• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sony's response to EA Access Subscription plan

Status
Not open for further replies.

coldone

Member
We in Europe will get Crysis 3, An EA published game.

EA Service is starting on Xbone. We never got a AAA title on PS4 so far in NA. I wont complain, if Sony can give FIFA or Madden on PS+.

Neither they will make NFL games, nor they would let me get it cheaply directly from EA. Sony is acting like idiot.

Sony instead of acting like a big brother, can do one of the three.
- Make FIFA/NFL games and give it for $30/yr
- or Get it from EA sports and give it part of PS+
- or Let EA sell their $30/yr service to me

They are going to do nothing and make me waste my money.
 
That makes sense, but only if "people" share your (and no doubt my) definition of bad. They don't.

Actually there seem to be a lot of people suggesting options are always better or that it will fail if it isn't good and go away. Perhaps I can illustrate why this isn't necessarily the case:

The tale begins with a man called George. He is just an ordinary man in a sleepy village somewhere in the Northern region of France. There isn't much to say about George, he is a good man, who loves eating all kinds of fruit and leads a peaceful existence.
The town too is unremarkable except for one astonishing detail. Every week members of the village (and only members of the village mind you!), go into the town square to get their share of the profits from the local fruit growers.
George enjoys this system. Each week he goes up to his friend Sonya and gets $100 in his hand. With this money he can buy all the fruit he wants, as well as other goods and services. Basically anything he needs and some things that he doesn't, should he choose to do so. George is particularly fond of apples, but sometimes buys pears, oranges and even the occasional strawberry.
"Life," thought George, "is good."

But one day, without warning or consultation everything changed. George appeared at the same place and at the same time to get his $100. But now? There was another man there called Ed.
"Hold on there!" Ed cried as George prepared to take his usual $100. "I'm from the apple farm and the Mayor has authorised me to offer a choice. You can take the $100 from Sonya, or you can take $80 from me and this shiny new apple!"
George was shocked by this. Apples cost much less than $20, so why on earth would he take this deal? There was no value in it and he certainly didn't want other fruit sellers getting similar ideas. So he simply shook his head politely (laughing at such a bad deal was not something George would do), took his $100 as usual and turned to go home.
But there was a problem. Just as he was leaving he saw his friend Mike walk up to Ed, the seemingly dodgy apple representative. Then, inexplicably he reached out his hand and took the $80 and asked for his apple too.
George had to confront him about this. "Why did you take that deal?" He asked in a confused manner.
"I don't know, I just like the choice and I spend my money on apples anyway...so what is the big deal?"
George didn't know what to say. He also didn't know what to say the next few weeks as more and more people appeared to be taking up the other deal. It wasn't a big problem for him, because he still got his $100 and could buy several apples with the extra profits, but it somehow gave him chills. George was a wise man and he could see that it was not going to end well.

When he appeared one morning to see another provider offering $75 and two pears, he knew things were about to get very bad indeed. Sure pear lovers were ecstatic, for some reason that George still failed to understand, but collecting the weekly share of the profits was now a confusing ordeal.
"Oh well," sighed George, a little too loudly. "People can be stupid if they want. Morning Sonya, $100 please!"
"Here you go George! I'm glad you still come to me. I don't understand why anybody would take those other deals, they are terrible!"
George nodded. "I'm with you. Oh well, I'm off to buy about 10 apples with my extra $20!" He ended with a conspiratorial wink.
"Oh I'm sorry!" Ed cut in, offensively listening in on the conversation. "Apples can now only be received through my deal. But don't worry, with the $65 I give you, I also now include two Apples!"
"Wasn't it $80?" George asked in shock.
"Yes it was!" Grinned Ed, holding a number of apples close to his chest.

The weeks passed and George lived without apples, stubbornly refusing to take the now terrible deal. Unfortunately the other fruit vendors soon followed Ed's lead, holding their own tasty delights to ransom as they held on to more and more of the profits.
Then it finally happened. George, now an alcoholic, appeared one final time to receive his usual $100. But Sonya wasn't there, she was now selling insurance in another town. Through no fault of his own, the usual and best option had been removed.
Almost crying, George walked up to Ed and asked for his usual deal. Ed smiled knowingly and handed George $65.
George was in tears now. "But, but...where are the apples?"
"Oh you'll get some apples," Ed laughed, "but only after 10 weeks in a row of taking my deal. But don't worry, you then get three of them, which is amazing value!"

