Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 243

Thread: Electronic Arts Announces "EA Access" for XBOX One

  • Share
    • Facebook
  • Thread Tools
  • Display
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by skipwondah33 View Post
    Well PS memberships are up because it'd mandatory to have them to play multiplayer lol
    Exactly. Of course Sony wasn't too worried about asking their fans to pay for online this generation.

    "We don't think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer."
    When did CLW get a job at Sony? Seems silly to even comment on this but even worse is the assumption their fans would not like the "Choice" to decide for themselves. When is having a choice bad?

  2. #42
    Heisman skipwondah33's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    5,577
    lol I mean I have one but still I don't understand the multitude of services for one price statement he made.

    I got it so I could continue to play my friends online...duh. Didn't get it for any "discounts" for games purchased through the Store or even for the freebies (although that is an accepted perk don't get me wrong).

    Why they passed on it is fine with me, but the reasoning behind doing so atleast publicly makes no sense

  3. #43
    Heisman I OU a Beatn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Southern PA
    Posts
    5,548
    So because Sony doesn't see "value" in it, they're just going to assume that no one else does either and that the program shouldn't even be launched on their platform? Makes perfect sense.

    Meanwhile, Sony is trying to charge outrageous prices with PS Now to stream old games. Value.

    Keep on keeping on, Sony.

  4. #44
    Resident Lawyer of TGT CLW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Posts
    12,499
    Personally, I'd be surprised if Sony really refused to allow EA access. I could see EA asking for $X and Sony not willing to pay the price but I'd be surprised if they just barred it from their console.

    I agree with the idea that consumers should be allowed to make dumb choices.

    From what I have seen/read about EA Access the devil is in the UNDISCLOSED details about whether this is a good value or not.

    #1 if you only get 2-5 hours to Play Madden/FIFA/Live then its not worth it. You really cannot get a good feel for a game in that short of a time frame.

    #2 if you get 5 days then it probably is worth it (especially if you are potentially interested in multiple EA products)

    I don't see much value in the Vault b/c its not like they are ever going to put their newest Madden in it and the only EA games I'm potentially interested in buying are its sports titles so any of the year old+ FPS stuff is worthless to me.

    I would say that unless you are getting 5 full days its definitely not as good a deal as Season Ticket even was b/c you are only getting 1/2 the discount you used to get (10% v. 20% on DLC).

  5. #45
    Heisman jaymo76's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,103
    Quote Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn View Post
    So because Sony doesn't see "value" in it, they're just going to assume that no one else does either and that the program shouldn't even be launched on their platform? Makes perfect sense.

    Meanwhile, Sony is trying to charge outrageous prices with PS Now to stream old games. Value.

    Keep on keeping on, Sony.
    I agree fully IOU. Let me make the decision whether I want the offer or not. I chose season ticket because I considered it good value. Let individual consumers make the decision as to what works best for them.

  6. #46
    Heisman souljahbill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Posts
    6,691
    Quote Originally Posted by CLW View Post
    I don't see much value in the Vault b/c its not like they are ever going to put their newest Madden in it and the only EA games I'm potentially interested in buying are its sports titles so any of the year old+ FPS stuff is worthless to me.
    The Vault is what I'd be most interested in. I'd gladly play the year old games while everyone was playing the latest and greatest.

  7. #47
    Heisman I OU a Beatn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Southern PA
    Posts
    5,548
    I personally just find it ridiculous. I had no intentions on purchasing the service based on how I believe it's structured, but that's irrelevant. It should be the consumer's CHOICE if they want to purchase a service. Everyone ripped on Sony for the high prices they were planning on charging for PS Now rentals, so in theory they should have just yanked the service since it wasn't in the consumer's best interest.

    Microsoft got ripped for trying to force an online/digital only console on people and it wasn't because they were trying to implement those features - it's because they didn't give consumers a choice. If they would have added those features optionally alongside the ability to play off a disc and not have to be online, there would never have been a problem. They essentially made the choice that consumers didn't need discs and didn't need to play offline.

