Support NeoGAF

[Deuterium]

Why is the Wii U looking out into the rain? It's stuck inside the house?

edit: Wait, I guess the pad would be reversed if that were the case. But then why is the controller semi-transparent/turning invisible?

Huh? Now this meme is bugging me.

Isn't the whole point of this pic to show the Wii U stuck outside in the rain, looking into the house, all forlorn and abandoned? I thought it was supposed to be like a poor dog, in which some evil owner left outside in the rain.

What is the GAF answer on this issue? Is it outside looking in, or is it indoors, looking out?

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I never claimed that. It's just one of those GAF narratives that never dies. Just like the "Wii U is weaker than PS360" stuff that will persist until the thing is retired. People believe what they want to believe. Development hurdles are much easier to overcome when the money is flowing and the willpower exists, and in this case neither of this things appear to be in the cards.

No, you didn't. But what was I responding to?

The technical statement is bullshit because we have statements by developers of other high end engines running beautifully on Wii U like CE3. There was no effort into making the engine run well because of business decisions.

See also posts like this gem:

Good programmers will always figure out a way to make something work and that leads me to believe DICE's technical team is just fucking lazy and are lying through their teeth so they don't look like completely incompetent schmucks. Now they just look like a bunch of lying, lazy schmucks instead. Its really only natural for people to call them on their bullshit.

 

[Linkhero1]

What does Origin offer in terms of features that the current WiiU online system doesn't?

EA games.

Spoiler

 

[Allforce]

Huh? Now this meme is bugging me.

Isn't the whole point of this pic to show the Wii U stuck outside in the rain, looking into the house, all forlorn and abandoned? I thought it was supposed to be like a poor dog, in which some evil owner left outside in the rain.

What is the GAF answer on this issue? Is it outside looking in, or is it indoors, looking out?

Fading into oblivion. Always on the outside looking in.

It works on several levels.

 

[The_Lump]

Why/why not? I have little experience with Origin, but none with Wii U, so I'm going in blind here

Edit: TOP OF THE PAGE OH GOD DON'T HURT ME I'M AN HONEST MAN

It doesn't offer anything over what the WiiU has (except for EA games of course!) but it does have certain negatives...like EA games. Zing! But srsly I don't see a reason to take it over eShop.

 

[Zoramon089]

Feature: It Has Games

Origin support doesn't magically make all those PC games run on the Wii U

 

[kswiston]

Does it? I know EA's shambolic digital distribution system did in the past, but does Origin still do that?

No, EA hasn't done that in years. In fact, you can register retail games you bought years ago at retail or on Steam and have them in your Origin library if you want to.

 

[PairOfFilthySocks]

Based on?

We already know the dev kits for the Wii U are, or at least were, rather lacking in documentation and support. Combine that with the lacklustre momentum for the system and it's not hard to see developers weighing up the effort involved in making an acceptable port happen and getting a decent return on their investment.

Edit:

I definitely is not hard to imagine. I was more interested in your confidence, though. The way you worded it implied you knew something for a fact.

Nah, I'm no insider. I'm just going based on what we've heard from developers over the past few months.

Now assuming the tools are improved as well as people here say they are, the potential increase in motivation for devs and publishers to get involved with the Wii U is surely being hampered by the console's market performance at this point. I still maintain the risk vs reward economics of developing for the Wii U is the biggest factor in developers avoiding the system as opposed to some secret under-the-table shenanigans between EA and Nintendo.

 

[Schnozberry]

No, you didn't. But what was I responding to?

Yeah, like I said, people believe what they want. There is plenty of history to show that if the money was there, so would the engine. Remember Valve's Orange Box on PS3? Originally the engine would take too much time to get running on the platform to be worth the effort, and then Sony came along with the wallet and that attitude got rectified in about 20 minutes.

 

[Schnozberry]

We already know the dev kits for the Wii U are, or at least were, rather lacking in documentation and support. Combine that with the lacklustre momentum for the system and it's not hard to see developers weighing up the effort involved in making an acceptable port happen and getting a decent return on their investment.

The tools have gotten much better recently, and so has the support from Nintendo. Criterion said numerous times in their developer commentary about Most Wanted U that Nintendo's tools were much more mature than when they started getting the engine running, and they had made themselves available to them for any support questions.

 

[Mario007]

Yeah, like I said, people believe what they want. There is plenty of history to show that if the money was there, so would the engine. Remember Valve's Orange Box on PS3? Originally the engine would take too much time to get running on the platform to be worth the effort, and then Sony came along with the wallet and that attitude got rectified in about 20 minutes.

