
EA is opening its Nintendo Switch account with a FIFA title, but the company's executive vice president Patrick Söderlund says that owners can expect more games in the future.
Speaking to IGN, Söderlund outlined EA's decision to support to the console at launch, and why working with the Japanese veteran is so appealing:
We've been with Nintendo for a very long time. I'm a Nintendo fanboy since I grew up. Nintendo is the reason I got into gaming.
What I like about Nintendo is that they come to the table with a slightly different approach. They've done that in the past to great success, and sometimes not so much, but I think unless you're willing to think about something unconventional, it's going to be hard to break ground.
Nintendo forces us to think differently; [Switch] challenges conventions. As game makers, makes us think about the platform in a different way.
Söderlund cites EA's choice of FIFA as its first Switch release as evidence that it's taking the console very seriously:
It's our biggest brand. It's the brand that spans across the most markets. It's the brand that spans the biggest age demographic. It's a mass market proposition. It's a game a lot of people want to play. This is our way of showing we're going to be there. We're supporting the platform. We are not announcing anything [else] yet, but you can expect us to be there once the platform launches and takes off.
We have the benefit of being a platform agnostic company. We will be at whatever platform the consumers are. New hardware is always a positive for our industry. It allows us to push forward.
Indeed, Söderlund is optimistic that the Switch can carve out its own niche in a market which feels divided between consoles and smartphones:
There's no denying [smartphones are] the biggest platform today. That's not going to change in the foreseeable future. But I think the types of game experiences you can get on the Switch will be different than what you can get on a smartphone. The power of it and the types of games will, I hope, bring a renewed interest in portable gaming. That's what I hope.
He ends the interview by admitting that The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild is his most anticipated release of the year:
It's on the top of my list for 2017 as one of the games I'm looking forward to the most. I've played every single Zelda since the first one. And having completed all of them, even if I forget about my job, just as a gamer, from what I've seen and what I've played, I can't wait to get my hands on it.
EA has made bold comments about Nintendo consoles in the past, of course - but do you think we could see the publisher rekindle its partnership with Nintendo with this new platform? Or, as was the case with the Wii U, will we see support fall away as the months roll by? Let us know with a comment.
[source uk.ign.com]
Comments 93
I wonder how many versions of Fifa end up on the Switch. Place your bets. I'm going for 1. EA's excuse will be it's too hard to work with.
I say this every year, but as a Nintendo-only player, it's been shocking how we've been dismissed by EA.
I used to love growing up with the N64 and Gamecube FIFAs, with FIFA 07 the last one that matched the other console's efforts.
FIFA 13 on Wii U was great, but anything in-between (ie, on Wii) was a disgrace.
Please EA, please, just give us the same as the other consoles: Manager Mode, all the teams and players, and Ultimate Team.
To have that on the go, you'd make millions.
Respect the Nintendo fanbase!
If the console sells well, ea will be making games.
"We've been with Nintendo for a very long time" - this is some kind of ice-breaking joke right? As a joke it is pretty good albeit not the best timing for it.
If it is intended as a statement of fact maybe it classifies as "fake news"; I did not notice them "being with Nintendo" during the past few years for example.
"Nintendo Forces us to think differently "
Not too differently, same game different name.
Rinse, repeat.
The best way for him to back up his support for Nintendo would be to announce some games.
@Moms-Meowth Switch is very easy to develop for - all the developers are saying that. . .
I was really hoping we'd get Battlefield 1 at least. I didn't ask for it for Christmas because I wanted to wait. Oh well. I'll get it eventually.
The Switch better get Battlefront II though
"We've been with Nintendo for a very long time." but just not releasing games! lol
@kantaroo That was because the Wii U flopped and the few games they did put out at the beginning,understandably sold poorly.The Wii though received good support from them with many great exclusive titles like Boomblox 1/2 and Grandslam Tennis.It comes down to sales,if the Switch is a success EA will be there with plenty of games.Saying that though,considering their role in the industry they have a responsibility to help any new console become a success.They never gave the Wii U a fair crack,as soon as it was in trouble they bailed.
All I want from EA is The Sims 4 Switch version.
I don't trust EA whatsoever,,they have no respect for nintendo fans, I think I'm wright in saying and I'm not Alone .IF this fifa is fully fledge Game with no compromise then we wil see.EA has to build bridges and not just start it and then say after first few months.Oh switch is not selling like we want and so will bump it.ITS up up to you EA.I'm watching
We need to see a more diverse commitment. Not from the sports division. Something from the ground up to get Switch gamers excited, and to get gamers excited about EA.
They said the exact same things about Wii U. How did that go again?
He says. "We are not announcing anything [else] yet, but you can expect us to be there once the platform launches and takes off". So he is actually saying that they will be there IF it takes off..
