By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DonFerrari said:
Nautilus said:

And 10 millions make sense?Whats your source for that?Do you think Sega would be that unwilling to fund Bayo 2 if the all the costs related to the game would only be 10 millions?Obviously not.

Because the original sales and cost of opportunity for its sales wouldn't justify the sequel being made by them paying it up. And claiming Nintendo would finance a game that would cost a lot more than their own games is quite strange if given without any source except "i guess so"

LOL

Im sorry, but this is just too funny.You say my reasons for thinking the costs are high is "I guess so", but then you go on to say that your reasons for being low is "I guess so" too.

Look, Sega is a company that wants money.If what you say its true and Bayonetta games usually costs around 10 millions, then why were they dissapointed with the first one?The first sold roughly 2 millions between 360 and PS3 and assuming that each game gave them 30 dollars in raw profit(given the discounts as the years passed by) the game would still have made 60 million dollars, 6 times more than the initial investement.Why wouldnt Sega be happy with it, at least not enough so that it wouldnt continue with the franchise?

So tell me, why do you think that Bayonetta 2 costs around 10 millions, instead of the 30 or so that usually AAA games costs?Oh, and give me actual facts or concrete data, because your childish excuse such as"Nintendo is so stupid, they dont like to spend money" dosent fly.

Edit:Oh, and Nintendo said that, for its bigger games, they usually need 2 million units sold to break even and have a small profit, so thats about 100 million dollars right there that are spent with their big first party games.Just so you know.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1