By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Aeolus451 on 27 February 2015
Edit Thread
walsufnir said:
Aeolus451 said:


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.


Again: Why not let the market decide?

Because people for the most part are short sighted. :D Don't believe me? How do bad presidents/leaders get elected? EA would just do just enough to enhance the percieved value in the service and the rest would be history.

It don't take much to convince people that something is a good idea but it takes everything to convince people something is a bad idea. Just bring enough immediate benefits to something and people will buy into it for the most part. Sony wisely denied the service. 

Besides, the service is on other platforms, so your experiment is already live and it's proving the naysayers right on EA access, already. "We" will get to see how it plays out in the "long run" on a isolated platform(s).