Is Sony being less than honest about why they do not want EA Access on the PS4?
Unless your a complete idiot you know Sony turned down EA Access. Because they have basically the same service PS NOW coming very soon . .and to be honest that's fine . . My only issue is . I hate when big companies play the whole bull-Sh$% PR card . . If your Sony don't lie and say OH yes we did it because its bad value for the PlayStation owners SMH .. Just be honest and say we don't want it to take sales away from our service PS NOW..
Agreed. They have a perfectly understandable reason for not wanting EA Access. But it's not due to lack of value. It's because it competes with their own offerings.
Completely agree.. Its totally valid for them to turn it down.. But the excuses are ridiculous..
Very true. And to be fair if their taking the choice of getting EA Access out of our hands shouldn't they make PS Nows valve equal or better then EA Access?
To be fair, coming out and saying we don't want to take money away from PS Now can back fire on Sony too.
It does devalue what Sony is currently offering. Everyone needs to forget PS Now. That isn't the issue. It is Plus that will suffer with such a move. Imagine it. We are paying to get access to the online services but those perks that make it a steal would dwindle without major third party publisher support. EA isn't going to let their titles appear on Plus or games with gold if they are trying to sell their own service on that system (it would be pointless having the service). So we will still be paying the same price for a lot less support from third parties. Hence the devaluing. This isn't a hard concept to grasp
@iamsuperman If more publishers take their content off of ps plus or games with gold, that would force Sony and Microsoft to find other ways to provide value. Maybe they'd offer more first party titles... maybe they'd lower the price, maybe they'd roll in other services like xbox music... Also, if publishers have their own services, gamers have more control over their monthly bonuses. Right now, with ps+ and gwg, you get two games a month on next gen consoles. But there's no guarantee you will want the games that end up being offered or you may already have them. If all publishers copied EA Access, gamers could change services monthly, based on whichever company had the best vault. In other words, competition in the digital space leads to better offerings from 1st and 3rd parties.
Admittedly, I'm biased towards Sony most of the time - I think I should let that one out first. To you guys who are seemingly 'angry' at Sony for rejecting EA Access, why exactly do you think Sony should embrace the service in the first place? Sony has their own PSNow that they have announced way earlier, already in Beta too, which will offer many more games from many publishers INCLUDING from EA themselves and as for offering old games in "vault", Sony already has PS+! I think, Sony is pretty "honest" when they said their reason to reject EA Access was because of "poor value for gamers". Think about it. It's like they are encouraging publisher to charge for a redundant service already available to them in the form of PSNow and PS+. That's poor value already over there. I know their interest is more towards pushing their own service, but who doesn't? Remember when Nintendo rejected EA when they wanted Nintendo to use Origin? Gamers were up in arms that day praising Nintendo and booing EA's arrogance but why the hate towards Sony now for this rejection? Double standards much? "Bu...bu...but...MS accepted it! They are thinking about the gamers!" BS! MS needed every boost they can get at the moment considering they are lacking behind both the PS4 and the Wii U! But why suddenly EA announced Access? Are they trying to be a good guy? Look no further than PS+! EA knows Sony is making money off the PS+ model while offering free games from other publishers too, not just theirs! Now just imagine offering a similar service but with in-house games only and there will be more profits as you don't have to share it with other publishers! THAT'S what EA is after and see from now on, there will be no more EA's games offered in PS+ or GWG as EA will try their best to capitalise on EA Access!
