Sony's response : EA Access Doesn't 'Represent Good Value To The PlayStation Gamer'

Game Informer: Following EA’s announcement of the company’s new subscription program, Access, we were curious about it being tied only to Xbox One. We reached out to Sony for clarification, and it seems like PlayStation 4 owners shouldn’t hold their breath for the program.

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Ballsack1956d ago

Not really hell yeh

Coz playstation now at its current pricing is even less value to a gamer than EAs offering

Mikelarry1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

not really, ps+ offers you discounts on multiple titles from different publishers big or small not just Sony first party titles. EA subscription only offers discounts on EA titles nothing more nothing less how is that better value to the gamer??

@ riverstars86: thanks for pointing that out, ok then you are right ballsack and apologies for reading your comment wrong

PeaSFor1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

EA rly Access, So they are just delaying games for a week so they can make people pay more..

EA can barely release a finished product on their normal release schedule and they want me to pay $5 to play it even earlier or have discounts on (probably) old EA titles, LULZ!

thx but no thx even if DanzoSAMA think otherwise.

riverstars861956d ago

Mikelarry, Ballsack said PS Now, not PS+.

G20WLY1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

When did EA ever offer good value to anybody? Everyone knows they're among the most money grabbing companies in existence.

EA Access is just another mechanism, ultimately designed to milk the gamer wallet, whether through direct transaction or hidden via the MS Money Hatting Program...

Darkstares1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

When is Sony going to admit that 200% rise in PS+ membership fees are largely due to having online multiplayer behind a paywall (which is now like XBox Gold)?

For $5 a month or $30 a year with EA access you get,

1. 10% off digital purchases (meaning a $60 game is $6 off, already paying for itself)

2. Game trials 5 days before it's released

3. Full access to some EA games, The Vault.

PS+ also offers some good value but the members have no idea what those free games are (which are almost always older titles that nobody wants to buy any longer) and the discounts are only towards certain games. Isn't it the consumers who should decide, not Sony, on what we view value on?

torchic1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

why are people comparing PSNow to EA Access? two completely different things.

asking gamers to pay another $30 on top of the PS+ $50/$60 is steep for basically the same thing... PS+ gives you a wide variety of publishers over 3 different platforms (PSV/PS3/PS4) for $60 while for half that you only get EA titles and discounts on one platform...

Microsoft agreed to this plan as a shortcut method of bringing Xbox services on par with PS+

FATAL1TY1956d ago

EA access = Trojan Horse

Achievement unlocked

donthate1956d ago

The only reason it isn't good value to "Playstation Gamers" is because it ain't good value to Sony!

For almost half the cost of PS+, I get access to a vault of multiple games that grow as time goes by as opposed to getting a few games every month.

I would ask Sony:

a) if it is good value to pay to be able to play online on a console that rarely has updates (after all, it is FREE on PC!)?

b) does Sony really think PS Now is good value "Playstation Gamers"?

c) why not let "Playstation Gamers" decide if it is good value?

Simply put, Sony doesn't want to have a service to compete with their own, or they are just SALTY for screwing up the deal!

I personally just subscribed to EA Access and downloading BF4 and Peggle 2 while looking forward to more games being added into the mix.

truefan11956d ago

So 1 game 4 hours for $5 is good value but 4 games 1 month $5 is bad value? Sony is clearly salty, in this damage control sratement.

I thought ps4 was for the gamers. I guess this should be revised for the gamers, excluding those who like EA.

stuna11956d ago

With EA and Microsoft showing their hands with this program, this actually gives Sony the overall advantage! With their pricing scheme as well as what they have on offer.

Nothing dictates really what Sony will offer in the long run with PS now still being in Beta, and not really being aclimated to how well it will be received. Looking at it from one perspective, PS Now already has a huge advantage simply on how many devices it'll be offered on. Not only that, Developer backing that I'm sure will include not only 1st party developers, but 2nd, 3rd and Independent developers as well.

To me I don't really believe there's a comparison to be made.

badz1491956d ago Show
stuff1956d ago

I have a feeling that they will only offer games that have sold to a certain quota. EA still has to make a profit and are responsible to their shareholders. This, in a lot of ways,is an incentive for people to buy games digitally. But in the end it's a technique for getting people to give them money for there year old games instead of buying a used copy.

