Support NeoGAF

[bebop24]

You give them flak, others including myself applaud them.

EA is not good enough to deserve a retainer outside of what I pay for psn. Send this scam to Xbox users to beta test. Let them embrace the drm service subscription model, where ea cannot even deliver working games. Although, I guess by the time the games make it into the vault, they have most of the major bugs worked out.

EA games don't hold my ps4 in the balance. I bought it without this subscription addition, and I am fine to keep it that way. If they have game of value, I will buy it.

A scam to play 4 games for 1 month for $5 as oppose to play one for only 4 hours for $2.99? So what's the bigger scam here.

 

[Amentallica]

They're stopping people who bought a ps4 from accessing the service because it is apparently "bad value". Something which should be entirely up to the consumer to decide.

And sure, let's force people to buy a £350 machine just to access this service, instead of letting our customers decide whether or not the service is bad value.


Yes. But according to Sony they rejected it because of "value" reasons.

You need to rid yourself of this pseudo notion that people can make any decision they'd like. And stop treating companies as if they aren't companies. They exist to make money and provide services in their best interest. You and many others just sound over entitled at this point. I wouldn't hesitate to defile something Sony, or any company for that matter, does should it actually be anti-consumer, but this is not anti-consumer. A bummer? Maybe. But you have not been stripped away choices that exist all around you in which you can access this service, or more specifically the games under EA's wing. You have choices. Not every company is going to do what every other company does.

 

[Afrikan]

I've already addressed this point.

We can sit around speculating all we like however Sony have stated their reasoning and it is anti consumer. Hence they deserve any flak they receive for it.

are you also currently giving flak to Microsoft for being anti consumer?

 

[jem0208]

By that logic, EA is also stopping people who bought a Wii U from accessing the service -- something which should be entirely up to the consumer to decide. And yeah, let's force the Nintendo crowd to buy a $399 sysem just to access the service. However, you insist that it would be bad business for EA to invest in Wii U. Guess what? Sony also thinks it's a bad investment for them to have that access on their ecosystem.

These corporations will always look out for their own self. Sony PR bumbled today with their choice of words, but do not make this about "consumer choice."

I'm done with this discussion about reasoning. Sony gave their reason and therefore that's the one I'm sticking with.

You give them flak, others including myself applaud them.

EA is not good enough to deserve a retainer outside of what I pay for psn. Send this scam to Xbox users to beta test. Let them embrace the drm service subscription model, where ea cannot even deliver working games. Although, I guess by the time the games make it into the vault, they have most of the major bugs worked out.

EA games don't hold my ps4 in the balance. I bought it without this subscription addition, and I am fine to keep it that way. If they have game of value, I will buy it.

Many others also believe this not to be a scam and that it's good value. In the original announcement thread there were almost as many people wondering why it wasn't coming to ps4 as those discussing the service itself.

You could applaud them. Or you just have easily ignored the service and continued on purchasing games as normal. Hence why choice is a good thing.

 

[Maximus.]

I am okay with Sony not supporting such a service. Rather than having every publisher offering a streaming access service, I rather use something like PS Now that is all consolidated. I know the pricing scheme is not the best for PS Now, but I am just using that as an example of a consolidated approach.

 

[Amentallica]

I'm done with this discussion about reasoning. Sony gave their reason and therefore that's the one I'm sticking with.


Many others also believe this not to be a scam and that it's good value. In the original announcement thread there were almost as many people wondering why it wasn't coming to ps4 as those discussing the service itself.

You could applaud them. Or you just have easily ignored the service and continued on purchasing games as normal. Hence why choice is a good thing.

I implore you think for yourself and not take their statements at face value. You have argued to your wits' end for several hours on how this is supposedly anti-consumer, drawing all types of conclusions, but you won't at least stretch their statements to dig deeper and realize that they're just delivering news nicely, or in other words lying. They're not going to say "we want to maximize PSN profits", or whatever their real reason is. Think about that.

