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

Forums - Gaming - Should EA continue to ignore Nintendo?

b00moscone said:
fleischr said:

The point I'm making is that there's a compelling reason to see some money on the table.

Deeper issue here is that EA  has struggled to market games on the Nintendo platform in ways that competitors with similar titles haven't.


However, EA see's the PS4, X1 and PC markets as a much more worthwhile place to invest time and money in. If they were to put their games on Nintendo systems, it would take the same amount of resources as the other systems, with a much lesser reward.


Not If NX has a similar architecture as PS4 and X1. It would be easier and cheap to port the games. There would be no reasons for EA not to bring their games to nintendo's console. However if NX is a complete different type of console, then nintendo won't have EA, Ubisoft or activison support in the near future. 



Around the Network

I can see them putting their mobile games on the NX.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


danielrdp said:
b00moscone said:


However, EA see's the PS4, X1 and PC markets as a much more worthwhile place to invest time and money in. If they were to put their games on Nintendo systems, it would take the same amount of resources as the other systems, with a much lesser reward.


Not If NX has a similar architecture as PS4 and X1. It would be easier and cheap to port the games. There would be no reasons for EA not to bring their games to nintendo's console. However if NX is a complete different type of console, then nintendo won't have EA, Ubisoft or activison support in the near future. 

You said quite a few 'if's. First of all, there is no guarantee that the NX will have similar architecture to the PS4/X1, you never know what Nintendo will pick. Secondly, right now I'm talking about the Wii U, which is not of a similar architecture, has a low install-base and a history of AAA games not selling well. Do you think taking all those things into consideration EA is gonna put the resoucres and effort into porting those big games to the Wii U? Of course not, they would be losing money. But yeah, in the unfortunate case the NX is different to the PS4 and X1 in architecture, then Nintendo would have to rely on it selling big, while being powerful enough to handle those games.



 

NNID: b00moscone

Switch ID: SW-5475-6755-1986

3DS friend-Code: 4613-6380-5406

PSN: b00mosconi

zippy said:
Mr Puggsly said:

Quite frankly, Wii U owners have ignored games from numerous major publishers. EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc...

The Wii U audience is primarily interested in exclusives and casual stuff. Anybody that disagrees simply needs to look at Wii U software sales.

I feel core gamers already know the best place to find core games is on Playstation and Xbox. If Nintendo wants to become a relevant platform for core gamers they need to do more to attract 3rd party developers.



Nintendo has core gamers and games..Splatoon is a core game. Mario, Donkey Kong Zelda and co are core games. You don't need mature content to have a core game, I imagine a lot of these "core gamers" would weep playing something like Tropical freeze.

Well Wii U owners are buying a lot more 3rd partry casual and family friendly stuff than 3rd party mature stuff. The only M rated games that have done remotely well are exclusives. Which tells me people bought those on Wii U simply because they had no other option, such as Bayonetta 2.

3rd parties are still bringing some casual and family friendly stuff to Wii U because there is demand for that. Frankly, the only game I feel was a missed opportunity from EA was Plants vs Zombies GW on Wii U. That could have potentially performed well.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Mr Puggsly said:
zippy said:


Nintendo has core gamers and games..Splatoon is a core game. Mario, Donkey Kong Zelda and co are core games. You don't need mature content to have a core game, I imagine a lot of these "core gamers" would weep playing something like Tropical freeze.

Well Wii U owners are buying a lot more 3rd partry casual and family friendly stuff than 3rd party mature stuff. The only M rated games that have done remotely well are exclusives. Which tells me people bought those on Wii U simply because they had no other option, such as Bayonetta 2.

3rd parties are still bringing some casual and family friendly stuff to Wii U because there is demand for that. Frankly, the only game I feel was a missed opportunity from EA was Plants vs Zombies GW on Wii U. That could have potentially performed well.



Totally agree with Plants v Zombies GW being on Wii U. It would have done quite decent.

Around the Network

Spam bot removed

 



cheshirescat said:
zippy said:
Im surprised they haven't tried again with FIFA, a 10 million plus userbase is quite a big one to ignore with a game like FIFA.


Only about a quarter of that 10 million is in Europe where the vast majority of fifa's sales originates.

