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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - EA Announces Subscription Service On Xbox One: EA Access

walsufnir on 30 July 2014

So much for Sony and EA Access:

“We evaluated the EA Access subscription offering and decided that it does not bring the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect,” a Sony representative told us via email. “PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer"

Thanks Sony for deciding for your customers what is of value and what isn't.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/07/30/sony-ea-access-doesn_2700_t-represent-good-value-to-the-playstation-gamer.aspx



Around the Network
KLXVER on 30 July 2014
walsufnir said:
So much for Sony and EA Access:

“We evaluated the EA Access subscription offering and decided that it does not bring the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect,” a Sony representative told us via email. “PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer"


Ouch!



walsufnir on 30 July 2014
KLXVER said:
walsufnir said:
So much for Sony and EA Access:

“We evaluated the EA Access subscription offering and decided that it does not bring the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect,” a Sony representative told us via email. “PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer"


Ouch!


Made a thread about it, strange reaction by Sony.



Burek on 30 July 2014
walsufnir said:
So much for Sony and EA Access:

“We evaluated the EA Access subscription offering and decided that it does not bring the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect,” a Sony representative told us via email. “PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer"

Thanks Sony for deciding for your customers what is of value and what isn't.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/07/30/sony-ea-access-doesn_2700_t-represent-good-value-to-the-playstation-gamer.aspx

That is soo......  no comment!



jlmurph2 on 30 July 2014
walsufnir said:
So much for Sony and EA Access:

“We evaluated the EA Access subscription offering and decided that it does not bring the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect,” a Sony representative told us via email. “PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer"

Thanks Sony for deciding for your customers what is of value and what isn't.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/07/30/sony-ea-access-doesn_2700_t-represent-good-value-to-the-playstation-gamer.aspx

...ok lol



Around the Network
Burek on 30 July 2014
jlmurph2 said:
walsufnir said:
So much for Sony and EA Access:

“We evaluated the EA Access subscription offering and decided that it does not bring the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect,” a Sony representative told us via email. “PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer"

Thanks Sony for deciding for your customers what is of value and what isn't.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/07/30/sony-ea-access-doesn_2700_t-represent-good-value-to-the-playstation-gamer.aspx

...ok lol

Well, I guess timed exclusivity is off the table then.



Conegamer on 30 July 2014
DirtyP2002 said:
$4.99 per month... or 4 hours of PSNow.

Probably should have stepped in earlier, but no more comments like this will be tolerated. Try and keep things on topic and nice and civil as well please!



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

jlmurph2 on 30 July 2014
Burek said:
jlmurph2 said:
walsufnir said:
So much for Sony and EA Access:

“We evaluated the EA Access subscription offering and decided that it does not bring the kind of value PlayStation customers have come to expect,” a Sony representative told us via email. “PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer"

Thanks Sony for deciding for your customers what is of value and what isn't.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/07/30/sony-ea-access-doesn_2700_t-represent-good-value-to-the-playstation-gamer.aspx

...ok lol

Well, I guess timed exclusivity is off the table then.


Yeah, sorry man.



Headshot on 30 July 2014
BillyBong said:

How do you guys think this will impact retail EA titles sales on the x1 if people began to prefer to wait 6-9 months and get the title via subscription?  Hell.. If I knew I'd eventually get the game by being patient then why would I need to buy it on release?


It'll effect certain games more than others. Plus, look at EA games with the exception of biowares and most of them are either annually released sports games which people won't want to wait for or games known for their multiplayer like titanfall and battlefield which people also won't want to wait for because by then the population will have died down and generally you want to play these games as soon as possible. However it does seem like some of these games will be available at launch on ea access which might impact retail quite a bit.



endimion on 30 July 2014
prayformojo said:
NobleTeam360 said:
prayformojo said:


People in general are ignorant to a fault. Most people read about this sort of thing, think about the entry cost, and instantly fall for it like well trained, gullible little circus animals. They can't see the big picture even if you laid it out in front of them.

Companies like EA, they want to take the games out of your hands. That's what they want and they're trying anything they can to achieve this goal. Why? Because most of their games are sports titles and sports titles are the ones that get traded into Gamestop or sold on Ebay the most. This hurts their bottom line. Instead of developing better games that people want to hold onto, they'd rather continue with their profit margins as is and find a way to prevent you from doing what you want with the half assed game you bought.

So what's better than this deal? Create an all you can eat model which prevents second hand sales by manipulation (low price point up front). It's the definition of consumer manipulation and most people are too ignorant to ever notice.

Personally, I want to own what I play and do what I want with it. That copy of Madden? It will run for however long I want it to run for. It won't be inaccessible in 10 years when EA is done with the servers and if I don't want it anymore? Bam, an easy $40.00 on Ebay that I can put toward gas, food, other games, movies or that hot girl at work I want to bang lol. 

Subscription services are a scam and only pay off for a very small amount of people. The majority of people end up spending more and don't even realize it.

Damn that must be one hell of an Madden game if you still get 40 bucks for it 10 years from now . Also I guess you must not care for GWG or PS+ or Netflix or Amazon Prime...... since you know you don't care for supscription services and all.

Netflix doesn't bother me because most of the movies on there are movies I wouldn't buy. As far as everything else? It's a scam. Do you honestly think these companies haven't hired mathematicians to figure all this out ahead of time? The majorty of people don't spend $120.00 a year on music. Yet, they think it's totally acceptable to subscribe to Spotify because...omg, only $9.99 a month? 

I am not ignorant enough to fall for something like that. If I were ever to do something like this, I'd crunch the numbers first and figure out if it's cheaper in the long run. And even if it was, I would still take pause because I actually, you know, want to be able to see, hold and OWN things I pay for. With music and movies, it's about quality (Blu-Ray looks and sounds better, CD's are well over 1,000 KB which murders legal downloads and streaming services), stability (streaming doesn't always work when you need it to), they are collectable and last but certainly not least, they're resaleable should you need to do so.

If you want to over pay for virtual goods which are inferior, never truely yours and have the shelf life of an open container of milk, then so be it. But not everyone shares that desire. When the servers go down, I'll have my game. You won't have yours. 

Buy cheap, buy twice?