-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
[Nintendo] Shigeru Miyamoto: "You need to sell 30 million copies to be considered a big hit"
- Thread starter Oberstein
- Start date
- Status
DKPOWPOW
Member
Of course they have, but they don't make consoles.
Think of it this way.
Mario Kart 8DX = $3 Billion
Zelda BotW + TotK = $2.5 Billion
Animal Crossing = $2 billion
Smash Bros = $1.5 Billion
This is all a rough estimate of revenue, but you're looking at 5 games, that made almost $10 billion in revenue combined. These are not live service games, and some had DLC on top of it.
Those 5 games could theoretically keep the company alive for a short duration (maybe 3-5 years) if for example every other game they released did terrible sales wise.
It's like a method of survival . The way he talks, makes it seem as though Nintendo has come closer to the edge than most thought. Had the Wii & DS failed, or the Switch failed...
We would be looking at a very different Nintendo.
BlackTron
Gold Member
There will be great games, but you better be an emotional Rock as well to get over the misses.
Unknown?
Member
1 million used to be rare and made you a cultural phenomenon, then it was 10 million, now it's 30???
a multicultural team of v
Member
I mean don't get me wrong, Wikipedia is not an accurate source for many things these days, but I would expect that the numbers are based on various reported numbers (so if anything they undercount). But if there is something very wrong with the Wikipedia methology then fair enough.
UltimaKilo
Gold Member
No successful company is looking to “screw the customer.” That would be a recipe for disaster. Business is not zero sum: you must provide a product the market is compelled to be willing to pay for. The second you try to “screw the customer” is when you business fails. Consumers are not stupid.
Woopah
Member
Basically, Wikipedia relies on companies reporting the sales of Switch versions of games.
Now Nintendo reports the sales of all their games that sell over 1 million. So a lot of their titles are on there.
Monster Hunter Rise and SMT got sales updates and were exclusive, so they are on there too.
Hogwarts Legacy sold a ton. But we don't know specifically how well the Switch version did, so that's not on there. Same for FIFA, Just Dance, Rocket League, etc. etc.
We don't get the Switch numbers for Minecraft from MS. However, we do know some of the Minecraft sales from Japan, France and Spain. So Wikipedia uses the numbers from those three countries added together.
Basically that list is not the top 93 Switch games. It's just 93 games where we have some sort of confirmation that the Switch version did over 1 million.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
I feel like the longer Nintendo are in the business, and as long as backwards compatibility and virtual console exist, this is a diminishing problem. There are enough bangers from previous generations to fill in several gaps between new releases or make up for a dud here and there.
BlackTron
Gold Member
Indeed. Star Fox Zero crushed me, but at least I could play the game they based it on with the VC amirite
Heimdall_Xtreme
Jim Ryan Fanclub's #1 Member
Put F-Zero as the launch title.
And at the same time a shitty title like 1-2 Switch... You're going to see that people will buy more F-Zero.
And at the same time a shitty title like 1-2 Switch... You're going to see that people will buy more F-Zero.
Last edited:
BlackTron
Gold Member
I understand your thirst for F-Zero, but they already had a racer ready, and were going to make a casual cash-grab title regardless of how many racers they had. If they have a racer that breaks 30mil they apparently don't want another one, blame Mario Kart
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
Well like he never said that. So there’s that. Lol
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
You cannot launch with an FZero as your flagship game. Not if your goal is to sell consoles, any way.I understand your thirst for F-Zero, but they already had a racer ready, and were going to make a casual cash-grab title regardless of how many racers they had. If they have a racer that breaks 30mil they apparently don't want another one, blame Mario Kart
Last edited:
Astral Dog
Member
Miyamoto is not saying that selling 1 million can't make a profit(or break even) in some cases, but that truly big hits in the industry sell 30 million, and Nintendo wants to cultivate more of those
They care a lot about their more niche series (1 - 3 million sold) but Nintendo finds a healthy balance between appealing to a core audience and mainstream hits
They care a lot about their more niche series (1 - 3 million sold) but Nintendo finds a healthy balance between appealing to a core audience and mainstream hits
Sorcerer
Member
I think one has to take this with the fact the Nintendo does not sell Windows and Office on the side, or electronics such as tv's and stereo equipment. They really need to hit big I would think. Now 30 mill might be far fetched for an average, but I can see where Miyamoto is coming from if my reasoning is correct.
It seems their lack of distraction as a whole puts them on track to make better games, because they have no other choice really.
It seems their lack of distraction as a whole puts them on track to make better games, because they have no other choice really.
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
diffusionx
Gold Member
I remember reading in Nintendo Power in the early 1990s that Super Metroid was basically made for American audiences. It's always been this way. I do think there is something about the "hard sci-fi" that westerners take better than Japanese (Alien, etc.). This is why I don't really buy this idea that MP4 is Switch 2's BOTW.
Woopah
Member
When you launch a new IP and it grosses nearly half a billion dollars, you're allowed to call it a hit.