That 10 million is split with around half in the US and Canada (& Americas), a quarter in Japan, and a quarter in Europe (& Others).

It's known that NFL is most popular in the USA, NHL in Canada, and FIFA in Europe - but FIFA likely has the most spillover popularity.

I think these Sports Brands should be ubiquitous in that their EA licensed Sports games should be on as many platforms as possible.

The Sports licensor (i.e. NFL, NHL, FIFA) also try to be accessible to all people and too would benefit by reaching more people.



foxtail said:
cheshirescat said:


Only about a quarter of that 10 million is in Europe where the vast majority of fifa's sales originates.

That 10 million is split with around half in the US and Canada (& Americas), a quarter in Japan, and a quarter in Europe (& Others).

It's known that NFL is most popular in the USA, NHL in Canada, and FIFA in Europe - but FIFA likely has the most spillover popularity.

I think these Sports Brands should be ubiquitous in that their EA licensed Sports games should be on as many platforms as possible.

The Sports licensor (i.e. NFL, NHL, FIFA) also try to be accessible to all people and too would would benefit by reaching more people.

Heh, funny. I read in multiple places that since EA has exclusive rights to the NFL license they are legally obligated to put Madden on every platform. Seeing as it isn't on Wii U right now I bet they can opt out if the game doesn't meet a (very small) sales quota. It really sucks because the game can sell on the Wii U (and Vita/3DS)



spemanig said:
RubberWhistleHistle said:
EA cancelled at 100% completed Crysis 3 that was ready to be shipped and everything. It makes me wonder what their motive is with all this shit? They couldn't even ship out a completed game? They straight up say NO to a few extra bucks, but FOR WHAT? Like you said, they don't have NFS listed on their website. WHY? im sure they have some copies to sell. There seems to be something deeper going on. Something that causes EA to not take any money resulting from a Nintendo product whatsoever. What is the motive??


The motive is it wouldn't have sold, and EA would have lost more money than if they had released it. Just like the fully complete localization of Earthbound Beginnings that never came out. No hidden motive. Just an obvious motive: money.

The thing is it would have sold. Crysis 3 as a launch game on Wii U (and from all reports it was technically far superior to the PS3/360 versions) would have been a system seller and put paid to the misinformation at the time of launch that Wii U was weaker than the current Sony and Microsoft consoles.

As big as Nintendo is EA is not an emeny you want to have, like them or not they are one of the biggest publishers in the world. When EA released Fifa 14 on the 7 year old Wii but not Wii U and didn't release Madden in PAL territories at all you knew that they had the shits proper.

Nintendo need to have a complete rethink on their relationships with 3rd party devs and companies like EA and Ubisoft are critical to the success of NX.



twintail said:
tripenfall said:

The thing is it would have sold. Crysis 3 as a launch game on Wii U (and from all reports it was technically far superior to the PS3/360 versions) would have been a system seller and put paid to the misinformation at the time of launch that Wii U was weaker than the current Sony and Microsoft consoles.

As big as Nintendo is EA is not an emeny you want to have, like them or not they are one of the biggest publishers in the world. When EA released Fifa 14 on the 7 year old Wii but not Wii U and didn't release Madden in PAL territories at all you knew that they had the shits proper.

Nintendo need to have a complete rethink on their relationships with 3rd party devs and companies like EA and Ubisoft are critical to the success of NX.


Not really especially because it would not have been a launch game. Not only did Cry3 launch after the WiiU had launched, but they only really started work on it after the other versions. Besides, the project was canned because of poor relations between EA and Nintendo, which was not really a thing until like a year after the WiiU launched. By the time Cry3 would have come to WiiU, no one would have cared.

 

Nintendo does need 3rd parties more than 3rd parties need them. But I reckon Nintendo will design the NX in such a way where if their core base remain the only ppl buying the product it will be ok.

Sorry yes you're right it wouldn't have been a launch game, but in the "launch window". Wii U was out December 2012 and in March 2013 one of the

devs made this quotoe -

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/crytek-explains-why-crysis-3-wii-u-had-to-die/1100-6404763/

Just a shame. In the early days of a console momentum is very important. When would be consumers see the open slagging and bagging of a console by a major publisher it sways people. Lets hope NX has better luck.