• 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.
E

Exploratory

Banned
How are people arguing the value isn't there for this service? Maybe for you individually it isn't but for many others it is.

If I subscribe for 5 dollars on September 18th I get access to Battlefield 4, Madden, FIFA, and Peggle 2. Maybe you've already played those games but I haven't. Hell even if you do play those games you could sell em to GameStop and get more than 5 dollars worth of credit.

So I sub for a second month. I've paid 10 bucks and gotten to extensively play 4 new games. Now I get 10% off Dragon Age which is a game I'd actually buy. That's 6 dollars off making the total I've paid for the sub only 4 dollars! AND I get the game 5 days early? AND its a full game which means I can run through the full game in the 5 day period and pay nothing? AND if I do buy the game my save crosses over for the trial?

And that's not worth 4 dollars? That's not good value? Bull fucking shit.
 
B

Brad Grenz

Member
Dunlop said:
Who cares?
Click to expand...

Who cares? Someone cared enough to construct a false argument. I just demonstrated why that argument was invalid.

If you like a specific publishers games than this is of great value.

PS+ is just a crap shoot of what Sony feels like offering each month, it is not some a la carte service where you could just pick any EA game to make their service moot
Click to expand...

Dunlop said:
but you have no choice in these offerings, if I get 10000 games that I will never play, what is the value?

If I like EA games then this has actual value to me, if not I don't subscribe
Click to expand...

Both are a crap shoot. You have no control what EA adds to to vault, or when. PS Plus has the advantage that they add near 10 times as many games in a year as EA even publishes, so the chances you will get a number of games you want to play is very high.

EA Access has a very narrow appeal where you have to like their games to the exclusion of other games, but not so much that you can't wait until those games are a year old and have been added to the vault.
 
S

Shadow_FFVI

Member
I don't see it as a big deal. Considering how EA has favored Microsoft heavily during this gen, I wouldn't be surprised if the subscription was exclusive for a certain period of time regardless of Sony's position on the matter.

It will come to PlayStation platforms in the future if it's anything worthwhile anyways. I wouldn't have subscribed until I have a sense of where EA is going with this either.
 
NoMoreTrolls

NoMoreTrolls

Banned
BruiserBear said:
Really? Microsoft doesn't want to put Halo on the Wii. EA wanted to offer this subscription service on the PS4, and Sony said no.

Big difference.
Click to expand...
Why do I get the feeling that it's not as simple as that? Do you have the contract terms EA offered to Sony for carrying this service on hand, perchance? Or are you perhaps oversimplifying the refusal?
 
TrueGrime

TrueGrime

Member
Exploratory said:
How are people arguing the value isn't there for this service? Maybe for you individually it isn't but for many others it is.

If I subscribe for 5 dollars on September 18th I get access to Battlefield 4, Madden, FIFA, and Peggle 2. Maybe you've already played those games but I haven't. Hell even if you do play those games you could sell em to GameStop and get more than 5 dollars worth of credit.

So I sub for a second month. I've paid 10 bucks and gotten to extensively play 4 new games. Now I get 10% off Dragon Age which is a game I'd actually buy. That's 6 dollars off making the total I've paid for the sub only 4 dollars! AND I get the game 5 days early? AND its a full game which means I can run through the full game in the 5 day period and pay nothing? AND if I do buy the game my save crosses over for the trial?

And that's not worth 4 dollars? That's not good value? Bull fucking shit.
Click to expand...

Seconded.
 
C

coldone

Member
I was wondering where the stupid Sony went. They are still around. Stop deciding for us and let us choose what we want. If no one buys the EA subscription, EA will stop it. You dont have to be the middleman deciding for us. !!!
 
D

Dremark

Banned
Praise the Lorde said:
Yeah, like the value in paying $60 (only dropped to 50 because of consumer backlash) dollars for a port of a year-old game.....
Click to expand...

Oh is that why it was only $50? I honestly see no issue with $60 for it, former exclusive times getting ported are often full price. If GTA5 follows I might upgrade that too if it's only 50.
 
