Can we summarize your argument?
1. EA's strategy for Wii U software was terrible
2. The software itself was terrible
3. The software didn't sell, as expected
4. That's Nintendo's fault somehow and definitely not the fault of EA
Is that it?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
EA has no titles in development for Wii U
- Thread starter strangedopamine
- Start date
Can we summarize your argument?
1. EA's strategy for Wii U software was terrible
2. The software itself was terrible
3. The software didn't sell, as expected
4. That's Nintendo's fault somehow and definitely not the fault of EA
Is that it?
Justzisguyukno
Member
Do you really need someone to tell you why it sold poorly?
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
EA looks at the install base. Its shit.
EA looks at Nintendo not even advertising it. Why should EA develop for it.
EA looks at the lack of hype for it. Why invest in it.
Why invest in something that is being ignored by the creator when you can invest in two consoles that are expected to be hyped, advertised, and marketed with hundreds of millions over the next few months.
Why bother responding to my posts when you refuse to answer simple direct questions?
I'm not advocating any "conspiracy theory" - I'm advocating the "theory" that EA's launch titles were doomed to fail due to poor strategy and execution on the part of EA, and that there was little reasonable expectation of success. And that EA clearly bailed out very early on given that they were gimping their own games out of the gate, had no plans for things like roster updates, destroyed any chance at decent ME3 sales before release, etc.
This is not "conspiracy theory" - this is what happened.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Can I summarize your explanation for EA's lack of support?
1. EA hates Nintendo
Is that it?
I honestly think Nintendo failed to realize how Microsoft's creation of dude-bro culture evaporated the teen gaming segment it used to dominate. Adults that grew up w Nintendo recall warm Christmas memories of NES gaming because there were no other competitors. Now after being weaned on COD and Halo, kids don't give a second glance to Nintendo's "underpowered" system. Its a generational thing, and the real question Nintendo should be asking is how to make its brand cool again. How can the trigger finger COD crowd be wooed back to kid-friendly Nintendo?
EA is hedging their bet the biggest market exists with the consoles that will make the prettiest shooters. Nintendo was never going to win EA's support, regardless of tablet controller design, first party game support or even specs. Nintendo's philosophy is to design innovative architecture/design to challenge the way we game. Question is, can someone realize the Wii U potential before it's too late?
EA is hedging their bet the biggest market exists with the consoles that will make the prettiest shooters. Nintendo was never going to win EA's support, regardless of tablet controller design, first party game support or even specs. Nintendo's philosophy is to design innovative architecture/design to challenge the way we game. Question is, can someone realize the Wii U potential before it's too late?
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
I have responded. Just because the answers arent up to your standards doesnt change the fact I have responded. You refuse to answer either of my questions so I'll ask again.
1. Why did BLOPS 2 sell so shitty?
2. To summarize your stance: EA hates Nintendo?
Try to answer my questions for a change.
The PS2 outsold the PS3 in 2007. Possibly in 2008 as well ( ww sales). It's not uncommon for that to happen. Obviously not by these margins though.
In Retrospect, EA didn't like what they saw :-O
darkistheway
Member
COD sold like shit because it was on a system with a low install base, a historical market demographic that doesn't care about shooters and was five days late in a world where COD sells 7.5 million in its first month to a rabid fanbase entrenched on either 360 or PS3.
I highly doubt Activision was expecting too much from COD Wii U. I don't think it met expectations but those expectations wouldn't have been crazy.
Activision and Ubisoft seem to recognize that Nintendo consoles help them sell Just Dance, Skylanders etc. Their core support is probably very tightly considered.
You in fact did not answer, presumably because you can't.
I will gladly answer your questions if you answer mine first. I did ask first and it's much more directly relevant. I'll remind you once again:
Can you explain to me why anyone would reasonably expect ME3 to sell well when it's available for other systems for much cheaper, a trilogy version was just announced for a much greater value, people who already own ME 1 and 2 can buy it on those systems, and people who don't own 1 and 2 have no way to play them on WiiU?
So far you answer was "I'm not EA." But you are speaking for EA in this thread, claiming to understand why they make the decisions they do, so "I'm not EA" doesn't seem like a good faith response.
