Nuvendil said:
We know that putting an 8GB cart Switch game on the shelf in mid 2017 was equal more or less to the cost of putting a PS4 game on the shelf. 4GB carts are obviously cheaper, that's why Nintendo has them to save costs for games that don't need 8GB or more. Do the math, it's not hard to comprehend. I mean, think it through: if 4GB carts cost more than a BR, then 16GB would be a massive increase, probably 4x or more the cost. Which would chop off a big chunk of profit. But we know that's BS because multiple devs have used thr 16GB and we already know a 32GB cart is only 2x a BR. We've had this data for a year but a bunch of revisionists desperately trying to defend Capcom's cheapskate behavior have been trying to sweep it under the rug. But these are the facts: Capcom is taking advantage of incorrect presuppositions about cartridge costs born mostly out of decades old experiences in order to get away with being obscenely cheap in order to pad their bottom line at the expense of consumers. And people are livid about this latest bit because not only is it consumer hostile, it also more or less confirms Capcom has no intentions of putting any effort or any resources of note towards the Switch. Every game so far has been minimal effort. The MMLCs are both ancient game collections, the RE:Rev ports are old games built with weaker hardware in mind and just slapped on the system, USFII is just the 360 SFII remake with a $40 price tag. The closest thing to "effort" is MonHun Gen Ultimate since they did retexture it but it still looks like a GCN remaster, still runs at 30fps, and is being localized over a year after the fact. And all of these were branded as "tests" (which is always contemptuous as it is basically them holding their bigger games to ransom to try and pressure people to buy their stuff) implying the big sruff was right around the corner if people buy these low effprt games. The only untarnished game and the only current gen home console game coming to Switch is Mega Man 11. But don't be shocked if that game come with asterisks to. And then they do this. They show that they are willing to stoop to any measure to get money for basically doing nothing. Showing they don't see the Switch as a console to support, but as a cash grab they can exploit. Not that any of these arguments or facts matter to you. You and a few others have adamantly defended every crappy practice, every anticonsumer decision, every bad decision made with regards to Switch. I'm fairly positive if Capcom canceled Mega Man 11 for Switch and instead offered it as a stream game for $15 a month, you would defend that. Hell, you would probably defend them deleting all their games from the eshop for no reason at all. Cause you've made it abundantly clear that in your opinion Switch owners aren't allowed to complain, ever, about anything from 3rd parties. And thats just bull. |
Putting a 8GB cart on shelf versus a PS4 BR in shelf is completely different than 4GB cart cost less than a BR. And still, please provide source (link perhaps).
Carts cost don't scale linearly, so no a 32GB doesn't cost 2x 16, 4x8, 16x2...
If the cartridges is cheap, them Capcom itself isn't cheapskates or would need to be when using it. Your reasoning doesn't make much sense.
All products are released as tests if you don't know. Any product that doesn't sell good can and probably will be taken back and successor may not be made.
All companies do calculate the minimum investment and maximum profit. The thing is for they to get the minimum in one platform is different than in another.
Nope not even defending Capcom. I'm discussing the need to bash at 3rd parties at most times as if there is a universal scheme to screw Nintendo that comes in VGC since Wii. And that will be kept for any company for who no one have the right data but makes speculations to see perceived damage. As the obnoxious "Sony paid Capcom to leave MHW away from just Switch". You may not like it, but the responsible for relationship with Capcom, to negotiate the best interest of its userbase is Nintendo. So if Capcom is in your perception mistreating Nintendo fanbase, Nintendo is the one that needs to go there and talk.
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."
