SheAttack: Sony says "No" to EA Access program. Xbox One benefits! Erica of SheAttack discusses why Sony missed a big opportunity and why they can't fool us with the excuses!
Not PS4 confirmed :(
By choice... Also this is EA we're talking about here...E-A It seems MANY Microsoft fans have forgotten which company wins the WORST OF THE WORST every year. But because they "picked" Microsoft over Sony (In reality that is not what happened...Sony declined as stated above^) they are now on the MS fans "team" so that makes them ok... Man trying to follow and explain that logic is making me dizzy.
EA still sucks as a company, but as a PS owner, I would have at least liked the chance to decide if EA Access was for me or not. Now, thanks to Sony, I don't have that opportunity.
EA approached both companies of their service but Sony declined. And yes we know why they did it. While in this particular case MS was open to the idea and are supporting it. This only strengthens MS and EA's relationship further just because Sony wanted nothing to do with the service. As a hardcore gamer and customer this could only mean games for that platform realistically. With that said I think the service will end up on PS4 in the future regardless.
>EA access launches >Sony drops prices on all EA games with PS+ to 20% below EA access prices >EA access dies or lives on in as a cancerous lump slowly killing XB1 from the inside >gamers with half a brain avoid or sell their XB1's and buy a PS4 I stopped buying EA games after BF3 anyway so no big deal even if EA dropped Sony support fully, this would only lead to EA games getting more and more expensive on the XB1 with no competition. If this crap catches on expect ever publisher to floow suit then you can pay $30 a year for all of them. I don't play updates, I don't play features, I don't play apps, I don't sit there and play with the UI and think "wow this is great, what a fun UI". I play games. Said games look better on the PS4, the hardware is better, it can hit higher resolutions, framerates and have better effects more often. You can upgrade the PS4 software (although I don't really care) but you are stuck with the xbone hardware. 1080p IS a selling point, my TV is 1080p, not 792p or 900p and upscaling and related artifacts and aliasing look like crap. Personally I wish Sony would NOT bloat up the PS4 with crApps and "features" that I won't use and will just take memory and power away from game use. Let the A.D.D. xboners "snapp apps" in between playing their low res choppy games. I will stick with my PC as primary gaming machine and PS4 as my primary and only console. I don't play updates, I don't play features, I don't play apps, I don't sit there and play with the UI and think "wow this is great, what a fun UI". I play games. Said games look better on the PS4, the hardware is better, it can hit higher resolutions, framerates and have better effects more often. You can upgrade the PS4 software (although I don't really care) but you are stuck with the xbone hardware. 1080p IS a selling point, my TV is 1080p, not 792p or 900p and upscaling and related artifacts and aliasing look like crap. Personally I wish Sony would NOT bloat up the PS4 with crApps and "features" that I won't use and will just take memory and power away from game use. Let the A.D.D. xboners "snapp apps" in between playing their low res choppy games, I will stick to the best console gaming experience. And if this catches on expect all those dodgy publishers to do the same thing. Then you can pay $30 a year to each publisher to "access" (lol) their games. One for EA One for Ubi One for Atci One for MS Studios and so on And the XB1 just keeps on bleeding the dumb while they smile and think its a good thing. SMH
Shut your mouth.EA sells to the masses and those who have voted are delusional hardcore ps fanboys not the masses who get their gaqmes on pc , ps and xbox and just want to play Fifa and Sims.
@Angels "But because they "picked" Microsoft over Sony (In reality that is not what happened...Sony declined as stated above^) they are now on the MS fans "team" so that makes them ok... " Seriously, what kind of nonsense are you spewing. What makes you think you are equipped to tar all 'Microsoft fans' in the same brush? "Man trying to follow and explain that logic is making me dizzy." What logic? There is none; just a sensationalist sweeping statement with no substance. If you want to know about logic, here is something. Signing up to the EA access program is voluntary. NO ONE is forcing you to get it. But it gives those players, who ACTUALLY PLAY GAMES (and EA games) instead of just playing politics on internet forums, OPTIONS. So no...what's probably getting you dizzy is the desperate attempt to downplay this from you due to whatever insecurity you have about the service. Its a service, that offers gamers something if they CHOOSE to sign up. Xbox gamers have that option. People on PlayStation don't. Simple as that.
