75 réponses à ce sujet

[Guanxii]

Solmanian wrote...

Guanxii wrote...

Haargel wrote...

I guess it's because ME3 sales for the Wii-U are extremely dissapointing.

I dont think they even sold 50k copies. Read that in an article somewhere, cannot find the source.

Mass Effect 3 sold like crap on Wii U. It's more like 4k.

http://www.vgchartz..../mass-effect-3/

0.04M equal 40k...

My bad. That's still pretty embarassingly low... I bet Mass Effect: Galaxy sold more copies.

Modifié par Guanxii, 24 février 2013 - 11:58 .

[Anthadlas]

[inappropriate post removed]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 05 mars 2013 - 09:35 .

[SurelyItsJames]

No one has mentioned that BioWare didn't actually develop the localized Wii U version of the game. EA got another developer to do it, can't remember the developers name, but BioWare had little to do with the Wii U version. As to why they aren't releasing DLC for the Wii U version?

Well maybe they can't be bothered coding for it, or having to deal with Nintendo, maybe the cruel truth is that the playerbase on the Wii U doesn't warrant the extra man hours and money that it will take to make the DLC Wii U compliant. Unless BioWare or EA actually come out and say why the hell they aren't releasing it, we'll never know. Yes It sucks, yes Nintendo and fans of the Wii U are totally getting the shaft here, but there doesn't look there is a whole lot we can do about it.

[T41rdEye]

The Wii systems have always been about ease of use, casual pick-up-and-play that anyone can immediately take to. The Citadel DLC is reportedly a culmination of relationships built throughout the trilogy, where only a poor port of me3 is currently available on Wii U.

Combine that with the terrible sales, and you're asking EA to pour resources into a game where they have no chance at a reasonable return on investment. You should be happy there's any version to play on Wii u. In order to have any emotional investment in most of these characters you'll need to have played the previous games. Not possible on Wii U. If you have, then you need to go back to that system you originally played on.

I don't buy this poor man's syndrome people cry about when complaining about dev support. You had the money to buy a new system and game(s)/accessories, yet buying a cheap console that's been out for nearly a decade with all the support is too much?

Cry me a river. If you crave the most compete experience, find the time and money to buy an established console or be happy with what you get. Sorry if that seems insensitive, but this is a business after-all.

[skulker]

Straight Right did the port at Bioware's behest (not EA). If they've moved on to other projects, let the public know. Basing decisions solely around poor sales of new consoles is self defeating as if poor support is given when player base is small, there won't be new sales when player base grows. I expect sales of the ps4 & next xbox to be poor also (because of meh economy and cheaper alternatives) Even if Citadel is meaningless to people who haven't played the previous games, there are still 4 other dlcs not on the wii that would work fine.

[Masterdramon]

Me1mN0t wrote...

The Wii systems have always been about ease of use, casual pick-up-and-play that anyone can immediately take to. The Citadel DLC is reportedly a culmination of relationships built throughout the trilogy, where only a poor port of me3 is currently available on Wii U.

Combine that with the terrible sales, and you're asking EA to pour resources into a game where they have no chance at a reasonable return on investment. You should be happy there's any version to play on Wii u. In order to have any emotional investment in most of these characters you'll need to have played the previous games. Not possible on Wii U. If you have, then you need to go back to that system you originally played on.

I've already presented at least one scenario where this is not possible. I purchased the first two games through Steam, then switched to Wii U for the third installment because my laptop couldn't handle it.

Since I'd wager Wii/Wii U + PC is not an uncommon system combination, this experience probably speaks for at least a few other Wii U users.

I made these purchasing choices many months in advance, based on EA's assurances that ME3: Special Edition would be the "definitive version" of Mass Effect 3. When it turned out it was anything but, it was a little late to change course.

Not that I can really see another course beyond getting a new PC, and that's nowhere near within my budget right now.

Me1mN0t wrote...
I don't buy this poor man's syndrome people cry about when complaining about dev support. You had the money to buy a new system and game(s)/accessories, yet buying a cheap console that's been out for nearly a decade with all the support is too much?

