superchunk said:
Its not free to port those games. If they only sold a few hundred thousand copies on an 11MM user base... what is going to make those same few hundred thouse buy it again (assuming most WiiU owners buy a Switch) and strive the other new users to buy what will be perceived as an "old game"? That is where his mental model of adding more to the game makes sense. There has to be something about the game for it to make sense to put dev work back into it. Perfect example failure is going to be LEGO City Undercover. Why would anyone rebuy this for $60? What is making it new and interesting to people now if they didn't already want it on WiiU (or the other consoles it was ported to)? Their mental model on this is right. Porting an old game is not valuable unless you are adding something to it. Only exception would be VC type games as that value is being able to play it on new hardware decades later. |
Let me rephrase this...Nintendo should port every 1ST PARTY Wii U game to Switch at this point. From a business standpoint it only makes sense to gauge the sales of software on a previous console with an average of some sort and then dictate whether developing a certain piece of software is viable. Obviously Zelda and Mario Kart prove that people will be willing to buy ports. Hell, the Mario Kart 8 deluxe port sold more than a lot of AAA games do lifetime. Nintendo's IP needs to be available on platforms where the install base is bound to be greater than that of the previous console. Porting these games also gives them more time to create new and engaging experiences without people complaining about droughts and yeah, Arlo's video basically sums up how I feel on the issue. Not going to budge on it.
