Peter Moore, I want to Believe you, but your Own Website Doesn’t even Feature Wii U or 3DS

EA’s Peter Moore stated that “Nintendo is a great Partner” with EA, and they are not dead to us. However, EA’s own site doesn’t even feature the Wii U or 3DS systems in their own “Featured Platforms” section. PS4, PS3, PC, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Facebook Games, and everything else seems to be featured though.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Kayant1668d ago (Edited 1668d ago )

Basically from what I see the platforms they don't care about are hidden. (PS Vita, Wii U, Mac Blackberry lol etc).

If you go into browse games you can find all the platforms there.

Theyellowflash301668d ago

I made sure to give you credit for the story. You saw that right?

1667d ago
ovnipc1667d ago

Wii u its the most dissapointing console ever release. I got it week later sold it on ebay. I will keep my xone and ps4. Wii u its so last gen. Nintendo had the chance to make big Nd make a console releasing a year earlier than x and ps with next gen power but no they decided to make a console the same power of the x360. Nintendo shoukd rock the world like they did with nintendo n64. That was my favorite console it was awesome. Cant denied it.

DualWielding1667d ago

I don't think the Wii U can really be called disappointing it is what anyone could have expect a box that plays Mario and a few other Nintendo first franchises and does that as well as it could be expected... Anyone who was expecting it to be a real console with real third party support was in the clouds......

The N64, now that's probably the most disapointing console in history, I know a good number of people that rush to buy one just cuz it was the SNES successor and they expected all the franchises they associated with the SNES to continue on it (final fantasy, mega man, street fighter, ect) just to feel like suckers when all of those jumped shit to playstation...... I don't think even those who really love the N64 Smash Bros, Golden Eye or Mario Kart can really claim that they were not at least a bit disapointed with the N64 lack of third party support....

The Wii U can't be disappointing because no third party support is now exactly what everyone expects of non-handheld Nintendo consoles

blackmanone1667d ago (Edited 1667d ago )

"Wii u its the most dissapointing console ever release."

This is what, you're second or third generation playing games? In no way is it even top 5 most disappointing consoles of all time.

n4f1667d ago (Edited 1667d ago )

*wiiu is so last gen
too much mistake
2/10 will not read

mydyingparadiselost1668d ago

This is probably for the better, EAs presence on a platform isn't exactly a selling point anymore.

ABizzel11668d ago

Regardless of how you feel about their business, the fact remains that EA has some good IP's under their belt.

Battlefield, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Mirror's Edge, Burnout, Skate, Dead Space, Need 4 Speed (every few years), EA Sports (for better or worse), Crysis, Peggle, Plants vs. Zombies, are all solid games, and all are a boost to any consoles library.

Wenis1668d ago (Edited 1668d ago )

The only reason why EA hates the Wii U is because its specs are too different from PS4/XB1 and therefore to make multiplat games that conform to Wii U takes too much time and effort. If Wii U simply had better specs (ie more comparable to PS4/XB1) and it was cheaper for EA to make their "PS4/XB1 Games" on the Wii U then they wouldn't be crying. Its all about money to EA thats it

ABizzel11668d ago (Edited 1667d ago )


I completely agree.

The Power PC CPU, and the bottom end HD 4650 GPU, and the 2GB of slow DDR3 RAM are all huge downfalls for the Wii U compared to the PS4 and XBO.

Compared to the PS360 the Wii U is completely acceptable since it has a better GPU and more RAM, but I don't see why Nintendo didn't see that developers are ready to move on, it's what happens EVERY generation.

If they wanted to go low-end they should have simply went with AMD's A8-3850 APU and 4GB of RAM DDR3 1866MHz (or 2133), which would have gave them a more power than the Wii U has, and nearly identical architecture to the XBO.

Or better yet they could have went with Trinity which released the year Wii U was, so it could have been used as well. Something like an AMD A-10 5700 would have been PERFECT, and they wouldn't be in the 3rd party situation they're in now.

This is an example of going cheap now always being the best route.

IAmSovereign1668d ago

I'd like to comment on this and say how EA ran Battlefield into the ground with their yearly entries and dillution of the game formula.

