Cutting through the idiocy of all the smarmy Yahtzites gloating about big bad Nintendo getting some sort of "justice," perhaps I could shed some light on the situation as to EA's motives.
The original "unprecedented partnership" was largely a proposal by EA to run Nintendo Network - Wii U's counterpart to Xbox Live - on the Origin framework and hosting the service on their own servers. It would've given Nintendo an already-existing service to build from, but this would have given EA a lot of control over the system's online as they're the ones who would effectively been providing it. Granted, Origin would've brought many EA titles over to the system (and EA would've been eager to do so as they'd essentially have an "Origin Box"), but it also would've meant that EA could've done stuff like strong-arming Nintendo into making EA-leaning decisions by forcing certain prices if they didn't, or even giving companies like Activision bad support and online toolkits for the console in order to bolster their own products (so Call of Duty U might have been forced to be a laggy piece of crap while Battlefield U would've run flawlessly, being an in-house EA game.) Essentially, this would've turned the Wii U into EA's console as far as the online was concerned, as they would be pulling all the strings. They would've practically held the console ransom and made Nintendo their *****.
Ultimately, Nintendo decided the proposed deal was more trouble than it was worth as the power they would be giving EA largely outweighed the benefits of using EA's infrastructure. So they put their foot down and cut the deal off, deciding to just make their own online service from scratch. Ever since then, EA's been throwing a hissy-fit and cancelling all the Wii U ports they can and severely crippling the ones they had already promised. This is why - for example - the PS3 and 360 got the Mass Effect Trilogy collection while at the same time Wii U got a mere port of Mass Effect 3 that didn't even include any DLC (original ending and all.) Or why though a Battlefield was announced for Wii U, none ended up coming and Battlefield 4 is skipping the system entirely when PS3 and 360 are still getting ports. The Wii U isn't any less capable than those systems, mind you, it's actually quite a bit more powerful and as far as stuff like DLC is concerned, it's just as up to snuff as their offerings.
It's just that in EA's case - yes, they are indeed deliberately trying to sabotage the system because Nintendo wouldn't let them own it.
It's not in my nature to be dramatic or exaggerate details. I'm saying it because for once it's absolutely true: EA has actually stooped so low as to try to get revenge on Nintendo. Honestly, though: should we expect any better from the #1 Worst Company in America?
