Support NeoGAF

[Effect]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

Ugh. Expected this would be some of the thinking out there.

I just really hope if there is another game even remotely similar to ME out there from another company that Nintendo backs a Wii U version and pushes it the best they can so Wii U sales are good. Just throw a middle finger back at EA. Or I'd just settle with Ubisoft, Activision and others doing well while EA being the lone major company to do poorly on the system and let them explain to their investors why.

 

[Earendil]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

I really, really wish this surprised me (if true).

Wow...why does Kotaku sound so down on the Wii U...?

notsureifserious.gif

 

[aeroslash]

Wii U will be playable in your nearest Euro capital sooner than you thought.

In Spain, Nintendo is inviting players to try the console and a bunch of launch games Friday the 5th, so there'll be plenty of new impressions and stuff. We're inviting five readers for a VIP session in the morning, in which they get to play more relaxed and more time, and the chance to win a Wii U. Pretty nice initiative IMO.

How can i get into that? I want to try it!

 

[Kouriozan]

So that mean they are launching ME3 on Wii U to don't sell, then they have an excuse to not port their multi-platform games on it.
Sounds about right.

 

[EatChildren]

So that mean they are launching ME3 on Wii U to don't sell, then they have an excuse to not port their multi-platform games on it.
Sounds about right.

No. They don't need an excuse. Nobody needs an excuse. Don't think of this kind of stuff as a publisher crafting some evil scheme to have a game fail and use it as 'evidence' of a bad market, and thus deny future support. They don't need to have evidence. They're all businesses that don't answer to anybody except their bank balance/wishes and if they don't want to support something they just flat out won't.

This is a case of the latter. They don't think it will sell, thus they don't really care to begin with.

 

[The_Lump]

There's no input. The Wii U itself is just a very powerful universal remote.

Oh. How does the tv guide n stuff work? And the additional content like they showed with the sports stats etc? Sorry, I'm a layman.

 

[Aostia]

No. They don't need an excuse. Nobody needs an excuse. Don't think of this kind of stuff as a publisher crafting some evil scheme to have a game fail and use it as 'evidence' of a bad market, and thus deny future support. They don't need to have evidence. They're all businesses that don't answer to anybody except their bank balance/wishes and if they don't want to support something they just flat out won't.

This is a case of the latter. They don't think it will sell, thus they don't really care to begin with.

So why ME3 and not simply NO GAME at all?
Don't forget how hard was for them to justify to the investors at a certain point of Wii's lifecycle, their non-support of the console.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

So why ME3 and not simply NO GAME at all?
Don't forget how hard was for them to justify to the investors at a certain point of Wii's lifecycle, their non-support of the console.

They likely wanted to provide some token support - like dipping your big toe in the water to test the temperature.

ME3 instead of nothing makes sense in that instance.

 

[Aostia]

They likely wanted to provide some token support - like dipping your big toe in the water to test the temperature.

ME3 instead of nothing makes sense in that instance.

I understand.
But the question is still there: what kind of "temperature" could be tested with such an awful move?
I mean: if this game doesn't sell, which is the deduction that you can obtain by this move?

Can a Top manager admit that the game (ME3 on Wii U) sold like shit because his decision of porting that episode alone in this particular moment, one year later, with the Collection coming out one week before on more established consoles, was idiot?

Or will it be easier to criticize the console as a product unable to receive "hardcore" AAA cinematographic games?

 

[Pennywise83]

No. They don't need an excuse. Nobody needs an excuse. Don't think of this kind of stuff as a publisher crafting some evil scheme to have a game fail and use it as 'evidence' of a bad market, and thus deny future support. They don't need to have evidence. They're all businesses that don't answer to anybody except their bank balance/wishes and if they don't want to support something they just flat out won't.

This is a case of the latter. They don't think it will sell, thus they don't really care to begin with.

Wrong. EA Investors need an excuse. EA must have strong motivations to not invest into a new console, This is what happened with DS:Extraction.

 

[Berg]

Oh. How does the tv guide n stuff work? And the additional content like they showed with the sports stats etc? Sorry, I'm a layman.

Pretty sure the TV guide will be populated thru the internet. I think TVii will draw a lot of info from internet databases like they said they would for sports stats.

