By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony: EA Access Doesn't "Represent Good Value To The PlayStation Gamer"

crissindahouse on 30 July 2014

I think I have to say it in a single post but PS Now costs 5 bucks for 4 hours and then they try to tell us that it's not good to give people the option to play at least four games (with an increasing library and old games never disappearing) for 5 bucks a month.

So, why exactly is it better for me to pay 5 bucks for Battlefield 4 on PS Now to play it for 4 hours as if I would pay 5 bucks to get the same game over this subscription and for a month?



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 30 July 2014
crissindahouse said:

I think I have to say it in a single post but PS Now costs 5 bucks for 4 hours and then they try to tell us that it's not good to give people the option to play at least four games (with an increasing library and old games never disappearing) for 5 bucks a month.

So, why exactly is it better for me to pay 5 bucks for Battlefield 4 on PS Now to play it for 4 hours as if I would pay 5 bucks to get the same game over this subscription and for a month?


Its a shitty pricing model for a great overall service. Hopefully Sony changes the pricing plan. 



overman1 on 30 July 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:
crissindahouse said:

I think I have to say it in a single post but PS Now costs 5 bucks for 4 hours and then they try to tell us that it's not good to give people the option to play at least four games (with an increasing library and old games never disappearing) for 5 bucks a month.

So, why exactly is it better for me to pay 5 bucks for Battlefield 4 on PS Now to play it for 4 hours as if I would pay 5 bucks to get the same game over this subscription and for a month?


Its a shitty pricing model for a great overall service. Hopefully Sony changes the pricing plan. 


I really really doubt that pricing was standard....



S.T.A.G.E. on 30 July 2014
overman1 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
crissindahouse said:

I think I have to say it in a single post but PS Now costs 5 bucks for 4 hours and then they try to tell us that it's not good to give people the option to play at least four games (with an increasing library and old games never disappearing) for 5 bucks a month.

So, why exactly is it better for me to pay 5 bucks for Battlefield 4 on PS Now to play it for 4 hours as if I would pay 5 bucks to get the same game over this subscription and for a month?


Its a shitty pricing model for a great overall service. Hopefully Sony changes the pricing plan. 


I really really doubt that pricing was standard....


I know...thats why I am saying I hope they change it soon for the sake of their PR because a lot of people would be missing out on some great content in PS NOW.



TheBlackNaruto on 30 July 2014
Burek said:
TheBlackNaruto said:


LOL from what I am seeing you have a good point and more than likely are correct lol. Because I can't see any real logical reason for all the back and forth when NO ONE even knows how this will work. Heck $30 a year for an ENTIRE backlog is SUPER cheap and that would mean MS/EA would be coming out of some money to make this happen so where will they make up for that money? How many games a year? Are the games only available for that month or do you only get a limited amount of time with those games? Is there a set number of hours you can play a game per month or year? How big will the downloads of the game be? I can keep going and going on so many questions lol. But what is the point in thinking like that lol.....there is no fun in that!

Actually, most of your questions already have an answer, and also many XBox owners already started using it, so they know how it works.

EA already said that Vault games never get deleted, and new games will be added at a set schedule. All Vault games work same as PS+ games, you download them to your console and play them as much as you like as long as you subscribe. Downloads will be as big as the game is big, what kind of question is that?

Subscribers will have access to new games a week in advance, and the access will be on game-to-game basis. So, Dragon Age for two hours, sports games will have some mides unlocked etc. This is also nothing new. EA has Early access to sports games for many years now. Only by now those were $20 just for Madden, FIFA and NHL. Now it's $30 for an entire year and many more games ..... And those older games from previous paragraph...

See, no need for questions, many answers are out already. 

And yet people still defend $50 PS+ and at the same time bash this service. They are both the same, and are both a great value. According to all, except Sony and their appologists. 

 

I am very upset at Sony right now. Until they issued that crap PR statement, I was just sad that MS got the deal and I got left out. But upon finding out that Sony flat out refused to offer it's customers a service being provided by the 3rd party, I was irritated beyond belief. There are dozens of apps on my PS4, and I already subscribe to some like Crunchyroll and MLB. All of a sudden, this app gets blocked, and even ridiculed.

And I hoped everybody would be upset. But then people en masse start defending Sony for being a "good guy"? I was completely shocked. 

I better leave it at this, and abandon this thread. Surely Road Not Taken is a better deal than Battlefield or Madden. Or even Peggle...


Oh I am not defending what Sony said by any means or bringing up PS+ at all. It just felt that this service and the questions had not been fully answered yet. And okay if all that information is already out there then that is different and people that find value in it should be fine with it and those that don't should just ignore it. And wow so just for subscribing you get access to new games a week in advance? And you get an ENTIRE backlog of games that will never be deleted all for just $30 a year no catches? If there is nothing else to this and everything is clear then yeah it is indeed a very good deal.  And they have clearly already laid all of this out and this is for sure how it will work?

