Support NeoGAF

[Nirolak]

Since EA and the Wii U are a favorite topic around here, I'm sure people will be interested.

Basically they want more people who want to buy sports games on the platform.

MCV: What needs to happen before you’re back on board with Wii U?

Andrew Wilson: I build for a userbase. I made games on Facebook because I thought people were there that wanted to play them. Then it became apparent to me that either I had the wrong game or they weren’t there. We had a strong offering on Wii U at launch. The platform hasn’t had the take-up. Our games hasn’t had the take-up we’d have liked. So at this moment we are not focused there. Now they could do a range of things that might change that situation, and we’d never count them out. And should there be a sizeable gamer base there in the future, we would build games for Wii U. But for us it’s less about building for a platform, and more about building for a group of gamers on a platform where they are. And sports gamers weren’t there.

Source: http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/the-...ok-and-not-messing-up-ps4-or-xbox-one/0118027

 

[Steve McQueen]

So if WiiU will start to sell, EA is in.

 

[Chao]

Strong offering at launch, sure!

 

[BlazingDarkness]

There's a surprising lack of detail in there.
'A range of things' doesn't specify anything at all.

 

[Effect]

We had a strong offering on Wii U at launch.

I'm really sick and tired of this lie and it never being called out when EA says it.

 

[Dits]

Pretty much what was said at E3. Nintendo are starting to get their first party core titles ready for attack. If they sell and so do systems, other will follow.

 

[MMaRsu]

So basically they are saying what we already knew? The fanbase is too small and the people who own Wii-U's are less interested in EA's offerings.

 

[Ushojax]

What are they waiting for Nintendo to make a football game?

If you want to build an audience for sports games waiting for Nintendo to do it is idiotic. Maybe they should have released a FIFA that wasn't a year old.

 

[bumpkin]

Put NHL 14 on the Wii U and I'll buy it, despite the terrible choice for a cover athlete.

Spoiler

I wasn't going to buy the game on 360 or PS3 because I actually, you know, play hockey; in real life. I don't need to do it in a video game.

 

[Yagharek]

We had a strong offering on Wii U at launch.

Wrong

 

[Nirolak]

There's a surprising lack of detail in there.
'A range of things' doesn't specify anything at all.

It makes more sense in context:

"The platform hasn’t had the take-up. Our games hasn’t had the take-up we’d have liked. So at this moment we are not focused there. Now they could do a range of things that might change that situation, and we’d never count them out."

Translation: "Both the platform and our sports games on the platform aren't selling well. They could do a variety of things to improve the sales of (the platform and/or the games)."

 

[GitarooMan]

Basically as everyone already knows, the people who buy EA games are not on the console right now. That could change, but it's unlikely.

 

[DESTROYA]

EA can kiss my ass!

 

[prag16]

None of that is TOO unreasonable really.

Except the part about the "strong" lineup at launch. Not sure if srs...

Other than that, can't blame them, though I do believe there's something to be said for being there all along in order to reap the benefits if/when the platform takes off, and in case one of the other options (e.g. xbone) flops. Especially after they admitted after the fact that with regard to the Wii they had "backed the wrong horse" and would have proceeded differently with the benefit of hindsight.

 

[SmokyDave]

I'm really sick and tired of this lie and it never being called out when EA says it.

"Your launch offerings were half-arsed!"

"We half-arse launch games on every platform and yet they still sell better than these did".

"Huh, good point".

 

[JordanLMiller]

I honestly don't want them back. It has been years since I've bought anything from EA and part of that reason is that they won't make games for anyone outside of their normal routine of yearly sports titles and generic western action games. For a while, around the start of last gen, I thought Mirror's Edge and Dead Space was them attempting to broaden their base and appeal to more people, but I look at what those franchises have become and just smh...

 

[daxgame]

Our games hasn’t had the take-up we’d have liked.

Wow. I even had my FIFA13 money ready, if the version turned out to be decent. It wasn't, so no money from me. Fuck you, EA. I even picked up NFS but it was a 6 months old port. Embarassing statements

 

[FreedomFighter]

So basically they are saying what we already knew? The fanbase is too small and the people who own Wii-U's are less interested in EA's offerings.

Who else would want to pay $60 for a Mass Effect 3 port when PS360 was getting Mass Effect TRILOGY?

Also, later ports of games that people already bought on PS360 should be expected to do little on a tiny userbase. In Madden's case, it didn't even have the new physics engine.

I wish the reporter asked them about these things. EA is bullshit and everyone can see it. I'll not support this company again due to their shady practices and this is just icing on the cake.