Madden 25 for Xbo is less than $20 now on ebay and will be far cheaper when Madden 26 releases.

Ocsta1956d ago

Dude. Sony know what EA are. THEY weren't interested.

Darkstares1956d ago


"we don't see value in EA offering a subscription model to play games early, get discounts and to play some games as much as they want"


In what bizarro world is this? Thanks Sony for choosing for me and not letting me decide what is of value or not.

How can the same company endorse 4 hour rentals that cost upwards of $4 yet tell me that I don't want this for $5 a month or $30 a year. What a joke.

UltraNova1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )


I guess you really wanted that Kinect when you bought the XB1 for 500 bucks didn't you?

Double standards much?

PSnow pricing was part of the BETA. If and when PSnow is released with that kind of pricing or even close to that I will join the crowd dissing it myself. For now lets be civilized here.

One question though are xbox fans ok with paying an additional 30 bucks on top of the 60 already paid for live gold?


So I take it your are still SALTY since June's NPD results...

nicksetzer11956d ago

Yea, I agree with you guys ... choice totally sucks. I am glad Sony can make all my decisions for me. Thanks Sony.

ramiuk11956d ago

well EA service isnt great,sounds better than it is.

Old games on it,who plays fifa 14 when 15 is out?
same with all others that on it.
new games are not included but you can buy them at 10% off price(which going off digital)would still be more than retail with no resale value.

what peopel need to remember is its EA and they a pure greed,so there is more bad to come from this and alot of direct profit.

jmac531956d ago

@Salty You are still paying for Gold are you not? $60 + $30 does not equal $50.

SonyWarrior1956d ago

im glad sony doesnt let these turd companys clutter the PS store with there trash and clutter.

MorePowerOfGreen1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

Clearly this was a painful and devastating thing for Sony to find out about. Fanboys are either envious or really worried. The fact Sony had to do PR on it tells you the gravity of this EA and MSFT partnership. Sony knows that this isn't some superficial deal but a co developed program by both companies .

The web was shocked/stunned and was silent for a day, now here comes the damage control, then the attacks will follow.

This PR damage control will only be comforting to the most fanatical and delusional PS4 fans.

Prime1571956d ago

Psnow is streaming, that's the difference. Psnow will be playable on bravia TV's. It also has plans to go to tablets. Ea access is downloading to one system.

cemelc1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

I dont understand something, do xbox owners have to pay for live + EA acces? or does EA acces comes with the live price already included?

Cos youll otherwise be paying a 60$+30$ year to keep playing online right?

Teddy-Duchamp1956d ago

Nice try! U wish, jelly fish.

Sevir1956d ago

Devastating? The normal XB trolls are out in full force, seriously, EA's line up is paltry and outside of the Mass Effect and Dead Space IP, the games they have are broken and unfinished experiences rushed to compete with another stale IP that's stifling innovation in the gaming industry.

Why on earth would I pay $30 a year to play pre release battlefield, or A slew of sports titles I don't give a rat's ass about..

Most of their IP's only sell 2-3 million with the exception of Battlefield.

The value simply isn't there. Most of these games come to PS+ in a matter of months anyway so what's the flipping point. They get larger discounts on PS+ anyway.

It's great to have options, but this is clearly a price gouge. And the program brings no value to Xbox fans either.

TheGreatAndPowerful1956d ago

This could be the reason why Sony said no to this service.

EA reserves the right to change and update the EA Access Services, and the EA Content offered through the EA Access Services without any liability to you. In particular, Vault Titles are subject to change and may be removed, and the online services for certain Vault Titles may be discontinued.

BallsEye1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )



Funny how horde of people copy info from one another that is completely false. If you pay 60$ for gold I feel sorry for you. You can get 12 months for 40$ on amazon (even cheaper at my place).

As for EA Access, I never was fan of it but it does look pretty tempting. 30$ a year is NOTHING and you get ever growing library of actually amazing games. So far even ps+ and xblg don't offer that good titles... I mean...battlefield 4, that's pretty neat!

Whoever say it has no value need to go back and see how sony charges for ps now. How can you defend this and bash ea access?

incredibleMULK1956d ago

Agreed. Insecure Sony. Not one positive comment all generation. Nothing but negative shit all generation toward Xbox/Microsoft even when they showed professionalism and spoke high of the ps4.

