Anyone who would put EA or Activision (who by the way, unlike EA, is still supporting Wii U), above Ubisoft, is a fool. I will the whole Rayman Legends deal still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. It should still be a Wii U exclusive (if other consoles can get exclusives, so can a Nintendo system). Or at the very least, should have been released on it's original date, and any extra content could have been added later. I think they really left some software sales on the shopping mall floor with that decision, because less people that would have bought it for Wii U will actually get it when it comes out in Sep., even on the other consoles, than I think would have back in Feb.
But OTHER than that, Ubisoft is putting pretty much all of their top software on Wii U, including AC4, Splinter Cell, Watch Dogs, Rayman, they're already working on a Zombi U sequel (supposedly), etc. So they deserve props for that. EA are acting like idiots as far as I'm concerned. Sure, you can argue "oh it's just a business decision", but I'm sorry, Wii U sales ARE destined to pick up, and not producing ANY titles whatsoever for the system just stinks of sour grapes, and in no way can be construed as a sound business strategy. I wonder how they're going to act when Disney tells them to make Star Wars games for Nintendo consoles?
Regardless, Ubisoft, despite my issues with them also turning into an Activision/EA type giant, who largely seems to care about putting out annual sequels and little else, is still supporting the console. And quite frankly, their output is a lot better than EA's anyway, so given a choice between the two, as well as Sega's recent even-closer-cozying-up to Nintendo, I think Wii U will be fine. EA will eventually wake the fuck up when sales pick up later this year, and likely will regret missing out on sales they could have had once that happens. So as the saying goes, "whatev".
