There aren't many, there are some I've seen point to this as pro-consumer but those posts are so outlandish they were rightly ridiculed, so not sure really unless you're responding to a specific post what the point of creating a fictional scenario is.
Sony's response to EA Access Subscription plan
- Thread starter RexNovis
- Start date
- Status
There aren't many, there are some I've seen point to this as pro-consumer but those posts are so outlandish they were rightly ridiculed, so not sure really unless you're responding to a specific post what the point of creating a fictional scenario is.
Admiral Woofington
Member
This. Notice how when one company does something popular and others see a way to do it as well it will usually happen. Didn't Activision start the trend for dlc season passes?
Options would be nice if it didn't smell of possible future issues.
JetBlackPanda
Member
How many xbones has Microsoft sold?
There you go.
This is the same reason PS+ came about.
I'm wondering if it will pay out a different way
With Sony putting their foot down, as long as they stick to their decision, EA is stuck with all these games they want to sell on a subscription service but they can't get access to Sony players the way they can MS players. As a result... what will they do?
Maybe since EA access subscription will not be an offering on Sony Platforms that instead EA will double down on PS+ and release a subset of those games there instead since that is their only avenue to get these dollars from Sony players. Outside of full-priced game sales, but that's not their goal here.
That's what I hope happens, anyway.
Very stupid move from Sony. Now gamers are gonna go out and pay a lot of money for BF4, Peggle, Madden, Fifa when instead they could of had those games for pennies on the dollar. Its anti-consumer. You shouldn't need a corporation to hold your hand in telling you how to spend your money.
Also I see console gamers flip flopping a lot. Always complained about expensive pricing for digital games and now when they are offered them much cheaper with a service like this. they quickly change their mind and decide they don't want cheaper games lol smh.
Also I see console gamers flip flopping a lot. Always complained about expensive pricing for digital games and now when they are offered them much cheaper with a service like this. they quickly change their mind and decide they don't want cheaper games lol smh.
You weren't the one who I asked but the question still applies since you are using the same logic. If Sony isn't looking out for you by keeping EA's sub system out is Microsoft looking out for you by offering it?
Do you think MS has a history of offering consumers a better value than Sony?
You said it. The juvenile "good guy, bad guy" logic in here is laughable.
SolidSnakeUS
Member
This is how I feel. One subscription, that's all.
Plus, really outside of NHL, Battlefront (would get on PC) and Mirror's Edge (would get on PC), they have nothing else I give a crap about. NHL would be the only console game and I know who I'm going to play with.
And with PS+, you still get an absolutely crazy amount of games for 3 systems (2 games for each) each month.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
The difference being MS are in a pretty desperate situation and are trying anything they can to get some sales momentum for their flagging console (compared to PS4).
This EA subs service isn't going to do anything for them.
I personally wouldn't go near anything from EA. I don't like their games, I don't like the company.
AusRoachman
Member
Exactly, plus monthly bills, monthly transport smart riders, monthly magazine subscriptions, tv subscriptions e.t.c e.t.c , how can our minds handle the chaos.
Description
Member
Just because PS is not allowing the EA Access service on their console is not mutually exclusive from EA/Ubi/Whoever from requiring a subscription model on their services.
They could easily have a secondary subscription- when logging into a game you must log into their service (Origin, Uplay, etc.) to allow you to download exclusive content, or play online, etc.
So I don't see why this service for downloading old games, or getting special discounts, etc. would make all of this come into fruition.
They could easily have a secondary subscription- when logging into a game you must log into their service (Origin, Uplay, etc.) to allow you to download exclusive content, or play online, etc.
So I don't see why this service for downloading old games, or getting special discounts, etc. would make all of this come into fruition.
Track record was my point. All these companies have them and they swing both ways, according to profits. The only person looking out for you as a consumer is you. Not rocket science. Wish people could look for meaning of post, instead of friend enemy signal after first few sentences.
Its amazing how every single post of yours is nothing but console wars. If this EA thing was a Sony only thing you would absolutely LOVE it.
Yes, but people still don't ALL buy dlc or use microtransactions. When games are overly DLC-laden or microtransaction heavy, people don't buy into that so easily. See every free to play that does microtransactions poorly. I don't like dlc or microtransaction and rarely purchase them, but if they are done right I happily do. If devs/pubs don't do it right, again their loss, they lose my sale
But you pay for Netflix or whatever. Those aren't negotiated into the cost if PSN+.
I think EA should be allowed to do and charge whatever they want. The customer will soon decide if it's worth it.
