KrspaceT on 08 September 2020
GamingRabbit said:
V-r0cK said:
Probably. They may have realized that the money spent on this port would require X amount of sales they may not reach.
|
Or they did the math and realized that other projects are simply more profitable for them.
A little example:
Spoiler!
Money for devs to keep on average (phys+digital): |
60% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Switch |
|
PS+XB+PC |
|
Time to make the game (years) |
1 |
|
5 |
|
Units sold |
1.500.000,00 |
|
10.000.000,00 |
|
Price (base) |
60,00 |
50% |
60,00 |
60% |
|
40,00 |
35% |
40,00 |
25% |
|
30,00 |
15% |
30,00 |
15% |
Price (avg) |
48,50 |
|
50,50 |
|
Turnover per game (devs) |
29,10 |
|
30,30 |
|
Turnover |
43.650.000,00 |
|
303.000.000,00 |
|
Cost (dev+prod) |
18.000.000,00 |
|
120.000.000,00 |
|
Profit |
25.650.000,00 |
|
183.000.000,00 |
|
Profit per year |
25.650.000,00 |
|
36.600.000,00 |
|
|
Source please?
Otherwise that is just nonsensical data that the Giant Corp shills on this site made up to argue on their behalf.
The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?