@olrodlegacy Very well said.And completely True
@cfgk24 But you watch EA change there tune if the game don't sell well.
Really so where were you when the Wii U needed some big titles to stop t going under EA?
oh yeah kissing Microsoft's a**
Well i think a wait and see approach works best here but i had expected they at least announce Madden for the American users.
Guys, take a chill pill. EA is a company which can only work by making profit. If a console is failing, of course they won't support it. That is Nintendo's fault, not EA's.
Okay, I'll place my bet: FIFA 18 will come to Nintendo Switch on Friday September 29th 2017, and will be not only the sole FIFA game on the system, but the sole EA game on the Switch.
Just to add my reasoning: With Super Mario Odyssey scheduled as a Holiday 2017 title, that leaves 1-2 months before it comes out? A full fledged Mario game will sell systems in the holiday season but by that point EA may have looked at FIFA launch/1 month numbers and come to a decision.
Give the Switch a fully fledged FIFA and let's see how it goes. It's the biggest selling franchise in the world - if it can't do well on Switch then it'd be quite understandable for EA to lose interest.
They say they're a 'fanboy', but they ditched the Wii U completely and were very cautious at first with the Switch...hmm...doesn't sound much like a fanboy to me.
Back to the article at hand, it's nice to know that the sports series will be coming to the Switch, and hopefully every year that the others come to the other consoles too...it's a good addition, granted I'm not a big fan of them, it's a good decision too and hopefully nintendo helps them to keep it going...maybe we'll even get the My Sims and The Sims and even Sim City titles back too. More companies on board, the better the amount of games coming to the system!
@EllenJMiller Madden 2017 will come too...next year when Madden 2019 is out on the others...then, they'll get mad that it doesn't sell, because Madden 17 will be $20 on PS4 and XBONE, but $60 on Switch...then they'll walk away!!!!
EA just don't learn... the popularity of a franchise in general should not be taken as an indication of it's popularity on a specific console.
They done the exact same thing on the Wii U... created ports of their more popular franchises (including FIFA), assuming them to be popular on the Wii U as well, but they weren't, and stopped supporting the console as a result, even though it was their own mis-judgement that was to blame.
"They forces us to think differently"
"I used to love buying Nintendo consoles, now I don't"
EAlies - do they really think, that gamers and movie watchers are so stupid and naive ?
@JLPick
Ooh.... I want MySims and or The Sims series back again on Nintendo Switch. Of course, must have solid gameplay even after post-game (Last MySims games on Wii had very awful replay after post-game. Remember MySims Agents Wii ? After post game, there is nothing to do but wandering around for nothing or wasting the time by waiting incoming calls from your Sims during missions)
Even if the football/soccer game is for me pro evolution (did kOnami announce something about?) I think Switch needs EA support. Other sports gaming brands are needed. But if Switch is not capable to handle them (and if Nintendo didn't work well with important third parties even if it is EA...) we will see another WiiU situation. and for big N it will mean the end.
You can't really fault his argument here, they're a business. They're money makers. They will be on the system if it's a success. Everybody loves Nintendo within the industry for what they've done for it, more than any other company can boast. But unless Nintendo offers them the same money making opportunity than the other systems do, they're not going to be there, and releasing a console that makes it hard to port big AAA titles to without significant downgrades that cost a lot money to make happen than a simple quick port, then those games simply aren't going to happen... unless the money making opportunity is big enough to warrant it. In the Gamecube days, EA games always automatically appeared on the system because there was power parity with the other systems on the market, it was in the same league and porting to it was super easy and not too expensive, so even if the games didn't sell all that much, they also didn't have a lot of money to make back for those releases to be viable and continue coming through. Nintendo has been giving them a harder time to do that since those days. Their decision to not support them as much made sense...
Although I'll put out there that they've made pretty stupid decisions too, like porting only Mass Effect 3 and not the two previous games, late after the other systems which did welcome the trilogy by that point, at the same price as ME3 alone on Wii U. It was OBVIOUSLY not going to sell. On the other hand when a team working on an EA game for Wii U, NFS Most Wanted in this case, that brought to Wii U the single BEST console version of the game, and that game didn't sell well either on it... then you can't fault them. I was a day one adopter of the Wii U version, and never regretted my purchase. It's sad that not many more Wii U owners supported it and picked up the game.
@nintykid I wish more people could understand this
I wouldn't hold my breath for any support from EA. They offered token support for Wii U but their games never had any realistic chance of success because they weren't backed by the EA marketing machine. Since EA games are heavily reliant on that initial marketing push late ports out on a limb are basically sent out to die.
Maybe some people inside their organisation like Nintendo on a personal level but as a business they don't seem to have any synergy or workable relationship.
I don't know they've already have announced the Switch will be a modified version of FIFA, so I guess we'll have to wait and see what's there and not there.