Wasn't Orange Box a port done by an outside developer and for Portal 2 Valve had to hire ND engineers to get their engine running on the system?

 

[blu]

We already know the dev kits for the Wii U are, or at least were, rather lacking in documentation and support. Combine that with the lacklustre momentum for the system and it's not hard to see developers weighing up the effort involved in making an acceptable port happen and getting a decent return on their investment.

I definitely agree it is not hard to imagine. I was more interested in your confidence, though. The way you worded it implied you knew something for a fact.

 

[Azih]

The question isn't whether Dice is able to get FB on WiiU. I'm sure Dice could get it running to an acceptable degree if EA was willing to sink the resources for them to do so.

The question is why EA isn't willing to spend those resources?

 

[Mastperf]

I see I was misunderstood.

Plenty of people, including myself, have claimed that DICE don't care enough to port it - for money reasons, ROI or whatever. Very few people have claimed that it is some crazy malicious plot by EA.

It is possible that EA just don't see it as important enough to work on, nothing malicious about that. There clearly are one or two people hanging around who do believe something like that though:




Jeez, I even managed to get on the shitposts twitter. Maybe I should stop posting at 3am.



Yep, albeit slower. But that GPU thread shows that it isn't much of a problem.

The WiiU gpu thread hasn't shown anything more than opinions. It has a few poster knowledgeable enough to sound interesting without hard proof of anything.

 

[StevieP]

The WiiU gpu thread hasn't shown anything more than opinions. It has a few poster knowledgeable enough to sound interesting without hard proof of anything. It's like the guy who lights a sparkler in a room full of retarded people- to everyone else it's nothing but to them he's a fuckin superhero.

Show us your knowledge, almighty masterperf. Share your infinite wisdom with us lowly peons. Tell us better than criterion, shinen, frozen byte, etc already have.

 

[Gamer @ Heart]

I cant believe people are still spouting that bullshit origin rumor. As if nintendo would give up control of such a huge part of their system.

 

[spekkeh]

Isn't the whole point of this pic to show the Wii U stuck outside in the rain, looking into the house, all forlorn and abandoned? I thought it was supposed to be like a poor dog, in which some evil owner left outside in the rain.

What is the GAF answer on this issue? Is it outside looking in, or is it indoors, looking out?

The way it's shopped indicates that it's inside watching out.

It would have been much better if they made it look like it was outside watching in.

 

[Schnozberry]

Wasn't Orange Box a port done by an outside developer and for Portal 2 Valve had to hire ND engineers to get their engine running on the system?

Exactly, but it was all paid for by Sony. Hats full of money make the gaming world go round.

 

[Zoramon089]

The WiiU gpu thread hasn't shown anything more than opinions. It has a few poster knowledgeable enough to sound interesting without hard proof of anything. It's like the guy who lights a sparkler in a room full of retarded people- to everyone else it's nothing but to them he's a fuckin superhero.

"Those guys saying positive things don't know what they're talking about because I say so"

Real mature argument there. I also enjoyed the likening of people in that thread to retards. Really classy

 

[Mondriaan]

Exactly, but it was all paid for by Sony. Hats full of money make the gaming world go round.

So what's stopping Nintendo from funding a similar effort for FB?

 

[megabytecr]

The WiiU gpu thread hasn't shown anything more than opinions. It has a few poster knowledgeable enough to sound interesting without hard proof of anything. It's like the guy who lights a sparkler in a room full of retarded people- to everyone else it's nothing but to them he's a fuckin superhero.

One proud retard here almighty Mastperf, you know better, guide us into the intricacies of thee wii u hardware, I promise I will listen.

 

[Bisnic]

The question isn't whether Dice is able to get FB on WiiU. I'm sure Dice could get it running to an acceptable degree if EA was willing to sink the resources for them to do so.

The question is why EA isn't willing to spend those resources?

Isn't it kind of obvious? The Wii U sells like shit right now. Who would want to put resources into that when your games are having trouble having sales numbers even in the 6 digits? EA aren't alone in this. Only Ubisoft so far seems to be willing to support it with more than 1 or 2 games.

 

[Nekofrog]

So what's stopping Nintendo from funding a similar effort for FB?

Nintendo doesn't give any fucks about anything but themselves. Which isn't a bad way to operate in and of itself, but when all their competitors are willing to give aid to other developers it is.