 

[Rurunaki]

I'm done with this discussion about reasoning. Sony gave their reason and therefore that's the one I'm sticking with.


Many others also believe this not to be a scam and that it's good value. In the original announcement thread there were almost as many people wondering why it wasn't coming to ps4 as those discussing the service itself.

You could applaud them. Or you just have easily ignored the service and continued on purchasing games as normal. Hence why choice is a good thing.

Wow.. You take PR for their face value.. I'm actually saddened by this.. I wonder how you reacted when Microsoft presented their original vision for the Xbox One filled with PR speak..

 

[jem0208]

are you also currently giving flak to Microsoft for being anti consumer?

What anti consumer aspects are you referring to?

 

[CosmicQueso]

What are you talking about not giving the consumers choice? You have a choice, access it on Xbox One. It's not like Sony filed a lawsuit against EA to not release their subscription plan on every other platforms.

was crap when MS used this horsecrap line at E3 2013 and it is horsecrap now.

are $9 TLOU hat packs on PS4 okay though? And is that just because Sony gave me the choice to purchase them or not? they've deigned $9 hat packs good value so I should be cool with that too??

 

[Pimpwerx]

Sony seems to be protecting their own interest in PS+ here. Not surprising. Unfortunate for those who want to sub to the EA plan, but they might now find the Xbox more appealing as a result. PEACE.

 

[Rurunaki]

was crap when MS used this horsecrap line at E3 2013 and it is horsecrap now.

are $9 TLOU hat packs on PS4 okay though? And is that just because Sony gave me the choice to purchase them or not? they've deigned $9 hat packs good value so I should be cool with that too??

Uhh what? That TLoU pack is a waste of money, but they're doing it because people are buying it --- that is your average consumer. Now it has become a norm because the corporations feel that they can get away with it.

 

[Afrikan]

What anti consumer aspects are you referring to?

well I think with the way you are so concerned about these game companies being anti consumer, you would know right away some examples. do I have to list a couple? Current ones?

And also, when Microsoft had their fiasco last year regarding DRM, were you posting about your anti consumer opinions then?

 

[JaggedSac]

Origin DRM has so far added zero value to gaming for me and in one specific instance has actually created a massive complication for my game collection that has lowered my enjoyment of the hobby. So, to answer your question...yes. Origin tech help is also 100% useless.

In light of the existence of Steam (which works far better in general and has less intrusive DRM) I fail to see why Origin even exists. The same goes for Uplay, Rockstar's garbage, etc....

Origin exists because EA doesn't want to give Valve a cut of sales. Which is a fairly good reason to implement ones own distribution channel.

 

[Mike Double U]

The appeals of EA Access varies person to person. Most of my friends are buying it to play the vault games. While I'm looking more at it to get the discount on games and content I would already be buying (with the added bonuses of accessing the vault and playing new games early.)

I'm not sure why people are praising Sony for making this decision for them. One argument is that other subscription services might pop up. So what? If Ubisoft and Activision want to follow suit and make a Netflix like service for games then why does it even matter? You can still go out and buy the games without being subscribed.

I'm not required to buy EA Access to play NHL 15 online. I'm not required to buy EA Access to play Dragon Age: Inquisition. I can still go out and buy those games at retail or download them digitally and play these games the same way EA Access Members are right now. I just wouldn't be able to get the EA Access Member benefits to try the game early and to get a day one 10% discount.

All this is a Netflix like service for video games with two benefits as mentioned above. I can watch The Avengers on Netflix or I can go pop in my/go out and buy the Blu Ray if it gets taken off of Netflix.

Right now, this is a great program. The only reason I'm not subscribed is because I already own FIFA, Peggle 2, and Battlefield 4. Also Madden doesn't interest me. I will definitely hop in a month or two to get the 10% discount of games that I would already be buying anyways. (NHL, FIFA, Dragon Age, Battlefront, Mass Effect, etc.) And hopefully they'll have a game in their "instant queue" that'll appeal to me within the next year. I'm sure they will. If not, no big deal because I'm still saving money on games and DLC.

