How many units must a game sell to be considered a success?

[Baloo]

A friend of mine and I are having this argument over how many units a game needs to sell in order to be considered a successful game. I'm not talking best seller, but more of a financial success. I think it's around 300,000 or so, but he claims anything that sold less than 1 Million units is a failure, which I think is preposterous.

Anyone have any general ideas on what a reasonable number might be?

[Bojay1997]

A friend of mine and I are having this argument over how many units a game needs to sell in order to be considered a successful game. I'm not talking best seller, but more of a financial success. I think it's around 300,000 or so, but he claims anything that sold less than 1 Million units is a failure, which I think is preposterous.

Anyone have any general ideas on what a reasonable number might be?

It all depends on the budget, publisher, developer, marketing, etc...A game developed by a small team over a period of a year or so that only cost a few hundred thousand dollars to make and had very limited marketing would be a massive success if it sold 300K copies. A game with a budget of millions of dollars that took years to develop and had a huge marketing budget but only sold 300K copies would be a huge disaster. There is no such thing as a break even point rule for games given the wide variation in production, distribution and marketing costs.

[Press_Start]

Your friend has a very narrow view of success....though success is like Baskin Robbins. There's 31 varieties and everyone prefers their own flavor.

But it's hard to pinpoint a "profit number" when there's so many variables to consider (programming, production costs, post-prod. costs, testing, expectations, etc.). The "one size fits all" mentality doesn't sit still with profits as Muramasa turned money at 100K units sold while Halo 3 needed millions.

The only thing I care is when an obscure game (or RPG preferably) makes enough to warrant the release of another one. (Crosses fingers for Sin & Punishment 2's success.)

[BHvrd]

infinite monies.

[j_factor]

Since this is in Classic Gaming and all... It really also depends on what timeframe you're talking about. A game selling 300k in 1987 is not the same as a game selling 300k in 2010. Even aside from differences in development costs due to modern games being larger/more expansive. Formats are different, prices are different, there's inflation, the market has grown, and the general population has grown.

[retroman]

hell..if u sold 300k in 87....take it to the bank. Mad money...Now days...eeee. Depends. Still might make some money though.

[Aussie2B]

It all depends on the budget, publisher, developer, marketing, etc...A game developed by a small team over a period of a year or so that only cost a few hundred thousand dollars to make and had very limited marketing would be a massive success if it sold 300K copies. A game with a budget of millions of dollars that took years to develop and had a huge marketing budget but only sold 300K copies would be a huge disaster. There is no such thing as a break even point rule for games given the wide variation in production, distribution and marketing costs.

Exactly. Look at all the niche titles brought over from Japan with a very tiny budget for localization. They could probably sell under 100k and still be considered successful.

But on the opposite end, look at something like Shenmue. In the grand scheme of things, the worldwide sales weren't too shabby, but it wasn't remotely close to enough copies to balance out with their absurd budget. Its sales can be considered a complete failure, but I'm sure other developers would be overjoyed to have such sales.

[DeputyMoniker]

It all depends on the budget, publisher, developer, marketing, etc...

Yeah. Same goes for a movie. By Avatar standards, House of 1000 Corpses was a flop. They more than doubled their investment on it though...so the numbers may not be as big but doubling your investment=win.

[Emuaust]

How long is a piece of string?

[Oldskool]

I remember hearing about a game a month or two that sold "horribly" after it's release, because it sold "ONLY 400,000" copies that month. I don't recall the game now but I think it was for PS3 or 360.

400,000 for one month in 1990 would have been unheard of.

[Haoie]

And of course, as well all know, low sales don't mean awful game. Heck, the crappiest sell more than the best.

Poor Okami, Beyond Good and Evil, Psychonauts, etc etc etc

[zektor]

One. If I buy it and I truly enjoy it, it must be a success!

[skaar]

There is no spoon.

A game can turn a profit with as little as 20k sales. Ask NIS.

[SEGA]

If Development + Marketing + Blah Blah Blah <= Net Revenue, the game is a winnar!

I'm just waiting for the day when video games become like the movie industry where most games lose money and the developers survive by tent poles every so often.

[chrisbid]

If Development + Marketing + Blah Blah Blah <= Net Revenue, the game is a winnar!

I'm just waiting for the day when video games become like the movie industry where most games lose money and the developers survive by tent poles every so often.

isnt this the state of the big publshing houses?

[Bojay1997]

isnt this the state of the big publshing houses?

Yep. This is the EA and Activision model currently.

[rpepper9]

There is no spoon.

A game can turn a profit with as little as 20k sales. Ask NIS.

My spoon is too big!

[skaar]

My spoon is too big!

So's your mom!

Thread over yet?

[tom]

I wrote a game for the Atari XL way back in the 80s. I sold 15 games, for me, a success.