You really think other publishers isn't going to do the same thing. Like I said many times before be prepared because this gen is going to get ugly. Why wouldn't they the see everyone else making money Look at steam. When publishers saw how much cable was making they made their own store. I bet its going to end up as a app to launch the service on xbone. Other pubs is going to approach both of them. PS+ and psnow is only going to have exclusives. Why should they let Sony and ms rep the benefits of their games when they can do the same. They lost with the online access for each game for mp last gen this is their next move. I also find it funny how people on this site always brought up accessibility and choice when it comes to consoles. Well this proved yet another point y'all are not in control of anything. The console makers choose for you.BC is gone now your buying remakes. No more free mp now if you Dont sub you brought half a game. Now this. Be prepared its only going to get worst. they noticed that all y'all pay attention to was the dumb console war and comparisons with exclusives. They seen how last gen was and now they know how to give y'all a bone. After da makes money off this the others will follow then Sony will let them do what they please. They re not going to decline if all pubs do it.
@angels and EA has some of the best franchises out there. @wizard your fanboy is showing.
Wizard_king..... sounds like the name only an 8 year old Cartman could come up with.... you basically insulted anyone who does not share your elite ideas.
Why the praise of EA Access? We should be asking for Netflix style gaming subscription. Not a series of walled gardens in which EA is trying to create.
you guys keep telling yourself its a bad deal. maybe youll eventually believe it. me on the other hand, ill pay 5$ every few months and get to play whatever new games are added to the vault as much as i want. then if i time it right and do it when a ea games releasing, i get the 10% off and save more money than i spent on the months subscription. man that sounds like such a bad deal! id much rather be stuck paying my ps now prices where i get 4 hrs with ONE game for the same price, no discount, no nothing. this subscription might even help get those terrible prices down.
Hilarious, people are fighting over an OPTION only available on one platform. The real question is why? I can understand PS4 owners getting upset about not having the choice but why should there be any fighting with one another? EA and Microsoft are testing the waters to see if there is a demand for this. What's the problem? Consumers will DECIDE if they like it or not. Again what's the problem? EA games are still coming to the PS4 and other platforms. You can still buy Madden and Mass Effect. So why are so many arguing, am I missing something here? Like I said, the only people who should be upset are those who want to try it out and cannot.
EA Access conflicts with Sony's PS+ service (which by the way has EA games on). People can argue that one is better than the other but Sony thinks it will have a negative impact on PS+ so it makes good business sense. Don't get this confused by comparing EA Access with PS Now though. PS Now is a whole new different service.
Regardless of what people think of EA, they still make games people want to play. Bottom line, Sony 'chose' to deny the 'choice' to gamers. That's not very customer-centric. Sony have too many services of their own they are tring to develop and push, just like MS. The difference here is that there will be an option to xbox gamers for a pay to play service from EA, that Sony gamers will not have a choice in using even if they did see value in the proposition. Hmmmm, I'm not so sure this is a good decision. No matter how you look at it, its always better to have a choice.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAND once Titanfall hits the ps4 u will all love EA again. Stop it.
If gamers start paying $30 a year to play older EA games, next could come Square, Activision, Ubisoft, SEGA, and others doing a similar thing. Sony seems to be avoiding this by giving gamers the same assortment but under one price point. How it will all pan out in the future will decide, but gamers supported DLC and Micro transactions so if we keep opening our wallets easily it will get worse for us. The EA service doesn't entice me and I don't think some are ready it closely. Does anyone honestly think EA will let you play Madden 2015, UFC 2015, and more brand new unlimited play for $2.50 a month ($30/12)? When you pre-order through the service you'll get early access, otherwise you can play games in the vault which are last years games.
@Septic If you bothered reading I did NOT say "all Xbox fans" But rather "MANY XBOX fans" Stop trying to play the victimization card. I was merely observing something I noticed in SOME of the fans I encountered. It seems even when I bold words...people still don't notice them. I have no right to profile an ENTIRE group of people (which is not what I did), but I do have a right to group people I notice saying and doing similar things. Kinda like how I wouldn't say "all Brazilians play soccer" (because that is simply not always true), but if I saw a group of them doing it...or MANY of them doing it, I would say "Those Brazilians play soccer" or "MANY Brazilians play soccer."
