FrontlineJaguar said:
No origin and ea access are two different services meant for two different platforms why would EA compete with its own service in PC market. I think you are failing to understand the concept behind the two they are basically two different services targeted for two different platforms. And PS+ vs EA access is a different story where it depends on what do you play if you love to play online games ps+ is a necessary service for you and you cannot deny to pay for it. And ps+ free games cannot be compared with ea access games since sony can offer games from other publishers but Ea cannot and is limited to its own games and if one loves to play EA games ea access is a better offer but then also you need to buy xbox live or ps+ to get full benefit of those games. A comparision between the two is not fair. And I repeat EA Access and origin are two different services for two different platforms. For example if in future Valve wants to offer it's games to consoles it might have similar approach like EA access but might not offer that service on PC since it already has steam on it. |
That still don't deny that origin and PS+ are better value than EA Access.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







