EA: "We're currently not making any games for the WiiU"

[Mr.Mattress]

It's finally official. [http://kotaku.com/ea-has-no-games-in-development-for-nintendos-wii-u-507588994]

"Less than two years after vowing to deliver on an "unprecedented partnership" with Nintendo, gaming giant EA is quiet on the Wii U front.

"We have no games in development for the Wii U currently," company spokesperson Jeff Brown told Kotaku yesterday. He did not rule out the chances of EA developing for the Wii U again. EA publishes many of gaming's biggest franchises, including Madden, The Sims, and Battlefield." (From the Article)

So, for the entirety of 2013, there will be no games from EA for the Nintendo Console. What are your thoughts on this?

 

[ShinyCharizard]

Nothing EA are making these days really appeals to me that much so I don't care. What I want from the Wii U is some big hitting Nintendo games and some good JRPGS.

 

[capper42]

Nothing EA are making these days really appeals to me that much so I don't care. What I want from the Wii U is some big hitting Nintendo games and some good JRPGS.

Whether or not you care about EA games personally, this is a massive hit to the Wii U. EA games are big sellers, particularly the sports games, and not having these is really going to hurt Nintendo.

I think this could be yet another sign Nintendo is going the way of Sega. Personally, I don't really have a problem if they make games for other consoles because it will give me access to the few Nintendo franchises I love without having to buy a console I otherwise don't want.

That said, I'd be really sad if Nintendo went under. The first few consoles I owned were made by Nintendo, and to see what I still consider my favourite gaming company lose their position as a major player would just be bizarre to me.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

I want to know why. I'm betting on one of these reasons: EA wanted to put Origin on the Wii U and Nintendo said no so EA threw a hissy fit, EA made a few shitty ports of year-old games and were surprised they didn't sell well then came to the conclusion the Wii U isn't worth it or something Nintendo did.

 

[krazykidd]

Wait . So what games did the wii have , that EA published , that sold well on that console? Because honestly , i can't think of any . So i really doubt this is gonna matter .

 

[Requia]

Nothing EA are making these days really appeals to me that much so I don't care. What I want from the Wii U is some big hitting Nintendo games and some good JRPGS.

Whether or not you care about EA games personally, this is a massive hit to the Wii U. EA games are big sellers, particularly the sports games, and not having these is really going to hurt Nintendo.

I think this could be yet another sign Nintendo is going the way of Sega. Personally, I don't really have a problem if they make games for other consoles because it will give me access to the few Nintendo franchises I love without having to buy a console I otherwise don't want.

That said, I'd be really sad if Nintendo went under. The first few consoles I owned were made by Nintendo, and to see what I still consider my favourite gaming company lose their position as a major player would just be bizarre to me.

I'm quite sure Nintendo will manage to make more money than either Sony or Microsoft this go, even if they only manage to put out first party titles. Their business model is more sound, even if the customers aren't big fans.

 

[spartandude]

I want to know why. I'm betting on one of these reasons: EA wanted to put Origin on the Wii U and Nintendo said no so EA threw a hissy fit, EA made a few shitty ports of year-old games and were surprised they didn't sell well then came to the conclusion the Wii U isn't worth it or something Nintendo did.

See the official reason (and probably the biggest reason of them all) is that the Frostbite engine isnt working well on the Wii U and to cut back costs, this is the engine EA will be using for its titles in the near future

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

So, for the entirety of 2013, there will be no games from EA for the Nintendo Console. What are your thoughts on this?

Why would they deliver games for a console that has shipped relatively few units that also shares a remarkably different feature set from both current competition and soon to be released consoles? It generally seems to be a sound business strategy given that EA focuses on delivering games at the very expensive (the Battlefields for example) and the very cheap (their myriad social games). Without a focus on that middle of the road experience, putting resources behind a device that isn't doing well is silly when the same resources could go to platforms where EA has consistently performed well.

 

[Mr.Mattress]

Why would they deliver games for a console that has shipped relatively few units that also shares a remarkably different feature set from both current competition and soon to be released consoles? It generally seems to be a sound business strategy given that EA focuses on delivering games at the very expensive (the Battlefields for example) and the very cheap (their myriad social games). Without a focus on that middle of the road experience, putting resources behind a device that isn't doing well is silly when the same resources could go to platforms where EA has consistently performed well.

That'd be fine, and I would accept that as an answer from EA if they said that. However, they have said that they would have unprecedented support for the system right before launch. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImzCgwdPIAw] Now, you could say that, "Oh well, time's change quickly, and EA has every reason to end their support for the WiiU, at least for the time Being", and I would agree... If they said they weren't supporting the WiiU. They have not, even when they say games aren't coming for the system. [http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/2/4292578/no-madden-nfl-2013-game-for-wii-u]

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

That'd be fine, and I would accept that as an answer from EA if they said that. However, they have said that they would have unprecedented support for the system right before launch. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImzCgwdPIAw]

The WiiU has dramatically underperformed; that alone is sufficient cause to pull support.

