TheLastStarFighter said:
Absolutely. But it only takes about 20k sales to pay for a port. Maybe a little more for a game like battlefield. With 100k they would easily be in the black, and they would sell 100k. When it comes to EA there is a mix of reasons in their business decisions. They balance making money on software with helping their biggest software competitor. A Battlefield port would probably make a little money but not a lot. Having Battlefield on WiiU might push systems, however, which is not in EA's overall goals. This is in contrast with a company like, say Ubisoft, which wants Nintendo to sell as many hardware units as possible, and tries to have an early presence on Wii U and all other systems. With EA there is a mix of pure business, strategic software giant vs software giant business and a little bit of personal feelings from guys like Hawkins and Probst that goes in to how they operate. I honestly think they make some poor financial decisions based on some of their business 'principles', and that shows in their recent CEO departure. EA should be printing money right now. |
i really doubt that the port for battlefield would just need 20K to break even. one of battlefields main selling points is its great graphics, a simple port wouldnt cut it, with every system they make the game on Dice does build the game ground up on the system, not just port it. so they would spend a lot of time making frostbite 3 running on it and they would take a lot of time learning the new hardware and getting the best out of it. then the question is, how much would it really sell? CoD sold a very low 170K, would it be worth it? worth all the time and worth stretching the developers thin just for a few extra bucks?








