CriticKitten said:
That wasn't the only reason. Just the one that made the most business sense.
Never said it was the only reason. Just pointed out that the idea of them abandoning Nintendo's console because of the Xbox One reveal was patently wrong.
Also, what's this? EA didn't actively try to burn their bridge with Nintendo?
Then what do you call all of this?
Again, never said they
didn't attempt to "burn their bridge" with Nintendo. I was listing an alternate reason as to why they'd done so.
As for your links:
The first one is a random tweet from some random software engineer within the company. Hardly indicative of the thoughts of the company as a whole.
The second link is refuted by the third link when it is shown that Brown had no idea what he was talking about. Though, the article covers other reasons for EA's limited Wii U game development beyond poor unit sales. Including DICE having trouble getting Frostbite 3 running on the Wii U hardware.
So, at worse, those links just show that EA's "left hand doesn't know what it's right is doing." Makes them seem more incompetent than dickish.
They actively ranted against the company for a while, then on the same day as the Xbone reveal (notably, mere hours after it's finished and the internet has already started to light its torches and grab its pitchforks), they suddenly shift their opinion and claim they're actually making lots of games for the Wii U....a stance which they then reverse again by saying that they'll only make those games if the console sells better, this about a month or two later when the rival consoles have gained a bit more popularity. What exactly do you call that, then? Sheer coincidence? Well if so, that's an awfully convenient coincidence. It would also not be the first coincidence, but rather, yet another in a line of historical coincidences stretching back through the entire company's history.
Look, I'm no fan of EA. I dislike them as much as you seem to. And I even agree that they seem to have a rather dismissive stance towards Nintendo. But much of what you're asserting is conspiratorial.
For one, Blake Jorgensen's statement about Jeff Brown misspeaking and clarifying that EA was actually making Wii U games came hours
before the Xbox One reveal, not after. Second, they made it clear from the start that the Wii U's limited consumer base was the primary reason for limited game production. And, that should sales of the unit pick up, production of game titles would expand to similar levels of those of the PS4 and Xbox One.
I won't defend everything they've done, but in this one instance their moves were just a case of being "business savvy".
EA always does this. They get loud and mouthy about someone, then when someone does poorly, they retreat and rehash and rewrite what they said previously so it doesn't sound as confrontational and they can still get sales from the people they just attacked.
I never denied this. In fact, I've bore witness to many of their more egregious shenanigans. I can recall quite vividly their obnoxious PR stunts against Steam and other DD services in the build up to Origins release. Not to mention their waffling stances on certain monetizing techniques.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Regardless, we're getting a bit off topic. I have no interest in fighting over EA. And I assume neither do you. Not only are they not worth our time but I can all but assure you that I have as much ire towards them as you.
All I was attempting to clarify before was: The concept of making further Titanfall and Respawn-branded titles for the PS4 and other platforms was already in place and percolating
well before the incredibly successful launch of the PS4. That's all.
The successful launch likely reinforced that decision. That I'll grant. But it was still in place beforehand.