The following week, George left town, swore to never eat fruit again and started a semi-successful shop selling odd socks. Sometimes he would wonder "where did it all go wrong? What could I have done?" There was no good answer, there was nothing he could have done. All he had now was socks.

Perfect.
 

Alienous

Member
Caving in? Caving in to what? To accepting a fee for allowing its product on a service? Caving in to perform a normal course of business evaluation and agreement?

Caving in in essentially sending the message that their service isn't better than Sony's. They would be separate from Xbox's subscription offerings, but tied to Sony's. That wouldn't be good for business. Microsoft would probably also want EA games as part of XBL offerings, then EA would be at square one.

A business has to be fairly stern.
 

KiraXD

Member
What does EA have that can possibly be worth the cost? like... for someone who doesnt like sports/racing/FPS... they have... Dragon Age (will that even be included in this thing?) seriously who cares its not on PlayStation... EA doesnt have very much to offer right now anyway....
 

Synth

Member
Great way to describe the outcome of certain options and the possible negative effects they can have on us as consumers... also loved the ending! lol

Yea, the only problem with it is that in this story he could take that $20 and get the apples on top of everything else he was used to. So, if you'd like to tell me how I can digitally rent BF4 on PS4 whilst coming out financially ahead of what EA just offered me, then I'll agree that my choice makes no sense.

Or should I just sit and wait for PS+ to stop giving me the indie of the month? We should be at Knack soon, I can feel it.
 
Of course there is. If giving a portion of consumers the choice of a new service means hampering an older service tens of millions already use, then offering such a choice could absolutely be seen as a negative or anti consumer. In this instance to the consumers already invested in PS+, who already get tent pole EA games from time to time, who presumably may no longer get them were this new service to come in to competing fruition.

You do realise here's nothing to stop EA launching this service and at the same time refuse to release games on Plus?
 

EdgeXL

Member
But this is one of several publishers doing this on top of PS+. And it conflicts with PS+. Why sell Sony rights to a decent old game that would draw in subscribers? Now they've got to give their access customers those games and it is more important than giving Sony more PS+ subscribers.

You description of access is what PS+ is for, but Access is one publisher conflicting with it. What if they all were allowed to do this on top of PS+? They'd all put their subscribtion titles as a priority over the + deals.

Then Sony would have to compete to make Plus as attractive as their subscription offers. Maybe it is the PC gamer in me talking but I am okay with companies having to work harder to earn my dollar. I can see why Sony wouldn't want to have to work harder though.

I'd cancel my Plus subscription in a heartbeat if I felt the value wasn't there. I'd renew it if Sony did something to make Plus valuable again in my eyes.
 

Navy Bean

Member
pretty much this, I have all the free rentals for PS+ on my PS3/PS4 and don't really play any of them recently. The value is fine if the games interest people, but I have no choice in what is offered. For me PS+ is pretty much for some sales and MP

Fifa 14 and Madden would have more value to me just in the playtime they would get from my kids and I would happily plunk down the $30 for the trials and rebates
I know people hate EA, but imagine this service on the 360 right now. There would be a metric shit-ton of enjoyable games to choose from.

Hopefully they get there with the Xbox1.
 

Dunlop

Member
What does EA have that can possibly be worth the cost? like... for someone who doesnt like sports/racing/FPS... they have... Dragon Age (will that even be included in this thing?) seriously who cares its not on PlayStation... EA doesnt have very much to offer right now anyway....
And being optional you would not buy the service
 
Maybe they will give you the possibility to play games in concept stage. Cause there is no way in hell EA has any games ready to add for the next 6 months. They already release games in beta stage next up concept stage.
 
They will put dlc and other stuff behind their pay wall.

So if I would want a full game, I would have pre order at a certain store, get the collectors edition which costs more and subscribe to the publishers service for exclusive content. Yeah, that's the future I want.

Remember Watchdogs and all its versions? It will get worse.
They will? How do you know this? I mean, we don't know where this subscription service is going since it just came out.
 

coldone

Member
What does EA have that can possibly be worth the cost? like... for someone who doesnt like sports/racing/FPS... they have... Dragon Age (will that even be included in this thing?) seriously who cares its not on PlayStation... EA doesnt have very much to offer right now anyway....

FIFA outsells any other game Sony has made year after year other than GT5(which is a racing game). There are more consumers who play games like Madden, FIFA, Need for speed, BF4 than games like Motorstorm, Resistance etc.