 

[TalesOfWin]

why would anyone buy a watered down version of BF4/Star Wars anyway?

yeah let's say that DICE got FB3 running on Wii U with downgraded specs. Are you happy to buy that when PS4/Durango got the superior versions?

 

[StevieP]

why would anyone buy a watered down version of BF4/Star Wars anyway?

yeah let's say that DICE got FB3 running on Wii U with downgraded specs. Are you happy to buy that when PS4/Durango got the superior versions?

There are a lot of ps360 owners that will make sure their versions sell drastically more than any 8th gen skus, even though Star Wars has generally sold quite well on Nintendo platforms in the past.

But let's follow your train of thought for a moment. Why would anyone want any console version of anything when the PC version will generally be far better in price, control method, visuals, IQ, and customizability?

 

[Mastperf]

"Those guys saying positive things don't know what they're talking about because I say so"

Real mature argument there. I also enjoyed the likening of people in that thread to retards. Really classy

I have no problem with good WiiU hardware news. Nintendo is an amazing developer who I want to see stick around indefinitely. My point was that he was stating that those in the WiiU gpu thread had supposedly figured out that bandwidth wasn't a problem for the system despite none of them being qualified nor informed enough to come to any solid conclusion.
I removed the retard comment as it was meant jokingly but offended some.

Show us your knowledge, almighty masterperf. Share your infinite wisdom with us lowly peons. Tell us better than criterion, shinen, frozen byte, etc already have.

You don't need infinite wisdom to see that you're not an insider or a developer. You're someone with just enough knowledge to defend what you like while trying to make others see you as something you're not.

 

[Bisnic]

There are a lot of ps360 owners that will make sure their versions sell drastically more than any 8th gen skus, even though Star Wars has generally sold quite well on Nintendo platforms in the past.

But let's follow your train of thought for a moment. Why would anyone want any console version of anything when the PC version will generally be far better in price, control method, visuals, IQ, and customizability?

Because having a good PC is expensive and not everyone can modify the hardware inside so it can play games with the performance you want?

 

[StevieP]

Because having a good PC is expensive and not everyone can modify the hardware inside so it can play games with the performance you want?

Thus the point of playing on whichever console you own. For a lot of people, that will be ps360 for years to come.

 

[Zoramon089]

why would anyone buy a watered down version of BF4/Star Wars anyway?

yeah let's say that DICE got FB3 running on Wii U with downgraded specs. Are you happy to buy that when PS4/Durango got the superior versions?

The point you're missing is that it's dumb to use the "watered down" excuse when even talking about consoles. Unless there's a HUGE difference to the point the game is fundamentally different (like Dead Rising 360 -> Wii) then you really don't have much of a strong argument

 

[Argyle]

why would anyone buy a watered down version of BF4/Star Wars anyway?

yeah let's say that DICE got FB3 running on Wii U with downgraded specs. Are you happy to buy that when PS4/Durango got the superior versions?

Here's my take on it...

Basically, the WiiU kinda falls into the 360/PS3 cross platform bucket. Between those two consoles, the PS3 is the lowest common denominator when it comes to GPU, and the 360 is the lowest common denominator when it comes to CPU (in the past the PS3 had problems because people didn't know how to take advantage of the CPU design, but Frostbite uses the SPUs pretty well).

Enter the WiiU, with presumably a better GPU, and a somewhat worse CPU. Now the limiting factor for all platforms is the WiiU's CPU - and scaling things based on CPU is a lot less simple than scaling based on the GPU. If you have a range of GPUs, it's easy to reduce the polycounts/number of particles/size of textures and still basically have the same game at the end of the day, it just doesn't look as nice on the weaker platforms. On the CPU, you have fewer options - for example, reducing the number of enemies so you have less AI to calculate has definite gameplay implications.

So you have really have two choices - you can cripple the game on the PS3 and 360 so that you have parity across all platforms, but if the game is actually lower in complexity than the last PS3/360 only iteration that might have interesting consequences, especially given the (lack of?) sales potential on WiiU. Or you can make something like Battlefield U: Gaiden, which would be a somewhat different game, requiring more effort from your content creators (read: money) as they have to balance and tune it separately.

I am totally with gofreak on this - I was shocked to hear that devs on Wii U seemed to be having trouble getting 360/PS3 level performance out of the system. They should have designed the system to at minimum make it easy enough to get 360 level CPU performance, and then the improved GPU would have made it simple for the WiiU to have the best version of all 360/PS3 generation multiplatform games.

