EA Access launched just about a week ago, but thanks to lack of content and some rather strange decisions, the service has stumbled out of the gate.
What a joke EA Access is $30/year, just launched and has 4 AAA games on it already. And 3 of those games are still $50 at most major retailers, $28 on Amazon. Great option, ergo the 9/10 it just scored on an earlier thread.
While there is content, the fact the price hasn't been lowered at retailers is irrelevant. All four games are a year old at least. With Madden fans being the most affected by this move, they essentially had to pay $5 to play a demo in their first month. It's not a huge deal, but not a good move either
Madden demo's have ONLY the play now mode with 2 preselected teams. Ea access is the FULL game it just has a 6 hour time limit. Which is completely fairas they don't want people to get burnt out playing 10 hours a day for 5 days then not buy the game.... The constant need to bash this service (mainly due to it not being available to certain console owners) is sad. It offers 4 games, (3 of which are more than 30$ alone) 10% off all DLC and games, and 5 day early access to the full game. (So you can FULLY try and see if you like it before blindly buying.)
6 hours a day ?? thats nice...
I wish the Early Access thing was literally the option to purchase the full game a week early. I would sign on for that feature for sure, as I am super impatient when I am really looking forward to a new game.
"Madden fans being the most affected by this move, they essentially had to pay $5 to play a demo in their first month" Did EA hold a gun to their head? EA made them do nothing, anyways IMO $5 to play 6 hrs of a new Madden before you buy it is a pretty nice trial to decide whether to spend the whole $60. You get access to every aspect of the game, whether it be rosters, seeing if your team (s) are any good, and see all the new additions. If you like it you can even save $6 when buying it on the store and get access to 4 other games for the rest of the month. How tragic... I guess the only real negative thing is there will be even less demos due to this service, though you could pose the question would the game of had a demo anyway (Madden was one of the very few games to get a demo)
Axios, what you don't realize is that EA access is a marketing ploy, especially right now. 1) if access had launched on 360/ps3 and the rest of that generation then value could be argued as they have many games for those systems. But there are only 8 games on xbox one, with almost half being sports titles. Which is fine, but not for the gamers who play multiple games a month. 2) sport games depreciate even more quickly than other games. Go to a local mom and pop place and you'll find that most of those stores won't even take them anymore. Hell, just look at the trade in values of Madden, nba, fifa, ect as the next year's approaches, yet alone 2 years after. That is a simple supply and demand principle. So, what they are doing is charging people for demos (that used to be free), marketing upcoming games (as they won't put a new release the vault - which sounds like double dipping to me), and creating a DRM-revenue service. I'm not saying that it might not mature into a great program, but it's E-freaking-A! What did we expect, good consumer practices? @nick, "The constant need to bash this service (mainly due to it not being available to certain console owners)" See, it's that argument that is flawed... the true value in this service would be on 360/ps3 generation AND PC... but they didn't, why? How do they conveniently not take it to the 360?
tbh i think i would rather have the demo and 2 teams for free than 5 bucks for 6hrs to play a week early when i can just pay 60 bucks and play forever
Paying 30$ a year for limited timed demos vs free unlimited time demos.
You aren't "paying for a demo" you are paying for access to vault games and 10% off all EA content. (including DLC and games) the 5 day early access is just a perk to allow you to try a FULL game before buying it. You guys act as if the only thing provided for 30$/year (aka 2.50$/month) is a demo .... Worst part yet? If you don't want it noone is forcing you to buy it. Also, this article is clearly just flamebait as it has not been near a month yet even in beta, so why would you cancel 10 days into your 1 month sub?
Why post this fud? The service is still in "beta" form, but STILL offers ppl $200 dollars worth of games for a $5mth/$30yr subscription. No need to hate on a good deal.
Lol, I noticed a trend among those who are desperate to downplay this service. They all scream "you are paying $5/$30 for demos" while PURPOSELY IGNORING: You get 4 Games that even right now on Amazon with discount pricing cost more than $100, so you can play them all for a tiny fraction of that today. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw... -Please explain how in the world $5/$30 for unlimited play of 4 games makes them only a demo? You get 10% off other EA game purchases. You get early access to play EA games before release. You get (for early access new releases) the FULL game vs a traditional demo that cuts off content; for example if the character or team you like is not part of the demo(which is almost always the case) then too bad you don't get to sample that. Those 4 games will continue to grow as new games release, sales slow down and EA adds to the vault. -Of course the ones most upset by this will continue to CONVENIENTLY IGNORE THE FACTS and incorrectly state it's only about paying for demos because their agenda from the start is to bash anything good that comes to X1. -I don’t expect any logical answers, just disagrees.