Then there is what they did to Mass Effect. You can tell the difference in between Mass Effect 1 (Published by Microsoft Game Studios) vs 2 and 3 (EA) I love all 3 Mass Effect games, but what EA did to Bioware is sickening.

N4g_null1667d ago

Nope the kiddy campaign would have been used... they are making Facebook games man.... really wtf.

lilbroRx1667d ago

There are actually still human being that believe the Wii U has a 4650, when it has been confirmed that the Wii U was using 4850 prior too launch and that the final GPU, which is completely custom built, has even higher performance than that.

The tech in the PowerPC CPU the WIi U uses is more advanced then the tech in the PS4/Xbone. They use x86 which is over a decade older and far less efficent. They simply have higher clocks and more cores to offset to handle problems with brute for the. The Wii U doesn't need them. The biggest complaint about the CPU is simply that it is so different from the others that their code won't work on it.

No dev to this date, including the one from that secret developer interview has said anything about the Wii U's eDRAM being a problem. Devs have said only positive things about the Wii U's RAM. He even went on record to specifically address that exact false claim made by people like you even though he was speaking negatively of Nintendo overall.

Stop regurgitating false information from 2012.

ABizzel11667d ago (Edited 1667d ago )

@lilbroRx could you post a link please. I did plenty of searching myself and couldn't find anything.

But I did find confirmation on everything I've been saying for the longest. Since this post has gotten long, I've decided to go ahead and list the 360, PS3, Wii U, XBO, and PS4 so all this can be put to rest once and for all.

Wii U vs. XBO vs. PS4 vs. Low-High GPU vs. Mid-High GPU vs. High end GPU

As you can see the PS4 is the only mid range console on the market. The XBO is now considered a Low-end PC. But to their benefit being consoles allows them to perform above what their hardware would entail in a similar PC, since developer have full access to the hardware, and optimizations of hardware, game engines, and development tools are why consoles can outperform PC's of equivalent and greater hardware. So once things are worked out "ON AVERAGE" the XBO should be performing on par with a HD 7850 while the PS4 should be on par with the R9 270x.

But getting back on point.

Wii U: 5 CUs, 8 ROPs, 16 TMUs, 320 SUs, 350 GFLOPS
4650: 4 CUs, 8 ROPs, 32 TMUs, 320 SUs, 384 GFLOPS
4850: 10 CU, 16 ROPs, 40 TMUs, 800 SUs, 1 TFLOP

The Wii U can't be a HD 4850, because it makes no sense to take a GPU and under-clock it by 20% and then cut its performance by 50% and put it in a console. It's ILLOGICAL. A modified HD 4650 is the more likely. Even IGN has the same stats on their official comparison page.

The 4650/4670 GPU were pretty much confirmed during it's original breakdown earlier in 2013.

Once again confirming the same specs. that have been pretty much listed as the official specs. of the Wii U from every major source.

The 360 has a 115 GFLOP CPU + 240 GFLOP GPU.
Total 360 performance equals 355 - 360 GFLOPS (aka the name)
Realistically 320 GFLOPS

also this, after being caught Xbox Delta had to be dropped for One :D

The PS3 has a Theoretical 300 GFLOP CPU + 192 GFLOP GPU
Total PS3 performance 492 - 500 GFLOPS
Realistically 400 GFLOPS (all SPU's would have to be running at 100% in the real world that just doesn't happen, and 1 of the SPUs is used as a reserve a fairly big drop in CPU performance down to like 220 is realistic.)

The Wii U's CPU is unknown but considering it's based of Broadway which was based off Gekko, but tri-core and has contemporary OOEs, albeit weaker and lower clocks than the Xenon Processor means:

The Wii has a theoretical 30 (aka 10x Broadway) - 100 GFLOP CPU + 352 GFLOP GPU.
Total Wii U performance 382 - 452 GFLOPS
Safe bet 400 - 450 GFLOPS

ABizzel11667d ago (Edited 1667d ago )

GPU wise the Wii U is superior to the PS360, but it's SIGNIFICANTLY weaker than the XBO and PS4. And on the flip side the PS3's CPU (Cell) has a significant advantage over the 360's and Wii U's since it's actually capable of a decent amount of rending normally preserved for the GPU. This is why exclusive games like Uncharted, Heavy Rain, God of War, The Last of Us, Gran Turismo, Beyond: 2 Souls, and more look better than most if not all 360 games, because 1st party devs. could spend time maxing out Cell for their games while 3rd parties have to focus on generally 3 platforms and couldn't max Cell.

