ARMS is actually a really good game. It just lacks enough Single Player content so its mainly an Online Game. Which is fine it just shrinks its Marketability. If there was a sequel with a decent amount of content I would buy it. As a competitive game I actually really enjoyed it, but soon after games I enjoyed much more came out (Splatoon 2, Odyssey, Xenoblade Chronicles 2).
Arms is awesome, don’t care what anyone says lol. I enjoy the game a lot and it’s fun as hell with friends. It’s a more casual fighter sure but still technical if you want it to be. The motion controllers are great in that game.
Those games are all huge success's for Nintendo, not sure Ive seen anyone say otherwise but I could be wrong. Those games budgets were very low compared to a typical AAA, Nintendo backed up to brinks truck on all of them.
TheMisterManGuy said:
Just look at this forum alone. I made an ARMS topic a while back, and 90% of the posts made were about the game being a supposed failure, and that Nintendo should move on from it or farm out a sequel to a third party so they can focus more on the safe AAA franchises. It didn't matter that the game did 2 million copies worldwide, the fact that it didn't reach the highs of Splatoon 2 or Mario Odyssey was enough for people to write the game off. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/dev2016/thread.php?id=237192&page=1 Anytime Nintendo introduces a new Switch IP and it doesn't immediately do 5 million in a year, then it's deemed a bomb and a total failure by Nintendo fans, Even if Nintendo considers 2 million a success. How many "Failures" is it going to take Nintendo to get it through these people's heads? |
I remember that thread. I was the one that said a sequel would probably be farmed out to a 2nd party with Nintendo guys producing, directing and supervising it. As a whole, Nintendo EPD has the largest collection of creative talent in the industry but they don't have enough artists, coders and other essential devs to go around so Nintendo has to prioritize what gets done internally...which are typically the games that sell 4m+. And when I say 'farmed out', I mean in the same way Smash Bros currently is where Nintendo hires another studio to handle the grunt work while Nintendo's people supervise, produce, direct and provide the creative vision.
That being said, I also wouldn't be surprised if an ARMS sequel is handled internally. Like the original Splatoon, ARMS was basically a proof-of-concept game that was given a meager budget and thrown out to either sink or swim on its core concept alone. It wasn't a break out game like Splatoon was but it might have done enough to convince Nintendo that a proper sequel is worth developing in-house.
Last edited by wombat123 - on 27 December 2018
Ka-pi96 said:
That's not really accurate though. Some of the people there are obviously a lot more talented than others. Would you really want them giving BOTW or Odyssey like budgets to the new trainees or whatever they had working on those other games? So in reality it's probably smaller things like Arms, 1-2 Switch etc, or a huge expensive flop because they gave too much money to their B team. |
Well Retro was new when they made Metroid Prime. Nintendo has many great veterans that can oversee projects.
| TheMisterManGuy said: It's a trend I've noticed a lot with Nintendo's new concepts on Switch, whenever it doesn't do Mario Odyssey, Breath of the Wild, Smash Ultimate, or hell, Wii Sports numbers, it automatically is deemed a failure, even before official numbers and expectations come out. 1-2 Switch? Failure (sold 2.69 million), ARMS? Failure (Sold 2 million), Nintendo Labo? Failure (Sold 1.4 million in its first few months, and has seen sales boosts during the holiday season, so it's probably at 2 million already). The only exceptions to this rule are Snipperclips, which was eShop only in its original run, and Sushi Striker, a game that actually failed. 2 million is not a failure, at all. You may not like these games, but they have an audience, and are some of the Switch's best selling titles. Do people honestly think Nintendo expects everything to catch on like Splatoon or have the same audience as it? Or is it because these IP are reminiscent of the filthy Wii era, and thus, need to hold them to the impossible Wii Sports standard to justify their argument? Also if ARMS and Labo were such failures, why does Nintendo keep promoting them regularly? |
Everything is relative, first of all. Certainly in comparison to many of Nintendo's existing IPs like Mario, Zelda, Animal Crossing, etc, these new IPs should be considered failures. Think of it this way: there are many bands who make music that sucks. No news flash there. But there are certain bands that are absolutely amazing. I'm not going to give examples, because music, like games, is very subjective. But whatever amazing band or artist you are thinking of right now, imagine all their best songs. Now think of the terrible songs they have...you know you can think of a couple. Now...think of those songs in comparison to the terrible bands, and you'll realize that even the worst songs from the best bands are better than the best or decent songs from the bad bands. It's the same with Nintendo. We have come to think of their best IPs, both critically and comercially, to be of almost celestial levels. So when they don't hit the stratosphere it's very easy for fan and foe alike to cast them as failures.
