The EA Access and Sony debacle

Sony recently denied a new service by EA for the PS4 called EA Access. Microsoft announced that they would be partnering up with EA to bring this service to those who may want it on their Xbox One. In short, EA Access is supposed to bring discounts, online features, game demos and full games to its subscribers. Sony's action sparked an instant outcry amongst gamers. I've seen comments both for and against the service, and after having reflected a bit upon it myself, I will share my views on the matter.

Let me just start off by applauding Sony for taking this stance. I was never going to make it ambiguous to you about which side I'm on. Be it a business reason or actually trying to protect their consumers, denying the service outright is the best case scenario for everyone except EA.

Well, what is actually EA Access? Is it Sony's competitor? Why should Sony decide whether I want it or not?

Some people are comparing it to PlayStation Now, a video game streaming service that allows you to pay to rent games. PS Now is nothing like EAA, being a streaming service and all. PS Now requires no download after you rent a game, and you have full control over what games you get at any given time. I am not endorsing PS Now until I see how well it works, and I would be happy to see more of a subscription-based system like Netflix rather than the current pricing scheme, but it's still a system in beta.

The most correct parallel is PlayStation Plus. A subscription-based service that offers discounts of up to 75% in the PlayStation Store, free games for download on rotation, and access to online services. It also works across PlayStation systems and has cloud saving. Everything you buy on your PS Plus account is available only while you pay the subscription fee, so if you cancel your subscription, you'll lose all your paid games until you subscribe again. However, any game you "buy", whether it's free or 10-75% off, will stay on your PS Plus account forever.

Comparing EA Access, they want you to pay through the Xbox Marketplace for additional access to their services, and Xbox Live Gold is required on top of that if you want to play online. Anything you "buy" on a discount is only available for as long as you subscribe, like PS Plus, and it is still unclear as to how "The Vault" of free games functions. It is not currently known if there will only be a few games or if it will build up a larger library more akin to Netflix' system. A Twitter post ( https://twitter.com/EAAcces... ) suggests that the games are there to stay, though.

Now, if it's all so similar to PS Plus, why can't EA just offer their titles through PS Plus? Why should we pay for the same thing twice when playing EA games? You're basically paying fees to an additional company for an overlapping service of select titles, you get imposed with additional DRM, and for any overlapping issues, you now have two companies to relate to when trying out customer service. All of EAA's value lies in "The Vault", and while I do agree that it's good value to have a selection of premium subscription-based games at hand, what happens when Ubisoft and Activision also wants you to pay subscription fees for their games? After it is implemented, it's not going away easily. It would be much better if this service was provided by the 1st party of the console (PS Plus), or a third party that can license a broader spectrum of games (akin to Netflix and Spotify).

You want to decide for yourself, right? Well, if EA launched their own system, they could do whatever they wanted with it. I don't see them offering anything like this on EA Origin, but there's no outcry there ( https://twitter.com/EAAcces... ). You could argue for Origin On the House and Game Time, but these seem more like competitors to Steam equivalents. Sony decided against EAA on their own system, and I hope they stick to their guns, simply because of my fear of seeing how this could evolve as a standard when it gets a foothold. EA is notorious for milking their franchise for all it's worth, and I'm seeing the possibility of exclusives and required subscription for certain games. Launching this system on their PlayStation brand would tie it into their company with both the good and bad. I believe Sony decided against it because they would give up a part of their control to EA, and this is not in the best interest of the PlayStation or its brand, nor is it in the best interest of the consumers. Sony decides what kind of marketing models they want on their service. After that, you may decide if you want to buy in on it. Or rather, since it's on Xbox Live Marketplace, you can decide to go get an Xbox One with EA Access.

In the bottom paragraph, I want to say that I think it's great to see the markets evolving towards future models. This does, however, require some moderation and criticism around what is happening, so that we don't start off in the wrong direction. History has shown several examples of better designs losing out because of arbitrary reasons, often because something "almost as good" came first. Just look at your own keyboard, for instance. I think EA mainly wants to recoup used games sales and second hand trading, which is perfect after Microsoft's intended daily DRM check had to be removed from the Xbox One. They "might" not have the worst intentions with the whole ordeal, but their past points to them just wanting to maximise profits. Damage control comes later. Thus I am greatly sceptical to EA Access and its future, and with PlayStation Plus offering much of the same features I can easily see why Sony would not want it on their system.

[Mikelarry]

Very interesting read indeed, great blog i especially like the line "PS Now is nothing like EAA, being a streaming service and all. PS Now requires no download after you rent a game, and you have full control over what games you get at any given time"

some gamers are quick to relinquish their control over some marketing talk of "cheaper options for gamers" without fully understanding what they are giving up.

with the way the industry is going i can see my self finding a new hobby as gaming is becoming more and more about screwing gamers at every turn

[Chevalier]

Exactly. I understand that on the surface it seems like a good value, but, as Ichizon and you have been mentioning, it's not all great overall. I just look over at EA and pulling their product from Steam for their own Origin and that control has allowed them to not have to offer any deals or incentives to preorder.

If Ubisoft, 2k Games, Bethesda, Ubisoft, Konami, Deep Silver, Microsoft all joined EA, I can only imagine that to have access to all the content I want I'd have to have 10 subscriptions. That is not a future I'd look forward to.

But here is EA having some nice shiny offerings while they reach into your back pocket distracted to grab some money. Then they'll offer you 'discounts' which you've paid up front already with subscription for access and offer it as a 'deal'. Letting you play old games that have dropped in players and enticing with 'discounts' on content packs.