By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 said:
DonFerrari said:

I know, but when you are replying to that point it must be taken in consideration. But we both agree companies make mistakes that sometimes can even appear dumble in hindsight. But no coompany makes decision intend to lose money so they can giggle =]

So for Switch case some may have thought before release that it wouldn't be  major hit, others may just though their genre isn't that much sellable on Nintendo or just not compatible port possible. Some of those estimates could be wrong but I wouldn't say it's prepaposterous decisions most of time.

Yeah, naturally there's people on both sides of the debate who take things to the extreme. And I agree, no company makes bad decisions on purpose just for giggles, it's just that we can't always know at the time if the choice we're making will turn out to be the best one.

Yep people go to extreme when they want to defend a point. But I'm pleased that game by game Switch is showing that it can sell 3rd party games



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."