All i see is crying. The service is great.
@Prime, If you think it is bad skipping PS3/Xbox 360, what do you think about forced PS+ for PS4 owners that have paid for a year already and received nothing but indie games?
BF4, Peggle 2, these games aren't a year old at least.
Hmm 60 for live, about 96 for netflix, 30 for EA essentially this is the average sub cost a year or an XBox gamer. This is about what my cousin pays a year and the majority of everyone I know that owns a MS console with the addition osfe access. If I decide to get another X1 I'm sure I'll opt out of this.
@Death, PS+ is not "forced" unless you want to play online in certain games. It's not all indie games, especially if you consider the PS3 and Vita games you get. The indie games you do receive are spectacular (most of them) and are actually really fun. You also get discounts across PSN on a lot of stuff. Besides, you need XBL Gold for must stuff on Xbone so that negates your whole PS+ being required argument. It evens it out. I don't care for the selection in PSNow either, but that's the same reason Prime was getting at - the library is currently not worth the price. PS+ also isn't required for demos. Also, as seen with games like Destiny, PS+ isn't needed for ALL multiplayer aspects. Anything that doesn't require matchmaking in that game is free. As is F2P online games. The overall impression is, even though based on price, EA access may look like a good deal, but until that library fills up, it just won't be worth it for a lot of people.
If you own a PS3, Vita/PSP and PS4 then yes Plus is an incredible deal. If you are one of the 30% that are new to Playstation with your PS4, Plus is a waste of money. The "free" indie games you have received to this point were not worth the $50. Live was never sold as a game rental service. It is a match making service that is starting to get "free" games also. If it was sold as a game service like Plus, it has also been a waste of money. EA Access is being sold to customers like Plus was on the PS3. It is an optional service that allows gamers access to a library of games. In the first week alone the games being offered are arguably a better deal than what Plus has offerd PS4 owners. It seem when given a choice, subscription services offer more to entice customers. Since Sony made it mandatory for online play it has been mediocre at best and no where near the value it was when optional on the PS3.
How many "madden fans" actually download the demo though? All the ones i know are going to buy the game regardless in most cases. Literally they pre order every year and get it at midnight. I think this falls into the "vocal minority" issue. Fact is alot of the articles are based on comments on other articles and tweets at EA. I participated in some of these yesterday because a large majority of the people that want a refund, are doing it because they said they were under the impression when they bought it, that they would have unlimited access to Madden 5 days early. When I told them that when Access was announced, the press release referred to get 2+ Hour early access for some games not all. I got a lot of return tweets from people saying they thought was for some other game not Madden. They never included madden in this until later. And the game the press release used as an example was Dragon age. So what we have hear is alot of fuss about nothing. Because people didn't do research before the bought something. All the information was out there. If anything EA gave more on Madden then they previously said they would. Triple the amount of time! Oh and since everyone want to compare this with PSNow, this is timed by game time not real time. So your 4 hour rental isn't going to run out if you run and get some dinner
@kozmo0chez So every game on this list is an indie for ps4. You can't talk about the ps3 library because this is a next gen only service. So there goes that part of your argument. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/w... Also the pay wall has been removed for a large majority of all xbox apps. "Got anymore BRAIN BUSTERS?" -Billy Madison
@Death, "@Prime, If you think it is bad skipping PS3/Xbox 360, what do you think about forced PS+ for PS4 owners that have paid for a year already and received nothing but indie games?" Well, for one, if you think Playstation had a choice after the 5BILLION DOLLARS that XBL brought in over the years (5.2Billion in August 2013) vs the <200m... well, that number speaks for itself. There was no choice if PS wanted to compete. I still hate people who bought into XBL back then because of the new business practices coming about in the gaming industry. Here's some quotes: "IHS IHS +0.31% Electronics and Media (via GII) says that while Sony only made $140M from PS Plus subscriptions in 2012..." which segues into, "...This figure is comparable to how much Microsoft currently makes from Xbox Live Gold, which netted $1.25B last year." SOOOO: 140,000,000(PS+) vs 1,250,000,000(XBL). Sorry, was there a choice for sony? Did I not see this coming? This was stupid consumerism on 360 owner's part. Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites... So, PS+ in 2012 = 140million while XBL was 1.25Billions. 140m/1.25B = .112, or PS+ made only 11% of XBL. Or XBL made 10 times PSN. (I remember reading last time this year that xbl had generated 5.2 billion, vs PS+ <200ish million, however I could not find the same articles, but I remember typing many times on disqus, n4g, kotaku and the like that PS+ brought in 1/32 of what XBL had made over the years). So, yes, PS+ requirement was inevitable, and I don't blame Sony for that, I still blame Microsoft as the cause. Oh, and in regards to your "recieved only indie games" part. Indie does not equal bad and AAA does not equal good. ----------------------------- -- However, that's besides the point. Your question is off put as EA doesn't produce their own console, and EA Access isn't on PC (Origin offers free games). How come it's not on PC? Oh, because the value of it couldn't compete well with other PC services (Including THEIR OWN ORIGIN SERVICE). Not to mention PS+ offers third party publisher games while EA access does not. ****So yes, we can argue value all day, but as a PC primarily gamer, followed by my Ps4, followed by my wii u, followed by my xb1, followed by my 360/ps3 access is a ripoff for me (and many others). That's what you XB fanboys don't get... MANY OF US ARE PC GAMERS. There are more PC gamers than console gamers (based off of market share spending). There's more, but I've already typed a novel. Yes, you primary XB1 gamers see the value in it, and that's fine. But, there are MUCH better deals and programs once you branch out, and hence EA Acess' backlash.
@XisThatKid, what are you talking about??? "Hmm 60 for live, about 96 for netflix, 30 for EA essentially this is the average sub cost a year or an XBox gamer." -#1 Your logic is totally flawed because IF you purchased those games they would cost you more than $30. -#2 Both consoles charge for online gameplay access, btw you can easily find a discount for both services if you look. -#3 Netflix, Hulu, etc is no longer only available to Gold members on X1 so what does that have to do with this?..and who pays 96 for Netflix? Bottom line its a good service, sure others will follow suit but I don't get the logic that more/cheaper options for purchase gaming content is bad even if there are 20 different pubs with their own service= Its not like they are ever going to delete the option to buy vs subscribe AND just because there are plenty of sub services available doesn't mean you have to subscribe to them all just to have the ability to play ALL the games. NO, you simply do like we do with services available on pc, also through cable companies and even the tv networks now= you pick 1 or 2 of you favorite services that offer a good deal and you just buy or watch ALL the other content individually. You simply can't lose when you have the option to pick and can possibly ignore any subscription you don't see value in.
Just how has it stumbled out of the door? XB1 owners are surprisingly excited about this. It sparked much comparison with the slated PSnow service, actually highlighting how it does give the consumer better value for money. Thats just with 4 games in the vault! I've said how I feel about this service in other threads. 1st year proposes excellent value to the customer. If only two games have been added to the vault by the second year... you might as well wait a year until renewing your subscription because you will likely have already played 66% of the vault listings.
I do not see the problem with EA Now. People slamming it are being ridiculous. However...those defending it, such as nicksetzer1 are some of the same individuals that rabidly attacked PS Plus when it first premiered and are now doing their best to slam PS Now. Pick a side of the fence and get on it rather than choosing temporary beliefs per article when it supports your console. Otherwise you are just an inconsequential hypocrite and anything you say is worthlessly invalid.
None of the games are a year out. And it's really just the beginning.
I must say having put 300+ hours into BF4 on the PS4, wow the Xb1 version is absolute garbage in comparison. The controllers better, but that doesn't justify the game crashing half the time I start it not to mention its still bugged to hell, which is ironic given EA/MS partnership.
overall, a DISASTER of a launch game
thats a lie havent had a bug in months and I play all the time
"I must say having put 300+ hours into BF4 on the PS4, wow the Xb1 version is absolute garbage in comparison." Excuse my language, but you're a god damn lie! Stop trolling, because I own battlefield 4 for my PS4 and XB1. It's the same damn game, with the exception the XB1 has KINECT head tracking.
@HugoDrax Agreed. That and the PS4 version seems to have better AA. I bought both at launch.
What are you talking about have u played the xbox one version
@KrimzonSnow You are either delusional or just a liar, pick one.
Double post, sorry.