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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Is ARMS a failure, or not?

ARMS isn't a failure. It was well received among critics and fans and it sold well.

Wyrdness said:
The only fighting games that have sold more than it this gen are Tekken and Smash Ultimate so it's far from a failure.

Besides Tekken and Smash, there's actually a bunch of fighting games that have sold more as well. That still doesn't make ARMS a failure though.

Best selling fighting games in the 8th generation (excluding WWE 2K and EA Sports UFC):
1. Super Smash Bros. Ultimate: 15.71 million (link)
2. Mortal Kombat X: 10.5 million (link)
3. Tekken 7: 5 million (link)
4. Dragon Ball: Xenoverse: 5 million (link)
5. Dragon Ball: Xenoverse 2: 5 million (link)
6. Street Fighter V (excluding Arcade Edition): 4.1 million (link)
7. Dragon Ball: FighterZ: 4 million (link)
8. Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm 4: 3 million (link)
9. ARMS: 2.1 million
10. Mortal Kombat 11: 1.8 million digital sales in 1 week (link)

Including physical sales, MK11 is of course over 2.1 mill as well as it's currently 2019's 2nd best selling game in the US (link).
Injustice 2 shipped 1.5 mill in 3 months (link) so that may be over 2.1 mill as well.

Last edited by Replicant - on 17 February 2020

Around the Network

Failure/success has multiple meanings. One thing to consider is that Nintendo is a heavily successful company, especially on the software front. It depends if ARMs satisfies Nintendo’s business goals for the game.

As for a game that’s enjoyable? I personally enjoyed it quite a lot. But I think Nintendo ruined the chances for the game catching fire by putting in button controls. First off, part of the image of Wii Sports that made it successful was that it had people up and playing it; adding button controls would have harmed its potential. This game lacked the viral approach as a result as large percentages of the community - including youtubers - were not using motion controls, but showing the game is nothing but another slob-on-a-couch fighter.

This is one feature addition that you know there’s no way a healthy Iwata would have signed off on. I’m a little surprised Miyamoto did (or I assume he did, I don’t know his positioning in the company currently).

Anyway, if they DO have a sequel to ARMs, if I have one request, it is to make the punches more accurate. The game had airplane mode for punches, basically, where a straight punch would ever off to the side and the only way to throw a straight was to hold your fist sideways.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 03 November 2019

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

I feel like ARMS definitely benefited from the timing of it's release.

It came out 3 months after the Switch launched where there weren't many games releasing around that time with users wanting to play more games on their shiny new box.

I would be surprised if it sold 2.1 million if it came out now, but I can always be wrong.



PS4(PS5 Soon)and PC gaming

There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Arms was fun, but got old due to repetitiveness and lack of story for me. Same with Splatoon and Overwatch. Overwatch is at least doing a correction and launching story modes, here's hoping Arms will get one in the future. Nintendo seems to have awknowledged the need for one in Splatoon with Octo expansion, but I haven't played it yet so I'm not sure how good that campaign is?



If it was profitable, it was a success.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
TheMisterManGuy said:

They're exceptions, not rules.

They prove you wrong, calling them exceptions based on nothing doesn't change that. All of Nintendo's biggest franchises were hits right out the gate, Mario/Zelda/Pokemon/Smash/Animal Crossing/Splatoon/etc. so it's wrong to even call them that.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
TheMisterManGuy said:

They're exceptions, not rules.

They prove you wrong, calling them exceptions based on nothing doesn't change that. All of Nintendo's biggest franchises were hits right out the gate, Mario/Zelda/Pokemon/Smash/Animal Crossing/Splatoon/etc. so it's wrong to even call them that.

The first Animal Crossing sold about 2.3 million LTD.



Lonely_Dolphin said:

They prove you wrong, calling them exceptions based on nothing doesn't change that. All of Nintendo's biggest franchises were hits right out the gate, Mario/Zelda/Pokemon/Smash/Animal Crossing/Splatoon/etc. so it's wrong to even call them that.

ARMS is a hit too. Any New IP that sells 2.1 million would be considered a hit. It's just not a massive hit.



Kai_Mao said:

The first Animal Crossing sold about 2.3 million LTD.

Ah my bad, though my point remains. It's really Animal Crossing that's an exception then.

TheMisterManGuy said:

ARMS is a hit too. Any New IP that sells 2.1 million would be considered a hit. It's just not a massive hit.

What does ARMS being classified as hit not a massive hit have to do with this conversation exactly? Certainly doesn't prove you can't be a big franchise on the first try. It's really not hard to just admit your wrong, certainly a better look than desperately trying to change the subject to avoid doing so.



Lonely_Dolphin said:

Certainly doesn't prove you can't be a big franchise on the first try.

You can. It's just difficult to do. Many series don't reach those insane heights at all, let alone on their first game. I feel that its better to have a game series be a consistent and well selling game, rather than trying to make it the next big phenomenon. You can try to do that, but it's not something you can control at the end of the day.