curl-6 said:
I'm certainly no longer grumpy with Capcom; I was wrong about them, and I can admit that. Though I don't think it necessarily follows that every time a company skips the Switch it's the right decision. It depends on the circumstances. Even when I was annoyed at the apparent lack of support Capcom were showing Switch, I still understood that porting World wasn't necessarily the best move, in fact I always said they'd be better off making a new game for Switch. I mean, on the flipside, plenty of folks said (and indeed are still saying) that after the success of World it would be a bad idea for Capcom to make a Monster Hunter game for Switch at all. |
Hey as I said we can totally think those companies made the wrong decision and perhaps based on bad data. The problem is on thinking it is due to silly motives like hatred, bigotry or stuff like that. Companies love money and all their decision is based on how to make more money.
For me it sure makes no sense to not port because technically it is totally feasible, but perhaps they are making much more money with DLC or have a sequel for the PS5 and Series that making the port would end making less sales for the versions on those systems. We never have the full picture available for us.
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."