So what would you call EA purposefully 

1) putting out a $60 ME Trilogy at the same time as the $60 ME3 WiiU game and only advertising the trilogy?

2) putting out a Madden 13 and FIFA 13 that were both missing 100% of the upgrades for the 2013 versions of these games, essentially making them 2012 games with a newer roster?

3) putting zero marketing behind the NFS game.

All the while every other late port from the other companies accompanied extra DLC (standard practice) among other upgrades. 

Is that the unprecedented support EAs CEO promised on Nintendo's E3 stage? Is that even remotely close to what you'd consider proper business strategy if you wanted the best ROI you could get? EA stated it wasn't putting any future effort into WiiU in January. That's BEFORE its console sales slowed down and BEFORE NFS had released... the only EA title to actually be a solid port.

I don't see how you could possibly come to any decision but the one I and others have been saying all along. Its clear that between E3 2012 and Nintendo's launch, something happened and everything EA was planning for WiiU went out the window and even the highly successful 3DS isn't getting support beyond what is mandated by contract.

Fair enough.  I did say that EA has made some mistakes.  To me it seems a lot of launch consoles have lazy ports though so I don't think this is exclusive to the WiiU.

However NFSMW is a good game so we do know they tried with it.

PSN / XBLA HD release.

Which isnt as good as the Wii Edition. 

I'd have to respectfully disagree based on a couple of things that I read:

First, and I can't personally vouch for this since I never played the HD versions, but according to the reviews I read (most notably IGN), the game is not an HD remaster like, say, the God of War or MGS collections on PS3, and is a badly upscaled version of the GC/Wii game.

Secondly, the Wii version gives you the ability to use the pointer controls for aiming (PS3 did not) and nunchuck motion with your knife making breaking boxes all around you a snap. And for those who don't like the Wii controls for whatever reason, you can switch at any time mid game to the classic controller if you wish, giving the player complete freedom of choice.

As I mentioned I've not played the HD versions myself but the people I know who have (along with the reviews I read) all seem to agree that the Wii version still holds the crown as the best version of RE4.

I'm just a graphics whore, I love the HD.

Preferred the motion controls over the PS2 controls though.

@OP

It's a matter of fact that EA is acting like a spoiled bitch, sorry to say. It's unprofessional of them to lie and say that Frostbite 3 doesn't run on Wii U hardware when it can. It's disingenuous of them to say they have an "unprecedented partnership" with Nintendo, and then turn around and not support the console (past a late Need for Speed port that admittedly Criterion did a great job on).

It's also outright bullshit for a publisher to sit and imply that a new console like Wii U needs a bigger instal base for them to justify spending resources to make games for it, when they're not supporting the console to help it get that along. It's also stupid of them to not be supporting every console, considering they put out games for the (STILL) underwhelming Vita, but not the "Literally just came out months ago" Wii U.

EA's stance on the matter is rather indefensible. If Activision and Ubisoft, both also massive soulless corporate machines who love money JUST as much, can be supporting Wii U with some of their best software, then EA has no ground to stand on in it's obstinate lack of support.

As far as I'M personally concerned, who gives a fuck? Because I don't personally care for the games EA puts out anyway. BUT, on a larger, more objective scale, they're acting rather foolish, and it's totally irrational of them to act like this when PS3 had just as abysmally slow a start, yet they supported it full bore.

I never said the sales were great but not bad for a launch considering most are ports and people bought mario lol. I didn't bother listing the mario games as well we know how much that sold and it is 1st party.

MHTri here at least has been sold out for weeks, you coudl only get it via preorder, poor distrubtion by Nintendo on their part here. 3DS games have also suffered shortage.  Ironically I finally got my hands on the game and I had the demo on hdd, and after the Wii U update the games from the HDD load MUCH quicker than they used to (well at least for the ones I had)

COD indeed has shit sales, sadly I think Activision dug that hole all those years ago when  Modern Warfare come out on the other platforms and  Nintendo cause they couldn't get a console to handle the HD graphics. Those who like COD and also because of the hype around it, had no choice but shifted. So all the userbases now established. Realisticlly I reckon that if Modern Warfare come out on Wii at the same time, the userbase on NIntendo platform would be somewhere between 3 to 5 million (more if it was in HD). Which isnt bad consideing how COD does no Wii now.

I agree that EA games do not feature there, but as I said there is no Mass Market on Wii U atm, the crowd that owns a Wii U is not very tollerant of EA and their BS to begin with.  All I know is if EA stopped talking shit like a bipolar person then this thread would not be needed, as Nintendo gamers would have just accepted EA is doing what EA does and that is hardly support a NIntendo platform. But when you hear message like there is still strong support and NOT ONE game annoucened wtf does that say? So I guess I do not think EA is taking too much heat atm.

Ironically the same crowd was having a go at Ubisoft for delaying Rayman. Yer be pissed off but a lot of them said they will boycott the game. Then they also said I hope we get watch dogs, splinter cell at the same time as the other platforms since the other platforms are holidng up Rayaman. Well guess what YOU ARE NOW. So it will be interesting to see how much of those fans are just talk and no action. 

Assuming Watch Dogs isn't a disaster game (highly unlikley based on what we seen), then I expect at least a 20% attach rate of this game (consideirng there is fuck all new content on Wii U). I also expect Rayman to outsell the other platforms due to the fact the game was designed around the game pad, and it works very well. Spinter Cell not so much, but I know alot of one console gamers missed the franchise so they will pick it up.

If these QUALITY TITLES sell poorly, i will join you in a Nintendo fan bashing by all means, as they will deserve it for being loud mouth no action whinging gamers.

Something to take into consideration is that most publishers recognise that a new platform is unlikely to give them profitable games straight away. Games released early in a console gen are designed to establish franchises on new platforms. Assassins Creed did this for Ubisoft last gen, as did CoD 2 & 4 for Activision and Dead Space for EA.

All this talk of profits seems to have forgotten about this little fact. It's why most new games are ports of older versions or will get ported to other next-gen consoles.

The fact that EA have reduced support suggests they don't think it's worth establishing these franchises on WiiU which would further suggest they don't think WiiU has much of a future. The only way I see this changing now is if other third-parties (or even Nintendo themselves) show a significant market for these games is available.

There is a catch 22 here, cause whenever NIntendo does make a game that competes with 3rd party, devs jsut say we can't compete with NIntendo. If their mentality is that, they SHOULD be the ones pushing a certain genre to grow that audience. 

My view is different, if Nintendo CANNOT work out their relationships with 3rd parties, they shoud acknowledge that fact and just go out and make their own new IPs and grow on their own. Instead every new gen they say we got 3rd party support, and it dwindles away.