    That's exactly what Sony is doing here. Whether or not they see the value does NOT mean that potentially hundreds of thousands of their consumers couldn't find some value in EA's subscription services.

    Personally, I think it's just some smoke to cover up the fact that they don't want ANY competition whatsoever against PS Now.

  8. #48
    Administrator JBHuskers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    35,251
    The way PS Now sits, there will be no competition because no one will be using PS Now.
    The dude abides.

  9. #49
    Administrator cdj's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Lincoln
    Posts
    13,122
    Quote Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn View Post
    So because Sony doesn't see "value" in it, they're just going to assume that no one else does either and that the program shouldn't even be launched on their platform? Makes perfect sense.

    Meanwhile, Sony is trying to charge outrageous prices with PS Now to stream old games. Value.
    Initially I thought the decision was made more to protect PS Plus, but perhaps it was done so for PS Plus and PS Now. (PS Now is so off my radar, I had forgotten about it.)

    The "reason" given should be taken with a boulder of salt since it was off the record and anonymous, but I can't help think they may have passed on EA Access to help protect + & Now. Sony cannot afford to have each and every developer/publisher with their own console app to rent/purchase old games. I would assume EA's participation in Plus and Now would drop significantly should Access come to PS4, if it hasn't/won't already. The same could possibly (likely?) happen once Ubi-pass, Acti-scription, etc. come to fruition.

    This isn't an issue with Microsoft as their free games in Games with Gold have been considered extremely weak and outdated. PS Plus has been solid in this regard.

    In the long run, PS Plus to play them online and then costs for PS Now and/or for multiple publishers to play older titles could end up being very costly to consumers. While I personally would prefer more choices (let me decide to buy or not buy EA Access), I also do not want to see less publishers offering titles with PS Plus, hence a lower perceived value for the cost. (This assuming publishers will get a higher cut with their own app vs. PS Plus.)


    I'd also add it's worth noting that the website/release for EA Access does not say anything about it coming first, only, or exclusively to Xbox One. Given the backlash, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony reverses course, though in the long run I am not sure it would be for the best of the gaming community.

  10. #50
    Resident Lawyer of TGT CLW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Posts
    12,499
    Sony Was Right To Turn Down EA's Video Game Subscription Plan

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain...rtner=yahootix

  11. #51
    Heisman jaymo76's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,103
    Quote Originally Posted by CLW View Post
    Sony Was Right To Turn Down EA's Video Game Subscription Plan

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain...rtner=yahootix
    I respectfully disagree and Sony is taking a lot of heat from it. Consumer choice is never a bad thing.

  12. #52
    Heisman skipwondah33's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    5,577
    As much heat as EA seems to take for being the worst company ever can't imagine why.

  13. #53
    Resident Lawyer of TGT CLW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Posts
    12,499
    Quote Originally Posted by jaymo76 View Post
    I respectfully disagree and Sony is taking a lot of heat from it. Consumer choice is never a bad thing.
    Consumer choice is never a bad thing for the consumer. But Sony is not a consumer.

    For Sony the ? is what do they want out of PSNow (its own service that it announced well in advance to EA Access). My take, is they plan to (eventually) try to turn it into the long hyped "Netflix for video games" that many (including myself) want. Essentially PSNow will have most/all PS games in its library and it will entice me/consumers to pay a monthly fee to have unlimited access to the PS library. Sure the newest releases will probably not be available (at least for the next several years). However, if Sony does it will they basically have a HUGE LEAD on the entire gaming console industry when it goes all digital.

    IF Sony plans on turning PSNow into a subscription model giving a user access to most (or even all) of its games why would Sony allow a developer of what 5% of all games out there to have its own special app and thus take those games out of Sony's own PSNow service?

    They wouldn't b/c it's not smart business. Sony has ALL the leverage against EA right now. #1 EA doesn't make consoles (or any device capable of playing its product/games). #2 Sony has the hottest console on the market right now with the PS4.