@mhunterjr Competition isn't always a good thing. In this case it actually quite a bad thing. The more publishers get involved the more subscription services are needed to be paid for but we still need to pay access for online. Your talking a great expense just to play back catalogue games. One service is not only more user friendly but consumer friendly. We get a lot of benefits right now with plus and games with gold. It won't change prices but discounts (which require paying to multiple services to get)
@iamnsuperman Movie studio execs made similar arguments years ago about emerging digital distribution services like Netflix, before that it was music industry but you know what happens, YES as they predicted sales of actual physical movies disc purchases declined a lot over just the last 5yrs, BUT the movie studios still make more in the long run because of MORE people in TOTAL renting through services like Netflix, Hulu and not only have movie studios jumped in bigtime, now they and most tv networks now have their own inhouse and online distribution sites for their content alone. The reason being is although a lot of people on average used to buy 1 movie maybe per month, many didn't and they either rented, or borrowed movies but since the cost of entry became so cheap with Netflix many and other services, many MORE people consider a DVD rentals like a impulse purchase, no different than buying a piece of candy, its the age old strategy of lowering prices and make less per consumer but making more profits because you now tap a much larger customer base. Sony, Micro, EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc could all co-exist and thrive in this digital sales environment but only if they adjust and realize the one who will do well is (A) the one who offers good content(not necessarily their new releases but quality games from their backlog) (B) the ones who offer the best or comparable deals, they may lose on individual purchases upfront but word of mouth of the great deals will drive up revenue, especially because its digital(very little extra costs between selling the same digital content to 1000 or 1mil customers. The scare tactics from consumers who are against change is always well they will raise prices later and then what do we do? Uhm cancel, bad or expensive services either fail or the companies usually adjust before it does but the beauty of competition is NBC wants you to subscribe to their tv network service so they aren't going to charge you 3X's as much as CBS tv network and expect to stay in business, HBO however has premium content so yes its more expensive but once again just because networks, studios, game pubs, offer a subscription service DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR IT, that's the other beauty of this competition, personally I don't know why in the hell some people would actually pay for a online tv network subscription vs just dvr and watching it for free when you get a chance but guess what some do so they can access their favorite show instantly on any device= CONSUMER OPTIONS ARE ALWAYS GOOD. So what most normal consumers usually do is subscribe to 1 of their favorite services and then buy the other companies products the same way they did 10, 20 yrs ago(all their life) and guess what other than how prices for products and services go up with inflation like for all retail store products, there is no "Aha price gouging" on pc due to COMPETITION and also retail brick and mortar stores are still selling the same products. PSN can and will co-exist the same way physical products have not disappeared and WILL NOT disappear anytime soon until all the advantages of consolidated pricing through a wide variety of retailers is in the consumers favor, so not anytime soon.
I tried PS Now yesterday, and it was awesome: - The prices were legit at least to me. $2.99 for 4 hours, $5.99 for 7 days, and $20 for 3 months - I rented Twisted Metal(PS3), and I had a blast in multiplayer. My Internet speed is around 12 to 15 mbps, and I didn't have any lag. Everything was smooth. - There are aslso a good collection of games. I cannot wait for the other devs to include their games as well. This service is shaping to be awesome so far. It already has my full support. It it keeps delivering its promise, then there's not need for EA Access.
$3 for 4 hours is awesome. Only a die hard could find value in that nonsense. Hopefully this can move to a sub based service because the current pricing is crap.
Yeah, it is BS on the reasoning. Same thing with why there's no local/streaming mp3/vids other than subscription based Music/Vid Unlimited, it's obviously to get as many subs as they can before we chase them down with torches and pitchforks for the free apps. PS Now also needs to get rid of the 1st payment option of 4 hours and change it to 1-2 days, if they don't wanna look like crooks. Because, any price for that 4 hours is gonna look like a ripoff, cuz it's only 4 HOURS!
I do not want digital distribution. I like my discs.
Amen. The conspiracy theorist part of me thinks the full install requirement on the new consoles is mainly a ploy to get people to download.
@Mystic: How's this for a conspiracy then? Sony raised the price of the PS4 games in Canada by $5 but only for the disc based versions. You can download PS4 games for the $60 price without taxes as well. So it's cheaper to DL games off PSN in Canada.
"Because they have basically the same service PS NOW coming very soon." NO THEY DON'T! What the hell is wrong with people? PS Now and EA Access ARE NOTHING ALIKE! EA Access IS like Games with Gold or PS+ but it is not, I repeat IS NOT, a game streaming service like PS Now. And it's completely legitimate to say that it isn't a value for people because it's not. This is EA, the biggest money grubbing, nickle and diming Publisher in gaming. They don't come out with good games very often and yet have the audacity to come out with an early access system for their terrible games? People have already brought up that their subscription system will likely delay the official release of games so as to allow EA Access members to get the games earlier. But for the last time, PS Now is like Netflix, EA Access is like PS+. VERY DIFFERENT SERVICES!
PS Now is not like Netflix other than they both stream the content, Netflix offers a subscription model where all the content is included for a monthly fee. Netflix offers older titles for a flat fee that can be viewed as much as you want and anything you want. PS Now offers a title by title selection which are also older titles that have a ridiculous pricing model. So until Sony wakes up and offers the same subscription model it will never be like Netflix.