 

[TalesOfWin]

The point you're missing is that it's dumb to use the "watered down" excuse when even talking about consoles. Unless there's a HUGE difference to the point the game is fundamentally different (like Dead Rising 360 -> Wii) then you really don't have much of a strong argument

I dont have an argument? Ok, so you think a Wii U version of BF4 that struggles to run is not a huge difference to the next-gen releases that are coming? We wont know the difference since it is not happening, but Repi is a good guy and if he thinks that it will run like ass on Wii U then I dont doubt it is a huge difference.

 

[diffusionx]

EA is going to move into the next generation with one engine and put games on all the platforms. If Nintendo fans are really confused as to why they don't want to spend a bunch of money to make a downgrade port like BF3 console only for the Wii U for every single game... I dunno what to say. Maybe if the Wii U was some monster hit, but it is not.

 

[aza]

Huh? Now this meme is bugging me.

Isn't the whole point of this pic to show the Wii U stuck outside in the rain, looking into the house, all forlorn and abandoned? I thought it was supposed to be like a poor dog, in which some evil owner left outside in the rain.

What is the GAF answer on this issue? Is it outside looking in, or is it indoors, looking out?

I always saw it as a depressed Wii U, indoors, looking outside into the rain. Like in this picture:

 

[Schnozberry]

So what's stopping Nintendo from funding a similar effort for FB?

Probably the same fear EA has. They'd dump a bunch of money in it and it wouldn't sell.

 

[frankie_baby]

why would anyone buy a watered down version of BF4/Star Wars anyway?

yeah let's say that DICE got FB3 running on Wii U with downgraded specs. Are you happy to buy that when PS4/Durango got the superior versions?

strangely enough the 'watered down' star wars force unleashed on wii outsold the ps360 versions

 

[Zoramon089]

Why are we still on this weak CPU argument? We've had maybe a dev or 2 directly comment on it versus a multitude of other devs saying it wasn't an issue so how did it become a fact? Not to mention why is it that it's always "definitely weaker CPU" but only "supposedly stronger GPU" when both come from essentially the same sources?

 

[diffusionx]

strangely enough the 'watered down' star wars force unleashed on wii outsold the ps360 versions

The Wii version was a better game. TFU was not very good. Wii also was a pretty decent seller.

BF3 on 360 and PS3 is a pale imitation of the PC version. That is the sort of discrepancy we are talking about. Past a certain point there is no reason for EA to do that, especially if the Wii U is not a big hit.

 

[Schnozberry]

strangely enough the 'watered down' star wars force unleashed on wii outsold the ps360 versions

EA has a very different vision for the future of the games industry than Nintendo does. Both probably consider the other a bit myopic, but what can you do? Things aren't going to improve for Nintendo until they prove the concept of their own console. I think the Wii U has a ton of promise, but it has yet to really be demonstrated in a way that everybody can immediately identify with and desire it. Hopefully some of the games they show at E3 do that. Then third party support will grow along with the user base that seeks those types of experiences.

I give credit to Nintendo for trying something. I fear that Sony and Microsoft may be doubling down on a shrinking market. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[blu]

Here's my take on it...

Basically, the WiiU kinda falls into the 360/PS3 cross platform bucket. Between those two consoles, the PS3 is the lowest common denominator when it comes to GPU, and the 360 is the lowest common denominator when it comes to CPU (in the past the PS3 had problems because people didn't know how to take advantage of the CPU design, but Frostbite uses the SPUs pretty well).

Enter the WiiU, with presumably a better GPU, and a somewhat worse CPU. Now the limiting factor for all platforms is the WiiU's CPU - and scaling things based on CPU is a lot less simple than scaling based on the GPU. If you have a range of GPUs, it's easy to reduce the polycounts/number of particles/size of textures and still basically have the same game at the end of the day, it just doesn't look as nice on the weaker platforms. On the CPU, you have fewer options - for example, reducing the number of enemies so you have less AI to calculate has definite gameplay implications.

You make it sound rather single-sided. GPU scaling can be every bit as difficult and then some, considering we are talking generational differences here. It suffices that a given RT format taken for granted on one platform was missing on another, and the implications can go quite deep.

