the_dengle said:
More like they just released it on PS3/360/PC because they could. Who knows what their original sales expectations were for that game. I just thought it was funny that the OP used Assassin's Creed as an example, since it basically wound up describing Liberation, aside from that being on Vita rather than Wii U. Maybe publishers would rather support Sony's struggling handheld than Nintendo's struggling home console. I don't think it matters. Even when they sell well, this sort of exclusive spin-off rarely stays exclusive. Dead Space: Extraction, Resident Evil: Revelations, Castlevania Mirror of Fate, etc. For third parties, developing exclusive titles for a single console can still be viable, but not as spin-offs of big franchises. It doesn't make busniess sense to sell Assassin's Creed spin-offs to an entirely separate market from the main series when you could be making and selling those games directly to existing fans. |
Dead Space: Extraction is the first thing that came to my mind, a game that many Wii owners were angry about because it wasn't what the other consoles received.
Exclusives should be exclusive IPs, not exclusives based off universal franchises. Otherwise, someone ends up feeling like they got the short end of the stick and they start complaining on the internet. Petitons get signed!
That being said, I think that applies more to home consoles than to handhelds. The 3DS and Vita hardware are just too far apart to try to match, plus the market is split into halves rather than thirds.
As far as the Vita Assassin's Creed, Ubisoft said it did quite well and that they were happy with it.