I do question if they would care about Nintendo at all if their business on the other 2 hadn't fallen off a cliff recently? FIFA seemed to be used as a pack in title to sell PS4's, and Titanfall... fell over Titanically.
@Moms-Meowth Of course! If the game doesn't sell well - and they don't make enough profit for the development they have put in to the product - they would divert their resources elsewhere - somewhere more profitable. Your point was that EA were going to say that the Switch was too hard to work with. Which it isn't according to experienced dev - this is obviously a good thing so I'm keeping very positive. Also - EA stated that FIFA was a customer build for Switch - this may mean that it has multiple Multiplayer options - both of local and online play! Imagine 8 player Fifa!
I will buy fifa but I am still disappointed although not surprised that EA doesn't just put all of their sports titles or at least madden as well on the Switch to start. Give the system a chance first. Just make the games EA and people will buy them. I feel like Nintendo is putting in the effort but EA isn't. We shall see this year though.
I used to like this site because it wasn't filled with miserable cynics like all the other game sites. Sadly it is now filled with people who constantly predict failure and then will it to happen so that they can be proven right.
Anyway, back to EA... I really hope they bring their other sports games to the Switch. I would love at least one good effort at Madden, NHL and PGA Tour from them. If not, hopefully 2K at least bring NHL 2K## along with NBA 2K18.
@Nik-Davies
Oh man if they bring battlefield i would eat my switch and buy a new one lol
Don't like this guy. He can keep his stupid sport games. Who needs EA on Nintendo anyway.
i don't doubt for a minute that this guy is a nintendo fan (let's face it, most people working with games nowdays grew up playing nintendo games) and i do understand that ea is a business, so if it doesn't make financial sense for them to release games on the switch, they won't release games on the switch…
the only thing i don't understand is: who the hell thought it was a good idea to present themselves in front of a red and black banner!!?? it made them look positively evil…
@DragonEleven
Cosigned on this. More developers need to realize that it's not that their games can't sell on Nintendo platforms but they need to put the right games on them to sell.
That said, I do think Sports titles will be quite successful on the Switch. Being able to take FIFA and 2K on the go and easily play with friends at parties, school, work, etc. will be a big selling point.
@Lilith93 It's that sort of crappy attitude which results in us getting crappy games.
We need EA games, but I'll bet we get a crappy FIFA 17 that they'll try to pass as FIFA 18.
I'm the first to say that I hope they actually release the same version of FIFA 18 as PS4/XONE, only with graphical downgrade to ensure performance if necessary. But keep the same contents!
Well, as someone who literally falls asleep watching sports I'm not too highly invested in this. However, I think EA made a wise business decision in pulling out of the Wii U... but a terrible public relations decision.
What EA does now will cement how Nintendo fans see them for life. Will they announce games? Or will they simply continue to flap their lips?
"We are great Nintendo fans"
"Then make some games for their systems!"
"We are Rolling Stones fans too, that doesn't mean we're writing any songs for them!"
@olrodlegacy so true. What will I hear next
Who needs capcom
Seriously now. Anybody about to post anything read and digest what @nintykid said, "EA is a company which can only work by making profit. If a console is failing, of course they won't support it. That is Nintendo's fault, not EA's."
This is the crux of the matter.
@Lilith93
Good grief. Nintendo do for a start. Lots of gamers want to play their games.
@JLPick
EA aren't fanboys. The man talking is saying he is a fanboy. EA are a private company with shareholders that exists to make a profit. Just like Nintendo.
@Moms-Meowth
" But you watch EA change there tune if the game don't sell well"
And?
@electrolite77 I would say @ninykid was absolutely right, but there is the business side of things & the public relations side of things. A lot of people really don't understand the reason the Wii U failed and place blame entirely on the third-party developers. While this is wrong, EA did little to fight this perception.
The same people attacking EA now are the same people that will praise them if they release a few AAA titles in the next few years. The nature of public opinion unfortunately.
@electrolite77 @olrodlegacy Yeah sorry about that. There just something about this guy. He looks evil. Like a star trek bad guy or something. For EA fans I hope they will bring some great games. But honestly, can't see it happening
@MrGawain
EA killed Titanfall 2. Idiots sent it out to fail straight after Battlefield and before COD. Shame as it's really good (and I'm not a big FPS fan). FIFA being bundled just means big money though.
EA is like Ubisoft when it comes to Nintendo. You can't believe a word they say. The Switch does not need something different, it just needs a solid game with solid controls. No water down crap. Im tired of all the buzzwords that don't mean anything.
I think everyone is being a bit harsh. This guy genuinely sounds like a bit of a Nintendo fan and wants it to do well but it will come down to sales whether ea sticks with it
I don't like soccer, so I won't buy FIFA.
lol EA. Good for those who like their games, but it's the only part of the Switch presentation that I actually skipped
@Dakt the FIFA (FIFAs?) coming to Switch is not a part of the yearly installment series. It's a customized version exclusively for Switch.