D

Dragonborn

Member
Exploratory said:
How are people arguing the value isn't there for this service? Maybe for you individually it isn't but for many others it is.

If I subscribe for 5 dollars on September 18th I get access to Battlefield 4, Madden, FIFA, and Peggle 2. Maybe you've already played those games but I haven't. Hell even if you do play those games you could sell em to GameStop and get more than 5 dollars worth of credit.

So I sub for a second month. I've paid 10 bucks and gotten to extensively play 4 new games. Now I get 10% off Dragon Age which is a game I'd actually buy. That's 6 dollars off making the total I've paid for the sub only 4 dollars! AND I get the game 5 days early? AND its a full game which means I can run through the full game in the 5 day period and pay nothing? AND if I do buy the game my save crosses over for the trial?

And that's not worth 4 dollars? That's not good value? Bull fucking shit.
Click to expand...

You can't play the full game in those 5 days. It's a limited trial. As for the discount, you can get something like GCU which gives you 20% off of all new games, not just EA games (top it off with rewards certificates, and rewards points and you get some really good discounts).
 
C

chubigans

y'all should be ashamed
Huh, never occurred to me that Sony rejected this deal. I just assumed it was another MS moneyhat. Makes sense for them to do that business wise, but I think it has the potential to backfire at Sony for a bit.
 
Z

Zatoichi's Cane

Member
I don't care for EA's program. I don't think you're going to have the current year versions of the games in this program anyway (starting next year).

No way FIFA 15, BF5 and etc show up and EA not lose a shit ton of $ on sales.
 
S

Stone Ocean

Member
NoMoreTrolls said:
Why do I get the feeling that it's not as simple as that? Do you have the contract terms EA offered to Sony for carrying this service on hand, perchance? Or are you perhaps oversimplifying the refusal?
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter what the terms were. The only thing that matters is that we know that the service was on the table in some form instead of never being offered.
 
J

jett

D-Member
The answer is bullshit, but this is no surprise at all, this is technically competition for Sony, with EA trying to subvert their PS+ program with their own thing. Why would Sony allow this to happen instead of bringing EA into the PS+ fold?
 
L

LastGamer84

Member
Gestault said:
I think it's unfortunate that people are happy Sony is protecting the community from a business model exactly like PS+.
Click to expand...

All the games on one platform on a subscription versus one publisher's games on a subscription. Big difference.

If you want to start paying $5 for EA, $5 for Activision, $5 for Ubisoft in addition to what you pay for Gold/PS+ - then be my guest. Some of us don't want that and are happy Sony put their foot down and said "no". That's the only thing that saved us from the DRM debacle at the beginning of this gen. If Sony had signed on with that (as many suspected) - then no amount of #nodrm internet outrage would have stopped it.

I'm not claiming Sony are the good guys here: but in this case their own self interest has coincided with the interest of gamers who don't want games on a subscription based future.
 
B

Bgamer90

Banned
Sony shouldn't have made a public response to this. Find it very shortsighted. People who were interested in the PS4 and the service and thought the service was only exclusive for a timed period may now switch to getting an Xbox One. Saying something isn't good from a company that makes the top selling games on your console is unnecessary. Burning your bridges a bit.

Somewhat reminds me of back in 2003/2004 when MS thought Xbox Live as a unified service was more important than getting EA online play. Services from big third party companies that make games that help sell your console should be welcome IMO -- If it isn't good then users would put blame on 3rd party company, not the console maker. Service would fail & hurt 3rd party. The console itself would be out of the mess.
 
O

Ol No Bones

Banned
Dragonborn said:
Sony is a company that's out to get money. In this case, yea, they're using the excuse to mask the real reason but I don't really care what their reason is, it's the right choice in my eyes.
Click to expand...
Yes companies want to make money. I think they should have just been quiet about it personally. You may think they made the right choice because you don't see the value in your case. I'm actually in agreement and I have no plans to subscribe to this but many as illustrated in this thread would have liked the choice. That's like me saying I don't want killzone released on the PS4 because its not something I like or want. Well hold on, many people do want killzone. The pretense that they were just looking out for the consumers just doesn't make sense. Again, I'm sure they had reasons for not wanting this on top of their service but I don't need them to BS me.
 
