well it isnt install base, capcom just want to develop for the 3DS. must people are just butthard its not coming to vita. with that 'logic' we should have been asking Capcom why monster hunter wasnt on the DS, since the install base was HUGE! its obvious that they just choose the 3DS, but many say nintendo paid them so idk

i never once stated they wont make money, obviously it'll make money. If they ported it, it can easily do 500k-1mil. i just said capcom or any third party isn't responsible for making hardware move.

Quote tree shortened - Kresnik

Wouldn't they have to task a dev team with porting the game? Isn't it possible that they could find a more profitable activity for that team to be doing?

And you have no proof that having the game on both platforms would increase profitability. It's in Capcoms interest to have the audience united on one platform since developing the game for one platform is simply cheaper than developing the game for two platforms. Even if the port itself is profitable, chances are it would be at the cost of 3DS sales, the only real added value would be people who wouldn't buy the 3DS version because of (t)reasons. Also, no matter how cheap the port would be, it costs time and manpower and there is something called opportunity costs. Maybe capcom thinks they can increase profitability even further by spending those resources on other projects.

You're right OP! All this sudden and intense denial makes me think that PSVita MH4 is approaching fast. I would even bet on an unveiling at TGS.

Also, I find very strange that Siliconera had to close comments on this article. Would they have something to hide?

I would like to take that bet.

what would be more profitable than MH for vita?

a quick cheap port for ~1m lifetime sales. cant see much beating that.

i'm just looking at capcom games on the 3DS and it looks like only 1 has sold more than a million units....and thats MH tri.

So do you think they should stop making 3ds games and concentrate on a 'more profitable activity'? like on 360 and PS3 where they can get far more sales if they made a game?

based on what?...

Thats like saying theres no point making wii U games because it will just take sales from the PS3/360. Its an argument that doesnt make sense.

And like i said in my comment above, only 1 capcom game on 3ds has sold more than a million units so opportunity costs is not an issue because they are still making handheld games which dont even sell a million units.

I don't think paying for development costs means they paid off the developer/publisher either.  They're just funding  the project like if they funded any of their own projects.  Most developers and publishers are no longer open to the public though so we don't know whether this or that is a pay off or not, and we can only go by statements that they make.  Capcom with Dead Rising 3 for example.  Dead Rising 3 being exclusive to Xbox One because it's impossible to develop on another console is just bs PR and by that comment it's obvious they were paid for the games exclusivity.  The statement on this topic from Capcom about Monster Hunter plus their previous statements on the franchise as well.

The way a lot of these comments are worded and it's quite obvious that there's some pay off g oing around.  Look at it this way as well.  You also only need to look at the companies release history.  Capcom is well known to release their games on as many consoles as possible if they know the game is going to make money elsewhere.  The statement that they want their franchise to just be exclusive to one set of consoles, going against company history, alone proves that this comment is bs PR trying to make excuses for a payoff.  If Capcom didn't make any comment we wouldn't say anything, we wouldn't even expect anything, but Capcom coming out making excuses and very poor ones at that, so it's pretty obvious what's going on behind thet scenes.