Support NeoGAF

[modsbox]

So what's stopping EA from releasing a digital-only title on PSN called 'EA Fan 2014' that provides free and paid DLC for it which consists of full games and addons?

Seems like they could just go ahead and do that, price it at $60 or $80 or whatever they want for a year, and they get exactly what they want while Sony can do nothing to stop it.

Think of it as an Arcade title that has a menu with access to multiple games. Only in this case the menu has Madden, Battlefield, etc.

 

[Kuni]

Welcome to games as a service.

Holy hell! That's a scary image... Seeing how DLC and pay for online took off this is actually a possible future for the industry. If all the publishers started doing this I won't be able to game anymore Only a select few games I supoose. Please don't do this... It will just limit the market substantially.

As for Sony obviously this isn't the real reason. Probably more a veto for a competitor service / lack of network and software to implement. Nonetheless other industries show that platform subscriptions are really the only thing that will work (Spotify for music, Netflix, cinema subscriptions) aka places that show all content from various places.

 

[GeordieMark]

wtf are u talking about? that ea season ticket thing gives users '3 days 'Early Access' to the full game' are u telling me ea couldnt have possibly released the game 3 days earlier? or are they giving users the illusion of early access just to sell people the season ticket. the answer is obvious

u wanted option u got options. selling ur ps4 is a option just like ea access is a option

What's wrong with offering an incentive? And it's not an 'illusion', it's legitimately early access if you get something before the full release date.

You get incentives for pre-orders. What's the problem?

Also, repeating that crap about selling the PS4 makes you sound like obnoxious and stupid. It's an impression not helped by the text speak either.

 

[Shady859]

I hate Sony deciding what is good for me.. I want this, I feel it's worth it, I paid for this the last 2 year on 360 when it was the Sports Season Ticket package and was happy with what they offered.

You are getting much more now with the addition of full games into the mix and adding the EA catalog not just sports games early. You know when Dragon Age early access time comes this site will be abuzz... I and many sports game fans happily drank the koolaide to get sports games a weekend early. I am not a hockey fan so that weekend of play was pretty great as well as it was always enough to satisfy my curiousity for the game. The free week even got me to play and later buy FIFA for the first time as well.

 

[Corto]

So what's stopping EA from releasing a digital-only title on PSN called 'EA Fan 2014' that provides free and paid DLC for it which consists of full games and addons?

Seems like they could just go ahead and do that, price it at $60 or $80 or whatever they want for a year, and they get exactly what they want while Sony can do nothing to stop it.

Think of it as an Arcade title that has a menu with access to multiple games. Only in this case the menu has Madden, Battlefield, etc.

Sony and Microsoft control their store. EA doesn't push a button and unilaterally decide to upload an app/game without passing Sony or MS QA.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

The post that was put into the OP explains it but basically, it's bad for Sony because it costs them money with no benefits. It has to be routed through their service, their support is the one that'd be taking calls/fixing issues, and they wouldn't be getting any money at all.

From Sony's perspective, it's also bad for consumers because they want to include these services under the PS+ banner. If they were to include it under that, you'd get a bigger benefit without paying anything extra which is better for the consumer overall.

But don't people already download a crap load of games digitally on the PS4 anyway? I don't see how it would be that much of a departure for a system that already supports downloads for very large games on a large scale. Do they somehow anticipate a surge in downloading so big that their system won't be able to handle it? I doubt that's it. I was also under the impression (at least this is what has been said) that Sony was a lot more open and non-restrictive where it concerns PSN. This apparent refusal of EA Access seems to contradict that.

Why can't Sony both include these same services under PS+ while also allowing gamers to choose whether or not they want EA Access? I don't see how the route they've chosen is better for consumers. It's as if PS4 owners would somehow be forced to spend this money on EA Access. This looks to entirely be a case of Sony not wanting PS+ to have any competition on its platform since the games you get monthly are one of the key benefits. And let's be honest, there's nothing wrong with Sony not wanting PS+ to have any extra competition right now, but their line about it not being a good value is total nonsense. Any issues with EA Access would be directed at EA themselves, since they're the ones that control the subscription service, not Sony. And if gamers are somehow unable to download the vault games just as they're able to download the same exact games on PSN, why shouldn't Sony support want or have to answer some of those questions?