This is EA we're talking about here. How many GOOD EA games come out in a year? 1 maybe 2? How many FUNCTIONING and good EA games come out in a year? Even people who love sports games complain how little changes with each iteration, so this is no loss. Eric Kain from Forbes said it best about this subject, but I'm going to elaborate on something neither Kain, nor Erica are talking about. EA Access, in so much as it is a subscription plan that other publisher WILL mimic if successful, undermines both PS+ and Games with Gold. Right now, PS+ and GwG are two services that offer a catalog of games from different studios, first and third party, which prevents shady pricing systems and fosters competition via deals, free offerings, etc... If EA Access succeeds, there's no reason to have PS+ or GwG when Ubisoft, Activision, Capcom, etc.. etc... etc.... decide to have their own subscription services adding on to the PS+ and Live subscription fees. Having no one to corral these publishers because all they need to do is give a cut to the platform holders, the publishers will be able to price games with impunity, and offer the most ridiculously old or unpopular games first, or even delay releases for non-subscribers to allow subscribers the chance to play it first. Sony and MS both have their early access systems in place, but they are by and large for demo purposes and NOT full game releases, what would there be to stop EA from allowing EA Access subscribers getting the game a week before non-subscribers? What could Sony or Microsoft do to stop it so long as they're getting their cut and everyone else is still getting the game? Nothing. EA Access is the beginning of subscription services completely undermining the core subscription services that each platform holder has already in place, and has the potential to affect available games. Sony is smart not to get involved with a service that would undermine their own. Microsoft has just signed on to give themselves a lot of headaches.
If sony would have accepted, the same people criticizing them would have said "sony buys in to EA cash grab."
Compared to Sony putting up 80 pieces of DLC for Last Of Us Remastered before it was released?
Yeah, Sony missed out on an opportunity... ...to let EA eat their lunch. Imo, good job Sony.
This year MS and EA went out in the first round. It seems it's mobile phone companies that're getting a spanking. Just remember that the busiest posts on here can rack up 400 comments. Say there's 2 million console gamers out there. That's only 0.0002% of the gaming population that give enough of a toss to get on nag and state their opinion All the figures are far from precise, but you get the picture
You must be dizzy, I hate EA as much as the next guy.But you know what? That don't change the fact they put out some of the best games on the market. You see this is what fanBOYs get for following a company blindly. Sony is now making decisions for you. Must feel great to not have to think for yourself. It's only an option, just because you feel this way don't make it so for everybody, this is a huge loss no matter how you put it. You defending them for making decisions for you is very silly. Here is a little hint for you Sony is lying through their teeth they don't want competition with PlayStation now and if they keep pushing EA away, our PS4's just might tank. I mean how does a gamer not want more games or at least the option? Dizzy you said it first. Remember this, casuals make the market and they don't think like hard core gamers, they only see the games.