Let the consumer choose. If some one wants it, let them get it for cheap from EA. I dont understand why Sony has to decide what is best for me ?. Even If I am the minority, when it comes to gaming taste ?
 

jem0208

Member
10% off the already inflated digital prices and month of free games that otherwise could have been made available thorugh ps+/xbl so i ask u again what is the point of this service?

Right, here's my example:

- Brand new, $60 EA game comes out this month.
- You sub to EA Access for $5
- You get 10% off of the brand new game, hence you pay $54.
- Add on the sub fee and you pay a total of $59
- Get the game for $1 cheaper than you would have paid, and get a month of free games.


What's bad about this?
 
Exactly! I'd much rather pick and chose which subs I have, rather than just have something like PS+ where I'm basically stuck with indie games that I'll never play month on month.

lol no you're content to go around trying to take shots in PS+ threads. You don't actually seem to have ever actually experienced PS+ (or taken the time to acquaint yourself with the facts) if you think it's all indie games.

I think Sony should have gone ahead and let EA do this, I just find it incredibly hilarious you're trying to go around here acting like you're objective about this situation as opposed to caring more the system it is and isn't on.
 
What does EA have that can possibly be worth the cost? like... for someone who doesnt like sports/racing/FPS... they have... Dragon Age (will that even be included in this thing?) seriously who cares its not on PlayStation... EA doesnt have very much to offer right now anyway....

That's 3 pretty popular genres you mention there.
 

DOWN

Banned
Then Sony would have to compete to make Plus as attractive as their subscription offers. Maybe it is the PC gamer in me talking but I am okay with companies having to work harder to earn my dollar. I can see why Sony wouldn't want to have to work harder though.

I'd cancel my Plus subscription in a heartbeat if I felt the value wasn't there. I'd renew it if Sony did something to make Plus valuable again in my eyes.

That's my point. How do they compete? They need past EA titles to support PS+. That's why we got Dead Space 3 recently. How can they do this if EA keeps shoving things in their own vault? That just means Sony now is not allowed to offer as many EA titles via PS+ if Access needs more games. That's not good.

They'd just be stuck with worse titles from EA or paying more. Or worse titles and paying more to get games from companies that aren't EA.
 

Alienous

Member
That makes sense, but only if "people" share your (and no doubt my) definition of bad. They don't.

Actually there seem to be a lot of people suggesting options are always better or that it will fail if it isn't good and go away. Perhaps I can illustrate why this isn't necessarily the case:

I know you put a lot into that, but gosh is that a bad analogy.

1. Games don't grow on trees.
2. The street price of 'apples' hasn't changed. In movies and television, despite services like Netflix, DVD boxsets are available and haven't exponentially grown in price.
3. There's more than a single 'apple' distributor.
4. EA's service doesn't present undeniably bad value.
 
The biggest selling point for many will be the early access, or basically 5 day rental, of the sports games. As I've said countless times - this is nothing new and people have been paying EA for this service on Xbox 360 AND PS3 for the past 3 years.

they arnt offering early access, they are just delaying the retail launch. its like ms used to offer access to netflix as a selling point of xbl gold. just think about for a second. and how have x360/ps3 users been using this? please enlighten me
 

FleetFeet

Member
Yea, the only problem with it is that in this story he could take that $20 and get the apples on top of everything else he was used to. So, if you'd like to tell me how I can digitally rent BF4 on PS4 whilst coming out financially ahead of what EA just offered me, then I'll agree that my choice makes no sense.

Or should I just sit and wait for PS+ to stop giving me the indie of the month? We should be at Knack soon, I can feel it.

What you're missing is that sooner or later, once that line of thinking has permeated the consumer base, they can and will take the liberty to dictate their usual draconian stance against consumers. If that's worth $30 for BF4 now, then we have a dreary outlook ahead of us.

I'm not here to defend PS+... I wouldn't sub if MP wasn't locked behind it. And guess who we can ultimately thank for that (hint: not sony, even though I'm sure they are ecstatic that they can charge for MP and that they actually got a way with it scot free)?
 

Spades

Member
lol no you're content to go around trying to take shots in PS+ threads. You don't actually seem to have ever actually experienced PS+ (or taken the time to acquaint yourself with the facts) if you think it's all indie games.

I have a PS4 only and a PS+ sub. I've yet to get anything other than an Indie/PSN game from the service.
 