@Stalker McGee: So you basically agreed with what I said with the "subscription" caveat thrown in. You must have a lot of time to waste.
Dragonnight wrote, "So you basically agreed with what I said with the "subscription" caveat thrown in." That's the ONLY part i agree with but then again I'm talking to a narcissist who never admits when he's wrong and has a habit of only picking out the little tidbits that cater to your agenda. "You must have a lot of time to waste." Says the guy who has written 99 blogs, over 8,700 comments and wastes most of his time defending a company who doesn't pay him. Let me know when your late act starts so I can get seat early. I know how your stand-up shows sell-out real quick.
@Stalker McGee: See, your problem is that you're not understanding that you are agreeing with me. That completely invalidates your life mission to be in opposition to everything I say and do. You are agreeing with me but trying your best to remain in opposition to me. You're a living, breathing oxymoron. "Says the guy who has written 99 blogs, over 8,700 comments and wastes most of his time defending a company who doesn't pay him." You know how, for years, you've been attacking not only me, but chiefly me, for what you call people who "don't like to game, they just spend all of their time attacking what they don't like?" You know how you've been trying so hard to tell people what to do with their time, and their opinions, and basically try to run their lives for them? Look what you're doing. Tell me that you actually think that going to my page, looking to see what I've commented on and where, looking at the number of blog posts and comments I've made (keeping in mind that I've been on the site for a hell of a lot longer than you, probably more than most) so you can use it as a slam against me actually constitutes a healthy use of your time. You're actually stalking me. I would even go so far as to say that you've probably tried to do more than just go to my N4G account page to follow me. You do realize that right? You can't seriously tell me that you don't see your own sick obsession with me, to the point you've created multiple accounts to fail at every attempt you've made to either get me banned, or turn the site against me. What ever happened to "I'm sick of this site that allows people like you to comment freely here. I'm staying on neogaf?" I bet you never had a neogaf account did you? Or you were probably banned from there for the same reason you've been banned from here so many times. You have a problem and need some real help. I can't return your affections so do us both a favor and find someone else who shares your mental handicaps.
Speaking of complete idiot, I think you'll find it's 'you're' not 'your'
DWalls- EA Access and PS Now are not the same thing. One is a subscription base service that let's you download some games in their vault for free, get a discount on new games, and lets you play newly release games 5 days before it comes out (try before you buy) and the other service is a rental/streaming game service. Not the same thing. I agree with you on when companies spin stuff, but what else our they going to do. Whether you are MS, Nintendo, or Sony you have to look out for the bottom line and make sure you don't commit PR suicide...cough er Don Mattick...er cough.
It's just PR spin, take it with a pinch of salt.
It isn't PSnow EA access competes against. It's PlayStation Plus. Value wise Plus can offer more by putting EA's off the system (forces EA's hand and doesn't get into a situation that will happen to games with gold where EA games will no longer appear)
Unless "you're" providing proof you shouldn't be calling people idiots over this. It was damage control after the fact( after the announcement/reveal) worded in a foggy/confusing way so pro Sony forces could spin away. What Sony said was a PR response to its competition one upping them, there is nothing Sony said that solidly says EA came to them and was rejected. The two services are not even the same. Does this really matter? XB1 gets a service that's getting monster hype and causing great excitement, exclusive to XB1.
Oh thee of great hyperbole. First and foremost, I agree that "proof" is needed to back statements. That goes for EVERYBODY. As for "damage control"...it could be true...if there was actual DAMAGE. EA drops a couple of series that people want. This is a DIGITAL service, which is gaining traction but is STILL not close to disc based distribution. Many people can be patient enough to not have a game 5 days in advance. The vault games could be attractive to some. But, I submit that if they WERE, most would own them already. Overall, it's a good business deal between MS and EA because they are both getting something. MS is getting another service to sell and tout as a difference between their competition. EA is getting more exposure. It's a cool option. But, IMO, it's a far stretch to call it "monster hype".
Nothing worse then holier then thou gamers...who pretend that they have been wronged...
Sony can't even keep track of all their bullshit. Claiming it's bad value for PlayStation owners when PS Now prices are ridiculously unfair in comparison. It doesn't matter though because the fanboy apologists will be out in full force and Sony knows this.
And so it begins ... Not really. Just throwing out a nomenclature to make myself look wise.
Unfortunately for Sony by now the prices of Playstation Now are ridiculous
Comparing these services is ridiculous. PS Now is a game streaming service. EA Access is a subscription service to hook you on their products.
