KiigelHeart said:
It seems they did outbid them tho. Between the two consoles, if 1/3 of the game that sells millions of copies come from one of the consoles it's not small potatoes. It's common sense to think you don't get exclusive marketing deals for free in situation like this, Activision sure wants to maximize their profits and sales on both consoles. Of course I believe it might be a bit cheaper for Sony to seal this kind a deal because of more popular console, but in the end it's about money and who pays the most. But in the end it's all just our assumpions of how these deals are made and what these companies are planning. |
This is something we've all been witnessing for years if we've been paying attention. Dude....if a game is on two consoles and sells 2/3 of its units on one platform opposed to the other, it just means the primary fanbase is where the majority of units sold resides. Keeping a keen eye on marketshare makes it easier for publishers to take less risk in going exclusive and cutting out potential buyers from another platform (pending a hefty fee for going exclusive in the first place).
Let me ask you a question. If the PS2 had not sold as many consoles as it had from the start (coming of the last gens dominant victory) that Rockstar wouldn't have accepted Sony's moneyhat? If Sony had competition and the sales were more evenly spread, the answer is hell no (unless they were essentially paying for the development itself).
The place where the largest potential dollars might come from is a large incentive to go exclusive (especially if they are dominant).
Read this....its an insider talking about how much valuable beating Sony to market is to Microsoft. This includes skimping on the development costs to rush the 360 out to gain business leverage with third party and gain marketshare. Why? Marketshare matters.
http://techreport.com/news/13974/microsoft-insider-xbox-360-was-rushed-to-market