 

[Earendil]

No. They don't need an excuse. Nobody needs an excuse. Don't think of this kind of stuff as a publisher crafting some evil scheme to have a game fail and use it as 'evidence' of a bad market, and thus deny future support. They don't need to have evidence. They're all businesses that don't answer to anybody except their bank balance/wishes and if they don't want to support something they just flat out won't.

This is a case of the latter. They don't think it will sell, thus they don't really care to begin with.

I disagree. They have to answer to their shareholders. And if in a couple years their shareholder want to know why they have ignored Nintendo yet again, they will point to ME3 failing as the reason. I'm not saying this is their plan, but it's gonna happen whether they outright intend it to or not.

 

[EatChildren]

So why ME3 and not simply NO GAME at all?
Don't forget how hard was for them to justify to the investors at a certain point of Wii's lifecycle, their non-support of the console.

Because the game is still relatively new, has lingering buzz, and porting it is probably fairly cheap and easy. As Alberto said, it's token support. It probably costs them very little and won't be hard to make the investment back.

The issue is that the investment itself is lukewarm. It's a cash grab with, in EA's eyes, no foreseeable future. That doesn't mean Mass Effect 3 the Wii U port won't turn profit, it just means that EA has no interest or does not see the franchise itself having a strong enough user base on the Wii U to put in any real significant effort.

Having something is better than having nothing, because that something can be cheap enough to make some money. Publishers still want to make money even when they don't have a long term investment strategy.

That's just the reality (the dumb reality, mind you) of the business. Yes, most publishers have to answer to shareholders, but that's not what people mean when they throw around theories of publishers sending games to die to use them as evidence of poor sales. They don't need evidence and they don't need excuses because they're not interested in nor have to answer to gamers. If they don't wan't to support something, they just flat out won't, and where they do support they will do so in the cheapest, most profitable way possible.

Or, TLDR: Mass Effect 3 Wii U is probably cheap enough to make an easy profit, but EA legitimately believes there's no future for the Mass Effect franchise on a Nintendo platform, and that sees no point making extra effort to establish such a market.

EDIT: The investors excuse doesn't hold enough water when (and I've mentioned this before) publishers are selling the idea of making big money elsewhere, which is what EA has been doing with other projects (with plenty of failure, mind you).

 

[F#A#Oo]

notsureifserious.gif

The bullet points reads like a disclaimer...

 

[Spieler Eins]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

The conspiracy is real. :lol

 

[wsippel]

They likely wanted to provide some token support - like dipping your big toe in the water to test the temperature.

ME3 instead of nothing makes sense in that instance.

You really think so? Sure it's token support, but that doesn't mean the particular choice makes any sense. It's basically guaranteed to bomb - it's old, it's the last part in a trilogy, it's much, much cheaper on other platforms and it had bad word of mouth. Just doing the usual EA Sports shit at launch and announcing Dead Space 3 would ship day and date on Wii U would have made much more sense in my opinion.

 

[plagiarize]

not that it makes much difference, but if anyone wants to see that Sonic Wii U footage without some annoying Sonic fan blabbering over it, and without it having been reconverted to the wrong aspect ratio and god knows what, i believe this is the original upload.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VQC3_I1puA

doesn't much effect how the framerate looks though, but i don't think that's really the game. if you watch at around 1:40 a dude walks past at a choppy frame rate too.

look at how the 60 fps NSMBU looks in one of their other videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-x_SAzZEPI&feature=relmfu

 

[nikatapi]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

Well it is kind of an expected failure though with the announcement of the trilogy on the other platforms and given the fact that ME3 will be a full price title on the WiiU.
If they sold it for less than full price i'm sure some people would consider getting it.

 

[Earendil]

Or, TLDR: Mass Effect 3 Wii U is probably cheap enough to make an easy profit, but EA legitimately believes there's no future for the Mass Effect franchise on a Nintendo platform, and that sees no point making extra effort to establish such a market.

EDIT: The investors excuse doesn't hold enough water when (and I've mentioned this before) publishers are selling the idea of making big money elsewhere, which is what EA has been doing with other projects (with plenty of failure, mind you).

Sorry still not buying it. When a new console comes out, that is the perfect time "to establish such a market."

