Alby_da_Wolf said:
Most probably the main reason is that Notch sold Mojang to MS after having stricken a deal with Sony for Minecraft ports to its platforms, so it wasn't possible anymore to make Minecraft totally exclusive, as such deals are binding even if one of the companies changes owner. You can tell quite a strong deal exists from the fact that the publisher of Minecraft on Sony platforms is neither Mojang nor Microsoft, but Sony itself. |
And that deal have all future versions of the game including Minecraft 2? I guess not.
But you said making it only on X1, so I answered that MS would lose much more selling Minecraft only on X1 than they would gain from the "system seller" status... even removing only PS4 version of the table, 17M sales less would hardly be recovered by what the x1 sales of people that really want to play Minecraft on a console that would buy a 300 USD console because of it.
Cloudman said:
Well, I'm sure they are there. I have heard some people were upset about this from videos talking about the subject and the opinion on this has been negative overall. When I heard about cross play, I thought it was a cool idea and there is a good place for cross play. |
You said MAJORITY and you have nothing to sustain that so you are moving the goal post.

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."







