EA, Ubi, Activision on Pulling Wii U Support

[Mercedes]

When the Wii U first came out, the biggest publishers, who's games continually shift millions of copies and hit the top play and sale charts of countries and platforms alike, EA, Ubisoft, and Activision were among the biggest supporters for the brand new, un-proven console, happy to take a risk and bringing over a lot of titles to the Wii U, with Ubisoft bringing the exclusive ZombiU to the platform and announcing Rayman: Legends, the sequel to the critically acclaimed Rayman: Origins, to be exclusive to the Wii U, which was a major win for Nintendo.

However, support eventually tailored off, and though some big titles continue to make their way to the platform, such as Ubisoft's very hyped Watch Dogs, both Ubisoft and Activion have been substantially less enthusiastic, with Rayman: Legends being delayed for it to hit all the consoles, and EA perhaps being the most out-spoken of the big 3 and saying they have no games in development for the Wii U, with their next-gen engine currently not even supporting the platform.

Yves Guillemot, Chairman and CEO of Ubisoft, has cited ZombiU's terrible performance as the reason Rayman: Legends was made multi-platform, with him describing the game as not even being close to profitable, despite being quite popular amongst early adopters. Losing Rayman as an exclusive was a big knock for Ninty. He spoke of the Wii U,

We must find a way to ensure the creativity of those games could have a big enough audience. We hope it will take off. At the moment, we've said 'let's do through Christmas and see where we are from there.

Added to this, Ubisoft currently has absolutely no plans for a sequel to ZombiU for the Wii U console.

Activision, like Ubisoft, were a big partner for Nintendo at release, and regardless of opinions to their practices and their games they shift a lot of titles. Eric Hirshberg, President and CEO of Activision Publishing, like Ubi, commented on the weak sales of the game they brought over as to being why they will not be supporting the Wii U as much as they did, with Call of Duty: Ghosts still not having been announced to be coming to Wii U or not and has been pegged as, like it's predecessors, break numerous sales records.

We came to the table with a robust slate, but we have no announcements now.

EA was probably the most direct publisher about the Wii U's situation, announcing absolutely no titles in development for the Wii U at one point and being a lot less tactful than others when discussing the problems. EA's Peter Moore comments, echoing the same reasons as his predecessors, but also that the lack of online functionality being the reason why Madden will not be appearing on the Wii U.

We were there with four games for them [at launch]. It's been a disappointment when you look at sell-through and, as a company, we have to be very judicious where we deploy our resources.

The lack of online engagement that we see on Wii U [is troubling]. It's so integral to what we do. They're so small it's hardly worth running the servers. It seems like a box that's out of sync with the future of EA - which is one that gives a real social feel to our games. The Wii U feels like an offline experience right now."

GI.biz, via NeoGAF

These comments come pretty soon after Iwata discussed 2 ways in which the Wii U can re-new third-party support, and you can read the news about that over at this ZD thread: Click!

So, does Nintendo really have a problem here? Iwata's plans of increasing momentum with their own launches won't hit in time for the holiday season, and could cost them, but if the selling power of the Wii U increases, will we see more games hitting Wii U shores? Regardless of opinions for or against publishers like EA, Ubi, and Activision, their games bring in a lot of money for Microsoft and Sony on both the Xbox and Playstation consoles, and fans want them, and I'm sure Nintendo would be very happy to share in some of that money.

Drop a comment and let us know wat you think!

 

[Ventus]

I can understand Ubisoft's decision because they put honest efforts. Activision and EA? No, sorry. They put tired port after tired port and expected to see sales? L E L. They're, like...they're dumber than me. I'm sorry but what could you possibly hope for when you are trying to establish a game's presence on a system that comes weeks to months to YEARS after the original game's release? That's justugh. Whatever.

Nintendo had this coming. I don't give a damn about EA or Activision. Ubisoft is the only one that matters - and their decision really makes sense to me. ZombiU should've been profitable, but it wasn't. It was an honest effort. :/

 

[Big Octo]

All three publishers have legitimate reasons to look over the Wii U. They do point out how the console has been doing very poorly and is, at this point, a money sink. Nintendo needs to try VERY hard to get back in the game. As I stated in the other thread, I am skeptical of Iwata's plans to boost Wii U sales. If Nintendo doesn't do something miraculous soon, this could very well be the end of them in the hardware market.

 

[Dan]

This is quite sad to hear but it seems once again the Wii U will be a console with mostly Nintendo games and a few other little gems, still makes an awesome Netflix player

 

[Mercedes]

I can understand Ubisoft's decision because they put honest efforts. Activision and EA? No, sorry.

Yeah, very good point, I can agree with that. EA and Activision did just play it safe. I can concede they saw bad sales but, come on, those guys aren't dumb, they would have expected it.