Cry me a river. If you crave the most compete experience, find the time and money to buy an established console or be happy with what you get. Sorry if that seems insensitive, but this is a business after-all.

If the choice for an existing Wii owner is to buy a PS3 for $300 or a Wii U for $350, you can't say the second choice isn't at all reasonable.

Buying another 2005-2006 system now makes little sense, because they will both be obsolete by the end of the year. The PS4 won't be backwards compatible, and the next Xbox probably won't be either.

The Wii U, for whatever other faults it may have, is entirely backwards compatible with all Wii games, controllers, accessories, and digital content. It's essentially a one-time upgrade that requires no further expense.

For a Wii owner on a budget, it is in fact the most logical purchasing decision if an HD console is desired.

[Spawnfreak73]

Because you're dealing with a company that has never given a **** about online gameplay or DLC. They only care about their next big gimmick.

[EDarkness]

Guanxii wrote...

My bad. That's still pretty embarassingly low... I bet Mass Effect: Galaxy sold more copies.

You really gotta ask why it didn't sell so well.  The reason is more important.  As I mentioned earlier, EA basically killed the Wii U version before it was even released.  The fact that it even sold that much should make them happy.  Wii U owners who purchased ME 3 got taken for a ride.  That's just the sad truth of it.

[Darc_Requiem]

Spawnfreak73 wrote...

Because you're dealing with a company that has never given a **** about online gameplay or DLC. They only care about their next big gimmick.

Damn, then how the hell did those extra characters suddenly appear in my copy of Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge

[Cyrax86]

@EDarkness

WiiU doesn't get 2 dlc and has some minor bugs, PS3/Skyrim had game crippling bugs, would crash your system, no dlc(i think now their releasing the dlc, not sure). the Wii U dlc situation is not as bad, you're blowing this out of proportion.

40k copies sold, compare that to how many were sold on the other systems(i can't look it up, if anyone can post the numbers). if they took a loss on the EC dlc, its just 1 dlc. You're asking for multiple dlc ports on console which sold the least amount of copies and has the potential to sell the least amount of dlc, they could end up taking multiple losses, and i pretty sure thats bad for any business.


It does matter if its 1 or 1 mil. A game i bought and enjoyed is Vakyria Chronicles, and i wanted a sequel for the PS3, but because of low sales, it was instead made for the PSP. Was i saddened by this? yes, was i upset by this? no, do i understand why they chose to do this? yes, did i sit in forum and complain? no. I went on to telling people about how good this game is and recommending it to them.

[Masterdramon]

Cyrax86 wrote...

40k copies sold, compare that to how many were sold on the other systems(i can't look it up, if anyone can post the numbers). if they took a loss on the EC dlc, its just 1 dlc. You're asking for multiple dlc ports on console which sold the least amount of copies and has the potential to sell the least amount of dlc, they could end up taking multiple losses, and i pretty sure thats bad for any business.

It does matter if its 1 or 1 mil. A game i bought and enjoyed is Vakyria Chronicles, and i wanted a sequel for the PS3, but because of low sales, it was instead made for the PSP. Was i saddened by this? yes, was i upset by this? no, do i understand why they chose to do this? yes, did i sit in forum and complain? no. I went on to telling people about how good this game is and recommending it to them.

I'm definitely not denying that it's a logical business decision for EA to make. But at the same time, I'd hope you can understand the frustration we feel over being entirely blamed for the poor sales, when EA's previous business decisions played a huge part in producing them.

It's like when Disney released "Winnie the Pooh" on the same weekend as "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2." They got back lower-than-expected box office returns, and took it as proof that moviegoing audiences just don't care for 2D animated films anymore.

To which fans of 2D animation responded, "Well, what'd you expect? You released it against the biggest family film of the bloody summer!"

When EA shoots any chances of getting good sales in the foot through their own bad calls, and then punishes the players who paid up anyway by denying us any further support...well yeah, of course it's understandable.

But it's also anger-inducing. And I should think, justifiably so.

[impingu1984]

Anyone that liked Bayonetta (Xbox / PS3) will have to purchase a Wii U to play Bayonetta 2... I would reckon that a large of PS3 / Xbox users will not / have not considered purchasing a Wii U...

