Sony's response to EA Access Subscription plan

Status
Not open for further replies.
TechnicPuppet said:
I wouldn't bet on it. EA want this to happen so why would they keep giving their games away on PS+. That isn't going to convince Sony is it.
Click to expand...

Because Sony give them a lump sum payment every time an EA game is included in the IGC. EA won't say no to free money as the games that go into the IGC are heavily depreciated, it's pure profit.

Opus Angelorum said:
Good thing it's a choice then.

If you don't think it offers good value, don't subscribe.
Click to expand...

So many people said the same thing about XBLG, and yet here we are and PS+ is now mandatory for online play. I have absolutely zero trust in the gaming consumer as a whole, the lure of early access and exclusive DLC is too great for some people. Better not to set the precedent.

How long until EA Access is required to play any EA published game online, even with PS+/XBLG already in the bag? I could see it by the end of the generation.
 
I'm of 2 minds on this, obviously the reason why they didn't want EA to do something like this on PS4 is because of PS+ and PSnow and I'm thinking more so latter then the former. I don't like Sony deciding to do something like this for me...

Unless they are going to have a similar setup on PS4 for all games and this would conflict with that. Then I would be fine with it. PSnow beta was suppose to launch at the end of this month and we still haven't seen anything about it yet. So yeah...

Perhaps Sony is planning to directly counter it with PSnow or perhaps they don't want it because it makes PSnow look bad, we will have to wait and see what real pricing and what kind of sales models they have for PSnow because if its just the rentals like we've already seen then... yeah I'm not interested.
 
PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price.
Click to expand...
Well....that also might have something to do with the fact that they are mandatory if you want to play online...
 
zomgbbqftw said:
Absolutely the correct decision from Sony. Surprised that MS went along for the ride, opening the door to publishers selling directly to consumers through your product is not a good precedent. How long until we get Activision Access and Ubisoft Access all of which will have timed exclusive DLC etc...

There may be a short term gain for Xbox One here if the 5 day early access stuff catches on (which is clearly the sweetener from EA to MS) but the longer term picture definitely suffers by giving publishers their own platform with which to exploit consumers.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that MS is getting a cut of the subscription service.
 
Marcel said:
Wow. The logic cartwheels and Sony apologists in here are fucking amazing.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this. I get there are people who agree with them but how are we coming to the conclusion that this service is worth it if we haven't seen it in practice yet. Until we get there, what are we exactly arguing against? Choice for one is valid, but now arguing that this service is better off for everyone? Idk.
 
I don't think Sony allows other game related subscriptions to be made through their store. To my knowledge, any that exist are dealt with outside of the PSN store, such as subs for FFXIV.

I guess they do not want competing subscriptions advertised.
 
Impeccable said:
I think that money speaks for everyone involved and EA still would consider offering games not offered on their subscription service as eligible for Games with Gold or Playstation +.
Click to expand...

We will agree to disagree. I don't think there will ever be an EA game on PS+ for PS4, maybe still on Vita and PS3.
 
I'm sure Sony doesn't want to open the floodgates for every big publisher to have their own $5/month plan on top of PlayStation plus.

I can imagine that Activision would love to charge $30/yr for online access to call of duty themselves.
 
BibiMaghoo said:
I don't think Sony allows other game related subscriptions to be made through their store. To my knowledge, any that exist are dealt with outside of the PSN store, such as subs for FFXIV.

I guess they do not want competing subscriptions advertised.
Click to expand...
I am not completely sure this is true.

Call of Duty Elite was on the PSN Store. Though yes, it was a long time ago.
 
I think a lot of this is going to be decided on just how good these EA "deals" are. Fact is, once they're adopted by a system and locked behind a paywall, they can charge whatever they want for them.

Also, knowing EA, once they've got their foot into a system's online services, I'm curious as to how long it'll be before the EA Subscription is mandatory to play EA games online...
 
zomgbbqftw said:
So many people said the same thing about XBLG, and yet here we are and PS+ is now mandatory for online play.
Click to expand...

And they offer good value to those who subscribe.

You want to go back to the old days of gaming when you bought a game and all the content was on that disc. Those days are long gone.
 
Console gamers make impulse digital purchases all the time and EA is counting on it with this service. It's no surprise it's primarily aimed at sports gamers at the moment, whom are the most likely to make stupid purchase decisions ($60 roster updates, FIFA microtransactions, etc) with minor incentives (play games 5 days early! 10% discount on new releases!).
But as more people impulse purchase it, they'll be more inclined to add more and substantial incentives up until the point where owning an EA game without EA Access will have you missing out on certain features. Hell the 5 game early thing is already kind of annoying. If it's ready to be released digitally, then fucking release it. Don't hold it back for a $30 subscription..

So yeah I'm glad Sony nipped this one in the bud. I don't need or want more console subscriptions, thanks.
 
glaurung said:
I am not completely sure this is true.

Call of Duty Elite was on the PSN Store. Though yes, it was a long time ago.
Click to expand...

As with BF Premium, it is a season pass under another name. The subscription never recurs, and lasts forever once purchased for that game, certainly with BF.
 
Lol, people are mad about this decision? Smh...