The Wii U's GPU is around 50% - 70% more powerful which means it's exclusive games will look better than PS360, but over all the console sits around 20% more powerful than the last-gen offerings from Sony and MS. That's not next-gen hardware and a far cry from the HD 4850's 1 TFLOP of performance alone.

So once again AMD's Llano APU are more powerful than the Wii U offering 7% - 20% more performance, and would have been a better option plus match the PS4/XBO architecture. Meanwhile AMD's Trinity is significantly more power offering around 37% - 55% more performance over the Wii U. Both of which are are still much weaker than an HD 4850.

On top of all that the 4850 would have nearly identical draw power to the PS4, which again doesn't make sense, because the Wii U runs at nearly 1/4 the power of the PS4. In comparison the 4650 runs at less than half the draw of the 4850, and with under-clocking, and modifications it could very well drop dow to the extra 15% - 20% needed to meet the Wii U's power draw.

And if all that isn't enough, here's a read for you and everyone else, on why 3rd parties aren't working on the Wii U, and it basically shuts down your HD 4850 argument mid way, with the developer flat out denying it from a Developers perspective (who's likely a Lead at his place of employment).

If you don't want to read through, the basic premise is that. Nintendo didn't have their developer tools together, everything was a mess a launch, it took to long to get response back from Nintendo America because Japan basically runs all their R&D, online was a mess and not running until launch, and the hardware is comparable to the PS360 and FAR behind the XBO and PS4 that publishers choose to put developers on instead of forcing them to make Wii U games that aren't making the companies profits or worse bring in a loss.

I've been debunking this mess for the longest. If you don't want to hear the truth, fine. But don't spread rumors and lies for the sake of being a fanboy.

A lot of you are doing a bunch of talking and defending, but the fact is I have a Wii U, I buy games for my Wii U, I enjoy my Wii U for what it is. But I'm not going to sit here and tell people the Wii U is way beyond the PS360 and close to the PS4/XBO when it isn't.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1667d ago
Soldierone1668d ago

Sell a few units and it will suddenly be the first one listed lol All about money at the end of the day.

ABizzel11668d ago

EA is a multi-billion dollar corporation with hundreds of employees who have salaries that need to be paid, and possibly families to take care of. For companies that large, it has to be about business and money first, because if they aren't making money then people are losing jobs. Simple as that.

If you're looking for innovative and creative companies that push the boundaries then you need to look for first party or indie devs.

Soldierone1668d ago (Edited 1668d ago )

Not really, their is a mix between customer satisfaction, and outright putting money first.


Bestbuy was money first, barely staying a live. Amazon is customer first, is quickly becoming one of the largest companies in the world.

Sony, was putting money first, started to struggle. Switched back to customer first, now they started to thrive again.

You don't blatantly go for money and leave customer concerns on the road, its not a good gameplan. There is a mix of how to keep customers happy and how to profit off that area. Simply throwing WiiU on their home page or showing a tiny bit of support is not going to cause anyone to lose their jobs.....

n4f1667d ago

even tho I agree with you soldierone,
for a business company, its always about business.

Justindark1667d ago

to sold i disagree with the sony part. they never reply to emails its insane Now nintendo is all for the fans.

ABizzel11667d ago


And you're adding extra words to my post, and taking it from the topic at hand to ethics. The topic is why EA isn't putting it's games on Wii U and other platforms that aren't best sellers, and the reasons are software sales data and hardware sales. My point was the Wii U has neither hardware sales or 3rd party software sales going for it, so EA as a business made a choice simply not to support that platform since they feel they can't make money off of it.

I never said customers didn't matter, and for the most part EA does cater to their customers, the VAST MAJORITY of which are on PS and XBox. They have some a shady side, and strike deals like the TitanFall deal, and Battlefield DLC being timed exclusive to each platform when it seems beneficial, but I again that's business and to maintain their IP's, developers, and budgets.....As a big business, BUSINESS ALWAYS COMES FIRST.