If you plow a field and forget to plant anything, you don't blame the ground when nothing grows.

 

[Angel Whispers]

So that mean they are launching ME3 on Wii U to don't sell, then they have an excuse to not port their multi-platform games on it.
Sounds about right.

Dismissing it all as some 'silly anti-Nintendo conspiracy' is rather poor form, in my opinion - Some Dreamcast fans know all about EA's douchebaggery and haven't forgotten, and with that in mind, it's not so unreasonable to believe this. Really, if this is the 'unprecedented partnership', then when they fall out, one wonders what will happen!?

 

[Aostia]

Because the game is still relatively new, has lingering buzz, and porting it is probably fairly cheap and easy. As Alberto said, it's token support. It probably costs them very little and won't be hard to make the investment back.

The issue is that the investment itself is lukewarm. It's a cash grab with, in EA's eyes, no foreseeable future. That doesn't mean Mass Effect 3 the Wii U port won't turn profit, it just means that EA has no interest or does not see the franchise itself having a strong enough user base on the Wii U to put in any real significant effort.

Having something is better than having nothing, because that something can be cheap enough to make some money. Publishers still want to make money even when they don't have a long term investment strategy.

That's just the reality (the dumb reality, mind you) of the business. Yes, most publishers have to answer to shareholders, but that's not what people mean when they throw around theories of publishers sending games to die to use them as evidence of poor sales. They don't need evidence and they don't need excuses because they're not interested in nor have to answer to gamers. If they don't wan't to support something, they just flat out won't, and where they do support they will do so in the cheapest, most profitable way possible.

Or, TLDR: Mass Effect 3 Wii U is probably cheap enough to make an easy profit, but EA legitimately believes there's no future for the Mass Effect franchise on a Nintendo platform, and that sees no point making extra effort to establish such a market.

EDIT: The investors excuse doesn't hold enough water when (and I've mentioned this before) publishers are selling the idea of making big money elsewhere, which is what EA has been doing with other projects (with plenty of failure, mind you).

Just to clarify, I think that you are at least partially right.
But the announcment of the Trilogy (at this time, with that release date, considering the "low effort" that could have been done to port it also on the Wii U subsituting ME3 compared to the higher sales that it could have done compared to the third episode alone) underline not only the idea that probably the franchise will not have enough market on Nintendo console, but also the intention to make that small market even smaller, if not non-existent.

 

[EatChildren]

Sorry still not buying it. When a new console comes out, that is the perfect time "to establish such a market."

If you plow a field and forget to plant anything, you don't blame the ground when nothing grows.

I'm not contesting the idea that EA's poor investment is stupid and they're failing to easily capitalise on a new market with a soon-to-exist product.

I'm saying they don't need an excuse to not give a shit because they already don't give a shit and have no interest in changing their mind, even if that makes them wrong or stupid (which it usually does). They're not interested in establishing a Mass Effect fanbase on the Wii U because they don't think it exists/don't think it's worthwhile, and would thus rather do a cheap port of a single game as token launch support.

It's easy to sit by and say "Well it's over priced and undercut/devalued by the trilogy pack, which would make much more sense to release". But you/I say that because we give a shit and we see the logic in trying to establish that market. When the intention isn't there to establish the market in the first place, that logic doesn't fly.

EA literally does not care. And the company's annual performance should give you a good idea of how much their not caring on a whole host of situations is working out.

 

[The_Lump]

Dismissing it all as some 'silly anti-Nintendo conspiracy' is rather poor form, in my opinion - Some Dreamcast fans know all about EA's douchebaggery and haven't forgotten, and with that in mind, it's not so unreasonable to believe this. Really, if this is the 'unprecedented partnership', then when they fall out, one wonders what will happen!?

No, the timeline was as follows:

1)Nintendo thinks 3rd party online platforms might be cool.

2)EA thinks it might get Origin to be Nintendo's exclusive online platform.

3)EA and Nintendo announce unprecedented partnership

4)Nintendo says "Er, no chance" to point number 2.

5)EA throws its toys out the pram and says "Er, f**k you then, rubbish support only for Wii U" to Nintendo.

Spoiler

6)Nintendo says, "Meh".

