Sales data accompanying Nintendo's recent investor briefing shows 18 Nintendo-published titles selling over one million units worldwide during the last nine months of 2010.
Super Mario Galaxy 2 was Nintendo's top-selling new release during that period, selling 6.15 million units worldwide, with the bulk coming outside of Japan. Wii Party and Donkey Kong Country Returns also showed strong worldwide sales of 5.07 million and 4.21 million copies for the year.
The "limited edition" Wii version of Super Mario All-Stars managed to sell 1.95 million units, split roughly evenly between Japan and the rest of the world, while Kirby's Epic Yarn joined the year's million-sellers with 1.38 million sales.
On the DS, Pokemon Black/White Version sold 5.26 million units in Japan alone, and new releases including Art Academy and Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Mini-Land Mayhem also sold over one million copies worldwide.
Nintendo's decision to publish both Professor Layton and the Unwound Future and Dragon Quest IX outside of Japan seems to have paid off, with both titles selling over one million copies even excluding Japanese sales.
As far as legacy titles, common Wii pack-ins Wii Sports and Wii Sports Resort have now combined to sell over 102 million units worldwide, with over 22 million coming in the last three quarters of 2010.
Mario Kart Wii passed 20 million sales in 2010, with 2.8 million sales during the last nine months of the year, while Pokemon HeartGold/SoulSilver passed 11 million sales with 3.32 million in the period.
Meanwhile, New Super Mario Bros. Wii's lifetime sales of 21.28 million are now quickly approaching the original New Super Mario Bros.' sales of 26.21 million.
Wii Fit Plus rounds out the list of Nintendo's top-sellers with 5 million new sales during the period and nearly 18 million sales over its lifetime.
Including all publishers, over 150 million units of Wii software sold during the period, accompanying nearly 100 million units of Nintendo DS software.
The headline says it all if you look at it as a comparison....
If you include SMG1 sales you could say:
1. SMG series sells 15M, Wii Sports Series sells 102M.
2. Wii Sports series sells 6.8 times as much as SMG series.
Now if you knew how much all these games cost to develop you could come up with some percentage return-on-investment for each series, and I suspect the numbers would favour Wii Sports even further.
What sane company would continue pouring resources into 3D mario as opposed to using them to figure out what their next Wii Sports is going to be? SMG appears to exist to keep some Nintendo developers happy but you could argue it's dragging down the company.
You could perform a similar comparison with New Super Mario Bros DS and Wii vs the SMG series and 2D mario still whips 3D mario! Some people are saying that SMG is evergreen but it seems like the least evergreen Nintendo series. Isn't NSMBWii selling more than SMG and SMG2 combined right at this moment? It's still in the UK weekly charts at number 29. Again, it was probably cheaper to make too.
People cut SMG a lot of slack when talking about sales because it's every critic's favourite Nintendo game. But let's not delude ourselves. It has failed to surpass niche status by Mario or Nintendo standards.
On a personal level, I loved the first Galaxy and the second one was good but just didn't feel new or impressive. This may have partly been because I played NSMBWii to 100% completion in between and it was the first 2D mario I have played properly (I'm historically a PC gamer). After playing 2D mario it seemed to highlight how sluggish 3D mario controls felt.
Mark, you're taking it all out of context. I'm sure you would love to be involved in such successful games. But you're not Nintendo. In a business sense 3D Mario is a drag on Nintendo's profitability compared to almost all of its other offerings. It looks expensive to make too. To be honest I think making SMG was fair enough but SMG2 was overkill, as it was bound to sell less.
If Nintendo have lost some of their lead over the competition in the past year it must be partly because of games like SMG2.
Edit:
And it was part of their strategy for SMG2 to be a mainstream hit beyond SMG1. They *really* wanted it. UK and Japanese copies came bundled with an instructional DVD instructing us retards how to man up and play 3D mario (I'm in the UK) so hopefully we could stop buying 2D mario and embarassing Nintendo! It was heavily marketed for the broad Wii audience. So for Nintendo it was a flop.
In your logic, it has to say Super Mario Bros. Series (2D+3D) sells 35 million, Wii Sports Series passes 102 million and you had to ask, why Nintendo isn't abandoning the whole SM Series in favor of Wii Sports. What you are suggesting is, that Nintendo should only make 1 franchise in the future, their most successful. But in reality for anybody else a game like SMG2 was a success, regardless, if there were more successful titles.
Nintendo had many titles in the last years, that sold much less, the SMG2.
Metroid Prime 3, Metroid - Other M, Punch Out, Wii Music, Legend of Zelda : Twilight Princess, Super Paper Mario all sold considerably less then SMG2, do you suggest, that Nintendo abandons the Zelda or Metroid series because of this?