If they said they weren't supporting the WiiU. They have not, even when they say games aren't coming for the system. [http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/2/4292578/no-madden-nfl-2013-game-for-wii-u]

That's an argument of semantics with no real basis. Given their relationship with Nintendo - that is, they tend to make games for the system - stating they aren't currently making games is equivalent to saying they aren't currently supporting the system.

 

[likalaruku]

While I do get a kick out of hilarious FIFA glitches & Skate 3 was the funniest game is the history of forever, I associate Sims with the PC. In fact, I'd be lying if I said I played many western games on Nintendo consoles.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

So why on earth are Disney letting EA's dick-swinging contest get in the way of business?

Because Disney doesn't want to be in the business of making games. They tried and didn't do terribly well.

If EA are developing Star Wars games, they should be developing them for every major platform. EA's spite isn't just screwing themselves over, it's actively costing Disney revenue and marketshare they could be seeing on Nintendo consoles.

EA takes the risk on game development while Disney only stands to prosper. They have literally nothing on the line in this case. The Star Wars property still has plenty of other avenues to exploit - film, television, toys, etc.

Either EA are in for a very rude letter from Disney, or something's going on behind the scenes.

Likely neither. Unless Disney had a very strange contract with EA, they didn't specify things like which system one game or another would appear on. Doing that would be folly given how quickly market conditions would change requiring a time consuming and costly renegotiation every time the industry took a new twist or turn.

Stopped reading here. Nintendo has currently got more money than God, and an incredibly successful handheld. If you think that makes them comparable to Sega, then you need to read up on your gaming history.

They have a marginally successful handheld, a console that isn't selling and two years of net financial losses. That doesn't stack up to a positive view of the company. Note: this doesn't mean that Nintendo is doomed; it simply means their position is not nearly so sunny as you seem to believe.

Which would make sense if they hadn't just anounced that Frostbite is now running on smartphones.

There are nearly 100 million iPhones in the world and about as many powered by Android or Windows. Several hundred million devices represents an enormous market. Given that EA has a strong commitment to the casual market, directing development to such platforms is perfectly reasonable. By contrast, directing development resources towards a device with a scant few million units in the wild is foolhardy especially given the significant architecture differences between the WiiU and the current generation consoles as well as the new ones.

All they said was they did some preliminary tests. Do preliminary tests of any engine on a new piece of hardware, and it'll run like crap. That's what optimisation is for. Crytek managed to get Cryengine 3 running 'beautifully' (their own words) on Wii U, and Epic have at least acknowledged that someone could get Unreal 4 to run on Wii U if they put in the optimisation effort.

Engine optimization can be obscenely expensive and, again, why would they dedicate the resources necessary when the device is not selling at or even near expectations? EA is a giant public company and like most giant public companies they are risk adverse. Committing the resources necessary to produce the engine changes as well as the games for the console is a lot to wager on a system who's current outlook is far from favorable. Nintendo is actively scrambling to try and figure out how to sell the damn thing to people, exciting titles are months if not years away, Nintendo has withdrawn from the main show at E3 and they are soon going to face new consoles in the field.

Sure, they could bet on the Wii, but what basis would you use to justify such a risk? Past performance? The market has changed radically since the breakout success of the Wii and there is no evidence to suggest the enormous crowd of casual gamers is going to turn out again regardless of Nintendo strategy. That leaves the core gamers and wooing them is going to be difficult given the incredibly sparse release schedule over the next year. The best hope for grabbing such people relies upon significant strategic missteps from Sony and Microsoft.

This whole Frostbite thing is just salty bollocks from EA, because Nintendo didn't let them put Origin on their network.

I'd wager that rather than being so very petty, the reason boils down to nothing more than the fact that EA is not convinced they can make money developing Wii U games. Bad Blood between the companies be damned; it is a publicly traded company. If there was obvious profit to be had, they'd be more than willing to dive right in.

 

[likalaruku]

Don't really care. But I suppose if Skate 4 were made & I had a Wii U & Skate 4 was for everything but Wii U & PC, then I'd be disappointed.

Skate 3: Funniest game in the history of forever.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Well, it's EA so even if they did, there's a 95% chance I wouldn't have bought it anyway, they, like many other dev/publishers, just don't know how to 'get my dollar' anymore

 

[Amir Kondori]

Nothing EA are making these days really appeals to me that much so I don't care. What I want from the Wii U is some big hitting Nintendo games and some good JRPGS.

