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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - EA thinks EA access isn't good value to its costumers

FrontlineJaguar on 28 February 2015
DonFerrari said:
FrontlineJaguar said:
DonFerrari said:
FrontlineJaguar said:

Why pay a sub when ea keeps  on giving free games on origin and discounts.


Which shows EA knows EA access isn't the best value for costumer, preffering to give them Origin only in PC. Seems Sony was right so far.

Lame reason I must say

1. Origin is a service for PC through which Ea offers games to its consumers. The service is mainly used to play EA games but they also try to bring other publishers on board and yes few publishers do release their games. They need to attract consumers to their service so offering few free games now and then is basically a way to get consumers on board. Another incentive offered by them is Game Time which basically gives you access to more latest games for a specific amount of time. And like other services they offer discount on several occasions to boost sales during that period.

2. Consoles are not open like PC is and consoles are in much more controlled environment where companies have right on what is published and what is not. So therefore EA cannot offer Origin like services on consoles until they partner with console manufactures so basically EA decided to make EA access for consoles a subscription which gives you access to certain number of EA titles and also gives 10 % discount and early access for few games.

3. If you play EA games which many do I believe EA access has great value for them.

If you start comparing the price of a game and add them its better to just buy EA access which is much cheaper.

In Summary, Origin is better value than EA Access right?? I also think PS+ is a lot better value than EA Access... you can't say in PC it is okay to skip EA Access because Origin is better value buy say Sony is wrong for not ofering a third party service while the offerer itself don't offer it on their own service.

No origin and ea access are two different services meant for two different platforms why would EA compete with its own service in PC market. I think you are failing to understand the concept behind the two they are basically two different services targeted for two different platforms. And PS+ vs EA access is a different story where it depends on what do you play if you love to play online games ps+ is a necessary service for you and you cannot deny to pay for it. And ps+ free games cannot be compared with ea access games since sony can offer games from other publishers but Ea cannot and is limited to its own games and if one loves to play EA games ea access is a better offer but then also you need to buy xbox live or ps+ to get full benefit of those games. A comparision between the two is not fair.

And I repeat EA Access and origin are two different services for two different platforms. For example if in future Valve wants to offer it's games to consoles it might have similar approach like EA access but might not offer that service on PC since it already has steam on it.



Around the Network
LudicrousSpeed on 28 February 2015
FrontlineJaguar said:

Lame reason I must say

1. Origin is a service for PC through which Ea offers games to its consumers. The service is mainly used to play EA games but they also try to bring other publishers on board and yes few publishers do release their games. They need to attract consumers to their service so offering few free games now and then is basically a way to get consumers on board. Another incentive offered by them is Game Time which basically gives you access to more latest games for a specific amount of time. And like other services they offer discount on several occasions to boost sales during that period.

2. Consoles are not open like PC is and consoles are in much more controlled environment where companies have right on what is published and what is not. So therefore EA cannot offer Origin like services on consoles until they partner with console manufactures so basically EA decided to make EA access for consoles a subscription which gives you access to certain number of EA titles and also gives 10 % discount and early access for few games.

3. If you play EA games which many do I believe EA access has great value for them.

If you start comparing the price of a game and add them its better to just buy EA access which is much cheaper.

The bolded is really all that needs to be said and should be common sense to anyone who is into gaming at all. You're never going to come out even when you compare the console and PC market.

EA Access is EA's version of Origin on consoles, since they cannot put Origin on consoles. They don't need an EA Access on PC, they already have Origin. OP must not know a thing about Origin to ask such a silly question ;)



cpg716 on 28 February 2015

EA Access on Xbox One is a "great value" .. because there is no optional digital distribution channels like Steam, GOG, Origin, etc.

Games on PC are almost always cheaper.. So for PC EA Access is less needed to offer "value".. on Xbox One .. it is NEEDED for more options to obtain AAA games at discounted pricing..

It is a very simple answer.. to a very un-informed statement..



XBLive: cpg716     PSN ID: cpg716  Steam: Luv4Tech77

Predictions on 12/01/15 - Generation 8 Totals:

PS4: 85-95m
X1: 55-65m
WiiU: 20-30m

DonFerrari on 28 February 2015
FrontlineJaguar said:
DonFerrari said:
FrontlineJaguar said:

Lame reason I must say

1. Origin is a service for PC through which Ea offers games to its consumers. The service is mainly used to play EA games but they also try to bring other publishers on board and yes few publishers do release their games. They need to attract consumers to their service so offering few free games now and then is basically a way to get consumers on board. Another incentive offered by them is Game Time which basically gives you access to more latest games for a specific amount of time. And like other services they offer discount on several occasions to boost sales during that period.

2. Consoles are not open like PC is and consoles are in much more controlled environment where companies have right on what is published and what is not. So therefore EA cannot offer Origin like services on consoles until they partner with console manufactures so basically EA decided to make EA access for consoles a subscription which gives you access to certain number of EA titles and also gives 10 % discount and early access for few games.

3. If you play EA games which many do I believe EA access has great value for them.

If you start comparing the price of a game and add them its better to just buy EA access which is much cheaper.

In Summary, Origin is better value than EA Access right?? I also think PS+ is a lot better value than EA Access... you can't say in PC it is okay to skip EA Access because Origin is better value buy say Sony is wrong for not ofering a third party service while the offerer itself don't offer it on their own service.

No origin and ea access are two different services meant for two different platforms why would EA compete with its own service in PC market. I think you are failing to understand the concept behind the two they are basically two different services targeted for two different platforms. And PS+ vs EA access is a different story where it depends on what do you play if you love to play online games ps+ is a necessary service for you and you cannot deny to pay for it. And ps+ free games cannot be compared with ea access games since sony can offer games from other publishers but Ea cannot and is limited to its own games and if one loves to play EA games ea access is a better offer but then also you need to buy xbox live or ps+ to get full benefit of those games. A comparision between the two is not fair.

