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

B

MajorMalfunction said:
DonFerrari said:

And of course if they think a game that could be done for Switch will be profitable being launched only on Switch and decide to not make it for PS4/X1/PC that is totally fine. Seems like they though Octopath would make more money being exclusive to Switch.

But for some reason Sony paid to Capcom to not launch MHW on Switch, and funny enough that money shall being used to make an exclusive MH for Switch. These crazy theories of VGC.

Oh, hell yeah. It can and does happen. Some Nintendo fans (incl. me) don't want to accept that Nintendo hasn't made an ecosystem where you can get everything on one box. AAA are out of reach for the most part. Hardware and cost of publishing stand out as two major factors for why Switch doesn't get everything. It's great that Nintendo is on track to have a massive console, but Nintendo themselves don't seem to understand the clout that the other two platform holders have, as well as the influence third parties have on the industry today. I don't want to say Nintendo is stuck in the 80s, but they're no longer big man on campus. When Sony entered the market, third party games that were exclusive by default to NES/SNES moved to PS1. They mostly haven't come back.

At least they have been getting good games that need less power due to their good sales on the platform.



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."