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

Forums - Nintendo - EA is not committed to Switch, they don't understand the Switch market yet.

burninmylight on 01 November 2017
Bofferbrauer2 said:

 

pokoko said:
A business attempting to gauge a market before jumping in?

That's just awful. How dare they.
ryuzaki57 said:
Looks like the Switch audience's interest in FIFA wasn't sufficient. But actually, why mobilize an entire dev team for 1% of sales? EA is just taking the rational conclusions for its business.

Yeah, because gauging with a gimped game will always do well and show off exactly what the players want (a non-gimped version of the game, but that certainly never the conclusion they'll draw)

Besides, it's not like swapping a couple of players around in the game and slapping a 19 on the package would be very expensive now that they have an engine for the Switch version.

That's exactly what EA did with the Wii U.

It released Mass Effect 3 as a $60 for a port of a game about a year old, on top of releasing the entire trilogy + free DLC all in one $60 package on other consoles and PC within the same week of ME3 for Wii U. It released the previous year's version of Madden with nothing more than a roster update.

The only EA game for the Wii U that was an honest effort was Need For Speed: Most Wanted.



Around the Network
burninmylight on 01 November 2017
DonFerrari said:
Flilix said:

We like portable gaming because it's a fun way to play games.

Yes sure... you all bought PSVita as well right?

No, we bought 3DSes. It's a fun way to play games.



Flilix on 01 November 2017
DonFerrari said:
Flilix said:

We like portable gaming because it's a fun way to play games.

Yes sure... you all bought PSVita as well right?

Nah. It didn't have any games I'm interested in.



TheLegendaryWolf on 01 November 2017
burninmylight said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes sure... you all bought PSVita as well right?

No, we bought 3DSes. It's a fun way to play games.

^ I 1-UP this statement.



DonFerrari on 01 November 2017
burninmylight said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes sure... you all bought PSVita as well right?

No, we bought 3DSes. It's a fun way to play games.

And PSVita isn't?

Flilix said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes sure... you all bought PSVita as well right?

Nah. It didn't have any games I'm interested in.

I believe in that, and then the consoles 3rd parties that do those type of games should launch their game on Switch because of reasons?

 

So again my point come back to "Switch as portable is better than a console, because Nintendo made 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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Nuvendil on 01 November 2017
DonFerrari said:
Flilix said:

We like portable gaming because it's a fun way to play games.

Yes sure... you all bought PSVita as well right?

Nuvendil said:

You know it's amazing how this is somehow considered a serious, real notion when done on Nintendo platforms.  So not only should consumers interested in fully featured Fifas have bought this mediocre effort port that's basically the PS360 version with bolted on graphical effects and some missing features (even though buying that sends the message you obviously DON'T care about getting a feature complete game), but also consumers interested in Madden games, scifi shooters, military shooters, all these people should buy this mediocre effort product that they likely have no interest in.  I'm sorry, but that's just BS.  And if Fifa 18 WAS a test and it's standard of success really WAS the 50 to 75% attach rate EA hilariously predicted, then whoever made that decision is certifiable.  Everyone with two braincells saw where this was going with its modest efforts on the technical front, missing constantly promoted Journey mode, missing 90% of gameplay adjustments made to the new release, missing a random assortment of features from several modes, no promotion from EA for it AT ALL, and not even a trailer or gosh darn gameplay screenshots on the freaking eshop.  This was an effort by a company that either already didn't give a shit or that's run by jackasses.

Funny enough is that even if a Fifa launched with all these issues on X1 or PS4 it would still sell a lot better than Switch, because the userbase is diversified enough that there is a big sport games followers.

1) It would still be a massive, massive sales disappointment and 2) they would only get those sales based on the past quality, a built up reputation.  Take that away and the results would be identical.  EA has given table scraps and half assed efforts to Nintendo platforms for years.  It's got nothin to do with diversity.  It's got everything to do with EA's actions both past and with this port.   They've ruined what little reputation they could have had .  



DonFerrari on 01 November 2017
Nuvendil said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes sure... you all bought PSVita as well right?

Funny enough is that even if a Fifa launched with all these issues on X1 or PS4 it would still sell a lot better than Switch, because the userbase is diversified enough that there is a big sport games followers.

1) It would still be a massive, massive sales disappointment and 2) they would only get those sales based on the past quality, a built up reputation.  Take that away and the results would be identical.  EA has given table scraps and half assed efforts to Nintendo platforms for years.  It's got nothin to do with diversity.  It's got everything to do with EA's actions both past and with this port.   They've ruined what little reputation they could have had .  

Yeah sure it would be identical, probably based on extensive research you put and most Multiplats selling the same on Nintendo and other platforms right?



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

IkePoR on 01 November 2017
cycycychris said:

Sounds like a nice way to see "no plans to support it". But thats probably to be expected from EA. I don't have much of any interest in most the games they make, so there lack of support won't affect me. But i know that they make a lot of big games on the market that would benefit the Switch sales wise, a long with building a stronger switch market.

This.  I don't even hate EA because they don't make anything I care about.  Same with Ubi and Activision for the most part.  I sympathize with my fellow gamers who once enjoyed their games before the lootbox era, though.  



"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"

Flilix on 01 November 2017
DonFerrari said:
Flilix said:

Nah. It didn't have any games I'm interested in.

I believe in that, and then the consoles 3rd parties that do those type of games should launch their game on Switch because of reasons?

 

So again my point come back to "Switch as portable is better than a console, because Nintendo made it"

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. You're statement was 'This gen they all like everything portable, because Switch is now hybrid.', which isn't true (at least, not for me). I'm not interested in Playstation, but if I would get one, I'd definitely take the Vita over PS4.



Chrizum on 01 November 2017

EA basically lives from microtransactions. Switch owners don't care for that. EA has no place on Switch really.