The concept of downloading games is similar, or perhaps Microsoft is more directly involved in the building of this service and app than we've been led to believe, and Sony simply can't dedicate the resources to accommodating EA in such a manner right now, and maybe that's the real reason it isn't on the PS4. That would be a much better rationale than the one they've provided, because obviously people must understand it isn't as simple as it might seem to set these things up, which is why I think a different type of response would have served them better than the one they've given.

 

[Cynar]

I'm glad that we're not seeing this stuff on consoles. I don't want to have separate monthly fees from publishers. Plus this makes no sense for console companies to offer as there is already plus and gold.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

The only problem I see here is if EA doesnt release any games for PS+ which seems kind of suicidal IMO. Sony obviously sees this service as competition or as a threat, there is no other reason for not going with it, and so be it. Stop taking this #4theplayers PR language seriously... They are not making decisions for you. They are making decisions for themselves. I think PS+ is a great deal and if the only way I can continue to have this service is by accepting the fact that I can't have EA's subscription service as well than cool. If this service is so important to you and holds such a great value that it would determine what console you should buy then thats your choice to make.

 

[Scully Scully Scoo]

What's wrong with offering an incentive? And it's not an 'illusion', it's legitimately early access if you get something before the full release date.

You get incentives for pre-orders. What's the problem?

Also, repeating that crap about selling the PS4 makes you sound like obnoxious and stupid. It's an impression not helped by the text speak either.

'What's wrong with offering an incentive' ill tell u whats wrong. they delay the actual release of the game by 3 days. it isnt early access, early access would be access to a beta/alpha. all they are doing is delaying the game.
and u repeating the same crap ea spits isnt doing u any favours either

 

[Synth]

Honestly feel like that will be the case, since the user base is almost half the size of the competitor, and I don't see this turning it around.

Then you should have nothing to worry about. But the idea that the userbase disparity would be the main cause, kinda implies that its a service many PS4 owners would opt for if it were made available. It's a shame that they don't get to make that choice for themselves.

wtf are u talking about? that ea season ticket thing gives users '3 days 'Early Access' to the full game' are u telling me ea couldnt have possibly released the game 3 days earlier? or are they giving users the illusion of early access just to sell people the season ticket. the answer is obvious

u wanted option u got options. selling ur ps4 is a option just like ea access is a option

Actually, seeing as the digital release of games is usually the exact same day you can buy them in stores, it's not a simple case of being able to release 3 days earlier, as that would mean having the game in stores around the country 3 days earlier. You shouldn't be so quick to claim things are super obvious without giving them much thought.

So what's stopping EA from releasing a digital-only title on PSN called 'EA Fan 2014' that provides free and paid DLC for it which consists of full games and addons?

Seems like they could just go ahead and do that, price it at $60 or $80 or whatever they want for a year, and they get exactly what they want while Sony can do nothing to stop it.

Think of it as an Arcade title that has a menu with access to multiple games. Only in this case the menu has Madden, Battlefield, etc.

Pretty sure Sony can prevent pretty much anything from releasing on their platform if they don't want it there.

 

[GVA1987]

Yes. When publishers aren't trying to bend us over every time we try and trust them. Then there can be optimism, this is EA ffs.

At what point does someone's or something's actions become unforgiveable? Surely there has got to be a point where they can give us an opportunity to show that they aren't the assholes they're always painted to be. “Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”

 

[coldone]

wtf are u talking about? that ea season ticket thing gives users '3 days 'Early Access' to the full game' are u telling me ea couldnt have possibly released the game 3 days earlier? or are they giving users the illusion of early access just to sell people the season ticket. the answer is obvious

u wanted option u got options. selling ur ps4 is a option just like ea access is a option

So Sony is the self righteous company that is here to protect us from EA ?. That is why they made PS+ mandatory for online play ? That is why Sony is selling Vita with $100 memory card ?. Sony is not doing this to save you from EA, they want all the money directly go their pocket and scared that people wont find any value in PS+, if publishers start doing their own programs directly with consumers. They make money by being a middle man...

I would rather subscribe directly with publishers than Sony arbitrarily picking and choosing what I get in PS+.

I'm glad that we're not seeing this stuff on consoles. I don't want to have separate monthly fees from publishers. Plus this makes no sense for console companies to offer as there is already plus and gold.

PS+ doesnt give me Madden/FIFA etc on PS4. So far no AAA game came on PS4. Why not give ma choice to be able to get Madden/FIFA for cheap directly from EA.
Either Sony should have given Madden/FIFA in Aug or let me get it from EA. Just blocking and standing on the way is absolutely not helpful. It just makes me to waste more of my money.