 

[big_z]

WiiU: can't sell because it has no games, has no games because it can't sell

 

[Aquamarine]

WiiU: can't sell because it has no games, has no games because it can't sell

It's a vicious negative feedback cycle that can kill a platform.

That's why a strong first-party lineup is so critical for Nintendo.

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

Sports games outside of Mario tittles and tiger woods Wii have never been big on a Nintendo console. I doubt this will ever change.

 

[PSGames]

This just strikes me as a backwards way of doing things.

If the Wii U does turn out to be a success they will be so far behind with development on the platform(engines not coded for the Wii U, etc) that it would take an additional year or 2 before they would be able to capatilize on the userbase.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

Did support for PS3 ever dry up when it wasn't doing too hot at launch (I understand it was never Wii U levels bad)?

 

[Akey]

That strong release support of 1 year old sports games..... I'm not sure how Nintendo builds up a user base for franchises it doesn't own in markets only EA has the rights to.

 

[GitarooMan]

Did support for PS3 ever dry up when it wasn't doing too hot at launch (I understand it was never Wii U levels bad)?

No, but the software sales were never this bad.

 

[RPG_Fanatic]

"We had a strong offering on Wii U at launch."

Hahahaha. I know them waiting WiiU sales to pick up before making games for it is a reasonable stance to take, but saying they had a strong line-up of games at launch makes me laugh.
I'm pretty they had a couple sports games with less features then the other versions, a port of the final game of a trilogy where all three games were being released of other consoles together for the same price, and a well made port of Need for Speed released month after the WiiU and other versions released.

 

[PdotMichael]

WiiU: can't sell because it has no games, has no games because it can't sell

It's Nintendo job to change it with games or with deals with the third parties together.

Though you never really heard something outside of some deals with a few japanese third parties like Capcom and Sega. Not sure why Nintendo is so focused on japanese developers.

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

Did support for PS3 ever dry up when it wasn't doing too hot at launch (I understand it was never Wii U levels bad)?

PS3 owners bought third party games.

 

[StrikerObi]

This is such bullshit. If Xbox One is a failure I'm sure they'll keep making games for it anyway.

 

[Robin64]

Dear EA, why would I spend £50 on your Wii U version of Mass Effect 3 when the other consoles just got Mass Effect Trilogy for £40? It makes no sense. Blame Nintendo if you want, but you didn't help yourselves at all.

And yes, I wish a journalist would stop them at the "strong launch" bullshit. Overpriced ports of old games and "new" games with old engines while other consoles get the new engines is not strong at all. Come on, game journalism!

 

[shink]

Strong offering at launch, my ass!
Announcing the ME trilogy even before the Wii U version was out must have been the stupidest decision I have ever seen. Indication they had little to no care to make any sales on the Wii U.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Oh man. If only the WiiU sold better, we'd get lazy and late EA ports again!

 

[Snowden's Secret]

PS3 owners bought third party games.

Were PS3 multiplats as relatively bad as the Wii U ones? For example: Mass Effect 3 U launching at the same time the other platforms got the trilogy collection? And no DLC?

You can't complain people won't buy your gimped shit.

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

This is such bullshit. If Xbox One is a failure I'm sure they'll keep making games for it anyway.

Xbox one owners will buy third party games.

 

[Mlatador]

Originally Posted by MCV

MCV: What needs to happen before you’re back on board with Wii U?

Andrew Wilson: I build for a userbase. I made games on Facebook because I thought people were there that wanted to play them. Then it became apparent to me that either I had the wrong game or they weren’t there. We had a strong offering on Wii U at launch. #1 The platform hasn’t had the take-up. Our games hasn’t had the take-up we’d have liked. So at this moment we are not focused there. Now they could do a range of things that might change that situation, and we’d never count them out. And should there be a sizeable gamer base there in the future, we would build games for Wii U. But for us it’s less about building for a platform, and more about building for a group of gamers on a platform where they are. #2 And sports gamers weren’t there.

#1 first huge LIE - EA fucked fucked it up with their half-assed, horrible ports!

#2 Stupid, short-sighted conclusion AFTER the effect of said fuck up.

Oh, and something else EA: you'll definitely attract more "sports gamers" in the future by NOT releasing your fucking sports games on the console, right?

 

[Mario007]

Dear EA, why would I spend £50 on your Wii U version of Mass Effect 3 when the other consoles just got Mass Effect Trilogy for £40? It makes no sense. Blame Nintendo if you want, but you didn't help yourselves at all.

ME has nothing to do with EA Sports. EA is pissed no one bought FIFA and so no more FIFA. Makes sense. I mean even FIFA2013 on Vita which was just repackaged FIFA Football sold well.

