BTW, the profit the company makes off of a game is based on whether or not they make more money on the game than they spent on it's production. There is no magic profit number, and 500k certainly isn't a standard for profit.

Isn't it time that we all acknowlege that the sales pattern for Wii is a very different beast from PS3 and 360? We have seen many Wii games start slowly and just show rediculously long legs. While I think we can still safely predict the long term sales of the other consoles after a week or two, I'm thinking you need at least a 10 week sample to get an idea of Wii sales for anything that's not a AAA Nintendod franchise (which open huge AND have long legs).

That's kind of my point though, Deadly Creatures, Tomb Raider and Umbrella Chronicles are not exactly emblematic, triple A efforts but we use them as benchmarks on the Wii because they're about the best we have. Some are better than others and some sell better than others. Honestly, if this were a debate about 'core third party efforts' on the 360 or PS3 do you think efforts like that would even be mentioned? We'd be talking about games like Metal Gear Solid and Grand Theft Auto.

Tomb Raider is like Driver, it was once a big name, people have strong memories of it, and it lingers.

You didn't exactly rediscover america with that post, but hey you're right.

I really don't care about the game's profit, but one thing:

Is it better to sell 1 million in one month and die off or 1 million in one 1 year or more?

Rainbird said: Well, there could never be any examples to back it up, because it can't be proved. Quality is relative after all

End Thread.

The former in theory, however it's not a sign of health for a franchise. It means you managed to generate a tonne of hype, but the people who buy it don't enjoy it enough to encourage other people to buy it, or the next one in the series.

The way i see it is that for a developer to function he has to have a steady income of cash generated from sales of their titles. Therefore this mechanism pushes the dev to constantly create new games to sell. if they recieve a load of money after they ship the game they have enough funds to make a new game right away, while in the second scenario they have a steady income of cash that's probably not enough to get to making a game right away.

If it were up to me, i'd rather the first scenario happened since then i could have all my funds visible and could mange them in a according manner. not to mention that you get more money when the game sells while it's new (talking about lowering the price for the sw, budget re-releases and so on.).

1. Bleach: Versus Crusade
2. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
3. Super Mario Galaxy
4. Madworld
5. Mario Kart Wii
6. Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
7. No More Heroes
8. Super Paper Mario
9. Super Smash Bros. Brawl
10. Tales of Symphonia: Dawn of the New World
11. Tatsunoko vs Capcom: Cross Generation of Heroes
12. Tenchu: Shadow Assassin
13. House of the Dead: Overkill
14. Wii Sports
15. Rune Factory: Frontier

No Im not just making another stupid list like other people.

These are games I ACTUALLY OWN AND ENJOY. These are all quality titles. Just had to do this. 

EDIT - I dont bother listing the ports that are great that I own.

I can name 2 games that for me have the same feeling as zelda, Fable and Fable II, and they're successful