By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - 1M Game Sales Required to Make Profit On Wii

LordTheNightKnight on 10 April 2010
loves2splooge said:
Kenryoku_Maxis said:

This is completely false. The developers for games like No More Heroes, Muramasa: The Demon Blade and The Conduitmade a profit and those games didn't come anywhere near 1 million. Why do you think those developers are making more Wii games now? Because you don't have to sell over a million to make a profit on the Wii.

Yeah it boggles my mind that third-party publishers aren't taking the Wii more seriously. The Wii is a lot cheaper to develop for than the PS3 and 360 and even cult-like games like the ones you mentioned manage to make profits. Having played No More Heroes (which is a "core" action-adventure with partial motion controls) the past couple of days and really enjoying it, I asked myself why the hell third-party publishers haven't considered putting more of their "risky" titles (ie. new IPs, niche games, etc.) on the Wii exclusively.

It's as if third-party publishers want to shape the gaming market to what they want. Rather than make the necessary adjustments to adapt to what the gaming market wants (and the sales have spoken. The gaming market doesn't want Mirror's Edge, Dead Space and Dante's Inferno that badly. If they did, the games would have turned a profit. They want Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 987 instead). EA is losing money and plenty of other third-party publishers are losing money. THQ was almost bankrupt until UFC 2009 Undisputed (which wasn't a risky title. The UFC brand is very popular) saved it's ass. I don't see why EA couldn't have put Dante's Inferno on the Wii. It would have dodged the "God of War clone" label being thrown at it. The production costs would be much cheaper and they would have been able to make a profit. Revenue isn't everything. You can make a game profitable on the Wii with a lot less revenue.

When you see Sega publicly saying that Madworld was profitable and then next minute they turn around and say that there is no core market on the Wii, they were a mismatch with the Wii, you have to really wonder about their motivations. Maybe what Naz said about the gaming media hating Nintendo also applies to third-party publishers? Because right now, I just don't see the rationality in what the third-party publishers are saying and doing right now.

I would say this. They were basically told by stockholders to support the Wii and they did everything to sabotage genuine support.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
bigjon on 10 April 2010

yea, 1 million for Metriod Other M, or Maybe Zelda... Cant tell me cooking mama needs to sell 1 million.... try maybe 150k tops.



End of 2009 Predictions (Set, January 1st 2009)

Wii- 72 million   3rd Year Peak, better slate of releases

360- 37 million   Should trend down slightly after 3rd year peak

PS3- 29 million  Sales should pick up next year, 3rd year peak and price cut

amp316 on 10 April 2010

That's why they made a sequel to No More Heroes.

The first one sold several million.



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

Rhonin the wizard on 10 April 2010
spurgeonryan said:

WHo is this person that wrote this article, and how has he garnered over 4000 VG $? This does not make any sence at all. Companies do not just continue to make games if they are not selling. Plus you cannot tell me that a game like wii play or ANubisII need a million sales to make a profit! Maybe full fledged, high value games need this, but other than that no this is either a miss quote or just a total lie. Im going for a total lie! Did the article say that ACtivision has about 40 games and only 3 of them have made a profit? That does not sound right at all, again why would a company continue to make games for a system if that was the case? It is not like the movie industry or book industry where you just continue to make profits off of new iterations of media. Hardcover-paperback/ movie theaters-dvd-tv-rerelease after rerelease-merchandise-books and on and on. If games dont sell there will not be more. This thread should be taken off and the person banned for a day for even making this garbage up. Dead Space: extraction might have lost some money.

Lastgengamer didn't write the article, it comes from Gamestooge.



Games4Fun on 10 April 2010

http://kotaku.com/5191706/update-how-many-copies-does-a-wii-game-need-to-sell-to-make-money


It looks like the New York Times got it wrong in this article. In an update today, the paper says that Nintendo contacted them to point out they misunderstood the numbers:

"Finally, one clarification on the story we did Monday on this subject. For the story, Nintendo had told me that publishers of Wii games need to sell only one million games to turn a profit. The company wrote me to say that it meant that publishers can make a profit selling fewer than one million copies of a particular game. Nintendo declined to be any more specific about a number."

So now we don't have a hard number to run some math on. I under if instead of 1 million it's 900,000, or 200,000 or one less than a million. I think that's exactly what Nintendo was going for.



Around the Network
dark_gh0st_b0y on 10 April 2010

then, how comes there's a Conduit 2 coming since the 1st one did not even sold 0.5m?

also, how comes we also got a NMH sequel, sounds like either the developers are stupid or the person that wrote that article is stupid



don't mind my username, that was more than 10 years ago, I'm a different person now, amazing how people change ^_^

Bamboleo on 10 April 2010

1 million just for the AAA high budget titles such as Mario Galaxy or Monster Hunter 3.

If this was true for every game, then all PS3 games would be a loss and only 2 X360 games would give a little profit..



Arius Dion on 10 April 2010

LoL.



Bet between Slimbeast and Arius Dion about Wii sales 2009:


If the Wii sells less than 20 million in 2009 (as defined by VGC sales between week ending 3d Jan 2009 to week ending 4th Jan 2010) Slimebeast wins and get to control Arius Dion's sig for 1 month.

If the Wii sells more than 20 million in 2009 (as defined above) Arius Dion wins and gets to control Slimebeast's sig for 1 month.

shokenchi on 10 April 2010

it would be more believable if it were for ps3 or 360.



LordTheNightKnight on 10 April 2010
Games4Fun said:
http://kotaku.com/5191706/update-how-many-copies-does-a-wii-game-need-to-sell-to-make-money


It looks like the New York Times got it wrong in this article. In an update today, the paper says that Nintendo contacted them to point out they misunderstood the numbers:

"Finally, one clarification on the story we did Monday on this subject. For the story, Nintendo had told me that publishers of Wii games need to sell only one million games to turn a profit. The company wrote me to say that it meant that publishers can make a profit selling fewer than one million copies of a particular game. Nintendo declined to be any more specific about a number."

So now we don't have a hard number to run some math on. I under if instead of 1 million it's 900,000, or 200,000 or one less than a million. I think that's exactly what Nintendo was going for.

I hope the OP edits this in. Also, the reason a hard number wasn't given is because the budgets vary. So there isn't a hard number, just that most Wii games don't need to sell a million.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs