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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Why does Metroid Mainline Games sale so sell low? And could it sale higher now?

Release a proper Metroid for NX and market the shit out of it. Featuring content in Smash and Mario Kart. Finally give Metroid a TLOU aproach in which you can connect to Samus, while retaining the Prime gameplay. Oh and don't make it cartoony, Metroid needs to be gritty and Dark.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Around the Network
Dunban67 said:

You don t understand the difference in a game and a brand-  Smash is a game consisting of alot of brands -  It is a popular game

Metroid is a big and very marketable brand due to Samus-  She is the face of the Metroid brand -  like Mario, and Link-   Fire Emblem Animal Crossing etc  does not have  a recognizable face even though they are popular games -  

 

You need to do your homework re Pokemon-  They are not the majority shareholder in Pokemon-  there has been plenty of news and even a statement from Nintendo re this due to the confusion over who was to benifit most from Pokemon Go-  you can also look up Nintendo s Annual report in english online-  it is all there-    If Nintendo was a majority owner of the Pokemon co,  then it woud be a subsidiary of Nintendo which it is not-  Nintenod aslo owns a minority intrest in the Niantic co along w Google and others

They have the controlling stake in the company which means they hold more than any one else and have more control, look it up Nintendo approves all of their actions because Nintendo not only owns the IP they own the controlling stake in PC, they wouldn't need Nintendo's approval otherwise.

Firstly Smash is an IP and therefore a brand no different to King of Fighters and Street Fighter which also use characters from other brands. Smash itself is a brand notable for it's unique approach to the genre, Smash s a brand that many brands gain exposure from. Secondly Metroid is not a big marketable brand in any form it's this illusion that I'm pointing out in my earlier post that Metroid fans refuse to accept the reality of the IP.

Games like FE and AC don't need a particular character's face for their franchise as they have a distinct style that people recognize that's their face, Samus being the face of Metroid doesn't mean much when the IP at best is niche it's like you saying you're the face of your local convenience store, yeah they get enough business to get by but compared to the likes of Walmart they're not even in the same ball park.

Your claim that Metroid is the third strongest brand of the first party library is simply untrue in truth it barely makes the top 10.



Jumpin said:
No one thinks Metroid is a top 3 Nintendo brand. Lylas Wars/Star Fox is bigger, Kirby is bigger, Animal Crossing is bigger. Mario Kart, Smash, and Pokemon are all much bigger, as are Donkey Kong, Mario, and Zelda.

Metroid is usually not something I think about when thinking of important Nintendo brands. It's kind of one of those brands that people mostly know because of Smash Brothers.

Disagree on two things. I'd argue Metroid's bigger than Star Fox; while 64 sold much more than any Metroid title, Star Fox has had sales disappointments (Zero, Command) that Metroid simply hasn't. The median Metroid game sells better than Star Fox.

Metroid is also definitely not a brand most people know because of Smash Bros; that would be something like Fire Emblem pre Awakening. As long as the term "Metroidvania" remains in existence, Metroid will be tied to the exploration genre more than anything else.



Wyrdness said:
Dunban67 said:

You don t understand the difference in a game and a brand-  Smash is a game consisting of alot of brands -  It is a popular game

Metroid is a big and very marketable brand due to Samus-  She is the face of the Metroid brand -  like Mario, and Link-   Fire Emblem Animal Crossing etc  does not have  a recognizable face even though they are popular games -  

 

You need to do your homework re Pokemon-  They are not the majority shareholder in Pokemon-  there has been plenty of news and even a statement from Nintendo re this due to the confusion over who was to benifit most from Pokemon Go-  you can also look up Nintendo s Annual report in english online-  it is all there-    If Nintendo was a majority owner of the Pokemon co,  then it woud be a subsidiary of Nintendo which it is not-  Nintenod aslo owns a minority intrest in the Niantic co along w Google and others

They have the controlling stake in the company which means they hold more than any one else and have more control, look it up Nintendo approves all of their actions because Nintendo not only owns the IP they own the controlling stake in PC, they wouldn't need Nintendo's approval otherwise.

Firstly Smash is an IP and therefore a brand no different to King of Fighters and Street Fighter which also use characters from other brands. Smash itself is a brand notable for it's unique approach to the genre, Smash s a brand that many brands gain exposure from. Secondly Metroid is not a big marketable brand in any form it's this illusion that I'm pointing out in my earlier post that Metroid fans refuse to accept the reality of the IP.

Games like FE and AC don't need a particular character's face for their franchise as they have a distinct style that people recognize that's their face, Samus being the face of Metroid doesn't mean much when the IP at best is niche it's like you saying you're the face of your local convenience store, yeah they get enough business to get by but compared to the likes of Walmart they're not even in the same ball park.

Your claim that Metroid is the third strongest brand of the first party library is simply untrue in truth it barely makes the top 10.

Nintendo does NOT own a controlling stake in Pokemon-  later tonight ill find some documentation that will clarify

I think we have both said our part on the other brand topics-  our opinions differ - 



Sales figures show that USA is the main market for both 2D and 3D Metroid.
Japan ONLY likes 2D Metroid.
Europe is not too hot on either.

Does a 2D Metroid stand a better chance of getting made?
It does not require that much development resources and could potentially sell quite good in both Japan and USA.
The indie game market (Axiom Verge, AM2R) seems to show a demand for 2D.

EDIT: When I play No Man's Sky I imagine it like a Metroid 3D game.
It would be enough with a dozen planets/moons and a little more detailed environments and a lot of things to explore on and off the planets.



Around the Network
Wyrdness said:
Dunban67 said:

You don t understand the difference in a game and a brand-  Smash is a game consisting of alot of brands -  It is a popular game

Metroid is a big and very marketable brand due to Samus-  She is the face of the Metroid brand -  like Mario, and Link-   Fire Emblem Animal Crossing etc  does not have  a recognizable face even though they are popular games -  

 

You need to do your homework re Pokemon-  They are not the majority shareholder in Pokemon-  there has been plenty of news and even a statement from Nintendo re this due to the confusion over who was to benifit most from Pokemon Go-  you can also look up Nintendo s Annual report in english online-  it is all there-    If Nintendo was a majority owner of the Pokemon co,  then it woud be a subsidiary of Nintendo which it is not-  Nintenod aslo owns a minority intrest in the Niantic co along w Google and others

They have the controlling stake in the company which means they hold more than any one else and have more control, look it up Nintendo approves all of their actions because Nintendo not only owns the IP they own the controlling stake in PC, they wouldn't need Nintendo's approval otherwise.

Firstly Smash is an IP and therefore a brand no different to King of Fighters and Street Fighter which also use characters from other brands. Smash itself is a brand notable for it's unique approach to the genre, Smash s a brand that many brands gain exposure from. Secondly Metroid is not a big marketable brand in any form it's this illusion that I'm pointing out in my earlier post that Metroid fans refuse to accept the reality of the IP.

Games like FE and AC don't need a particular character's face for their franchise as they have a distinct style that people recognize that's their face, Samus being the face of Metroid doesn't mean much when the IP at best is niche it's like you saying you're the face of your local convenience store, yeah they get enough business to get by but compared to the likes of Walmart they're not even in the same ball park.

Your claim that Metroid is the third strongest brand of the first party library is simply untrue in truth it barely makes the top 10.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/07/25/investors-learn-nintendo-doesnt-own-pokmon-stock-tanks/87520372/

ok this is not the best article but it still cotains/verifies Nintendo s ownership structure of the Pokemon co and that they spunn the co off years ago



Jumpin said:
No one thinks Metroid is a top 3 Nintendo brand. Lylas Wars/Star Fox is bigger, Kirby is bigger, Animal Crossing is bigger. Mario Kart, Smash, and Pokemon are all much bigger, as are Donkey Kong, Mario, and Zelda.

Metroid is usually not something I think about when thinking of important Nintendo brands. It's kind of one of those brands that people mostly know because of Smash Brothers.

then think Samus - 



Soundwave said:
NoirSon said:
Part of it is appealing to the core base while being marketable.

Metroid never got a bigger push in America besides during the Prime 1/Fusion release window. I do think that a side scroller like many purist wish can't really sell so the series best hope is either a faithful 3D third person shooter or a FPS like the Prime series.

Metroid is just too hard of a concept to get into. It's slow, it's tedious at times, it's solitary. It's a great game, but it's not very mass market friendly. 

It's not much of a surprise that the "Metroid Prime" on GameCube or even with the red-hot Wii behind it, never really could fill the void that GoldenEye did on the N64 or do what Halo did for the XBox. 

On the nose. Metroid is like Star Trek. As Halo, being a simliar type of game to Metroid Prime, is to Star Wars.

Star Wars will normally out do Star Trek. In box office money. This Genre type, is just more beloved by a larger people. Because the many type of people it hits.

Examples: Star Wars caters to people who want action. People who will watch anything. As long as it has action. Even if the story doesn't exsist. Or it's a low budget unknown movie. IE: Transformers film franchise, Nemesis movie franchise, for unknown low budget action films. Star Wars stories are simple and straight forward. Bad team VS Good  team. The characters are beloved. Each section hits different people.

Star Trek is different. Examples: Star Trek caters to intelecual types. People who like to see conflict resolved through talking. Capt. Picard will do lectures, over a lightsaber fight. The characters are smart. The tech of the show defines the stories plots and outcome. IE: It can be harder for people to watch an episode. Because Data will solve the problem, by using a tech reason. If you don't really get it, you won't really like the show. It be like if CSI explaned and showed how they do DNA test. And never did the cool CGI zoom ins. And explained it in lamens terms. You wouldn't find it compelling. More like a college course.  Yes, Star Trek does have action. That can either equal or exceed Star Wars, in many ways. But it's not there all the time. So people who would like Star Wars, won't all like Star Trek.

Metroid is a slow paced FPS shooter. Or sidescroller. Filled with text, and back tracking. Not a lot of people want that. They want Master Chief. Beloved characters kicking ass. People who like Star Wars Battlefront. Samus can and does kick ass. But not in the same way. If they change Metroid. Then the series is just like Resident Evil. Going for a new audiance. But Capcom is never happy with RE. Because they know they lost the people who want RE0-3. If they were happy. They never try to constantly cater to people who want those games, in their advertisments. They stick to action over horror. And not try to say it's a scary game.



hey... I don´t think that 1,3 million copies sold are "low numbers" at all for any game.
I like the comparison with Bioshock and Dark Souls but then again, they were launched on multiple consoles. Metroid was launched on a single console so I think Metroid sales are just fine for the its genre.
The game seems to have a loyal following.



Rogerioandrade said:
hey... I don´t think that 1,3 million copies sold are "low numbers" at all for any game.
I like the comparison with Bioshock and Dark Souls but then again, they were launched on multiple consoles. Metroid was launched on a single console so I think Metroid sales are just fine for the its genre.
The game seems to have a loyal following.

With a HD budget, 1,3 million are very low sales. Which is why Nintendo has put metroid in the freezer untill they got a recipe that sells well, tastes nice and requires few resources.



In the wilderness we go alone with our new knowledge and strength.