PS Now - rent games for a set period EA Access - rent games for a set period
PS now - rent games from multiple publishers for a set period EA Access - rent EA games only for a set period
PS Now you rent games for a hours at a time and those games are streamed over the internet... EA Access you subscribe to a service on a yearly basis where games are downloaded to your console... You also receive discounts if you choose to buy games and DLC. These services have completely different models. Comparing them is apples to oranges...
@yarbie and MikeLarry- You do not rent the games from EA Access...you can keep them for ever. PS now is a rental service for temporary gaming fun. EA Access is a subscription service for permanent gaming fun. On the surface (barring prices) both have great potential. I like the idea of PS Now, but the prices are ridiculous IMO. $3-$5 for 4-5 hours...key word is hours not game hours. The issue I see wit h PS Now is that devs are aloud to set the prices for their games and not Sony. Sony has good rep on offering great deals on their games. I will download the beta for it and check it out. later today. I like the idea of EA Access. I got early access and paid $30 for a year....mainly because my kids wanted FIFA, Madden, and Peggles. We got those three for no charge; so $100 to $150 worth of games for $30. IMO that's a deal. The issues/questions I have for EA Access is how often will the games be cycled through the vault. Bottom line...I like having options. When gaming companies try to take away my options that bothers me.
PS Now - rent games for a few hours EA Access - rent games for a month There's a big difference here.
Pay a fee for a month, be able to play that game for a month. Both services offer this, so yes, they can be compared. Real reason Sony didn't accept it, not only does it compete directly, it also undercuts their prices massively.
I think Sony should have given people the choice. EA might turn to Microsoft now as the lead platform and lets be honest most of the big mutiplat's originate from EA. What Sony going to do if Ubisoft does it too? I think the PR statement from Sony will backfire on them over time. [email protected] Battlefield and Fifa are two of biggest multiplats out there are you denying that?
EA has most of the big multiplats? What universe do you live in?
FIFA, Madden, Dragon Age, Mass effect, Dead Space, Battlefield, The list goes on and on. The only other Publisher that launches as many games is Ubisoft.
Can't honestly see EA doing that over EA access, there are currently millions more PS4 consoles in homes, EA may not be 100% happy with Sony over EA access but they didn't get where they are for being stupid and risking isolating the platform with the most sales would certainly be stupid.
I don't think Sony cares. It is Microsoft who should worry. They have essentially allowed a big publishers onto their system with a competiting games with gold style system. I am shocked they allowed it. Instead of having one subscription that applies to all publishers, Microsoft has allowed to take the EA part out and let them charge for their own titles. If Ubisoft does it Sony should decline them too. It's devaluing a service we already have to pay for to play these games online. It's pure idiocy and the fact some (not aiming at you by the way) support the move is mad. Quite frankly EA made its bed before this generation started (which has backfired on them more than Sony). EA can't alienate the console with the biggest market share
I do not think this will cause MS to be come the lead platform for upcoming games. It did however give XB1 owners a optional service that has good potential. Sony made the right decision for the company. Can't blame them for that. In turn they said it was due to the fact that it did not offer a value to PS owners. That's PR magic. I think that bothers people. Personally I understand and it does not bother me. Yes, EA is the largest game publisher...fact. Biggest mutliplats...that subjective.
I don't blame Sony. They have a nice suite of services on offer with more to come. What's next? Ubisoft does the same thing and offers a subscription service? Who's next? Take Two? Activision Blizzard? Before you know it, every publisher will be following suit and the monthly fees will be exorbitant. Screw EA. I would rather have access to all publishers library of content under one umbrella, instead of paying piecemeal to each publisher for their specific content.
EA acess $5 a month Ps now $4 for 4 hours Sony doesnt see value in ea service. Hmmmm.
Facts don't matter. Sony doesn't want it so we will get every excuse in the book now for why PS now is superior.
Is that the only price on PS Now? I haven't tried it, but it seems there are other options. And what about the limited library of EA Access? Or how they can change the offerings at any time? No, I guess none of that matters.
So you're going to try to quote placeholder beta prices of PS Now as the official prices? Troll harder.
