h2ohno said:
I'd consider both a success, though in different ways. You're right that success and legs are not the same thing, though they're related. Right now the only thing we have to go on with Arms is the initial succes since there is no information to even start talking about its legs. Context matters. A COD game selling 3 million units would be a flop given past success, expectations, being split over at least 3 platforms (XBOX, PS4, PC), and the likely high development and marketing budget for the game. On the other hand Fire Emblem was considered a big success and a breakout hit when Awakening sold over 1 million after the series saw consistently declining sales. Nintendo games have less people working on them and smaller budgets that most big AAA games like Mass Effect or GTA, and Arms would have had a smaller budget than other Nintendo games like BOTW and Mario Oddessey. And it's on a system that still only has an install base of about 5 million. It's hard to see how it could have possibly been expected to do better, |
I sure wouldn't call Arms a Flop, and you are right about context.
On legs, each genre or phase of franchise have it's specifics.
Some games are very front loaded (like 70%+ of sales on First Month), others have good legs (let's say 40% first month and sales for over 1 or 2 years) and we have some of those Nintendo evergreens that seems to not care about how long it have been released will still put nice numbers almost every week (Minecraft does that as well).

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