I think its more sony wanted ea games on PSNow. But ea didnt like the idea of people renting their games for a weekend and then going and buying a used version. So they proposed to Sony and they said no. So it actuality it should "Ea turns down PSnow." Frankly I cant blame them. Everyone complains about EA sports titles being $60 roster updates every year. Well those people should feel satisfied now right? If thats the case you'd be fine play a 9 month old sports title? But the no the internet will never go 've them credit for it. We will focus on how superior Sony is with their way of deciding for us. Thank god I have upper management on the other side of the world to decide what I like. Now their will be a whole lot less EA games on Now if any at all. Thanks Sony. Your right $2.99 for 4 hours of a ps3 game is better than $2.50 for a month of 3 AAA 9 months old games and pebble along with % 10 off all future purchases for choosing to go digital. Id be lost without Sony. Good thing I dont buy 3+ EA games a year. Oh wait I do. Fuck me
@Neonridr "EA still sucks as a company, but as a PS owner, I would have at least liked the chance to decide if EA Access was for me or not. Now, thanks to Sony, I don't have that opportunity." Thanks to Sony, EA doesn't have the opportunity to opt to offer their games on their own service, rather than PS+, which you're most likely already paying for. Those in favor of having a choice aren't seeing the bigger picture. In the past year or so, we've gotten Battlefield 3, Kingdoms of Amalur, Dead Space 3, and next month, Crysis 3. That's four EA games, which are ours to keep for as long as we have a Plus subscription, compared to EA Access, which only allows you to PLAY the games as long as EA continues to offer them. Let's say EA launched EA Access on PS3 a few years back, and think about how that would affected Plus in the last year. Do you think EA would have allowed their games to be free on Plus, if they were trying to promote their own games service? Of course not. They'd be completely undermining the value of EA Access. Now, if EA is allowed to have their subscription, so too is every other publisher. Just like what happened with the online pass. Capcom sees EA doing this, and creates their version of the service. Do you think they'd offer Dragon's Dogma, Remember Me, Resident Evil, and DMC with Plus, or their own subscription package? Nope. Then Square Enix does it. No Hitman, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, or Sleeping Dogs for Plus. Then 2K does it. No Borderlands 2, BioShock Infinite, or XCOM. All because publishers wanted to cash in on their own subscription. Where does that leave Plus? It leaves Plus subscribers with whatever Sony can come up with to fill the void, and you're not going to easily fill a void left by those fifteen AAA games, when only a few remaining publishers will even consider offering their games through Plus. Just EA having their own service isn't going to have that drastic of an effect. But it paves the way for it. Whether or not that affects us doesn't come down to choice. It affects us no matter what we choose... we either pay more for multiple subscriptions, or we just stick with our existing Plus subscription, which is worth less than ever. I don't want either, but if Sony were to allow these publisher subscriptions to become a thing, I'm forced to choose between two crappy options that are nowhere near as great as what we got before. Sony's right. That's not a good value for us. It might not be a choice we get to make, but it's in our best interest. And that's before we even get into publishers locking all discounts and demos for their games behind their subscriptions.
@DragonKnight "EA Access, in so much as it is a subscription plan that other publisher WILL mimic if successful, undermines both PS+ and Games with Gold." -Uhm if successful that means consumers liked the value in this "subscription plan". So your logic doesn't make sense, from a consumer/gamer perspective. I mean how can it be bad if 1 publisher offering a good deal means that other publishers will offer you a good deal(maybe better)? Sure it could add up but having more options doesn't mean you are forced at gunpoint to subscribe to ALL OF THEM= No that just means you are spoiled with an abundance of choices= The consumer wins, just like all the options for services on pc and in general everyday retail services, nobody pays for every service just because somebody is selling it. Lol, no just pick which 1, or 2, or 3 you like, then buy games from other publishers you don't subscribe to the same way you do now. If these pubs are going to start offering "shady" deals to consumers wouldn't that just mean most gamers would gravitate toward only using sonys ps+/ps Now or micros GwG because ps Now pricing is so much better right? Eric Kain from Forbes logic has been heavily criticized on Forbes as nothing more than silly excuses, which you've seem to bought into. If you personally don't want the service that's fine but your reasoning sounds like you work at Sony rather than being a gamer looking for MORE options. Why should we care that other publishers offerings will undermine sony PS+ or games with gold offerings, NO that just means both will have to make changes to compete for our money and again its not like any 1 gamer NEEDS to subscribe to every pubs deal, lol all pubs will be still be selling all games in stores for a very long time.
Everything Neonridr said in his first comment above.
Neonridr- Sony made the decision based on what most benefits you as a gamer because they care about their customers. Remember this next time you think about questioning their motives. It's all about you Neo. Sony is your friend.
So I guess sony is just doing a lot of passing this gen, passed on Titanfall, Sunset Overdrive, and now EA Access, what's next? Also for consecutive E3's in 2013 & 2014 sony ridiculed MSFT for not giving gamers a choice, but now they know everyone's financial situation to determine their level of value. Not to mention psnow prices are ridiculous, and yet they that's good value. Sony should just be honest an tell everyone it conflicts with psnow, because saying ps+ is stupid when xbox has the same thing in xbl. They both require online for gameplay and both give free games, except I get to download and keep my XB1 games. Sony released a terrible spin statement, that is already backfiring. What are they going to do, if ps4 fans really start demanding for EA Access to be on ps4.