If shit like EA Access is successful, even more (big) publishers will do this.
They also wouldn't need to give "free" games or discounts to PS+/GwG subscribers then, because they'll be exclusive to EA/Activision/Ubisoft/whatever Access...
 
Damn. No TitanFall 2 on PS4 then lol

All jokes aside, I think that MS most likely approached EA with this idea, then EA going to them if you ask me.
 
Marcel said:
Wow. The logic cartwheels and Sony apologists in here are fucking amazing.
Click to expand...

Instead of just assuming I'm a Sony fan boy, it would be nice if you actually commented directly on what I'm saying without just quoting one part of my post. Total disclosure: I have an Xbone and I'm pretty sure I'm going to subscribe to EA as I'm into getting to play games early.
 
Marcel said:
Wow. The logic cartwheels and Sony apologists in here are fucking amazing.
Click to expand...

Well given that were are talking about the very consumers that paid for xbl for almost a decade to only play online, yes I guess that it's better to take away some choices when people appear to not have the ability to restrain themselves and know better.
 
boosh5 said:
People keep saying that this is just Sony trying to protect PS+. That may be true, but I'm all for that. I want to protect PS+. I pay for it, I like it, and I want to continue to like it, but if every publisher has their own service, why would PS+ ever get another game from them? This would devalue a thing that I already pay for.
Click to expand...

That should be Sony's concern. Not yours. Keeping control over the competition isn't the greatest way to hold value.

If a publisher's service can potentially be a risk to PS+ or be more appealing then Sony should step it up.
 
zomgbbqftw said:
Because Sony give them a lump sum payment every time an EA game is included in the IGC. EA won't say no to free money as the games that go into the IGC are heavily depreciated, it's pure profit.



So many people said the same thing about XBLG, and yet here we are and PS+ is now mandatory for online play. I have absolutely zero trust in the gaming consumer as a whole, the lure of early access and exclusive DLC is too great for some people. Better not to set the precedent.

How long until EA Access is required to play any EA published game online, even with PS+/XBLG already in the bag? I could see it by the end of the generation.
Click to expand...

I agree with this 100%.


I keep thinking about the fucking horse armor every time the words DLC come up, and then I think, oh great some people decided it was a good idea to buy that garbage. Now we get games that are made around DLC.
 
Sony should let their costumers choose what holds value for then or not.

I would pay 30 bucks a year for access to EA last year catalogue.
 
There's no need for Sony to add another subscription service to their platform, they're already rolling in PS+ subs and want people to stay on them and not migrate. Giving people another option means less money for them.
 
AyaisMUsikWhore said:
I don't understand this. I get there are people who agree with them but how are we coming to the conclusion that this service is worth it if we haven't seen it in practice yet. Until we get there, what are we exactly arguing against? Choice for one is valid, but now arguing that this service is better off for everyone? Idk.
Click to expand...

In practice my mate just traded in his copy of Fifa for £21 and bought EA Access for £20.

He is now downloading Fifa, Madden, BF and Peggle. In practice I subscribed this morning and downloaded BF and Madden. Two games I would have liked but didn't fancy paying a lot for.

The fact we will get more games for free over the course of the next year not to mention 10% discounts and early access just makes it even better.
 
EA Access Denied.

Choice is nice but this is EA and I don't trust them (Well, I trust EA to be EA), I also don't want it to become the norm with all big publishers setting up their own subscription service.
 
leaf_ said:
Well given that were are talking about the very consumers that paid for xbl for almost a decade to only play online, yes I guess that it's better to take away some choices when people appear to not have the ability to restrain themselves and know better.
Click to expand...

It's insulting to suggest people who pay more for an additional experience are unable to restrain themselves. I'm very able to decide where and how I spend my money.
 
If I bought more than 1 EA title a year it would make sense for me but being that their vast catalog of games is pretty much the ones I avoid outside of Battlefield its not something that means a lot to me. That said though I think it makes sense for Sony to include it.

Consumer choice is never a bad thing.
 
leaf_ said:
Well given that were are talking about the very consumers that paid for xbl for almost a decade to only play online, yes I guess that it's better to take away some choices when people appear to not have the ability to restrain themselves and know better.
Click to expand...

So you're in favor of one corporate entity having control over a marketplace and dictating what is valuable and what isn't, since they know better than their customers right?
 
7DollarHagane said:
I'm sure Sony doesn't want to open the floodgates for every big publisher to have their own $5/month plan on top of PlayStation plus.

I can imagine that Activision would love to charge $30/yr for online access to call of duty themselves.
Click to expand...

Make it every call of duty x skylanders x tony hawk x etc Activision game and I'd subscribe

I'm part of the problem but you all said you wanted a digital future ;)


UFC and plants vs zombies will probably be the second wave of EA games for this in like October/November
 
TechnicPuppet said:
In practice my mate just traded in his copy of Fifa for £21 and bought EA Access for £20.

He is now downloading Fifa, Madden, BF and Peggle. In practice I subscribed this morning and downloaded BF and Madden. Two games I would have liked but didn't fancy paying a lot for.

The fact we will get more games for free over the course of the next year not to mention 10% discounts and early access just makes it even better.
Click to expand...

