Opus Angelorum
Member
Yay, more ways to lock dlc behind a paywall! I'm so glad at least one console maker is standing up to this.
Nintendo?
Yay, more ways to lock dlc behind a paywall! I'm so glad at least one console maker is standing up to this.
Because if there's anybody who could make a worse mess of it than EA, it's Ubisoft
fucking uplay.
Yay, more ways to lock dlc behind a paywall! I'm so glad at least one console maker is standing up to this.
You mean just like how the lack of competition has drastically improved cell phone carriers and ISPs in the US?
Sour grapes from gaf
Subscription services are cool
Yeah, I know. But I'm glad of it. Just imagine if every publisher start to this shit.That one console maker is "standing up to this" to protect their own paywall. You do realize that, right?
It does not benefit PS+ at all which is why Sony is blocking it.Not because of some high morals high ground where they took it upon themselves to save us from ourselvesIn PS+ case, more competition means less games for the service, which is bad for the gamer since most of them will be paying for PS+ for the multiplayer, to even make good use of EA Access you'd need PS+ too.
EA Access...no EA games for PS+.
Ubisoft Access...now no Ubisoft games
Activision...now none of these
Etc
How does this benefit PS+?
So let me get this straight:
I'f this goes thru, you have to buy a console, buy a game, buy a subscription to MS to play online, then possibly buy a UBI/EA subscription to access content for the game you already bought? Is this the direction we're headed?
Just realized it's been this way for a while now, just by other means.
Wonder when individual devs are gonna do this... $5/no for Insomniac games, etc.
Actually, Nintendo should hop on and provide this for the e-shop and virtual console
Nope. They aren't.
Yeah, I know. But I'm glad of it. Just imagine if every publisher start to this shit.
Nope. They aren't.
It does not benefit PS+ at all which is why Sony is blocking it.Not because of some high morals high ground where they took it upon themselves to save us from ourselves
Sour grapes from gaf
Subscription services are cool
So let me get this straight:
I'f this goes thru, you have to buy a console, buy a game, buy a subscription to MS to play online, then possibly buy a UBI/EA subscription to access content for the game you already bought?
No one is forcing you to do anything you've written above. So you don't have to do anything.
So you're saying subscription services are cool, but only if Sony does it?
I just find it hypocritical. If Sony can redeem themselves in the eyes of gamers why not others?
I have to remind to you some beat em up where you have to pay to unlock some character? There are tons of opportunity for the company to lock contents just to have more money. They develop game, don't care to defend the customer integrity.No. The subscription doesn't unlock content for games you bought. Actually if you buy the game, the subscription is useless for it, except maybe for a discount if you buy digital.
The subscription is only useful for games you haven t bought: Unlimited access to older games in the vault, or trial of full games before they release.
If you really think the first iteration of EA access is where it ends and that EA will always give you the options you want, I believe you are in for a rude shock.
again, you are basing your critique of facts, based on assumptions.
I took up a subscription based on facts for the subscription.
when its time to renew it, again I will look at the facts that i will have at that point.
And for me personally, seeing possibility that ubi enters the ball room too, should be good news. we said so the very first day the ea service was announced, that ubi is probably the only other pub that can pull this thing with ease (ie providing good value so win/win for both parties)
for example, as I wrote initially their deal should be at least as good -preferably better- as ea's.
so how about making that ea 10% discount -> 20% dear ubisoft? or maybe 25% for preload? make me feel like I am getting more value from your service than the competition's.
and how about throwing more games than ea into your vault? do you have them? so lets see them.
anyway, they can prepare whatever they like. its their thing to do.
IF they have a good proposal for me, then yes I will sign up there too.
I dont see the reason why i should be feeling wrong or bad or scared about it.
Where I have said that? I hate to pay to play online, but I have no choice if I want it on ps4. Fortunately ps+ offers 2 free games per months, but I never concur with this practice. Now, just imagine company start with this, cut sp campaign with extra dlc. Jeez. Nope nope nope. I'm with sony. I prefer to have a single subscription. I'm not want to spent further money to have access to the full game contents.
You are very ingenuous. If this thing become a success, will happen without any doubt. Did you know the season pass? This shit cut things to sp campaign in the ubisoft game. I don't think they have started to develop the extra missions or the 'extra' story after to have released the whole game.Nothing is being cut, nothing is being locked behind a wall. You get access to 4 games and a discount on digital purchases. That's all this is.
PS+ is what is locking multiplayer and making you pay more to have the full game content.
nothing is being locked behind a wall.
