That's what I was thinking: EA does this, then Ubisoft wants to do it, then even smaller third parties want to do it, and eventually only a few smaller companies and indie devs are left offering PS+ games.
Sony's response to EA Access Subscription plan
- Thread starter RexNovis
- Start date
- Status
So they take 50% less money because Sony doesnt want their access subscription?
haha you must be trolling
Dragonborn
Member
Probably even more since the X1 is dead outside NA/UK. They'd be horribly limiting themselves which is why it'd never happen.
.
It's a ploy. They're offering old games right before their sequels' release dates and bullshit excuses for price cuts so they can sell DLC and microtransactions.
Not to mention if this shit goes down then there will be a fucking stupid amount of subscriptions from Ubisoft, Activision, 2K, Warner Bros, Bethesda, Square Enix, id, Gearbox. You name it, a company will have their version of Access. It's not healthy for the industry, it's exploiting consumers by making something look like it has value when it doesn't.
OsirisBlack
Banned
This seems to be leading us off in a very dangerous direction. How long before we have to pay for a subscription to get exclusive or even mandatory content? I can see it now New multiplayer maps for StarWars Battlefront available only on EA access or how about ...Mass Effect Next not sold in stores only available on EA access? Yea I see this going horribly wrong for gamers and very easily.
Goodacre0081
Member
exactly what I said. MS wont invest nearly as much money into GWG now. I find it funny they finally get a proper answer to PS+ and this other service comes along to muddy the waters.
TrickyDaddy
Banned
No. Hell, EA can just make their own system and have their games as exclusives. They'll be just fine. 3rd party games are the major sellers for the systems nowadays.
Either way, this is such a great deal for X1 gamers. I'm very surprised seeing this coming from EA. It'll be very interesting to see how well this does for EA. If it succeeds, other publishers will jump in as well. I'm quite excited.
The (well thought out) reasons in that post still don't resolve the fact that the PS+ subscription gaming service is a success and gamers love it because it provides value for $$$.
There is no reason why a similar EA subscription service couldn't provide the same value to a subset of gamers. Not offering it simply removes the choice from the customer in favor of Sony's own subscription based service.
Worrying about a future where subscription based gaming is common is kinda silly because (1) it's already upon us with PS+ and GWG, and (2) the vast majority of gamers have embraced it.
joecanada
Member
joke post? joke post.
Dragonborn
Member
Sure, but you don't seem to realize how expensive that'd be and again, they'd loose their exclusive sports licenses. It'd kill EA. You're overestimating their importance.
Miles Quaritch
Member
It's not a matter of making games exclusive to Access. It's a matter of applying pressure to Sony to force them to allow the service on their platform and there are a number of ways to do that. They can make the Xbox version of games more appealing through added content, they can limit certain features to Xbox, they can support the Xbox version more. All of this puts pressure on Sony as it makes the games seem inferior and lacking in support.
This is all a what if Access is roaring success scenario and with the way EA have priced Access, I wouldn't be surprised if it does go on to become pretty successful.
You say that as if protectionism isn't already at the very heart of business model for these kind of services. Like we didn't already have total segregation between XBL and PSN.
The "choice" here is the same as it has ever been. Pick a platform. Or don't and buy them all because gamer street cred >>>> having money.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Weren't these guys all about giving gamers the choice? 
Seems more like they're viewing it as a competitive threat to their own services rather than as a way to further improve their platform, which it absolutely would be. PlayStation 4 owners would be able to make a choice on whether or not they want access to those vault games or deals. Seems pretty silly to not even offer it up as a choice.
I'm also super surprised they issued this type of response to it. I can get responding, but not really like this.
Seems more like they're viewing it as a competitive threat to their own services rather than as a way to further improve their platform, which it absolutely would be. PlayStation 4 owners would be able to make a choice on whether or not they want access to those vault games or deals. Seems pretty silly to not even offer it up as a choice.
I'm also super surprised they issued this type of response to it. I can get responding, but not really like this.
Jest Chillin
Member
I wasn't trying to invalidate that you're getting 4 games and early access to a game for 4 dollars. I was pointing out the one aspect of your post that was, at best, an overestimation of early access privileges and then used the rest of the post to talk about the primary goal of EA's subscription program. That's all.
the bolded? you can't be serious
TrickyDaddy
Banned
No. They would still keep their license. Big publishers have the upper hand when it comes to dominating software markets.
I have a job, I don't need a discount, a discount is not going to win me over into supporting EA. . I won't even run games that require Orgin because I think Orgin is horrendous.
Lmao do you realize how much it takes to go into thr console hardware business
I wasn't defending it, was just simply giving you the information
HighResTomato
Member
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Something also just hit me. I guess EA is using Microsoft's datacenters and resources to host this service? The vault games download straight from Xbox Live, do they not?
TrickyDaddy
Banned
I'm dead serious. Compare EA games with Sony exclusives.
Sony is not Nintendo, champ.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
It would hurt EA just as much if not more. The PS4 isn't the Dreamcast.
