EA Access, a new subscription service, gives those willing to pay unlimited access to a library of games. Nintendo should do the same.
Hell no in tired of paying for subscriptions I'm not paying for another.
Yeh the thought of gaming turning into a subscription service makes me shudder, I have enough of that from wow and all the other mmos.
Not one subscription service, but multiple.
Sony pioneered that trend with PS+ and EA Access is just an extension of that. I don't mind it at all and in fact it will be cheaper in the long run "as of right now". Question is, how do developers make money if I am too busy playing last years games for $30 a year? This isn't World of Warcraft with monthly subscription that cost $15. I will be significantly reducing my outlay with this. I already did on GwG by passing over a few games, and already seen that come back for Max and Crimson Dragon. On EA Access I almost bought Peggle 2 and considered getting BF4, but that was free with my subscription. I am not buying anything for some time, because I got games to play and while I am playing those, there are more games being added to my subscription. This is a death spiral for the industry if it continues.... I said that when PS+ started, and I continue to say that today while taking advantage of all said benefits on both Xbox and PS.
@YouAreSalty I really don't understand how people can even compare this to PS+ or Games with Gold, they offer you more than just their specific games and with PS+ it has quite a bit of value in the terms of all the different games they switch out and the absurd discounts on even brand new games. EA is only letting you play old EA games and giving you a measly 10% discount. I don't see why everyone is so excited over that. More importantly they change the games but once they are removed, you can no longer play them. So again how is that like PS+ or Games with Gold? It would be horrible for this to become a new business model that all publishers start using, tying their games to a subscription. Then services like PS+ and Games with Gold will be completely pointless, so I can't even see the relation when if one happens it will kill the other. As people with logic have pointed out, this is just a plan for EA to make more money on digital sales, microtrans, DLC and old games. It really has no benefit to the consumer unless you want to play a bunch of old EA games that most likely aren't even supported anymore or had their servers closed a long time ago. No doubt they did this because so many people buy their games used and for good reason, they release the same games almost every year so most people have gotten wise enough to know it is easier buying their games used since their prices drop dramatically pretty fast. Even retailers know it will only be a short period of time before a new game comes out to replace it as to why their games end up so cheap, so fast. I just don't see the same value that people are seeing in EA Access. Even if it were for new games the entire idea of this just seems awful and knowing EA they are probably just testing the waters and will eventually fully tie their games behind this. They already did this with Origin trying to snuff out everyone and now they want even more capital from games people really don't care to play anymore, that could be bought used for less than 30$ a year. I mean literally their games hit bargain bin prices, you'd be a fool to pay more in the long run than you would just buying them used. People are stupid though, they will eat this up and think EA is actually trying to do something nice for a change but I see straight through it all. I mean it is pretty simple, a one time fee is always cheaper than a subscription. What are you just going to play the games for one year? Most likely not and even games that cost $60, might seem like more but people fail to see that you can play that game forever without ever paying more to play it each year.
Nintendo doesn't have any kind of thing like Xbox Live Gold or PS+, and they don't usually tend to reduce the price of their games in the short-term... I'd say yes.
I agree that Nintendo should have something like PS+ or Games with Gold but I don't want to see it like EA plans to do it. It just isn't as flexible.
Nintendo doesn't have those things because it doesn't need them. "Their games" don't usually go down in price because they are highest valued games in the game industry. Though I say usually because there have been many deals and prices drops given by Nintendo, like the buy Mario Kart 8, get another game free deal or all the sales on the eshop. What you are saying is based on false information. Its negative about Nintendo, though, so you still get bumped up on agrees.
I would subscribe because I am easily spending 100$ a year on Nintendo games, having to pay only 30$-50$ (similar to EA/live/ps+) and then being able to play even more Nintendo games sounds good to me. Probably not such a good deal for Nintendo... The idea to pay for the complete catalogue of NES and SNES games is really tempting. It could generate money for Nintendo, because it does not cut in on their profits from new games and many would subscribe to play the games of their childhood... nostalgia 4tw.
Actually it wouldnt be required. Imagine paying a subscription for unlimited access to any virtual console game u wanted? That sounds good to me. It's not like they are asking for money to play games online.
You know, there was a time that when gamers bought a game, they were able to experience that game in its entirety without having to pay an extra charge to unlock features or have constant advertising for such features thrust in their face. I know that this EA Access isn't like that, that is if EA can resist the greed that we all know they have, but Xbox Gold and Playstation Plus ruined the subscription idea for me. I'd rather Nintendo keep things the way they are
Maybe when they introduce a proper account system one day like every other device in the world that has a digital store.
This is so off topic.
I know for a fact that they have already considered the idea, but using only their virtual console catalog instead of new software.
EVERY company should do the same! Imagine the savings! That's only $5.00 a month times ( 2k + Activision + Atlus + Bethesda + Blizzard + Bungie + Capcom + Disney + EA + Microsoft + Namco Bandai + Nintendo + Rockstar + Sega + Sony + Square Enix + Take-Two + Telltale + Ubisoft + Valve + Whoever I left out ) !!!!!!
The idea is you only subscribe to the ones you play. In that respect, you are paying far less. Many gamers buy at least one game a month if not more, and that usually exceeds the cost of these memberships for one month. Heck, $30 for EA Access annually is $2.5 pr month. Pretty good deal if you ask me! I don't see how these publishers will make money in the long run with time share being used up on old games, and money share is tiny.....
Good deal? They dont give you titanfall with that... If I want to play last years Fifa, I go buy it used at gamestop for $5. Games you get over a subscription, cannot be traded or sold. You most likely get 2 games you like and 50 you dont. PS+ and Gold Membership is a different story, they dont offer just their own stuff.
@chris: If you don't like the games available, then that is fine. With PS+ or GwG, you do not get to select from a bunch of games and only the ones they offer you, and you don't know in advance what you will get. They cost more as well. So they all have their disadvantages and advantages, but for half the cost and a vault of games I get to see up front, I would say that is a darn good deal, especially if you consider PS+ or GwG a good deal!
Subscription services are not inclusive. People without internet access, credit cards, from not supported countries, etc will not be benefited at all.
They could be just an option.
Ps Plus is optional/mandatory and we (from my country) have to jump through many hoops to buy stuff from PSN directly and take advantage of some features, i.e: I cannot rent movies from the PS Store at all, because my country is not supported, a lot of Xbox Live features are unavailable as well.
There is a big reason why Nintendo will never follow EA with this. It is known Nintendo told EA to stick it when they tried to push Origin.
One of Nintendo's biggest profit sources for creating their consoles and funding their projects, is software sales. Put their software on a subscription service and they suddenly make a lot less money, because a lot of people aren't going to keep the subscription forever; they'll sign up once, play everything they want a few times, then drop it. Nintendo should stick to normal game sales methods. They aren't EA and shouldn't act like EA.
I'd rather just buy a full game for retail price and not have to pay any monthly fee or anything. Emphasis on "full".
But this is the future, and companies will have a iron grip on your playing habits. Are you not excited? /s This is a terrible idea, but people are far less resistant due to buildup from other shady schemes.
Nintendo should look to EA for inspiration? Tomfoolery. Fuck Ye EA!
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.