CronosBlade
Member
So, not for you?
Just checked Gamestop, 9 months after release used:
Battlefield and Madden are 27 each. FIFA is 45. So basically 100 bucks to walk out with those today. And yes, you might find them cheaper via eBay or Amazon, just using this in this example.
I'm playing them for 30. They can remove them if they want, chances of me playing them months from now are low. For me the first year investment was an easy choice. We'll see if they earn my second year.
Yea, very reactionary move lol. They shouldn't even of responded.
Maybe? Doesn't all depend on the value of those? Do you think that all these producers will stop selling games?
Sure! Heck, why not rope in Netflix, Hulu, HBO and Amazon into PS Plus! We can chuck in a few unicorns and then we will have the ultimate consumer-best scenario.
jts
...hate me...
No but Sony addressed this by saying that it doesn't believe this service brings the value expected by their consumers. And yet they don't oppose to other terrible value proposals, such as the PS Now service, in behalf of those consumers.
Basically, we always get PR talk from companies, of course. But it's all about how easily that PR talk can be dismounted.
edit- also responds to this:
Are you asking what the reaction on here will be, or what EA Access will entail (which still seems to be murky)?
Again, as I stated on the last page, implying that hypocrisy about some other topic means they're wrong in this case doesn't work. Hypocrisy doesn't mean they're wrong, it means they're inconsistent, and like everything, including people and companies, they're going to be hypocritical about some things. That's not even mentioning the fact that a. PS Now hasn't come out and b. the value of the service is entirely subjective. All you're doing is deflecting the topic onto PS Now bashing which no one is really defending nor caring about in this topic.
It's hilarious how they have to resort to sticking PS Now in their argument when there is nothing set in stone about the service and Sony is still adjusting the prices during beta.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Sony made the right call here.
Btw for all of you scared that EA is going to hide game modes behind the service or other things, that is not part of what EA has announced. This slippery slope nonsense is a red herring. Of course EA could end up doing these things...then we should cancel our accounts. But just being against something because perhaps in the future something else could happen based of this is stupid.
Numerous EA games have had discounts through plus subscriptions as well as being offered as full game trials (a feature on PS3 that will come to PS4). In addition some EA games have had discounts if pre-ordered through plus.
A 10% discount and 5 days early? Ok maybe you like that, but would you pay simply for having 5 days early? Many stores offer as much as a $10 discount on pre-ordered games, especially sports games, no subscription needed. Bestbuy right now, $10 reward for pre-ordering Madden 15, $4 more than the discounted subscription paid discount.
fastballspecial
Member
Sony made the decision I would have made anyway. Nice work!
If EA's thing was going to include new releases (lol) then I'd be on board. Buuuut...
If EA's thing was going to include new releases (lol) then I'd be on board. Buuuut...
No I just want the maximum amount of choice to look out for myself is the point. I dont see a friend or enemy with these companies.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
Meaning of post? I think we know companies are doing what helps their bottom line. All the rest of what you were saying doesn't pertain to this discussion. Firmware, controller defects, what? This is about the proposed "value" that Sony vs Customer seem to have a different opinion on.
shanafan
Member
What are your thoughts on games offered with PS+ then?
Hate to say it, but this is ONE decision that I'm pleased Sony decided not to go further with. Having more people subscribe to PS Plus means better games for PS Plus members. It's as simple as that.
EA was not happy with PS Plus and XB Gold services eating into their profits, particularly where Sony and Microsoft were in 100% complete control of the deal and this is their offering. EA know they will never have as much variety to offer as Sony or Microsoft and have reduced their price accordingly to $30 a year. If they were really confident about their offering and were going to offer great games they would have upped it to the same price as PS Plus and XB Live gold because there's nothing for them to lose. If you're a business you don't halve your potential income unless your product is inferior. If you're competing on price it means your product is not as good. It's as simple as that. I'll hold further judgement until its been out for longer, but i remain sceptical because of how they have priced it and what they have offered so far.
Also I'm not Anti EA, just trying to be as honest as possible with the information released so far.
EA was not happy with PS Plus and XB Gold services eating into their profits, particularly where Sony and Microsoft were in 100% complete control of the deal and this is their offering. EA know they will never have as much variety to offer as Sony or Microsoft and have reduced their price accordingly to $30 a year. If they were really confident about their offering and were going to offer great games they would have upped it to the same price as PS Plus and XB Live gold because there's nothing for them to lose. If you're a business you don't halve your potential income unless your product is inferior. If you're competing on price it means your product is not as good. It's as simple as that. I'll hold further judgement until its been out for longer, but i remain sceptical because of how they have priced it and what they have offered so far.