What's best for the customer and the company should always be brought up, and an effort to appease both should be the goal. But if MS and Sony are throwing around multi-million dollar checks, why wouldn't they accept them?

The best selling EA game on Wii U only hit 140,000 units sold. They released a total of 4 games all of which are known as solid/good games and good sellers on Wii U (Mass Effect, MAdden, Fifa, and the superior version of Need for Speed: Most Wanted), and together all 4 games didn't break 500,000 copies sold on Wii U. That's horrible.

Then you looks at the PS4 and XBO:

Fifa: 1.3M / 680k (surprised by this especially since it was bundled free)
Battlefield: 1.3M / 1.1M
Need for Speed: 640k / 270k
Madden: 470k / 420k
NBA Live: 70k / 80k (Bad game is bad game)

In the case of PS4 EA's second worse selling game (Madden) sold as many copies as 4 of their best selling franchises did on Wii U. Why would they want to support Wii U with sales like that happening. It makes no sense, and no AAA dev./company can survive off of those kinds of sales. Indies and First Party can.

Off Topic:

Those PS4 and XBO also show that EU is again the main reason Sony is going to beat MS this generation if things continue to same route. Games that are very American influenced like Battlefield, Madden, and NBA Live are neck and neck on both consoles. Then games that the EU market love like Need for Speed (racing), Fifa (Soccer/Football), show the PS4 dominating the sales charts, an doubling the XBO versions sales numbers.

Just thought that was interesting to see.

clouds51667d ago

@abizzel1: you're joking right? They release some ports of games that are 6-12 months old and have been on all other platforms and then expect good sales?
Mass Effect, NFS improved old games. Madden only sells in us. Fifa for the wiiu didn't even have all the features...

I got mass effect and the NFS game because I waited with playing them because I wanted to play them on the wii u. But I'm one in a million. Most gamers already played all the other games! And people that are new to gaming and got the wii u? Are they gonna get mass effect 3 and be confused about the story all the time?

EA are complete idiots and it is not surprising that their games didn't sell on wiiu.

ABizzel11667d ago


Look at COD: Ghost sales on Wii U. It's in the 100k range as well. Why would EA bring Battlefield 4 to that console when 3rd party games aren't selling.

In a years there have been over 70 retail games on Wii U. Only 9 have broken 500k in sales, and only 5 have broke 1 million.

The PS4 will have achieved those same sales results in 3 months. It already has 8 games that broke 500k (Madden is again at 470k), and 5 have already broke 1 million, 2 of which are EA games.


Talking to you Nintendo fanboys is liking trying to explain Astrophysics to a 4 year old. I can't say it any clearer than I've already said it.


Let's talk new games, there isn't a 3rd party Wii U game in the TOP 100 selling games of 2013.

Skylanders: 1.45M Wii, 790k 360, 620k PS3, 230k Wii U, 110 PS4/XBO
Lego Marvel: 1M 360, 830k PS3, 340k PS4, 240k XBO, 210k Wii U

Assassin's Creed 4: 2.48M PS3, 2.21M 360, 1.22M PS4, 600k XBO, 120k Wii U
Call of Duty Ghost: 7.87M 360, 7.12M PS3, 1.63M PS4, 1.39M XBO, 120k Wii U
Injustice: 980k 360, 800k PS3, 170k PS4, 80k Wii U

Skylanders is the only game where the Wii U outsold the PS4 and XBO. As you can see I grouped Lego Marvel and Skylanders together, and Assassin's Creed, COD, and Injustice together. EA's games have much more in common with the latter of the two group, and the PS4 and XBO dominated the Wii U sales for those games even though the Wii U has a larger install base.

Hardcore 3rd party games simply aren't selling on the Wii U, but games that have a stigma of being "4 kids" are putting up 2x the numbers of "core" games. Why would EA put it's games on the Wii U.

I'm giving facts and data, as always while you're giving excuses, and bashing. If all of you really wanted to help, you'd be telling people what 3rd party games to buy, and what you feel are good on Wii U, not being argumentative, because a company doesn't want to support your platform of choice, or because developers and games say the Wii U is under-powered compared to the PS4 and XBO.