Spades

Member
they arnt offering early access, they are just delaying the retail launch. its like ms used to offer access to netflix as a selling point of xbl gold. just think about for a second. and how have x360/ps3 users been using this? please enlighten me

No they are not delaying the launch. They set a launch date, then give subscribers access to the game early. Just like they've been doing for the last 3 years with EA Season Ticket.
 

xAngelSerranox

Neo Member
I wish more companies follow suit. At $30 a year that means Ubisoft, Activision and EA games older titles for $7.50 a month.

The publishers make out well because they make money off titles that would have been purchased second hand where they see no income.

Customers would benefit because instead of buying a game used you have access to a broad catalog.

The only thing that could make this better is if PS+ and Xbox Gold then offered their catalog for members.
 

Liberty4all

Banned
That makes sense, but only if "people" share your (and no doubt my) definition of bad. They don't.

Actually there seem to be a lot of people suggesting options are always better or that it will fail if it isn't good and go away. Perhaps I can illustrate why this isn't necessarily the case:

The tale begins with a man called George. He is just an ordinary man in a sleepy village somewhere in the Northern region of France. There isn't much to say about George, he is a good man, who loves eating all kinds of fruit and leads a peaceful existence.
The town too is unremarkable except for one astonishing detail. Every week members of the village (and only members of the village mind you!), go into the town square to get their share of the profits from the local fruit growers.
George enjoys this system. Each week he goes up to his friend Sonya and gets $100 in his hand. With this money he can buy all the fruit he wants, as well as other goods and services. Basically anything he needs and some things that he doesn't, should he choose to do so. George is particularly fond of apples, but sometimes buys pears, oranges and even the occasional strawberry.
"Life," thought George, "is good."

But one day, without warning or consultation everything changed. George appeared at the same place and at the same time to get his $100. But now? There was another man there called Ed.
"Hold on there!" Ed cried as George prepared to take his usual $100. "I'm from the apple farm and the Mayor has authorised me to offer a choice. You can take the $100 from Sonya, or you can take $80 from me and this shiny new apple!"
George was shocked by this. Apples cost much less than $20, so why on earth would he take this deal? There was no value in it and he certainly didn't want other fruit sellers getting similar ideas. So he simply shook his head politely (laughing at such a bad deal was not something George would do), took his $100 as usual and turned to go home.
But there was a problem. Just as he was leaving he saw his friend Mike walk up to Ed, the seemingly dodgy apple representative. Then, inexplicably he reached out his hand and took the $80 and asked for his apple too.
George had to confront him about this. "Why did you take that deal?" He asked in a confused manner.
"I don't know, I just like the choice and I spend my money on apples anyway...so what is the big deal?"
George didn't know what to say. He also didn't know what to say the next few weeks as more and more people appeared to be taking up the other deal. It wasn't a big problem for him, because he still got his $100 and could buy several apples with the extra profits, but it somehow gave him chills. George was a wise man and he could see that it was not going to end well.

When he appeared one morning to see another provider offering $75 and two pears, he knew things were about to get very bad indeed. Sure pear lovers were ecstatic, for some reason that George still failed to understand, but collecting the weekly share of the profits was now a confusing ordeal.
"Oh well," sighed George, a little too loudly. "People can be stupid if they want. Morning Sonya, $100 please!"
"Here you go George! I'm glad you still come to me. I don't understand why anybody would take those other deals, they are terrible!"
George nodded. "I'm with you. Oh well, I'm off to buy about 10 apples with my extra $20!" He ended with a conspiratorial wink.
"Oh I'm sorry!" Ed cut in, offensively listening in on the conversation. "Apples can now only be received through my deal. But don't worry, with the $65 I give you, I also now include two Apples!"
"Wasn't it $80?" George asked in shock.
"Yes it was!" Grinned Ed, holding a number of apples close to his chest.

The weeks passed and George lived without apples, stubbornly refusing to take the now terrible deal. Unfortunately the other fruit vendors soon followed Ed's lead, holding their own tasty delights to ransom as they held on to more and more of the profits.
Then it finally happened. George, now an alcoholic, appeared one final time to receive his usual $100. But Sonya wasn't there, she was now selling insurance in another town. Through no fault of his own, the usual and best option had been removed.
Almost crying, George walked up to Ed and asked for his usual deal. Ed smiled knowingly and handed George $65.
George was in tears now. "But, but...where are the apples?"
"Oh you'll get some apples," Ed laughed, "but only after 10 weeks in a row of taking my deal. But don't worry, you then get three of them, which is amazing value!"

The following week, George left town, swore to never eat fruit again and started a semi-successful shop selling odd socks. Sometimes he would wonder "where did it all go wrong? What could I have done?" There was no good answer, there was nothing he could have done. All he had now was socks.

love it.
 