 

[Iced_Eagle]

Welcome to games as a service.

SMH... You do not know what games as a service means.

All it means is that unlike a typical boxed game of yester-year, a game as a service is a game which is constantly being updated with not just bug fixes, but also content. You go from a model of ship and forget to shipping just being the start of much more to come. Dota 2 or LoL are great examples of games as a service.

Games as a service says NOTHING about the business model for the game, and it pains me a little bit on the inside when I see people get this so frequently wrong and try to spin it as some sort of bad thing.

 

[Toki767]

So Sony is the self righteous company that is here to protect us from EA ?. That is why they made PS+ mandatory for online play ? That is why Sony is selling Vita with $100 memory card ?. Sony is not doing this to save you from EA, they want all the money directly go their pocket and scared that people wont find any value in PS+, if publishers start doing their own programs directly with consumers. They make money by being a middle man...

I would rather subscribe directly with publishers than Sony arbitrarily picking and choosing what I get in PS+.

EA is still arbitrarily picking and choosing what you get with EA Access...the only reason they're giving Battlefield 4, Madden, and FIFA is probably because they know no one else will sign up with the other 5 games they have.

If it were more of a Netflix style thing where you could choose like 2-3 of any of their currently library from their Vault, I think that would be way more compelling.

 

[FleetFeet]

If you weren't going to buy the game anyway, then why are we having this conversation?

Also, I'm 100% digital on both Xbox One and PS4. That includes EA's Titanfall, which I actually got cheaper than retail by purchasing it from the US store instead of the UK one. Please don't try to decide how I should spend my money. If there's nothing from EA Access that I still feel like playing next month, I'll cancel it. It would have then cost me £4 to try out four games I currently don't own.

Of course I'm not going to support EA... I didn't support the idea of Horse Armor Downloadable Content either, but look where we are in that regard. Games aren't just made to be sold at retail, they are now making games so as to sell us DLC. Something I never wanted to be apart of, has somehow engulfed my hobby, and we can't realistically escape from it now.

I don't know if you saw the "" part, but that was just a joke, no need to take such umbrage, I honestly don't care what you do with your money. I only care in the fact that these types of decisions will affect all consumers, no matter if they participate or not.

 

[Mostlypainless]

'What's wrong with offering an incentive' ill tell u whats wrong. they delay the actual release of the game by 3 days. it isnt early access, early access would be access to a beta/alpha. all they are doing is delaying the game.
and u repeating the same crap ea spits isnt doing u any favours either

Almost all games are released on Tuesday in the US. Giving subscribers an early access weekend affects the release date in no way.

 

[coldone]

EA is still arbitrarily picking and choosing what you get with EA Access...the only reason they're giving Battlefield 4, Madden, and FIFA is probably because they know no one else will sign up with the other 5 games they have.

If it were more of a Netflix style thing where you could choose like 2-3 of any of their currently library from their Vault, I think that would be way more compelling.

I am happy and ready to sign up .. even if they didnt add any thing else for the whole year. BF4/Madden/FIFA is worth more than $30 for the next 12 months for me. Now, can Sony move from my way and go do some thing useful ?.

 

[OccamsLightsaber]

SMH... You do not know what games as a service means.

All it means is that unlike a typical boxed game of yester-year, a game as a service is a game which is constantly being updated with not just bug fixes, but also content. You go from a model of ship and forget to shipping just being the start of much more to come. Dota 2 or LoL are great examples of games as a service.

Games as a service says NOTHING about the business model for the game, and it pains me a little bit on the inside when I see people get this so frequently wrong and try to spin it as some sort of bad thing.

I can't wait to buy BF: 5 with BF Premium expansion packs and EA Access for Online access Xbox Live for next gen matchmaking. /s

 

[modsbox]

Pretty sure Sony can prevent pretty much anything from releasing on their platform if they don't want it there.

Sure, but an $80 EA game that lots of people would buy? They get their big cut of it and on the DLC sales, plus the customer support angle goes away. They'd have a harder time choosing to stop it than this multiple layers of subscription stuff EA started with.

 

[PanicFreak]

Wasn't that example spending $5 (since that's the minimum -- one month)?

$5 would give early access to a new retail game on top of the 10% discount which would mean having the game earlier for $1 less. Seems like a no brainer for anyone interested in an EA game (who doesn't buy many EA games per year) that doesn't mind getting the game digitally.

