Dude, I agree with everything in your OP but you can't insult people for having a different opinion than you on a games service and then tell them to listen yo your opinion on a games service. I absolutely hate that Sony fans on this site need to harshly insult anyone that doesn't completely love PS Now. Which is a crap load of people including Forbes, Polygon, and many other websites and their users. Some people don't like PS Now  and some people just have to accept that.

On the OP, I agree, but a lot of it is based on what COULD happen, with the only indication that it will happen being the possibility, and EA being money grubbers. That's enough for me and you, but won't be for someone more optimistic about EA or the service. (As you can see by the comments.)

CONSPIRACY THEORIST IN THE HOUSE!

You're arguing that EA access is awful by creating hypothetical examples of what 'could' potentially happen? Sure, EA could put fifa 15 on there for a day and remove it but they could also keep it on there for a year. Sure they could have exclusive DLC available only to EA access subscribers but why criticise them for it when Sony and MS have been doing exclusive or timed exclusive DLC for years and on a much wider scale. Sure this sort of thing has to stop somewhere but the main culprits are sony (watch dogs, destiny) and microsoft (cod, the division).

"And what about DLC? You buy the DLC and then lose access to the game. Wasted money on DLC. Have to buy the game anyway..to keep playing it. How many times do you want to pay for the damn game? Jeez." They would only be paying for the game once, when they actually buy it. Subscribing to EA access isn't paying for a game, its paying for access to the vault and the added perks along with it, some of which you completely ignore such as 10% savings on all digital purchases such as DLC and full game downloads.

Your entire argument is based around fiction and consumer ignorance. EA is seen as some kind of monster so you create these hypothetical arguments based around that notion eg. EA could remove a game after a day, create exclusive dlc for EA access subscribers etc. You also create arguments were you see EA access as restricting when it's not, subscribers are paying for 10% of all digital purchases on EA games and access to a vault which will contain EA games. They are not paying for access to a specific game although some may feel that way.

oh give me a break your saying its a ripoff just because they have a clause that protects them in case they have to remove something chances are any service that takes money to grant access to content has the same clause. im assuming you wouldnt want access to those products on a sony console then/

and even if they do put a brand new game that everyone wants to play all you do is sub for the month for $5 play the game then if you enjoyed it use the 10% off the digital version of the game and save a $1.plus you still have the whole month to play the other ea games that are still on the vault

also you complaing that they could put a game up and take it down just to get subs well sony and ms can do the same thing with ps+ and gwg. they can put up a great brand new game for the month get people to sub.

And since when have we started saying things like: "The X1 is more restricting than the PS4 because it's more expensive"?

Also to be quite frank for a second, anyone that expected similar prices from PS Now to what EA is offering here is an idiot. I mean has anyone ever even thought about the costs that each service means for their company?

EA: Offers older games that have all broken even in their serviece and offer you 10% discounts on new games and DLC, those discounts will only start costing EA something if a user buys several EA games in one month of this subscription and then simply drops it, the plan for EA though is to lure users into renewing the subscription as is the case with every single subscription out there. Overall EA has basically no sunk costs or costs at all here and has to use almost no resources to run the service.

Sony: Offers you to stream games to, in the future, any device with a screen, thus having huge server costs every year. Every single time you stream a game through PS Now you're actively using a service that Sony has to pay for.

The whole EA Access vs PS Now comparison is extremely shortsighted, I mean just look at what the services actually offer:

Stream an older game from a library of different games from different publishers and developers to your PS4, PS3, PSV and later on TV, Smartphone and Tablet for a time that depends on what you pay (a sum which might still need some tweaking) vs. download and play an not quite as old game from EA that EA chooses to let you play for the amount of time that EA chooses to let you play it on your X1 for a fixed subscription.

Seriously the likeness between the 2 services is small at best.

Also, just curious here, why is that EA service not available on PC?

-  u need a vita, or playstaion tv, or new 2014 bravia tv, or playstion for ps now

- "ps now games may differ, or lack some of the features that can be found in downloaded or disc based version"

and this:

- ea acces let u chose to rent for a mont or year, if u like the game(s), currently offered, or not. if u dont like them any more. dont subscrice any longer. dont see the point there. they wont drop the games after 2 weeks ofc..

Someone with some sense!

Why? We are comparing the VALUE of these services, not the services themselves. PSNow, as it stands, is WAY more of a rip-off than EA access - dime for dime.

If you can't agree to that then all I can say is H-U-Z-Z-A-H!

OP isn't even close to right, all I saw was a bunch of what if this happens or what if they do this. Lmao, kind of a joke OP when you really read it

Serisouly, can someone tell me why this doesn't come to PC?