To say a game, that sells 6 million in about 6 months is dragging a company down is the kind of thinking, that lead us into the last financial crisis, nothing more.
Out of that list of games, customers either rejected them or they did not perform as well as the previous games in the series. Most of them sold below expectations. Nintendo needs to look at the reasons behind this.
For Zelda and Metroid, they probably need to abandon the *direction* they are taking each series as they are just getting driven further and further into irrelevance. Twilight Princess is quite a horrible experience for the first few hours where you only get to watch boring cut scenes and play mini-games. It sold OK but I think it might be the last Zelda game for many fans. It was my first Zelda game and after enduring the start I found it fairly enjoyable but nothing special and lost interest before reaching the end. The Zelda series is not making passionate new fans. The most logical thing to do would be to go back to doing whatever made passionate new fans. The games that started the Zelda phenomenon were entirely different beasts.
What they shouldn't do is release exactly the same game again (like with SMG2) and hope that it will sell a lot more because it has an instructional DVD and a condescending 2D to 3D transition at the very start.
Again, it wasn't me that said that SMG2 should be much more successful than SMG1. It was Nintendo. This is why it must be a failure in their eyes.
This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It is simply a matter of finding out what makes your customer happy and giving it to them. As such a massive company, you need to have a cut-off point where you say that even a certain profitable product was not profitable enough. If you didn't do that you would not be a large successful company. Especially not in the winner-takes-all entertainment industry.
2 things are obvious, first, you didn't played SMG 1 or 2 much, otherwise, you wouldn't say, both games are "the same", but that isn't important.
Second and more important, you simply refuse the facts, SMG1 was released 38 months ago, and it sold to date 8.9 million copies, SMG2 was released 8 months ago and sold to date 6.15 million copies.
It took SMG1 18 months to reach 8 million sales, released in November 2007, Nintendo announced in May 2009, the milestone. To see, if SMG2 is more successful, then SMG1 you have to take this in consideration as well, you can't compare SMG1's performance of 18 months with SMG2's performance of 8 months.
SMG2 is already on place 12 of the best selling Wii games of all time, I don't see anybody with a clear mind saying, this game is a commercial failure. Otherwise, he had to say, when a game is a success, if it is the best selling game only? Are the Top 3 the list to look at? The Top 10?
This is indeed pre-crisis thinking, do what worked in the past, maximize the profit, minimize the variation and try to convince the shareholders, that an eternal rise of profit margins is possible, without any change in concept, just by cutting the expenses.
To say, Zelda might by the last Zelda game for many fans, while admitting it was the first you ever played sounds strange, how can you know, what the fan liked about the game, if you never played a Zelda title before? The Zelda series is not making passionate new fans? Sorry, you simply don't seem to recognise how diverse the video game market is today. At least for Nintendo it is absolutely necessary to have games, that appeal to different fan fractions from the various generations of Nintendo devices as well as it necessary for Nintendo to create other games that appeal to new players.
Nintendo was having a hard time among certain hardcore players, that feel abandoned by the company, those people will buy every Zelda game, they bought 4 million+ copies of DKC Returns this christmas and they are valuable customers for Nintendo as well as the people, that bought Wii Sports Resort.
I played all of SMG1 and got to the last world of SMG2. I felt both games were very similar. Again, I think SMG2 is a failure in Nintendo's eyes, because of their clear hopes for the game to be *big*. This is not based on their words but their actions.
I accept that I am unqualified to talk about the history of Zelda. My thoughts were guided by what I have heard from old-school Zelda fans. But the fundamental point that it is a series in decline still remains. Again, I'm not saying that it should be killed off or go back to 2D. Just that they should try maybe getting rid of excessive cut-scenes and making it more action based. You don't need to be a Zelda expert to see how much it has fundamentally mutated over the years.
And I didn't say they should minimize variation. They should accept when a current path is not working and try something else.
Clearly, we have different definitions of not working, but this gets nowhere, because you are not willing to respont to any of my arguments (different shelf time of both titles, definition of a success and adressing different customer groups).
I agree it's getting somewhat circular. I concede that SMG2 may be on track with SMG1 sales. It doesn't have a big effect on my point. You didn't agree or disagree with my point that Nintendo wanted SMG2 to do a lot better than it did.
I'm not sure on the whole customer group thing. I don't think it should necessarily mean that a series has to get less popular. Don't really have time or inclination to get further into it right now. Has been interesting though.
SMG (1/2) or NSMB are a completely different experience then WiiSports. But important factors were left out:
1. WiiSports is a pack-in title (except Japan, but let's ignore that). Since Nintendo sold ~80 mil Wii, 80 mil were the first version of the game. The second, optional game (that now is a pack-in too) sold the remaining 20 mil. Were these 2 titles standalone, would they have performed as good?
