Given how many occurences of game company's logic that doesn't necessarily involve sales and profitability as the main justification of certain decisions (or simply but, personal bias), what makes this case so hard to believe so that accusations of conspiracy fly out? Because business is always about sales and profitability, lol? This logic in many times defines EA and to lesser extend third parties in general. I knew for a fact EA has seized any publishing for Wii U back in March, likely worldwide, likely the decision was made even earlier, so these news don't surprise me at all. Nor any justification because of lackluster sales of EA titles could be made simply due to how unprecedented early in the Wii U lifecycle they've jumped off the platform entirely.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
