-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
I Think ARMS Will Be The Next Staple Nintendo Franchise
- Thread starter Da-Kid
- Start date
Whether it becomes a staple franchise or not is tough to determine just yet. It certainly seems to have all the parts that one would need to see to suggest it's quite possible, yes.
But the problem with this is how you define a "staple" franchise. I can't even consider Splatoon a "staple" franchise yet, because a staple is predicated on a success with a sequel that isn't there yet. Is it super-likely to be one? Absolutely, at the very least in Japan. But it hasn't happened yet. When the eggs have all been hatched, we can count our chickens.
So how one defines a "staple" franchise is a debate that needs to happen first and foremost.
Do I think it will achieve Splatoon's level of sheer cultural cache in Japan? No, I don't. But I don't know if that's required, either. One can easily make a case that it isn't required. (see: Pikmin commercial theme song being inexplicably one of the most popular songs in Japan for a while)
Do I think it will obtain a large dedicated multiplayer fanbase for generations like Smash (and possibly Splatoon)? I honestly don't really know, because I haven't played it and can't because I don't own a Switch. But is that what defines a staple, where there are non-multiplayer games that also fit under that umbrella?
Do I think it will achieve the volume of sales or the attach rate that a game like Mario Kart can rake in? My gut says it won't, but my brain tells me that it's a pretty high bar and that ARMS may not have to aim that high to have that kind of staying power. There's a lot of Mario games that don't hit that threshold either, but Mario platformers are still considered a "staple" franchise. So does that mean it only has to achieve that distinction once to be considered a "staple"?
Until these things are defined, the conversation will revolve around differences in how people define what it takes to become one of those franchises, rather than the criteria itself and whether it can meet said criteria.
But the problem with this is how you define a "staple" franchise. I can't even consider Splatoon a "staple" franchise yet, because a staple is predicated on a success with a sequel that isn't there yet. Is it super-likely to be one? Absolutely, at the very least in Japan. But it hasn't happened yet. When the eggs have all been hatched, we can count our chickens.
So how one defines a "staple" franchise is a debate that needs to happen first and foremost.
Do I think it will achieve Splatoon's level of sheer cultural cache in Japan? No, I don't. But I don't know if that's required, either. One can easily make a case that it isn't required. (see: Pikmin commercial theme song being inexplicably one of the most popular songs in Japan for a while)
Do I think it will obtain a large dedicated multiplayer fanbase for generations like Smash (and possibly Splatoon)? I honestly don't really know, because I haven't played it and can't because I don't own a Switch. But is that what defines a staple, where there are non-multiplayer games that also fit under that umbrella?
Do I think it will achieve the volume of sales or the attach rate that a game like Mario Kart can rake in? My gut says it won't, but my brain tells me that it's a pretty high bar and that ARMS may not have to aim that high to have that kind of staying power. There's a lot of Mario games that don't hit that threshold either, but Mario platformers are still considered a "staple" franchise. So does that mean it only has to achieve that distinction once to be considered a "staple"?
Until these things are defined, the conversation will revolve around differences in how people define what it takes to become one of those franchises, rather than the criteria itself and whether it can meet said criteria.
we need to - a reason to grind for coins once you unlock all the ARMS
I dont have a switch, but as a non fighting game player ARMS appeals to me way more than any fighting game. I love the concept behind it. I think it will probably be a hit, though mostly because of the early release bump when the console has no games, so I'm not sure about lasting appeal.
I'm surprised, in a good way! And it certainly speaks to the quality of the game.
But on PS4 there are a lot of games coming out now, a lot of choice. On Switch there's really not much, so Arms is more of an obvious buy.
ryanofcall
Member
I'm really looking forward to see what Singleplayer will be like... Splatoon really hit the ball out of the park with a Single Player that was even better than the multiplayer, and we didn't know much about it either before release iirc
Android18a
Member
So far I see Arms as being like the modern equivalent of Super Punch Out. Stylish, cool and a strong one on one fighter for Nintendo's flagship console. As for a staple, I'm not sure yet. I'd like to see it because I think it's a charming new IP but Nintendo has a habit of making non Zelda/Mario franchises disappear after a couple of games.
Jaded Alyx
Member
And what does any of that have to do with this thread?
(Hilarious that injustice 2 has much more in common with injustice and mkx and mk9 than Arms does with Wii Sports Boxing)
I don't think so. It's a fighting game which is already pretty niche, and after the demo it's either you really love it and will buy it or not. I think it's okay, not even close to the amount of fun I had with the Splatoon test fire on the Wii u. Due to the fact that it's just okay it's an easy skip. I mean I just don't see it having broad appeal, my brother's felt the same way after the demo
Then again the Splatoon 2 testfire didn't even sell me on the game because it seemed not that big of an improvement of the first and the first game is flat out better with the Wii u gamepad
It could very well be a staple but I don't see it being on Splatoon levels tbh
Then again the Splatoon 2 testfire didn't even sell me on the game because it seemed not that big of an improvement of the first and the first game is flat out better with the Wii u gamepad
It could very well be a staple but I don't see it being on Splatoon levels tbh
You can just say this for all the kind of games, splatoon included.
CJY
Banned
Not detecting any sarcasm here. There are so many things wrong with this comment, I don't even know where to start. I'm not vouching for ARMS quite yet, as it may turn out to be little more than a fun diversion; the jury is still out, but to call it Wii boxing is bordering on ludicrous
Tekken 7>Injustice 2
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
First of all, Arms is nothing like Wii Sports Boxing. In fact the game is best played using button and analog stick controls. Secondly, Tekken 7 all day, bitches.
CJY
Banned
jts
...hate me...
I played Injustice 2 in 1984 and it was called Karate Champ.
I swear there's like a cursed AI somewhere just churning these posts out
For whatever it's worth, I think it will be successful but more niche. Splatoon works on a fundamental level with incredibly easy to learn controls and mechanics. You could give it to a baby and they would have fun. The demographic is entirely more open. Arms seems to have a much higher learning curve and will require more time investment and dedicated player base. Like any fighting game, really.
I think it will be successful, but not on the same levels of Splatoon. Whether it becomes a "staple franchise" (whatever the hell that means) is yet to be seen.
I think it will be successful, but not on the same levels of Splatoon. Whether it becomes a "staple franchise" (whatever the hell that means) is yet to be seen.
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
I'd rather be able to play the full game so I can get in some training/CPU matches before I'm thrown in against a player online and get made a fool of.
Karate Champ might have less stiff in-battle animations though...
On-topic: compared to Splatoon and Pikmin, I wonder if ARMS' mostly one-on-one, fighting oriented gameplay might be a limiting factor with regards to its widespread appeal. That said, SFII was loved by pretty much by everyone when it came out because of its similarly colorful cast and instantly gratifying pick-up-and-play gameplay, so the fighting game genre itself doesn't necessarily limit the potential audience (even if SFII might have been a unique outlier). I'm curious to see how widely ARMS will be accepted, in other words.
As for the term "staple", I guess for me an IP only becomes as such when the sequels don't have to closely follow in the footsteps of the initial game(s) anymore in terms of aesthetics and overall gameplay. Just like how Zelda and Mario games are guaranteed to make some impact regardless of how different one installment is to the next and with each even having its own sub-fanbase. Both Pikmin and Splatoon have not reached that level yet, nor has something like Animal Crossing perhaps.