And I repeat EA Access and origin are two different services for two different platforms. For example if in future Valve wants to offer it's games to consoles it might have similar approach like EA access but might not offer that service on PC since it already has steam on it.


That still don't deny that origin and PS+ are better value than EA Access.



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."

LudicrousSpeed on 01 March 2015
DonFerrari said:

That still don't deny that origin and PS+ are better value than EA Access.

Origin is a digital distribution service for EA on the PC market. They also offer discounts and, at times, free games through it. But for the most part the service exists simply to sell games. You're comparing things here that simply don't compare well at all. Instead of comparing Origin to EA Access, compare Origin to the PS Store and the XBL Marketplace.

Even PS+ vs EA Access is a fools errand. One is primarily a gateway to online gameplay, with some free games and discounts thrown in. The other is a publisher specific catalog of free games and discounts. What you're saying is more like your cable providers Ultimate Movie Channel service is way better than NBA League Pass. Ok... your premium movie bundle might allow you to do more stuff and have more variety, but NBA LP customers don't give a shit about that, their service is literally just the NBA.

Either way even if you were right about any of this, which isn't the case, none of it excuses Sony from barring it from their platform and telling their customers they don't think it's a good value for them. You can say PS+ is much better until you are blue in the face, it's irrelevant. If it's so much better, then Sony would stand to risk even less by allowing it on.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 01 March 2015

Thats because it isn't a big deal. People just like to hype up things because they are exclusive. Sony was right not to take it. EA has very few things that are worth paying yearly for (if any at all).



DonFerrari on 01 March 2015
LudicrousSpeed said:
DonFerrari said:

That still don't deny that origin and PS+ are better value than EA Access.

Origin is a digital distribution service for EA on the PC market. They also offer discounts and, at times, free games through it. But for the most part the service exists simply to sell games. You're comparing things here that simply don't compare well at all. Instead of comparing Origin to EA Access, compare Origin to the PS Store and the XBL Marketplace.

Even PS+ vs EA Access is a fools errand. One is primarily a gateway to online gameplay, with some free games and discounts thrown in. The other is a publisher specific catalog of free games and discounts. What you're saying is more like your cable providers Ultimate Movie Channel service is way better than NBA League Pass. Ok... your premium movie bundle might allow you to do more stuff and have more variety, but NBA LP customers don't give a shit about that, their service is literally just the NBA.

Either way even if you were right about any of this, which isn't the case, none of it excuses Sony from barring it from their platform and telling their customers they don't think it's a good value for them. You can say PS+ is much better until you are blue in the face, it's irrelevant. If it's so much better, then Sony would stand to risk even less by allowing it on.


You can't say they don't compare and them justify they don't offering EA Access on PC at the same time...

If they aren't the same why wouldn't EA offer it on PC? It's an open platform where they can offer it anyway they want.



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."

The Fury on 02 March 2015
CosmicSex said:
The Fury said:
Ka-pi96 said:
Does anybody actually use Origin though?

I do, I've so far acquired 4 or 5 free games from them. Never bought anything.

But the arguement is a good one, why isn't this service on PC?

Because if you got 5 free games without buying into their subscription,  EA Access really doesn't offer the value people claims and with the bottom priced bundles from Steam,  EA can't really make the case on PC 

Those games were like small games or really old. Peggle 2, Wing Commander and DA:Origins for example. If they offered new games, people might go for it. The games they offered on Xbone were out in the last year, just offer that.



Hmm, pie.

walsufnir on 02 March 2015
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Thats because it isn't a big deal. People just like to hype up things because they are exclusive. Sony was right not to take it. EA has very few things that are worth paying yearly for (if any at all).


You make it sound like this is a fact while it is totally your opinion. EA would stop the service if no one would use it, wouldn't they? But you are right, if anything is exclusive, people care for it much more than it deserves.

Imagine The Order being multiplat, there would be way less talk about it, good or bad, love or hate.



S.T.A.G.E. on 02 March 2015
walsufnir said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Thats because it isn't a big deal. People just like to hype up things because they are exclusive. Sony was right not to take it. EA has very few things that are worth paying yearly for (if any at all).


You make it sound like this is a fact while it is totally your opinion. EA would stop the service if no one would use it, wouldn't they? But you are right, if anything is exclusive, people care for it much more than it deserves.

Imagine The Order being multiplat, there would be way less talk about it, good or bad, love or hate.

What does the Order have to do with this? We're talking about services. Thanks to Valve Microsoft and Sony have better deals. 

Tis better to get "Access" to games from various publishers, than a limited list from one publisher. Valve did it first and still does it best, Sony followed and then Microsoft did as well as follow Sony's PSN+ Method. Truthfully its up to people whether they want EA titles, but when you saw the abundance on the Xbox One that was the Ultimate Game sale can one truly say that EA Access could compete with that? Regardless of whether its on the same product, they are still competing. 

And as much as EA would hate to hear this, their annual games can be found for a decent discount at least a couple months after launch as annual titles mostly devalue. NBA live hasn't seen glory since the 90's and Madden is only alive because they paid the NFL to give them exclusivity so 2k wont make them look like has beens (capitalism at work). 2k's last football game proved just how much EA nickel and dimes customers on development, which is why EA has to keep them away. EA has survived by gobbling up talented developers. Personally, I just hope they haven't discouraged 2kSports from making American Football games...because they know they'll get destroyed again once the exclusivity is up. As for UFC, EA was better off copying THQ's method completely. The new UFC game is a joke.

You're right though, it is an opinion. Thats the best part about being in a forum. It doesn't have to be the final word, just an opinion.