spemanig said:
the_dengle said:
I hardly think making twice as many Pokemon games is the solution here. It's already practically annualized.
Also, think about what you're suggesting. Instead of developing one game, making some minor changes to it, and selling it as two versions, they'd be developing two entirely different games, effectively doubling their workload. Now take into consideration that one of those games would require HD assets and a huge 3D world and we are so, so far beyond merely doubling the workload. And the end result of this is that you might get some players to buy both games. That does not sound like an attractive proposition for a company who has posted a net loss the past three fiscal years.
GameFreak isn't big enough to churn out games like that. They'd have to become a bloated mess of a dev team to do this.
|
I'm not sure they'd need to continue annualizing if they did this. Instead, they could focus on a console-like release system where they take more time between releases. I don't care about their workload. I care about their product. I don't think they'd be posting that loss if the Wii U launched with a massive console Pokemon RPG. Quite the opposite.
|
Money doesn't just come out thin air. Think about it. You're asking them to spend 10x the money (probably this much if they want to make a good game) making an entirely different kind of Pokemon game on Nintendo home consoles, which are in not good shape right now and are dwindling in Japan. Furthermore, such products would require longer devlopment cycles, meaning they depend that much more on sales to pull a profit. Let's not mention what will happen to the handheld version (that is to assume such a thing still exists) when hardcore gamers flee to the version which is clearly superior. How would they be more profitable?
You're essentially asking them to make a move that would likely lose them A LOT of money, even when you take into consideration new and returning fans. While it's perfectly reasonable to ask companies to do things that may not clearly be the best from a business standpoint, it's completely unreasonable to ask them to make investments that will have severly diminished returns.
