| BMaker11 said: I don't know why you'd highlight the "are not a replacement for" part and saying that's not good enough for EA...while praising EA for doing the exact same thing. But the associated DLC that people buy (I repeat, that goes directly into their pockets) and larger exposure (later in the game's life, I'll add, after the majority of the sales have been done) to create a higher fan base for said game....that's not good enough either? And I mean, it's not like EA is Square Enix....who sell 5M copies of a game and are still disappointed. Other than Madden, FIFA, Mass Effect, and Battlefield, what franchises does EA have where free exposure (due to being paid by MS or Sony, mind you) ---> larger fan base and more DLC money won't be a good thing? I just looked at the 360 (I think that's a safe platform, since EA sold most of their software on it last gen) and only Battlefield, L4D, and ME got above 3M (with Battlefield 3 skewing things up with 7M sales). You telling me Need for Speed, Dead Space, Crysis, Medal of Honor, Dragon Age, Mirror's Edge, Army of Two, etc. wouldn't benefit from people getting to play it, who overlooked it. Bought DLC, sequels, and whatever other merch....that's not "good enough" for EA? They're not needing 5M sales for these games to be successful, so the free money that Sony or MS could give them to put on PS+/GwG, plus the associated revenue from more people being exposed to these games.....if that's not "good enough", I don't know what is |
"Creating a higher fanbase" doesn't mean a lot.. Is there any prove people actually by the DLC (who buys DLC for a game they rent?) Arent Crysis 3 and Deadspace 3 (PS+ games in europe) the last of their franchise.. Create a fanbase for the non excisting sequel? even if there are sequels its gonna be 2 years since they were a part f PS+.. How many games are from EA on PS+? It also can devalue a brand, making people wait till it comes to PS+ or GwG.. Sure it can happen to this too but at least people are paying EA..
We are talking about multi billion dollar companies.. We all have seen the numbers.. its going down the drain.. If EA gets money from this directly from their older games not having to deal with Sony (negotiations), giving consumers more games from the EA library, for a better price they think they will be profitable with.. i'm all for it.. Why should EA give their Games to Sony or MS for pocket change when they can get more money from it themself and offer more? For exposure? for people that might buy a sequel? That's not a strategy for anyone.. Shouldn't the money go to the developers and publishers who make those games.. and if Activision wants to compete with a 25 dollar subscription why not?
Can it devalue PS+ or GwG? Sure.. do I care about that? Nope.. its nice to have options..
Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!)