This is not a good thing.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE it went about as well as every other 3rd party relationship did on Wii U.
Did EA give it a try in the way that Ubisoft did? Not exactly. However, at some point it's 'you' not 'them', in a sense.
@electrolite77 Yeah, but EA bringing out fully-fledged games would have helped the Wii and Wii U to no end, as casuals wouldn't need to buy the more expensive other formats to play FIFA, which is a system-seller to the majority of console buyers.
The third parties ARE to blame - a console won't do well if they don't bring their games to it!
@olrodlegacy
The Wii didn't need help and EA put out plenty of games on it. They didn't put out traditional versions of their games because the only games that really sold on Wii were first-party games, Just Dance and minigame collections.
Lack of third-party support on Wii U (or any other console) is ultimately down to Nintendo (or whoever makes the console). The likes of EA will happily put out endless iterations of heir games if there's money to be made. They were very quick to call the Wii U a flop (they gave the same derisory support to Vita and none to Dreamcast). All that says is maybe they're a better judge of what machines will sell than people like me who pay money for them!
@DanteSolablood It's funny because these companies just expect consoles to sell, and then they'll make games. But they never think maybe just maybe, a launch lineup including Battle Field 1, Madden 17, and Fifa 17 would sell consoles.
@Nintendoforlife But it's not their job to sell consoles. That's the job of Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony. EA sell games. As long as there are platforms that are selling well that they can release their games on then they are happy. Given how successful EA have been as a company I would suggest that they know what they are doing.
@Nintendoforlife Actually companies do think about games helping a system sell & for the Wii U released at least a couple of games including Mass Effect 3: Special Edition & Fifa Soccer 13 at launch.
The problem is that when a developer releases games, they need people to buy them or else they lose money & potentially people lose jobs. Mass Effect 3 for the Wii U? Sold 0.27m units worldwide and made a massive loss. Zombie U (Ubisoft), sold around 300,000 units & made a massive loss leading to job losses. A business has to consider everything, including it's employees.
Are you expecting EA or Ubisoft to make games... and just expect them to sell without a console? It's not EA's job to make the Switch look good. They've announced their support, which isn't too bad considering that they didn't make any money on the Wii U.
I can't trust EA but I really hope we get what the other systems have
@BionicDodo @DanteSolablood It's not neccesarily the job of EA to help sell consoles, but putting forth minimum effort to support a console then saying "Oh the console didn't sell well what a shame" is ridiculous. Think of it like this, let's say I sponsor a product. I can very well provide little to no support, and live off of any success it might find. Or I can put a lot of effort into supporting the product, and maximizing the amount of success it will have.
Here's the Xbox One Launch line up:
Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag (Ubisoft, Ubisoft)
Battlefield 4 (DICE, Electronic Arts)
Call of Duty: Ghosts (Infinity Ward, Activision)
Crimson Dragon (Grounding/Land Ho!, Microsoft Studios)
Dead Rising 3 (Capcom Vancouver, Microsoft)
FIFA 14 (EA Sports, Electronic Arts)
Fighter Within (AMA Ltd., Ubisoft)
Forza Motorsport 5 (Turn 10 Studios, Microsoft Studios)
Just Dance 2014 (Ubisoft Paris, Ubisoft)
Killer Instinct (Double Helix, Microsoft Studios)
Lego Marvel Super Heroes (TT Games, Warner Bros. Interactive)
Lococycle (Twisted Pixel, Microsoft Studios)
Madden NFL 25 (EA Sports, Electronic Arts)
NBA 2K14 (Visual Concepts, 2K Sports)
NBA LIVE 14 (EA Sports, Electronic Arts)
Need for Speed: Rivals (Ghost Games, Electronic Arts)
Powerstar Golf (Zoe Mode, Microsoft Studios)
Ryse: Son of Rome (Crytek, Microsoft Studios)
Skylanders: Swap Force (Vicarious Visions, Activision)
Zoo Tycoon (Frontier Developments Ltd., Microsoft Studios)
Zumba Fitness: World Party (Zoe Mode, Majesco)
Now we have the PS4:
Angry Birds Star Wars
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag
Battlefield 4
Blacklight: Retribution
Call of Duty: Ghosts
Contrast
DC Universe Online
FIFA 14
Flower
Forced
Injustice: Gods Among Us - Ultimate Edition
Just Dance 2014
Killzone Shadow Fall
Knack
Lego Marvel Super Heroes
Madden NFL 25
NBA 2K14
Need for Speed Rivals
Resogun
Skylanders: Swap Force
Sound Shapes
Super Motherload
The Playroom
Trine 2: Complete Story
Warframe
There's no denying the launch lineup support significantly increased the value of the system. People weren't buying the Xbox one or PS4, because they were such amazing consoles. It's simply because they had major titles set up for a launch date.
