It might be fatalist but it's certainly not regressive, undemocratic, or superstitious. It's merely observational. Technology changes markets.
Beta vs VHS isn't interesting or even relevant. Your other examples are also too microscopic. The VCR itself, though, changed the markets immensely! It created the whole new market of home viewing and without it we wouldn't have time shifting (leading to DVRs) or Blockbuster (leading to Netflix). Then when the technology moved on (streaming and DVDs), those same markets died (Blockbuster, again).
If a market can't adapt to new technology, it deserves to die—we shouldn't be curbing new technology just to prop up outdated markets.
If this includes the gaming market, so be it. Something new/better will rise up in its place (games will never go away at this point). I actually don't see this as fatalistic—I find these changes exciting. Humans are inventive and I love to see what we come up with next.
Beta vs VHS isn't interesting or even relevant. Your other examples are also too microscopic. The VCR itself, though, changed the markets immensely! It created the whole new market of home viewing and without it we wouldn't have time shifting (leading to DVRs) or Blockbuster (leading to Netflix). Then when the technology moved on (streaming and DVDs), those same markets died (Blockbuster, again).
If a market can't adapt to new technology, it deserves to die—we shouldn't be curbing new technology just to prop up outdated markets.
If this includes the gaming market, so be it. Something new/better will rise up in its place (games will never go away at this point). I actually don't see this as fatalistic—I find these changes exciting. Humans are inventive and I love to see what we come up with next.