Now they're talking shit to ea. Someone needs some humble quick we feel what number 3 feels like....cough cough ps3.

MSBAUSTX1956d ago


I think EA is doing this because they don't feel they are getting enough money from what PS+ is offering and they want in on the money train that Sony has stumbled across with PS+.

TheGreatAndPowerful1956d ago


nothing but nice? professional? they were nothing but d**kheads all last gen but now they're too busy eating humble pie to open their mouths to say anything else.

MS marketing director: "We are going to kill Sony at E3!"
However, the key for me was the end of a revealing interview with Craig Davidson, Director of Global Marketing Microsoft. According to him, "Xbox One will surprise the world during E3." Ending with a resounding "We will kill Sony at E3".

DragonKnight1956d ago

Wow. People are really trying to compare EA Access, which is a subscription service that tries to justify (apparently successfully based on the ignorant comments here) the Early Access model that PC gaming already has and gets blasted for; to PSNow which is a streaming service and thus has an entirely different infrastructure, and is indeed completely different to EA Access?

The lengths some "gamers" will go to defend the complete lack of willpower they have so as to justify their need to be without any money and allow companies like EA and Microsoft to nickle and dime them to death.

There's nothing of value in EA Access. These are EA games. EA's games are terrible. Paying to access garbage early is still paying to access garbage, and you're trying to be proud of that?

And the absolute irony of this situation is that the people who are saying "thanks for deciding this for me Sony, why not let US decide what value is for US" would also be the first people to jump on the hate wagon if Sony did do this saying "first you make us pay for online on the PS4 (which they don't, considering there are so many games that don't require you to have PS+ to play online, so that's a B.S. argument) and now you're letting this add another $30 a year onto the price? You're just as bad as Microsoft."

And when people say that one company is as bad as another, yet support the other company they just said was bad with such fervor, guess what that is?

4Sh0w1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

lol, Who said Xbox gamers love EA now? No, Xbox gamers who want to play a bunch of EA games for a fraction of the price, get early access and 10% off new games just appreciate a good deal.

By your logic do ps owners love Bobby Kotick/ Activision now?

pfft despite the soap box rants gamers ultimately play games they like.

Call a spade a spade, sonys done a great job so far this gen but this statement is self-serving BS. Yesterday this **OPTION wasn't available, if it has no value let the end user decide.

Visiblemarc1956d ago

Ps+ is an awesome value.

The bizarre thing is people complaining that Sony won't let a company cut them out of their own ecosystem.

EA is, generally speaking, a greedy bully. I wish they didn't own so many IP's I enjoy.

bmf73641956d ago

Sony should really consider a $10/mo sub-fee to PS Now for unlimited access to the titles.

ABizzel11956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

Well that makes it even more interesting then, since it seems like EA did come to Sony as well, who denied it.

Personally I think it has potential, but first and foremost you have to be a big EA fan for this to even matter. How it currently looks, this is nothing more than a cash grab from EA, since the games they're trying to add are all games that are about to have their online community replaced due to annual installments with the exception of Peggle 2.

It only makes sense depending on when they replace the games in the EA line-up (Do the sports games go up at the beginning of the year), and what games they add to the catalog (PS360Wii / PS2XBCG / etc...).

I think this EA program is most beneficial to Sports gamers. You could theoretically, buy the game new, trade it in when it hits the service (probably 6 - 9 months after launch), and play them for the remainder of the year until the next installment comes out. At the end of the day EA is still getting over, but it give you a bit more value than you currently get with trading / keeping sports games too long.

The early access game trail is nice, and 10% digital discounts is good if that's your lane. It has potential, but for it to be great they need to make sure the Vault builds up fast.

PS3/360/Wii/PS2/XB/GC/DC/olde r: Mirror's Edge 1, Mass Effect Trilogy, Syndicate, Need for Speed, Medal of Honor, Burnout, Dragon Age, Portal 2, Dead Space, Crysis, Army of Two, Dante's Inferno, Brutal Legend, Mercenaries 2, The Godfather, Unreal Tournament 3, Alice, Bulletstorm, Skate, Def Jam, Harry Potter, Hasbro Game Night, Shadows of the Damned, NBA Streets, Fuse, Plants vs Zombies, Command and Conquer, Boom Blox, etc...