Jest Chillin
Member
The bold is not a viable option at all. It's incredibly expensive to design and develop a system and EA would then need other third party publishers to develop games for that fledgling system, which is added expense to those publishers for an unknown gain. The Wii U is a system for an established console maker and a lot of publishers hesitated taking on the cost of making games for it because they were unsure if it's install base would be worth the effort. An EA console would be an even larger risk.
"the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect" from subscription services must be taking formerly free things (multiplayer) and making them require a subscription.
EA is taking a formerly not free thing and making it an optional subscription. Yeah, I can see how that'd confuse PlayStation customers.
Dragonborn
Member
No, I'm pretty sure a stipulation of some of their sports license (like Madden) is that they can't be exclusive
Yeah, I see where its all going. I tolerate PSN mainly for the "free" games but once other publishers start trying this BS forget it. I'll quit console gaming if it gets to be the standard way of practice.
you seem to underestimate what all is involved with getting into the hardware business
Would it be stupid? Something as small as 1 day exclusivity to that would make many big Mass Effect fans sign up to the service and wouldn't really greatly impact sales IMO.
They're also not any of the other companies EA has slighted for not playing ball with them. Doesn't make the statement less true.
They likely won't succeed taking on Sony, but I'll be damned if they won't try.
TrickyDaddy
Banned
And you seem to underestimate 3rd party sales dominating the market.
And again, people assumes that this service will keep EA/Ubi/whatever games out of PS+. Not gonna happen. It doesn't make sense. PS+ is tied to the online fee, so the userbase is always going to be huge compared to EA Access one. If you can make a big profit offering your games in a service like that, why would you stop doing it?
I feel it would still fly off of shelves on top of giving EA more money via EA Access subs. Something as small as even one day would be big for hardcore fans. Other people (and obviously PS4 users) would get still get it for $60 on the shelf.
I'm not
rokkerkory
Member
Good grief with all this speculation lol
Perhaps this is direct competition vs PS+ have you guys thought of that? That's why Sony didn't opt in.
Perhaps this is direct competition vs PS+ have you guys thought of that? That's why Sony didn't opt in.
PS4 is not like the Wii U, it has more than 2% marketshare.
If they ignore Sony they cut their own revenue by atleast 50% might want to ask Shareholders how they feel about this.
funkystudent
Member
My take.
PlayStation Plus has been good to Sony and they dont want to fix what isnt broken.
EA isnt a big contributor to the PS+ offers anyway so even if EA cut PS+ off it wont be a big loss for Sony.
MS had to be dragged kicking and screaming to match the Instant Game Collection and so far have been half assing it. MS and EA being MS and EA came up with a solution that is more friendly to big publishers.
Sony will have this on PSN eventually.
Ubisoft will copy it within 6 months.
PlayStation Plus has been good to Sony and they dont want to fix what isnt broken.
EA isnt a big contributor to the PS+ offers anyway so even if EA cut PS+ off it wont be a big loss for Sony.
MS had to be dragged kicking and screaming to match the Instant Game Collection and so far have been half assing it. MS and EA being MS and EA came up with a solution that is more friendly to big publishers.
Sony will have this on PSN eventually.
Ubisoft will copy it within 6 months.
Chobel
Member
I'm only discussing the part about "ME trilogy exclusive to EA access".
TrickyDaddy
Banned
No, their license agreement doesn't rely on which platforms EA will be making their software for or not.
The publisher pays the NFL for everything related to the league's branding and its 32 teams, and has a separate deal with the NFL Players Association under which the names and likenesses of real NFL players appear in Madden.
Refresh my memory.
The Wii-U bombing cost EA dearly. Dropping the platform like a hot rock was a business move. Nothing more.
The PS4 is currently expected to be the market leader of the generation. There is money to be had on the platform, lots of it.
These aren't decisions made on "who wants to kill this company" or "I really hate that company, let's fuck them over". These are numbers speaking, and it's why they won't abandon the PS4 anytime soon.
figadapaura
Member
I don't really see the value either, so I'm glad Sony didn't bother with it. PS+ is enough.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Well that will never happen and I'm surprised anyone would claim as much.
I could see a scenario where MS gets exclusive content if Access is a success and Sony still refuse to allow it on the PS4.
Jest Chillin
Member
EA's titles do not carry enough weight for enough consumers to buy a console JUST for those titles. EA would then become a first party and then THEY would need 3rd Party support just as much as Xbox and PS do. It would cost these 3rd Party Publishers even MORE money to publish on that console because then they're making each game for Xbox, PS, possibly Nintendo, AND then EA. This means more employees and more time spent making games. That's a LOT of cash for publishers to spend on a console that may not even be bought by enough people to justify the price of making the game.
You're really not thinking this through at all.
He isnt
Your not realizing how much of a money sink it takes to get in the console business. Were talking bout a billion dollar investment, EA arent that loaded
Miles Quaritch
Member
This argument reminds of the 'Wii is the market leader' there's lots of money to be had on the platform. Lots. Developers won't abandon the Wii. They just won't.
- Status