DePapier
111p3,832 comments posted · 15 followers · following 15
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Uncharted 4: A Thief's... · 0 replies · +1 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Here's The Controversi... · 0 replies · +3 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Here's The Controversi... · 0 replies · +3 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Hyrule Warriors Gave F... · 0 replies · +1 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Hyrule Warriors Gave F... · 2 replies · +2 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Speed-Up Enemy Turns i... · 0 replies · +1 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Hyrule Warriors Gave F... · 0 replies · +4 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Splatoon - eShop page ... · 1 reply · +4 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Evolve's BS DLC Practi... · 0 replies · +7 points
9 years ago @ PLAYERESSENCE - Hyrule Warriors Gave F... · 9 replies · +5 points
Suppose people at Platinum Games pushed for Nintendo to also fund development for Bayonetta 2 on PS/360 or PS/ONE. Would Nintendo pay for that?
Sony and Square Enix made a slime PS4 for the game last year, before the game even launched. I believe they also made a PS4 bundle for the launch of the game in Japan. Square Enix is publishing this game to sell PS4s, why would they put the game on Nintendo hardware? Square Enix is making a partnership with Sony on this game, why would the finance a port for the game to a console that belongs to the competition of their partner?
The Dragon Quest numbered franchise is on Nintendo right now, and that's a fact. But realistically speaking, this game has been commissioned by Sony. Why would Square Enix put a game that has been commissioned -- and thus partially financed -- by Sony on Nintendo?