" that you know people will get attached emotionally to, you are playing god. And when you make it so that it just breaks after few years, then you basically suck at being god. You are responsible for the feelings of loss and suffering people will experience because the design wasn't good enough (and if you go the planned obsolescence way, you're an evil god). > Perhaps we need heavily subsidised electronic pets that have in app purchases to enable different behaviours. Now this sounds like something straight from Black Mirror. I hope I'll never live to see it happening, it's wrong on so many levels...

pjc50 12y ago

heavily subsidised electronic pets that have in app purchases A robot that guilts you into spending money on it? That's probably the worst possible outcome of this.

gkya 12y ago

> pets that have in app purchases This very phrase made me unable to think for a while.