2. More of such titles have been made (WiiMusic, for instance) and flopped. So, what does that tells us? Should Nintendo stop making these titles because of this single one?
Nintendo is in the right path with diversification. They can not make only the type of game that appeals to only a particular segment of their user base. They know they have to diversify to reach out to the maximum spectrum of users they can.
No one buys Wii Sports in the US(The Wii's biggest market) or in most of Europe (The Wii's second biggest market by regiion). The game is bundled for free with the Wii for crying out loud!
What is all this nonsense about "selling" 102 million units of Wii Sports series then?
Going by that line of thinking, Kinect Adventures which is bundled with Kinect, has sold close to 8 million units (leaving out the few small countries where Kinect Adventures is not bundled) in just 60 days. In by book, that trumps 102 million Wii Sports series "sales" in over 4 years.
I think it's fair to say that Wii Sports should not be including in these lists of "top sales". The thing comes with the Wii. The consumer doesn't have a choice of whether or not to buy it, it just comes with it. In my book, Wii Sports hasn't sold a single copy, it has just been given away 102 million times.
Super Mario Galaxy 2, while not my GOTY is incredibly awesome. It's the only game I got one hundred percent all the save files, and I loved every minute of it. As far as I'm concerned it's the 3D Mario equivalent of Super Mario World, which is to say that it's the best of the 3D Marios. As such, not really surprised it did well.
Those numbers are good when considered in terms of volume, but they do highlight an interesting trend: are Nintendo's IP as much of a draw as they used to be?
On the SNES, Super Mario World reached approx. 40% of the total userbase (20 million/50 million consoles)
On the Nintendo 64, Mario 64 reached approx. 33% of the total userbase (11 million/33 million consoles)
On the Gamecube, Super Mario Sunshine reached approx. 25% of the total userbase (6 million/21 million consoles)
On the Wii, Super Mario Galaxy has reached approx 10% of the total userbase (8 million/85 million consoles) - though New Super Mario Bros managed to reach 25% of the userbase (21 million)
The comparsion is misleading, Super Mario World was a pack-in title, Super Mario 64 was a launch title and was released for a console, that saw much fewer game releases then any other Nintendo console, so it is to be expected for the average title to sell better.
After all, I don't see, what the percentage of the installed user base, that owns a specific game should tell is about the performance of an IP. I think unit sales in general are much more interesting. And then, you realize, that Mario Jump'n'Run games on the Wii sold much more, then on previous consoles, just because Nintendo released already 3 titles, that sold 35 million units, compared to 6 million on the Gamecube, 11 mllion on the N64 and 24 million on the SNES (Super Mario World+Super Mario World 2).
You have to go back to NES days to find better numbers, but I think we can all agree, the NES days won't come back for anybody.
"The comparsion is misleading, Super Mario World was a pack-in title, Super Mario 64 was a launch title and was released for a console, that saw much fewer game releases then any other Nintendo console, so it is to be expected for the average title to sell better."
I don't think Super Mario World was included with Super Famicoms in Japan. I think you had to buy it separate. Also, unlike the Wii and Wii Sports, Super Mario World was not included with every Super Nintendo console. There were different bundles that did not include the game, so if you still wanted it, you had to buy it separate.
Instead of the view you propose, I like to think that people bought the Super Nintendo because of Super Mario World, not the inverse.
I do not agree with your view on Super Mario 64. I don't think a game is guaranteed to sell better because 1) it's a launch title, and 2) the game library is limited.
For one thing, Super Mario 64 didn't achieve 11 million sales at launch. It took years to do that. For another, the other launch title (there were only two), Pilotwings 64, did nowhere near those numbers. It should have done higher numbers under your theory. Also, Twilight Princess was the first Zelda title released with a new console, and the Wii arguably had a limited lineup. Yet it couldn't match the sales of Ocarina of Time (not as far as Wii copies of the game go).
"You have to go back to NES days to find better numbers, but I think we can all agree, the NES days won't come back for anybody."
I think the Wii is the closest thing to the NES days that we've ever had.
That's a fair point on SMW, as is the "pack in" situation [*], but I think it's misleading to combine all of the Wii's Mario games into one figure, as there will be a significant overlap between the three audiences. What you actually have is
1) NSMW: 21.2 million
2) SMG: 8.8 million
3) SMG2: 6.1 million
Personally, I suspect NSMW has sold as well as it has thanks to nostalgia: it looks and feels like the games people played on the NES, SNES and GBA - and Nintendo have heavily promoted it's multiplayer features, to boot. I also suspect its sales represent the upper limit of the Wii's active (i.e. game-buying) userbase: "traditional" IPs (Mario Party, Super Smash Bros, Zelda, etc) have all struggled to break the 10 million barrier.