Instead of b!tching get up and do something. But you won't cause it's too much work to take 5 - 10 minutes and go to the blog section and post a top 10 3rd party games on Wii U, and help out the developer who are actually putting effort into aiding the Wii U. No it's much easier to post a 1 minute complain about someone who decided that the Wii U and it's audience isn't best for their business, after several attempts and researching proven data. Have a seat, you've been served. Next Please.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1667d ago
dcbronco1668d ago

He can't just drop Nintendo. If they are indeed releasing a new console in the next few years, and that seems likely considering the Wii U sales, it will most likely be a more powerful console than the PS4 and Xbox One. I know, people will disagree that it will be more powerful.

But the reality is they are losing millions because they made a lesser console with powerful machines planed to be introduced by the competition a year later. They were stupid. Only way to say it. But I'm sure they have learned their lesson. In two years they can launch a console twice as good for the same launch price as the current machines. Developers will come back to that.

Theyellowflash301668d ago

I think Nintendo hasn't sold people on the Wii U Gamepad. That is the biggest problem.

However, lets see how this year plays out. A lot of big titles are coming to the Wii U, its sure to beat its first year sales of 5 million

ABizzel11668d ago


Who would disagree that it's more powerful. A console releasing a few years after the PS4 and XBO, should be more powerful.

If not then it needs to be in the same range as both of them, and sell at a lower price.

Nintendo's in a hard place right now. I'm sure they're going to give the Wii U at least until the end of 2014 to see if it picks up, and if it's worth riding out a full generation with it. If it is it'll get a bit more support. If not, there will be modest support even from Nintendo for the Wii U. We'll see a full release of their main franchises on the Wii U such as 3D Zelda, 3D Single Player Mario, 3D Pokemon Stadium-type game, 3D Metroid, and a few other surprise, but everything else will likely be lower budget games.

What Nintendo really needs to be focusing on are getting in touch with the current state of gaming, getting better relations with 3rd parties, spending it's $11 billion on outsourcing 1st party exclusives from smaller 3rd / 2nd party developers, and fixing the business side of Nintendo crop. to prepare for the future of Nintendo. If none of these issues are fixed by the time the next console launches, then it's going to be in the same boat as Wii U.

And another console failure (if the Wii U doesn't pick up), could see Nintendo become a handheld only manufacture on the hardware side.

theizzzeee1667d ago (Edited 1667d ago )

It has little to do with the Wii U's power. It has more to do with Nintendo and EA's relationship. EA wants to make the most money with the least effort. The last few gens have been won by the least powerful console. The Wii U's power problem is more perception than reality which for all intents and purpose becomes reality. I want to start a new debate in relation to power to help showcase this. Is the XBOX ONE closer to the Wii U or PS4 in power? On the surface you may say it is clear cut. Think of this look at games on the nextgen twins and how games on XBOX ONE games are running at 720 and 900p native and lower fps. Which performance is that closer too. I think that will improve with time just like the Wii U. It all boils down to money, perception, the games and performance. If, you look at last gen most folks with agree that the power of the PS3 was more powerful or comparative to the 360. Yet most games ran worse. Were folks asking for Sony to come out with a more powerful system to make the games run better??? Folks minds are so fickle and guided like puppets on strings.

dcbronco1665d ago

The next gen consoles still have a lot of power to be exposed. Comparing them to the Wii U now is unfair. There is still so much to be learned about HSA. This machines have a very different way of working. The Wii U is more like the 360 than Xbox One.

MSs decision to have so much of the available resources partitioned for the OS creates problems. But that will decrease as they come up with more efficient ways of using the OS and better methods on the games side. The Wii U will be left far behind.

Allowen1667d ago (Edited 1667d ago )

You can't patch a game if the basic SKU has only 8G of size.
Therefore you would have to lose more time and money polishing every game like Nintendo does with their games.Preaty much these 1st party IPs have no bug but takes extra months to finaly be really to be launched.

The main hardware problem of the wiiu is not the 2G ram or the expensive tablet controller but the fact it was not build in with an HDD inside.

Show all comments (38)
The story is too old to be commented.