Ubisoft pulling Rayman: Legends was a real knock for me. I was so looking forward to that game, probably could have swayed me onto a Wii U. But I respect Ubisoft weren't willing to put a potential hit on a quiet console.

 

[surferguy7]

Ubisoft is the only company that deserves to have a say. EA and Activision just ported year old games, complained about them not selling, and then blamed the Wii U.

 

[JuicieJ]

Ubisoft already said they won't make any more Wii U exclusives until it starts selling. HOWEVER! They also said at the same time that they wouldn't pull their third party support, so they haven't given up on the console yet.

 

[DarkestLink]

EA and Activsion just gave the Wii U inferior ports. No **** that didn't work out.

Ubisoft had ZombiU...but not only did that game score low...it was directed to the wrong audience. Why on earth would you expect M rated titles to do well on a Nintendo system? =l THAT should have been the multi-platformer.

 

[Ventus]

EA and Activsion just gave the Wii U inferior ports. No **** that didn't work out.

Ubisoft had ZombiU...but not only did that game score low...it was directed to the wrong audience. Why on earth would you expect M rated titles to do well on a Nintendo system? =l

Resident Evil, baby.

 

[DarkestLink]

Resident Evil, baby.

Multi-platform and last I checked, it sold better on the playstation.

 

[Ventus]

Multi-platform and last I checked, it sold better on the playstation.

Best versions were still the GC and Wii versions, as noted by everyone in the fanbase.
But other than that, M rated games as you said just don't belong on Nintendo systems.

 

[Salem]

Why on earth would you expect M rated titles to do well on a Nintendo system? =l THAT should have been the multi-platformer.

M rated games as you said just don't belong on Nintendo systems.

God, I die a little inside whenever someone says that.....

 

[BlitzPlum]

I think it's a shame that Ubisoft made the decision so quickly. I know that ZombiU was pretty much a failure in terms of sales, but I think one of the reasons is because it was a launch title. At that point, people were unsure about the Wii U and whether they'd get it or not. However, popularity has clearly increased since the announcements of Smash Bros, Mario 3D World, Mario Kart and Donkey Kong Country. Maybe we'll see something other than ports in the future. I, for one, am remaining hopeful.

 

[The Jade Fist]

I can understand Ubisoft's decision because they put honest efforts. Activision and EA? No, sorry. They put tired port after tired port and expected to see sales? L E L. They're, like...they're dumber than me. I'm sorry but what could you possibly hope for when you are trying to establish a game's presence on a system that comes weeks to months to YEARS after the original game's release? That's justugh. Whatever.

Nintendo had this coming. I don't give a damn about EA or Activision. Ubisoft is the only one that matters - and their decision really makes sense to me. ZombiU should've been profitable, but it wasn't. It was an honest effort. :/

Not everybody loves zombies, left 4 dead zombied me out for years to come after a weekend with the game, I can't see me wanting to invest in a zombie game ever again. It might be a good game, but alot of people can't see themselves enjoying it.

Its a good title to add the variety of the system, but its not the kinda game every one wants to play.

I think it's a shame that Ubisoft made the decision so quickly. I know that ZombiU was pretty much a failure in terms of sales, but I think one of the reasons is because it was a launch title. At that point, people were unsure about the Wii U and whether they'd get it or not. However, popularity has clearly increased since the announcements of Smash Bros, Mario 3D World, Mario Kart and Donkey Kong Country. Maybe we'll see something other than ports in the future. I, for one, am remaining hopeful.

That part is also true, the launch wasn't very appealing in general, so even if it was a good game, even more so people weren't buying it if they weren't buying the console.

 

[Justac00lguy]

Not surprising in the slightest.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to that word, "sales". Revenue is what drives a company and whatever their corporate objective be, they still intend to maximise sales, to either expand, stay competitive or to simply survive. Now while these companies could make really great games that are exclusive for the Wii U, it may not mean sales.

Since the Wii U is a year ahead of the other consoles, you would think it has some sort of competitive advantage, you know, getting a foot hold in the market? Yet they haven't attacked the market really, without any true competitors they laid back too much in my opinion. Lack of games, rushed release, not enough technical support etcetera. All of which lead to a rather mediocre console as of now, sure it's innovative but it hasn't been used to its full potential.

So now we are dawning on the the true start of the 8th generation, and Nintendo have yet to get that advantage, shown by its poor sales and easily analysed by its lack of games and actually lack of "good" games. No wonder the big third party game companies are more hesitant, they would be investing a lot more than they would on the PS4/Xone (for the GamePad I mean) so this could be seen as a "risk" -- is it worth it? Is the question. Now that the competitive field is balanced (even with the Wii U's head start) this might be the right decision and judging from the past gone E3 I can't see that console doing a whole lot better in the next year.