Opus Angelorum
Member
Nintendo?
-
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
Nintendo?
CoffeeJanitor
Member
Sour grapes from gaf
Subscription services are cool
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? 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
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
OverdriveOtaku
Member
Just the horror of uPlay alone, I don't think a bunch of people would be flocking to this. As long as they don't pull an EA and outright lock their games to the service, which doesn't sound like they would
for now
CosmicQueso
Member
That one console maker is "standing up to this" to protect their own paywall. You do realize that, right?
*facepalm*
Competition to PS+ is Games with Gold, Ubi Access wouldn't even be competition it would be a subtraction with an additional cost.
Lets use the absolute worse case scenario and Every major publisher has their own thing, you're now left with a situation where Sony can only offer their own games and indies, of which Sony's been criticised of their PS4 PS+ offerings so far might I add, there is no capability of adding value to the service beyond that, and you'd still need PS+ anyway to play your UbEActiTakEnix games online.
Nope. They aren't.
Yeah, I know. But I'm glad of it. Just imagine if every publisher start to this shit.
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
cripterion
Member
No one is forcing you to do anything you've written above. So you don't have to do anything.
CosmicQueso
Member
So you're saying subscription services are cool, but only if Sony does it?
Maybe you're not the customer they're targeting with these programs.
I can see some other people appreciating this.
More options for everyone else is always good. I don't want one of these subscriptions, and it would take a lot to talk me into them, but the amount of upset they cause is ridiculous.
This is what I don't get - nobody has to subscribe to these services if they don't want them.
You don't say. I though Sony was the new church. Thank to God someone open my eyes.
Marvel
could never
Not all subscriptions...
Alx
Member
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.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
For now, but when they would want to grow their userbase I'm sure they'll start to lock things behind that paywall.
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.
Well you can already see how EA for example redeems itself with the new Sims game..
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.
Knowing ubi? It's a terrible news.
CosmicQueso
Member
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.
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.
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
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.
ShinobiFist
Banned
I'm all for it, especially if the price is right. These subs will save me money in the long wrong.
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.
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.
Cave Johnson
Member
Clearly you're not thinking this through. Suppose this takes off with success, who's to stop them from eliminating retail copies altogether. This would mean we would have no choice but to subscribe to a service to try out an individual game.
Companies can cheat value because they accumulate everything in one service with no alternative means to play them. Theoretically speaking, they can jam in 90% shitty games in that service which you yourself would have no choice but to pay for; this does not account to the price that will inflate the more successful it is.
Convenience comes with a price, and this subscription bullshit is too damn high. Games don't magically get better with a streamlined service, it's a Trojan horse masquerading to funnel unaccounted cash flow especially if the consumer is not interested in 50% of the games. You're not paying for an individual games value, you're paying for a service - which can be abused especially to he business minded.
What's bad about season passes? I'm getting DLC I was going to get anyway at a cheaper price? Oh no the horror!
The past is the only thing we have to go on before the future becomes present and if you consider this EA and ubisoft look really bad
Past behavior is the best and only predictor of future behavior.
CosmicQueso
Member
Access to full game for a period of time =/= demo. And he was talking about SP and mission content being locked behind an EA paywall, which isn't the case.
There is plenty of doubt on that, and what do season passes have to so with this, exactly? This thing has nothing to do with DLC other than a discount on it.
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.
I hope you are ready for one from every publisher under the sun if this shit gains any traction.
Games as a service will really take off, and we'll be in a much shittier position we already are with pre-launch DLC and retailer-exclusive shit.
You have pay to an extra campaign, missions, when probably tens years ago you wouldn't have to pay for those because they were included in the whole game. But you are free to spent how many money you want in the dlc. Honestly, I prefer to not spent furthermore for a game two days after the lauch.
It took years for Sony not fucking up epically to be redeemed, right now it seems a big publisher is 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.
cripterion
Member
What does that have to do with offering a subscription?
Sony cut MLB13 multiplayer recently, should I take that into consideration?
Once again what does the Sims 4 or even NHL 15 missing features have to do with their subs? Do people take a shit on World of Warcraft because Blizzard screwed up with Diablo 3?
As to the other points, I said that because most people seem to be praising Sony for not being ok with this and making the choice for you. I get that you want more for less but truth be told, EA, UBI or anyone else for that matter isn't obligated to offer their games with GwG or PS+.
Handy Fake
Member
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.
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.
ImNotOnline2Day
Neo Member
UPlay Access Confirmed.
But it will happen.
Oh and honestly i think locking a demo behind a subscription is content being locked behind a paywall.
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.
Read above. I think DLC & season pass are a good example. I don't have so much faith in Ubisoft honestly.
Lol ok so you just didn't answer my question at all, nice one.
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.
I dont know, but I would imagine that the platform holder may also have a say, at least setting some borders and stuff? I know I would if it was my platform and i let another dude open shop inside.
but other than the platform holder, again its us who in the bottom line feed this industry with money. if they fuck up, they get no money. make this a rule and i see no major problem.
Jurassic Munson
Banned
Because Nintendo isn't worth more than any of those publishers.
cripterion
Member
After 17 pages and we still get posts like this.
I can only congratulate Sony's masterful PR for having so many gamers believe they can do no wrong and that it's all for the players.
I'm talking about this question I asked you after you said years ago we got DLC for free instead of having to pay for it...
You answered with some nonsense about Assassins Creed having day one DLC these days.
Just admit you're wrong if you are, don't pathetically try to change the subject.
Edit: Ah I see what you've done, you're going back and editing your posts constantly to make it look like you're talking about something else. Dick move really.
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