 

[MadeInBeats]

AI Wars is Unity as well.

I know Endless Space was made with Unity.

Edit: beaten.

Not that I'm aware of, but I'm not all that savvy on Unity games. There's some interesting stuff coming up though, like Mechwarrior Tactics. Endless Space was also made on Unity. Both CRPGs Wastleland 2 and Project Eternity will be made on Unity too.

I'll look into these. Hope it gets the big retail RTSs as well.

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

Yeah, I just don't buy it... why bother in the first place. Even if it isn't costing them much, how did they think releasing Tri on the other platforms a couple of weeks before the launch of WiiU version would effect sales? It's an epic business decision fail; and to use those sales results to gauge reception on a Nintendo plaform? even more fail.

Oh. How does the tv guide n stuff work? And the additional content like they showed with the sports stats etc? Sorry, I'm a layman.

In what sense? I seen a rep demoing the TVii system say they are grabbing all their TV Guide and sports stats data from licensed databases, for which you can assume they will be paying a fee for. They can then feed that data over the net into any application they want, like the sports stats and TV guide interfaces.

 

[Pociask]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

Why make ME3U a much less valuable proposition, in that case? If they want to just dip their toe in the water, that's fine, that's understandable. But by releasing a trilogy of all three games, at the same price, a week earlier, it's like filling the water with sharks before you dip your toe in. People buying video games aren't completely stupid - the games are all on shelves pretty darn close to each other. You're either going to have non-savvy buyers seeing 1 game vs. 3, and thinking not a good deal, or savvy buyers hesitant to buy because of a possible release of a trilogy further down the line.

Honestly, this just indicates to me that EA is in financial trouble and is needs some quick easy cash, damn the consequences on future earning potential on a new platform.

 

[Earendil]

I'm not contesting the idea that EA's poor investment is stupid and they're failing to easily capitalise on a new market with a soon-to-exist product.

I'm saying they don't need an excuse to not give a shit because they already don't give a shit and have no interest in changing their mind, even if that makes them wrong or stupid (which it usually does). They're not interested in establishing a Mass Effect fanbase on the Wii U because they don't think it exists/don't think it's worthwhile, and would thus rather do a cheap port of a single game as token launch support.

It's easy to sit by and say "Well it's over priced and undercut/devalued by the trilogy pack, which would make much more sense to release". But you/I say that because we give a shit and we see the logic in trying to establish that market. When the intention isn't there to establish the market in the first place, that logic doesn't fly.

EA literally does not care. And the company's annual performance should give you a good idea of how much their not caring on a whole host of situations is working out.

I see your point now.

 

[EatChildren]

RE: Mass Effect Trilogy undercutting Mass Effect 3: Wii U.

Again, this is logical...if you think EA is trying to establish a market with both games. But they're not.

Put it this way. There's two types of people buying Mass Effect games (any game, for that matter). The people legitimately interested in investing in the series because they're sold on the marketing, heard good word of mouth, think it looks interesting, etc. These people are likely to buy DLC, be interested in future Mass Effect games, and so on.

Then there's the second kind of person, who just kinda buys games they notice with passing interest. They might have some money to blow, they might be caught up in launch system hype, they might be simply looking for something to kill time over the holidays. They don't really know much about the series, the franchise, the game. But the box looks cool and they need a new game to play so whatever.

The trilogy is aimed at the former. It's aimed at established long time new fans. This is coupled with EA/BioWare's N7 Day shit. With the trilogy pack they're saying "Hey, you there. This series is rad sick awesome! Get into it, because there's more to come!". These are your dedicated, super interested new fans.

Mass Effect 3: Wii U is aimed at the latter. It is a title for people with a passing interest and, most importantly, caught on launch console hype looking for a flashy new game they've never played or maybe even heard of to give their new console a work out. They might not really care about the epic sci fi trilogy, or the multiplayer, and they might not even finish the game. But a new system is out and they need a new game and this one has a soldiery looking dude in front a planet I think he shoots aliens cool get that.

Yes, in the eyes of a gamer, it makes sense to put the former on the latter platform because weyo, you start building a new market. But that market, even if it could be built, will only be built if the publisher/distributor thinks it's worthwhile or possible or if they actually care. The latter is a token "this will be a nice stocking stuffer" riding off new console hype and a market they legitimately believe isn't worth going the extra mile for.

