I can think of quite a few games with extended development cycles where they scrapped what I originally wanted and eventually released a game that, while still decent, "underperformed" because it was essentially tasked with turning the profit of two or three games instead of one.

Gosh, just finish the first game and ship it. Then do the same rework you were going to do and ship that too. I will happily enjoy both cakes.

It's crazy to think that the leadership of multimillion-dollar publishers and developers operate with the same conviction and decisiveness as an unfocused art student.

EDIT: I look at something like Sony third parties during the PS2/PS3 transition vs Nintendo around Y2K. SO many PS2 games got delayed and ported to PS3, getting roughly the same sales on higher expenses. Square Enix even infamously did it with the PS3/PS4 transition, scrapping 7 years of work on Final Fantasy Versus XIII to turn out XV in the following 3 (though, in a sense, they learned their lesson, since XV was basically released half-completed, the Royal edition finally adding in most of the planned features).

Compare to Nintendo releasing several of their N64 games in Japan with missing features that would be added in for a subsequent US or GameCube release (most notably Pokemon Stadium and Animal Crossing). Instead of trying to desperately claw back extended development expenses, they double-dipped.