By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
d21lewis said:

I don't know the history of EA and Sony. I owned a PS3 and an Xbox 360 last gen and I don't really remember any favoritism. And even if there were, why would it be any worse than Grand Theft Auto giving M$ a one year exclusive to GTAIV dlc or Call of Duty giving Xbox players first access to certain content?

Also, does Sony want EA Access? Does EA want their service on PlayStation 4? I legitimately do not know. Somebody educate me with some facts because this thread isn't doing it.

What I do know is that I'm on week two of a month long free trial and when it runs out, I'm signing up. Need For Speed franchise, Battlefield franchise, Plants vs Zombies franchise, Mass Effect franchise, Start Wars Battlefront, Unravel, Dragon Age, etc are too much to pass up for less than the price of a burger a month.

I can say what I suppose.

At the time EA Access was started EA put MS and Sony to bid and MS won, so Sony just made that remark out of spite after losing.

Or the even more plausible. EA demanded that most of the cut made from the games on EA Access discount plan to be made to EA because it would be their game and their service. So you get free games on EA Access that would compete with the sale of PSN and also the discounts that when made through EA Access wouldn't be made on PSN.

So altough it isn't less value to PS customers to have EA Access it almost certainly is less money to Sony.



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."