Conversely, the SMG franchise doesn't carry any significant nostalgia and has only attracted interest from approx. 10% of the total userbase, despite being one of the most critically acclaimed games of all time. And SMG2 has shifted a third less units, despite having firmly established IP and gameplay *and* receiving even more positive press than the original.
Admittedly, SMG has been out for three years, whereas SMG2 has only had eight months, but (if vgchartz is to be believed), it's tracking at about 1 million below the sales SMG had after 8 months. Also, the Wii install base has grown from 20 million (December 2007, shortly after SMG launched) to 71 million (June 2010, shortly after SMG2 launched) and now sits at 85 million.
So, in summary: despite the install base having grown by over 400%, sales of SMG2 are significantly lower than those of SMG. Similar applies to the Metroid series and to a degree, you can argue the same is true for the Wii Sports and Wii Fit franchises.
The question is why has this happened? There's several possibilities:
1) A significant subset of the userbase only bought the Wii for specific "lifestyle" titles (Wii Sport, Wii Fit, etc) and aren't buying traditional games
2) A significant subset of the userbase has effectively abandoned the Wii (e.g. only using it when having a party)
3) Nintendo's IP is losing it's appeal, except when presented in a nostalgic way
4) Something else...
I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo is frantically trying to find out what the cause is, behind the scenes - the three scenarios I think are most likely all imply that their sales will continue to diminish and may not be boosted by the release of new hardware.
For the moment, they don't have any issues: they're still posting big numbers, they have a huge cash reserve and they're not going to go bankrupt, be bought out or merge with anyone else at any point in the near future. However, if this trend continues, then they won't be able to pull in the profits which they've produced over the last few years, which would impact their share price and possibly lead to internal political issues...
[*] Though as with Wii Sports, I suspect a lot of people bought the SNES/N64 specifically to get access to the new Mario game!
People did not buy New Super Mario Bros. Wii because of nostalgia. They bought it because they like the gameplay. More people buy 2D Mario than 3D Mario. It's because more people like 2D Mario than 3D Mario. That's not to say there isn't some overlap there (I buy all 2D and 3D Mario games that are platform based).
It's also not true that traditional IPs have all struggled to break the 10 million barrier. For one thing, Mario Kart is as traditional an IP as Kirby. It was released in 1992. The series never exceeded 10 million units until Mario Kart DS, which, last I checked, has exceeded 17 million units. Mario Kart Wii is now past 26 million.
Also, Super Mario 64 broke the 10 million barrier and it had no nostalgia factor - it was entirely different from prior Mario games.
I don't think any of the possibilities you listed are true. In reference to your points:
1) This argument is disproven by the massive sales of Mario Kart and 2D Mario on both the DS and Wii. When prior iterations of Mario Kart couldn't exceed 10 million units in sales, then where did all those massive sales come from this generation? New gamers.
2) Then why haven't other consoles shot up in sales dramatically (aside from hardware revisions or typical games that increase their sales such as Call of Duty and Halo)? Also, why is the user base purchasing dance games from Ubisoft en masse and still buying Nintendo-published games such as Donkey Kong Country Returns and Wii Party?
3) The better argument here is, "Why do Nintendo games have decreased or low sales when they don't adopt their NES/SNES roots (assuming they have such roots)?" Maybe Metroid: Other M should have tried to be a true sequel to Super Metroid and not the experimental title that it was.
4) Something else would be the lack of proper software that the market wants.
You're onto something with point #3, but it needs to be refined. It's not nostalgia. There's plenty of nostalgia for Metroid, but Other M tanked. Something else is at work here.
@Mike: Mario Kart Wii is something of a special case: it's a strongly multiplayer-orientated game which came with an accessory (the plastic wheel), so I think it leans more towards being a "lifestyle" game than a "traditional" game, at least within the context of this debate.
As for Mario 64 sales, I agree it sold well, but I don't think it was just down to the IP: it was essentially the first truly successful console 3d platformer (PC platformers such as Fade to Black were already available) and looked visually stunning, compared to equivalent games on the PSX and Saturn. The technology and the novelty were a major factor in it's popularity.
Beyond that...
1) I don't believe it is disproven: as with Wii Sports and Wii Fit, Mario Kart is heavily focused on multiplayer and it comes with an accessory. I believe the combination of a strong multiplayer focus and "familiar" 2D play which drove NSMW sales on the Wii. And right or wrong, I'm leaving the DS out of this debate to try and keep things simple ;)
2) Other consoles haven't shot up in sales (though it's worth noting that Microsoft in particular have continued to claim year-on-year increases in hardware sales) because the people leaving the Wii to gather dust are the casual gamers. They bought the Wii for a specific game - Wii Sports/Wii Fit - and have no interest in gaming outside of these two titles.