And maybe a few games of Battlefield for the month. I don't see how this is a bad deal for anyone, especially for those who wanted to go all digital for this console gen.

 

[bbjvc]

All your naysayer's argument are just this 'will be bad in the future' , but as of of moment It is a damn good deal, and it's entirely optional.

it may evolve to something better or change to something bad, but I can judge it and make my own purchase decision when it actually happens. I'm not going to worried about possible future scenario now and reject a current good deal.

 

[BeforeJam]

Welcome to games as a service.

This is amazing. It's amazing because it's EA and this is exactly what will happen if this shit comes to pass. I can't decide if I find this hysterical or grim because we're gonna be years down the track and this is the exact shit that'll plague the industry and it all started with EA.

 

[bebop24]

Have ppl forgotten that game rentals back then were $8 for a few days at stores? This is great value if these EA games interests you.

 

[FleetFeet]

Then you should have nothing to worry about. But the idea that the userbase disparity would be the main cause, kinda implies that its a service many PS4 owners would opt for if it were made available. It's a shame that they don't get to make that choice for themselves.



Actually, seeing as the digital release of games is usually the exact same day you can buy them in stores, it's not a simple case of being able to release 3 days earlier, as that would mean having the game in stores around the country 3 days earlier. You shouldn't be so quick to claim things are super obvious without giving them much thought.



Pretty sure Sony can prevent pretty much anything from releasing on their platform if they don't want it there.

I didn't say it will be the decisive factor, while I do believe it will be a big one. I think the reason why it won't work is because it's EA and they will cock it up somehow. One thing I don't understand is how can you come to the conclusion that most ps4 users would want this because of the size of the user base.

It's actually a life saver, because we'd all be up shits creek without a paddle if sony allowed EA to do their thing.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

EA Access in its first month far surpasses PS+ on PS4. Its near half the price and has far better games. Sony dont want the competition because the cant compete. Their offerings have been very poor.

 

[coldone]

I can't wait to buy BF: 5 with BF Premium expansion packs and EA Access for Online access Xbox Live for next gen matchmaking. /s

You are talking about Sony saving you from EA. Sony is the one that deceived with PS+ and made it mandatory. They are ones charging $100 for a vita memory card. None of these guys care a crap about us. They will do what ever it takes to get the maximum amount of money from us. So instead of scare mongering... let us look at today. For today EA is giving a good value. If tomm, they decide to screw up.. We can go play some thing else and dump EA, they will wind up their tails and follow us quickly.

 

[Scully Scully Scoo]

Actually, seeing as the digital release of games is usually the exact same day you can buy them in stores, it's not a simple case of being able to release 3 days earlier, as that would mean having the game in stores around the country 3 days earlier. You shouldn't be so quick to claim things are super obvious without giving them much thought.

if they really wanted to they would make it happen. games are delivered to stores and just sit there for few days waiting for the release date before staff can put them on shelves. i aint buying this bs excuse

So Sony is the self righteous company that is here to protect us from EA ?. That is why they made PS+ mandatory for online play ? That is why Sony is selling Vita with $100 memory card ?. Sony is not doing this to save you from EA, they want all the money directly go their pocket and scared that people wont find any value in PS+, if publishers start doing their own programs directly with consumers. They make money by being a middle man...

I would rather subscribe directly with publishers than Sony arbitrarily picking and choosing what I get in PS+.


PS+ doesnt give me Madden/FIFA etc on PS4. So far no AAA game came on PS4. Why not give ma choice to be able to get Madden/FIFA for cheap directly from EA.
Either Sony should have given Madden/FIFA in Aug or let me get it from EA. Just blocking and standing on the way is absolutely not helpful. It just makes me to waste more of my money.

did i say sony were here saving everyone? i said im glad they arent releasing this crap. why are u crying about ps+? i wonder why madden/fifa havnt been made available hmm. maybe because ea is going to release them on their own service thats why. yeh sure lets cut out services like netflix and instead subscribe to 10 separate companies that sounds really amazing idea

 

[Synth]

Of course I'm not going to support EA... I didn't support the idea of Horse Armor Downloadable Content either, but look where we are in that regard. Games aren't just made to be sold at retail, they are now making games so as to sell us DLC. Something I never wanted to be apart of, has somehow engulfed my hobby, and we can't realistically escape from it now.

I don't know if you saw the "" part, but that was just a joke, no need to take such umbrage, I honestly don't care what you do with your money. I only care in the fact that these types of decisions will affect all consumers, no matter if they participate or not.

