Looking at it as a single incident, the "conspiracy theories" don't make much sense. But there is a recurring pattern with EA games on Nintendo platforms (at least since a certain point of the Wii's existence), and this is just the latest example.

I agree, this probably isn't about spite, but those of you who are laughing at any theory that EA could be sabotaging its Nintendo games on purpose are very, very naive. This isn't a game, and in the business world, people don't get to where they are at this level by being nice.

1. This is a huge company in a multi-billion business.

2. People are murdered daily for much smaller sums than what is at stakes here. Not that this is what is happening here at all, haha, just illustrating how serious the amounts at stake are and how much further than just "absurd" sabotage some people would go for far lesser amounts.

3. EA might possibly have some prior agreements or obligations towards Nintendo, from the time they were "buddies" in E3 2011, that it can't just ignore (without ramifications) by not publishing any game on the WiiU.

4. EA have their stake holders that need appeasing, surely some (many?) of whom might think EA would be losing money by not investing in core games on the WiiU initially

5. A million dollars or so is pocket change for EA, no matter how you look at it, especially if they think it will save them a lot more money down the road.

Now suppose that Peter Moore and/or a sizable faction at EA thinks that EA is better off not investing in core games on the WiiU at all, and that it will lose a lot of money and resources if it invested in the WiiU.

Now suppose there is a large group of share holders who don't think the same way. Unlikely? I wouldn't think so at all (just look at all the share holders clamoring for Nintendo to publish their games on IOS, and that is REALLY stupid).

So on the one hand: EA, by spending pocket change, brings a "prestigious quality game" to the WiiU so they can't be blamed for the quality of the game nor the quality of the port itself (thus shutting up shareholders and possibly Nintendo if there were some prior obligations), and so EA will be able to say "we tried"

And on the other hand, EA goes the extra mile to make sure it fails commercially.

End result: shareholders shut up, Nintendo (if there were prior obligations) can't say anything (though internally they will realize they have been given the shaft), and EA can go ahead without core game investment in the WiiU which they think will be a waste. And all it cost them was pocket change.

If you think shareholders are all smart and would see through something like that, think again. All EA needed to completely shut up any investor push for core games on the Wii was Dead Space Extraction's initial NPD month sales of 9000

I am not saying it is a fact that this is what happened, just that in this world something like this is very possible (and the recurring pattern makes it even more likely).

Maybe it would be easier to convince me that this isn't what they're doing if EA hadn't done it before. This game bears all the markings of an EA intentional flop:

• inferior version of an existing product: check. Even if the trilogy wasn't happening, I haven't found anywhere confirmation, or even a mention, that the Wii U version will be supported with post-release DLC. Sure, it comes with From Ashes packed-in, but will Wii U players ever get to play Leviathan, Omega, or future DLC adventures? We still don't know, but it doesn't sound like they will!

• bad release date: check. last month it was reported to be a launch title for Wii U, but now it doesn't appear on Nintendo's official list of day one games. Pushed back to avoid potentially decent Black Friday sales? Maybe. Maybe it's still a launch title, which just means EA isn't doing a good job of spreading the word, as even Nintendo doesn't know the game's coming out. Again, either way, this release is at best two weeks after that of Mass Effect Trilogy for 360.

• inexperienced development studio: check. Surely EA cares enough about this game, one of their only Wii U games planned for a launch window release, to put a good, respected team on the job? Nope, they're just making a port after all, let's get that Australian team whose entire resume consists of a single Need for Speed port to iOS. What experience! Surely they can come up with some amazing, innovative uses of the GamePad, and make a very high-quality product!

• no advertising: It's early to call this one. But there has been a distinct lack of hype for Mass Effect 3 for Wii U. EA had no presence at Nintendo's conference this past E3 to discuss their game (unlike Ubisoft and Warner Bros), simply dropping the title into the sizzle reel of Wii U games with no explanation. They had no presence at the Wii U press event earlier this month to discuss their game (unlike Activision). I'm pretty sure the only time we've seen ME3 on Wii U was at EA's summer showcase. Maybe there was a demo at the press event, but if there was, I can't find it.

