You realize development costs have went up based on the console right?  Not because dev cost magically increased, 250k is still a hit on the PSP for example. many games don't even hit that on PSP yet they keep coming, developers aren't going out of business, and they're still coming despite piracy, imagine that! :P

Alot of companies will release a game, with the financials in place to expect to lose money on it. However, in this case they hope the subsequent sequels will be cheaper as dev costs will be less with the engines already setup and marketing not as important once the brand is established.

To me a flop has to be a game that completely sinks, like the publisher couldn't in their wildest dreams believe the game could tank so hard - I think Bionic Commando is a good example of this. Capcom were expecting millions for that game and it didnt launch above 100k.

Let me throw my opinion in here.

A game is a success if it makes money. If it costs $1 million to make, and made a substantial amount more, it is a success! Games that break even aren't successes persay, but they are not flops either.

One of my favorite games to talk about, No More Heroes, is a game I wanted to sell like 5 million copies. However, the budget for that game makes selling that amount to reach profit unnecessary. It only needed like 200k to be a success and for Suda51 to throw a celebratory party. Just because it did not sell a million, doesn't mean it is a flop.

Games that underperform are commercial flops, but in terms of raw sales numbers are not. However, I only base things on commercial success. ET sold like 9 million, but was still an overproduced flop.

Yes I know dev costs have gone up based on the console, and with this generation, more work is being put in because said consoles are more complicate tp develop for (compared to last generation). It's proportional, not magical

Well, LBP is a flop and No More Heroes isn't, so I'm not sure, actually.

EDIT: What I mean by this is that it is relative to "expectations". Apparently, the entire site predicted 10 million sales for LBP (if you say so), and No More Heroes selling 400k copies is enough to make so much profit that Suda now owns a mansion, ten sports cars and a small Pacific island.

"Expectations" is in inverted commas because, obviously, expectations change from person to person. Neither LBP nor NMH is a flop, but I would hesitate to call either one a success. MW2, now that is a success. Wii Fit, Halo 3, San Andreas, etc.

It really depends on the series. For the PS3 a GT or a GTA game should sell minimum 5 million copies and for the 360 Gears of War should sell at least 5 min and a Halo game should sell closer to 10 min. It really depends on the series.

To me, its a combination. But it should be noted that more often than not games perform below the expectations of some of the more zealous users but within the expectations of the developers themselves.
That way, many games that are considered flops in here might be a slight, moderate or even big success for the publisher and/or developer.
All in all, there haven't been many flops this gen, those obscure niche titles that you've never heard about that have sold poorly didn't make an impression or tie in with high expectations anyway.

That said; there are quite a few games that have surprised me, and disappointed me, when it comes to sales this gen.

Whats funny, is that the makers of Crackdown said they broke even. I was shocked to hear that a game that sells 1.5 million copies just breaks even. Then I heard that the makers of Heavenly Sword decided not to make the sequal because they did not make money on the game (which sold over 1 million). From the developers point of view, it is possible to view these games as a 'flop' from an economic situation. Just imagine what kind of a flop Crackdown could have been if the Halo 3 beta was not included in it.

I think that true flops would be games like Haze, and Too Human. Heavy hyped, with much higher anticipated sales. I think this is why more and more games go multiplatform in order to hedge there product and potentially prevent it from getting that 'flop' lable.

Edit: weird, I thought i wrote something, oh well...

I should have said in my previous post that it would make a profit, but still be considered to be a flop by Activision. I agree that flop or not should be based off dev/pub expectations, LBP for example did better than the devs were hoping, yet many called it a flop because of the 'LBP will be HUEG!!!' comments before its release. That is of course silly.

but Activision requires their big franchises to not just make a small profit, they need Cod and GH to make a huge profit, so that they can finance their new IPs, most of which fail to make a profit. But if they don't make these new IPs, then eventually they run out of franchises that can reliably make them money. Activision would describe 2 million for CoD6 as a flop, and thus so do I

Um...what Twesterm said.