Mr Khan said:
You're engaging in reducto ad absurdum too. It does not need to be a conspiracy at all levels, just a few bruised egos, a few misunderstandings, at choice levels that lead to the bad decisions being made (along with the analysts constantly running interference to keep the investors from complaining). There have been few proven instances where a company gave actual good support to Nintendo consoles and got burned for the effort. ROI is all well and good to speak of, but where's the backing? |
It doesn't need to be a conspiracy at all levels? Then why has it persisted for decades? Why is it so widespread amongst almost every major publisher? This is, at the least, hundereds of people over many years that you are suggesting all have it out for some random Japanese company and want their downfall more than they want money. Trying to play it off like what you're saying isn't absurd is unnecessary. I think we both know just how silly it is.
For most companies/games we have no way of knowing whether the effort was profitable or not. Do you have examples of companies that directly stated that their game did very well on a Nintendo console from a financial perspective but then decided not to support them after that anyway? And more importantly, why would such a company, if it had this vendetta against Nintendo, attempt to support them in the first place?