| SvennoJ said: Perhaps Nintendo is right and it is time to scale down to more manageable hardware. It seems the market isn't big enough to sustain games that aren't a guaranteed hit, and thus can't make back their AAA budget. |
Uh... Or maybe it was just a crap game whose developer couldn't manage it with the number of other games on their plate?
And honestly speaking, I am rather dubious of calling Scalebound "AAA", it honestly felt from the beginning to be a "AA" effort.
What "AAA" developer manages the number of simultaneus titles that Platinum does? That's a hint for you.
More hardware power doesn't need to translate to huge development costs.
Take any Nintendo game, add more hardware, and get better resolution, AA, lighting, material rendering... With little extra dev costs.
Having one or a few extra engine programmers is really little cost inthe scope of total development (and promotion) costs.
Sure, hardware power can enable games not possible without it, but EQUALLY is usable for simple upgrades of game experience.
Specifically in Platinum's case, hardware power can EASE development for a studio stretched with many projects,
where we see them successfully going forward with Nier on PS4 while dropping Scalebound on Xbone. Think about it.
PC is known for hardware performance, even at low end. Yet indies which are not performance centric thrive on PC.
But realistically speaking, the vast majority of AAA games are of genres which existed 10 years ago.
Applying your "Grand Theory of Everything" of videogames to every single case is just circular logic.
And I hardly see how that relates to Nintendo or their choice to NOT use modern fab for a simple 20-30% performance:watt boost.
(which would not challenge Xbone performance, but would give alot more performance headroom, incl. for "Nintendo style games")
But I suppose that is the conundrum with Nintendo fans, who do not understand tech, but create grand theories hinging on it.
