Mr Puggsly said:
Maybe Im speculating here, but Sony doesent own the most notable games on PS1 like Nintendo and Sega generally did. So that means they likely pay higher fees just to get content on their device. I cant help but think thats why the PS1 is missing notable content. The PS1 reached $49 a long time ago and while those specs were still being produced. However, Sony could create a device that plays PS1 games, has a disc drive, and even improves the visuals/performance of PS1 games just by relying on emulation. The PS1 mini disappointed people because it brings none of that to table in spite of relying on emulation and the games run worse. |
Fully agreed.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