Unless Sony knows something about this that we don't then I don't get their statement at all...well it's not as if I ever defended it anyway though lol.



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

Around the Network
overman1 on 30 July 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:
overman1 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
crissindahouse said:

I think I have to say it in a single post but PS Now costs 5 bucks for 4 hours and then they try to tell us that it's not good to give people the option to play at least four games (with an increasing library and old games never disappearing) for 5 bucks a month.

So, why exactly is it better for me to pay 5 bucks for Battlefield 4 on PS Now to play it for 4 hours as if I would pay 5 bucks to get the same game over this subscription and for a month?


Its a shitty pricing model for a great overall service. Hopefully Sony changes the pricing plan. 


I really really doubt that pricing was standard....


I know...thats why I am saying I hope they change it soon for the sake of their PR because a lot of people would be missing out on some great content in PS NOW.

I hope so too. Anyway, we will see tomorrow when the beta comes out :)



crissindahouse on 30 July 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:
crissindahouse said:

I think I have to say it in a single post but PS Now costs 5 bucks for 4 hours and then they try to tell us that it's not good to give people the option to play at least four games (with an increasing library and old games never disappearing) for 5 bucks a month.

So, why exactly is it better for me to pay 5 bucks for Battlefield 4 on PS Now to play it for 4 hours as if I would pay 5 bucks to get the same game over this subscription and for a month?


Its a shitty pricing model for a great overall service. Hopefully Sony changes the pricing plan. 

well, I hope so as well but I doubt that it would be cheaper to play a few EA games like Battlefield 4 and Madden over PS Now as over that EA subscription service even after a changing price model.

The EA service won't be like something from heaven but it also doesn't really sound to me as if their is no value for at least a decent amount of players.

It would be simply an addition and those who want to pay for PS+ and that EA Vault should simply get the right to do so. I mean, it's not as if people have to pay for it. They can still buy the games on the marketplace for 30 bucks or whatever they cost atm...



Kratos on 30 July 2014
crissindahouse said:
Kratos said:
Yeah I dont think PlayStation has any need for EA access PS+ offers enough as it is. I already have a huge backlog on my PS3 because of PS+

Great! As addition to this post I want to say that I think that Sony should stop allowing EA games on the PS marketplace at all since they cost also money as addition to a PS+ membership. I mean, who are they at EA to take 30 bucks for a game on the marketplace if you want to buy one of the games which you could also get with this subscription. 

I also think Sony should stop the F2P and MMO model on PS4. It's not a good value to pay like 15 bucks per month for FFIV or 30 bucks for some gold in a F2P game when PS+ costs only 5 bucks a month...

I think everything which is not part of PS+ should be not accepted because it's not the same value!

Btw how much does it cost to stream games over Sony's Playstation Now service? Ahh yeah, 5 bucks for 4 hours...

Jeez no need for the condescending tone. As i said before in another post:

I said for me personally I dont see any need for it but thats just me. I am not defending anything, I think it is great value for x1 users and I also agree with the notion that Sony should give the option to the gamers. Am I not allowed to express my opinion on wanting or not wanting this service for myself?

I did jump the gun with saying sony does not need it because it might turn out they do need it.



PSN ID: clemens-nl                                                                                                                

S.T.A.G.E. on 30 July 2014
crissindahouse said:

well, I hope so as well but I doubt that it would be cheaper to play a few EA games like Battlefield 4 and Madden over PS Now as over that EA subscription service even after a changing price model.

The EA service won't be like something from heaven but it also doesn't really sound to me as if their is no value for at least a decent amount of players.

It would be simply an addition and those who want to pay for PS+ and that EA Vault should simply get the right to do so. I mean, it's not as if people have to pay for it. They can still buy the games on the marketplace for 30 bucks or whatever they cost atm...


If it works with MS thats great. I am just glad its not on Sony so if it doesn't grow into some monster of an unfair service, everyone has a safe haven. If it makes some gamers happy then it couldn't hurt.



Burek on 30 July 2014
TheBlackNaruto said:

Oh I am not defending what Sony said by any means or bringing up PS+ at all. It just felt that this service and the questions had not been fully answered yet. And okay if all that information is already out there then that is different and people that find value in it should be fine with it and those that don't should just ignore it. And wow so just for subscribing you get access to new games a week in advance? And you get an ENTIRE backlog of games that will never be deleted all for just $30 a year no catches? If there is nothing else to this and everything is clear then yeah it is indeed a very good deal.  And they have clearly already laid all of this out and this is for sure how it will work?

Unless Sony knows something about this that we don't then I don't get their statement at all...well it's not as if I ever defended it anyway though lol.

Sorry about that, that part of the rant wasn't aimed at you.

Just quoted you to answer those questions, but then I got carried away :)

That's why I said it's better for me to leave this thread, logic and reason have left it long time ago.