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

[starcraft]

The Fury said:

There is something about this statement and the idea about EA Access that seems a little off. Only on Xbox One is fine, it's great for those that feel this will be of value but for Sony to say it's not good for consumers makes me thing something else is going on.

For example, when a game sells (hard copy or download) some of the money from that sale goes to Sony, MS or Nintendo for the 'right' to have the game on their system. Me thinks that this service bypasses that income, while MS happy to let EA do this on their system because they are mostly rolling in money and want more people to use the system anyway. Sony on the other hand might not be as willing to let that extra income go. While in the case of PS+, the companies that make the games get a cost for putting the game on PS+, EA might not be giving any income to Sony for using their system for this service.

So while it hasn't been explained how the income in made, if Sony don't make any from the service being on their machine, why bother, especially when the games are out there to purchase anyway, just in hard for or download from the store.

I doubt all this though... maybe they really don't think it's good value.

I think what is very clear is that while Sony is saying this deal isn't good value for gamers, what they mean is that it is not good value for Sony. They do not wish to see a competing service on their own system.

I think you can safely assume that Microsoft is getting a cut of the subscription cost. If the Xbox One was selling better perhaps they too would not have allowed this. But no one spinning this looks very sensible. This is very clearly a win for people who own an Xbox One and are interested in EA's games. Hopefully if it takes off Sony will come around.