By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Otter on 20 June 2017
Edit Thread
GhaudePhaede010 said:
Otter said:

"Business" is quite a generic term which doesn't say much, do you mean profit? Tech is important and also effects profitability. Tech effects the costlength of porting and the presumed audience on each platform. 

Beyond that there are plenty of cases of developers ignoring platforms which don't allow them to fulfil their ambitions. This is why so many games skipped Wii.

1) Business = bottom line = profit.

2) Yeah, like 3DS got ignored because it was the weakest console of the generation... oh wait... that would be a total lie.

3) Wii got, "skipped" (it really didn't but lets say it did because you are... not educated) because developers were not seeing proper business when they made games for the console. If CoD would have sold 10 million instead of 1, do you really think we would not have seen thirty (instead of the what, 4) CoD titles? Business is all publishers and developers care about. Make them money and they will make you games. 3DS business (as all Nintendo handheld business) was good so developers workd on the platform in spite of it being weaker than Vita, PS4, XBOX One, Wii U, PS3, and XBOX 360.

When people come up with, "Switch is too weak to run this game" all I do is laugh about it. If 3DS can run Wii U titles, Switch can run PS4 titles (concessions made, of course) but the question is, will it be worth the money invested to make a port for Switch? Business is the answer to why certain games are not coming to Switch.

2) lol, what are we talking about? I mean the 3DS got ignored by most western devs but I didn't mention that platform in my post.... I don't know what aspect of my comment you're responding to with that?

3) And yes, many games skipped the wii, we have to revise history to beleive otherwise. Where was FFXIII/GTA/Mass Effect/Elderscrolls/Bioshock/Battlefield/Tekken/Red Dead Redemption, I could go on... pick any year and most PS3/360 games skipped the Wii. No one said third parties skipped the Wii altogether. 

Also did you not notice how sporadic COD releases were on Wii. Treyach would support the system whilst Infinity Ward would not. Financially their games presented a similar financial reward on the platform but one was interested whilst the other was not. Business is more than just profit, it takes into account individual company behaviours and mentalities. 2 business' can see the same profit but due to corperate mentalities, one takes a different approach to the other. Despite the failing console market in Japan, FFXIII-2/LR/FFXV did not make their way to the 3DS, why not when its obvious "profit". Profit is not the only consideration, developers actually have specific ambitions and intentions with their games (its often publishers who act as the business arm and want to undermine developer goals in favour of profit)

But to go back to my point, the "business" we're talking about is based on technology and is effected by technology. Most PS4 games in their current form likely cannot run on the Switch without signficant (costly) optimsation, or at least far more than what is required for the same game to run on X1. Equally the Switch/Wii version may not stack up to the competitors version of the game, which makes it an unappealing purchase. Thus the technology is resonsible for making the business venture unappealing. So "Switch is too weak to run this game" can be the literal cause for the business decision. Business being a bottom line is a  generic, meaningless answer for everyone involved. why is it percieved as a bad business decision? Does it come back to tech? But I think we agree, I was adding an addendum to your commentary.