I have a PS4 only. I've yet to get anything other than an Indie game from the service.

That's an entirely different problem than a general problem with PS+. If you have a PS3 or PSV, you're getting, and have gotten great value. If you're on PS4, the unfortunate reality is that there's not enough stuff for them to give out yet.
 
What does EA have that can possibly be worth the cost? like... for someone who doesnt like sports/racing/FPS... they have... Dragon Age (will that even be included in this thing?) seriously who cares its not on PlayStation... EA doesnt have very much to offer right now anyway....

They do have the Star Wars license. Early Battlefront 3 will be mighty appealing to some people.
 

coldone

Member
they arnt offering early access, they are just delaying the retail launch. its like ms used to offer access to netflix as a selling point of xbl gold. just think about for a second. and how have x360/ps3 users been using this? please enlighten me

Here again.. same issue. Is Sony now the Guardian Knight of gaming world. They are going to go around fixing all the wrong doers. They for one sold Vita with a $100 memory card.

All I am saying is, Get out of my way. If I like EA's subscription I will buy. If I think they are ripping me off, I wont buy it. Sony doesnt have to tell me what I do with my money or protect me by blocking the service. I am an adult, it is my money, If I like EA.. I will give it to them.
 
It won't be a PS+ game anyway. It's doubtful that EA will just ok "Ok, you said no, here, have our games".

They would have no reason to say no. IIRC PS+ service actually pays the pub for each title downloaded so it is not as if they lose out versus their subscription service BUT if Sony had allowed EA service on the console they may turn down a PS+ offer simply to make their service look more attractive. If the service is not on the system then they would have no reason to turn it down.

The vast amount of popular retail titles offered by plus has been astounding over the years so I would rather them keep it up then to be sidetracked by another competing service.

Exactly! I'd much rather pick and chose which subs I have, rather than just have something like PS+ where I'm basically stuck with indie games that I'll never play month on month.

Since 2014 started across all consoles there have been 16 major retail releases available on PS+. If you are talking about PS4 only I can kinda see what you are saying if you are talking about the service as a whole, I am not sure how you reached that opinion.

or......

Or should I just sit and wait for PS+ to stop giving me the indie of the month? We should be at Knack soon, I can feel it.

.... maybe I should start paying attention to the posters themselves because I am seeing a theme being repeated.
 
And it's this line of thinking that we now have to deal with outrageous amounts of DLC...

Seriously, why would anyone not want to pay a pub for content that was normally apart of the initial transaction in previous generations... like take my money and stuff, please. /s
My line of thinking is making outrageous amounts of DLC? Really? First, you don't know what I buy and what my gaming habits are. And despite this ridiculous assumption of yours, I rarely buy DLC because I feel it is not worth my money.
 

xexon

Banned
So Sony thinks charging us prices to rent games on psnow that costs more than if we bought them on disc is good for the consumer but not this ea sub plan which I would definately buy on my ps4 isn't a good deal. Come one Sony.
 

FleetFeet

Member
What does EA have that can possibly be worth the cost? like... for someone who doesnt like sports/racing/FPS... they have... Dragon Age(will that even be included in this thing?) seriously who cares its not on PlayStation... EA doesnt have very much to offer right now anyway....

You'll get a short trial up to 5 days before release, presumably a 2 hour long trial?

So essentially a paid, early demo, which is basically what leaked just a short while ago... remember the 4.99 demos on the MS marketplace?
 

EdgeXL

Member
That's my point. How do they compete? They need past EA titles to support PS+. That's why we got Dead Space 3 recently. How can they do this if EA keeps shoving things in their own vault? That just means Sony now is not allowed to offer as many EA titles via PS+ if Access needs more games. That's not good.

They'd just be stuck with worse titles from EA or paying more. Or worse titles and paying more to get games from companies that aren't EA.

EA hasn't offered all that many games on Plus so no, I do not think Sony needs more EA games to support Plus. Like I said, I am okay with Sony working harder for my dollar. You prefer things the way they are now and that is fine too. I will simply enjoy Plus on PS4 and EA Access on Xbone.
 

Rurunaki

Member
The biggest selling point for many will be the early access, or basically 5 day rental, of the sports games. As I've said countless times - this is nothing new and people have been paying EA for this service on Xbox 360 AND PS3 for the past 3 years.

I'ts a 2 hour trial not 5 day.
 

