By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - EA on Wii U: "What we describe as "Gen 4" is yet to come."

chocoloco said:
Metrium said:
EA are terrible anyways, if they lack the vision to see how WiiU is next gen despite other consoles being able to show 1 or 2 more pixel, that's

I believe they posted losses for the last quarter right? And If I'm correct their have been posting losses for a while no? If I'm wrong someone plz correct me. Losses on Q3 is a clue to what's to come.

Well, in quarter 1 and 2 it says they have made large profits. I suppose they have not released quarter 3 earnings.

http://investor.ea.com/releases.cfm?ReleasesType=Earnings

Not sure where you're reading that. Perhaps you're confusing profits with revenue? They had high revenue, but it's quite clear that they had a net loss (GAAP) of $381 million in the three months ending September 30, 2012, although they had a non-GAAP net income of $49 million. In the three months before that, they had a net income (GAAP) of $201 million, but a non-GAAP net loss of $130 million. So if you add the two together, in the first half of the financial year, they had a net loss (GAAP) of $180 million, and a non-GAAP net loss of $106 million.



Around the Network
SxyxS said:
chocoloco said:
mjk45 said:

I think it could also be interpreted as them seeing gen 4 (their term not mine) starting when all three players games are in the ring . coming from a 3rd party  it makes more sense for them to see next gen games as ones that showcase the entire console spectrum  and that it really isn't complete till we have the 3 main players with games out.

The article says they have invested the majority of their money outside of the Wii U for the next gen. 

Using the PS460 as leading plattform(more power,more expensive development) and downscaling games for Wii U this is not avoidable(especially not when you know that 3rd party games are selling bad on nintendo plattforms)

Yeah, it is possible as this is EA we are talking about they generally try to make most games multiplatform. Though the statements still sound as if they do not consider the Wii U as a part of the next Gen which can easily mean most of their titles will not be available on the Wii U. That is how the statement seems to be.



Sensei said:


To be honest, I don't like 99% of EA games.

However, I think they are an extremely important third party to have. Missing out on their huge IPs while the rival platforms get them is a major problem for any console (Fifa, Battlefield, Dead Space, NFS, Mass Effect etc).

EA is a massively important publisher for sure, especially in Europe where FIFA dominates. But the Wii U already has (and will continue to receive) FIFA and Madden, and EA says Battlefield 4 will be there. NFS and Mass Effect are also there, and hopefully that will become a trend. So the Wii U should at least receive some support from EA, likely better than the Wii got.





Double post



Aielyn said:
chocoloco said:
Metrium said:
EA are terrible anyways, if they lack the vision to see how WiiU is next gen despite other consoles being able to show 1 or 2 more pixel, that's

I believe they posted losses for the last quarter right? And If I'm correct their have been posting losses for a while no? If I'm wrong someone plz correct me. Losses on Q3 is a clue to what's to come.

Well, in quarter 1 and 2 it says they have made large profits. I suppose they have not released quarter 3 earnings.

http://investor.ea.com/releases.cfm?ReleasesType=Earnings

Not sure where you're reading that. Perhaps you're confusing profits with revenue? They had high revenue, but it's quite clear that they had a net loss (GAAP) of $381 million in the three months ending September 30, 2012, although they had a non-GAAP net income of $49 million. In the three months before that, they had a net income (GAAP) of $201 million, but a non-GAAP net loss of $130 million. So if you add the two together, in the first half of the financial year, they had a net loss (GAAP) of $180 million, and a non-GAAP net loss of $106 million.

That may be true, but it is still quite the assumption to assume that the Wii U would cause them to turn that around.



Around the Network
chocoloco said:
Aielyn said:

Not sure where you're reading that. Perhaps you're confusing profits with revenue? They had high revenue, but it's quite clear that they had a net loss (GAAP) of $381 million in the three months ending September 30, 2012, although they had a non-GAAP net income of $49 million. In the three months before that, they had a net income (GAAP) of $201 million, but a non-GAAP net loss of $130 million. So if you add the two together, in the first half of the financial year, they had a net loss (GAAP) of $180 million, and a non-GAAP net loss of $106 million.

That may be true, but it is still quite the assumption to assume that the Wii U would cause them to turn that around.

What would help them turn it around is reducing the cost of development for their games. They don't have to develop for Wii U to do that, but it will probably be cheaper to develop for Wii U than for Sony and Microsoft's next consoles...



lol holy shit people..I even updated the OP now so people won't get confused and jump on the hate wagon just because of the term Gen4. It's like people don't even read the OP now



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

chocoloco said:
That may be true, but it is still quite the assumption to assume that the Wii U would cause them to turn that around.

I made no comment about the idea of EA doing better if they put effort into the Wii U, mostly because I suspect that their "good Wii U game" would be mediocre at best, anyway. I don't have a lot of respect for most of EA.

But you claimed that EA had posted huge profits in the last two quarters, and that's clearly false. In fact, in the last two quarters, they've had a net loss across the two no matter which way you judge it (although whether it happened due to first or second quarter is up for debate).



Aielyn said:
chocoloco said:
That may be true, but it is still quite the assumption to assume that the Wii U would cause them to turn that around.

I made no comment about the idea of EA doing better if they put effort into the Wii U, mostly because I suspect that their "good Wii U game" would be mediocre at best, anyway. I don't have a lot of respect for most of EA.

But you claimed that EA had posted huge profits in the last two quarters, and that's clearly false. In fact, in the last two quarters, they've had a net loss across the two no matter which way you judge it (although whether it happened due to first or second quarter is up for debate).

Your last paragraph is pretty much a repeat of your previous post.

The statement was not for you alone. Tons on people assume all the time that if a third party makes more games for Nintendo there are mountains of gold waiting in their future. 

And fine, I happen to have enjoyed a lot of EA's games this gen so them making it on current and future consoles I own is relevant to me.



chocoloco said:
mjk45 said:

I think it could also be interpreted as them seeing gen 4 (their term not mine) starting when all three players games are in the ring . coming from a 3rd party  it makes more sense for them to see next gen games as ones that showcase the entire console spectrum  and that it really isn't complete till we have the 3 main players with games out.

The article says they have invested the majority of their money outside of the Wii U for the next gen. 

where does it say that? 

It's like people don't read.



Bet with ninjablade:

Ninjablade wins if the next 5 multiplat on the wii u are inferior to the 360 version.

I win if one of the 5 mulitplats are on par or superior on the Wii U.