happydolphin said:
Oni, it all depends on whether the owner is multi-plat or not. Many customers only own one console, hence the huge discrepancy between say PS2 sales and GC+Xbox sales. That's a normal generation. The current one was fragmented, so it was a little odd, but normally there is one main console. The worst case gap is PS2 to peers is 153.68Mil - 24.65 (XB) -21.74 (GC) = roughly 107Mil. There were 107Mil purchases that were single-console, unless they were re-purchases by the same customer (which probably happened quite a bit due to remodel and whatever other reason, like 2 dvd-players per home).To be nice, let's say 50Mil are single-plat buyers against another 40 some Mil which were multi-plat, let's say. If someone owns only one console and needs a game, he won't care whether it has extra features or not, wouldn't you think so too? For the multi-plat owners what you're saying is true, but bare-bones there is a market even for a vanilla port imho. Then if they want to add extra features, all the power to them. But in terms of business strategizing, a vanilla port is completely feasible, imho.
If they never owned an HD console and are part of a good possible percentage of people who only owned a Wii, portables or older consoles like the DC or the PS2, then yeah, that customer would be very happy. A bare-bone port should be priced a tad higher than its counterparts, simply for retail reasons (you don't want it to look cheap since it's a new release) and not because it cost much more to release, especially with what we know about porting 360 games to the Wii U (apparently one of the features in the sdk featureset, can't find the source though ... I looked for it). You might want to think this one through. @RE4-Wii, it was, most likely released at budget price since the studio had probably already capitalised much on the title already.
Me too :) I agree about the Wii having lesser power thing, I've always agreed with you on that. It was Nintendo's decision and theirs to own. It didn't fly by 3rd parties and that is an unshakeable fact. Now I want to know the rest of the story. I just hope the resentment doesn't carry over to Nintendo's next offering. Seriously, the fans have had enough. |
Gonna disagree with the bolded, respectfully. The thing with PS2 is it DOMINATED, totally. YOu be hard pressed to find a game that sold better on GC/Xbox than PS2, no matter how much worst the PS2 version was. Hell RE4 was released later and destoyed the GC version. Freaking Sonic Heroes got the worst reviews on PS2 and its still sold better. Etc. Now look at Wii. Muliplat games do worst across the board on Wii than the other two, unless its a dance or exercise game, or someting geared to children. (Lego, Zumba, JD, etc.) But PS360 versions trounce Wii's repeatedly. Now some would say, that only happened in the last few years, bullshit. Its always been like this. The only difference is that the PS3 versions have passed up the WIis, but the 360 versions have always done better. So that leads me too either two scenarios; A the Wii is really a casual/family console and people dont care about those "core" games B there are alot of Wii owners with another console or PC and they are simply buying games for one of those.
Why should late ports be priced higher?? That makes no sense to me, people arent stupid and they dont want to feel like they are being gyped. If game a was released last year for 50 dollars and now it is realesed on on system b for 50 dollars, game a on system a now cost 25 dollars, how is one not supposed to feel like they arent getting raped. See heres my thing. game a is NOT a new release, whether a person owns the system it was originally on or not is not relevant, it is not a new game and trying to sell it much later as a new game, to me is an insult to the consumers intelligence and looking at sales of most late ports, they dont like being made to look stupid
