By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
caffeinade said:
ShadowSoldier said:
This is why Microsoft SUCKS. They are afraid to take risks even with a critically viable prospect. How am I as a Gamer and a consumer supposed to have faith in a company like that.

Not many companies are willing to make art for the sake of art.
At the risk of profitability.

Not Sony, not Nintendo, not Valve and not Microsoft.

For art sake no, but they can be a platform to grow their own market.

The level of risk Sony is willing to take is one that only 4 in every 10 games break even and that only 2 really bring a lot of money and covers for the cost of all those other 6 that failed... and they will use those as test to new games that could enter that 2 in 10.

But all the 10 brings customers to the ecosystem, sell HW and that allows them to collect royalties from 3rd parties.

MS is just lazy.



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."