Why? Because it didn't get any DLC. None. Wii U purchasers were supposed to get the Nuketown map, but that was dropped right before the game was released. Wii U owners are still playing on the same maps and such that other versions started with. On Miiverse it's an every day thing to read about people missing DLC. If someone was a hardcore CoD player, why would anyone bother with the Wii U version.
Hell, I even purchased the game, and even now I'm not happy about it. Rest assured, I won't be doing it again in the future.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Sorry. I already answered your questions. If you would like to respond and answer whether you believe EA hates Nintendo which is why its not developing Wii U games (its a yes or no answer) then I'll try to go into more detail regarding your questions. Otherwise I'll be waiting for your answer.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Perhaps if more people bought the game Activision would invest in porting the DLC over to the Wii U. You do realize they have to pay people to do the work right? If not enough people bought the game to begin with then theres no reason to invest their own money in porting DLC that wouldn't return their investment.
Wrestlemania
Banned
That's clearly not his position.
Take Ubisoft as an example. Clearly the low install base is not great for them, but they've supported it well and based on the fact that most of their big upcoming games are still being ported, it must be working out okay for them.
To blame Nintendo entirely for a major publisher bailing after their weak software achieved little success seems silly in the light of another major publisher seemingly managing just fine. For now, of course. If sales don't pick up it seems unlikely the Ubi support will continue forever.
It's not hatred, it's incompetence.
Justzisguyukno
Member
Quick google search shows that the game sold over 11million copies before the Wii U was even released...
The DLC was pulled before the game was even released. Sales had nothing to do with it.
As for buying to get something, I think that's BS. I bought the game, and yet I got nothing. It's not my job to sell their game, it's Activision's. Either way, by not supporting me, I have no desire to support them.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
Haha, that´s too true.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
And perhaps Ubisoft is more willing to take a chance financially than EA is? Ubi also pushed by Rayman Legends and made it multiplatform. Ubi wasnt too happy about Zombie U results if I am not mistaken so expect the sequel to be MP too.
At the end of the day the success or failure of a console falls on the manufacturer. Nobody else. Nintendo received the praise for the Wii's success and rightfully so and deserves the blame for where the Wii U is. Nobody else.
Wrestlemania
Banned
Exactly. It's not a great mystery why sales were poor for a late release of a game already available on platforms which are owned by everyone likely to be interested in that game.
The DLC was pulled because the Wii U's operating system didn't offer DLC support until the December update. It's Nintendo's fault - maybe you shouldn't support them?
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Amd its not EA's job to sell the Wii U, it's Nintendo's. We agree. Also, DLC wasnt available for Wii U when BLOPS 2 released on the system.
Everything third party sold poorly on the WiiU, even the exclusive stuff like ZombiU.
And with poorly i mean completely abysmal.
I think Ubi is definitely hoping that the Wii U will pick up in sales soon and their support will pay off
I blame Activision, because they could have added it later. The map was a free map, yet we didn't even get that. So yeah, they didn't support me, so I won't be supporting them unless we get the same treatment as everyone else.
The release wasn't all that late (a few days really aren't all that significant): But the scenario you are describing means that even if all versions had been released day-and-date it wouldn't have been worth the effort to Activision: All they would have done is syphoning off PS360 sales of the game.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Why should Activision invest money into porting over content that may not be profitable? Just because you bought their game? Did you buy it with the promise DLC would be available? You paid for the game and got what you paid for.
Maybe it costs them too much not to run it through origin or something? Not worth the promise of servers etc with such low sales.
PaulExcellent
Member
This is going to cause a lack of truly immersive and visceral experiences full of content on the WiiU.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
The Vita with no software is outselling the WiiU in the UK. The WiiU in the UK is in the worst shape of any other market i reckon, maybe not after this month´s NPD.
Justzisguyukno
Member
It really is, especially with a game like COD, where close to half of the total sales happen with in the first week of its release.
EA is salty about not being able to sell software on the WiiU.
What I'm wondering is why poor offerings that clearly weren't going to sell not selling is the fault of Nintendo and not the fault of the company that developed and marketed the games.
There is little return on investment on bad products people don't want. That's not the fault of consumers or the venue.