Yes every decision a consumer makes affects other consumers, but that doesn't mean that it's automatically bad because you don't like it. Consumers in large rejected the pre-180 Xbox One. That actually completely blew up my digital ownership plans for the generation (buying the game cheaper physical, and then just discarding the disc). For someone like me who has no real interest in owning their games physically, this EA Access stuff is one of the best things to happen this gen so far, and I hope to see more of it. I'd happily trade my monthly GwG and PS+ content in to have the ability to simply pick and choose who's content I want to subscribe to.

I know tons of people that grew up playing game pre-DLC where you bought a game with a fixed amount of content and that was that. Many of them prefer how things are today, where a game they like can be extended beyond anything that would have made it into the game day one. Not all DLC is bad, and so the world wouldn't be objectively better if it had been snuffed out in year one.

 

[Steverulez]

EA is still arbitrarily picking and choosing what you get with EA Access...the only reason they're giving Battlefield 4, Madden, and FIFA is probably because they know no one else will sign up with the other 5 games they have.

If it were more of a Netflix style thing where you could choose like 2-3 of any of their currently library from their Vault, I think that would be way more compelling.

This is true although its much easier to see what games are likely to be in a pipeline which could appeal to people more if they like EA games.

They say more games coming soon, well unless they're feeling mighty generous with UFC, Madden 15 and/or NHL 15 (which they won't be for obvious reasons) then we can reasonably assume NBA Live 14, Need For Speed Rivals and PvZ Garden Warfare will be the choices for those "coming soon" - not that they all will definitely make it, but thats the choices so far which could tempt people and so on whereas on PS+/GwG has a much bigger choice to choose from making it more difficult to know what you're getting.

 

[draetenth]

I suppose my Steam copies of Mirror's Edge, Burnout Paradise, Dead Space, Dead Space 3, Crysis 2, Medal of Honor & Command and Conquer: Red Alert 3 do not really exist even though I am viewing them right now in my Steam library.

Weird.

I'm pretty sure he is referring to EA's newer titles... For instance, Dead Space 1 + 2 are on Steam (but not Dead Space 3 like you have listed...), Dragon Age 1 is on Steam, but 2 isn't and 3 won't be...

Anyways, my thoughts on this matter are:

1) I don't care about EA games so the subscription service is worthless to me. I mainly only play RPGs and I haven't really enjoyed post Baldur's Gate 2 Bioware. I couldn't finish Dragon Age Origins, and while Mass Effect 1 + 2 were okay I never felt the need to buy Mass Effect 3. I did like Dead Space though (haven't played 2 or 3 yet).

2) IMO EA is probably the last company I would trust with a subscription service... They have done too many questionable things IMO. Maybe this is just me being a bitter Dungeon Keeper Fan (and no I didn't waste money on the mobile game) who probably won't ever get the chance for a new Dungeon Keeper game (c'mon EA just do it like Ubisoft did with Might & Magic X).

3) Not supporting EA's (or any other publisher's) subscription service doesn't mean I really support Microsoft or Sony's charging for online. Although, I do have PS+, I had it before Sony announced it was required for most online games and I still have played any online games (SP only for me). I had it because I like the discounts on games I want. The "free" games are a nice boon.

 

[jwhit28]

Sony looks really slimy trying to spin this as consumer protection while at the same time launching PSNow. I guess we could never expect true service competition on a closed platform.

 

[Jigorath]

Welcome to games as a service.

EA will destroy this entire industry if they get too much power.

 

[DrkSage]

According to their confusingly worded TOS, it sounds like you might actually lose access to your discount-purchased games as well.

Discounted DLC is definitely tied to your subscription.

so if you buy an EA game or DLC using the EA access 10% discount and you decide to cancel or forget to pay your sub youll lose access to the game/dlc you bought?

EA, please stop. People wont recieve EA Access well because it innovates too much.

 

[Memorabilia]

Then you should have nothing to worry about. But the idea that the userbase disparity would be the main cause, kinda implies that its a service many PS4 owners would opt for if it were made available. It's a shame that they don't get to make that choice for themselves.



Actually, seeing as the digital release of games is usually the exact same day you can buy them in stores, it's not a simple case of being able to release 3 days earlier, as that would mean having the game in stores around the country 3 days earlier. You shouldn't be so quick to claim things are super obvious without giving them much thought.



Pretty sure Sony can prevent pretty much anything from releasing on their platform if they don't want it there.