If they really push their back catalog it could be a worthwhile service. But I understand Sony, because right now where it's at it's just not worth it to most gamers, but later down the line that could change.

But at the same time, more options are almost always best (too many options can become a problem), and this is a case where Sony should have went ahead and just did it IMO.

loulou1956d ago Show
ziggurcat1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )


How is sony's statement "damage control" or "salty"? it's pretty funny seeing you attack/trolling people/sony for doing exactly what you do here *every single day*. Based on your activity over the last few days, the only one being "salty" or controlling any damage here is you (with your desperate attempts at downplaying PSNow, and TLOU).

Sony's right, too - PS+ gives you much more value than EA's service (because their service is more akin to PS+ than it is PSNow). You get discounts/freebies for games from *all publishers*, not just EA. Plus, you're paying an extra $30 on top of what you already pay for your XBL subscription - and they didn't even include titanfall as one of the games available as part of their service.


"For almost half the cost of PS+, I get access to a vault of multiple games that grow as time goes by as opposed to getting a few games every month."

you're limited only to EA titles...

diehardmetallicafan1956d ago

wow, darkstares gets 'well said' and zodtheripper gets 'trolling'? wooow.
Alot of people claiming that one service is better than the other, why not pay for both? Isn't that what all the neutral fence sitters always say when it comes to buying a console?

RosweeSon1956d ago

My mates just text me to say pretty much the same thing playstation now prices are not even final... It's a beta!!! Microsoft's marketplace is overpriced but hey that's just the way it is, it's launched and overpriced deal with it. They could change it like they could do this and that but it's Microsoft they won't unless there's an outrage like when both consoles revealed.

Eddie201011956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

Xbox One get shiny new turd, Sony doesn't want it.
Xbox One fanboys praise the Shiny new turd because it is something Playstation 4 will not have.

EA, previously despised by Xbox and Playstation gamer's for crapy business practices is suddenly the hero of Xbox fanboys, not surprising.

ShinMaster1956d ago

A small number of games from EA is not a good value.
Especially when they're delaying the games on purpose to make people pay for "EA Access".

+ Show (39) more repliesLast reply 1956d ago
DanzoSAMA1956d ago

"EA Access Doesn't 'Represent Good Value To The PlayStation Gamer"


Killz4Twinkies1956d ago

As PS4 owner i wish sony would have given the consumer the choice to pick this up or not. However most ppl havent read the fine print...

Games will leave the vault (similar to PS Plus)
$100 value at any given time (last years madden will account for $40 of this)
"Unlimited Online Play (not for certain single player will be avail)
Partial early access to new sport titles five days in advance (you can play a 2 minute quarter demo)

Seems like everyone thinks they will have this huge library of EA games to play when in reality it will probably be 2-3 old games at a time (one previous year sport title / one old indie game / Franchise Game #1 (when the 4th is on the way for xmas)

mixolydian_id1956d ago

30$ for access to an ever changing pool of EA games for a year?

This is a better deal to those who buy one new EA game per year.

I think I worked out XBL is something like 11p per day.
So were looking at 16p-ish per day for both services.

Not too shabby to be fair.

Games with gold and a number if EA titles available. Brand spanking games available as standard.

Sounds like there'll always be games available.

mochachino1956d ago

Agreed, Sony should let me decide what I think a good value is. I don't want them dictating what services I can or can't purchase.

I love my PS4 but shame shame Sony. I hope this trend doesn't continue.

objdadon1956d ago

I have all three systems and I have no interest in ea subscription or playstation now! I buy my games, own my games, when I'm done I sell my games! I pay for xbox live and psn+. My wii u is free, the way it should be!

redwin1956d ago

Got my code. I'm downloading ... I'm gaming. Maybe I'll get early bata for bf5. ...take my $30 now please.

turdburgler10801956d ago

I commented on how this was going to go down yesterday and I was right. Sony at the height of their hubris took jabs at EA during E3 and now EA took a jab back. I said Sony would make some PR comment trying to downplay their screw up and they just did. EA doesn't hurt for money so they don't have to give anything to Sony despite their reputation. Sony on the other hand needs EA so they can get money from EA's game sales. You don't bite the hand that feeds.

cee7731956d ago

It do not represent A good value when xbone has more EA games than ps4 and yet we still pay the same price hell no and I dont like the precedent EA is starting next thing you know every pub will want 30$ A year.

