By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 06 August 2018
Edit Thread
TheMisterManGuy said:
curl-6 said:

External partners and outsourcing do help a lot, yeah, but you still have to be careful how you allocate your flagship teams when you're a first party with the weight of selling your system almost entirely on your shoulders; its not like MS or Sony where they can lean on third parties to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

Just how big is this "loyal player base" though? It's all well and good to have a small following of passionate enthusiasts, but to attain lasting success takes more than that.

Look, I know you really want an ARMS 2; there are a lot of games I'd love a sequel to as well, but unfortunately things don't always work out the way we want. I'd give my right arm for The Last Story 2 for Switch, but I doubt it will ever happen. Who knows, maybe they will make an ARMS 2, stranger things have happened. I'm just trying to look at things from a business point of view.

Nintendo already has a good chunk of system sellers on the Switch already. Super Mario Odyssey, Breath of the Wild, and Splatoon 2 continue to sell consoles regularly, and with Pokemon and Smash on the way, there'll still be plenty of them coming. While ARMS is not a system seller like those two, it still sold enough for it to be considered a success, and many of its players still play it regularly. Besides, it outsold Xenoblade Chronicles 2, as well as many of Capcom's recent fighting games within the same time frame. 

It's not just that I want an ARMS 2, it's that I don't see why there won't be an ARMS 2. It's a successful new IP with a comparatively small, but loyal fan-base that can be even bigger with a new installment. And like I said, Nintendo never goes into new ideas thinking they're going to be the next Mario. A game should succeed on its own standards. Sure, it may not make sense for someone like EA or Capcom to keep going with a game that only managed to sell 2 or 3 million. But for Nintendo, who's games don't need to be 4m+ sellers to be a hit, it makes sense. 

Still though, it comes back to investing in a 3 million seller not making much sense when you could invest the same into a potential 10 million seller. Why commit a flagship studio to a game with limited potential and which there isn't much demand for?