The appeal of this program is different for person to person and unfortunately Playstation 4 owners are not allowed to make that decision for themselves.

 

[Killing_Joke]

I think people willing to pay for a EA subscription on top of PS+/XBL is in the extreme minority. It makes no sense to devalue your own service to help out another. Once upon a time EA was playing hardball with MS over XBL till they go their way. Push companies their way because they want a piece of the pie. Want to buy used games? Buy online passes. P2W games making a lot of money? Force it in their games. Steam is better? Too bad we want it our own. Having major success with PS+/Games with Gold? Screw you we want our own. They even blackballed party chat on PS3 IIRC.

It's business so it's all understandable. Clearly they must have wanted something that Sony didn't agree with. I don't think they said to themselves "fuck gamers choice who cares what they want!".

 

[grumble]

was crap when MS used this horsecrap line at E3 2013 and it is horsecrap now.

are $9 TLOU hat packs on PS4 okay though? And is that just because Sony gave me the choice to purchase them or not? they've deigned $9 hat packs good value so I should be cool with that too??

Are the hat packs cosmetic upgrades? If they are, who cares if Sony is charging for them? As long as it doesn't cripple the game in any way, let people pay for pointless novelties

 

[CosmicQueso]

Are the hat packs cosmetic upgrades? If they are, who cares if Sony is charging for them? As long as it doesn't cripple the game in any way, let people pay for pointless novelties

Oh, I see. It's way cool for me to have the choice of buying these hat packs.

However, the line is drawn at the EA service because Sony has deemed it not to be "good value". I do not have the choice to buy that.

Great! Just wanted to make sure I understood the playing field.

Sony says $9 hat packs are good value = It's okay to buy them.

Sony says $5 a month for 4 full games and extras is not good value = don't dare criticize them.

good to know.

 

[ugh_the_boot]

The more publisher based accounts and logins I have to sign up for the more I am turned off the idea of multiplayer games. There are just too many to keep track of and I don't like signing up to this sorta stuff especailly if I barely buy any other games from this publisher. A good example if EA, I created an Origin account for SimCity and have not used it since the game launched (which was garbage) and now i've got an account at EA which I will probably never use again as I don't support their products.

Good on Sony for not going ahead with this service.

 

[Neuromancer]

Oh man you guys totally nailed it. Because Sony has micro transactions in one of their games they should open the gates to every publisher that wants to set up a competing service using Sony's network infrastructure. If only we could all share in the amazing future of paying $30 a year for every publisher's second rate, year old offerings.

 

[Hitokiri03]

My fear of this subscription services is publishers not reducing prices or making sales of their older games in way to make their sub plans artificially more attractive.

 

[Xenus]

People need to get through their heads in this case personal choice matters becuase it doesn't. Mob choice matters and is what sets the trends like it or not. Mob choice makes terrible decisions all the time. Just becuase you would see it as a terrible value and think it should never happen doesn't mean the mob does.

Essentially what Sony has done here is make it their choice for their motives and not leave it up to the mob. For good or ill. Also wehat people need to understand also is mob choice doesn't necessairly mean the majority. 2/10 of 160 million people is still a lot of people. So the minority of consumers can make a choice that hurts the majority.

In short people are greedy. Most will do what they feel benefits them in short term. Long term consequences or the greater good be damned.

 

[Neuromancer]

Sony not letting EA do this is like a town sheriff scaring off a wandering huckster trying to peddle his snake oils and patent medicines out of the back off his wagon. I say good riddance and let the fraud move on to the next town over.

 

[shem935]

I actively hope the EA plan fails. I do not want that to be a trend. It devalues plus and games for gold, and gives the green light for other pubs to do the same.

 

[93xfan]

Fine with me. I don't want every company to push their own subscription. I just hate that model.

 

[coldone]

Sony not letting EA do this is like a town sheriff scaring off a wandering huckster trying to peddle his snake oils and patent medicines out of the back off his wagon. I say good riddance and let the fraud move on to the next town over.

