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

Forums - Gaming - Sony was right, EA access is a rip-off and needs to flop

Digi30 on 03 August 2014

Man you people should really read the TOU on physical games you purchase.



Around the Network
Mr Puggsly on 03 August 2014
BeElite said:
Mr Puggsly said:


Sony isn't much better. They're pushing digital sales because it benefits them, you lose access to game if you cancel your PS+ subscription, it cost money to play games online, they mocked EA Access because it didn't benefit PS+, and PS Now is looking like a cash grab.

Nobody is more sly than Sony. They seem about as anti-consumer as MS but don't get the criticism.


Now is a rental service, do you not get that ??? 

Its temporary short term entertaiment, its not ownership or value based.

I know its a rental service. The problem is its an over priced rental service.

If Sony is worried about EA Access not being a good value, they shouldn't allow publishers to charge so much on PS Now.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

DonFerrari on 03 August 2014
Ka-pi96 said:
DonFerrari said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Yes there are, not likely to be any more though and that would solely be Sonys fault, they are the ones that bashed EA about EA access. If EA really wanted to react to Sony's condemnation they could stop supporting PS platforms entirely, other companies have done similar things, that too would be solely Sony's fault.

Yeah they put games on PS+ for money, not very much money though. Is it so wrong of them to want more money? Can you honestly say you would turn down more money yourself?

Well EA could drop their support for Sony and I wouldn't care... They probably wouldn't benefit much from it.

Yeah it wouldn't be a good choice but I was just making a point that they could do that, if they really wanted, and IMO Sony would be more at fault than EA if they were to do so.

Both would lose... who would lose more would depend on if Sony can keep good sells without EA or if EA could generate enough profit being only on MS.

But yes, if we were just to look at EA being pissed and cutting support Sony would be at fault (since even if they didn't made this awfull declaration it would be their job to keep 3rd party support).



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."

DonFerrari on 03 August 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
DonFerrari said:
Mr Puggsly said:

Their financial problems began before well before their $8 a month strategy. That's something they started doing in recent months. I've completed numerous games on the service and it generally worked fine.

The biggest reason for OnLive's failure is weak support. That's a death sentence for any platform.


Ok fair enough. But seeing that $8/month is basically 60% more than PS+ but on PSNow that could give you access to north of 1k titles in the future, and each publisher wanting a slice I find hard to believe it would cost less than 20 month... If $3/month is good value on 4/5 games on EA, imagine how much it would be with 20-30 publishers and thousand of games.

Realisticlly, if PS Now gets a monthly plan it'll only be for access for selection of games (maybe 100 titles?) not the entire PS Now library.

Anyhow, I think $5 - $10 is reasonable for a month acccess to a single game depending on the value of the game on the market. However, some games charging $15 for 30 days or even $50 for 90 days of access is ridiculous. Sony shouldn't allow that because, "it's not a good value for the Playstation gamer."


Pricing is dependent of the publisher, but I do agree that Sony should regulate it enough that bizarre cases don't appear (games putting a 50 dollars for 90 days access are probably because of publisher knowing the game don't have much replay value and if it was retail the game would be resold, and probably wouldn't take even one month to finish... sadly there are a lot of games and publishers like that).

Well let's see what they offer for subs... how many games a month, what is the poll, etc... then we can discuss a fair price for that.



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."

Azerth on 03 August 2014

so since were playing the hypothetical game lets say EA puts mass effect in the vault and in a couple years bioware breaks off and becomes there own company and with get 100% ownership of everything mass effect, and they want it removed from the vault. if they have the clause then they can remove the game without being sued or owning people anything. but without the clause EA would either A) be sued by bioware for not removing it or B) be sued by the customers because they didn't have the clause saying that they could remove content.



Around the Network
Wright on 03 August 2014

Let the consumer decide. They have the option to, on Xbox One. They're forced not to pay for it on Ps4.



DonFerrari on 03 August 2014
Azerth said:
so since were playing the hypothetical game lets say EA puts mass effect in the vault and in a couple years bioware breaks off and becomes there own company and with get 100% ownership of everything mass effect, and they want it removed from the vault. if they have the clause then they can remove the game without being sued or owning people anything. but without the clause EA would either A) be sued by bioware for not removing it or B) be sued by the customers because they didn't have the clause saying that they could remove content.


And how would bioware would break from EA without EA consent?



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."

DonFerrari on 03 August 2014
Ka-pi96 said:
DonFerrari said:
Azerth said:
so since were playing the hypothetical game lets say EA puts mass effect in the vault and in a couple years bioware breaks off and becomes there own company and with get 100% ownership of everything mass effect, and they want it removed from the vault. if they have the clause then they can remove the game without being sued or owning people anything. but without the clause EA would either A) be sued by bioware for not removing it or B) be sued by the customers because they didn't have the clause saying that they could remove content.


And how would bioware would break from EA without EA consent?

They would also need a lot of cash to buy themselves back, especially if they wanted to take Mass Effect with them.

But I think the point is just to show why they have clauses like that in their TOS, better to be safe than sorry.


Yep... no policy is really bad untill they decide to enforce it... So yep it isn't necessary to judge ahead of time.



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."

Azerth on 03 August 2014
DonFerrari said:
Azerth said:
so since were playing the hypothetical game lets say EA puts mass effect in the vault and in a couple years bioware breaks off and becomes there own company and with get 100% ownership of everything mass effect, and they want it removed from the vault. if they have the clause then they can remove the game without being sued or owning people anything. but without the clause EA would either A) be sued by bioware for not removing it or B) be sued by the customers because they didn't have the clause saying that they could remove content.


And how would bioware would break from EA without EA consent?


its hypothical just like the op



prayformojo on 03 August 2014

I've been saying this since day one. Anyone who thinks EA is going to give something for nothing is a fool. Buy your games people. If you don't, you'll regret what happens to this industry.