I love the idea of choice. Over time this may prove to be a good option for some. And if thats the case then Sony may do a 180 of their own if enough PS4 owners proclaim they want the option. As it stands now, however, its obvious Sony sees this idea as a threat and something that potentially devalues standard PS+ because henceforth EA games would be available only via the EA subscription.

As a gamer Im mixed on this idea. On the one hand, in the short term it seems like this type of extra sub could be enticing if the catalog is good enough. For example, I like the idea of trying out a few sports titles that Id never pay full price for. On the other hand, I very much prefer physical copies of console games so the 10% discount holds zero value for me. I can instantly beat that deal with BB's GCU which costs the same annually, gives 20% off on all new games not just EA titles, and gives me the benefit of selling/lending/trading my games after Im finished if I choose. More importantly, I very much dislike the idea of EA starting a trend where publishers all begin to charge sub fees. The obvious and ominous trend for the industry is not a good thing imho. EA does not exactly have a consumer friendly track history.

We shall see how it works out. But, history shows us what bottomless greed has done to nearly every other industry and I dont see this ending well for the gaming biz or gamers if this sort of thing catches on in a big way.

 

[Gestault]

EA Access in its first month far surpasses PS+ on PS4. Its near half the price and has far better games. Sony dont want the competition because the cant compete. Their offerings have been very poor.

I've gotten *plenty* of value out of PS+, even if it's been a little softer lately. I'm someone who'd potentially sign up for both, assuming the back catalogs were strong. Their sports focus is something that adds nothing for me, though.

$5 a month each for PS+ and EA Access would legitimately provide more games than I have time to play in the free time I have. $10 a month is cheaper than a lot of entertainment out there.

 

[EdgeXL]

I'm pretty sure he is referring to EA's newer titles... For instance, Dead Space 1 + 2 are on Steam (but not Dead Space 3 like you have listed...), Dragon Age 1 is on Steam, but 2 isn't and 3 won't be...

Anyways, my thoughts on this matter are:

1) I don't care about EA games so the subscription service is worthless to me. I mainly only play RPGs and I haven't really enjoyed post Baldur's Gate 2 Bioware. I couldn't finish Dragon Age Origins, and while Mass Effect 1 + 2 were okay I never felt the need to buy Mass Effect 3. I did like Dead Space though (haven't played 2 or 3 yet).

2) IMO EA is probably the last company I would trust with a subscription service... They have done too many questionable things IMO. Maybe this is just me being a bitter Dungeon Keeper Fan (and no I didn't waste money on the mobile game) who probably won't ever get the chance for a new Dungeon Keeper game (c'mon EA just do it like Ubisoft did with Might & Magic X).

3) Not supporting EA's (or any other publisher's) subscription service doesn't mean I really support Microsoft or Sony's charging for online. Although, I do have PS+, I had it before Sony announced it was required for most online games and I still have played any online games (SP only for me). I had it because I like the discounts on games I want. The "free" games are a nice boon.

He said EA *still* does not put their games on Steam. I only mentioned I have EA games on Steam. I was in error about Dead Space 3. Not sure why i thought I had that on Steam.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

I am happy and ready to sign up .. even if they didnt add any thing else for the whole year. BF4/Madden/FIFA is worth more than $30 for the next 12 months for me. Now, can Sony move from my way and go do some thing useful ?.

Well here is an INCOMPLETE list of free games with PS+ last year.

Super Street Fighter IV (Arcade Edition), Little Big Planet 2PS3, Demon’s Souls, BioShock 2, Vanquish, Resident Evil 5: Gold Edition, Sleeping DogsPS3, Borderlands, inFAMOUS 2, Just Cause 2,Darksiders,Saints Row 2, Spec Ops: The Line, King of Fighters XIII, Ratchet and Clank: All 4 OnePS3, Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine, Zombie Tycoon 2: Brainhov's Revenge,Knytt Undergroud, Retro City Rampage, Foosball 2012, Double Dragon Neon, Pac-Man Championship Edition, Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light, The Walking Dead (Ep. 1 & 2), Virtua Fighter 5 Final Showdown, Closure, Renegade Ops, Dungeon Defenders, NFL Blitz, Quantum Conundrum, Rochard, Anomaly: Warzone Earth, Joe Danger 2: The Movie, Mega Man 10, Mega Man 9, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, Starhawk, Hard Corps: Uprising,Guardians of Middle Earth, Sideway: New York, The Cave, Gotham City Imposters, Choplifter, PAYDAY: The Heist, Bloodrayne Betrayal, Labyrinth Legends, Zombie Apocalypse: Never Die Alone, Malicious....