A bit of trivia re FB: back in the day DICE were extremely proud they had created a workload-parallelism engine where the (non-gpu) performance of the engine would scale close-to-linear with the number of cores, thanks to sophisticated work-packet scheduling mechanism capable of utilizing all available cores. In this regard, it would not have surprised me one bit if they talked of bad results when downporting a PC _title_ developed for 8 cores - making full use of 8 contemporary desktop-class x86_64 cores, taking that down to 3 embedded cores could be quite a challenge. But no, what we have here is the statement that their current-gen _engine_ which supposedly scales well with cores (which means it goes linearly up _and_ down) did not perform well on the WiiU. Cue in forum analyses concluding it must be Expresso's fault.

So you have really have two choices - you can cripple the game on the PS3 and 360 so that you have parity across all platforms, but if the game is actually lower in complexity than the last PS3/360 only iteration that might have interesting consequences, especially given the (lack of?) sales potential on WiiU. Or you can make something like Battlefield U: Gaiden, which would be a somewhat different game, requiring more effort from your content creators (read: money) as they have to balance and tune it separately.

Second bit of FB trivia: one of FB's big advantages made use of in DICE's ps3 games was that they could use an SPE or two to perform coarse geometry occlusion culling on the SPEs and thus reduce the workload from the trisetup-inadequate RSX. Now, imagine a third choice: that on the WiiU DICE would not have to use any cores for such tasks because the GPU can do those things just fine on its own?

 

[KKRT00]

strangely enough the 'watered down' star wars force unleashed on wii outsold the ps360 versions

Source?

 

[Argyle]

Why are we still on this weak CPU argument? We've had maybe a dev or 2 directly comment on it versus a multitude of other devs saying it wasn't an issue so how did it become a fact? Not to mention why is it that it's always "definitely weaker CPU" but only "supposedly stronger GPU" when both come from essentially the same sources?

Are you replying to me? If so, I was presuming both things (better GPU, worse CPU) as I am just going by what has publicly been said about the system. I don't have any firsthand experience with the WiiU, but I am quite familiar with Frostbite.

My impression is that the CPU is better clock for clock than the 360 CPU for most things, but it is clocked much slower than the 360 and seems to be hamstrung by a complicated memory architecture. It's one thing if it had the potential to be more powerful than the 360 CPU even if it required developers to jump through hoops to get there (for example, CELL) but another if you have to jump through similar hoops just to get a comparable level of performance out of it.

 

[shandy706]

Why are people still discussing this?

The simple answer is that the effort it would take + the install base = no profit.

I'd say that's the end of it.

 

[GC|Simon]

I'm so sick of all those Wii U (or even Nintendo) is doomed threads. Yeah, Nintendo made a huge mistake with having basically nothing ready for a brand new system for about half a year. I understand that some might not like Nintendo's way of approaching things. I understand that some might not like another Super Mario game. And yeah, Wii U's long loading times and the lack of an account system for e-purchases is a shame. But man, the Wii U is NOT a shitty piece of hardware. In my opinion the GamePad is not just a gimmick, it is one of the best controller devices ever build. There are tons of benefits, especially for local multiplayer. And yeah, there are still people who play with friends in one room on one television. I understand that some want just a regular controller and better graphics instead but Nintendo believes that better graphics don't necessarily add something to the fun. Personally, I agree with this design decision.
Six months after release we have one major issue for some fixed: the super long loading times are gone. In the meanwhile we had at least one fantastic game with Lego City: Undercover and soon we will have Nintendo's 2013 1st party line-up with Pikmin 3, Zelda: The Wind Waker, Mario Kart and EAD Tokyo's next Mario jump'n'run installment. So there will be goddamn games and maybe they will be very good. Appreciate another Mario platformer or not, both Galaxys belong to the best games of all time. They are ranked number one and three on Gamerankings and the same guys who made those awesome games are right now working on the next installment. And this one will only be available for Wii U. If that's not a reason to buy a Wii U than you have to hate Mario. Let's just wait one more month and see if those games are worth getting the console or not.

From a 3rd party point of perspective it would be great to have more or less identical systems: Making big AAA games is expensive and risky and shareholders want to see profits. A system which is different and has a remarkable market share increases the costs. I personally doubt that the lack of support we are seeing right now is just based on business decisions. You know, the time from the decision to invest in development until the release of a game is quite long. Longer than six months. While some 3rd parties announced and showed-off ports and even exclusive games others did not. 3rd parties also tend to announce games quite early in the development process which makes sense from a business point of perspective: A game will most likely sell better with some hype. So, if a company like EA was working on a lot Wii U games up until it was clear that the console itself isn't selling very well, why the hell did we never hear or see anything about them? I think that they put many projects on ice after whatever happened between them and Nintendo way before the launch. The had very little interest in investing into Wii U since quite a while now and right now I think they would appreciate a Nintendo which is going out of the business.