A

AyaisMUsikWhore

Member
Dragonborn said:
You can't play the full game in those 5 days. It's a limited trial. As for the discount, you can get something like GCU which gives you 20% off of all new games, not just EA games (top it off with rewards certificates, and rewards points and you get some really good discounts).
Click to expand...

This. Not saying the service is bad but it's EA only which does not appeal to me. My favorite devs is Rockstar anyways. GCU is 20% and can price match if lower and I get extra back if I trade it in. Downside is the service is for $120 for two years, I got mines on sale for $60 though so I ain't mad.
 
D

DoubleTake

Member
7 Years from now when everyone is complaining about having to get an Activision+ subscription to be able to download an exclusive COD map, and when Square(if they're even around by then) locks story missions behind their specific subscription, I will look back on this thread and laugh.

People seem so short sighted in what this could mean for the industry. No doubt Sony doesnt like this because it conflicts with their own services, but I can still definitely see where this ends up. Of course it looks like a great deal now, no doubt its not a bad one(if all you play are EA games), but the moment these companies get the chance that will all turn on its head. Too bad the average consumer, and many gamers in this thread are too short sighted to see that.
 
NoMoreTrolls

NoMoreTrolls

Banned
foodtaster said:
it is amazing how brainwashed some people in this thread are.
Click to expand...
This is the worst type of post. People having a different opinion than you =/= brainwashing. Jesus.

Honestly, I'm a bit disheartened to hear that the service won't be on the PS4, even though I likely wouldn't have used it. I suppose if it meets success on the Xbox One, and enough consumers demand it from Sony, we will see it on the PS4 sooner or later.
 
B

BlackBuzzard

Banned
Im glad Sony decided to make the choice for their own selfish reasons(their bottom line). Because some consumers have made bad decisions for me in the past. Like the people that bought horse armor. Or paying 50$ (which later became 60$ and everybody just kept paying without any added benefits of the price hike) a year to use their own internet connection, to use p2p servers to play the game they already paid 60$ for.

Im glad those people now don't have a choice to make. Well they still have a choice if you don't like it, buy an Xbox One.

This whole publisher subscription model, is just a Pandora's box waiting to be opened.
 
D

Dragonborn

Member
Ol No Bones said:
Yes companies want to make money. I think they should have just been quiet about it personally. You may think they made the right choice because you don't see the value in your case. I'm actually in agreement and I have no plans to subscribe to this but many as illustrated in this thread would have liked the choice. That's like me saying I don't want killzone released on the PS4 because its not something I like or want. Well hold on, many people do want killzone. The pretense that they were just looking out for the consumers just doesn't make sense. Again, I'm sure they had reasons for not wanting this on top of their service but I don't need them to BS me.
Click to expand...

I get your analogy but it doesn't really work. As I've said, the worry is that EA doing this will lead to other publishers piling on and offering their own services, which may make an all inclusive service like netflix impossible.

Killzone or any other game getting released on PS4 affects nothing

AyaisMUsikWhore said:
This. Not saying the service is bad but it's EA only which does not appeal to me. My favorite devs is Rockstar anyways. GCU is 20% and can price match if lower and I get extra back if I trade it in. Downside is the service is for $120 for two years, I got mines on sale for $60 though so I ain't mad.
Click to expand...

Yup, it's on sale often for 60 bucks, and I save way more than 30 bucks per year with it. Pretty great deal (for me, at least).
 
K

kitch9

Banned
LosDaddie said:
Like I said in the other thread, as a ps4 owner, I would probably pay for this if it were on the console. For $30-yr, I'd most likely get my money's worth out of it. I actually do hope Sony changes their mind on this.

But I guess since it's not on Sony's console, most of GAF hates it.
Click to expand...

Nice little persecution complex you have there.
 
dugdug

dugdug

Banned
"Arrogant Sony" "Hubris" "Anti-consumer"

Meanwhile, they just announced 6 free games you're getting next week. Half of which, came out this year, on PS platforms. Two of which will be brand new.

