-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ubisoft interested in EA Access like program, thinks it's good for publisher brands
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
I'm trying to explain to you the DLC at launch, are free contents in the whole game some years ago, then company like Ubisoft put them behind a wallpay (or capcom). I though was clear. Or I have to explain to you how they develop the 'extra' DLC at launch? A subscription give them the power to handle more contents sacrificing the whole game.
CosmicQueso
Member
Nintendo. The one publisher with no subscriptions, no nickel and dime DLC, beautifully made games of the highest reviewed quality of the gen with a fantastic console that is cheaper than the other two and that no one wants to buy.
It is certainly impressive. Whoever is running PR over there needs a raise.
Other than the fact this is completely false.
Impeccable
Member
After about a million posts about EA Access I still find it funny that when taking Sony into the conversation we're constantly reminded that Sony is in it for itself and doesn't give a fuck about us.
... yet the argument is that we shouldn't make assumptions about other companies intentions because they are good guy EA(Ubisoft) because as it stands now - it's a good "deal". Go figure.
Jurassic Munson
Banned
Nintendo could do a sub on their own system. This isn't an Xbox exclusive idea. They have the deepest and most valuable catalog to toy with any business model they want.I'd love a ninty sub on xbox. all of us would I bet. whether this makes financial sense for nintendo though, its something i dont know.
but I'd insta-buy that sub for sure
Stare-Bear
Banned
Their own paywall featuring games of every publisher. Not just Sony published ones.
Be prepared now to not only have DLC exclusive to certain retailers, consoles or pre-orders, now we get DLC exclusively for the publishers subscription service.
Well you were talking about season passes with me dude, not day one DLC. Let me know next time you want to change the subject mid discussion.
Edit: And stop talking to me in a patronizing tone when you can't even follow the discussion we where having. Editing your posts constantly to say something else is pretty shit mate.
Jurassic Munson
Banned
I agree with you. I was responding to the notion that Activision is the last big publisher not on this model. No disputing Nintendo quality.
Nobody is saying that, they all care only about profit.In this case Sony's best way to achieve this is to remove the choice from us.
Understandable but shouldn't be fucking applauded
What the... I give to you an example. AN EXAMPLE. You reply to me just talking of semantic indeed to discuss to the whole matter. Could at least say what's wrong in my though?
I edit my post because my english syntax it's not perfect, just to be precise, don't be paranoic.
It seems you can't get your thoughts across properly due to a language barrier issue, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. I'll just leave this discussion alone.
Handy Fake
Member
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=126134915&postcount=78
Statement from Sony regarding it. They're not wrong.
Ok, I'm done. You are right. Whatever you said.
Edit:
But I though my english it's perfectly understandable although the syntax; I hate when people use this excuse to have the reason. It's pathetic.
DarthWalden
Banned
I can't for a second understand why anyone thinks Sony is doing this to save those industry.
This is one of those situations that is a win-win for both the consumer and the publisher. thats the reason all these other publishers are lining up and saying "hey this is a great idea?".
EA has found a way to monetize games that would normally be removed from retail shops and/or be eaten up by the trade in market. In the process they are opening up new markets for selling there DLC. In addition to that they are incentivizing digital purchases (eliminating resales) and most importantly they are increasing there brand awareness. People who sign up for this are going to pay extra special attention to what EA releases because they know they get things like early access, the discount, and access to these games in possibly a year. I think the key here for EA is that the consumer doesn't own the game and only has access to it with a valid subscription.
It's a win for the consumer because the consumer gets easy and cheap access to what is likely to be a great back catalogue of games.
EA will be retarded to fuck this up and try to gouge customers and if they are stupid enough to do that then there will be three other publishers handing over a collection of year old games for a yearly subscription.
If you think they are going to put there dlc behind this paywall I think you must be retarded... That is there bread and butter pretty much and it would be suicide to restrict the markets access to this. The intent is to increase how many people have access to buy this... That would be similar to Going into Walmart and buying Destiny only to discover you need a monthly/yearly subscription to purchase games.
I think did EA is going to screw people over like they generally do its going to be in the early access program... 6 hour "trial" of a full game is far too generous IMO and I can see that being more restricted and/or removed entirely in the future.
