By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Arcturus on 09 May 2013
Edit Thread
RicardJulianti said:
pokoko said:
Mr Khan said:
pokoko said:
Honestly stopped reading when this guy presented an insane and unsubstantiated rumor from reddit as plausible.

It's better than the lunacy that suggests that EA is perfectly justified in all of this.

No, it's not.  Let's forget how crazy the rumor is, the idea that EA was somehow ready to take over Nintendo's online infrastructure months before the Wii U shipped, or that EA had made all these plans dependent on the basis that they would control the Nintendo online store without bothering to get approval from Nintendo themselves.  All of that is nuts from a practical standpoint, but let's put that aside.

That people are grasping at straws by trusting an anonymous reddit poster that claims to have knowledge of what was said at a meeting between Nintendo and EA in Japan is what gets me.  People are just taking this as truth without any kind of proof.  Never mind that it makes zero sense; why are people putting faith in it when there is no evidence whatsoever?

There is nothing about this that fits well with reality.  It would be a nightmare to implement and there would be all kinds of problems and details to work out.  It's the kind of arrangement that would take years to hammer out in terms of logistics.

What I'm getting from all of this is that people believe it because they want to believe it.  It takes all responsibility away from Nintendo and puts it on EA.  We get instant Jedi and Sith.  Yes, it would account for the situation now, but you can always easily make up explainations after the fact.  A child can do that.  What if someone made up a rumor that said EA was angry at Nintendo because Nintendo was giving Activision a much better promotional deal with their Call of Duty franchise?  Would we instantly believe that without proof?

I don't know what happened between EA and Nintendo.  Personally, I think it does have to do with Origin and how it works from within EA games.  My guess is that Nintendo won't give EA the same kind of freedom that Microsoft and Sony have agreed upon.  That, I think, would be the most logical possibility.

However, that anyone in the gaming media is taking that rumor and just running with it, that's kind of sad.

Again....read the entire article before you start talking as if you have. There is one (1) paragraph about the supposed Origin rumor, and it isn't mentioned again. It's not like I am basing the entire argument around EA wanting Origin integrated. I don't bring it up later and say anything remotely close to "See? It IS true!"

You can even ignore that paragraph entirely, supplimenting your personal theory on what happened and everything still holds true. But don't try to dismiss the entire article because you don't like one theory. EA games still require an Origin account, so it's not as if Nintendo isn't letting them use their proprietary stuff for their games. 

The fact of the matter is, SOMETHING happened between the two and EA is full of hippocrites. THAT is the point of the article.

A lot can change over the period of a year and a half. Relationships between companies can change, markets change. That does not make EA a "hippocrite". Things changed and EA decided not to support the console as much as the vague "Unprecedented Partnership" implied.