I realize it sucks to not be able to pay an extra $30 for last year's sports games, but, y'all need to get a grip.
 
C

chubigans

y'all should be ashamed
Bgamer90 said:
Sony shouldn't have made a public response to this. Find it very shortsighted. People who were interested in the PS4 and the service and thought the service was only exclusive for a timed period may now switch to getting an Xbox One. Saying something isn't good from a company that makes the top selling games on your console is unnecessary. Burning your bridges a bit.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure EA welcomed the clarification. Up till now a lot of PS4 owners were angry at EA for having another moneyhatted exclusive. Now Sony ends up being the "bad guy" and EA can push gamers to petition Sony to change their minds.
 
S

sometimes i game

Member
Qassim said:
Thanks for deciding for me Sony. I couldn't have dealt with that decision myself.



Wow, that's a big number. I wonder why? Now that it's mandatory for basic functionality of a gaming console might have something to do with it.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it's not like Sony just says "Ok EA, try it on our platform!" and it all happens. Things like this take a huge amount of planning and execution from legal to finance, infrastructure to communications.

Also, it's clear that Sony does not want to endorse a competing program and give any reason for EA to avoid putting games on PS+.

But hey, if we scream loud enough we could probably make it happen.
 
E

Exploratory

Banned
Dragonborn said:
You can't play the full game in those 5 days. It's a limited trial. As for the discount, you can get something like GCU which gives you 20% off of all new games, not just EA games (top it off with rewards certificates, and rewards points and you get some really good discounts).
Click to expand...

GCU...120 dollars when not on sale GCU? You're comparing the option to pay 4 dollars for 2 months to 120 dollars for a year? I'm not saying GCU doesn't have value either (I wouldn't buy it because I don't buy most games day 1 and I missed the 60 dollar sale) I'm just saying its not comparable.

Is it a limited trial? Link? Even if it is that's still access to the game before release. Is it untrue you can get achievements in the trial?
 
M

Miles Quaritch

Member
Dragonborn said:
Sony is a company that's out to get money. In this case, yea, they're using the excuse to mask the real reason but I don't really care what their reason is, it's the right choice in my eyes.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that if this is successful on X1, more won't do the same anyway?

The only thing that will happen is that PS4 owners lose out as developers/publishers with the service stop supporting plus to try and force Sony to let the services on their console.

Plus will likely suffer either way. By not embracing this now, Sony are choosing to hurt their customers in the long run.
 
D

Dragonborn

Member
Bgamer90 said:
Sony shouldn't have made a public response to this. Find it very shortsighted. People who were interested in the PS4 and the service and thought the service was only exclusive for a timed period may now switch to getting an Xbox One. Saying something isn't good from a company that makes the top selling games on your console is unnecessary. Burning your bridges a bit.

Somewhat reminds me of back in 2003/2004 when MS thought Xbox Live as a unified service was more important than getting EA online play. Services from big third party companies that make games that help sell your console should be welcome IMO -- If it isn't good then users would put blame on 3rd party company, not the console maker. Service would fail & hurt 3rd party. The console itself would be out of the mess.
Click to expand...

Egh, they've nothing to loose, and this clears things up. The service will do very little if anything to improve X1 sales, so it's not like Sony is suddenly going to start loosing a ton of sales.
 
D

DevilFox

Member
Gestault said:
I think it's unfortunate that people are happy Sony is protecting the community from a business model exactly like PS+.
Click to expand...

Not even close. Look beyond the surface to see the potential implications.

LosDaddie said:
L

But I guess since it's not on Sony's console, most of GAF hates it.
Click to expand...

Right, they did 30+ pages just to say they agree.

willis1.jpg
 
B

BruiserBear

Banned
BlackFlip said:
I can't see how it's exactly like PS+ being only with one publisher.
Click to expand...

This argument is so weak. If the EA offer is a shit deal, consumers would respond by not buying in. Sony didn't do this to protect anyone.

The fact that Sony felt they needed to make a statement tells you everything you need to know about this. They felt the need to defend themselves, and they chose to put the spin on it that it was about protecting people from big bad EA.
 