    MS has screwed up. Why? B/c now EVERY publisher is going to come on to their console and have a Ubisoft app and a Square App etc...... So IF I am a XB1 gamer I have to pay 5-10 (or more) different prices/subscriptions. Now PS4 gamers only have to pay for 1 bill/service PSNow.

    It's like "bundling" cable/internet/phone. Why play on XB1 where you have to buy keep up with X number of separate accounts where on PS4 its all included in one nice bundle (PSNow).

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by cdj View Post
    In the long run, PS Plus to play them online and then costs for PS Now and/or for multiple publishers to play older titles could end up being very costly to consumers. While I personally would prefer more choices (let me decide to buy or not buy EA Access), I also do not want to see less publishers offering titles with PS Plus, hence a lower perceived value for the cost. (This assuming publishers will get a higher cut with their own app vs. PS Plus.)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rth_America%29

    Other than Crisis 3, Dead Space 3 (August) and a few arcade games, EA has not exactly been a top publisher in offering games to PS Plus. With the new service, one would imagine that there will be few, if any in the future.
    Last edited by bdoughty; 07-30-2014 at 05:30 PM.

  15. #55
    Resident Lawyer of TGT CLW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma City
    Posts
    12,499
    Quote Originally Posted by bdoughty View Post
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rth_America%29

    Other than Crisis 3, Dead Space 3 (August) and a few arcade games, EA has not exactly been a top publisher in offering games to PS Plus. With the new service, one would imagine that there will be few, if any in the future.
    Yep. Honestly, it wouldn't stun me if at some point if EA became completely exclusive to MS period. Of course, in my dream scenario it would permit Sony to hire real talent to build real sim games like The Show for soccer and football.

  16. #56
    Heisman jaymo76's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,103
    After taking some more time to think about this, what I find frustrating is that based on the current value (and the unknowns) of EA Access I would buy it in a heartbeat over paying $$$ for PSNow to rent/stream games. Currently I have ZERO interest in PSNow as the games to this point hold no interest for me. However, I would play the hell out of every single game available fro EA Access (early release and the vault)

    I'm a big fan of Sony and love the PS4. That being said I really think Sony screwed up with this one and I am a little bit less of a Sony fan today than I was yesterday. PSNow in its current form has minimal value and is highly, highly overpriced. Asking me to pay #30 for a year subscription is more than fair and I would have got my monies worth several times over. $1.99 to $4.99 to rent an old PS3 game for four hours...???... yep that sure is good value.

    IMO, Microsoft hugely one-upped Sony on this one and in the long run this may hurt Sony more than they know. This could be enough to sway someone on the fence for what system to buy.
    Last edited by jaymo76; 07-31-2014 at 12:47 AM.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by jaymo76 View Post
    $1.99 to $4.99 to rent an old PS3 game for four hours...???... yep that sure is good value.
    Sony using the old fashioned, "Renting porn at a hotel pricing strategy." Say what you will but if people will pay for things like MUT, FUT, HUT and LUT, you can darn well bet they will pay for this. With so few games being released on the PS4/XB1 they have to be kicking themselves a bit for not have it ready.

  18. #58
    Heisman souljahbill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Posts
    6,691

    Electronic Arts Announces "EA Access" for XBOX One

    I'm with Jaymo. I'd rather pay $30 a year to play last year's EA games than $15 a month to play PS1/2/3 games.

  19. #59
    Heisman jaymo76's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,103
    Was the beta of this programme supposed to be officially released today?

  20. #60
    Heisman jaymo76's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,103
    Peter Moore announced today that any game put into the EA Vault will NOT be removed. Once a game is in the vault it will stay in the vault and you can play it for as lng as you have a subscription. Moore also again recommitted to the fact that AAA titles will be added to the vault as time goes on.

    I still say Sony errored big time on this one.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •