The truth about Nintendo

[Zod95]

mysteryman said:

Zod95 said:

I think you are going too far. I had never presented such a logic. I only acknowledge that vocal music (with instruments, of course) demands a higher minimum effort than instrumental-only.

Music is Mario 64 is simpler, it has definitely less instruments than in Sonic Adventure, less music tracks and no vocals. Is it enough for you? It's not merely because of vocal music (this is only an indicator).

If some musicians create more with less effort, then they are most probably more expensive so it all comes down to the same thing (I have been saying for quite some time): effort / time / money.

Design choices are not valid arguments. If, by design choice, I decide to create a very simple game that is extremely easy and quick to develop, I'm not as commited as other dev that puts millions of euros and man-hours work on another game.

It's very interesting that you would make this argument, considering you have previously discounted artistic creation as being (paraphrasing) "effortless".

It's very interesting that you can't understand, on the text you bolded, that effort and money are separated by a "/", not by a "=". The example I had considered was about less effort and more money. In the end, the amount of commitment should be the same.

 

mysteryman said:

However they do need more than $0.

And...?

 

mysteryman said:

It's been mentioned to death that Sony and Microsoft may leverage off other departments, so pure profit from gaming isn't necessary.

Their consoles also serve as loss leaders, multimedia Trojan horses, advertisement boards, tools for brand recognition etc. which are all worth the additional cost to Sony and Microsoft, particularly when they can leverage off other departments.

Your comment doesn't contradict mine at all. Anyway, could you give me 2 examples for each of those purposes?

- loss leaders

- multimedia trojan horses

- advertisement boards

- tools for brand recognition