That's the price you pay for success.
Now someone yesterday was claiming that Nintendo fans cry a lot. That we are insecure. Certainly I find that insinuation offensive and it makes me uncomfortable, but threads like this make me understand their claim. We are Nintendo fans....we should have some pride in ourselves and the company we love, and have the confidence to take the negativity Nintendo receives in stride. Nintendo isn't going anywhere and neither is their reputation as an amazing publisher and developer, no matter what grumblings bubble to the surface here at VGC or other more shady parts of the internet.
Without reason any other posts bar the op, those games sold the numbers you said, that's all that matters, the same people's posts you're reading online are probably the same people who think that the Wii was a failure because it was a kiddy console regardless of the crazy amount of money it made for Nintendo. Ignore those people and just look at numbers
Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive
cause its the talking point people need to use to justify a specific argument. Good for clickbait youtube videos to get that extra revenue.
NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick
| Shiken said: 1,2 Switch was a failure. Had it not been a launch title, it would not have sold like it did. |
From what angle? It's still outselling Arms, yet it probably has a much lower budget put into it than ARMS or any other Nintendo made game.
Bottom line is, it WAS a launch title, and did well because of that. No ifs and buts
Dont get me wrong, I dont want the game to do well myself, but its more successful than ARMS lets face it.
Bet with Intrinsic:
The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.
Louie said:
I gave you concrete examples of Labo's marketing push but you still continue to dismiss it because you personally didn't see too many TV commercials and it wasn't as heavily advertised as Pokémon and Smash, two established 10m+ selling franchises. In case you missed it, Labo was also advertised by Jimmy Fallon and Ariana Grande. I mean, what exactly constitutes a big marketing push to you? Should Nintendo have persuaded Trump to build that wall to Mexico with a Labo Construction Kit? Pre-release hype has never been part of Nintendo's marketing strategy for mass market games since the Wii and DS days (because casual gamers can't be hyped up for games pre-launch and they don't watch e3, which is why it wasn't there) and the fact that they pushed Labo to more and broader review outlets than usual and gave it hands-on events before (!) release in the US and Europe somehow signifies low expectations by Nintendo to you. You then take a PR statement by Reggie for fact but dismiss the Japanese charts and literally just took a game that sold 11k units during launch week in Japan as proof that Labo is a success. And the Nintendo president glossing over Labo and not calling it a system seller somehow also proves that point according to you. Also, your fourth point is pure spin in which you try to make it look like Nintendo still somehow decides the shipment numbers - they don't. Retailers decide. And retailers certainly did not want the initial Labo shipment to last throughout the year. You also, in your very reply, admit that the Vehicle Kit and the Robot Kit both have low market appeal and the Robot Kit is still struggling with its first shipment. So we have one in three kits being moderately successful after, yes, a big marketing push and yet even the most popular kit couldn't make it into the Japanese charts, despite the charts being dominated by months or even year-old Switch games. You then move the goalposts to "the game wasn't on clearance" which is a completely different point. Even so, a quick Google search shows that the Multiset Kit can be bought on Amazon Germany for 49.99 and 41.60 on another website which is around half the price it released for I think. I can't speak Japanese but the Japanese Amazon website also indicates price drops for most of the kits. Of course, some of this is because of holiday sales but I can't jump forward in time to late January unfortunately. But again, this is you moving the goalposts because by now "the only way we know" if something is a bomb according to you is if the price gets slashed "ASAP" which means Labo would only be a flop if retailers had given the game massive clearance sales right after launch even though we all know Nintendo's strategy is to keep the prices of their games as high as possible for as long as possible and we even had a thread about this just a few days ago. |
I guess we'll agree to disagree here, we'll see what happens in January when Nintendo gives the results.
| LGBTDBZBBQ said: I think Nintendo is experimenting on some titles to see whether the Wii crowd is going to hop in or not. Fortunately for traditional Nintendo fans, core titles performed exceedingly well in comparison to wii like games. I certainly hope those sales numbers will discourage Nintendo from trying to go chasing soccer mom crowd. |
I doubt it. Nintendo games don't need to sell a whole lot to be considered a success, so expect more of them in the future. Besides, why would you argue for less game variety and genre coverage from Nintendo. Not everything they make needs to be super hardcore.
Last edited by TheMisterManGuy - on 27 December 2018
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
