Flip, flop, flippity, flippity flop. At first you talk about the Wii, I tell you about the U, you come back to the Wii, I talk about the Wii, you talk about the U.

you are missing the point, I do not care for their games on a Nintendo platform I generally get them on the other consoles, unelss something unique was to come out.

What shits me is BS statements they make that contradict themselves every week and sound liek a bipolar person.

Agree with more light gun games. To me house of the dead was the perfect fit for that. It had cheezy comedy and worked well. This is where I wanted the void to be filled from.  Would have been nice to see a few more, but it wasn't to be.

What are you even talking about?  You have said nothing that makes any sense what so ever. 

Let me sum this up for you since you are having a hard time with this.

X360/PS3 makes A LOT more money for EA than the Wii.

EA games did not sell well on the Wii.

And at this moment it isnt worth investing some games on the WiiU because they do not sell well on Nintendo consoles with a large userbase, then they definitely will not sell well on one with a small userbase.

Ill agree with people on some statements EA makes may sound foolish.  But all of the excuses people make and all the blame placed on EA is just as bad.

Let's see this scenario. A 360 and PS3 game cost on average $20 million, you sell aprox 1 million copies at $60, making a revenue of $27 million and profit of $7 million. Based on this, the publisher recovers $27 per game.

Wii games cost on average cost $5 million (sorry I couldn't add the specific line, just search for "Nintendo Wii titles cost" and you will find it) to make. Given that Wii games cost $50 lest say the publisher recovers $25 instead of $27 (given that the extra $10 are shared equally between all categories in the anatomy of a game sale) you sell aprox. 600k copies, making a revenue of $15 million and a profit of $10 million.

You are actually making more profit out of the Wii game. 

Granted this is an hypothetical scenario and doesn't apply to games like CoD, but you get the idea. 

I wish people on here would use their brain more often.

@bolded comment - they do not need to buy them, core gamers will read reviews and also play the demos. Madden and Fifa used the engine from 2012 and had bits missing. You dont need to BUY a game to know it. As an example OUTSIDE the Wii U, look at Aliens CM, most of us said WTF happen to this game before we bought it.

@underlined comment - if a TRUE gamer not a fanboy has a Wii U and a PS360, and both trilogies come out at the same time and price and the Wii U version at a minimum had off screen play, then people would have chosen that over the trilogy pack on the other consoles.  An example outside Wii U, to use your words "why the fuck would EA spend money on a port for PS4/NextBox when are are basically catering to the same crowd on PS360?" The answer is simple, enhancements that make the game stand out other their other owned consoles.

You may want to search development on the specific titles of each game.  20m is pretty much AAA games.  Madden games as ive said before are not that expensive beyond licensing.

4m Wii games sold at barely any cost, 18m 360 games at high cost, 12m PS3 games at high cost. Wii = easy profit.

Easy profit = easy logic.

Money talks, you know the rest.

Are you not listening at all or are you just simply ignoring me?  

Tell me the numbers for the WiiU with a low install base and then tell me why it is worth it?  You are only answering half of what I've said.

While yes the Wii has made some money (100m consoles)  the WiiU is not making them any at the moment (3m consoles)