Whether or not you care about EA games personally, this is a massive hit to the Wii U. EA games are big sellers, particularly the sports games, and not having these is really going to hurt Nintendo.

I think this could be yet another sign Nintendo is going the way of Sega. Personally, I don't really have a problem if they make games for other consoles because it will give me access to the few Nintendo franchises I love without having to buy a console I otherwise don't want.

That said, I'd be really sad if Nintendo went under. The first few consoles I owned were made by Nintendo, and to see what I still consider my favourite gaming company lose their position as a major player would just be bizarre to me.

I'm quite sure Nintendo will manage to make more money than either Sony or Microsoft this go, even if they only manage to put out first party titles. Their business model is more sound, even if the customers aren't big fans.

How does that work exactly. The Wii was an anomaly and all signs point to the WiiU NOT being a repeat.

 

[Little Gray]

So why on earth are Disney letting EA's dick-swinging contest get in the way of business? If EA are developing Star Wars games, they should be developing them for every major platform. EA's spite isn't just screwing themselves over, it's actively costing Disney revenue and marketshare they could be seeing on Nintendo consoles. Why haven't Disney stepped in and slapped EA with "You do what you want with your own properties, but you get our Star Wars games on every platform". Either EA are in for a very rude letter from Disney, or something's going on behind the scenes.

EA did not actually say that they would not be making games for the WiiU in the future just that they currently dont have any in progress. They have not said they will not ever make games for it. Really with how the WiiU is and with the audience that the Wii had its really not the right console for most of EA's games.

Wait . So what games did the wii have , that EA published , that sold well on that console? Because honestly , i can't think of any . So i really doubt this is gonna matter .

Nothing outside of Nintendo's games really sold well on the Wii. There are obviously a few exceptions but none of the major publishers really had much success with it. As stated in the article Ubisoft is really the only one with Just Dance.

 

[xPixelatedx]

What are your thoughts on this?

Good? lol, this is kind of like the news that the aliens game got cancelled; good riddance to bad rubbish.

None of these statements by developers or publishers phases the wiiU at all, because no one buys a Nintendo console to play Madden, CoD or any other copy/pasta game from other consoles. Why would they when they can play all these games on the consoles they have now? People buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games. That's why WiiUs aren't selling at the moment, there aren't any.

Nothing outside of Nintendo's games really sold well on the Wii. There are obviously a few exceptions but none of the major publishers really had much success with it.

Yeah pretty much this.

The WiiU has dramatically underperformed; that alone is sufficient cause to pull support.

True, but it's not like the PS4 will do any better. Or perhaps they don't have enough brain cells to remember what happened only one generation ago. The industry is just going to have to accept the fact this last gen changed the environment for the worst. Things are not going to sell nearly as good at first as before, and that's saying a lot for Sony, considering what an utter catastrophe the PS3 was for the first few years it existed. The last mainstream consoles released where the Vita, the wiiU and the 3DS. ALL FAILED, at first. The 3DS got sales after a steady stream of Nintendo exclusives appeared. The Vita and wiiU are still treading water right now.

Both gamers and publishers are going to need to learn so damn patience, otherwise everything is going to be a failure.

 

[Requia]

Nothing EA are making these days really appeals to me that much so I don't care. What I want from the Wii U is some big hitting Nintendo games and some good JRPGS.

Whether or not you care about EA games personally, this is a massive hit to the Wii U. EA games are big sellers, particularly the sports games, and not having these is really going to hurt Nintendo.

I think this could be yet another sign Nintendo is going the way of Sega. Personally, I don't really have a problem if they make games for other consoles because it will give me access to the few Nintendo franchises I love without having to buy a console I otherwise don't want.

That said, I'd be really sad if Nintendo went under. The first few consoles I owned were made by Nintendo, and to see what I still consider my favourite gaming company lose their position as a major player would just be bizarre to me.

I'm quite sure Nintendo will manage to make more money than either Sony or Microsoft this go, even if they only manage to put out first party titles. Their business model is more sound, even if the customers aren't big fans.

How does that work exactly. The Wii was an anomaly and all signs point to the WiiU NOT being a repeat.

Profit isn't just a matter of units shipped, but also profit margins. This is even more true with consoles, consoles cost the manufacturer more money than they cost the consumer. The WiiU is on a very slight loss, and is already bringing Nintendo money thanks to only needing one game sale per customer to make a profit. In comparison, I expect the PS4 and Durango to be in the red for 2-3 years, then spend years more making back the losses of the initial launch (based on previous steep subsidies, and that I can't see any way for them to fix the hole they dug for themselves by making gamers expect to pay far less than the system is worth).