Quantcast
EA tells Kotaku that it has zero titles in development for the Wii U

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - EA tells Kotaku that it has zero titles in development for the Wii U

Tagged games:

pezus said:
Zero999 said:
Soundwave said:

Lets be honest Madden 25 and FIFA 14 and Need For Speed: Whatever, would've bombed on the Wii U anyway. Even things like Black Ops 2 and Assassin's Creed 3 are having a rough go of it and sports sims have never really be something associated with Nintendo.

no matter what you wish for, those games sold pretty well considering the install base and must have made profits. now picture the wii u with a bigger install base and those kind of games will sell hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of copys.

Maybe then EA will want to make something for WiiU. That is, however, irrelevant now because their games sold next to nothing on WiiU and WiiU's userbase is barely expanding 

I think EA titles sales on Wii U were directly proporcional to EA's effort towards them.



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
pezus said:
Seriously, all this EA hate and trolling gets a free pass but when someone decides to chip in on the situation he gets banned because he is negative towards Nintendo?

Dodece got banned for his continuous attempts to stir up the pot. All he wanted is rile up Nintendo fans, so it didn't bother him to run contradictory points of view. At one point he says that Nintendo fans deserve what they get, because EA has seen next to no software sales on the Wii U. The next time he portrays the situation as some sort of death blow to the Wii U, because losing EA support is going to have a major impact on the future of the console. He has been doing this all week and some of his posts were quite spiteful, so his intentions were more than obvious to anyone who has read his posts. If anyone has any doubts, they are free to look up Dodece's recent posting history.

The EA hate and trolling gets a pass, because moderators don't treat third party publishers the same way as console manufacturers. Additionally, EA is a company that upsets fans of all gaming platforms on quite a regular basis, so we would see a lot of bans due to the many dismissive one-liners these threads usually cause. And if that happened, people would wonder why the moderators ban people for being angry at EA for their latest anti-consumer practices when that anger is usually justified as EA first screws over gamers and then pretends that they didn't screw over gamers, basically adding insult to injury.

Besides, would you take EA's side, if they decided to screw over a PlayStation platform or would you take the side of gamers? I think we both know that it would be the latter, if you had to make a pick. So don't call for moderations of other users just because they happen to be Nintendo fans. It won't do the forums any favor.

Rol's views reflect my decisionmaking on this in a nutshell.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

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.



pezus said:
Otakumegane said:

And for those of ya'll wanting Nintendo to go 3rd party SHUT UP you know what'll happen? SEGA 2.0. No way in hell that's good

:O but Sega is great?

Sega's still a massive cast of shelll of their formerselves, destroyed creatively and financially by the 3rd party route.

Nintendo going 3rd party means nothing but Mario games for the rest of forever.  We ain't going to seeing stuff like Fire Emblem or anything like that.



http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/profile/92109/nintendopie/ Nintendopie  Was obviously right and I was obviously wrong. I will forever be a lesser being than them. (6/16/13)

superchunk said:
Mazty said:
superchunk said:


Because a multi billion dollar corporation is about losing money and "sticking it to Nintendo". Obviously.

Annnnnnd back to reality in 3.....2.....1......

With EA folk on Twitter ... http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=160213

Going crazy with personal attacks to Nintendo and so on... can it get any clearer how wrong you are?


A software eng made a personal comment about the Wii U - is he not entitled to a personal opinion? His voice does not represent EA and you quite clearly don't understand how business works. 

 

Also: 

Yep, we've got plenty of problems, but WiiU isn't where that family/casual market is. It's on mobile/tablet now!

I've been saying that all along and clear EA agree. It's nothing personal but obviously a business decision. 


Around the Network
Mazty said:
superchunk said:
Mazty said:
superchunk said:


Because a multi billion dollar corporation is about losing money and "sticking it to Nintendo". Obviously.

Annnnnnd back to reality in 3.....2.....1......

With EA folk on Twitter ... http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=160213

Going crazy with personal attacks to Nintendo and so on... can it get any clearer how wrong you are?


A software eng made a personal comment about the Wii U - is he not entitled to a personal opinion? His voice does not represent EA and you quite clearly don't understand how business works. 

 

Also: 

Yep, we've got plenty of problems, but WiiU isn't where that family/casual market is. It's on mobile/tablet now!

 

I've been saying that all along and clear EA agree. It's nothing personal but obviously a business decision. 

 

Most companies have social-media policies in place. When an employee speaks then that can be taken as representative of a companies viewpoint and twitter comments are effectively PR. Even if it is his personal opinion, comments which could affect public perception of a company (which is quite clearly the case here) should be carefully controlled and vetted.

Unprofessional comments give a poor overall image of the company.



Scoobes said:
Mazty said:

A software eng made a personal comment about the Wii U - is he not entitled to a personal opinion? His voice does not represent EA and you quite clearly don't understand how business works. 