It was the third best selling first party title on PS4 I believe (unless I'm forgetting a game).
Last edited:
BlackTron
Gold Member
Flagship never even crossed my mind. Even as someone who bought F-Zero for GBA at launch. Actually, two...for multiplayer.
That system's flagship game was a remake of an NES game. The brand new F-Zero was nothing.
nial
Gold Member
They don't have to pretend anything when it's already one of their biggest franchises.
Last edited:
Zannegan
Gold Member
F-Zero is niche, and it's been so long since there was a new flagship entry that it's hard to say whether there even is a dedicated fanbase anymore. With that said, if there ever was a time to launch a new F-Zero or even a premium remake, it would be within the launch window of a new console.
I 100% agreee that you wouldn't lean on it as your main game to bring in the casuals, but it could be an excellent play for a dedicated core audience who are easier to convince to buy in to a new hardware generation, often serve as platform ambassadors (or evangelists, lol), and also tend to buy more software than more casual consumers. So, launch with an evergreen like 3D Mario for mass appeal, but a more hardcore project like F-Zero (or Metroid for that matter) might make your next gen offer I ng mpre attractive to a different audience amd prime the pump for lasting demand.
cartman414
Member
More people should be calling out other companies for spending millions upon millions on their AAA games. Nintendo is anything but out of touch here. Didn't Spider-Man 2 only break even?
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
It’s got nothing to do with bringing in the casuals. Switch sold like gangbusters on the back of BotW, that was the opposite of a game that casuals would play. If anyone is just buying a Swirch 2 and doesn’t want a gamer’s game, Nintendo will surely have something for them like Switch 2 Sports, or Ring Fir Adventure 2. But the system will sell and be a hit because of whatever big franchise game they’re launching it with. Clearly not a Zelda this time. So I’d assume EPD Tokyo’s follow-up to Odyssey.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
Obviously, this is nonsense. And he is only saying that because Nintendo has a few 30M sellers. Unless people think its a coincidence that that's the number he went with.
Why you need a 10-12x return on your investment to be considered "a big hit"... is beyond me. Has to be the greediest statement I have ever heard in my life.
And are you one of those people who think Nintendo is some sort of technical genius? their games and the fidelity of such games is dictated by their hardware. Wait till they make a Zelda game that has the fidelity of Horizon, we will see then how well they can maintain their sub $100M budgets then.
Why you need a 10-12x return on your investment to be considered "a big hit"... is beyond me. Has to be the greediest statement I have ever heard in my life.
That explains it, you are as out of touch as Nintendo is.
And are you one of those people who think Nintendo is some sort of technical genius? their games and the fidelity of such games is dictated by their hardware. Wait till they make a Zelda game that has the fidelity of Horizon, we will see then how well they can maintain their sub $100M budgets then.
Last edited:
Jack Package
Member
This is such a weird thing to say. Also, seeing those top four sellers really shows Nintendo are right to keep their exclusives, every other company would kill to get half of those numbers.
That said, if they keep up this near full priced HD remaster shit, they won't be seeing anything like those figures.
I would've quite happily bought a £30/35 DKC Returns port, as I missed it on Wii and 3DS. £50/60 for a port that somehow has worse graphics in a higher resolution? That's not the quality I expect from them.
That said, if they keep up this near full priced HD remaster shit, they won't be seeing anything like those figures.
I would've quite happily bought a £30/35 DKC Returns port, as I missed it on Wii and 3DS. £50/60 for a port that somehow has worse graphics in a higher resolution? That's not the quality I expect from them.
cartman414
Member
Honest question. Not being facetious.
Sony simply makes more AAA games than Nintendo.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
I get why you would say that, but I don't agree per say. Again, it comes down to Nintendo hardware. If Sony made a game like BOTW on a PS4 or even a PS5... it would at the very least look significantly better. I mean just look at astrobot... that whole looking better thing, is what makes development on the UHD platforms so expensive.
Hudo
Gold Member
Then many people on GAF and other places on the internet aren't normal. (No surprise there, really)
It's about how to screw the customer while making the customer feel like he has received a good deal. This is also the core principle behind live-service games.
Kataploom
Gold Member
I think you're misinterpreting Miyamoto's words, someone posted a better translation and people here got it better, it's about aiming for excellence all the time in order to try and sell that much, not about to get minimum numbers or else it's a failure.
Regarding your statement about Zelda in better hardware, nobody hates better visual fidelity but a focus so big on it that game design and art pass to second plane, and games get more expensive and take more time to make, etc.
When the new Zelda comes out people will love the graphics because of the art direction and the better tech will only give it more tools to look better. As an example, people praise Switch Zelda graphics, specially 2D ones. Botw and TOTK get praised by how good they look considering all the things they are running and the scale of its world... And none of that is because of Switch FLOPs.
Luminoth-4545
Member
So he is saying his beloved Pikmin 4 that he is no doubt very passionate about is only 1/10th of a big hit.
Last edited:
BlackTron
Gold Member
That is not what he said.