That's great for you and your friend. However that still not the practice I'm talking about.
 
There has been some obvious bad blood between EA and Sony for awhile now so.I can't really say I'm surprised by this. I'm not about to call Sony out as somehow being anti-consumer because they don't want the service on their platform, they do too many other things that could make them arguably the most pro consumer console manufacturer currently going, things like cross play/cross save/ the perks of +, their plans to allow you to use PSNow across their consoles, various tv's,phones, tablets etc.

They still are not impervious to making some questionable decisions, but looking at the way a lot of things have gone in the industry the past few years I can easily see this subscription stuff becoming a slippery slope.
 
Opus Angelorum said:
It's insulting to suggest people who pay more for an additional experience are unable to restrain themselves. I'm very able to decide where and how I spend my money.
Click to expand...

A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

Agent_Kay.jpg
 
Tratorn said:
Lol, people are mad about this decision? Smh...

If shit like EA Access is successful, even more (big) publishers will do this.
They also wouldn't need to give "free" games or discounts to PS+/GwG subscribers then, because they'll be exclusive to EA/Activision/Ubisoft/whatever Access...
Click to expand...

Why would it be a bad thing for more publishers to do this? Frankly, I really hope they do.

It's an optional service. No one is making you subscribe. It doesn't replace individual purchases, stand alone DLC or anything else. If, suddenly, subscription services are the only way to get certain content, then you may have a point.

But unless that's the case, why wouldn't you want every publisher to offer something like this? Would pay $100/year for something like this from Nintendo, for example.
 
I'm glad they didn't allow, some of you are so blind. If ea access becomes a success others will follow. It will make ps+ and the xbox's useless. It's that simple.
 
Freeman said:
There is no way of knowing that. The obvious consequence of a program like that coming from EA is that they would start putting even more content on DLCs.

Personalty I think Sony should just let them, assuming they are taking their cut.
Click to expand...

But again it would just be EA games, just don't pay for what you don't want.

Lots of people are moaning about EA "money grabbing" and loads of them have no intention of buying the products in question anyway.
 
zomgbbqftw said:
Absolutely the correct decision from Sony. Surprised that MS went along for the ride, opening the door to publishers selling directly to consumers through your product is not a good precedent. How long until we get Activision Access and Ubisoft Access all of which will have timed exclusive DLC etc...

There may be a short term gain for Xbox One here if the 5 day early access stuff catches on (which is clearly the sweetener from EA to MS) but the longer term picture definitely suffers by giving publishers their own platform with which to exploit consumers.
Click to expand...

I see a lot of gaffers analyse this thing from a consumer pow, i can see and understand the point they make, but i think that in the long run this thing, if successful, will come to bite back really hard.
MS,yeah, maybe in the short term there will be a good feedback, even move some box, but they are giving up on the control, crazy stuff, dangerous stuff.
Or they don't give a fuck anymore...
 
Opus Angelorum said:
And they offer good value to those who subscribe.

You want to go back to the old days of gaming when you bought a game and all the content was on that disc. Those days are long gone.
Click to expand...

Yes, that would be great. It's one of the reasons I still respect Nintendo, WYSIWYG with almost all of their games.

However, what I want is to halt the further erosion and fragmentation of the current market and destruction in value of my £45 purchase.

Allowing publishers a direct conduit to consumers will further enhance their profitability at the expense of the consumer, I think it sets a bad precedent to allow them this opportunity. Make no mistake, this is not about giving consumers a choice, it is about enhancing EA's bottom line, it wouldn't exist otherwise. I for one feel that gaming is reasonably well priced on consoles, if it gets any more expensive the market will undergo a severe contraction.

EA Access today may just offer a few old games in a vault for $30 a year or $5 a month, but EA Access in a few years may be required to play any EA title online and it may be required to get any EA DLC day one. I would rather not open the door to this eventuality, as it's not just EA who want this, every publisher does. Sony have made the right move here, whether or not they reached it to protect their own interests is of little relevance.
 
Officerrob said:
I am baffled that people are happy for less options, and no choice...
Click to expand...

Since ps+ already add a lot of games for 50$ I'm okay with that since I don't like to pay 5$extra for ea. And if that proofs to be successful 5$ for ubisoft and 5$ for etc. Because this would simply means I pay extra for stuff that would end up in ps+ and thus making ps+ less interesting at the end of the day you would just pay extra for the same stuff.

A service like Netflix is great because it contains content from most publishers it would be a disaster if you suddenly had to pay extra for WB, or Disney
 
They don't think EA access offers the value playstation consumers have come to expect?
Yet they are perfectly fine with charging how much for a 30 day rental of a single PS Now title?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Wild Assault Early Access Trailer
27
647
Hawk The Slayer replied
Geoguessr Steam edition coming to early access in April
1
231
jshackles replied
inZOI Early Access sales top one million
News 
7
381
Hari Seldon replied
NEIGHBORS: Suburban Warfare - Early Access Release Trailer
Trailer 
5
391
RaptorGTA replied
  • Locked
inZOI Early Access sales top one million on PC Steam
1
257
CyberCali replied
Top Bottom