Nintendo holds key to franchise longevity, profitability

So that solves the age old question:

SF>MK

Holy high sales, Batman!

10's of millions of those sold Mario games were really just games that came free with the system, like Super Mario Bros. and Super Mario World. Pokemon is really the best selling franchise ever. Everyone said it was just a fad, but more than 10 years later those game still sell like crazy. I don't get it. But the difference between Mario, Pokemon and everything else is freaking insane.

Haven't there been twice as many Street Fighter games as Mortal Kombat games? Wouldn't that mean that MK games sell more than SF games, but the SF franchise is more successful due to the amount of games? This is crazy. Anyway, I love both SF2 and MK2 and not much since.

I'd say all the Mario spin-offs are a good thing because you get the characters, but the gameplay changes. It's not like Tomb Raider that drove every enjoyable gameplay element into the ground.

But then when the core games come out (like New Super Mario Bros.) they retain all that is familiar and change the trivial (like graphics).

However Pokemon is just the opposite of that. The core games sell out despite no major changes and the spin-offs are largely ignored. Maybe the difference is the portable nature of the Pokemon franchise.

I wish there was a more thorough breakdown of which games in the series actually contributed to the totals. That would make analysis easier and more relevant. I guess I'll just have to wait for Wikipedia to write that article so the Independant can copy it.

SMB3 (I believe) is still the highest selling Mario game without being packed in with the NES (though it was packed in at one point). SMB1 sold 40 million, so yeah, most of them were pack-ins, but SMB3 reached 18 million when Nintendo stopped counting.

The GameBoy Tetris is at 30 million, like how SMB is at 40 million.

Even the 3D GTAs individually aren't close enough to top SMB3.

The key to franchise longevity is having 75% of the games be good, and establishing Nostalgia value to compensate for that 25% of games that are not, so that they will still be bought

I find that commercialization (hoodies, toys, tcg, etc) just cheapens it, but in Nintendo's case, one cannot blame them for making games into toys, since they are also a toy company

If I had been 100% ignorant of Mario somehow, and you told me just now that the industry's biggest-selling franchise involved the critically-acclaimed formula of plumber+mushrooms+giant enemy flying turtles, I would have thought the entire culture of video gaming was seriously fucked.

@ #5
haha!
best comment of the day,
no wonder i'm so messed up...

I'm so sick of this argument...

Judd :
Several million systems were sold on Mario's back alone.
The fact that ONE GAME can justify a $200+ purchase is utterly amazing.

So your attempt to dismiss the sales figures actually point out how truly impressive they really are.

@FuzzyPickles

Haha. You have a point, being such a long time gamer I never really think about what I am really playing. But it's the truth, while Mario may be just that, it sure is a hell of a lot of fun to play.

Yeah the psp sucks.

Thomas Falsetta, not quite the topic, but you are very wise.

I'd kind of like to wonder out load where Tetris is? I know the Gameboy version sold a ridiculous number of copies, and the other various itterations can have only helped its cause.

Furthermore, I definitely take your point (Chudgoo) and believe Mario is an incredible success. However, despite not selling the system, we'd then have to include solitaire, the stupid pinball game and minesweeper as utterly humongous selling games on the Windows platforms. While being bundled with each copy of Windows sold, I'm sure it was possible to purchase those games separately in some form. I don't see why they don't qualify.

Mario: 193 million
Tomb Raider: 30 million

For the Eidos dude who claimed that Lara Croft is more popular than Mario.

Why is Madden NFL not considered a 'licensed franchise' by the blogger?

And let's be honest - the James Bond figure shouldn't even be there. GoldenEye sold 8 or 9 million by itself, on a single platform. Every subsequent title had less and less to do with that game, but still sold many of its copies on the legacy of Rare's masterpiece.

While it's far off from hitting Mario, the Sims franchise at number 5 is the youngest franchise in the entire top 20. 54 million in 6 years is astonishing. While it mostly consists of expansion packs, that is quite impressive.

In a few years, I wouldn't be shocked to see it be the first non-nintendo franchise to hit 100 million.

Love it or hate it, the Sims is a force to be reckoned with.

