I dont think EA access is good for the industry that I like but this works for the budget gamer. They are going after the used market at the moment. @$5 a month you can get 2 months on all 5 services(your list + EA) with 2 more months of your choice for $60 total. Thats not a lot of money, and if each one has even 4 available titles you would get long rentals of 20 games a year @ $3 a piece. I only buy retail(when available) but this business model is here to stay as far as I am concerned.

Never.

What worries me is the very real possibility of this brings down the value I get from ps+. But since this did come to ps4 its not so real right now, but from a xbox consumer point of view, now that games with gold is taking off, this could diminish its value, imagine if other publishers follow...

Are some people really this blind to what EA access can start?

EA access as a service is a really good idea, so is PS+ or XBL. But at the heart of every service the whole point is to get more and more people subscribing to the service. Best way to do that is to add value to the service. So this is what EA will do.

- Early access (game demo) becomes locked to the service
- discounts (something that everyone should do) becomes locked to the service
- DLC comes to subscribers of the service first
- Subscriber exclusive content (game features, game modes...etc)

Now imagine that every other publisher doing this. And the publishers that aren't big enough to do this on their own, will partner up and do it anyways. The main part is this, you are now paying for yet another thing that you could have gotten for free. You think it will end there?Eventually, we will be paying in excess of $40/month for games and services. Then if you want to get the sports package too (NBA, Madden, Golf..etc) you can tack on another $20/month.

Games as a service. There is no way that is a good thing.

So basically you end up paying full price (54+5) for a digital download, and you get a month access to a few old games. I can see how that's good for EA.

If you go all digital, buy at least 5 EA titles a year that you have to play on release, yep it's worth it.

It wouldn't be downplayed if it was on Sony consoles too. Let's face it. I mean, everything xbox gets downplayed as do things from Nintendo and to a lesser extent, Sony. You'd have to be blind not to see it's value.

Keep it classy, VGC.

I dunno, can we stop downplaying:
ps+
wiiu
ps4 domination
xbo horrible sales
game release schedules for particular platforms
every good piece of news about 'the other' console?

My guess is no.

indeed.

No, I'm not blind.

You are. More money for the devs and less second hand sales going to gamestop and others?

Ehh.... Spin it how you want. 

Less second hand games isn't exactly a good thing, not everyone can afford subscription services and full retail games.

I find it somewhat hypocritical of you to say people must be blind to not see the value, then in the very next post, shrug off an observation of the services drawbacks for the industry as a whole, as "spin", way to be impartial.

You attacked his point as if he was trolling/flaming, yet he states both eaa and ps+ are good ideas, just because he choses to look outside of the box and consider the impact the success of this service will have on the industry as a whole, does not make it spin, it makes him not blind to cause and effect.

This industry isnt just as new sales, second hand sales are an integral part of the industry, too, they dont get money for the second hand game being sold, but they do get the potential for each and every new owner of that game to buy any of the addon packs or DLC, a game thats sold back to a store may change hands once, or even several times, moving to cut out the used game market will directly impact sales performance of digital content, and when that happens, corners will be cut, and belts tightened to counter the effect.