I would say thats pretty "useful".

 

[coldone]

if they really wanted to they would make it happen. games are delivered to stores and just sit there for few days waiting for the release date before staff can put them on shelves. i aint buying this bs excuse

did i say sony were here saving everyone? i said im glad they arent releasing this crap. why are u crying about ps+? i wonder why madden/fifa havnt been made available hmm. maybe because ea is going to release them on their own service thats why. yeh sure lets cut out services like netflix and instead subscribe to 10 separate companies that sounds really amazing idea

Did we get any else as high profile as BF4/Madden/FIFA on PS+ even from other publishers ?. Did they put AC:BF, KZ:SF, NBA:2K or any other game. It is because Sony doenst want to pony up the $$ to get these big games. Now EA is willing to create a better service.. I am upset that Sony is standing on the way.

Sony can do one of the three
- Make their own NFL/FIFA game and release it on PS+
- Pony up the $$ and put it on PS+
- Let EA sell it to me

Just standing on the way and making me to spend full retail price makes me angry.. rightfully so.

Well here is an INCOMPLETE list of free ganes with PS+ last year.

Super Street Fighter IV (Arcade Edition), Little Big Planet 2PS3, Demon’s Souls, BioShock 2, Vanquish, Resident Evil 5: Gold Edition, Sleeping DogsPS3, Borderlands, inFAMOUS 2, Just Cause 2,Darksiders,Saints Row 2, Spec Ops: The Line, King of Fighters XIII, Ratchet and Clank: All 4 OnePS3, Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine, Zombie Tycoon 2: Brainhov's Revenge,Knytt Undergroud, Retro City Rampage, Foosball 2012, Double Dragon NeonPS3PSN91Pac-Man Championship Edition, Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light, The Walking Dead (Ep. 1 & 2), Virtua Fighter 5 Final Showdown, Closure, Renegade OpsPS3PSN80Dungeon Defenders, NFL Blitz, Quantum Conundrum, Rochard, Anomaly: Warzone Earth, Joe Danger 2: The Movie, Mega Man 10, Mega Man 9, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, Starhawk, Hard Corps: Uprising,Guardians of Middle Earth, Sideway: New York, The Cave, Gotham City Imposters, Choplifter, PAYDAY: The Heist, Bloodrayne Betrayal, Labyrinth Legends, Zombie Apocalypse: Never Die Alone, Malicious....

I would say thats pretty "useful".

EA service is for current gen consoles. Not last gen. We are talking about PS4/Xbone. Not PS3/360.

 

[CosmicQueso]

List

Oh no... we're not going to list wars are we? I guess it is about that time.

Haha my bad..

I get your point though. Saying that Sony should go do something useful is not giving Sony the credit for PS+ that it deserves.

Still... given the offerings, I'd like to try out the EA service on my PS4 for that cost. It would be a good deal to me. But seems like a lot of people are trying to save me from myself and the evil devil clutches of EA.

 

[bbjvc]

wtf are u talking about? that ea season ticket thing gives users '3 days 'Early Access' to the full game' are u telling me ea couldnt have possibly released the game 3 days earlier? or are they giving users the illusion of early access just to sell people the season ticket. the answer is obvious

u wanted option u got options. selling ur ps4 is a option just like ea access is a option

No they cannot, to sell physical copy they need certain lead time to ship the copies to retail store, at which stage the game's ready, and the lead time to put a game on a on-line store is much shorter.

They cannot give this 'early access' for free to everyone buying digital which will risk their relationship with retailers.

Claim they delaying a release of ridiculous.

 

[jwhit28]

Well here is an INCOMPLETE list of free ganes with PS+ last year.