 

[Taker666]

I'm not contesting the idea that EA's poor investment is stupid and they're failing to easily capitalise on a new market with a soon-to-exist product.

I'm saying they don't need an excuse to not give a shit because they already don't give a shit and have no interest in changing their mind, even if that makes them wrong or stupid (which it usually does). They're not interested in establishing a Mass Effect fanbase on the Wii U because they don't think it exists/don't think it's worthwhile, and would thus rather do a cheap port of a single game as token launch support.

It's easy to sit by and say "Well it's over priced and undercut/devalued by the trilogy pack, which would make much more sense to release". But you/I say that because we give a shit and we see the logic in trying to establish that market. When the intention isn't there to establish the market in the first place, that logic doesn't fly.

EA literally does not care. And the company's annual performance should give you a good idea of how much their not caring on a whole host of situations is working out.

Well if that was the case I 'd have thought something like Mirror's Edge - Ultimate edition or a Wii U enhanced version of Mass effect 1 would have been far better received by multi-platform gamers and Wii only gamers.

 

[Linkhero1]

RE: Mass Effect Trilogy undercutting Mass Effect 3: Wii U.

Again, this is logical...if you think EA is trying to establish a market with both games. But they're not.

Put it this way. There's two types of people buying Mass Effect games (any game, for that matter). The people legitimately interested in investing in the series because they're sold on the marketing, heard good word of mouth, think it looks interesting, etc. These people are likely to buy DLC, be interested in future Mass Effect games, and so on.

Then there's the second kind of person, who just kinda buys games they notice with passing interest. They might have some money to blow, they might be caught up in launch system hype, they might be simply looking for something to kill time over the holidays. They don't really know much about the series, the franchise, the game. But the box looks cool and they need a new game to play so whatever.

The trilogy is aimed at the former. It's aimed at established long time new fans. This is coupled with EA/BioWare's N7 Day shit. With the trilogy pack they're saying "Hey, you there. This series is rad sick awesome! Get into it, because there's more to come!". These are your dedicated, super interested new fans.

Mass Effect 3: Wii U is aimed at the latter. It is a title for people with a passing interest and, most importantly, caught on launch console hype looking for a flashy new game they've never played or maybe even heard of to give their new console a work out. They might not really care about the epic sci fi trilogy, or the multiplayer, and they might not even finish the game. But a new system is out and they need a new game and this one has a soldiery looking dude in front a planet I think he shoots aliens cool get that.

Yes, in the eyes of a gamer, it makes sense to put the former on the latter platform because weyo, you start building a new market. But that market, even if it could be built, will only be built if the publisher/distributor thinks it's worthwhile or possible or if they actually care. The latter is a token "this will be a nice stocking stuffer" riding off new console hype and a market they legitimately believe isn't worth going the extra mile for.

I agree with you but considering it's not a launch title, that ride won't be that great for ME3. Doesn't seem like EA gives two shits about the Wii U but we'll see soon enough if that's the case.

 

[MadeInBeats]

Do you think EA will even have the decency to address this situation or answer tweets about it? I don't think they will, it'd be to much like admitting fault.

 

[F#A#Oo]

RE: Mass Effect Trilogy undercutting Mass Effect 3: Wii U.

Again, this is logical...if you think EA is trying to establish a market with both games. But they're not.

Put it this way. There's two types of people buying Mass Effect games (any game, for that matter). The people legitimately interested in investing in the series because they're sold on the marketing, heard good word of mouth, think it looks interesting, etc. These people are likely to buy DLC, be interested in future Mass Effect games, and so on.

Then there's the second kind of person, who just kinda buys games they notice with passing interest. They might have some money to blow, they might be caught up in launch system hype, they might be simply looking for something to kill time over the holidays. They don't really know much about the series, the franchise, the game. But the box looks cool and they need a new game to play so whatever.

The trilogy is aimed at the former. It's aimed at established long time new fans. This is coupled with EA/BioWare's N7 Day shit. With the trilogy pack they're saying "Hey, you there. This series is rad sick awesome! Get into it, because there's more to come!". These are your dedicated, super interested new fans.

