Err.. a lot of this is just hypothetical worrying type stuff. Doesn't anyone remember people saying the same type of stuff about PS+? A lot of it is the same crap people said back then.
"EA don't access"
Your main beef here seems to be the mere possibility that EA can pull a "bait and switch" tactic and screw people over. Why would they pull something like that? Be logical about it. Which of these sounds better for EA:
A) a steady stream of revenue from subscriptions, be them month to month or yearly
B) a quick surge of one month subscriptions thanks to one or two big games they put on it then quickly remove it which sours a majority of people on the service and they never come back
The best option is A by far. It makes no sense at all for EA to engage in, well, really most of the stuff in your post, but this one is the most reaching by far. The rest of this point stems from the speculation about shit you don't know yet. For example, how long will FIFA 14 be on the service? Peggle 2? Battlefield 4? It might be nice that 6 months after you download a game on PS+/GwG you can go back and play still play it but chances are there's probably a reason you didn't play it for those 6 months. You make a lot of comparisons to PS+/GwG but fail to realize it's a different service for different people. It's for EA enthusiasts. So there shouldn't be "months in a row" where no game appeals to you. Otherwise, why'd you sign up? It's for EA games. Also, both of those services have put shovelware and mobile ports on their service, so why shit on the mere speculation that EA might do it? If and when they add those types of games, you can thank MicroSony.
"Slippery slope"
More sheer speculation. You have no idea if those games would have come to PS+ or not if it weren't for EA Access. Do you know what Sony pays a company like EA to put games like that on the service? Can you then compare that to what they'd have continued to make at retail, and/or what impact they'd have made on EA Access? No? Well then shit. Seems like a majority of the logic is based on unicorn farts. Oh and also, aren't those last gen titles? Why would they matter to EA Access? That service is next gen only.
If all those other companies put up their own services then that's great. The only people who benefit are the consumers. And you're at least right about one thing. If you don't like it you don't have to subscribe. As for what happens with PS+ and GwG, MicroSony will simply have to step their game up. Idk why as a gamer you'd be more satisfied with the status quo than the possibility of competition spurring improvement. Next gen has been here what, almost 9 months now? Have we gotten a single retail next gen title for free on either platform? EA is here offering not one, not two, but three next gen retail titles available day one, plus an amazing digital only title, and for a yearly fee essentially half of what the other guys charge. Now imagine if Ubi and Crapcom and Activision followed suit.
If you're a fan of those studios, awesome. Subscribe and enjoy. If not, oh well. What changes for you? Nothing.
"Slipperier scope"
Well, nothing changes in reality anyway. When you add conspiracy theories and hypotheticals, anything can change. There was no need for you to make seperate "slipper scope" sections and then claim one is hypothetical, they both are completely hypothetical. By the way, as I said at the top, you realize this is recycled doomsday stuff from PS+? When was the last time you saw PS+ with exclusive DLC?
Why would EA alienate a bulk of their consumers by offering exclusive DLC to their vault? Unlike PS+ and GwG, which 100% of the online playing crowd on MicroSony consoles are subscribed to, EA knows a majority of their consumers won't be vault subscribers. A much more logical solution would be they offer discounts on that DLC. And hey what do you know! 10% off all digital game purchases and DLC when you are an EA Access subscriber.
The incentive part about dropping price on games makes no sense either. Most people going into Gamestop to buy a disc based game aren't the types of people EA is catering to here. And why do you "(fake) appearance of a cheap alternative" in there? If you're interested in EA's games, their Access program IS a cheap way to play their games. Right now the 4 games they have in their vault retail for well over $100. Doesn't sound too fake to me, idk.
The part about selling your consoles to go somewhere that they don't get in bed to screw consumers is especially funny. Forcing companies to go through PS+ to offer games is also screwing consumers. So get dressed and head up to Gamestop and trade your shit in for a Wii U.