FleetFeet

Member
My line of thinking is making outrageous amounts of DLC? Really? First, you don't know what I buy and what my gaming habits are. And despite this ridiculous assumption of yours, I rarely buy DLC because I feel it is not worth my money.


Well I'm not trying to single you out entirely, but that line I bolded... the idea of "Why can't I buy thing?" even if thing is going to poison the well.
 

Stare-Bear

Banned
They will? How do you know this? I mean, we don't know where this subscription service is going since it just came out.


Why wouldn't they? You want people to subscribe to your service? Lure them in with some BF dlc or 20 exclusive cars for NFS. They will and you know it. No one is that naive.
 

Liberty4all

Banned
Right, here's my example:

- Brand new, $60 EA game comes out this month.
- You sub to EA Access for $5
- You get 10% off of the brand new game, hence you pay $54.
- Add on the sub fee and you pay a total of $59
- Get the game for $1 cheaper than you would have paid, and get a month of free games.


What's bad about this?

When (not if) they start locking premium content behind their paywall. Extra levels, DLC, boosters, beta access, pre order bonuses, etc.

Sure you get a "brand new" game for 59 dollars. One you cannot sell or trade when finished with it.

I'm actually not against the rental part of the service. It's just that I 100 percent believe they will lock content behind their paywall to entice people to subscribe. I also think that the ecosystem I currently pay for (PS+) will suffer as a result of the publisher holding content for their own ecosystem. Fragmentation is bad for everybody.
 

Gartooth

Member
Then Sony would have to compete to make Plus as attractive as their subscription offers. Maybe it is the PC gamer in me talking but I am okay with companies having to work harder to earn my dollar. I can see why Sony wouldn't want to have to work harder though.

I'd cancel my Plus subscription in a heartbeat if I felt the value wasn't there. I'd renew it if Sony did something to make Plus valuable again in my eyes.

Competition with EA Access won't cause Sony to be more competitive with Plus when they're the only service on the console with online multiplayer.
 

BriGuy

Member
Right, here's my example:

- Brand new, $60 EA game comes out this month.
- You sub to EA Access for $5
- You get 10% off of the brand new game, hence you pay $54.
- Add on the sub fee and you pay a total of $59
- Get the game for $1 cheaper than you would have paid, and get a month of free games.


What's bad about this?

-Tired of game, decide to trade it in or lend it to a friend
-Oops, it's digital. Nevermind.
-Hope you didn't spend that dollar all in one place.
 
So Sony thinks charging us prices to rent games on psnow that costs more than if we bought them on disc is good for the consumer but not this ea sub plan which I would definately buy on my ps4 isn't a good deal. Come one Sony.
I didn't realize prices had been formally announced and finalized for PS Now.
 

Dunlop

Member
-Tired of game, decide to trade it in or lend it to a friend
-Oops, it's digital. Nevermind.
-Hope you didn't spend that dollar all in one place.
Then you would buy it at a store..exactly like you would now.

This service has absolutely no impact on that
 

OccamsLightsaber

Regularly boosts GAF member count to cry about 'right wing gaf' - Voter #3923781
Tl2UsP0.png



Welcome to games as a service.
 

Corto

Member
You do realise here's nothing to stop EA launching this service and at the same time refuse to release games on Plus?

That won't happen. They could delay them on Plus but they'll release their games on the service. Even more so with PS4 hegemonic position in terms of market share. EA will keep making business with both platform holders.
 
And it's this line of thinking that we now have to deal with outrageous amounts of DLC...

Seriously, why would anyone not want to pay a pub for content that was normally apart of the initial transaction in previous generations... like take my money and stuff, please. /s

Just don't buy the dlc. I almost never buy dlc but of the 5 or 6 times I have, two of those times were EA titles. I purchased all of the Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins dlc.

I like what EA is offering for $30. If I wasn't likely to buy most of their content on PC (where it will be cheaper and look better) I'd get this deal for my X1.
 
So Sony thinks charging us prices to rent games on psnow that costs more than if we bought them on disc is good for the consumer but not this ea sub plan which I would definately buy on my ps4 isn't a good deal. Come one Sony.
You don't to buy or even use psnow.

Ea doing this is the same shit that lead to online pass.

A system like this will lead to a situation where we are with dlc and we will start losing things we get for free.

A lot of people are whining about anti-consumer that said true is that a lot of consumers only care for the now, they can't think long term until this imaginary long term becomes the present.

Never forget:
Dlc
Online pass
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom