My Take On The Devil's Third Controversy

[PAOerfulone]

ihatefatkatz said:
It's disrespectful to not publish it. How will you convince other studio's to partner with you, knowing that they Big N might not even fulfill their end of the bargain.

You've committed to funding the game, so it is only logical that you support it to the very end. Even if you got a shitty product on your hands

- You wanna know what's more disrespectful? When said studio does such a poor job and put out a terrible final product, instead of making the game good. This has been in development for at least 3 years, maybe even longer, there's no excuse as to why this game is the way it is. If the developers had actually made the game good or somewhat decent, we wouldn't have this problem to begin with now would we?
-Nintendo and Platinum Games appear to have a very close relationship, and a big part of that is because unlike Valhalla, Platinum actually delivered in the clutch in crunch time when Nintendo passed them the ball to make something good happen, and that something good was Bayonetta 2, so affinity is high between both parties, so much so that Nintendo is trusting Platinum with one of their own IPs (Star Fox Zero)
When it comes to Nintendo and 2nd/3rd party developers, if you put in as much effort and energy to making your game the best it can be (Bayonetta 2, Bravely Default, Monster Hunter,) as much as they do, they trust you, and they'll keep their end of the deal.
If you half ass it, and just don't care and put out a bad/terrible game (This game, Sonic Boom), they don't, and they'll cut your ties. They want partners who are just as passionate about making each game the best it can possibly be as they are.

- No it's not. That money was spent on the game because they believed the studio was capable of putting out a good game, and they let them down. So it's money wasted. They'll make that money back some other way, but at that point, their is no point in trying to ride on a dead horse, when you could look for another one