| Puppyroach said: Since you download the games from MS Store, I am pretty sure that MS is the one providing the server. Would you say that a rental service is sometyhing that you pay for to get access to a product for a limited period of time? |
They are? Interesting, they are definitely getting a kick back then. Based on that it might not have been as simple as Sony thinking it's not a good for consumers (it's not but still). Maybe they would also have issues with integrating the discount/download system of EA Access into their store. It may have clashed with PS+.
Yes, I would. All these services are rental but there are different types of rental and/or how the system is implemented.
| Puppyroach said: Completely agree. I personally thought MS´s original version was better, where I acually was given games for my subscription fee, games I could keep even if I no longer subscribed. I do realize that the model Sony chose would be the one every company would jump on though. They presented a model where we as subscribers are never owners of the products, making it a better sell for Sony towards 3rd parties. Rental services are never good for the consumer longterm since you pay more for less, but you do get to play games you otherwise would´nt have played. Now that we have these services, I´d rather see good competition instead of a few controlling the market. That is why I welcome EAA aswell as other services. |
That was the exchange wasn't it? Pay a fee a year and get games as long as you keep paying, you can keep playing them.
Yet on your last statement I disagree. See my larger post early on.
Hmm, pie.
