Remember the other day when we reported that Activision broke Electronic Arts' decade-long stranglehold on third-party dominance? Well EA's CEO, John Riccitiello, certainly took notice -- and fully understands at least one reason for that unexpected fall. During EA's annual shareholder meeting, John acknowledged in a question and answer session their strategic mistake in underestimating just how popular the Nintendo Wii was going to be:
"The [hardware] transition has been a lot harder" than EA expected. Unfortunately we backed a little bit on the wrong horse in focusing so much on PS3 and Xbox 360, and [by focusing] to a lesser degree on the Wii."
Intrigued yet? There's plenty more where this came from, after the jump.
After spending enough time focusing on their own shortcomings, John Riccitiello went on to say that they weren't alone in their miscalculations, and had plenty of company to cozy up with:
"Let me assure you that almost all of us in the industry made the same judgment - after so many transitions guessing exactly right, we got this one a little bit wrong, and we're dealing with it now with strong investments on the Wii."
Company that is, excluding Ubisoft. In a nod to the success the French developer garnered from its aggressive run on both the DS and Wii, John responded that Ubisoft's financial results were reflective of how things could have been for EA -- had they done likewise.
Ignoring the need to appease shareholders' short term interests for the moment, it should prove interesting to look back on this years from now and see if suddenly pouring their resources into the Wii was indeed the best long-term investment. On one side we have people who say gameplay is really all that matters, and that the way the Wiimote enables you to interact with the games will keep the platform fresh.
On the other are critics who argue that the Wii's graphics will look archaic next to the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 in just a few years. Will the Wii start to lose steam over time, making this only a minor bump in the road back to the top for EA, and should Electronic Arts continue to bank on Sony and Microsoft as having the real staying power in the future?
Will Nintendo continue to mop the floor with the other two, reinforcing the notion that they have the winning platform that most people want -- and developers should hedge their bets accordingly? Luckily for us, we only need to sit back and enjoy the games while the other guys like EA sort this out for themselves.
[Via Gamasutra]
Contest:
11:36 PM on 07.26.2007
| 
Of course, maybe they will do something really weird and make a good game or three for it. Not banking on that one.
Just please, for the love of god, leave the minigames to ubisoft. There is no beating the rabbits, ever.
Yep, that's why the GameGear kicked Gameboy's ass, the N64 destroyed the Playstation and the Neo Geo home console totally ruled the market. It's a dead argument with evidence to prove so.
Then there's the underestimating Nintendo, I understand that too, I personally won't be convinced by a company until they've had at least 20 years experience in this industry and created some of the most enduring franchises to date...oh wait.
Even to this day I hear game reviewers gsaying stuff like "I was worried that the stylus control in Phantom Hourglass wouldn't work" What? What has Nintendo ever done to justify this concern, when have they ever released a major game that simply doesn't work?
It's just funny, Nintendo are one of those companies that will always be underestimated.
"No, but you will get original titles, like a sugary Sims game, a tech-demo-like block game, a "youth"enized Wii Sports/Wii Play package, and a ridiculous DD/Karaoke clone."
"Oh...say can you go back to ignoring us? Please?"
Not that I'm saying EA is doing anything wrong, but when your pushing out Rock Band and Army of Two for the other systems and Boogie and MySims for the Wii, we get what you're saying EA. Just say it.
NightDehumififier is right, we all get what EA is saying, so why don't they just come out and say it "We see the Wii as a cheap, quick, and easy way to make money, minimum effort, maximum return."
This matters to some people.
Madden, Tiger Woods, random sports game, Madden, Madden, Tiger Woods, Need for Speed, Madden, Tiger Woods, Madden, Need for Speed... Yeah...
@Mrsamuel "This matters to some people." Yup, some people, but a lot more people are interested in fun and game play... as evidenced by the 9.5 million Wiis in homes already. It's not like the games won't look better as the tap the potential, wat for Galaxy or Metroid 3, they look pretty.
@Mxyzptlk The Japanese love micro-transactions... I'm still not sure why, it's about the dumbest thing I've seen in a sports game.
07/27/2007 07:07
It matters to some people, but obviously not enough people, since the Wii is absolutely wiping the floor with the competition. It all comes down to the dollar...
Simplistic thinking. Not only does it come down to the dollar, but it also comes down to giving people something fresh.
Just recall the crowds that surrounded the Nintendo at the 2k6 E3. It was totally slammed from what I recall reading. That did not come down to any dollars. It came down to pure fun. The Wii gives people fun at a reasonable price.
________________
@mrsamuel:
Now for the graphics...developers need to know the limitations of the Wii and stick to those.
Why is it that having similar graphics to the ps2 is a weak point for the Wii and not the ps2? The ps2 is still outselling the ps3 and 360 so I fail to see why this is such a big eyesore for the Wii. If dev's make bad looking games, blame them! They took a short cut and got crap to market and we don't need to support that.