Forums - Nintendo Discussion - EA comments on Switch support, says most players also own a PS4/X1 and often play the publisher’s games on those platforms

With the Switch Lite coming out soon I wouldn't be surprised to see support drop to zero.



Around the Network
HollyGamer said:
DonFerrari said:

And by diverting money to make games focused on Switch they have a worse ROI than what they are currently doing and that is good because?

Why are you assuming that they will have bad ROI . We are talking specifict games that made for Nintendo not hardcore games that came out on PC/PS4 and Xbox One. Even Ubisoft are smarter by making dance games and casual games for Switch. During the Wii era EA are making specific games for Wii.

I'm assuming they aren't dumb, they run a big company and do business plan to make decision. If the BP they done for making a game specific to Switch returns less profit than what they are already doing they won't change. And since they aren't changing I assume that was their conclusion, and their PR basically confirms it.



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

Jranation said:
We live in a timeline were Microsoft supports Nintendo more than ea.....

That really says it all right there.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

DonFerrari said:

I'm assuming they aren't dumb

I see where you went wrong.



mysteryman said:
DonFerrari said:

I'm assuming they aren't dumb

I see where you went wrong.

I'll give the benefit of doubt to a company that have manage to stay open for so long and profitable and people that managed to reach CEO position in a company like that.

You want to claim they made a bad decision, be my guest, anyone can make them. But to claim they are dumb for not doing what you want is another thing. Would you have credentials to put they as dumb and you as bright?



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

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
mysteryman said:

I see where you went wrong.

I'll give the benefit of doubt to a company that have manage to stay open for so long and profitable and people that managed to reach CEO position in a company like that.

You want to claim they made a bad decision, be my guest, anyone can make them. But to claim they are dumb for not doing what you want is another thing. Would you have credentials to put they as dumb and you as bright?

What's their awesome grand strategy?  Buy up studios for their IPs and dismantle the studio within five years? 



DonFerrari said:
mysteryman said:

I see where you went wrong.

I'll give the benefit of doubt to a company that have manage to stay open for so long and profitable and people that managed to reach CEO position in a company like that.

You want to claim they made a bad decision, be my guest, anyone can make them. But to claim they are dumb for not doing what you want is another thing. Would you have credentials to put they as dumb and you as bright?

The problem is that EA's choices for the last couple of years have been incredibly shortsighted. Nevermind the buying studios and closing them after drying up all of their talent, they've been doing that for decades now. But things like reducing their game output to a very small variety of genres, IPs ad releases per year, applying microtransactions and/or lootboxes to all of their important titles even though they are being threatened with legal regulation, and launching games in a considerably incomplete state are seeds that will grow and strangle the company once the microtransactions & lootbox bubble bursts. They have little to no safeguards if their business model falls apart.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

Wondering if it has anything to do with EA access.



LurkerJ said:
Wondering if it has anything to do with EA access.

I don't think so. They still supported the PS4 when Sony said no to it at first.



KLXVER said:
LurkerJ said:
Wondering if it has anything to do with EA access.

I don't think so. They still supported the PS4 when Sony said no to it at first.

Suicidal not to support the PS4 when it's the only console selling in Europe (and Japan lol) with an audience that has an insatiable appetite for EA games, not to mention, EA still got their way with SONY eventually, a wise decision as next-gen is almost here & the cycle is about to reset, SONY no longer has the upper hand and it needs all the support it can get for PS5 to ensure a smooth transition. 

On the other hand, Nintendo has been historically disposable for EA and EA games has been historically disposable for Nintendo fans. Theoretically speaking, withholding EA games off the Switch until EA access is allowed would be a plausible bargaining technique, especially that EA financial stability has never relied on Nintendo platforms.