Mass Effect 3: Wii U is aimed at the latter. It is a title for people with a passing interest and, most importantly, caught on launch console hype looking for a flashy new game they've never played or maybe even heard of to give their new console a work out. They might not really care about the epic sci fi trilogy, or the multiplayer, and they might not even finish the game. But a new system is out and they need a new game and this one has a soldiery looking dude in front a planet I think he shoots aliens cool get that.

Yes, in the eyes of a gamer, it makes sense to put the former on the latter platform because weyo, you start building a new market. But that market, even if it could be built, will only be built if the publisher/distributor thinks it's worthwhile or possible or if they actually care. The latter is a token "this will be a nice stocking stuffer" riding off new console hype and a market they legitimately believe isn't worth going the extra mile for.

This doesn't make sense from a consumer nor business point of view tbh...

I think Nintendo asked EA to throw them a bone and Mass Effect is the chosen IP...instead of say Battlefield 3 Premium U Edition or an entirely new IP ala Boom Blox.

 

[A Twisty Fluken]

The problem I have is that this approach is still full of flaws, not from the perspective of a gamer, but even from that of an entrepeneur. I'm agreeing though that all things considered this seems likely, but it's still so stupid.

EC already pointed out that the balance sheet affirms this. EA right now is not good at business.

 

[Effect]

Do you think EA will even have the decency to address this situation or answer tweets about it? I don't think they will, it'd be to much like admitting fault.

Don't think anyone should hold their breath or expect any type of statement. Best to simply write EA off in the end and try not to worry to much. Let them continue to lose money. Pay attention to games and companies that actually want your money and are putting in some effort to get. That's how I'm looking at things.

 

[Vic]

Unity was support on the Wii too, as it did the 360 and (I think) the PS3. Wii U support isn't surprising. However, if porting tools are indeed very easy, and Nintendo very open to a wide spectrum of e-titles with a fair and encouraging distribution policy, we could see a lot of easy Unity PC titles ported over.

Really, it will all depend on Nintendo. The quality of all e-stores depends entirely on the company running it.

But the Unity deal is more than a simple Wii U support announcement though. Apparently, the deal allows Nintendo to distribute Unity licences for the Wii U version to their in-house or third-party partners, presumably for free. Since Unity users are mostly indie developers, that deal was probably made with them in mind. Nintendo want devs to create games that fully uses their hardware, which in this case is mostly the GamePad, and small devs are more eager to do neat things with it to differentiate themselves than big publishers.

 

[Linkhero1]

I was thinking. The one genre Nintendo is missing is the fps genre. I'm not talking about fps appearing on their console, but Nintendo hasn't published an fps game since Geist on GC iirc. What's to stop Nintendo from reviving Timesplitters 4? The game was canceled wasn't it?

 

[Father_Brain]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

That's pretty much exactly what I'd have expected, particularly given that MOH, DS3, Crysis 3, and Fuse aren't coming to the platform: they've prejudged the Wii U audience as being incapable of supporting core games, and will only give the system token support in that regard from here on out. Maybe they'll reconsider if ME3 and/or other core games in the launch window perform well, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

 

[Effect]

That's pretty much exactly what I'd have expected, particularly given that MOH, DS3, Crysis 3, and Fuse aren't coming to the platform: they've prejudged the Wii U audience as being incapable of supporting core games, and will only give the system token support in that regard from here on out. Maybe they'll reconsider if ME3 and/or other core games in the launch window perform well, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

Nah. The one game that really could change their mind but wont is Call of Duty. It wasn't enough to change their mind on the Wii when it was clear while not doing as well as the PS3/360 versions it was still a million+ seller every outing. Black Ops 2 will still do great, even better then the Wii games and I doubt at this point it will change the minds at EA. Not unless it's forced upon them by their shareholders once the numbers come in and they see EA as simply abandoning the console to Activision, at least on the FPS front.

Now the question I have if anyone can answer it is the following. Could the shareholders actually force EA management to change? Demand that certain titles going forward from whatever point this possible discussion takes place be on the Wii U?

 

[Shin Johnpv]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

More shitty business sense. That's just really dumb, well if they buy the rip off we made, we'll consider more. Who is going to pay 60 bucks for 1 game in a series when you can get all 3 for the same price or less. It's just dumb.