Also: 

Yep, we've got plenty of problems, but WiiU isn't where that family/casual market is. It's on mobile/tablet now!


I've been saying that all along and clear EA agree. It's nothing personal but obviously a business decision. 

Most companies have social-media policies in place. When an employee speaks then that can be taken as representative of a companies viewpoint and twitter comments are effectively PR. Even if it is his personal opinion, comments which could affect public perception of a company (which is quite clearly the case here) should be carefully controlled and vetted.

Unprofessional comments give a poor overall image of the company.


What company do you work in??? That simply isn't true. You have departmental rules and unless something is an official statement or said by high management then it certainly is not representative of the companies view. I can't find his comments on his twitter feed so go figure just how "official" they are....

But yes, unprofessional comments certainly do give a poor overall image of the company. 



Mazty said:
Scoobes said:
Mazty said:

A software eng made a personal comment about the Wii U - is he not entitled to a personal opinion? His voice does not represent EA and you quite clearly don't understand how business works. 

Also: 

Yep, we've got plenty of problems, but WiiU isn't where that family/casual market is. It's on mobile/tablet now!


I've been saying that all along and clear EA agree. It's nothing personal but obviously a business decision. 

Most companies have social-media policies in place. When an employee speaks then that can be taken as representative of a companies viewpoint and twitter comments are effectively PR. Even if it is his personal opinion, comments which could affect public perception of a company (which is quite clearly the case here) should be carefully controlled and vetted.

Unprofessional comments give a poor overall image of the company.


What company do you work in??? That simply isn't true. You have departmental rules and unless something is an official statement or said by high management then it certainly is not representative of the companies view. I can't find his comments on his twitter feed so go figure just how "official" they are....

But yes, unprofessional comments certainly do give a poor overall image of the company. 

An international Bioscience company that develops kits for diagnostics and reagents for research. We have a company wide social media policy in place to control the flow of information to the public so we have to be careful what we say on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn etc. We're free to post but if it's something that might affect the business or public perception (as occured here) we're advised to check with our line manager and if they need to take it higher then they can.

@ bolded

I think he probably removed them realising he might be in shitter with his managers (or his managers advised him to remove them and get back to work). I never said they were official comments but as seen in this thread, people will take them as representative of the company, regardless of official statements.



Mazty said:
superchunk said:
Mazty said:
superchunk said:

 



A software eng made a personal comment about the Wii U - is he not entitled to a personal opinion? His voice does not represent EA and you quite clearly don't understand how business works. 

 

Also: 

Yep, we've got plenty of problems, but WiiU isn't where that family/casual market is. It's on mobile/tablet now!

 

I've been saying that all along and clear EA agree. It's nothing personal but obviously a business decision. 

 

We're probably done here as we gonna have to simply leave it as we can't agree. However, I dont' see how you can view the entire path to where we are now, how the four games were made and delivered, how the repeated statems from various managers and this engineer at EA all attacking Nintendo and Wii U specifically ... and then still come to the conclusion that they are doing it solely for lack of sales. Even though during Wii many of their games, including big ones like Tiger Woods were the best sellers on Wii.



Mr Khan said:
RolStoppable said:
pezus said:
Seriously, all this EA hate and trolling gets a free pass but when someone decides to chip in on the situation he gets banned because he is negative towards Nintendo?

Dodece got banned for his continuous attempts to stir up the pot. All he wanted is rile up Nintendo fans, so it didn't bother him to run contradictory points of view. At one point he says that Nintendo fans deserve what they get, because EA has seen next to no software sales on the Wii U. The next time he portrays the situation as some sort of death blow to the Wii U, because losing EA support is going to have a major impact on the future of the console. He has been doing this all week and some of his posts were quite spiteful, so his intentions were more than obvious to anyone who has read his posts. If anyone has any doubts, they are free to look up Dodece's recent posting history.

The EA hate and trolling gets a pass, because moderators don't treat third party publishers the same way as console manufacturers. Additionally, EA is a company that upsets fans of all gaming platforms on quite a regular basis, so we would see a lot of bans due to the many dismissive one-liners these threads usually cause. And if that happened, people would wonder why the moderators ban people for being angry at EA for their latest anti-consumer practices when that anger is usually justified as EA first screws over gamers and then pretends that they didn't screw over gamers, basically adding insult to injury.

Besides, would you take EA's side, if they decided to screw over a PlayStation platform or would you take the side of gamers? I think we both know that it would be the latter, if you had to make a pick. So don't call for moderations of other users just because they happen to be Nintendo fans. It won't do the forums any favor.

Rol's views reflect my decisionmaking on this in a nutshell.

I disagree, if beligerance in your opinion and having minor inconsistencies in your logic (actually I don't see the idea that Nintendo fans didn't buy EA games and EA's absence being a deathnell as necessarily unworkable together) are enough for moderation then I'd have to moderate you in some of these EA threads.  



...