Beyond that, it's worth noting that sequels for other platforms have generally seen increased sales as the userbase has grown: Uncharted/Uncharted 2, CoD:MW and MW2, Gears/Gears 2, etc.
And if we go back to the Wii: Just Dance 2 has shifted around 5 million copies. Similarly, DKCR has sold around 4 million copies (though it's only been out for a short while) and Wii Party has managed 5 million. These are good numbers by anyone's measure, but they're still only reaching around 7% of the install base. Which I think lends weight to the theory that a significant percentage of Wii owners have essentially stepped back from gaming.
3) Possibly, though I think it's more of a general issue than a "going back to the roots" problem. The key factors in the Wii's best-seller list are a multiplayer focus and a "pick up and play" design: games which don't meet this criteria (e.g. Zelda, Super Paper Mario, Animal Crossing) have generally underperformed as compared to how they did on previous platforms - on the Gamecube, Zelda managed to reach 12% of the userbase, as opposed to just 6% on the Wii. As a result, it's very difficult to produce a sequel which offers significant changes or innovation.
4) Personally, I think Nintendo are making "proper" software, but that the active install base is a lot smaller than the total install base of 85 million.
In any case, looking at the numbers between generations has triggered a thought. When I'm on the train tomorrow, I may try and do some number crunching to see if IP marketshare has remained constant enough between generations to be able to provide a reasonable estimate on the active Wii install base...
I think you've answered your own questions at this point. This Wii market in general seems more interested in multiplayer games and titles which have some sort of arcade or 2D-based gameplay. We should all be able to agree on this.
As for Just Dance 2, DKCR, etc., these titles will continue to sell. They're not entirely front loaded, so give them more time. We have no idea how much Just Dance 2 can end up selling. It has already surpassed the previous game, and it seems to stay in the Top 3 on Amazon.
I think the Wii user base is quite active, it's just that, like any other gamers, they only buy titles that interest them.
How can you "sell" a game which is not for sale in the US or Europe (by far the biggest markets for the Wii), but is instead bundled for free with the Wii console?
If Microsoft were to rurn round today and claim that Kinect Adventures(wich is also bundled with Kinect and Kinect Bundled 360's) has sold close to 8 million units in just 60 days, the self-same Wiitards who are loudly crowing about the so-called "102 milion Wii Sports series" sales, will turn round and scream that .."but, but, Kinect Adventures is not for sales seperately", no?
If you include SMG1 sales you could say:
1. SMG series sells 15M, Wii Sports Series sells 102M.
2. Wii Sports series sells 6.8 times as much as SMG series.
Now if you knew how much all these games cost to develop you could come up with some percentage return-on-investment for each series, and I suspect the numbers would favour Wii Sports even further.
What sane company would continue pouring resources into 3D mario as opposed to using them to figure out what their next Wii Sports is going to be? SMG appears to exist to keep some Nintendo developers happy but you could argue it's dragging down the company.
You could perform a similar comparison with New Super Mario Bros DS and Wii vs the SMG series and 2D mario still whips 3D mario! Some people are saying that SMG is evergreen but it seems like the least evergreen Nintendo series. Isn't NSMBWii selling more than SMG and SMG2 combined right at this moment? It's still in the UK weekly charts at number 29. Again, it was probably cheaper to make too.
People cut SMG a lot of slack when talking about sales because it's every critic's favourite Nintendo game. But let's not delude ourselves. It has failed to surpass niche status by Mario or Nintendo standards.
On a personal level, I loved the first Galaxy and the second one was good but just didn't feel new or impressive. This may have partly been because I played NSMBWii to 100% completion in between and it was the first 2D mario I have played properly (I'm historically a PC gamer). After playing 2D mario it seemed to highlight how sluggish 3D mario controls felt.
Oh my god, I don't know if I would like to live in a world where selling FIFTEEN MILLION COPIES is "dragging".
Mark, you're taking it all out of context. I'm sure you would love to be involved in such successful games. But you're not Nintendo. In a business sense 3D Mario is a drag on Nintendo's profitability compared to almost all of its other offerings. It looks expensive to make too. To be honest I think making SMG was fair enough but SMG2 was overkill, as it was bound to sell less.
If Nintendo have lost some of their lead over the competition in the past year it must be partly because of games like SMG2.
Edit:
And it was part of their strategy for SMG2 to be a mainstream hit beyond SMG1. They *really* wanted it. UK and Japanese copies came bundled with an instructional DVD instructing us retards how to man up and play 3D mario (I'm in the UK) so hopefully we could stop buying 2D mario and embarassing Nintendo! It was heavily marketed for the broad Wii audience. So for Nintendo it was a flop.