You bet I did, as did a lot of other people. I pre-ordered the game with the notion that I was getting the Nuketown map. It wasn't until I got the game in my hand from Amazon that the representative told me we weren't getting it. Total BS, man. So yeah, I don't care about their money situation. They weren't up front about it, and still are giving people the line that it MIGHT come. This isn't Nintendo. This is all Activision, and to say that I shouldn't demand what I thought I was getting is flat out wrong. I paid for the game, but I didn't get all of what I paid for.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
So if the Amazon rep told you that you didnt get what you thought you paid for why not return it to Amazon. Theyre usually really good about returns.
As I mentioned before: If that is the case, then porting to the Wii U makes even less sense - fragmenting the existing userbase while only adding an insignificant amount of additional customers isn't worthwhile. If most of the potential customerbase already owns a PS3 or 360 they can buy the game on, why create a Wii U version at all?
I still think their best bet at this point is dropping the gamepad altogether. It's a stupid, expensive idea that no one is interested in. There's no way they're going to axe the whole fucking system.
They're better off selling a $199 console at a profit that plays Nintendo games in HD (with Wiimote support) than a $349 console at a loss with a shitty gimmick controller as the main premise.
Sell it separately, or bundled with a game like Wii Play.
They're better off selling a $199 console at a profit that plays Nintendo games in HD (with Wiimote support) than a $349 console at a loss with a shitty gimmick controller as the main premise.
Sell it separately, or bundled with a game like Wii Play.
that would be the most drastic measure they could take. if their franchises fail to ignite anything, they might be forced to do it.
RawkHawk2010
Member
...but drawing things on Miiverse is awesome.
You know what else is awesome? Mario Paint. But the SNES wasn't based around the mouse that came with the game.
Fuck, Mario Paint U. Comes with a Wii U Gamepad. Boom.
Porting free DLC is not profitable nor is offering it in the first place. Now you're just being obtuse.
You keep asking why people didn't buy COD and they keep telling you.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Except it pays off if enough people buy the game or companies wouldnt do it. Its a gateway to getting them to buy other DLC. It also entices them to buy said game. If not enough people bought the game to begin with no reason investing money in making DLC.
This is a basic strategy question that applies to most of the ports. Here are the answers:
1. There are at least some people who don't own a PS3 or 360.
2. Helping to create a viable platform is good long-term business, especially if that platform targets a somewhat different audience.
Expectations for these should have been low. COD is on like game 8 in 8 years, if someone wanted to play COD they probably have hardware that can do it. Most of your COD sales are going to cannibalize sales on other platforms. If you sell 10 million copies on Wii U that probably means 9.5 million less on PS3 and 360.
That is true. But isn't that something that Activision should know? Presumably releasing COD on Wii U is part of a larger strategy that makes sense in sum.
The expectation here should have been that offering COD on WiiU adds very little to COD net sales. Right?
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
This is the worst myth about the issue and pure fan fiction.
I wonder what the rate is of Wii/WiiU owners who own multiple consoles. My impression always was that it was only crazy hardcore folks who bought multiple consoles.
Ubisoft is watching its next couple mature-rated games.
The decisions on some of the support we're speaking of were made long before any sales results rolled in.
ClovingWestbrook said:
In what world? lol
Need for Speed U runs through Origin.
How many times are you going to repeat this? Again: EA does have other metrics at its hands than NPD numbers, they can assess risk based on plenty of other indicators.
In this world. Still doesn't mean the Wii was all that exciting a console.
Ninja Scooter
Member
It's not just about profits on the hardware, it's about lost profits from the diminishing marketshare. Even if they make $50 on every Wii U sold, if the Wii U loses them 50% of the marketshare they built up with the Wii, that is a huge loss of money for Nintendo. If the Wii U does GC or worse numbers (which it is on pace to do) that will signal a very distinct pattern of shrinking marketshare from N64-GC-Wii U, with the Wii being a very clear outlier. Shareholders and corporations in these situations demand changes. You can't go from 100 million consoles to 20 million without shit hitting the fan. Iwata himself has been quoted as saying that GC numbers, profit or not, are flat out not good enough. If they were, Nintendo would have just released a Gamecube 2.