PS3/360 Multiplats only cost 10% extra to make

[whatever]

stof said:

MontanaHatchet said:

stof said:
It sounds great, but in reality it's part of the problem. To get at a descent user-base and to recover the huge costs of development, devs have to add in an additional 10% cost. That 20 Million dollar game just went up to 22. Most companies would like it a lot more if they could save that 2 million and just have a game sell well on one system.

Well that just made no sense. Who would you care about an extra 2 million dollars if you already have a huge budget of 20 million? Hell, if the company only got 20 bucks per copy sold on the platform the game was ported to, and the game shipped 100,000 copies to store (which would make sense for a 20 million budget game), then they've already made back the cost of porting.

 

 

 

I think it makes a lot of sense that in a time when most companies are bleeding and firing that they wouldn't want to spend an extra 10% on their games. I'm not saying porting doesn't pay off. Of course it does and the companies are right to do it, in fact they can't afford not too. But the fact that they HAVE to increase their budgets by 10% by making all their games multiplat is a problem when budgets are already through the roof.

What would you rather as a company, a game that sells a million copies on one console? or a game that sells a million copies on 2 consoles and cost an extra couple million bucks to make? I'm just saying that the smaller user bases of the HD consoles this gen is putting dev's in a bind. I'm sure they're really missing the PS2 right now.

So your saying putting it on a 2nd console would add no sales??  I agree with Montana, your not making any sense.  As a company, I'd rather sell 1.5 million on 2 consoles than 1 million on 1 console if it only costs an extra couple million bucks to make.