In your logic, it has to say Super Mario Bros. Series (2D+3D) sells 35 million, Wii Sports Series passes 102 million and you had to ask, why Nintendo isn't abandoning the whole SM Series in favor of Wii Sports. What you are suggesting is, that Nintendo should only make 1 franchise in the future, their most successful. But in reality for anybody else a game like SMG2 was a success, regardless, if there were more successful titles.
Nintendo had many titles in the last years, that sold much less, the SMG2.
Metroid Prime 3, Metroid - Other M, Punch Out, Wii Music, Legend of Zelda : Twilight Princess, Super Paper Mario all sold considerably less then SMG2, do you suggest, that Nintendo abandons the Zelda or Metroid series because of this?
To say a game, that sells 6 million in about 6 months is dragging a company down is the kind of thinking, that lead us into the last financial crisis, nothing more.
For Zelda and Metroid, they probably need to abandon the *direction* they are taking each series as they are just getting driven further and further into irrelevance. Twilight Princess is quite a horrible experience for the first few hours where you only get to watch boring cut scenes and play mini-games. It sold OK but I think it might be the last Zelda game for many fans. It was my first Zelda game and after enduring the start I found it fairly enjoyable but nothing special and lost interest before reaching the end. The Zelda series is not making passionate new fans. The most logical thing to do would be to go back to doing whatever made passionate new fans. The games that started the Zelda phenomenon were entirely different beasts.
What they shouldn't do is release exactly the same game again (like with SMG2) and hope that it will sell a lot more because it has an instructional DVD and a condescending 2D to 3D transition at the very start.
Again, it wasn't me that said that SMG2 should be much more successful than SMG1. It was Nintendo. This is why it must be a failure in their eyes.
This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It is simply a matter of finding out what makes your customer happy and giving it to them. As such a massive company, you need to have a cut-off point where you say that even a certain profitable product was not profitable enough. If you didn't do that you would not be a large successful company. Especially not in the winner-takes-all entertainment industry.
Second and more important, you simply refuse the facts, SMG1 was released 38 months ago, and it sold to date 8.9 million copies, SMG2 was released 8 months ago and sold to date 6.15 million copies.
It took SMG1 18 months to reach 8 million sales, released in November 2007, Nintendo announced in May 2009, the milestone. To see, if SMG2 is more successful, then SMG1 you have to take this in consideration as well, you can't compare SMG1's performance of 18 months with SMG2's performance of 8 months.
SMG2 is already on place 12 of the best selling Wii games of all time, I don't see anybody with a clear mind saying, this game is a commercial failure. Otherwise, he had to say, when a game is a success, if it is the best selling game only? Are the Top 3 the list to look at? The Top 10?
This is indeed pre-crisis thinking, do what worked in the past, maximize the profit, minimize the variation and try to convince the shareholders, that an eternal rise of profit margins is possible, without any change in concept, just by cutting the expenses.
To say, Zelda might by the last Zelda game for many fans, while admitting it was the first you ever played sounds strange, how can you know, what the fan liked about the game, if you never played a Zelda title before? The Zelda series is not making passionate new fans? Sorry, you simply don't seem to recognise how diverse the video game market is today. At least for Nintendo it is absolutely necessary to have games, that appeal to different fan fractions from the various generations of Nintendo devices as well as it necessary for Nintendo to create other games that appeal to new players.
Nintendo was having a hard time among certain hardcore players, that feel abandoned by the company, those people will buy every Zelda game, they bought 4 million+ copies of DKC Returns this christmas and they are valuable customers for Nintendo as well as the people, that bought Wii Sports Resort.
I accept that I am unqualified to talk about the history of Zelda. My thoughts were guided by what I have heard from old-school Zelda fans. But the fundamental point that it is a series in decline still remains. Again, I'm not saying that it should be killed off or go back to 2D. Just that they should try maybe getting rid of excessive cut-scenes and making it more action based. You don't need to be a Zelda expert to see how much it has fundamentally mutated over the years.
And I didn't say they should minimize variation. They should accept when a current path is not working and try something else.
I'm not sure on the whole customer group thing. I don't think it should necessarily mean that a series has to get less popular. Don't really have time or inclination to get further into it right now. Has been interesting though.
Market Saturation. That is all you need to know.
SMG (1/2) or NSMB are a completely different experience then WiiSports. But important factors were left out:
1. WiiSports is a pack-in title (except Japan, but let's ignore that). Since Nintendo sold ~80 mil Wii, 80 mil were the first version of the game. The second, optional game (that now is a pack-in too) sold the remaining 20 mil. Were these 2 titles standalone, would they have performed as good?
2. More of such titles have been made (WiiMusic, for instance) and flopped. So, what does that tells us? Should Nintendo stop making these titles because of this single one?
Nintendo is in the right path with diversification. They can not make only the type of game that appeals to only a particular segment of their user base. They know they have to diversify to reach out to the maximum spectrum of users they can.