Soderlund seems a lot more straight forward than some of his superiors (and subordinates) at EA. It's a shame we don't see a lot more input from him than from the likes of Moore who seems to be almost reckless. If everyone spoke about their intentions for Nintendo the way he does here for the past 15 years, I don't think EA would have dug such a deep hole with this field of potential customers.
Instead EA's built an almost antagonistic relationship with Nintendo customers with bizarre comments department heads exuding an elitist "oh our stuff is just so much better than simple Nintendo hardware, it's for Real Gamers(TM)" air.
I doubt many Nintendo fans have a problem with them simply saying "hey are games just never seem to sell well on the platform, so we're not going to make too many". It's the bizarre feint & parry, promote & deny shtick that raises angst against them. They tend to come off as a company executing a corporate sabotage strategy against Nintendo's platforms to benefit platforms they perform better on than to simply align themselves where they sell and ignore the rest.
They really do need to acknowledge their missteps on Nintendo platforms though if they want to understand at least some of their market failure there. What they did on WiiU with several titles shot themselves in the foot before they launched, and they need to acknowledge some culpability in that if they intend to do better. It's clear they wish they could perform well on Nintendo, but they don't seem to be sitting down and asking themselves "what can we do to improve penetration into the Nintendo market?" They just throw a game or two at it and say "oh well we tried and no one bought it". Technically they don't make very many games that click with the Nintendo customer, but they do make some. FIFA, Madden, everything from their Bioware unit, NFS. They've got the idea down given their bumbled attempts at WiiU but the execution is very lacking.
@Nintendoforlife I don't doubt a good launch lineup can add value to a console's launch, but with both the PS4 & XboxOne there was a large playerbase expected to make the move across and both Ubisoft and EA expected their launch games to make money.
Move that to the Switch's predecessor where EA & Ubisoft supported the Wii U with multiple launch titles & lost significant amounts of money with every game... Ubisoft lost so much money on ZombiU they literally had no choice but to make Rayman Legends multiplatform. Again, jobs were lost, how many staff should lose their lively hoods to help Nintendo make money?
@Anti-Matter The only My Sims games I enjoyed were the original and Kingdoms...the others were pretty bad. The main ones I'd like to see...and I'm still waiting on one to come to the consoles, is The Sims 4 and the Sim City games. I still have The Sims 3 and Sims 3 Pets on PS3 and Sim City titles on Wii...just awaiting for some new ones...PS2, Gamecube and XBOX era we had many Sims and Sim City and other Simulation titles like them (Theme Park Rollercoaster, Railroad Tycoon and more)...it seems the only one I have recently on the new systems that comes somewhat close, is Tropico 5 on PS4. I just love sim games and awaiting for someone to put the Sims 4 on the systems, instead of playing on the PC.
@Nintendoforlife But if the Wii U had launched with the same line up as those consoles it still wouldn't have sold as well as its issues lay elsewhere. As long as there are three major console manufacturers, publishers like EA have the luxury of exercising caution when success is far from guaranteed. I can't blame them for that as they are a business and a very successful one at that.
@DanteSolablood Publishers are referred to as "partners" not "vendors". Their role in the industry is more than just "selling SKUs to consoles where there's a large install base", but working with the hardware manufacturers to build an ecosystem that is symbiotic. If they were the former you'd see no 3rd party games until the 2nd year of any console. They are in a position where their brand power added to a launch increases the platform value and therefore its install base, and grows their own market potential as a result. It's very symbiotic.
The problem is these publishers have become self-defeatingly risk averse and they arrive with absurd expectations and budget accordingly. ZombiU didn't sell very badly at all for a launch day game, but Ubisoft foolishly anticipated higher numbers, likely basing that estimate off the belief WiiU would be a runaway success like Wii. To be fair to Ubisoft, Nintendo expected outlandish numbers as well and likely provided guidance based on that. WiiU launch was a big success. The fallout happened in the months following launch, and the sudden retraction of all the publishers recoiling after not seeing Wii-like sales contributed to that greatly. Nintendo's strategy was, very publicly, to address publisher concerns about competing against Nintendo software and left the launch window open to the 3rd parties as requested and devoid of 1st party. When the 3rd parties backed off upon seeing WiiU was just a normal console and not a continuation of the Wii phenomenon, it left the launch window barren which set a negative spiral in motion that was never recovered. (For Nintendo's part, they retreated to bolster the ailing 3DS, and couldn't respond to the sudden 3rd party gap in time. In hindsight Nintendo's error was in not getting written contractual commitments from most of these publishers.)