Speaking of the summer showcase, EA spent a fair amount of time there justifying their Wii U games being inferior to the PS360 versions, something no other studio has had the gall to do.

oh yeah --

• bad pricing: seems pretty self-explanatory. it's dumb to ask people to pay full price for a game they can get for much cheaper on a different console. the fact that "they did it to PS3 too" doesn't make it more acceptable.

• bad box art: pretty straightforward, they took the original box art and added... plain text on a long black background reading "special edition." Doesn't it just grab your attention...?

Why would it cripple its sales? If you were going to buy ME3 for Wii U I would have to assume that you dont have a PC PS3 or 360 to play the game, so it doesnt matter if those systems got a trilogy or not as you would not have been purchasing it anyway and if you have those systems my question would be why have you not bought it for either of those three? Why choose to pay more money if you dont have too? Which brings me to my next point, the game alone is not worth 60 bucks trilogy or not, as you can get it for three other platforms for half the price. As i said before ME3 on Wii U simply doesnt make alot of sense. THe release is wrong and the pricing is wrong. Maybe they think lighting will strike twice and it will sell more than a mil like the PS3 version of 2 did, alot of people thought that would flop as well

Do not try to give reason to the many Nintendo conspiracy theorists on here, many have tried, all have failed, others lost limbs and many are now dead.

"Looking at it as a single incident, the "conspiracy theories" don't make much sense. But there is a recurring pattern with EA games on Nintendo platforms (at least since a certain point of the Wii's existence), and this is just the latest example.

I agree, this probably isn't about spite, but those of you who are laughing at any theory that EA could be sabotaging its Nintendo games on purpose are very, very naive. This isn't a game, and in the business world, people don't get to where they are at this level by being nice.

1. This is a huge company in a multi-billion business.

2. People are murdered daily for much smaller sums than what is at stakes here. Not that this is what is happening here at all, haha, just illustrating how serious the amounts at stake are and how much further than just "absurd" sabotage some people would go for far lesser amounts.

3. EA might possibly have some prior agreements or obligations towards Nintendo, from the time they were "buddies" in E3 2011, that it can't just ignore (without ramifications) by not publishing any game on the WiiU.

4. EA have their stake holders that need appeasing, surely some (many?) of whom might think EA would be losing money by not investing in core games on the WiiU initially

5. A million dollars or so is pocket change for EA, no matter how you look at it, especially if they think it will save them a lot more money down the road.

Now suppose that Peter Moore and/or a sizable faction at EA thinks that EA is better off not investing in core games on the WiiU at all, and that it will lose a lot of money and resources if it invested in the WiiU.

Now suppose there is a large group of share holders who don't think the same way. Unlikely? I wouldn't think so at all (just look at all the share holders clamoring for Nintendo to publish their games on IOS, and that is REALLY stupid).

So on the one hand: EA, by spending pocket change, brings a "prestigious quality game" to the WiiU so they can't be blamed for the quality of the game nor the quality of the port itself (thus shutting up shareholders and possibly Nintendo if there were some prior obligations), and so EA will be able to say "we tried"

And on the other hand, EA goes the extra mile to make sure it fails commercially.

End result: shareholders shut up, Nintendo (if there were prior obligations) can't say anything (though internally they will realize they have been given the shaft), and EA can go ahead without core game investment in the WiiU which they think will be a waste. And all it cost them was pocket change.

If you think shareholders are all smart and would see through something like that, think again. All EA needed to completely shut up any investor push for core games on the Wii was Dead Space Extraction's initial NPD month sales of 9000

I am not saying it is a fact that this is what happened, just that in this world something like this is very possible (and the recurring pattern makes it even more likely)."