First of all Stop comparing PS Now and EA Access they are 2 different things! I also keep seeing you clowns keep saying "PS NOW IS IN BETA THO" EA Access is in beta too! and CHEAPER! Stop trying to sugar coat that shitty pricing
First of all, I'm NOT comparing the two, read my comment above where I tell people to stop doing so. Second of all, EA Access being in beta is irrelevant considering it's NOT the same kind of service as PS Now and yet PS Now's prices are being used against it in comparison when it too is in beta and the prices aren't finalized. Reading comprehension. It's your friend.
EA Access is comparable to PS+ not PS Now. EA already offer games on PS+. If Sony had accepted then EA would remove games from Plus and force people to buy their service too. It's true that it would be competition for Sony but it's also true that it wouldn't be a good value for us.
I have the ea access and I dont mind it. For the price of the four older games i get to play for 30 bucks is cheaper than you can buy those now or anytime later. I do wish sony would have allowed this and gave the choice to us. i just look at it like its 2.50 a month for a year (30 a year). thats just one less sweet tea and mcdouble from mds.
Sony doesn't want the competition, it is their closed system after all so they are free to do whatever they want to make the maximum revenue. Sony have to be careful though as ea are shifting more towards Microsoft over the last year and this has probably played a part in that.
im glad xbox owners get there ea access. and im happy with ps+
that's where the comparisons should be ea access and ps+ and the clear winner content wise is ps+ ea access wins on price though
EA Access is not good value at all. It fails on value vs Plus by a wide margin. You've got to be a big EA fan to make it worthwhile. PS Now looks like bad value too.
I really don't understand why it is so hard for people to wrap their heads around this whole situation. 1) Sony didn't reject EA Access because it was a threat to PS Now, PS Now is a streaming service, EA Access is a PS+/Live Gold analogue w/ titles added & removed on a timed basis. 2) Sony also didn't reject EA Access because it was a threat to PS+, because you would still HAVE to have PS+ in order to even use EA Access, even if you could access the single player portions of the games offered w/o a Plus account, these titles are inherently multiplayer titles, along w. the majority of EA's content. If anything it would GAIN PS+ accounts. 3) Sony is privileged to details on Access that we as consumers simply aren't, most likely including the fact that "The Vault" will change in the titles available, but never the amount of titles available. The negative potentials of EA Access are as follows 1) If Successful, all major developers will do the same thing, removing their games from services like PS+ & Live Gold and instead forcing consumers to pay monthly fees to a dozen different publishers, ON TOP of the PS+ account in order to access mp. 2) As a result, this effectively KILLS the used game market. Gamestop's stock fell when this was announced for a reason, EA games will no longer have any trade in value whatsoever, even if you go to sell the game a month after release, does anyone think Gamestop will pay a premium for a game that will essentially be available for a couple of dollars in a few months? If all of the other major publishers follow suit, the used game market is effectively finished, not only w. Gamestop but everywhere, full stop. At the end of the day, Sony made a brave & courageous statement by not allowing Access. Look at all of the flak they have caught from gamers w/o foresight to understand why it is a bad value for consumers, they could've easily said to hell with it & allowed the service, instead they used their position of power as the leading games console to create a better future for gamers. Imagine if an upstart Netflix was coming along & the movie studios nixed it & made consumers pay on a per-studio basis? We would be giving out up to 10x the amount of money in order to access the same content we are now for one small monthly fee. I understand that people see what they perceive to be a deal, shrouded in flowery ad speak about "More games coming soon! Look guys its a whole Vault of games!", not reading between the lines and realizing that "The Vault" is just the name of whatever 4-5 games are available that quarter, not a reference to how huge the library will be. I said quarter & not month because judging by the content currently available, EA can only add games as fast as they produce them, and since they only produce around a dozen or fewer titles a year, there's simply no way that these games can be switched out more often unless they spent actual money on porting or emulating older titles, something that at this juncture seems illogical & very unlikely. IF that day comes and EA Access plays host to a huge back catalog of EA titles I will gladly eat my words, but read the EA official press release for yourself & couple that w/ EA's history as "Worst Company in America" & you tell me if it sounds actually feasible that they would be willing to take such losses over a pithy 30 dollars a year? It really confounds me that this perceived deal is enough for people to lose all critical thought & jump on a bandwagon that is heading in the worst possible direction for gaming. Even the biggest proponents of Access will most likely get bored of the same 4 games after a week or two, so what are you really gaining here?
You would note need PS+ to access EA Access.
You would to access multiplayer though, something that is the main driving & selling force behind every single one of these titles aside from maybe Peggle.
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.