Wii U losing all upcoming EA games

[Greg2600]

http://www.gamespot.com//news/ea-not...wii-u-6408481?
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...tbite-engine-3

I wouldn't think this is good news for a console nobody is buying.

EA Sr. Engineer calls Wii U crap.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/...ource=facebook

[Tupin]

Huh. Well, this certainly complicates things.

[kupomogli]

I see Nintendo developing Mario Football and another Mario Soccer in the near future.

[Rickstilwell1]

Not having EA on board actually gives me more faith in the Wii U being a quality console because of their absence

[Tanooki]

EA just showing their true colors again for another generation. There's clearly something more here than we all know. Back in the late 90s/00 they pulled this same shit on Sega throwing the Dreamcast under the bus, but there was some bad blood between the two from the previous system to cause the problem. I'm going to go with thinking something with the Wii pissed EA off pretty well enough to want to act like babies again tossing away an easy revenue stream. I know some of their games didn't perform well so they had to re-release them in HD like Goldeneye or just bitched and moaned about their waggle sports not doing as well for the lazy couch sportsman as your normal button pusher play off the Wii.

[Greg2600]

Not really the same as the Dreamcast situation. EA didn't have faith in SEGA, after the failure of the Saturn. Turns out they were the wise ones. In this instance, it's a matter of technology. EA has no interest it appears wedging their games onto the underpowered Wii U. In the case of Frostbite, I heard on Destructoid that they tried the Frostbite 2 engine, I guess to have FB3 run on that, and it was still too advanced for the console.

[kupomogli]

EA just showing their true colors again for another generation.

There's clearly something more here than we all know.

It's pretty clear actually. Every one of their games sold extremely poorly on the Wii U so they're going to wait until the console sales pick up for releasing any more games for it. Who knows, maybe since they're getting no profit from their titles, EA feels they're getting screwed by supporting Nintendo with no additional funding from them, while Nintendo is paying off developers left and right "per game."

I know some of their games didn't perform well so they had to re-release them in HD like Goldeneye

Goldeneye was Activision.

[Aussie2B]

And nothing of value was lost to this gamer.

[Bubble_Man]

I can see that this is bad for the console, but I don't care on a personal level since I've never bought any console for the sake of playing an EA title.

[Gregger]

Something tells me EA is in cahoots with Microsoft. They also didn't show up at Sony's PS4 press conference which was out of character.

[RCM]

This isn't as big a blow to Nintendo as it was to Sega. A lot has changed since the Dreamcast era, and EA has lost a lot of faith in the traditional market.

[treismac]

And nothing of value was lost to this gamer.

Word. In 3-4 years, if I decide to buy a Wii U providing there are enough worthwhile titles to justify the purchase, I won't roll a single tear down my cheek because EA doesn't have a game for the system.

[Griking]

This isn't as big a blow to Nintendo as it was to Sega. A lot has changed since the Dreamcast era, and EA has lost a lot of faith in the traditional market.

I'm curious, what's changed since the Dreamcast era that makes this less of a blow to Nintendo today?

[Greg2600]

I think it's worse. The Dreamcast was not all that harmed by not having EA. At the time, their Sega Sports games were far better than EA Sports anyway! EA wasn't doing all that many non-sports titles. Nowadays, EA owns so many major properties, it's a far bigger loss.

[cholkavich]

Does this mean Nintendo has to do more HD releases of N64 and gc games to make up for the loss

[Kitsune Sniper]

I'm curious, what's changed since the Dreamcast era that makes this less of a blow to Nintendo today?

Sega didn't have dozens of publishers who'd work with them just because of their brand name.

[Red Warrior]

I don't really consider this a huge loss for Nintendo. If anyone wants to play Mass Effect, Need for Speed, FIFA, or Madden, they already own a 360 or PS3 and will therefore purchase those games on those consoles. People buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games... which is why the Wii U hasn't sold well. The only decent Nintendo game available for it at the moment is New Super Mario Bros U, and that's not a good enough reason for most people to plunk down $350.

A $50-$100 price drop, however, would definitely make the Wii U a more attractive purchase... and a better name...

[Rickstilwell1]

Yeah since everybody only wants New Super Mario Bros. U they decided to make New Super Luigi U... This is proof that our money talks. Maybe the new Sonic exclusive will help. A lot of Sonic fans are now talking about finally "having to buy" the console. Mario has a lot of fans but they aren't as crazy as Sonic's fanbase.

[Greg2600]

I don't really consider this a huge loss for Nintendo. If anyone wants to play Mass Effect, Need for Speed, FIFA, or Madden, they already own a 360 or PS3 and will therefore purchase those games on those consoles. People buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games... which is why the Wii U hasn't sold well. The only decent Nintendo game available for it at the moment is New Super Mario Bros U, and that's not a good enough reason for most people to plunk down $350.

A $50-$100 price drop, however, would definitely make the Wii U a more attractive purchase... and a better name...

The price is low as it is, which is the problem. They didn't beef it up enough, in order to keep it lower. Also, are you suggested that Nintendo's business model is simply to provide hardware to play 1st party games? That is not going to work.

[Red Warrior]

The price is low as it is, which is the problem. They didn't beef it up enough, in order to keep it lower. Also, are you suggested that Nintendo's business model is simply to provide hardware to play 1st party games? That is not going to work.

That's not their business model, but that's how things usually work out for them from my perspective. I have a Wii, Wii U, and PS3 for the first party exclusives, and an Xbox 360 for everything else. I'm not saying everybody does it this way, but I'm willing to bet that the majority of gamers are not purchasing Nintendo consoles in order to play the next Mass Effect or Madden title.