walsufnir said:
Aeolus451 said:
Sony was right and wise to deny that service on their console. Imagine if every publisher and devolper had their own streaming/rental service. Hiding DLC or game content behind that type of service. It's just another paywall to content. EA could easily do that with many of their games. I can understand a company wanting to create new ways to make money off of their products but that concept is bad for gamers in the long run. I don't care for it. We don't need anymore paywalls to content and games.
If people are hating on EA for being EA (EA access) then they're right but if they're whining just because of the early access (they have it but I don't) with that game, that's silly.
|
If "we" wouldn't need it, then "we" would decide with our wallets. But for this to come true, all should at least have the option. If it is a bad service, you can quit it. If the majority thinks like you and others than the service would automatically disapper. But sadly some aren't even getting the option to decide.
So the experiment if we need such a service can't be determined by all and can't be decided if you don't even have the option. This doesn't change your opinion, though.
|
Yes, "we" need don't anymore paywalls. An experiment is not required to determine if it's bad or whether it is "needed". EA showed their intentions with EA Access by locking access temporaly behind a paywall or service. It wouldn't take much for them to do that with DLC to get more people to buy into that their service is worth it. They will only do things like that more with their other games. Of course, I'm not gonna change my opinion because of a paragraph and a few sentences. Sony chose not to have a bad service on "their" console when their console is dominating the market. Fair well, EA access. Good riddance.
