So you're saying you, Mr. EmptySpace, knows more than the average gamer, the consumer, and the future of market dynamics? So you've put yourself in charge of protecting gamers from themselves and from 'possibly' hurting their own wallets?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Fifa 15 now in the EA Access Vault
- Thread starter Steverulez
- Start date
So you're saying you, Mr. EmptySpace, knows more than the average gamer, the consumer, and the future of market dynamics? So you've put yourself in charge of protecting gamers from themselves and from 'possibly' hurting their own wallets?
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Gamers have constantly proven they little backbone to stand up against what companies push forward (overpriced DLC, broken games they still eat it up).
Regardless I don't think it any other company has any business pushing their own games service on PlayStation.
sadly it could happen
I keep hoping these "sony have our best interest at heart" post are satyre
megabytecr
Member
I bought it in a good deal in Nov or Dec last year, $35.
I am jelly of XB1 owners, seems like a great value, hoping this comes to PS4.
I am jelly of XB1 owners, seems like a great value, hoping this comes to PS4.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I didn't respond to this thread or any like it until the flood of posts claiming that PS4 really needs this started appearing. If you can't handle a dissenting opinion that's your problem. I think my reason for not wanting it is quite rational. I have not seen any one give convincing evidence otherwise other than "choices are good."
Hans.Gruber
Banned
Exactly what I'm thinking. As we speak every subscriber has a binding contract with EA thru MS for x amount of time for x amount of currency. EA can't change that.
If they announce a higher fee or less benefits, anybody can judge for himself if that new deal is any good. So we are totally safe in that respect.
Another scenario I read about in these "Sony save us from all these bad choices" camp is EA basically saying "You need to subscribe to Access or you can't have Bayern Munich/Patriots/MP maps etc. in your retail game". Again totally unrealistic.
And even if these moves were made by EA, GAF, Kotaku, IGN etc. would explode and EA would take them back (see, Xbox One DRM scandal).
AgentClassy
Member
Nice. I was never willing to spend the money on it but I really enjoyed the demo. Definitely appreciate this service even more. Peggle 2, PVZ, and NFS made it worth it for me.
I can certainly understand that you may not want the service.
What I don't understand is why you would want to deny the service to anybody else who wants it.
StudioTan
Hold on, friend! I'd love to share with you some swell news about the Windows 8 Metro UI! Wait, where are you going?
So how long would it take for all these games to show up on PS+?
Battlefield 4
Fifa 14
Fifa 15
Madden 25
Madden 15
NBA Live 15
Need for Speed Rivals
NHL 15
Peggle 2
Plants VS Zombies Garden Warfare
UFC
Your reasoning is that Sony needs to stick up for us because :
Frightening logic that you want a corporation to work in your best interests when their only interest is profit
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Maybe I am giving off the wrong tone, but I am not actively against EA Access on PS4. I would fine with it being announced at E3 or something like that. I'm saying why I "think" Sony turned it down and why I agree with that decision if my assumptions are correct.
Steverulez
Member
At the current rate? About 20 years. PvZ was free the rest haven't been on it. If that many sports titles were on PS+, people would complain
I don't think anyone is trying to force Sony into doing anything. However, it seems to me that an overwhelming amount of gamers are finding value in EA Access and since Sony has come out and said they're for the gamers this gen, shouldn't they at least try to placate their needs and let them judge if a service is worthy? If I'm a company and I proclaim I'm all in for my customer base, the last thing I'd want to do is make decisions for them, unless of course it affects my bottom line.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I don't think most of those games are suited for PS Plus(sports games).
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Basically all of those games need PS Plus to get the most value so it wouldn't really hurt Sony's bottom line in selling subscriptions. If it is a financial reason isn't as obvious as that. Unless I am wrong most people play sports games by themselves.
panda-zebra
Member
Some people might see that kind of attitude/response as being a problem for EA, but it's actually the opposite. You're not one of those guys who wants to be there day 0 to play the game for top price, but you're happy to subscribe and play these games once they're older/almost past their sell-by date and no longer likely to do much at retail.
Then they get to entice you with offers and early access and who knows, one day people might get so used to it that FIFA and the other sports titles are now a service you subscribe to.
Its very smart for EA to keep doing this and I am really surprised other companies haven't jumped aboard yet. EA doesn't see a penny for these game a year after release. People buy older titles used at places like gamestop. EA doesn't see any of that money and even if people buy older games at retail EA will barely see any of that money as well after all the cuts/splits. This way they make good money and in return provide a legit netflix like service to the gamers. They have no reason at all to remove the games from the vault. It would only hurt them if they did.