@truefan: 1. please point to an article where Sony passed on titanfall, and/or sunset overdrive. 2. PSNow prices aren't set yet.
100% agree, it conflicts with Sony's own service, and frankly, it spanks PS now: $5 for 4 hour, compared to $5 for 4 games @ Ziggurcat: http://www.vg247.com/2013/0... http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... @ Zuggercat, nice try, quotes from the articles: "He said he personally spoke to both Sony and Microsoft about the problem." “Microsoft realized that player-hosted servers are actually holding back online gaming and that this is something that they could help solve, and ran full-speed with this idea,” he said. "Sony wanted Titanfall developer Respawn to work on Vita"
@axios: 1. EA Access isn't an online streaming service, so it doesn't conflict with PSNow. That, and PSNow is not limited to just one publisher. 2. neither of those articles say anything about sony passing on titanfall. nice try, though. edit - the other thing is: titanfall was a timed exclusive until MS threw money at EA to keep it on MS platforms.
Sony is between a rock and a Hard place with this one. They paid a lot of money for that streaming service, with a plan of getting the fanbase to pay it all back. Now here comes EA with a plan to that offers more for less on their titles. They are trying to fight this. But they need to be careful not to rub EA the wrong way, as EA has the power to tilt the balance. @ziggurcat: True fan is not making that up. Respawn said that they when to Sony and M$ with Titan Falls and asked for server support. Sony declined and M$ stepped up. That is how MY secured exclusivity. The developer for Sunset Overdrive stated that Sony did not support that game idea so they took it to M$.
You know I see you more on Sony articles than Xbox, I wonder why that is?
You don't keep your games on games with gold on XBox one it's just like PS Plus.... You only keep them on x360...
Well i think sony did it for other reasons if you let one dev have an advantage then sales from other devs suffer. So what you lose from not having a subscription service you may gain in more exclusives from other devs.
@trollfan1 Trolley trolley trolley troll, troll, troll
Quick question, is your pride still with you?
How many idiots are going to compare EA Access to PS Now when the two services are NOTHING alike? EA Access is not a game streaming service, it's a game rental/early access service akin to Games with Gold or PS+ but with SUBSTANTIALLY LESS to offer. PS Now is a game streaming service. STOP COMPARING TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SERVICES TO EACH OTHER!
I find is funny how your just saying an opinion mixed with FACTS and people calling you a troll. FanBOYs are nothing more than little boys crying, trying to have a conversation on this site is almost impossible.
1. Sony didn't pass on Titanfall and Sunset Overdrive, they just didn't see eye-to-eye with what the developers wanted initially and MS was a better fit. That's not passing on, that's losing. 2. I agree, Sony should have given gamers the choice here. I said it before, but I think the reason for denying it is twofold: a) infrastructure work to get it done is more work than they can deal with right now and b) they don't want competing elements to PS+/PSNow. I don't think it was just one thing, though. 3. Microsoft is in a position now where they can't be as arrogant as they used to be. Sides have swapped from last generation to now. Microsoft has given up their paywalls, they've bent over backwards for Indies, they've done tons of 180s. All of that isn't because they want gamers to have more options, it's all because they need to do as much as they can to influence people to their console. Sony is in the position MS was last generation and a bit of that arrogance is coming out. Same as how MS never removed the paywall for apps last generation because they didn't have to. 4. If EA Access takes off, I'm sure Sony will add it eventually. Competition is what makes things thrive in the industry and Sony has to remain competitive no matter what. They don't have the funds that MS has. 5. I'm not going to demand for EA Access to be on PS4 personally because I wouldn't use it in the first place. But, if you honestly own a PS4 and want it, then I would highly suggest letting Sony know. 6. Sadly, this will be yet more fodder in the console wars. I expect to see tons of people who don't actually own the PS4 (or the XBO) start posting how Sony doesn't have EA Access as some reason why the XBO is superior or some nonsense. Yay for more fanboy fuel!
just like how sony declined the offer for titanfall on ps4 and xbox fanboys overreacted by calling it a must buy/system seller. Let's not jump the gun again, let's wait till the service launches what EA is promising is too good to be true,
After what EA have done to dead space, battlefield, simcity, dragon age and many more great franchises, I cant care less about them.
