PaulExcellent
Member
I actually thought that the Origin network claim had some truth to it.
Maybe this is just something extra.
Maybe this is just something extra.
This bears much repeating....when confronted with a choice of a brand new title playing to the systems strengths (ZombiU), a reliable party game from a publisher with a history of such a thing (Nintendoland) or an optimised for your platform multiformat (Sonic, CoD, AC3) you don't pick up the overpriced ports of year+ old games (ME3, Batman) or the gimped versiosn of multiplatforms (FIFA, Madden).
It's not exactly 'painting a narrative' to use your brain and say "If I was buying a WiiU at launch what games would I buy?".
Because your answer wouldn't be "The shit ones that are poor value for money"
I wouldn't necessarily describe the sales as "gangbusters" per se.I'm not getting into this debate because I think there are several justifiable reasons for EA to skip the Wii U but out of curiosity which late ports "sold gangbusters" on PS3? I remember late ports but I don't remember any doing very well.
The Wii U sin't selling and third party games are not selling. Used games aside, most companies would sort of panic about their investments if no one is buying them. Also, why would developers flock to Wii U when most of their engines will not run on Wii U and their games would have to be stripped down visually?
Last EA game released on Wii U was Most Wanted U so what's your point? It's not that Wii U doesn't run these engines (like Frostbite) it's that the publishers don't see the return to put the effort to ports.
or because Wii U is not selling well
or because Wii U is not selling well
That's what I'm thinking too. They're barely supporting the Vita, probably for the same reason.
And not talking about the Mass Effect sabotage, the very late ports and the gimped versions.
Make no sense at all. Crappy hardware, no userbase, bad experience with Wii and no sales of games like NFS or Black Ops 2 since launch are the reason.
If that's the case, Nintendo should be shouting it from the rooftops. And should've been for weeks now.
This is the reason I'm still very very sceptical about this. EA ditching Nintendo makes Nintendo look really bad. If they did it because of the used game stuff, why doesn't Nintendo clear that up? That would win them a lot of points.
What is fishy is the fact that they stopped supporting WiiU even BEFORE it released and sold like shit.
And not talking about the Mass Effect sabotage, the very late ports and the gimped versions
Just go PC then.
I swear if the PS4 locks out used games its over for me, PSx-to PS2-and finally the lackluster PS3. I need to sell my games when I beat them, I don't want to buy a $75 game and beat it in a weekend and be stuck with it..
Just go PC then.
What if he likes Japanese games though? That's one of my main issues with PC.
Yeah, at least that is kinda starting to change. LoS2 and DS2 are coming to PC day 1 for instance. Still not sure why SE never release the latest FF games on PC but they will give us FFARR and older PS1 titles
Just an idea. If the PS4 also requires a fee for used games, this could be why EA ditched Nintendo. Nintendo not playing ball with it. Emphasis on the word if.