Total crap.
No one buys Wii Sports in the US(The Wii's biggest market) or in most of Europe (The Wii's second biggest market by regiion). The game is bundled for free with the Wii for crying out loud!
What is all this nonsense about "selling" 102 million units of Wii Sports series then?
Going by that line of thinking, Kinect Adventures which is bundled with Kinect, has sold close to 8 million units (leaving out the few small countries where Kinect Adventures is not bundled) in just 60 days. In by book, that trumps 102 million Wii Sports series "sales" in over 4 years.
Someone should really tell him that.
I was wrong.
On the SNES, Super Mario World reached approx. 40% of the total userbase (20 million/50 million consoles)
On the Nintendo 64, Mario 64 reached approx. 33% of the total userbase (11 million/33 million consoles)
On the Gamecube, Super Mario Sunshine reached approx. 25% of the total userbase (6 million/21 million consoles)
On the Wii, Super Mario Galaxy has reached approx 10% of the total userbase (8 million/85 million consoles) - though New Super Mario Bros managed to reach 25% of the userbase (21 million)
After all, I don't see, what the percentage of the installed user base, that owns a specific game should tell is about the performance of an IP. I think unit sales in general are much more interesting. And then, you realize, that Mario Jump'n'Run games on the Wii sold much more, then on previous consoles, just because Nintendo released already 3 titles, that sold 35 million units, compared to 6 million on the Gamecube, 11 mllion on the N64 and 24 million on the SNES (Super Mario World+Super Mario World 2).
You have to go back to NES days to find better numbers, but I think we can all agree, the NES days won't come back for anybody.
I don't think Super Mario World was included with Super Famicoms in Japan. I think you had to buy it separate. Also, unlike the Wii and Wii Sports, Super Mario World was not included with every Super Nintendo console. There were different bundles that did not include the game, so if you still wanted it, you had to buy it separate.
Instead of the view you propose, I like to think that people bought the Super Nintendo because of Super Mario World, not the inverse.
I do not agree with your view on Super Mario 64. I don't think a game is guaranteed to sell better because 1) it's a launch title, and 2) the game library is limited.
For one thing, Super Mario 64 didn't achieve 11 million sales at launch. It took years to do that. For another, the other launch title (there were only two), Pilotwings 64, did nowhere near those numbers. It should have done higher numbers under your theory. Also, Twilight Princess was the first Zelda title released with a new console, and the Wii arguably had a limited lineup. Yet it couldn't match the sales of Ocarina of Time (not as far as Wii copies of the game go).
"You have to go back to NES days to find better numbers, but I think we can all agree, the NES days won't come back for anybody."
I think the Wii is the closest thing to the NES days that we've ever had.
1) NSMW: 21.2 million
2) SMG: 8.8 million
3) SMG2: 6.1 million
Personally, I suspect NSMW has sold as well as it has thanks to nostalgia: it looks and feels like the games people played on the NES, SNES and GBA - and Nintendo have heavily promoted it's multiplayer features, to boot. I also suspect its sales represent the upper limit of the Wii's active (i.e. game-buying) userbase: "traditional" IPs (Mario Party, Super Smash Bros, Zelda, etc) have all struggled to break the 10 million barrier.
Conversely, the SMG franchise doesn't carry any significant nostalgia and has only attracted interest from approx. 10% of the total userbase, despite being one of the most critically acclaimed games of all time. And SMG2 has shifted a third less units, despite having firmly established IP and gameplay *and* receiving even more positive press than the original.
Admittedly, SMG has been out for three years, whereas SMG2 has only had eight months, but (if vgchartz is to be believed), it's tracking at about 1 million below the sales SMG had after 8 months. Also, the Wii install base has grown from 20 million (December 2007, shortly after SMG launched) to 71 million (June 2010, shortly after SMG2 launched) and now sits at 85 million.
So, in summary: despite the install base having grown by over 400%, sales of SMG2 are significantly lower than those of SMG. Similar applies to the Metroid series and to a degree, you can argue the same is true for the Wii Sports and Wii Fit franchises.
The question is why has this happened? There's several possibilities:
1) A significant subset of the userbase only bought the Wii for specific "lifestyle" titles (Wii Sport, Wii Fit, etc) and aren't buying traditional games
2) A significant subset of the userbase has effectively abandoned the Wii (e.g. only using it when having a party)
3) Nintendo's IP is losing it's appeal, except when presented in a nostalgic way
4) Something else...
I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo is frantically trying to find out what the cause is, behind the scenes - the three scenarios I think are most likely all imply that their sales will continue to diminish and may not be boosted by the release of new hardware.
For the moment, they don't have any issues: they're still posting big numbers, they have a huge cash reserve and they're not going to go bankrupt, be bought out or merge with anyone else at any point in the near future. However, if this trend continues, then they won't be able to pull in the profits which they've produced over the last few years, which would impact their share price and possibly lead to internal political issues...