Also I'm not Anti EA, just trying to be as honest as possible with the information released so far.
Some people might realize they overreacted or jumped to conclusions. Thats my guess. I feel they will allow it someday since Im sure people will pay for EA access
To play devil's advocate here, just because the service has no track record, they don't deserve a chance do do it right? Not saying they would, but this makes it sound like Sony is damning it as a scam before it even has a change to prove itself worthwhile and attract gamers to the platform. Is this any more offensive than CoD and battlefield premium subscription models?
Chobel
Member
The former.
wumster3000
Member
This is complete bullshit. Why not give us the choice to decide. I was hoping that this would come to the PS4 because I love the idea and I wanted to make it my sports gaming console.
I have just subscribed to this service on Xbox One because of this and I just downloaded Fifa, BF and Madden. I get $5 off of all EA digital purchases, as I am all digital. I get early access to games. What the fuck is wrong with this service? Are you kidding me.
This is a dumb move that will cost them a little. PS Now has an absolutely horrid pricing scheme that a lot of people have expressed their displeasure for.
"For The Gamers" my ass.
I have just subscribed to this service on Xbox One because of this and I just downloaded Fifa, BF and Madden. I get $5 off of all EA digital purchases, as I am all digital. I get early access to games. What the fuck is wrong with this service? Are you kidding me.
This is a dumb move that will cost them a little. PS Now has an absolutely horrid pricing scheme that a lot of people have expressed their displeasure for.
"For The Gamers" my ass.
Admiral Woofington
Member
Then people accept it, move on and hope that it doesn't start a trend of everybody offering their own deals which would remove value from plus as a whole.
Yes, Sony didn't take my freedom of choice. Every product has compromises and features. It's up for me to decide if that sums up to a good value for the asking price. Just as a personal anecdote I haven't bought a PS4 yet. It didn't reached yet the point where the asking price meets my perceived value. It's my choice, not Sony's, right from the beginning.
Not going to happen unless sony doubles, triples or even more the price of PS+. If they make deal with that means they have to make same deals with all the other big publishers. I rather have these things separate since I can choose if I want them or not. Not being forced into them because I need PS+ to play diablo 3 online.
SEGAvangelist
Member
This really is a bummer for PS4 owners. It seems like an awesome service. I wonder if Sony will block similar things down the road.
Kssio_Aug
Member
That would hardly happens I believe. I mean, exclusive contents like "early access" are actually ok in my opinion, but such a thing as play online would only hurt themselves. I wouldnt pay a subscription to play any particular brand their online content, and I believe many gamers or casual gamers wouldnt either, and that way the publisher would just hurt their own sales (and I dont think the subscribers would make up for it alone).
But the subscription can be a good deal for those players who actually like that publisher games overall to use their benefits (but in other hand that same player would hardly pay multiples publishers subscriptions).
I dont believe on that story that Sony's making a decision for you because you dont know what is best for you yet. And I find it hard to believe that publishers subscriptions will destroy the market and restrict non subscribers, once that seems way too risky imo. I believe that Sony is just protecting their services, and besides Im not in favor with it, Im not particullary mad either.
well, its business, and there is a (profitable) meaning trying to accomplish that.
what you should be caring about, is if this proposal makes sense to you, and your playing and spending habits.
its an option you have, so if it makes sense for you, use it.
if you can get the games you want through used channels or else in a better price or in a more agreeable manner, by all means you should go for that.
but one company trying to gain back some profits of their products that somebody else is taking (used games), I dont condemn it if it is not unethical, breaking the law in a way I care about, or if I see that it does not harm my interests.
in this case, I may think that for many people, this is an interesting proposal.
me, I already subscribed for a year, and keeping an eye to where this one goes..
It has to happen if we want games to continue escalating in production value while the console market stagnates in size.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Willy Wanka
my god this avatar owns
And you failed to do so. Congratulations.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
I'm assuming they would, if you didn't have to pay separately for it. However EA can just say no too.
I'm not arguing that there isn't value there at all, just that the value they're offering isn't incentive enough for me to be okay with the potential for a slippery slope to a future of subscriptions for every major publisher.
If you were interested in battlefield, madden, or FIFA, you would've bought them buy now. Don't make it act like people were dying for games over 9 months old that they refused to buy new and now they're so happy they get them for this cheap.
EA wants people to buy digital, so they offer games no one are buying anymore to make it look like they're giving you a deal for the right to buy digital games to increase their profits.
- Status