Development costs are almost never consistent, and are only fixed across hours,

So then they're fairly fixed, then.

That's literally just when a companies revenue is higher than it's costs. That's it.

Yep, and that's all that matters. And the Xbox One Edition of the game was defnitely above the profitability threshold as it outsold the PS4 version and they're continuing to update that version.

You have no idea what "port" means.

Enlighten me about how porting extant versions of the game from PS4 to Xboxc One isn't "porting".

You are claiming you know C is positive despite not having the values for A or B. Do you understand why that is just blatantly wrong?

You are claiming the opposite without knowing the values of A or B. Do you understand why that is just blatantly hypocritical?

Those numbers were for December of 2017. December and January represent the highest active player rate for all games because students (the largest market for games) aren't in school.

Provide a source for that claim, particularly in relation to Minecraft.

"We don't have any data on XB1 or Switch. Not active players, not purchase data, not revenue data, not cost data. We have literally no data. But I know for a fact that ending those products was premature."

I do know for a fact that ending the Xbox One Edition was premature because it sold better than the PS4 edition and they're continuing development on the PS4 edition.

just knowing active user count doesn't tell you anything about profitability threshold in a conversation about user engagement.

If you seriously cannot grasp how knowing the active user count can serve as inputs when contextualized with other data to evaluate organizational decision making then it's no wonder you're so lost here.