[*] Though as with Wii Sports, I suspect a lot of people bought the SNES/N64 specifically to get access to the new Mario game!
It's also not true that traditional IPs have all struggled to break the 10 million barrier. For one thing, Mario Kart is as traditional an IP as Kirby. It was released in 1992. The series never exceeded 10 million units until Mario Kart DS, which, last I checked, has exceeded 17 million units. Mario Kart Wii is now past 26 million.
Also, Super Mario 64 broke the 10 million barrier and it had no nostalgia factor - it was entirely different from prior Mario games.
I don't think any of the possibilities you listed are true. In reference to your points:
1) This argument is disproven by the massive sales of Mario Kart and 2D Mario on both the DS and Wii. When prior iterations of Mario Kart couldn't exceed 10 million units in sales, then where did all those massive sales come from this generation? New gamers.
2) Then why haven't other consoles shot up in sales dramatically (aside from hardware revisions or typical games that increase their sales such as Call of Duty and Halo)? Also, why is the user base purchasing dance games from Ubisoft en masse and still buying Nintendo-published games such as Donkey Kong Country Returns and Wii Party?
3) The better argument here is, "Why do Nintendo games have decreased or low sales when they don't adopt their NES/SNES roots (assuming they have such roots)?" Maybe Metroid: Other M should have tried to be a true sequel to Super Metroid and not the experimental title that it was.
4) Something else would be the lack of proper software that the market wants.
You're onto something with point #3, but it needs to be refined. It's not nostalgia. There's plenty of nostalgia for Metroid, but Other M tanked. Something else is at work here.
As for Mario 64 sales, I agree it sold well, but I don't think it was just down to the IP: it was essentially the first truly successful console 3d platformer (PC platformers such as Fade to Black were already available) and looked visually stunning, compared to equivalent games on the PSX and Saturn. The technology and the novelty were a major factor in it's popularity.
Beyond that...
1) I don't believe it is disproven: as with Wii Sports and Wii Fit, Mario Kart is heavily focused on multiplayer and it comes with an accessory. I believe the combination of a strong multiplayer focus and "familiar" 2D play which drove NSMW sales on the Wii. And right or wrong, I'm leaving the DS out of this debate to try and keep things simple ;)
2) Other consoles haven't shot up in sales (though it's worth noting that Microsoft in particular have continued to claim year-on-year increases in hardware sales) because the people leaving the Wii to gather dust are the casual gamers. They bought the Wii for a specific game - Wii Sports/Wii Fit - and have no interest in gaming outside of these two titles.
Beyond that, it's worth noting that sequels for other platforms have generally seen increased sales as the userbase has grown: Uncharted/Uncharted 2, CoD:MW and MW2, Gears/Gears 2, etc.
And if we go back to the Wii: Just Dance 2 has shifted around 5 million copies. Similarly, DKCR has sold around 4 million copies (though it's only been out for a short while) and Wii Party has managed 5 million. These are good numbers by anyone's measure, but they're still only reaching around 7% of the install base. Which I think lends weight to the theory that a significant percentage of Wii owners have essentially stepped back from gaming.
3) Possibly, though I think it's more of a general issue than a "going back to the roots" problem. The key factors in the Wii's best-seller list are a multiplayer focus and a "pick up and play" design: games which don't meet this criteria (e.g. Zelda, Super Paper Mario, Animal Crossing) have generally underperformed as compared to how they did on previous platforms - on the Gamecube, Zelda managed to reach 12% of the userbase, as opposed to just 6% on the Wii. As a result, it's very difficult to produce a sequel which offers significant changes or innovation.
4) Personally, I think Nintendo are making "proper" software, but that the active install base is a lot smaller than the total install base of 85 million.
In any case, looking at the numbers between generations has triggered a thought. When I'm on the train tomorrow, I may try and do some number crunching to see if IP marketshare has remained constant enough between generations to be able to provide a reasonable estimate on the active Wii install base...
As for Just Dance 2, DKCR, etc., these titles will continue to sell. They're not entirely front loaded, so give them more time. We have no idea how much Just Dance 2 can end up selling. It has already surpassed the previous game, and it seems to stay in the Top 3 on Amazon.
I think the Wii user base is quite active, it's just that, like any other gamers, they only buy titles that interest them.
If Microsoft were to rurn round today and claim that Kinect Adventures(wich is also bundled with Kinect and Kinect Bundled 360's) has sold close to 8 million units in just 60 days, the self-same Wiitards who are loudly crowing about the so-called "102 milion Wii Sports series" sales, will turn round and scream that .."but, but, Kinect Adventures is not for sales seperately", no?