By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ka-pi96 said:
DonFerrari said:

It impress me that so many people in VGC ignores that companies work to maximize profit in almost 100% the situation, so yes most of times they will be multiplatform, they will avoid multiplatform only if the porting cost doesn't return enough profit to make sense (because resources are finite so even if the port makes profit not always it will be done because they can make more profit on the same resource doing something else, be it a DLC or a new game). But we have so many that think companies think like them based on hate and love.

Exactly. Square going temporarily Sony exclusive wasn't "bad" or "betrayal" or whatever, it was just business, and it was a huge success for both parties too! Same for Microsoft buying Rare, albeit that one wasn't so successful.

Well it wasn't perfect result, but better than the company closing out. And unfortunatelly Nintendo didn't want to buy the other half at the time. They probably had their reason to think it wouldn't profit from it even if we all disagree and think it was just the jealously of Iwata.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

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"

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."