The only thing surprising about this is that it took them this long

Good for them. I hope it's not store exclusive, people hate that.

Good. UBI is easily better than EA.

I'm just waiting for the day where we can have subscription to any gaming studio/publisher and have unlimited access to their games for as long as we pay, no matter how old they are. How much would you be willing to pay a year to be able to at EVERY Nintendo game ever created by Nintendo, including the ones yet to come out? If I think about how much I spend on Nintendo games alone every year, then these annual passes being as cheap as they are seems crazy to me haha.

Good, because being able to buy it from multiple storefronts gives users more of a choice. 

Look at Nintendo's first party title sales. Look at the attach rate of first party titles on Nintendo consoles.

They would be throwing away money by doing this.

With everything becoming services on top of services, piracy seems more and more attractive by the minute.

Seems like both the media and games industry haven't caught onto this big problem yet. It'll only get more annoying over time. All these sub costs will definitely add up and become more costly when combined, as time goes on. 

This is primarily why I do not believe in sub services for games, games that aren't an MMO that is. The same is what I see for the media industry as well.

"No one will follow EA model" they told me.

I'm not sure what the problem here. So far It's looking like I can get the entire EA and Ubisoft catalog 6-8 months after release for less than the price of one game per year.

I already buy more than one EA/Ubisoft game every year, so this would save me money and open up new titles to me that I otherwise wouldn't consider. I mean sure, that's the same downsides of PS+ and all of those other "subscribe to keep playing models" but that's only a downer if you're on the fence about paying $60/year for PS+ or $25 a year for EA Access or however much a year for Ubisoft whatever.