Im guessing you disagree with my comment? Please share as to why

Just ask yourself why some companies are making exclusives.

Also, ask yourself why many companies, who aren't making exclusives, are not big.

And don't take games with 10M+ sales, we are talking about games with, at best, a few millions sales of a specific genre. In the UK, around 80% of the sales for FFXV were on PS4 and only 20% for the XBox One. So is it really worth to create some XBox One version of the game for something like 600k copies? Don't you think they could something else, like developping Persona 5 R? Or another game?

Why did you use FF as an example? FF is a top tier franchise. Atlus doesnt have any that can reach that. 

All im saying is that it would benefit Atlus franchises to be avilable for a bigger and wider audience. Like I can understand if the 3DS and Wii U is not powerful enough or the system is harder to port games on. But now there is the Switch so no more of that excuse. And also we are finding more Japanese games to do better WW than in just Japan. 

So they should use the multiplatform to be seen by more people and gather more sales. And this is not the same case as Platinum where Nintendo is funding them to develop exclusive games. 

Like look at what Capcom did with the MH franchise. If it stayed as a Nintendo exclusive they would have not gathered the same amount of sales.

Because FF is a JRPG, like most of Atlus games. A type of games with big sales in Japan.
Oh, most MHW copies were sold on PS4, so the game would be almost as popular.

Oh and Monster Hunter 4 was for 3DS, yeah I am sure that a 3DS game released on PS4 is a great idea. From a niche market (3DS and Japan) to a wider market (home consoles) has NOTHING to do, right? There were MH games on PS2, a console with more than 150M units sold, and has lower sales, but the quality of the game has probably nothing to do with the sales, right? Sure, we all know that IT MUST boils down to "MULTI-PLATFORM" because you said so. We are on 2020, most players have multiple platforms (at least PC + a console) so the increase in sales is minimal.

Seriously, if MH is your best example, you basically admitted that you don't have anything.

Just ask yourself why some companies are making multi-platform games.

Also, ask yourself why many companies, who aren't making multi-platform games, are not big.

We can name a lot of small, medium and big companies making multi-platform games.

And we can name a lot of small, medium and big companies making exclusives.

So what's your point exactly?

You know Atlus's parent company has already gone bankrupt at least once, right? It happened not long after Catherine came out. That's why Sega owns them now. In that case, they probably could have used some guidance in how to handle their business.

When someones makes a claim, he is supposed to show why his claim is right, not ask us to prove why his claim is wrong. My only claim is "your claim is wrong", not "the opposite of your claim is true". One day, people will understand that the negation of "making cross-platform games makes you big" isn't "making exclusives make you big".

My point is: his claim is wrong. No, Atlus wouldn't be "big" if they released Persona 5 on XBox One. They could have sold a few hundred thousands copies, but giving it a localization in Europe (I am talking about subs) would have helped A LOT more.

Great fallacy :) If A is doing bad, then following B's advice would have been good XD

For the Wii U, Nintendo should have made porn games. What's the problem, the Wii U sold bad, so they should have followed my advice, right?

My claim is: your claim is wrong.

Some companies who mostly make multi-platform games: Activision Blizzard, Bethesda, CAPCOM, Electronic Arts, Konami, Namco Bandai, Rockstar Games, SEGA, Square Enix, Take 2, Ubisoft, Warner Bros. Interactive,... 

In this case, it would probably be of benefit to Atlus to expand the audience of their games to at least the Switch, which has a stronger presence in Japan than Sony plus a pretty good influence in the US.

Your second example is a pointless strawman.

YES! A Switch port would be a good idea, but the Switch was released one year after Persona 5 and nobody was sure about the success of the console. That's why the game isn't on the Switch but Scramble is PS4+Switch.

Atlus always aimed at the biggest audience, when the PS3/XBox 360 were tied, they released their games on both platforms. The handheld market (really big in Japan) was also their main target. But back to Persona 5, making it a PS4 exclusve made sense in 2016, and Atlus could have an unofficial agreement with Sony to keep it exclusive (at least for now) for all we know.

My second example was an analogy: saying "they failed so my advice was better" is a fallacy.