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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - EA Access is a system seller.

Nicklesbe on 03 September 2014
prinz_valium said:
Nicklesbe said:
prinz_valium said:


because so many people spray shit over in the internet maybe

u can play all these games als long, as u subscribe (like ps+ and gwg on xb1)  and as long as they are in the vault  (ea stated they have no intention to ever remove a game from the vault)

u can even play them offline without a 24h online check or anything.

There are pleanty of times they stated they had no intention of doing something before they did it in the future. It's not like ps+ or gwg. That vault is a pretty big and considerable difference. What matters is what TOS says which is actually a binding contract between you and them which states they can and will remove games from the vault at any time for what ever reason or no reason. Their statement of what their intentions may or may not be is not a contract, verbal or otherwsie and that is something important to note.


and? ps+ or gwg service can be shut down, too. so u cant paly any games any more. just as an worst case szenario (only the xb360 is an exception. u still can play the games even if ms going bankrupt

its the same

if u dont trust ea, dont subscribe

if they put down some games or break theire word, stop ur subscription

 

its so easy.

 

 

what about all the online server for old games. gt5 as example

they will be shut down. schould everyone stop buying a new gt for that reason?

 

 

thats the best part of subcriptions. if they do anything u dont like u can stop it.

if they do anything u dont like for an game u bought, u wont get ur money back form the company

You have a great deal of misunderstandings here. It's not the same because Ps+ and GWG can't remove the games they have already given their subscribers.

There is also a huge difference between buying a game and using that service. if you bought a game and it stop support independent users can and will put up thier own servers for the multiplayer. GTAV has a strong single player campaign it is not dependent on multiplayer. Like most good games the single player is actually a strong point while the multiplayer tho entertaining is usually lacking. it also doesn't change the fact that you actually own the game and you can sell it or you can mod it to connect to what ever server you want. The game in the vault hower you do no not own period, you cannot sell them and you cannot mod them. The only thing you can do is either choose to not feed it money or stop feeding it money at no point can you ever try to get your money back, With a purchased game, if you keep it in good condition you can even sell it to a collector long after its online support has ended and actually make a profit off it. Something which subscription services like EA are trying to end.



http://www.youtube.com/v/AoOOpLpcF28 http://www.youtube.com/v/CphFZGH5030

All Hail the Jester King. The King is back, and I am still a dirty girl prof ;)

Around the Network
BMaker11 on 03 September 2014
dreamcast210 said:
All the negativity people have toward EA Access reminds me of the original Xbox days when Splinter Cell 2 had some DLC come out and it cost $5. People were up in arms complaining, saying they wouldn't buy it.

Fast forward to now and few expect not to pay for DLC. It's a standard.

EA Access (more likely something akin to it in a subscription model) is a future we'll all come to accept in five years. Get over it.

Yea, the above is standard now. And it sucks. Don't tell people to "get over it" when we see a shitty practice coming from miles away. You know what happened when you "got over it"? On-disc DLC; content already on the disc, locked behind a paywall. DLC for Day 1 purchases; punishing people for not buying the game at launch. DLC planned before the game even releases; content which they could have just put into the game that's still being developed. Being complacent and "getting over it" allowed this crap to become the norm.

If bullshit is preventable, then you should fight against it by all means, not "get over it" and let it become standard. Otherwise, the Xbox One, for example, would have its original vision fulfilled and we'd all have to just "deal with it" being the standard for video games, moving forward. Imagine how you'd react if the attitude to 24-hour check in and other forms of DRM was "get over it". Actually, I'm pretty sure that's what MS said (well if you can't deal with XBone and 24 hour check-ins, we still have a great platform called Xbox 360) and there was outrage.



Puppyroach on 03 September 2014
Mr.Playstation said:
Well tell your friends this. " I hope that you have enjoyed supporting a buisness model, which will one day lead to the destruction of gaming ". Please do not buy an Xbox One because of Ea Access, in a year's time you willl regret it because Ea will always find a way how to screw over the consumer.