Jonny5isalive1956d ago

yea it is not a good value to ps gamers because if they paid for it, then it wouldnt work on their PS consoles.

JasonKCK1955d ago

Sony thinks $2.99 for 4 hrs is just so much better.

N4Gaf never changes.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1955d ago
lelo1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )

EA Access doesn't represent good value, but PS Now does?
Unless PS Now is offered free with PS+ (witch I highly doubt), it's a no go for me. Paying a high price to play last gen games, no thanks.

As for EA Access, I'm sceptical...

Menkyo1956d ago

The price model is set up by the publishers of the games on Psnow. Plus its a beta.

chrisarsenalsavart1956d ago

Psnow is a streaming service.
Nothing to do with ea access or ps+ for that matter.

madpuppy1956d ago

I guess if they were the same thing, the first part of your comment would mean something.

as for the second have seen the final pricing list for playstation now? I love it when no actual pricing has been revealed but, everyone "knows" what its going to be in lieu of an "actual" finalized pricing list.

Utalkin2me1956d ago


First EA access is more like PS+ and not PS Now. And plus blows EA access out of the water in value. And i didn't know PS Now prices was set in stone yet anyways.

dcbronco1956d ago


I believe EA Access is also a beta so maybe the price will go down.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1956d ago
Pogmathoin1956d ago

Its $30 a year, for this, its great value.

Keltech1956d ago

You can also add the $50-60 that customers have to pay for XBL. Let's not ignore that.

Sheikh Yerbouti1956d ago

Whatever happened to Games for Gold? Will Activision have their own service too if they wanted? This is just a money grab.

Ginesis1956d ago

Add in the price to rent games on PS Now and the Plus subscription. Let's not ignore that.

XStation1956d ago (Edited 1956d ago )


1.) It's optional to get the EA subscription service, so if you're having money issues you wouldn't get it anyways.

2.) $10 a month for XBL or $60 for a year...

3.) PS+ comes with a cost also, so it would be the same thing if it was on the PS4.

frostypants1956d ago

$30 a year, with no guarantee whatsoever that a given game will be available.

thekhurg1956d ago

Until you factor in this service forces digital purchases meaning you can never sell or trade the game to get more value back once you're done.

JorboTron1956d ago

I have never paid more than $45 for a year of XBL. It's called being a savvy consumer.
OT: EA Access is clearly not for everyone. But I wouldnt mind throwing down $5 once in awhile to play some older EA annual releases that I would never pay a full $60 for. To each his own. It's at least a good option to have. and PS+ > EA access clearly. but its nice to see more competition that will improve future offerings

jnemesh1956d ago

$30/year + DLC costs. For games that are in a bargain bin at your local pawn shop.

Who wants to play old versions of FIFA and Madden anyway? Usually sports game enthusiasts want to play with the most current stats and rosters!

Then there is BF4, the most BROKEN shooter ever. Maybe by the time this service launches, they will have fixed the bugs! (yeah, I couldn't say that with a straight face either...)

$30 for FOUR games? Four OLD and BROKEN EA games? No thanks!

I have done just fine without buying or playing a single EA game for years now.

Thanks Sony (honestly!) for keeping a CRAP service off of your console!

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1956d ago
OmegaShen1956d ago

Doesn't matter if PS+ or PS Now, both are far better and both offer more working games.

Its funny how people keep using a beta as a finally product.

mrpsychoticstalker1956d ago

I'm not a big fan of the consoles war . But this is a big win for Microsoft. Whoever doesn't think the same is in plain denial. It's a great deal, for a cheap price.

OmegaShen1956d ago

Need to try harder to not sound like a troll buddy, its EA. Theres no real win with them, so far the have screw up on alot of things that do online.

They weren't on the list for worst company for nothing.

ThePope1956d ago

"Its funny how people keep using a beta as a finally product."

The same can be said to you. EA Access is a beta as well so how do you know which is a better value. Maybe you should shut your mouth.