And selling vita memory card for $100, launching Vita2000 and saying that it will be just Indie games ?. Launching a broken port of BL2 without fixing it ?. You got a great Sheriff.

I would rather side with EA than Sony.. atleast they fixed BF4 after 3 months. Sony wont even fix most of their ports like Jak, God of War, BL2 .. after I spent 100's of dollars on those.

 

[furious]

Sony not letting EA do this is like a town sheriff scaring off a wandering huckster trying to peddle his snake oils and patent medicines out of the back off his wagon. I say good riddance and let the fraud move on to the next town over.

This is getting embarrassing.

 

[CosmicQueso]

People need to get through their heads in this case personal choice matters becuase it doesn't. Mob choice matters and is what sets the trends like it or not. Mob choice makes terrible decisions all the time. Just becuase you would see it as a terrible value and think it should never happen doesn't mean the mob does.

Essentially what Sony has done here is make it their choice for their motives and not leave it up to the mob. For good or ill. Also wehat people need to understand also is mob choice doesn't necessairly mean the majority. 2/10 of 160 million people is still a lot of people. So the minority of consumers can make a choice that hurts the majority.

In short people are greedy. Most will do what they feel benefits them in short term. Long term consequences or the greater good be damned.

Wow, never been called a member of the vulgar masses before. If only you could feed those of us who'd like to be able to make our own decisions to the lions, amirite? Cleanse the unclean from the face of the gaming Earth. Only leave the pure to drink from the golden teat of the gaming gods.

 

[yodathesoda]

The fact that people actively dislike a completely optional benefit being on their platform is mind-boggling.

If I only had a PS4 and had Sony decide for me that this wasn't a good idea I'd be pissed.

 

[Metfanant]

atleast they fixed BF4 after 3 months.

The fact that people actively dislike a completely optional benefit being on their platform is mind-boggling.

If I only had a PS4 and had Sony decide for me that this wasn't a good idea I'd be pissed.

the reason im NOT pissed as a PS4 only owner is that based on the games i play..i would be paying quite a bit MORE money by going with this program over how i do things now...so for me it has no value...but i do agree with your point

 

[yodathesoda]

People need to get through their heads in this case personal choice matters becuase it doesn't. Mob choice matters and is what sets the trends like it or not. Mob choice makes terrible decisions all the time. Just becuase you would see it as a terrible value and think it should never happen doesn't mean the mob does.

Essentially what Sony has done here is make it their choice for their motives and not leave it up to the mob. For good or ill. Also wehat people need to understand also is mob choice doesn't necessairly mean the majority. 2/10 of 160 million people is still a lot of people. So the minority of consumers can make a choice that hurts the majority.

In short people are greedy. Most will do what they feel benefits them in short term. Long term consequences or the greater good be damned.

Holy shit this is gold.

 

[tazz3]

Even if it did come to the psn I would never give EA any money

 

[ElRenoRaven]

Not saying I agree with him but he does have a point. Take Twisted Metal PS3 they never fixed that games online and it's been years. Course now it doesn't matter because it's pretty much a ghost town match making wise. There are still a few custom matches going still.

 

[meppi]

This is getting embarrassing.

After seeing how EA has been carrying themselves over the past couple of yearns I'd actually say that comparison is pretty damn fitting.

 

[Metfanant]

Not saying I agree with him but he does have a point. Take Twisted Metal PS3 they never fixed that games online and it's been years. Course now it doesn't matter because it's pretty much a ghost town match making wise. There are still a few custom matches going still.

im not saying Sony is perfect by any stretch...but using "fixing BF4" as evidence of "good guy EA" is well.....i dont even know what it is...

 

[sometimes i game]

Oh, I see. It's way cool for me to have the choice of buying these hat packs.

However, the line is drawn at the EA service because Sony has deemed it not to be "good value". I do not have the choice to buy that.

