By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
SpokenTruth said:
DonFerrari said:
SpokenTruth said:

No doubt the arbitrary limitations and delineation lines drawn up by this story are bogus but so too is the suggestion that Nintendo contracts such exclusivity for indies.  It is in fact quite the opposite.  They've been pretty vocal about wanting indies to take their games to all platforms.

Why would any indie that have great evaluation would stay exclusive to Nintendo when Nintendo themselves say that they should release everywhere?

I think it is about Nintendo understanding that indies need as much exposure as possible for success compared to the big publishers where such deals can make sense. It isn't that they don't like having exclusive indie games but they realize it benefits those developers, the industry and makes it healthier overall.

I asked about the devs, why would those 50 avoid launching on other systems if Nintendo is incentivizing them? Is that because most of their games are very bad that it won't sell so they preffer to have some props by being exclusive?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."