By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Talal on 17 May 2013
Edit Thread
chocoloco said:
Mr Khan said:

Not everyone, just this. I would admit that those who suggest 3rd parties avoid Nintendo (a position i disagree with) may have some merit to their arguments, but this, this thing with EA, this is different. This is maliciousness, this is bullying, this is blatantly obvious, and no-one has any good reason to be on EA's side in this.

It's like SOPA. There are some things that are just so egregious that one side has absolutely no leg to stand on whatsoever.

You treat Nintendo like an omniscient, omnipitant, infallible god Kahn. Quotes on EA's perspective.

“Nintendo was operating with near monopoly power,” Gordon says. “They had like a 95 percent share of the console business, and they had earned it because they took a huge risk.  If a publisher wanted to get in bed with the NES, they had to fly to Japan, state its case for a development system, and if Nintendo deemed it worthy, there was only one deal on the table.  Nintendo would sell the company a dev kit for what Gordon calls “a ridiculous price,” and after a game was finished the publisher had to send it to Nintendo, which would ultimately decide whether our not it would be manufactured.”

Bing Gordon Former Cheif creative Officer of EA

“Wait, we spend all this time and we build a game but we don’t know if we can bring it to market?,”

‘That’s right, and if we decide to bring it to market, we manufacture it and we’ll tell you how many we’ll build. You pay us half the cost, and then we manufacture it when we feel like it. When it’s done in Japan, you pay the second half of the cost, and we release it and you figure out how you want to ship it.”


“EA would be allowed to manufacture its own Genesis cartridges, could make as many games as it wanted, and received a more favorable royalty rate. The next day at CES there was a wall of 16-bit Electronic Arts titles running on the Sega Genesis.”

“We’re pretty strongly in the camp that low manufacturing cost in media is important to the overall growth of interactive entertainment,” Gordon said. “I doubt we’ll ever ship as many products for the Nintendo 64 in any year as we do on the PC or the Sony PlayStation.”


“One of the explanations we have is that there’s a lot of double ownership. So people having a Wii and a 360 and/or PS3. They’re really playing different types of games on those two machines, and historically up to now we assume those people will have played the more mature content on the more high-tech machine. Dead Space: Extraction is going to be a very nice test of that hypothesis, because we’re really building a game where the Wii version is very different to the Dead Space game on 360 and PS3, and we’ll actually see whether we can reach more people with a) a great game and b) interesting content. If that’s not going to work, then obviously the whole proposal from our point of view at least of more mature games on the Wii just does not work.” – Dr Jens Uwe Intat, European VP at Electronic Arts

There is plenty more if your willing to look at a side other than the infallible Nintendo here.

http://www.notenoughshaders.com/2013/03/25/the-sexual-history-between-nintendo-and-electronic-arts/


This a million times. I'm sick of fans pretending that Nintendo are angels. They are not, they make mistakes like everyone does. Even in the Wii days they had awful regulations.