| Snoorlax said:
By your logic the 3DS games should have failed because there was the WiiU and now Switch yet most first party games sold better on 3DS than on console.
Uhhh....No? and Uhhh.... Does it matter? 2D games were also availabe on the Gamecube like Four Swords, MegaMan and such so why would Metroid fans back then waste their time on Fusion and Zero Mission if they could have gotten the game on a superior console with a 3D Metroid game (Prime 1 and 2). You can keep pushing the remakes don't sell narritive all you like but even back then most young gamers had never played the original Metroid and even those who did, prefer Zero Mission over the original. There is more demand for remakes and remasters these days than actual new games so you need to take that argument somewhere else. The Switch is a console first and a handheld second and it's not the successor to 3DS but to WiiU if you'd watch Nintendo's Directs you'd see that Nintendo promotes games for both Switch and 3DS side by side why would they want to compete against their own console. We've yet to see if Ninty decides to end their handheld line of systems with Switch or come up with a 4DS. It has worked for them all these years they want to keep dominating the handheld market. An interview doesn't change the fact that the game originally underperformed on it's release date, once again, you can fall back and say it released during the end of the Super Nintendo but by that time a new IP came out which became one of the best selling Super Nintendo games ever DKC and it got 2 sequels on the same system. The fact that Metroid Prime was outsourced to a western studio says enough about Metroid as a failing franchise. It's thanks to Miyamoto that we got the Prime games cause not even it's co-creator Sakamoto cared for it. Yes, you're comparing it to other games that sold relatively bad cause according to you that makes SR's sales not bad anymore but you've missed the fact that it's the worst selling of the bunch and besides that it only outsold Fed Force in it's own series' history so this means that it's one of the lowest selling Metroid games ever. I mean, i get it, you think selling below 500k is a still a good number just cause it's a remake on a handheld system... let's forget the fact that it had a 3 year long development and got great scores which means lots of care went into it. Well, i'm positive most people here can agree that it failed even VGchartz awarded SR as the number 1 good game nobody played last year so i don't know what else you need to understand that it failed. Mediocrity is okay for you, not for the rest of us.
Yup, that's all they do... Post on forums and don't buy the games reminds me of the WiiU days.
It's still a great game and better than the original. |
"Uhhh....No? and Uhhh.... Does it matter? 2D games were also availabe on the Gamecube like Four Swords, MegaMan and such so why would Metroid fans back then waste their time on Fusion and Zero Mission if they could have gotten the game on a superior console with a 3D Metroid game (Prime 1 and 2). You can keep pushing the remakes don't sell narritive all you like but even back then most young gamers had never played the original Metroid and even those who did, prefer Zero Mission over the original. There is more demand for remakes and remasters these days than actual new games so you need to take that argument somewhere else."
I have absolutely no idea what MegaMan and Four Swords have to do with this...
I bought Fusion and Zero Mission because they were different games, and playing Prime on the Gamecube in no way prevented me from enjoying them. I've no idea what this has to do with remakes selling.
Of the top 10 selling games of this year, 1 is a remake. Of the top 100, 20 are remakes. So, no, there is not more demand for remakes and remasters. Stop making claims that do not conform to reality.
At any rate, remakes simply do not tend to sell as well as the originals, and tend not to sell as well as original entries from the series particularly on the 3DS. You can compare Metroid Fusion to Zero Mission, Alpha Sapphire to Sun and Moon or X and Y, Mario and Luigi Superstar Saga to Paper Jam or Dream Team, Dragon Quest 11 to 7 or 8, Yoshi's New Island vs Woolly World, Mario Party Island Tour/Star Rush vs Top 100, and Fire Emblem Awakening/Fates vs Echoes. The only time we see a remake outselling a comparable new entry) is with Zelda Ocarina of Time outselling Link Between Worlds, although Majora's Mask did not. Although you could argue that those aren't really comparable.
I'm sorry if you don't like it, but it's not an argument, or a narrative. It is a fact. Remakes sell less than original entries on the 3DS. Maybe you don't think they should, but they do.
"An interview doesn't change the fact that the game originally underperformed on it's release date, once again, you can fall back and say it released during the end of the Super Nintendo but by that time a new IP came out which became one of the best selling Super Nintendo games ever DKC and it got 2 sequels on the same system. The fact that Metroid Prime was outsourced to a western studio says enough about Metroid as a failing franchise. It's thanks to Miyamoto that we got the Prime games cause not even it's co-creator Sakamoto cared for it."
You claimed that Super Metroid's sales led to Nintendo not making a new Metroid game for 8 years. The interview directly contradicts that. Will you admit that your statement was wrong?
"Yes, you're comparing it to other games that sold relatively bad cause according to you that makes SR's sales not bad anymore but you've missed the fact that it's the worst selling of the bunch and besides that it only outsold Fed Force in it's own series' history so this means that it's one of the lowest selling Metroid games ever. I mean, i get it, you think selling below 500k is a still a good number just cause it's a remake on a handheld system... let's forget the fact that it had a 3 year long development and got great scores which means lots of care went into it. Well, i'm positive most people here can agree that it failed even VGchartz awarded SR as the number 1 good game nobody played last year so i don't know what else you need to understand that it failed. Mediocrity is okay for you, not for the rest of us."
No. I'm not just comparing it to other games that sold relatively bad. I'm comparing it to other games that are similar.
Because this is how we evaluate things. Any form of evaluation that's worth anything involves comparison. 500K is not a good number. It's not a bad number. It's just a number. How do we determine if this number is bad or good for this situation? I'd say by comparing it to similar titles. All of which btw as I've already stated, set franchise lows, just like Samus Returns. Which btw is not the lowest selling of the bunch. That goes to Wario Ware Gold.
Similar titles have been selling around 500K. And this has not stopped Nintendo from releasing more of them. Yoshi sold 500Kish and its spiritual prequel is on its way to the 3DS. Mario and Luigi sold around 500K, and its sequel is heading to the 3DS.
That seems to indicate that these sales are enough to make these kinds of games profitable, enough to warrant continued investment, and in lines with Nintendo's expectations. If these are bad sales, I would find it hard to explain why Nintendo keeps releasing more of them.
I've given you tons of data explaining why these sales should be considered, good or at least acceptable. Your counter argument is basically "well I say they're bad and I bet other people would agree". And data beats opinion every day.
So, I'll ask again. Do you have an OBJECTIVE criteria for what makes a game's sales good or bad? Or is it just based on whatever you feel like?
Last edited by JWeinCom - on 08 October 2018
