Grampy said:
tuoyo said:
disolitude said:
No one is suggesting that Wii may have cause this. However every Wii supporter on this site claims that companies supporting HD consoles only are the ones that are losing money. Howmany posts have you seen stating "Another casualty of HD gaming"? I want to show that this is simply not true.
|
I think the point they make is that companies with too much of a focus on HD gaming are the ones losing money and not that a company that supports Wii can never lose money. Sega would have been 10 times worse off if they did not support Wii and possibly much better off if they did not support the HD consoles at all.
|
If you use the often quoted rule of thumb that 250K is breakeven for Wii and 500K for HD and Sega created the same number of games for each concole:
Wii = 12 games profitable XBox=4 PS3=4
|
I've said it to you before but you're treating PS3 and 360 as seperate systems when in truth any SEGA multiplat is pretty much one project - 10% port costs is an often quoted figure (The UBisoft dude said it).
That puts stuff like Iron Man and Beijing 2008 as million sellers 0_o. Plus that Vikings of Asregard game at like 800k despite being absolute turd :/.
But yeah... stop being stupid.