Mass Effect was a terrible, terrible foot-in-mouth from EA. They did a good port of the new-ish but still late to the party end of the trilogy. On a platform with no prior exposure to that franchise. Then sold the entire trilogy for less money on every other platform. If there was anybody on that decision making team that did NOT know they were sending the WiiU version out to die, those people should not be on any decision making team within that organization ever again. EA was the one harmed by that. Mass Effect (and all Bioware RPGs) would mesh VERY well with the Nintendo market's interests. It wasn't just about introducing Mass Effect 3 to WiiU, it was about introducing the Mass Effect brand and Bioware style RPGs to the Nintendo customer base. They blew it. I think Andromeda would have done pretty well on Switch. So would Dragon Age. WiiU failed, but it dosn't vindicate the publishers as being right. They have to realize they contributed to that result. It's fine if they run the numbers and determine it's just not worth the risk, but as their investors endlessly push them to grow their market, it's silly for them to treat a sizeable market of "likely customers" as a problem rather than an opportunity.
@BionicDodo @DanteSolablood I'm well aware of the loss of sales for the Wii U. I still think if you're going to support console, then you can't continually throw out the same washed out FIFA port and call it "support". We'll see how this FIFA goes, but I am skeptical about its quality when it reaches the Switch.
Let me ask you guys, what do you think would be more well received? FIFA 17 or Battlefield 1 as a launch Title for the Switch??? I get not wanting to go all in with multiple games, but I bet BF1 would sell better. It would also make the console more appealing, and sell consoles. EA should just come out and say they don't think Nintendo currently has a big enough market and be gone. Rather than console after console say "You have our support" while constantly supplying and destroying false hope.
@NEStalgia Thank you for eloquently stating what I was trying to get across. When it comes down to it, there is nothing that can stop a console from selling when it has a strong game lineup. Unless of course the System is really just that bad aka the VirtualBoy.
If the Xbox one had a launch lineup of:
FIFA 14 (EA Sports, Electronic Arts)
Fighter Within (AMA Ltd., Ubisoft)
Forza Motorsport 5 (Turn 10 Studios, Microsoft Studios)
Just Dance 2014 (Ubisoft Paris, Ubisoft)
Killer Instinct (Double Helix, Microsoft Studios)
Lego Marvel Super Heroes (TT Games, Warner Bros. Interactive)
Lococycle (Twisted Pixel, Microsoft Studios)
It wouldn't have had anywhere close to the sales it had at launch.
@Nintendoforlife Oddly enough a Battlefield was in the works for the Wii U, however it was probably a mix of Call of Duty: Ghosts (Activision) flopping pretty badly and EAs previous failures that caused them to cancel it.
@NEStalgia I understand the point you are making & there is a level of risk adversity at play. You mentioned it yourself, EA & Ubisoft possibly had their expectations up too high after the amazing sales of the Wii. So where are their expectations after the Wii U? Isn't it natural to be cautious after repeatedly getting burned & then approaching an untested proposition like the Switch? I'm not going to harp on about the Wii U much more... but let's not forget that not only was it hard to develop for the Wii U, but at the time EA was in major financial trouble and had already lost a CEO during the Wii U's early life.
As I've said multiple times, of course a console will look more attractive with a larger launch lineup. That doesn't guarantee that a developer will get a single dollar in return for those games or in the long run. Another thing that people seem to miss is that while Sony & Microsoft will offer developers incentives and make things easier them to bring their games to their consoles... Nintendo does not do the same, Nintendo does & always has had the attitude that developers should consider it an honour to be allowed to develop for their platform.
@DanteSolablood You show me BF1, BOTW. AND GTA at launch. And I guarantee you the Switch would reach record breaking sales. It's incredibly easy to sell a console, but for some reason Companies decide not to put their best foot forward.
@Nintendoforlife I'd take that money & expect a nice healthy return on it. That's easy to say but AAA games does not guarantee a consoles success. The PS Vita & PSP weren't short of high profile games at the start. Plus let's not forget... Sony & Microsoft put a lot of money into attracting developers into making their games available at launch. We like to see Nintendo as blameless but their developer relations has always been poor back to the 90s.
@DanteSolablood You're right AAA games do not guarantee console success. But a console CAN'T be successful without AAA games.
@Nintendoforlife "You're right AAA games do not guarantee console success. But a console CAN'T be successful without AAA games."
Exactly, which is why Sony & Microsoft put a lot of effort & money into acquiring those AAA games at launch. If I remember correctly, Nintendo was charging developers almost double the licensing fee for releasing games than either Sony or Microsoft during the Gamecube era and haven't changed their attitudes.
@DanteSolablood Well that's completely on us, no excuses are to be made there. I don't know paint me as a salty Nintendo fan, but with EA having a hot franchise such as BF1 at their disposal. And only giving us a quick FIFA port that they threw together, really makes me question how much "support" is really being given.