G

Goodacre0081

Member
well, say goodbye to certain games on PS+ if EA gets it's way. other publishers will follow suit and we're left with first party games and indie games.
jbo7fXR6wVWzIx.jpg


this is a slippery slope people.
 
N

Novel Mike

Member
See unlike what they said in the press release I think this is directly conflicting with PSnow instead of PS+, if you can get some of these games for free via a subscription why would you ever rent them via PSnow, unless Sony offers a similar subscription plan for much larger verity of games with PSnow... then that would be interesting and would explain why it wouldn't be on PS4 but that remains to be seen...

Sony needs to figure out pricing for PSnow and it needs either a subscription plan or needs to be extremely reasonable.
 
D

Dragonborn

Member
Miles Quaritch said:
What makes you think that if this is successful on X1, more won't do the same anyway?

The only thing that will happen is that PS4 owners lose out as developers/publishers with the service stop supporting plus to try and force Sony to let the services on their console.

Plus will likely suffer either way. By not embracing this now, Sony are choosing to hurt their customers in the long run.
Click to expand...

They might, but at least it'll be on Xbox only. With PS4's install base this gen, Sony will be strong enough to say no without issue. Publishers aren't going to ignore the PS4 regardless.

BruiserBear said:
This argument is so weak. If the EA offer is a shit deal, consumers would respond by not buying in. Sony didn't do this to protect anyone.

The fact that Sony felt they needed to make a statement tells you everything you need to know about this. They felt the need to defend themselves, and they chose to put the spin on it that it was about protecting people from big bad EA.
Click to expand...

Nope, consumers buy "shit" deals all the time. DLC, Microtransactions, paid online, etc.
 
G

GeneralArrow

Neo Member
So here's how I see this.

A subscription service of this is an incredible value, that being said it doesn't look like it includes DLC. Which means, it would be bare bones games. Not sure if it's such a deal if you have to buy 60 dollars worth of DLC. Here's what this service is really designed to do. I read through the EA statement and found the catch.

http://www.ea.com/news/ea-announces-ea-access-on-xbox-one

It's put right before our eyes in plane marketing speak highlighted in bold, they're trying to make the games cheap so they can sell you additional content. Which isn't bad, but let me ask you fine folks this. If this becomes a norm, then how many other companies will be releasing this type of service with 5 dollar game subscription and 60 dollars with of extra content. Is that how much these companies really value there games at? Another question and statement. This seems to be a bit of a future concept. EA can sell you a Digital Exclusive game on this service with Micro Transactions and make way more money off of it. How much of the game to they actually need to have if the subscription service is only 5 dollars a month or 30 dollars a year? Half the game? Less than half the game? This is a worrying trend on EA. What seems to be a value, really becomes another way to shove services down our throats that we don't want or need. It's true value remains to be seen. It's not a bad move for EA to put them in a good like, but there's hidden costs here and an ulterior motive.

Awesome Value– Besides the great games in The Vault, EA Access members will save 10% on purchases of EA digital content for Xbox One offered through the Xbox Games Store. From full digital-download titles like the upcoming Dragon Age™ Inquisition or NHL®15, to additional membership services such as Battlefield 4 Premium or even FIFA Ultimate Team points, it’s all 10% off for members.*
The real goal of this program ^


So is Sony really being anti consumer here even if the price of PS Now or have they just spotted this trend and are looking out for the quality of games so they aren't beaten back and have to redesign like Nintendo did?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

EA raising price of EA Play subscription | Change will come into effect on May 10, annual fee rising to $39.99, while Pro up to $119.99
News Business 2
88
4K
Kerotan replied
Ubisoft Plus Classics Standalone Subscription Plan Is Now Available On PlayStation Store
28
2K
Cyberpunkd replied
[Verge]Why Microsoft might be considering Xbox exclusives on PlayStation and Nintendo Switch
2 3
115
9K
mckmas8808 replied
PlayStation Had The Chance To Steal FIFA From EA In The '90s, But Passed
News Retro 2
55
4K
K' Dash replied
EA to lay off 5% of workforce, or about 670 employees
News 2
91
6K
CamHostage replied
Top Bottom