BlackTron
Gold Member
All he is saying is that if they have one game that performs like that once in a while, it will ensure the company's success. By saying that "big hit" number is 30, he was not saying that games below 30 are unsuccessful or not worth making. He only said it's meh to break even. There's a massive ocean between break-even and 30m, and since Nintendo actually pumps out games like this and is a success, it's hard to call them out of touch.
Imagine being at the helm of multiple projects that break 30m sales and someone calls you out of touch. He seems more in-touch than anyone else.
Edit: Keep in mind, these exaggerated profits on games like Zelda enable them to take greater risks on smaller games which they consider an important part of their portfolio despite smaller sales.
Last edited:
His reasoning is correct.
"big hits" help funding smaller projects, which guaranteed variety which is important (Fire Emblem might sell "only" 5 million but the target userbase are more likely to be "high spenders" compared to a more casual game like Nintendo Switch Sports), and to have the leeway to shoulder the risks inherent with new and unproven ideas that might become the foundations of "big hits" of tomorrow.
Some people may wonder why Miyamoto formulated such high goal to define a "big hit" (30 million units on a single platform and in the case of Nintendo with relatively little leverage through sharp price drops) but that's because Nintendo, unlike other companies, has an extremely ambitious mindset.
That Nintendo is the most profitable consoler marker, the oldest still relevant, the one that sold the most game systems, with literally billions of first-party software sold is not by accident, nor does it depend on thinking videogames as 'artsy'.
On the contrary Nintendo's vision is comparable to the one of an expert artisan that pondered over a long time why people should be interested in his creations and what pitfalls should avoid to survive.
"big hits" help funding smaller projects, which guaranteed variety which is important (Fire Emblem might sell "only" 5 million but the target userbase are more likely to be "high spenders" compared to a more casual game like Nintendo Switch Sports), and to have the leeway to shoulder the risks inherent with new and unproven ideas that might become the foundations of "big hits" of tomorrow.
Some people may wonder why Miyamoto formulated such high goal to define a "big hit" (30 million units on a single platform and in the case of Nintendo with relatively little leverage through sharp price drops) but that's because Nintendo, unlike other companies, has an extremely ambitious mindset.
That Nintendo is the most profitable consoler marker, the oldest still relevant, the one that sold the most game systems, with literally billions of first-party software sold is not by accident, nor does it depend on thinking videogames as 'artsy'.
On the contrary Nintendo's vision is comparable to the one of an expert artisan that pondered over a long time why people should be interested in his creations and what pitfalls should avoid to survive.
Last edited:
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
How many more until we hit 30 million?
On Switch Nintendo has sold over 600 million units of just first-party software and is trending toward a final figure of around 700 million units.
That's an amount higher than the totality of software (first-party and third-party) sold on all Sega consoles combined.
Nintendo may have encountered hindrances in the past and surely will in the future but it has demonstrated times and times again that it can brilliantly overcome them, in small part even thanks to Miyamoto.
Last edited:
tkscz
Member
The title is very misleading.
They are not saying you need 30 millions just to be considered successful, just to be a "HUGE HIT". Not only that but they said at least one game to do that ever 3 to 5 years.
We have companies like WB out here believing they need to hit that every few months with all their games.
This sounds very reasonable honestly. One huge hit basically in a generation. They're not saying every game has to reach that, just one.
They are not saying you need 30 millions just to be considered successful, just to be a "HUGE HIT". Not only that but they said at least one game to do that ever 3 to 5 years.
We have companies like WB out here believing they need to hit that every few months with all their games.
This sounds very reasonable honestly. One huge hit basically in a generation. They're not saying every game has to reach that, just one.
Sorcerer
Member
Maybe what he ultimately tells the teams at Nintendo is strive to make a game that will sell 30 Million, shoot for the moon and your game will be better for it even if it of course does not come near that goal. (Whatever the budget of the game is) Just a philosophy about how important quality and doing the best you can really is. Never slum it.
Last edited:
BlackTron
Gold Member
MarkMe2525
Member
Wii U's are going to be so hard to come by in the upcoming years. I'm glad I grabbed one recently at a decent price (due to weak disk drive, modding took care of that problem).
BlackTron
Gold Member
I modded my launch Wii U but grabbed an extra last year off FB marketplace for 100 bucks. Just to hold onto a clean/stock one.
This was before I realized both the flash memory and discs go bad. I don't know it's not exactly like holding a Gamecube or N64 is it
butane bob
Member
Yes how dare a company want to make money. Grrr!
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
They are? How so? Explain or you’re just makin it up!
Last edited:
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
Ship has sailed. They already are. Same with 3DS. Those things are selling for ridiculous amounts of money.
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
Cute!Not as big an audience you could reach by launching on other platforms
What you’re saying would kill the platform so in essence you’re just arguing for them to go 3rd party. Which is clearly not going to happen and not remotely within the realm of possibility. It’s a fun 2012/2013 era conversation that doesn’t really apply anymore, for a large number of reasons.
Last edited:
- Status