badgenome said:
... that is the exact same thing. It is worth their while because there are so many customers to be reached at retail. Minecraft, GTA IV: Episodes from Liberty City, State of Decay... any number of games of all sizes and scopes and levels of production value have all done incredibly well launching on digital only and only coming to retail later if at all. There is plenty enough of a market there that, if retail were really eating them alive, publishers could and would cut it out. A substantial number of noteworthy games going exclusively digital would only increase the rate of growth of the digital audience, but that isn't really happening because as much as some in the industry bitch about it, retail is still profitable enough on balance to continue bothering with it. |
... that is the exact same thing. It is worth their while because there are so many customers to be reached at retail.
No they are not the same. Worth their while would mean they have a choice which they do not because it wold be stupid and cost them their business. Either way, it sematics
Yes, there are games that have done well launching digital only but then again look at their scale. You cannot name me any game where the investement is in the millions launching digital only. Just saying, this game has done well on digital without knowing the investement put into those games is not making a correct compasion. When you can sell 250 thousand and make a profit that means the development of that game was very small so the market for it can exist on a smaller scale. As the cost of the game increase so is the need for a much larger customer base. No publisher is going to put that kind of investment and not seek the larger cusumer base to insure they break even or make a profit. The market will change when consumer buying habits change. We already saw what happen when a company wants to strong arm customers into the future.








