couchmonkey said:
I think EA has already guaged the market and they realized there's not much reason for the to get involved in Switch. They're just trying to play it coy and not outright say, "Nintendo gamers don't like us" - just look at this thread. :) Personally, I'd be one more vote for, "I can live without EA". Maybe a decent Sims port or one NHL game could weasel their way into my collection. |
I don't miss EA as well... and that is how I also read it "since what we do have no interest on Switch userbase we will look elsewhere".
Goodnightmoon said:
Your point? |
That know it's good because Nintendo made it.
ryuzaki57 said: Looks like the Switch audience's interest in FIFA wasn't sufficient. But actually, why mobilize an entire dev team for 1% of sales? EA is just taking the rational conclusions for its business. |
You can't be rational around here son.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."