Soon, Xbox One gamers will be able to pay $5 a month for a Netflix -like subscription to EA games. The EA Access program is coming exclusively to Xbox One because Sony turned down the idea, stating that the company doesn’t think “asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer.
Electronic Arts has unveiled how EA Access will be arriving on Steam and 'coming soon'.
Featuring the complete nanosuit experience, The Crysis Trilogy has now joined the EA Access vault as a title that's free for those that subscribe to the EA service on Xbox One consoles.
It's been revealed that EA Access will be coming to Steam in the near future, as various EA games have been added to the storefront.
Too me, that was the right thing to do. PS+ already offers a pretty good service with so many games, discounts, and freebies, not even Games with gold comes close yet(thought they've been getting better lately). Also, If PS Now offers better prices and a subcription model for it, then it will be another win for Sony. No needs for EA Access thing.
I just don't want this to happen. Good value? possibly. But the paywall, to me, is heralding something else in the future. It's like we are digging our graves:
We allowed DLC to happen.
We allowed microtransactions to happen.
We allowed crappy games to keep selling.
and Now we are about to allow developers to hide their game behind a paywall. Like if there wasn't enough BS damaging this industry. If this successes, all publishers will do the same, and PS+, Steam, and GWG will become irrelevant. We will have to subscribe to a service in order to play games, I'm afraid. How is this good in any way?
Publisher run subscription services won't work for the exact reason the author gives. It is like Netflix offering subscriptions to other studios. They don't because it becomes confusing and expensive for the end user (one is okay but it does set a president for others to explot)
Though this doesn't mean Sony is right to deny the services. They could still alow it. Options. Though I feel this service will not take off because of the back catalogue stuff. Much of EA titles (their big ones) become irrelevant when the new one comes up due to yearly releases
I really dont see it as the "right" move. Its more of a move to protect their PS Now service. While EA Aceess and Now are very different, it can become confusing having so many services that offer downloadable games.
I personally think its just a matter of time until Sony will change their mind.
I know a few people who have already signed up for the year of Ea Access and are loving it.
Also so many of these articles keep driving home the $5 plan, and just kind of brush off the $30 plan which is the much more sensible route in terms of value.
There's an excellent post over at Gaff by panda-zebra that I agree with:
'Been thinking of reasons why Sony might be reluctant to allow this ( at least at this stage). People saying they're being anti-consumer by denying choice are, IMO, not thinking things through, merely knee-jerking. Sony aren't likely to deprive users of a service that might benefit the ecosystem as a whole, therefore we have to look for the potential for harm.
i. Firstly it obviously competes with and potentially devalues ps+ (you'd have to think EA games would be less likely to become available to plus, or potentially they could be even more outdated versions of the sports titles).
ii. End user support. For the tiny fraction of the fee Sony would receive, they'd be expected to manage the purchase and delivery as with any digital purchase, but the fact that it's not just a single transaction for a single item and rather the support of a yearly or monthly subscription service, opens the door to many more potential issues.
Sony would be the first point of call for end user support when anything went wrong (and with ea/origin on top of ps+, that might not be trivial). Reading the many threads on GAF, I'm sure Sony's CS support lines are busy enough as is regarding the various issues that are thrown up with with their own ps+ without generating more with an extra layer of potential pitfalls on top. There would no doubt be grey areas - problems where Sony think it's an EA issue, EA think it's a Sony issue. Not appetising.
iii. It's not just EA - you have to think further ahead. Other publishers are likely to expect to be able to be given the chance to offer a competing (but maybe not even necessarily that similar) service for their own titles. This would not only multiply the effects of the above concerns but, thinking it through a bit more, you'd have to factor in each publisher's competing service's rules, regulations and nuances... and you are now presenting an even more complex problem for Sony CS.
Taking this further, it's not difficult to imagine the potential for a sea of confusion customer-side when Johnny Gamer expects certain things of one service that is actually only a part of a rival service he also subscribes to. This would only compound with every new service added. All customers would go directly to Sony to air their grievances and have their minds set at ease. Those CS staff are going to spend the next few years in and out of training courses like an mcse.
iii. Having to set up an auto-renewal with a credit card held on file. Sony don't really want to go there, do they? And that Johnny Gamer guy - what if he forgets to cancel and the service auto-renews - Sony CS have to deal with enough "my dog bought COD Ghosts when it scratched its arse on my DS4 help me please!" kind of gripes as it is.'
i never trust e a.they might bumb up the price once people get use to the idea