Now anyone who thinks that Sony is worried about multiple publisher jumping is absolutely right but if anyone thinks Sony is looking out for anybody but there own interests is completely delusional. More cheap options to purchase games is never a bad thing for the consumer here. If this takes off and more publishers get added into the fray it is going to completely diminish the value of PS+ as there will be more competition for the consumer to pick and less games for Sony to pick from for there IGC. PS+ will be limited to indie and Sony published games which will extremely limit its value. This will also destroy any hopes Sony has of capitalizing on PS+ if company's like EA, Ubisoft, and Activision are offering monthly rentals of there next gen catalogue games for 5$ then what hope does PS+ stand offering singular last gen games at 5$/week.
Ubisoft and Activision are probably upset they didn't think of this first.
Microsoft is the perfect partner for this as well... xblg has never been about the free games and MS is looking for an edge right now to provide more value to there console... I think this is there edge.
This is one of those situations that is a win-win for both the consumer and the publisher. thats the reason all these other publishers are lining up and saying "hey this is a great idea?".
EA has found a way to monetize games that would normally be removed from retail shops and/or be eaten up by the trade in market. In the process they are opening up new markets for selling there DLC. In addition to that they are incentivizing digital purchases (eliminating resales) and most importantly they are increasing there brand awareness. People who sign up for this are going to pay extra special attention to what EA releases because they know they get things like early access, the discount, and access to these games in possibly a year. I think the key here for EA is that the consumer doesn't own the game and only has access to it with a valid subscription.
It's a win for the consumer because the consumer gets easy and cheap access to what is likely to be a great back catalogue of games.
EA will be retarded to fuck this up and try to gouge customers and if they are stupid enough to do that then there will be three other publishers handing over a collection of year old games for a yearly subscription.
If you think they are going to put there dlc behind this paywall I think you must be retarded... That is there bread and butter pretty much and it would be suicide to restrict the markets access to this. The intent is to increase how many people have access to buy this... That would be similar to Going into Walmart and buying Destiny only to discover you need a monthly/yearly subscription to purchase games.
I think did EA is going to screw people over like they generally do its going to be in the early access program... 6 hour "trial" of a full game is far too generous IMO and I can see that being more restricted and/or removed entirely in the future.
Now anyone who thinks that Sony is worried about multiple publisher jumping is absolutely right but if anyone thinks Sony is looking out for anybody but there own interests is completely delusional. More cheap options to purchase games is never a bad thing for the consumer here. If this takes off and more publishers get added into the fray it is going to completely diminish the value of PS+ as there will be more competition for the consumer to pick and less games for Sony to pick from for there IGC. PS+ will be limited to indie and Sony published games which will extremely limit its value. This will also destroy any hopes Sony has of capitalizing on PS+ if company's like EA, Ubisoft, and Activision are offering monthly rentals of there next gen catalogue games for 5$ then what hope does PS+ stand offering singular last gen games at 5$/week.
Ubisoft and Activision are probably upset they didn't think of this first.
Microsoft is the perfect partner for this as well... xblg has never been about the free games and MS is looking for an edge right now to provide more value to there console... I think this is there edge.
its not an xbox exclusive idea, but as we see it seems to be an xbox exclusive implementation.
on nintendo ip, I agree, I also find it more valuable than any other pub.
I dont know if it is because I grew up on game&watch, but also from a paidagogical point of view, in my eyes its worth many times over anything else.
Impeccable
Member
Where does the back catalogue come from if there is no back catalogue to offer?
No one think that, don't worry. Simply their interests favor more the customer interests, imho.
Oh ok, it's pathetic that you're changing the subject from SEASON PASSES to DAY 1 DLC. Go back and read my posts, where do I even bring up Day 1 DLC, you suddenly bring it up when I ask you about "free DLC years ago". Don't be a shit head because I can't understand your gibberish.
DarthWalden
Banned
Really? Because I can probably pull 100 quotes from this thread alone of people thanking Sony for blocking this program.
Impeccable
Member
What?
Sentenza
Member
I don't even know what the hell are you talking about. Where did I ever mentioned the end of physical things?
I don't buy physical games right now and I didn't essentially for the last 6 years.
Stop making up silly, dumb strawmen to serve your own arguments.