@2, If you subtract 40 million copies of SMB1 (NES pack-in) and 17 million copies of SMW (SNES pack-in), you'd still have 136 million Mario games sold. Still right behind Pokémon and still over double Final Fantasy. This is assuming that 100% of the copies of SMB1 and SMW were pack-ins.

(numbers from same Wikipedia article as this list)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_computer_and_video_games#Bundled_games

"However, despite not selling the system, we'd then have to include solitaire, the stupid pinball game and minesweeper as utterly humongous selling games on the Windows platforms. While being bundled with each copy of Windows sold, I'm sure it was possible to purchase those games separately in some form. I don't see why they don't qualify."


Except Mario games have never been bundled -free- with the system. Yes, sometimes they came in a bundle, but one which was always more expensive than the system-only package which was sold right alongside it. Not to mention the games were always sold separately as well. At least, that's the way it was over here. Back then, for both the NES and SNES, I chose to buy the bundle over the less expensive game-less system, because I wanted Mario. When the N64 came out, at first there wasn't even a Mario64 bundle (that came later) so I bought the game and system separately.

Anyway. So, no, Mario platformers cannot be compared to Minesweeper that way, they all count as real sales.

And for that matter, where's Warcraft and Star Wars? I don't have the figures, but I'm almost 100% positive they should be on that list (and for that matter, I'm not sure if Lineage even counts as a franchise..).

It's really no surprise to see Nintendo top the list. Nintendo's known for its franchises, after all, and its those franchises that were able to sustain a "failing" console long enough for the Wii to show up.

Anyone else surprised that Metroid isn't in the list anywhere? Maybe it's number 21. I'm also surprised that Zelda isn't higher.

Pokemon games are more or less the same. But for some reason, I still enjoy playing them.

21 thru 37 (from the same Wikipedia article)

# Warcraft (19 million)
# Metal Gear (18.3 million approximately)
# Rayman (17 Million)
# Spyro the Dragon (17 million)
# Winning Eleven (17 million)
# Diablo (17 million)
# Age of Empires (16 million)
# Half-Life (16 million)
# Halo series (14.7 million)
# Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell (14 million)
# Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six (14 million)
# Disney series (13.2 million)
# Metroid (13 million)
# Driver (12 million)
# Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon (11 million)
# Myst (11 million)
# Battlefield (9.9 million)

To quote one of my HS English teachers, "Just because it's popular, doesn't mean it's good."

Putting aside a few exceptions, all this list really tells me is that people really will buy anything.

@tathar
Zelda is low because Zelda games are far apart. They probably counted those Mario Sports games as well, since they were counting the franchise -- Mario.

Zelda would top that list if you made some Super Zelda Kart, Super Zelda Strikers, Zelda Teaches Typing, Zelda is Missing, Link's Mansion, Super Zelda Sunshine, and of course, New Super Zelda Bros.

I find this list surprising in a few ways. I would think that long popular franchises like Metroid and Castlevania would be on the list. I guess Metroid hasn't had all that many games, and two of those were on the Gamecube which had a small install base. Castlevania, on the other hand, is freakin' huge! It's existance spans 20 years and has appeared on nearly every major console and has had many games on the incredibly popular Gameboy and DS platforms. I believe it was even on the Commodore 64! How would it possibly not make this list? And what about the world's original videogame mascot, Pac-Man? That game has appeared on zillions of platforms, but perhaps Pac-Man's total was hurt due to splitting the 'Pac sales with Mrs. Pac-Man and Baby Pac-Man. And what about Happy Feet? It must be around #24. ;)

Now with the overachievers. I'm surprised that Donkey Kong is so high considering that the post popular part of the franchise was mainly the first two arcade games and a couple of the Donkey Kong Country games. I'm also surprised to see Sony on the list at all since the company places such little importance on being a first party developer, and as far as I'm concerned that shortsighted position is really screwing them today as all their big exclusives flock to the 360.

I also wonder how crossover games are counted. The Super Smash Bros franchise is hugely popular, so do those sales get added to Mario's, Zelda's, and the rest? Are they split between the franchises that make up that game, or would Super Smash Bros be considered its own franchise?

What in the hell is crash bandicoot even doing on that list? Crash bandicoot is made of ass and fail.