By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
S.Peelman on 09 May 2013
Edit Thread
Osc89 said:
S.Peelman said:
Osc89 said:

The article says they had this "unprecedented partnership" from E3 2011 until somewhere between June and September of the following year. EA wouldn't have done this (as well as giving them free advice, lots of support and going on stage at E3) for no reason. They must have believed Origin was going on the Wii U, but how could EA think Origin was going on the Wii U for over a year unless Nintendo said it was? Nintendo must have had a deal prepared, or were at the very least leading EA on.

I don't pretend to know what went on, but no way is this on Nintendo. Nintendo would never ever give any outside party such control over one of their products, or even alluded to it being a possibility. They never done that and they weren't going to start now.

If EA really did believe they would get a foot in somehow, they were seriously kidding themselves.

What about the SNES-CD? When Nintendo let Sony produce the CD add-on for the SNES and produce a Sony console compatible with SNES cartridges the deal was all in place. They even let Sony announce the console before revealing their Philips partnership, so they definitely aren't above leading a company on.

That was still a different situation though; Sony wouldn't get control over the SNES. Licencing some other company to use your tech for a different product and an optional add-on for your own is not the same as having one fully control one of the most important elements of your flagship product.

I'm not sure about the exact time-line, but it was my understanding no signatures were set at the time Sony announced their console and negotiations were already uneasy. I agree that Nintendo should've been a little more honorable in the way they 'dumped' Sony and went with Philips. Considering the course of history afterwards, you'd think Nintendo learned their lesson .