The drama never stops around here. When this story first broke I thought EA Access was a deal that EA made with MS and that Sony had nothing to do with it. Reality is that Sony could have done the same thing, and they still could if they want to. Personally I won't pay extra subs on top of PS+, and that includes PS Now, so I wouldn't sign up for this anyway.
This EA access thing is only going to make the DLC/subscription based platform much much worse. What if Activision decides to do this.. then Ubisoft, then... you get my point. And what if they start preventing Sony from having EA sales in the PS Store because it conflicts with their own sales? Or what if they prevent Sony from offering their games in PS+ because they don't want the competition? Now here's another big what if, what if they start locking DLC and other downloadable content for their games behind this additional subscription? So even if you get some free DLC for preordering, you would need to pay their subscription fee's to access that content. And imagine these subscriptions being required to play their games online. I could go on and on about what can go very wrong with what EA could do with this, and it needs to be stopped. Because if they succeed all content and online gaming access in EA games could be locked behind this paywall, and if other publishers follow suit we could be heading down a very dark road where there is no turning back (like DLC, micro-transactions etc). $5 a month doesn't sound bad up front... but just imagine having dozens of theses subscriptions for each game that has a different publisher... just because you want to play those games online or get access to their DLC. Pretty soon that $5 a month turns into $60 a month or more.
***Now here's another big what if, what if they start locking DLC and other downloadable content for their games behind this additional subscription? *** I actually see this happening and is my only worry with it right now. EA is king of putting DLC in so many spots. But, with their own plan on a console, I can totally see content being held hostage for just those who are EA Access subscribers. This can only make the issue of DLC worse in the long run and no matter how much we gamers complain about DLC, the public still eats it up and keeps spending money on it where they can even if it's done in the wrong way.
I buy tons of games ... too many really. I'm buying one EA game this year - Dragon Age 3. So whatever EA. I dont really care what you bring. I personally like the options I get from PS+. Lots of different games from different developers every month - some free, some discounted. And now I'm waiting for my iphone subscription to end so i can get a sony smartphone and get in the playstation now. Yes I am a Sony customer, and a good one.
I was waiting for the BS articles about how Sony rejected the supposed offering. There is no proof EA ever went to Sony. Why would Sony reject a plan like this offering new games vs their own services offing old games with a rip off pay system, when the competition will have EA Access? So the damage control begins followed by attack. That website has spun the context of that Sony statement. Sony was saying they took a look at the offering after it was announced and said it was nothing their fans would want anyways, as a response to the reveal, not a insight of prior dealings. The statement from Sony was just salty knee jerk PR damage control response due to being sucker punched/surprised and was not a business move made prior to the announcement. EDIT If I was wrong Sony would know many gamers are upset and would be releasing statements until their fanbase calmed down talking about in detail why they turned this down. Sony would also be reassuring developers they have an answer for this that matches the EAA service with new games. Some guy ran across another guy with some Email LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm pretty sure the service could go against ps now so to avoid that they simply didn't want it. Sony wants the Playstation brand to have its own ecosystem that allows players to interact between the subscriptions from each Sony device.
Can you please explain to me how this can go against psnow?
PS now allows you to stream old ps4/ps3 and maybe ps2/ps1 games....EA Access allows you to download old EA titles and get new titles at a discounted price. It also gives you the option to purchase early access content. Since they both allow you to play both old EA games there will be competition
Actually there is a great deal of proof that sony was approached by them....I can think of at least 3 articles already...including this one if you bothered reading it. Plus by your logic...Sony is ripping people off with an expensive service right? Companies are out to make money...what better way that to eliminate the competition. EA Access would be a conflict of interest. So Sony would be free to force ONLY their service. Regardless PSNOW and PLUS are still better values than EA Access...its EA vs the rest of the industry. Heck last time I checked NOW is suppose to have EA titles...