@Nintendoforlife I'm not trying to be an EA apologist, so don't get me wrong. However, there is a lot more that goes on in the background that people don't consider before just exclaiming "EA is evil, long live Nintendo" when it's often Nintendo themselves causing a problems for developers.
Look at Nintendo this way, while not Microsoft & Sony are selling their consoles at a loss to make sure they create a large user base... Nintendo sells at a profit, even if it means producing something weaker. Sony & Microsoft pay big money for exclusives and but huge amounts of effort into courting developers. Nintendo lose interest & break communications with devs (recent NL story).
I can understand your point about Battlefield 1, but it's actually less of a safe bet than Fifa for Nintendo who is likely looking to make sure the Switch is secure in Japan as well as other territories. Battlefield doesn't do well in Japan & Asia and only does moderately well in countries like the UK.
Football/Soccer is a massive thing throughout Europe & Asia, the only area which isn't a huge market for Soccer is America... but the fanbase is actually growing quickly.
Let's look at it this way, in 2015 Fifa was the second best selling console game Worldwide apart from Call of Duty: Black Ops 2. That's right... it outsold both GTA V, Star Wars Battlefront and Fallout 4 on PS4.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273335/sales-of-the-worlds-most-popular-console-games-in-2011/
@Nintendoforlife I think FIFA's probably a good call for testing the waters in some regards. It's EA's biggest franchise worldwide, and it plugs a hole that Nintendo often has, a lack of sports titles that makes the bread and butter of the casual gamer (and isn't Nintendo always derided as a casual console?) Even back in the 16 bit generation, Sega's modest popularity was built largely around it having sports titles while Nintendo didn't. It didn't speak to me as a gamer, but it spoke to a lot of potential customers. Nintendo launching with no sports games would be a big genre gap that the other consoles have, and EA plugs that hole probably better than any. It's not a bad fit to have a filled out library. I presume 2k is bringing NBA as well if not GTA.
I'm not sure Battlefield is the best fit for Nintendo. It doesn't fill any obvious holes in the lineup (Splatoon is the online shooter that speaks more to the Nintendo minded) and already established a player base on other consoles. I think it's worth having on Switch in its next installment after the Switch matures, but for launch, if I were picking and choosing which one EA offering Nintendo should accept between the two, FIFA makes more sense. Also the portable local multiplayer aspect, if implemented, would be a standout feature Switch brings to fans of sports games that would fit their play interests that you couldn't get from Sony or Microsoft. I can see people doing FIFA on Switch pools like a Fantasy Football pool. Battlefield doesn't really benefit from mobility too much as an online focused shooter.
@NEStalgia @DanteSolablood I believe that comes from the company that back these brands. The Xbox brand is backed for Microsoft, Playstation is back by Sony (Both of which have other forms of profits). Nintendo is just Nintendo there isn't another soucre of income other than it'a games/merch. That's where the advantage lies, but I definitly conceed the point on FIFA. You and have convinced me it's the better starter game. I don't know we'll see what the future holds.
@DanteSolablood "Look at Nintendo this way, while not Microsoft & Sony are selling their consoles at a loss to make sure they create a large user base... Nintendo sells at a profit, even if it means producing something weaker. Sony & Microsoft pay big money for exclusives and but huge amounts of effort into courting developers. Nintendo lose interest & break communications with devs."
Good writeup! I highly suspect Nintendo is selling Switch at a loss, which is part of the reason for the inflated accessories pricing. WiiU was sold at a slight loss (according to Reggie it became a profit with the purchase of one game however.) 3DS was sold at a loss initially. But you're right, Nintendo can't afford the deep subsidies that Sony and Microsoft offer, and the money spent subsidizing AAA publishers is basically their "1st party spending" making EA/Ubi, etc primarily 2nd parties for MS and Sony, meaning from a business perspective, Nintendo has to be a last priority. Nintendo invests that money into their own development rather than subsidizing partners.
There's a flip side to all that that a lot of people don't realize either. Sony's Playstation division is doing quite well. In fact it's one of the ONLY parts of Sony doing well. They've learned to produce profits that float some of the rest of the company. Nintendo remains profitable. Even the WiiU was profitable due to the high attach rate of software. Commercially it bombed, and it's image probably negatively affected the Nintendo brand, but only slightly because they wisely kept the Nintendo brand away from the Wii brand, but software attach was quite good, and yielded very small profits (that then became operating losses as they were sunk into Switch development.)
