sc94597 said:
1. Sure, but the biggest concern was about profitability, was it not? In that instance we need to consider costs in addition to revenue. Knowing how much Bayonetta 2 sold tells us very little. 2. I'm pretty sure Bayonetta 2 didn't take that much longer than Fire Emblem: Awakening. So length isn't an issue. One can argue that resources is an issue as well, but Fire Emblem Awakening had Intelligent Systems and Nintendo SPD working on it. I'm sure that is comparable to whichever team Platinum dedicated to Bayonetta. Higher HD costs were because of new engine methods, and assets for ALL games had to improve because of higher standards. Games that already had high level assets will transition easily without much higher costs, because their costs were already high to begin with. 500k * $45/copy revenue = $22 million development cost. Do you think Bayonetta 2 exceeded this? Especially with its minsicule advertisement campaign? The only way I can see Nintendo having taken a loss on this is if Sega asked for very high royalties/IP licensing fees. The difference in price between Bayonetta and Fire Emblem is because of the standards of demand on each platform. In economics class you learn that to at least some extent, price is dependent on supply vs. demand. Not many people would pay $60 for a handheld game, and hence it is priced at $40. 3. What about a game they know wouldn't sell well like Fatal Frame V? That game will likely sell half of what Bayonetta sold. It is clear to me that there are additional benefits besides short-term profit Nintendo is calculating into their cost-benefit analysis. |
1. First of all, let me clarify that when I said that the game flopped, I mean that IMO it's a flopped by nintendo standards. That means even if a game sold $100 in revenue and the cost associated to it were $99, it had a profit of $1 which is still a profit not necessarily what nintendo was expecting. In other words I do believe nintendo expected a resonable amount of profit from it so it's not about meeting profit and we are fine. There is also opportunity cost where Nintendo would have invested that money in other project that would have generate more profit than bayo was able to.
2. i don't have a clear picture about the distribution of $60 price when it's a funded game like bayo. I always thought it was $30 per copy. Now based on some information I was looking for, I found this http://kotaku.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to-make-a-big-video-game-1501413649. I can admit to you that to determine wheter a game is a flopped or not isnt as clear cut as I thought since it vary greatly by games. Games like jak and daxter had development cost of 10m-15m which I admit never would have thought of that whereas games like gears of war 1 were 10m. There are also games that you never thought it had a high development costs.
So all we have is speculation about the success or failure of a game and only the publisher behind it know if it was worth it or not. Let the sequel decide if it ever come along. Still I apologize If all that I said sounded as a fact which is far from it, it's just my opinion. At least I can tell you that you changed my opinion to "it's completely a flopped" at to "who knows if the sales were enough for nintendo".