And I thought it wasn't.
It's a subscription. An upfront cost that customers will end paying regardless of the quality of what they will get later on the road. I have absolutely no confidence in this turning for the better for consumers, especially if the formula becomes successful enough to be a main source of revenue.
I don't have changed the subject. Season passes give free dlc (or give dlc behind payment without season passes). I simply used those subject how example. I repeat to you, what's wrong in my example?I trying to explain to you before the DLC, PASSES ecc ecc... those things not existed because the whole game gave those contents for free. Then, not all, but some companies, like Ubisoft use those practices without any limits. Just imagine to give to Ubisoft even a subscription what they could to do. It's clear what I mean?
Edit
Calm down, please.
Exactly. All these companies are the same, it's only the deeply delusional who think Sony is somehow different or special. In fact, if anything, the reason the PS4 is so good is because they literally had no choice.
The company as a whole is tanking, so they had to make the PS4 as appealing as possible to the "whales" who spend the most money. They had to set their "all in one" delusions-of-grandeur box (original vision for PS3) aside and grab the most people who will spend the most cash and have the highest attach rate.
Personally, as much as this subject interests me, it's highly circular at this point because people are making wild assertions as to what the future of EA Access and similar programs hold with zero justification. EA fucking up BF4's launch, or SimCity's launch, has nothing at all to do with any of this. Just like Bethesda screwing up Skyrim on PS3 had no bearing on the game being amazing and selling a bazillion copies on other platforms, or the Wii U being an expensive, underpowered, slow selling piece of shit affecting the quality of the games Nintendo was putting out for it.
I don't care enough about EA or Activision games, but I'm looking forward for Ubi subscription. I hope that means they will keep doing games like Child of Light to provide enough content.
And again, this was not started by EA, whoever paid for PS+ helped the industry discover a new gold mine.
And again, this was not started by EA, whoever paid for PS+ helped the industry discover a new gold mine.
I look at the general sensibilities of companies like EA as a whole and make judgement based on that, Dragon Age had an NPC that you talked to with a long dialog, that started a quest, then you get directed to the store to purchase the actual mission.
Need for Speed Most Wanted, Criterion offered an embarrasing amount of free content in Burnout paradise, NFS:MW nope, there are cars you can interact with that makes it seem you can ride but again, I get directed to the store to purchase content.
Not too versed on Dead Space 3, but I believe microtransactions was incorporated in a more obnoxious way compared to previous games.
Dungeon Keeper... Moving on...
Sim City, another example of the game being a step down compared to it's predecessor in content, online only DRM not withstanding.
It's a shitty trend I don't like from EA, and after all that I don't have faith that they're not going to continue down this road with this sub.
You're right they aren't, the difference is they've gone from a maybe their game will go on the service, to a garunteed no.
DC1
Member
You know that 3 isn't happening.
Hi my future self ;D have good laugh
Well you seem to have a clear misunderstanding of what a season pass does, season passes give you access to all upcoming (not day 1) DLC in the future, how is that locking content behind a paywall? You're paying either way to get the DLC. At no point in time have expansion packs been free for games, that is what you said to me though .
See I said to you
You replied with
Then I said :
and you replied with some shit about Day 1 DLC.
Do you see where you went off talking about season passes and onto Day 1 DLC and where the confusion came from? This would have been easier if you just went back and read what you'd written, then admitted you'd gone off topic instead of blaming me for misunderstanding you.
DarthWalden
Banned
Other than "because EA is evil", Why? It makes zero sense from a business standpoint...
OOOK. I just to repeat to you, for the last time, season passes, dlc I'm not discussing here of what exactly are those, it's not the matter of the thread. I'm not sure why you continue to discuss of those. I have explained to you, I have used season passes & dlc how example of what a company can to do if you give them too much tools to gain more money. This is why I haven't replied to your question, it's not that the matter of the discussion.
blazeuk
Member
Talk of locking entire games and season passes behind this is the point where the fear has got to you a little too much, how many people subscribe to PS+/XBLG (which is considered very successful)? What percentage of the total user base? These publishers aren't completely insane, they know how to make money and cutting off 50%+ of their audience behind a paywall is not a good way to make money, if half your potential customers would simply look elsewhere when a barrier appears then it doesn't make good business sense to help them do that.