Great! Just wanted to make sure I understood the playing field.

Sony says $9 hat packs are good value = It's okay to buy them.

Sony says $5 a month for 4 full games and extras is not good value = don't dare criticize them.

good to know.

Funny. And almost a good point.

But hat packs are standard DLC fare. Tons, tons, tons of coordination and resources need to go into launching and maintaining a partnership/service like EA's.

 

[yodathesoda]

Funny. And almost a good point.

But hat packs are standard DLC fare. Tons, tons, tons of coordination and resources need to go into launching and maintaining a partnership/service like EA's.

How much is it to rent a game on PS Now for 2 weeks?

 

[bishoptl]

Oh man you guys totally nailed it. Because Sony has micro transactions in one of their games they should open the gates to every publisher that wants to set up a competing service using Sony's network infrastructure. If only we could all share in the amazing future of paying $30 a year for every publisher's second rate, year old offerings.

It's all equivalent tho

 

[staticneuron]

Is the pattern "people who actually have access to the service"?

As I mentioned before, the PS3 saw plenty of great PS+ content. However all that stuff means absolutely nothing in a comparison with EA Access, as EA Access is full-priced offering retail games from the current generation. What's the current tally on retail PS+ games almost a year into the generation now? If I want to play BF4 digitally today, without having to buy it for £50, this is my only option... and it's an option that there is currently no equivalent for from either GwG or PS+. If those services were currently offering stuff like Assassin's Creed 4, Ryse, Killzone: Shadowfall and so on, then I'd be able to see your point. They're not though, and so EA Access is already far better for me personally.

EDIT: Also, if you don't think the price-per-download EA sees from PS+ doesn't see EA losing out compared to seeing a recurring $5 (half of the entire PS+ share) for themselves... then your math is probably very flawed.

1. The narrative that I am seeing is that this service is beneficial as a choice. It seemingly coming from some of the strongest XBO supporters I have seen on gaf. EA's current offering on the PS4 iirc, are 7 titles, BF4, NFS rivals, UFC, PvZ, NBA live, madden and fifa. So unless you have a particular penchant for sports or you just want to invest in these scattershot titles then i see you have a point. I don't believe it though because most of the titles (5 of them) were launch titles. Most who wanted them would have already gotten them and if you only want one or two titles then it makes no sense to invest in a subscriptions service when you can purchase them outright to keep without throwing cash down the drain.

2. In the long run both services will not be comparable because you are going to get two games every month for every playstation console that is added to your list as long as you subscribe on PS+ Even if that is one console we are talking about, that is 24 games in one year. EA is a big company but again unless you are into sports you are not getting the same value proposition in terms of titles released. You may make fun of these smaller titles such as Fez, Towerfall Ascension, Resogun and Trine 2 but those titles still rank high on meta critic and the only two EA titles that come close are Battlefield and Fifa. So it is not like they are peddling crap there. If it is your thing 'only' to play big budget titles, I understand, but the concept of buying into this from only one pub and comparing it to what sony offers from multiple pubs, just all seems questionable.

3. As far as the price-per download, I am pointing out that since the service DOESN'T exist on the PSN then they wouldn't be losing out. Even if they did, they could still offer the service and maybe one of their games (from their oh so impressive current gen pickings, as you seem to be implying) and they should be ok.

Sony says $9 hat packs are good value = It's okay to buy them.

Are you seriously calling the Abandoned Territories Map Pack DLC, a "hat"pack? Or are you talking about another pack? All the hats are 99 cents so if they are selling bundled hats what is the hangup?

And selling vita memory card for $100, launching Vita2000 and saying that it will be just Indie games ?. Launching a broken port of BL2 without fixing it ?. You got a great Sheriff.

I would rather side with EA than Sony.. atleast they fixed BF4 after 3 months. Sony wont even fix most of their ports like Jak, God of War, BL2 .. after I spent 100's of dollars on those.

And there we have it....

You do know the issue lies with those titles being "ports" from PS3 in the first place, right?

