Not necessarily. Sony pays them enough to offset the loss of sales for a year, and they can then go multiplatform after. Usually with a GOTY edition or some bonus content. The recent Tomb Raider games ar a good example of this.
What numbers are being tossed around I could only speculate, but that’s the idea.
I wish it was illegal to do that. It’s blatantly anti consumer. Exclusivity does absolutely nothing good for consumers and only harms them by pushing them to have to own multiple, otherwise redundant consoles.
Wouldnt they make more making it more widely available? I feel like consoles being so prohibitively expensive makes exclusivity less of a thing.
Not necessarily. Sony pays them enough to offset the loss of sales for a year, and they can then go multiplatform after. Usually with a GOTY edition or some bonus content. The recent Tomb Raider games ar a good example of this.
What numbers are being tossed around I could only speculate, but that’s the idea.
I wish it was illegal to do that. It’s blatantly anti consumer. Exclusivity does absolutely nothing good for consumers and only harms them by pushing them to have to own multiple, otherwise redundant consoles.
Do you feel that Nintendo should be obliged to divest itself of the Mario, Zelda, and Metroid franchises?