Miyamotoo said:
If we talking about 32GB carts, we probably talking around $10 price difference instead of $5, so on 1m sold games we talking around $10m less profit. Profit matters in any case, it would main reason why they would released game on first place on Switch and they would go for highest profit. Saying that, maybe game is coming to Switch in any case but they are waiting or Nintendo promised them cheaper prices of 32GB carts next year, or something similar, only time will tell. |
Now put how much they invested on the port and waiting on those, plus missed revenue from delaying it plus not selling the stuff on the online portion... that certainly is quite considerable. As also was said if they were really scarred of the price for the cartridge, download would be a solution or even releasing the game for higher pricetag. Those were done in recent past without much hassle or backlash considering the profit made. I find it hard to believe they have put all the work and stopped with it finished due to it. If you said they didn't even start developing because they will wait for better margins it would make more sense.
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."