It amazes me how the idiot Xbots used to go on and on about screw EA and EA are the worst company ever and, I can't wait till they go under.. Yet now suddenly they talk about EA and Access being the greatest thing ever and it's going to be amazing to have access to those 4 EA games on X1, that service is only worth it if you still have a 360...Even then your not going to get Madden 15 in 2015 more like 15 in 2017 just like all their other titles... Not sure why knowing it's EA anyone seems to think access is going to offer new versions of games through the service right away... People also seem to be missing that all of those EA games will not have online capabilities period confirmed by EA, so they can have all the fun they want playing Madden 11 or 2012 solo offline
EA has you butthurt lmao
@MPoG: "Why would Sony reject a plan like this offering new games vs their own services offing old games with a rip off pay system, when the competition will have EA Access?" .. uh... because it's an *extra* subscription fee, and it's limited to just EA.
exactly why would i pay $30 a year just to play some old EA games when i could just wait for the release of the new versions of their franchises on the system. plus their sports games suck now since they have no one to fight against in the market. also EA only has 2 franchises that i care about NFS and Burnout there's no reason for to bother with this service when i could just get those games for cheap on PS, Nintendo, or MS systems by themselves.
@MPOG Dude you're delusional as heck bro, it makes me want to put you in Infinte Tsyumoki!
I'm pretty sure when EA saw PS family shipped numbers, they cry. A LOT!
WOW, Sony has you in a bubble, your comments are not realistic. Why would EA turn down more money? Answer: They wont.
EA Access would bump heads with PSN+ by forcing gamers to YET again pay for something they already have. I see EA access as MS/EA making this deal themselves and laughing evilly and while doing it.
Im torn between , Im glad sony refused such service because i dont want other studios to follow suit , on the other hand they are denying choices to their own consumers .. In other news , EA still has one other sub service to announce concerning PC , there are evidence of a premium membership for Sims 4 , will it be for that game alone or for Origin as a whole , idk but it's still worth monitoring hehe
Subscription service on PC? EA already has an online service for games, it's called Origin. And prices on origin are so good, there truly is no need for such a thing. The only other service that that competes is Steam, which is fantastic. Also, Origin has "Game Time" where they give you 2-3 days to play for free two games they select. Last month was Titanfall and some other game. And it didn't cost me a dime.
Exactly. In the past year, PS+ got Battlefield 3 (woo, free Battlefield!!!!), Dead Space 3, Kingdoms of Amalur, and starting next week, Crysis 3. PS+ got four EA games free. Now people are bitching because Sony won't let them pay EA $30 more to get four games free we would probably could have gotten through PS+ anyway. Anybody want to buy some magic beans? Only $100. If you sign up for the MrBeatdown Savers Club for the low, low price of $20, I'll sell you the magic beans for 10% off.
Ps now 1 payment or rent payments whatever u choose a vs EA started 30 a yr Activision 30 a yr next Ubisoft 30 a yr 343 studio 30 yr Ms studio 30 yr Glad u don't need xbox live but who plays single player EA games these days So on so on
It would be nice to have the option for who's interested i guess, it's not for me tho, i rarely buy EA games, and when i do i make sure they're used copies, i don't buy any sports games, i don't like Battlefield, especially the way it became these last few years, i'm interested in Dragon Age 3, but i can get that second party no problem, i've never played the Mass Effect games but i own the second one in the series (used copy lol) planning to play it sometime soon, Dead Space is as good as done ,and they've burned the NFS franchise to the ground, the last good one being Hot Pursuit. So this EA access thing doesn't present any value for ME at least.
WHAT ? Why do you think Sony is doing worst and missing opportunity? Letting EA Access doing this thing, if it works, could open the door for other publishers do the same thing. So, what will be happening to overall gaming industry if every publisher opens the service on-top to platform holders which already requires subscription. What would consumers or gamers have to do? Paying more, right? I don't think this move by Sony is worst at all. At least even it safes for its business, but as well gamers in effect.
I really think this a good deal for the moment but, I feel if this becomes successful then every big publisher is going to want to do this too. That i think could be a very bad thing for the gaming industry. That is just my opinion on it.
Why is it bad if a lot of publishers follow this idea? Even if there were 6 different possible subscription services, I would just choose the 1 (maybe 2) that I wanted and not use the others. You don't HAVE to have this service. If you don't have it, it changes nothing. You are not penalized for not being a member of the service, you can still buy the games just like you did before. I would just pick the publisher that makes the most games that I enjoy? What is bad about having the option of this service? or having the option of using 10 services like this? Don't see the negative