Sometimes stuff like this happens....

[Masterdramon]

impingu1984 wrote...

Anyone that liked Bayonetta (Xbox / PS3) will have to purchase a Wii U to play Bayonetta 2... I would reckon that a large of PS3 / Xbox users will not / have not considered purchasing a Wii U...

Sometimes stuff like this happens....

Those really aren't even remotely equivalent issues.

Microsoft and Sony were given the chance to secure "Bayonetta 2" by ponying up the cash when Platinum Games needed help. They refused. Nintendo put up the money to publish the game, and so they got the exclusive.

Your point would only apply if Nintendo was given the chance by EA to offer DLC for "Mass Effect 3: Special Edition" and refused. Which, given that various other Wii U launch games support DLC just fine...seems rather unlikely.

[impingu1984]

Masterdramon wrote...

impingu1984 wrote...

Anyone that liked Bayonetta (Xbox / PS3) will have to purchase a Wii U to play Bayonetta 2... I would reckon that a large of PS3 / Xbox users will not / have not considered purchasing a Wii U...

Sometimes stuff like this happens....

Those really aren't even remotely equivalent issues.

Microsoft and Sony were given the chance to secure "Bayonetta 2" by ponying up the cash when Platinum Games needed help. They refused. Nintendo put up the money to publish the game, and so they got the exclusive.

Your point would only apply if Nintendo was given the chance by EA to offer DLC for "Mass Effect 3: Special Edition" and refused. Which, given that various other Wii U launch games support DLC just fine...seems rather unlikely.

My point is from the view of the consumer... Stuff happens and the consumer is screwed, both Bayonetta and ME3 DLC on the Wii U come down to money. Bayonetta fans should be pissed at sony and microsoft, it's down to them just like ME3 DLC on the Wii U is down to EA.

If you really want to experience it buy a PS3/Xbox 360/PC, that's basically what EA might as well say, they are in the business to make money and DLC for the Wii U will not make them money. You can't really blame them.

I feel for those that did buy ME3 on the Wii U... but I understand the money isn't their to make it worth it.

[Cyrax86]

@ Masterdramon

I understand why people are upset about this, i own a PS3/Wii, i know the feeling of getting dlc late or not at all. When PS3 users got ME2 but no ME, PS3 users still bought ME2. Same thing with Bioshock1, even though it came out a year lateon the PS3, it sold 1 mil(can't remember), a lot of 3rd party games didn't sell well, with a few exceptions, im guessing that ME3 was a test to see if WiiU owners would buy ME trilogy, since it would take a lot time and money to port 3 games instead of 1. Had the game sold better, none of this would be a issue.

I understand how Wii U owners feel, and i understand why this is being done(dlc/trilogy).

[EDarkness]

If it was about money they shouldn't have ported the game to begin with. What is the point of porting a game to only give the users half of a game? If they weren't gonna give users the full experience, then why port? Especially for a game like Mass Effect where the a lot of the experience is from extra content.

It doesn't matter if 1 or many copies were sold, they owe it to their customers to give them the full experience. In this case, EA had no intention of giving Wii U owners a good experience. If they had, they would have released the same game everyone else got. What they did was release the game on the cheap and then refuse to give them any extra content. So the Wii U guys got a new gun. Awesome. Great. Cool. The comic doesn't allow for the same options a person who would have played Mass Effect 2 got.

My problem ultimately is that if they don't want to give Wii U owners the full experience, then they need to be up front about it. I read the Wii U Mass Effect 3 community and every day some new person gets the game without knowing they won't be getting the DLC. Nowhere on the box does it say it won't and they haven't been upfront about what the situation is with the Wii U version. So they want us to buy the game, yet are trying to trick people into getting the game by implying that they'll get the whole experience, yet they won't. No support for the Wii U users at all.

There is nothing cool about this. This kind of thing goes on in the game business all the time, and from some other companies, I expect this kind of thing to happen, but with Bioware, I figured they had more class than this. They always are preaching about how they're for the gamer, but I have to question this situation, because they're not supporting a portion of their playerbase.

