Huh?.. so like the sales would even out regardless of releasing on both consoles? Isnt the whole point of publishers releasing their games on both PS3/PS4 to maximize sales since there are buyers on both platforms. Is Gran Turismo some outlier where releasing on both would have been different from other games.
We don't know, but yeah, maybe. We don't know what the point of publishers releasing across console generations is, because it's not really a universally used method. The assumption is usually that when it doesn't happen it's to drive hardware sales, and so presumably when it does happen it's to drive software sales.
But what about something like GT where there's reasonable evidence that there's only 10-15 million people actually interested in buying the game at any given time, and you're already more or less guaranteed to reach that by releasing on a single console? Are there really extra sales to be had, or are you trading off a better game from running only on stronger hardware with maybe getting more sales in that first six months before the game ends up in the bargain bin? Is making that money up front worthwhile in the longer term, or are you going to lose yourself more money on later installments of the game than you make by following this strategy? Does Sony need that money right now, or can they play the long game and continue to build their franchises?
This isn't simple, and without data that only Sony likely has access to some of these questions can't be answered. But it's by no means a slam dunk that releasing across generations is always going to be the best decision.
And I'd bet millions would dive right into another Witcher game.
I'm sure there are, but I'd also bet that it's less after the Cyberpunk fiasco. Consumers are mostly not idiots. Sure, there are people with more money than sense, and there are people who are so invested in particular franchises or properties that they'd buy a game even if they had to crawl over broken glass to do so. But for most people their history with a franchise or developer matters.
For example, I think TW3 is one of my my favourite games of all time, so if they make another one I'll certainly be strongly looking at buying it. But after CP2077 I'll be doing my research first, whereas if they'd released another Witcher game straight after TW3 I would have lined up at midnight to buy it sight unseen and no questions asked. CDPR haven't necessarily lost my sale, but they've absolutely got me thinking more carefully about whether I really want to buy their game.
As far as Polyphony, they lost me for GTS after what happened with GT5 and 6. I did not buy a PS4 and didn't buy GTS largely on the strength of my poor experience with GT5 and 6 (aided by the fact that a lot of the other games that I liked were becoming cross platform). I gave them the benefit of the doubt with GT6, and I just wasn't interested in buying another game off of them until I had solid evidence that they'd turned themselves around. I think GTS seems like it's done a fairly good job of that, and I'm interested to see what GT7 looks like when it gets closer to release. But it's by no means a guaranteed purchase for me like every Gran Turismo before 6 was.
This is how goodwill works. It's not all or nothing, it's nuance. You don't lose customers outright (unless you're ActiBlizz apparently, but they can go choke on a satchel of sausages), but you do start turning people off your brand. And with that lack of excitement there's a greater chance that customers just decide that their money is better spent on something that isn't your product. It's not that hard to have half the people who bought your product think "meh, wasn't that great, I wouldn't buy another one".
