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

Forums - Sony Discussion - EA Access subscription service coming to PS4

Nice, this is worth it for Fifa alone for me and i think for Battlefield im gonna use it as well. Also you get a 10% discount, so you actually save money anyway. Also a 10% discount on Fifa Points is great.



Around the Network

I would have sworn that I already commented on this thread.
It's a good value. I had it for a year. While I had it, I bought a ton of EA games at a discount.
Mirrors Edge 1&2, Mass Effect 1-3, Unravel, and a couple more that I can't remember right now.



Twitter: @d21lewis

RolStoppable said:
Sounds like good value to me.

So sad nobody got this one. Just to educate the pleps:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-07-30-sony-says-ea-access-program-isnt-good-value

I assume this is another case where an evil company is suddenly not evil anymore because a console manufacturer is now dealing with them.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Ka-pi96 said:
DonFerrari said:

Considering what Sony said when EA Access launched seemed more like Sony didn't want it than just being sour grapes that MS got it.

Yeah, that's why I said dickhead hypocrites. They were being dickheads about it and it was also massively hypocritical since they have both PS+ and PS Now as subscriptions.

That is what corporate people do best.



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."

EricHiggin said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

I think, part of the reason is, that EA Access on XBO also offers 360 games, something the PS4 version definitely won't do. In other words, you get more out of the subscription on an XBO than on a PS4

Also, I think for PC, that's yet again a different subscription...

Looks as if it is a separate service on all platforms. I guess I can see why it make sense from both perspectives. Why couldn't it be one service across all platforms with one price, where each platform get's their cut and gamers simply get access to the EA games available to the platforms they play on? On the other hand, if that service needs to cost say $20 per month or $75 per year for multi platform, it makes sense to divide it all up and charge $5 for the month and $30 for the year per platform.

Still surprised there's little to no outrage by the cross platformers, but it would be directed towards EA and not PS or MS, unless they are a major part of the reason why the service is set up like that behind the scenes. We wouldn't find out either unless another Fortnite type controversy were to take place.

Almost all subscription services I can think of are platform agnostic and you pay for the subs itself. This is an odd and unwanted precedent.



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."

Around the Network

Considering how against this Sony was in the beginning, and I can see why, they must have gotten something big in return. Either a higher percentage of the cut than MS or some exclusive content for next gen.



thismeintiel said:
Considering how against this Sony was in the beginning, and I can see why, they must have gotten something big in return. Either a higher percentage of the cut than MS or some exclusive content for next gen.

I would rather they kept being against, and not because of EA games since I don't care about them, but that next gen when things start over there is always possibility of more publishers going same way. Took some time to other studios to go streaming still today Netflix alone isn't enough anymore.

We basically had a cycle of high movie/series piracy, netflix, low movie piracy, multiple stream providers, high piracy. Because what made piracy go away was the low cost and easyness of getting all content on netflix, but with the plethora of services that is going away.

Let's see if Stadia, PSNow, MS effort and others streaming games and starting to make exclusives and other platforms follow if we will go to a worse situation.



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."

vivster said:
RolStoppable said:
Sounds like good value to me.

So sad nobody got this one. Just to educate the pleps:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-07-30-sony-says-ea-access-program-isnt-good-value

I assume this is another case where an evil company is suddenly not evil anymore because a console manufacturer is now dealing with them.

I'm sure multiple people got it.  Sony's leadership in 2014 is completely different than that in 2019.  Whose to say that the same spokesman who was quoted is even there anymore.  Not being a value in 2014 doesn't mean its not a value forever, and with a new team in place, it seems its now a value.



Train wreck said:
vivster said:

So sad nobody got this one. Just to educate the pleps:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-07-30-sony-says-ea-access-program-isnt-good-value

I assume this is another case where an evil company is suddenly not evil anymore because a console manufacturer is now dealing with them.

I'm sure multiple people got it.  Sony's leadership in 2014 is completely different than that in 2019.  Whose to say that the same spokesman who was quoted is even there anymore.  Not being a value in 2014 doesn't mean its not a value forever, and with a new team in place, it seems its now a value.

Still a deal with one of the most evil companies.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

thismeintiel said:
Considering how against this Sony was in the beginning, and I can see why, they must have gotten something big in return. Either a higher percentage of the cut than MS or some exclusive content for next gen.

They were against it because it “wasn’t a good value”. So you’re saying Sony is now ok with offering their loyal customers a “bad value” service so long as Sony gets some money in return? Sounds pretty crappy.

A better, more likely explanation is Sony has had changes in management and strategy and are no longer against another service being offered on their platform. Maybe it’s the difference 90-whatever million consoles can afford them. Maybe they realized it’s been years and all this fear mongering stuff about EA Access leading to Ubisoft Access and Sega Access and Capcom Access and Namco Access etc etc was nonsense.