Where I have said that? I hate to pay to play online, but I have no choice if I want it on ps4. Fortunately ps+ offers 2 free games per months, but I never concur with this practice. Now, just imagine every company start with this, you give them a lot of power. They could start to cut sp campaign content behind an extra casch with dlc ecc ecc. Jeez. Nope nope nope. I'm with sony. I prefer to have a single subscription. I'm not want to spent further money to have access to the full game contents.
It's just started with the season pass. Where I'm talked of empty box? I said they will feel legitimate the cut contents for more money. They did with the season pass.What if in the future they sell you an empty box and make you pay again to ship the disc to you? What if in the future your console won't turn on without you putting money into a slot on the front?
It's fun to make crazy assumptions.
Knowing ubi? It's a terrible news.
Why are people caring about this? It is all VOLUNTARY!! You dont have to subscribe you morons.
It's just started with the season pass.
What if in the future they sell you an empty box and make you pay again to ship the disc to you? What if in the future your console won't turn on without you putting money into a slot on the front?
It's fun to make crazy assumptions.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2014/08/11/madden-nfl-15-demo-locked-behind-ea-access-paywall/
I am sure ubisoft wont follow EAs lead in this because of reasons
You are very ingenuous. If this thing become a success, will happen without any doubt. Did you know the season pass? This shit cut things to sp campaign in the ubisoft game. I don't think they have started to develop the extra missions or the 'extra' story after to have released the whole game.
Sour grapes from gaf
Subscription services are cool
What's bad about season passes? I'm getting DLC I was going to get anyway at a cheaper price? Oh no the horror!
I just find it hypocritical. If Sony can redeem themselves in the eyes of gamers why not others?
Which is why I'm only talking about PS+ on PS4. I use it as an example cause to some an UBI sub threatens that but in all honesty
1. Not every one is concerned cause not all people have a Playstation system.
2. I was proven wrong and some people actually purchased PS+ service for the monthly games and not for the multiplayer component so I'm sure some would see a value in having several of UBI titles behind a sub.
So all in all, I notice a lot of people that are totally against this seem more about protecting the value that they get with their PS+ than anything else.
Well you can already see how EA for example redeems itself with the new Sims game..
It took years for Sony not fucking up epically to be redeemed, right now it seems a big publisher are still dun goof every other week, see EA and Sims 4 for this weeks carnival of stupid.
1. Don't know why not everyone owning a Playstation has to do with anything, same logic can be applied to GwG.
2. It can be a mixture of both, PS+ on PS3 does show that it does sell on the games.
And of course I don't want to pay more for less, that's a basic desire.
yes, it may very well be terrible. as i said, thats their thing to prepare.
what is our thing? Judging what they may offer us according to what we want, and deciding on the ultimate transaction: pay them, or not pay them. up to us.
I think the way this works keeps itself in balance. but of course we will see.
You have pay to an extra campaign, missions, when probably tens years ago you woudln't have to pay for those. But you are free to spent how many money you want.
And he was talking about SP and mission content being locked behind an EA paywall, which isn't the case.
Tell me of all these games years ago that gave away free campaigns? I remember buying plenty of expansion packs back then (same as what DLC is these days really), the most I got was free maps for multiplayer games.
Read above. I think DLC & season pass are a good example. I don't have so much faith in Ubisoft honestly.Let me know when any of this stuff you're panicking about is actually happening and not just some fear of what might happen someday in the future.
The first AC has not a single DLC from what I remember. But when Ubi has discovered the DLC, the hell has begun. They put thousand of DLC just the first day of the launch. Ubisoft is not exactly equilibrate when we are talking of DLC. Give them the subscription, let's see what will happen.
What exactly imply answer to your question about what I'm saying? I'm not sure the hell you are talking about. I give an example to what could happen, you don't care to what I'm saying. To be honest I don't understand at all what's your question & what it has to do to what we are discussing.Lol ok so you just didn't answer my question at all, nice one.
I think the issue is is that once they've got their foot in the door (which they have with XB), all they have to say is "this DLC yadayada is ONLY AVAILABLE through EA Access". They can easily continue that with "Only Available to CURRENT MEMBERS of EA Access", and boom, you've got it sewn up tighter than a skydiver's arsehole.
Right then you've got a large core of gamers who will be unwilling to let their subscription slip and lose out.
Because Nintendo isn't worth more than any of those publishers.After Ubisoft and EA, the only remaining big publisher is Activision.
Kudos to Sony for putting stones in their path for this FUCKING SHIT
What exactly imply answer to your question about what I'm saying? I'm not sure the hell you are talking about.
Tell me of all these games years ago that gave away free campaigns? I remember buying plenty of expansion packs back then (same as what DLC is these days really), the most I got was free maps for multiplayer games.
Because Nintendo isn't worth more than any of those publishers.