People may not like the idea of subscriptions but it's a completely hypocritical stance to have if you already subscribe to PS+/XBLG, you either don't subscribe to any and make the point that it's all bad, or you accept subscriptions are now fair game and don't act as if people are just now causing the destruction of the industry. They're all offering games as part of it, Sony just happens to have the power to lock large chunks of games (online) behind the service too which "adds value". Should we suggest that if EA/Ubi locks their online multiplayer behind a paywall it would be of much better value too?
People may not like the idea of subscriptions but it's a completely hypocritical stance to have if you already subscribe to PS+/XBLG, you either don't subscribe to any and make the point that it's all bad, or you accept subscriptions are now fair game and don't act as if people are just now causing the destruction of the industry. They're all offering games as part of it, Sony just happens to have the power to lock large chunks of games (online) behind the service too which "adds value". Should we suggest that if EA/Ubi locks their online multiplayer behind a paywall it would be of much better value too?
I'm getting an Xbone this weekend and will definitely sign up for ea access.
When ea fuck it up, I'll end my subscription. If they don't, I'll keep it going. No negatives so far imo
When ea fuck it up, I'll end my subscription. If they don't, I'll keep it going. No negatives so far imo
Smh.
Yes, it is hypocritical. But I prefer the sony solution.
It will be used as an incentive to get more people to subscribe and to keep the subscribers paying since no one only wants half of a game.
It makes perfect business sense to try to get people to subscribe to your thing, Ubisoft had a Uplay exclusive preorder bonus version of Watchdogs ffs.
Lol whatever guy, you've got excuses for everything. Bring up season passes, suddenly it's Day 1 DLC, now you're just generally talking about everything. Don't bother replying next time if you're not going to follow the discussion through and just try to change the topic.
spoken like a ...reasonable person, something that I not often see in these topics
anyway,
Mister UBI guy, we are looking forward to your ...proposals too.
do your best and let us know.
kthx
friskykillface
Banned
So Ubisoft would be
Just dance 4
Assassins Creed black flag
That's it? Don't think they'd put watch_dogs since its still selling
Unless they put last gen games then I'll pass on ubis service
Activision I'd pass too since it'd just be Ghosts and Skylanders swap only (assuming no last gen)
IMO it only works for EA since I wanted to rebuy BF4 , buy peggle and play madden x FIFA
Just dance 4
Assassins Creed black flag
That's it? Don't think they'd put watch_dogs since its still selling
Unless they put last gen games then I'll pass on ubis service
Activision I'd pass too since it'd just be Ghosts and Skylanders swap only (assuming no last gen)
IMO it only works for EA since I wanted to rebuy BF4 , buy peggle and play madden x FIFA
Uno Venova
Banned
Can't say gamers don't deserve what will be coming to them in 5 years.
If you want the reason, I give to you the reason. I have not interested to annoy you. I tried to discuss to you, but you seem a bit obsessed to the semantic of the words. Without offence.
Birgitte2004
Member
I'm going to need this explained.
EA Access would add value to PS+, because you'd still need it to play the EA games multi-player, and there are very few EA games people would play without. Almost every EA Accesser would have PS+, and I'm pretty sure you could safely remove the word "Almost".
DarthWalden
Banned
Smh. That's a retailer preorder bonus. Completely different from locking dlc behind a pay wall.
Stare-Bear
Banned
Yes, they are not doing it at the moment. But thinking they won't is utterly naive.
What? You're just making shit up now guy so stop it. Where was I obsessing over the semantics of words? You said:
I asked you to clarify and you replied talking about something entirely different. Not really hard to understand where the confusion was.
Can you explain me exactly with some simple words what exactly you want to hear to me? Without to be offensive, if you can.
Handy Fake
Member
Not the Uplay edition of Watchdogs, which is why I purposefully picked it.
Watchdogs had 7 different pre-order bonuses iirc.
Just a simple apology for changing the subject mid discussion then calling me paranoid because I pointed out you were drastically editing your posts and then calling me pathetic for saying I couldn't understand your English.
Handy Fake
Member
I've a feeling you two might just be getting crossed-wires due to a language barrier here, mind.