Well, that argument kind of strengthens their choice then, considering Sony was first at launching this kind of subcription model...

OT: I think it might help a bit in the US, but not elsewhere much.



riecsou on 03 September 2014
prinz_valium said:
riecsou said:
prinz_valium said:

 


sorry typo.

fifa 14 ofc

I have always though of EA Access as of a demo Access.

Do you get to play some games without purchasing them for as long as you want???


because so many people spray shit over in the internet maybe

u can play all these games als long, as u subscribe (like ps+ and gwg on xb1)  and as long as they are in the vault  (ea stated they have no intention to ever remove a game from the vault)

u can even play them offline without a 24h online check or anything.

Wow great value then. Specially for people who purchase a lot of EA games



Nicklesbe on 03 September 2014
Puppyroach said:
Mr.Playstation said:
Well tell your friends this. " I hope that you have enjoyed supporting a buisness model, which will one day lead to the destruction of gaming ". Please do not buy an Xbox One because of Ea Access, in a year's time you willl regret it because Ea will always find a way how to screw over the consumer.

Well, that argument kind of strengthens their choice then, considering Sony was first at launching this kind of subcription model...

OT: I think it might help a bit in the US, but not elsewhere much.

it's not the same for distinct reasons. One is a platform, the other is a publisher. One can and will take away games it's given it's paying subscribers for any reason or no reason. The other can't.



http://www.youtube.com/v/AoOOpLpcF28 http://www.youtube.com/v/CphFZGH5030

All Hail the Jester King. The King is back, and I am still a dirty girl prof ;)

Around the Network
prinz_valium on 03 September 2014
Nicklesbe said:

 

You have a great deal of misunderstandings here. It's not the same because Ps+ and GWG can't remove the games they have already given their subscribers.

There is also a huge difference between buying a game and using that service. if you bought a game and it stop support independent users can and will put up thier own servers for the multiplayer. GTAV has a strong single player campaign it is not dependent on multiplayer. Like most good games the single player is actually a strong point while the multiplayer tho entertaining is usually lacking. it also doesn't change the fact that you actually own the game and you can sell it or you can mod it to connect to what ever server you want. The game in the vault hower you do no not own period, you cannot sell them and you cannot mod them. The only thing you can do is either choose to not feed it money or stop feeding it money at no point can you ever try to get your money back, With a purchased game, if you keep it in good condition you can even sell it to a collector long after its online support has ended and actually make a profit off it. Something which subscription services like EA are trying to end.

maybe u too.

but they can remove the service and u cant play any game any more. i just put it as example. never said its 100% the same

its a possibility. just like the remove of games form the ea vault.

 

and thats my point. its about trust and chances. everyone has to figure that out for themself.

i trust every company the same. they want to make money and be successful - persiod. how do ea make money and be successful in this case? get many subscriber.

so if they do something really bad, what would hurt the subcribtion numbers, the chance of that to happen is "low"

 

and even if it happen. just cancel the subscription.

its easy. if u dont find it that way, or dont like it. no problem i respect ur opinion.

 

 

onto the second part of ur post:

yes, but whats the matter?

ofc buying and owning is not the same. both with benefits and disadvantages.



jlmurph2 on 03 September 2014

Good for them! If you're buying an Xbox One with Gold and EA access you'll have a good amount of games for a great price!



Vasto on 03 September 2014

Not a system seller yet but it can be. I am signed up. ^_^



Azerth on 03 September 2014

its only a system seller for those who are truly split on which one to get. i dont think people are going to read about ea access and go run out to buy a one.



cannonballZ on 03 September 2014

That's a broad definition of system seller, by that same logic Pikmin 3 was a system seller.

EA access is becoming more and more tempting for me, I think I may take the plunge. If it's only $30 a year that's reasonable. I will do it for at least a year to try it out before I judge it to be a horrible service that will spell the end of gaming as we know it.