XBox, however, has never made a profit. Not ever. The entirety of the XBox brand has never made a single penny. In fact it's lost substantial amounts of money. They conceived of the XBox as both a trojan horse to get Windows into the living room, and a way to stem the losses from PC gaming (that drove a lot of new PC and thus Windows sales in the late 90's to early 00) that were migrating to the PS2 by locking DirectX as the continued development standard. They through unholy amounts of money out the window to establish it in the market. Even the success of the X360 didn't come close to making that money back, and the mediocre sales of the XBOne combined with the spending on AAA publishers and hardware subsidies is a slow creep to recovering much of it. Investors are furious, and investors and management has been calling to sell off XBox to pretty much anyone for a long time. It's a black hole and Microsoft doesn't really want to deal with it anymore. XBox has been padding their losses by shifting income from Android royalties into the division, so on paper it rarely looks as bad as it is.
So when comparing Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, only two are actually making money selling gaming products. Microsoft deficit spends just to be on the shelf. If they can cling on long enough they can probably recover, but it's questionable how long MS will let them keep borrowing from more successful divisions to "hopefully someday" get there.
Meanwhile EA will be asking for another few mil for the next Battlefield....
@NEStalgia Thank you, I was also aware of both Sony & Microsoft's situation, though it's always good to have affirmation of such. Interestingly the PS3 took quite a while to turn profitable... sometimes it's a long term game.
Another interesting thing about Microsoft is that on both the original xBox & the 360 it was hard to find a Microsoft logo on the packaging or the console. This is because Microsoft thought associations with the MS brand would damage the console's sales.
...and if there's one thing EA doesn't like it's thinking differently
@DanteSolablood PS3 was in many ways Sony's WiiU (despite Vita being more of a parallel in sales.) It was born of hubris from the success of their prior generation and it led them into a dangerous hole of weirdly proprietary hardware that cost way too much. It's truly a miracle, with huge credit going to Hirai and Yoshida that that managed to not only recover from that tailspin but turn it into a success! Nintendo didn't manage that with WiiU, but I have a suspicion they didn't actually want to. I think their goal has been to get to Switch from the day they launched the WiiU. I wouldn't be surprised if they really wanted the prior generation to be the Switch but the tech and costs just weren't there yet so the WiiU was thrown together as a stopgap instead.
A lot of people point out how nice Phil Spencer has been to Nintendo, not just in tweets, but in actual negotiations with crossing IPs, Rare products, etc. I imagine Phil doesn't want any bridges burned in the event XBox goes up on the auction block. A good rapport with Nintendo could do them well should they find themselves alone against Sony, or trying to divest of IP assets.
EA...much of their management are former MS execs. I would be surprised if they align their business ideas along the notion that they could be in a good position to bid on a for-sale XBox brand one year or another and be a 1st party themselves in the future.
Again, 3rd parties care about ROI. For like 95% of western 3rd party games, that's not on Nintendo platforms, much like Japanese 3rd party games on Xbox.
As long as that remains the case, Nintendo platforms will never get the majority of western 3rd party games. Doesn't matter what type of box Nintendo puts out.
@IceClimbers Very true, and the crowds that clambor for "Nintendo should just make the most powerful console ever" tend to miss that point.
That said, 3rd parties should be concerned about things other than ROI, namely long term market growth. They should be asking themselves "how can we penetrate the Nintendo and Japan markets" rather than just assuming it's not possible. As I said, they've grown too risk-averse for their own good. They're comfortable with the status quo which is the sort of thing that can bite them badly if there's any market disruption.
Being forced to think differently is a double edged sword. It can allow for new and innovative gameplay, but it can also make it harder for developers to bring games to the Switch.
@NEStalgia
100% exact.
EA made worst launch on WiiU: Mass Effect 3, if they would have launched Mass Effect Trilogy , I would have bought it for WiiU. But price comparison with other versions made me to ignore it.
After it only paid for 1 & 2 in humble bundle for PC at irrisory price.
EA lost money when launching WiiU version AND devaluating all the product line trying to sell all the other versions.
Only benefit were reduced development cost for next games ignoring WiiU platform and ignoring posible increase in player base if WiiU would
Ah, and EA doesn't was the only crazy company launches: NBA2K13 was years at full price at eShop (30€ more than price in other platforms) when GAME selling finally discs at 9€ and less.
So, I finally spent more money on Nintendo products at a result.
FIFA is an interesting choice.
I always hear some friends who are rambling upon who would win in FIFA.
With the switch, they might finally be able to shut up and settle it right there, since the Switch is portable.
Hope everything goes fine.
"We're supporting the platform. We are not announcing anything [else] yet, but you can expect us to be there once the platform launches and takes off."
This sentence is missing a caveat:
"But if it doesn't we're gone until Switch 2."
Haven't played FIFA since like the GBA days but I'm up for getting it on Switch if just for the ability to challenge my friends wherever I am. If it lets you do that, of course. And subsequent versions depend entirely on how much of an improvement they make or if they just kick out the same game with new teams.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...