Super Street Fighter IV (Arcade Edition), Little Big Planet 2PS3, Demon’s Souls, BioShock 2, Vanquish, Resident Evil 5: Gold Edition, Sleeping DogsPS3, Borderlands, inFAMOUS 2, Just Cause 2,Darksiders,Saints Row 2PS3Retail77Spec Ops: The Line, King of Fighters XIII, Ratchet and Clank: All 4 OnePS3, Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine, Zombie Tycoon 2: Brainhov's Revenge,Knytt Undergroud, Retro City Rampage, Foosball 2012, Double Dragon NeonPS3PSN91Pac-Man Championship Edition, Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light, The Walking Dead (Ep. 1 & 2), Virtua Fighter 5 Final Showdown, Closure, Renegade OpsPS3PSN80Dungeon Defenders, NFL Blitz, Quantum Conundrum, Rochard, Anomaly: Warzone Earth, Joe Danger 2: The Movie, Mega Man 10, Mega Man 9, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, Starhawk, Hard Corps: Uprising,Guardians of Middle Earth, Sideway: New York, The Cave, Gotham City Imposters, Choplifter, PAYDAY: The Heist, Bloodrayne Betrayal, Labyrinth Legends, Zombie Apocalypse: Never Die Alone, Malicious....

I would say thats pretty "useful".

So why shouldn't we be allowed to have both?

 

[Dunlop]

EA Access in its first month far surpasses PS+ on PS4. Its near half the price and has far better games. Sony dont want the competition because the cant compete. Their offerings have been very poor.

They don't really have to compete as a good percentage I would imagine would stay with PS+ for the MP factor alone, plus it is a good service

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Oh no... we're not going to list wars are we? I guess it is about that time.

Haha my bad..

 

[TechnicPuppet]

I've gotten *plenty* of value out of PS+, even if it's been a little softer lately. I'm someone who'd potentially sign up for both, assuming the back catalogs were strong. Their sports focus is something that adds nothing for me, though.

$5 a month each for PS+ and EA Access would legitimately provide more games than I have time to play in the free time I have. $10 a month is cheaper than a lot of entertainment out there.

I have both as well but Stick it to the Man apart the PS+ games have been terrible, to my tastes obviously. This month they really just seem to be not giving a damn what anyone thinks. Not even trying.

 

[Captain Tuttle]

And on paper, it does seem like a great service. But a 2016 service. Not a 2014 service.

PS+ started the same way, it really wasn't that great at all.

 

[coldone]

So why shouldn't we be allowed to have both?

This is the smart consumer.

 

[Synth]

Sure, but an $80 EA game that lots of people would buy? They get their big cut of it and on the DLC sales, plus the customer support angle goes away. They'd have a harder time choosing to stop it than this multiple layers of subscription stuff EA started with.

If Sony saw it for what it was, I think it'd be an easy choice for them. EA needs to sell games too, and Sony knows this. They're not about to pull the next Battlefield game because Sony wouldn't let them cram it full of Origin.

I didn't say it will be the decisive factor, while I do believe it will be a big one. I think the reason why it won't work is because it's EA and they will cock it up somehow. One thing I don't understand is how can you come to the conclusion that most ps4 users would want this because of the size of the user base.

It's actually a life saver, because we'd all be up shits creek without a paddle if sony allowed EA to do their thing.

And I didn't say most. I said many.

I actually think Sony will let EA do their thing if they don't see success with PSNow (which from a 'value' perspective, currently looks HORRIBLE when compared). I don't think PS+ is the problem, as they'll always have the MP to hold people to that. I'm confident that the differentiating factor here is that Sony bought Gaikai and MS didn't, so MS doesn't really care and Sony very much does.

if they really wanted to they would make it happen. games are delivered to stores and just sit there for few days waiting for the release date before staff can put them on shelves. i aint buying this bs excuse

You don't just magically change shipment dates. Why don't they have it in stores the day the game goes gold? There's shit that takes time before the game is ready for full release. Things that digital is largely immune to, but has to follow anyway in order not to step on retailers toes. Offering early access via a subscription is mostly harmless. Selling the game early before retailers have a chance to sell it, is a surefire way to get Saturn'd/Beyonce'd,

 

[infiniteheteroskdasticity]

Sony did the smart thing. The big problem with this is if it takes off and other pubs do the same thing, GWG and IGC would only be left with smaller games and first party titles. Sony's just looking out for themselves. Their calculation is that by not supporting this effort, they will derail its adoption by other publishers.

EA has already tried this with a few sports titles on the 360 and PS3. It only becomes interesting from a business point of view if they extend it to new games. I've always felt the logical outcome for sports games especially, and maybe annualized FPS mega franchises and sim racers is for them to go full on service. Paying a fixed annual subscription to always access a constantly updated game makes a lot of sense. Doing it for older EA titles seems very meh.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

They don't really have to compete as a good percentage I would imagine would stay with PS+ for the MP factor alone, plus it is a good service

So why block it?

 

[LookAtMeGo]

So why shouldn't we be allowed to have both?

Never said we shouldn't.