TheSting said:
|
What? *Goes and checks for an option on Origin*
"And everyone's Kickstarter has merit." - Malory Archer

TheSting said:
|
What? *Goes and checks for an option on Origin*
"And everyone's Kickstarter has merit." - Malory Archer

Protendo said:
|
Lol "not worth the Sony userbase" "hope it sells less on PS4"
What? *makes sure i quoted the right person*
TheSting said:
Lol "not worth the Sony userbase" "hope it sells less on PS4" What? *makes sure i quoted the right person* |
EA has shown that it's not worth their own userbase to put EA Access on EA's own PC gaming platform....
I am curious, are you trying to imply that consumers shouldn't make financial decisions based on how they feel?
"And everyone's Kickstarter has merit." - Malory Archer

I'm not sure why people are defending EA now that it has an exclusive contract with Xbox One. It's still EA.
The bottom line is that EA is looking for another revunue generator and you are paying for a demo. If EA access wasn't avaiable, EA would've made Hardline demo available for all consoles just like they have done with every release since 2006 or whatever. It's now called a trial and pretends to add a false value to EA access. Its the same song and dance behind a paywall.
Sony not giving consumers a choice is BS. I believe it competes with some of their services and that's why it's not offered.
| dane007 said: how is it MS or EA fault as its sony who said no to EA access. The blame is entirely on sony and no one else. If sony said yes to EA access then sony gamers would have the same access. There are some really stupid people out there |
Why should sony support EA access, next day you gonna pay for capcom access, ubisoft upay and activasion transaction and what have you
vivster said:
Or maybe putting their most loyal customers before their less loyal customers? Yeah, what a terrible practice. Nobody other than EA would ever do that. |
Where do you know how much money ps4 owners spent for their battlefield hardline? If some on bought a season pass for 90€ thats way more than some one who bought a regular edition with ea access
I don't think this thread is about if anyone here feels this is an issue (with predictable answers from all sides) but why some make it an issue and why they react as the picture in OP shows us.
If people are uninformed what EA said about EA Access in the beginning then you can't blame EA now but these people.

| walsufnir said: I don't think this thread is about if anyone here feels this is an issue (with predictable answers from all sides) but why some make it an issue and why they react as the picture in OP shows us. If people are uninformed what EA said about EA Access in the beginning then you can't blame EA now but these people. |
to put it more bluntly, it's just butthurt sony fanboys angry because the xbox guys get the game sooner.
Because apparently getting a playstation exclusive beta nearly a year ago wasn't enough to offset a 5 day/10 hour headstart for people who are paying extra for the prelieage to do so.
Ruler said:
|
For you to start such a service, you have to have a decent sized library on a console. Whether you think EA's library is good or not is totally up to you but at least they have enough games to put in their vault. Others don't (for example Capcom).
And of course in the end you can always decide if you want to subscribe to the service or not. It is an option. If it's good or not to have the option is of course influenced if you even have the chance to get the option which could already be seen last year when the service was announced.

Maybe it's because I don't give a damn about BF:H, but 5 days is nothing to get upset about.
e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)