 

[CosmicQueso]

Funny. And almost a good point.

But hat packs are standard DLC fare. Tons, tons, tons of coordination and resources need to go into launching and maintaining a partnership/service like EA's.

hey, I was just trying to reset my head. DLC is good value and subscription services outside of PS+ are not. I was unclear before but now I've been set straight. So I've got that going for me, which is nice.

 

[Xenus]

Wow, never been called a member of the vulgar masses before. If only you could feed those of us who'd like to be able to make our own decisions to the lions, amirite? Cleanse the unclean from the face of the gaming Earth. Only leave the pure to drink from the golden teat of the gaming gods.

Which is totally missing the point. It's not about your personal choice. Your personal choice could be pure as the white driven snow and as black as the ashes but in the grand scheme of things you are but one part in a million or more. Your personal choice is insignificant. Less then the statistical noise. The choice in large is made by a group and group decisions are not necessarily good. Anyone who has been in a college party full well knows the actions of a large group can be very very bad for the whole.

Not only that but a choice doesn't even have to be good or bad. A choice that could be perfectly beneficial to someone who plays mainly EA games can be very harmful to someone who plays the occasional EA game in this case.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

im not saying Sony is perfect by any stretch...but using "fixing BF4" as evidence of "good guy EA" is well.....i dont even know what it is...

True. That's why I said I don't agree with him there. IF EA was the good guy people are saying then they'd have never released it in such a broken state.

 

[Memorabilia]

I'm not trying to argue that EA not publishing on Wii U is a good thing. It sucks, however it makes sense business wise. According to Sony they rejected EA access because it wasn't good value for their consumers. Something which the consumer should be allowed to decide. That is straight up anti consumer.

You're presupposing that consumers always make the most rational choice with their purchases...which, in itself, presupposes consumers arent routinely mislead and/or ignorant about the effects that their choices make on the market.

 

[Neuromancer]

And selling vita memory card for $100, launching Vita2000 and saying that it will be just Indie games ?. Launching a broken port of BL2 without fixing it ?. You got a great Sheriff.

I would rather side with EA than Sony.. atleast they fixed BF4 after 3 months. Sony wont even fix most of their ports like Jak, God of War, BL2 .. after I spent 100's of dollars on those.

This is getting embarrassing.

I was kind of joking around but you have to admit there are some parallels...

 

[yodathesoda]

You're presupposing that consumers always make the most rational choice with their purchases...which, in itself, presupposes consumers arent routinely mislead and/or ignorant about the effects that their choices make on the market.

Thank god Sony is here to protect us from ourselves.

 

[synce]

Sounds like EA just wants an extra cut of what Sony and MS are getting from Live/PSN, and only Sony had the balls to say no.

 

[Memorabilia]

Origin exists because EA doesn't want to give Valve a cut of sales. Which is a fairly good reason to implement ones own distribution channel.

Thats fine and all the economic justification they need as a corporation. However, the fact remains Origin is sub-standard trash and gives the consumer no good reason for its existence in the current market.

 

[Memorabilia]

Thank god Sony is here to protect us from ourselves.

If its Sony platform centric sub vs. EA leading the charge for publisher centric subs Ill take Sony every time. But, I think you missed the point. Its a typical fallacy that people assume the market is perfectly rational.

 

[dubq]

Wow, that's a big number. I wonder why? Now that it's mandatory for basic functionality of a gaming console might have something to do with it.

That's a bit much..

 

[Xenus]

Thank god Sony is here to protect us from ourselves.

Thank god no one has ever made a bad decision in their lives or a decision while beneficial to them ended up hurting someone else. This personal outrage over a decision you may or may not make just obscures the topic away from rational reasoned thoughts and into taking it as a personal affront.

 

[Panthers]

I can understand that having multiple subscriptions for gaming services could be confusing to the average consumer. I think Sony is just trying to avoid a PR headache. This isnt like subscribing for FF14 or Netflix. Its a gaming service just like PS+.