Also, as far as cost is concerned, the assets have been made, the voice recorded and all that. The majority of the work has been done. To convert them over doesn't take long at all, especially since the game has already been made. If they don't want to give Wii U owners the Trilogy, then they should at least give them the DLC. Considering that this stuff is something they have to pay for, they can recoup the costs at some point. If people feel like they'll get good support, then maybe more people will buy.

One last thing, people can talk about sales all they want, but really if Bioware released the same game as everyone else got, then I'm sure sales would have been much better. But ask yourself, if you were a Wii U owner, would you even consider the Wii U version of the game? No Trilogy. No DLC. No support. To get something, they have to give something and right now they're expecting people to give with nothing in return. Not sure how that encourages people to buy.  Companies are not charities.  We don't simply give them money because they're nice guys.  We give them money for good products.  Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U isn't and I have a feeling they know that.

When Mass Effect was announced for the Wii U, I was excited because of the possibilities. But at the end of the day, I didn't double dip because it appeared to me Bioware just didn't care about this version at all. However, I'm more than willing to pick up something like Need for Speed Most Wanted U simply because at least Criterion appears to want to give Wii U owners a good experience and support. Ultimately, that's all people want.

Modifié par EDarkness, 26 février 2013 - 04:05 .

[shepskisaac]

100% true EDarkness. Nothing to add. All DLC should be released for Wii U.

[Young Ether]

I cant hate EA for this. Dont waste money on a sinking ship. If the game didnt sell well, why should any company have to burn money of the DLC. They should have labeled it DLC-less edition from the get go.

[EDarkness]

Young Ether wrote...

I cant hate EA for this. Dont waste money on a sinking ship. If the game didnt sell well, why should any company have to burn money of the DLC. They should have labeled it DLC-less edition from the get go.

You're right, they should have been up front about it from the beginning, but that doesn't make up for the fact that those who purchased the game still got the short end of the stick.  They have every right to be upset about it and it's totally Bioware/EA's fault.

Still, why would the game sell if the was lackluster?  We, as players and consumers, should buy gimped products?

[Battlebloodmage]

Maybe the sales was not high enough to justify a DLC port.

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 05 mars 2013 - 06:40 .

[deuce985]

I believe the Wii-U has been a disaster so far. It had a good opening launch but that was it. January sales were very very low and like previous Nintendo consoles, they're having a hard time with third-party support. People just don't seem to care about core games on their consoles. That's my personal speculation.

Just not enough software on the system for people to buy it right now and Nintendo doesn't seem to make it easy with an inferior online infrastructure. With the PS4/NextBox coming soon, can't see that as a healthy thing for a system that already struggles with third-party support. Especially since the PS4 is so easy to develop for(supposedly).

Modifié par deuce985, 05 mars 2013 - 06:55 .

[Jarlan23]

Because not enough people own a Wii U and it's expensive to develop for.

[CaIIisto]

Wii-U sales were up against it to begin with given the slugglish sales of the actual console so far, but then most people who were going to get ME have already gotten it for the 360, PS3 or PC.

Would I consider getting the game just to see how it works on the Wii-U gamepad? Nope.

Bayonetta 2 otoh.....yeah, I'll be getting that!

[Volkai7]

As far as I know, neither EA nor Bioware made any promise to release future DLC on any particular platform at any particular time. Therefore if they choose not to do so, you can't say any promise or guarantee has been broken - of course, you don't have to like it.

It's likely that the WiiU release of ME3 was an experimental release to test the WiiU market, and to find out if that market will generate enough revenue to justify porting other games.

It seems likely that ME3 sales were low enough that the WiiU platform has been entirely abandoned (save for multiplayer game service, maybe.), or at least low enough to not justify DLC releases (in which case we might see another EA title come out on WiiU eventually.)

The other, less likely possibility is that it takes a significant amount of time to port DLC to WiiU, and it's just not ready yet.



To be clear, this does not mean anyone buying the WiiU version of ME3 made a bad decision. But it does some that some who did so, made assumptions about DLC releases without any evidence to confirm them.

[a9fc]

It's likely coz EA asked bioware to port the game to Wii U as an experiment, to see if it's another customer base that can be tapped.