 

[Schnozberry]

You make it sound rather single-sided. GPU scaling can be every bit as difficult and then some, considering we are talking generational differences here. It suffices that a given RT format taken for granted on one platform was missing on another, and the implications can go quite deep.

A bit of trivia re FB: back in the day DICE were extremely proud they had created a workload-parallelism engine where the (non-gpu) performance of the engine would scale close-to-linear with the number of cores, thanks to sophisticated work-packet scheduling mechanism capable of utilizing all available cores. In this regard, it would not have surprised me one bit if they talked of bad results when downporting a PC _title_ developed for 8 cores - making full use of 8 contemporary desktop-class x86_64 cores, taking that down to 3 embedded cores could be quite a challenge. But no, what we have here is the statement that their current-gen _engine_ which supposedly scales well with cores (which means it goes linearly up _and_ down) did not perform well on the WiiU. Cue in forum analyses concluding it must be Expresso's fault.

I doubt we'll ever get any clarification from DICE, but it would be nice to know whether or not they were dealing with the machine before or after the late in cycle spec bump and tool set maturation.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

Sounds more like the "unprecedented partnership" ended because Wii U turned out to be too weak and poor selling - things you don't know until the system has been out for a few months and you've gotten to grips with the hardware. But of course it's always easier to just blame EA for a perceived correlation in their lack of support, rather than the fact that it was actually the system that caused these problems.

 

[StevieP]

Sounds more like the "unprecedented partnership" ended because Wii U turned out to be too weak and poor selling - things you don't know until the system has been out for a few months and you've gotten to grips with the hardware. But of course it's always easier to just blame EA for a perceived correlation in their lack of support, rather than the fact that it's actually the system that caused all these problems by itself.

Many tests and project hold/cancellations happened long before launch.

 

[Zoramon089]

Sounds more like the "unprecedented partnership" ended because Wii U turned out to be too weak and poor selling - things you don't know until the system has been out for a few months and you've gotten to grips with the hardware. But of course it's always easier to just blame EA for a perceived correlation in their lack of support, rather than the fact that it was actually the system that caused these problems by itself.

Maybe for owners of the system. Pretty sure devs have some grasp of power BEFORE the system launches...regardless I'm not sure how this even applies to DICE as they've had no titles released for the system

 

[KKRT00]

Sounds more like the "unprecedented partnership" ended because Wii U turned out to be too weak and poor selling - things you don't know until the system has been out for a few months and you've gotten to grips with the hardware. But of course it's always easier to just blame EA for a perceived correlation in their lack support, rather than the fact that the system has been a failure thus far and has actually caused all these problems by itself.

People dont understand that FB 2 was developed for X0 and PS3 for 2.5 years [with DICE having experience developing for them for already 3 years] and FB 3 is being optimized for X0/PS3 for 2 years, when WiiU would have like max year of development with the same complexity [because of weak CPU and slow memory] and power as X0/PS3, and no userbase to backup efforts.

Also people who say that hardware is ok in WiiU need to understand that in a month Intel is releasing Haswell CPU with integrated GPU that is 2-3 times more powerful than current gen consoles Nintendo messed up with hardware badly this time around.

 

[Bob White]

Nintendo had 7 years to make a system that could, at the very least, offer developers easy access to competitive current gen performance.

Making devs contort themselves to reach that level on 2012 hardware is a shame. What could or couldn't be done with a massive optimisation effort is besides the point, really. If you're coming this late with that level of hardware power, you cannot be demanding about developer effort. A certain level of performance with relatively little effort ought to be a given.

Very well said.

 

[Schnozberry]

Sounds more like the "unprecedented partnership" ended because Wii U turned out to be too weak and poor selling - things you don't know until the system has been out for a few months and you've gotten to grips with the hardware. But of course it's always easier to just blame EA for a perceived correlation in their lack support, rather than the fact that the system has been a failure thus far and has actually caused all these problems by itself.

You do realize that the "unprecedented support" was announced in 2011? Then around E3 2012 there were rumors about a falling out and a lot of projects subsequently got cancelled, all before the release of the hardware?

It may have nothing to do with DICE at all, but it certainly seemed to have changed EA's attitude towards the platform.