 

[wrowa]

It was bound to happen sooner or later. Sports game didn't sell too well on the Wii either and as a result EA put less and less effort into the Wii versions of their games. That's a vicious circle of course, since it means that even if people were interested in playing the games on the plattform, they wouldn't buy them simply because no one buys knowingly an inferior version of a game.

The same tactic was apparent in their first generation of Wii U software. It was clear that EA never had much faith in the plattform to begin with, so that they didn't put much effort into their games, which in turn scared the people off who would have been interested.

I'm not blaming them, though. The lack of faith was justified as it turned out and investing more money into the early Wii U games wouldn't have made sense for them.

 

[MikeE21286]

chicken and egg argument.

Although they did start off there and then scaled back.

Oh well....

 

[PdotMichael]

Were PS3 multiplats as relatively bad as the Wii U ones? For example: Mass Effect 3 U launching at the same time the other platforms got the trilogy collection? And no DLC?

You can't complain people won't buy your gimped shit.

I think late ports sold quite well for the most times like Oblivion - and the version was pretty bad.

 

[Effect]

This just strikes me as a backwards way of doing things.

If the Wii U does turn out to be a success they will be so far behind with development on the platform(engines not coded for the Wii U, etc) that it would take an additional year or 2 before they would be able to capatilize on the userbase.

This is why Ubisoft, Sega and Warner Bros will be ahead of everyone else if hopefully that does happen. Not only that but it creates goodwill with the customer base and conditions them to recognizing your brand regularly and not only Nintendo logos. So when new games do come out a customer will see the Ubisoft logo and not think twice about paying full price for a game from them as there is a level of trust built up between them and customers.

If Nintendo turns around the Wii U sooner rather then later EA will be significantly behind everyone else unless they are lying about having their engines running on the system. Them putting out a bad Wii U version of a game won't do them any favors either. No one is going to buy a Wii U version of an EA game if it reviews at a 5 or 6 out of 10 and the other versions, because they worked on those systems longer is getting a 8 or 9 out of 10. No one is going to be understanding and buy the game anyway. They'll pass on it.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Why would EA or any third party put any effort into a launch lineup when even Nintendo didn't? It's going to be nearly a year before we get a big 1st party Wii U post-launch game. That's pitiful. It's EA's job to build a userbase and build an audience and they have failed miserably. There is no indication that there is an audience at all outside of Super Mario Bros., let alone one that will buy EA games.

 

[SmokeMaxX]

"Your launch offerings were half-arsed!"

"We half-arse launch games on every platform and yet they still sell better than these did".

"Huh, good point".

"We had a strong line-up for WiiU."
"No you didn't."
"Huh, good point."

 

[Huff]

It's not like EA's launch titles were any better or worsen than any other launch titles, including nintendo's

 

[tokkun]

Why do so many people in this thread act like this is some kind of irrational, emotion-based decision on EA's part and not just a business decision based on projected return-on-investment?

Do you really think they actually believe they could make a lot of money by putting their games on the WiiU, but don't out of spite?

 

[PBY]

Anyone who is "mad" at EA just doesn't get it- this isn't a move out of spite, it's purely financial.

Also- the chicken/egg argument doesn't work, namely because sports games dont really sell systems, but more importantly- why should EA bear the risk when Nintendo can?

 

[impact]

WiiU: can't sell because it has no games, has no games because it can't sell

Tell it to the Vita.

 

[Robin64]

Even if you just look at FIFA, who would buy last year's FIFA with new kits over the new FIFA that the other consoles are getting? I'm not sure I know anyone who got a Wii U that didn't already have a Xbox 360 or Playstation 3, so that choice is a no-brainer.

 

[cyberheater]

WiiU: can't sell because it has no games, has no games because it can't sell

It was up to Nintendo to ensure there was a good first party launch line up. They failed.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Why do so many people in this thread act like this is some kind of irrational, emotion-based decision on EA's part and not just a business decision based on projected return-on-investment?

Do you really think that actually believe they could make a lot of money by putting their games on the WiiU, but don't out of spite?

Clearly you haven't been following the conspiracy theories. The fact is that EA asked Nintendo to make Origin the official Wii U online service, and when Nintendo said no, they decided to pull their support out of spite and put all their eggs behind Sony and Microsoft....two other companies who are...not...using Origin as their official online service.....it makes more sense when you have a tin foil hat on trust me.

 

[fabricated backlash]

Strong offering at launch, sure!

While the rest of his point stands, what with the WiiU not having a big enough user base, the notion that the crap they shat out at launch is to be considered a strong offering is offensive.