 

[jerd]

I was thinking. The one genre Nintendo is missing is the fps genre. I'm not talking about fps appearing on their console, but Nintendo hasn't published an fps game since Geist on GC iirc. What's to stop Nintendo from reviving Timesplitters 4? The game was canceled wasn't it?

This isn't published by Nintendo, but it is an exclusive. I had really high hopes for The Conduit and I hope they try one more on the Wii U. It looks really good running on dolphin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=327Wj24L1u0

 

[Shin Johnpv]

No. They don't need an excuse. Nobody needs an excuse. Don't think of this kind of stuff as a publisher crafting some evil scheme to have a game fail and use it as 'evidence' of a bad market, and thus deny future support. They don't need to have evidence. They're all businesses that don't answer to anybody except their bank balance/wishes and if they don't want to support something they just flat out won't.

This is a case of the latter. They don't think it will sell, thus they don't really care to begin with.

It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Linkhero1]

This isn't published by Nintendo, but it is an exclusive. I had really high hopes for The Conduit and I hope they try one more on the Wii U. It looks really good running on dolphin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=327Wj24L1u0

Well, my point is that considering Nintendo revived Bayonetta 2 not too long ago, what are the chances of them funding and publishing Timesplitters 4? It seems right up their alley.

 

[Xater]

I just realized that the WiiU is probably the only console which could make Border Break work. Sadly I doubt Sega is even going to consider this idea. Such an awesome arcade that will probably never see the light of day outside of Japan.

 

[jerd]

Well, my point is that considering Nintendo revived Bayonetta 2 not too long ago, what are the chances of them funding and publishing Timesplitters 4? It seems right up their alley.

Nothing would make me happier this gen than for Nintendo to somehow become a haven for indie games and beloved series that have been forgotten about/ignored/deemed unprofitable. Seriously would probably be my favorite gen if Nintendo keeps bringing stuff back from the dead.

 

[Blades64]

I feel bad for the studio that's porting ME3 over to Wii U that's what. Knowing that their work on the port would probably go unoticed in first place to just straight up ignored. EA treats their studios like crap. See Insomniac...

 

[lordfroakie]

I just realized that the WiiU is probably the only console which could make Border Break work. Sadly I doubt Sega is even going to consider this idea. Such an awesome arcade that will probably never see the light of day outside of Japan.

Boder Break is coming to iOS and we might get it

 

[Berg]

Didn't EA put battlefield three gameplay in the WiiU third party demo reel for E32011?

 

[Xater]

Boder Break is coming to iOS and we might get it

I would still doubt a western release of that. Also touch controls only will not really be the ideal way to play it. I mean the game has a stick and mouse setup in the arcade for fucks sake!

 

[Linkhero1]

Didn't EA put battlefield three gameplay in the WiiU third party demo reel for E32011?

Yes, but that wasn't an official announcement.

 

[Bluemercury]

I threw some questions out in the ether and the response to the whole ME3/METri thing appears to be "EA did not expect Wii U owners to buy Mass Effect, anyway, so no point in porting over three games. If ME3 sells gangbusters, they'll consider it a proper summer home for Mass Effect."

Grain of salt, etc. This isn't an official EA response, but it appears to be their reasoning.

So are you saying they don't really believe the game will sell anyway???wow....so why not porting the first one, do they think people see trilogies backwards????

 

[jerd]

Just curious, has anyone else's launch want list changed in the past few weeks? Rayman was a must buy for me, but now it is a wait and see, same with NSMBU. ZombiU is now a must buy, and I'm probably going to get TTT2 and take a serious look at Razor's Edge. Also, I ended up more sold on NintendoLand than I expected which is why I preordered the Deluxe box.


Edit: Also, I know we heard the weird rumor about Retro convincing Epic to port UE4 to Wii U (lol), but in that article it said there are actually supposedly multiple proprietary engines that many first and third party devs will be able to use. Did we know this or was it assumed? I was under the impression Retro was just building it for their game. Sorry if this was already discussed, I've been pretty GAF absent recently.

http://gengame.net/2012/09/rumor-retro-studios-is-working-on-game-engines-for-wii-u/