3-5 years from now the vault will have like 50+ games. And for that type of price its great value. Its probably going to be the future of console gaming. I expect Ubi, Acti and 2K to follow in the near future. I am hoping EA brings this service to PC via origin or maybe somehow MS brings the service to their windows 10 xbox stuff that they will be launching soon. It would actually be a really good way to kick some life into origin. Xbox owners have it good. Especially the people who go out and buy the console for the first time. 30$ lands them immediate access to all those games. That is a great value. It is impossible to deny that.
3-5 years from now the vault will have like 50+ games. And for that type of price its great value. Its probably going to be the future of console gaming. I expect Ubi, Acti and 2K to follow in the near future. I am hoping EA brings this service to PC via origin or maybe somehow MS brings the service to their windows 10 xbox stuff that they will be launching soon. It would actually be a really good way to kick some life into origin. Xbox owners have it good. Especially the people who go out and buy the console for the first time. 30$ lands them immediate access to all those games. That is a great value. It is impossible to deny that.
Well then what's the harm with EA Access being on PS4 then? It's obvious these sports games would never come to PS+ so who would EA Access prevent you from getting them on PS+?
It's obvious that the GwG and PS+ offerings this gen will be mainly indie related and not major titles... I mean sure that could change in time, but I highly doubt it. EA Access is just another venue to allow gamers a CHOICE on subscribing to games EA offers on their service that aren't and wouldn't be on PS+.
This is all hypothetical obviously because if Sony starts putting major AAA titles on PS+ regularly we can have another discussion, but for now that is more than likely not going to happen.
Spinning Plates
Member
Has any noticed any patterns as far as how long it is until games reach the vault? What's the shortest amount of time post release and longest time? Obviously Single Player games like Dragon Age take a lot longer.
CosmicQueso
Member
Well then why is it bad this service exists?
It's also possible that Sony turned it down to protect their own service from competition. Or some combination of both your assumptions and this assumption, or some combination of others or none of the above. All of which are fine.
But the fact is that, at this point in time, in the current market, many people see that this is a service they're willing to pay for. That's fine too. It's also fine that you're not in that group.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't happen. I explained why I think AAA games have not showed up yet(publishers can still sell them for more than they would get on Plus at this point, I think this tipping point is also when these games show up on EA Access).
#2 is correct by observation of industry trends alone. Online Passes..., now Season Passes. Things do catch on in this industry - and not necessarily for "value" reasons, more like extra revenue for the publishers involved.
As it's currently construed, for a gamer with specific tastes that include EA Games this service is good value. Sony deciding not to have it on their console is an arbitrary choice that people have to deal with - plain and simple.
But who will play FIFA 15 in 3-5 years from now?
Quantity of games is one thing but there needs to be a value in it aswell. Especially these heavily multiplayer oriented games.
CosmicQueso
Member
Nah, you hypothesized about why AAA games haven't shown up.
There's no reason to believe, given what we've seen so far, that a ton of big budget games will show up on PS+ anytime soon. There's also no reason to believe that any other publisher has a similar service in mind. You're against something not because of what it is, but because of some future desired state that may or may not happen regardless of this service.
Looking at EA's latest quarterly results (see Subscriptions line)... EA Access may be doing okay, but it's certainly not changing the landscape in a meaningful way:
There is nothing wrong with playing old games. Many people do it all the time. Just because a sports game is old doesn't mean its a bad sports game. People watch old movies on netflix all the time. Besides there are more than just sports games so I don't see why the value would depreciate. As long as they don't remove games from the vault or increase the price, the value will only improve over time.
From what I read, your first post in the thread is basically that this service isn't of value to you because you don't like sports games. Makes perfect sense! It doesn't change the fact that it is an incredible value to those that do. Heck, you could hate sports games and it could still be a great value! If I want to play Battlefield 4 + a dlc, PvZ, Need for Speed Rivals, and Peggle 2, then $30 ain't bad. Heck, even if you only wanted to play BF4, may as well spend the $30 and try out a handful of other games in the process.
My post was directed at those that swoop in and, well I'll just quote an example:
I mean, what is the bullshit.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
If no other publisher has a similar service in mind then why wouldn't they put their games on PS Plus? Some money is better than none, just like last gen(unless Sony is not willing to pay the same fees now which we have no way of knowing).
Like I've said before I buy my games so it won't effect me either way. Just my thoughts(misguided or not).
CosmicQueso
Member
It's a great question. Ubi, Squeenix, Bethesda all have conferences at E3. If they're going to announce similar services that's where they'll do it. Guess we'll have to wait and see.
But if I'm in those shoes, I don't look at EA's earnings and go "Oh man we gotta get on this subscription service train, NOW!" But maybe they will.
Why are you acting as if PS+ is a service that should have no competitors? You have to think of these as competing services. PS+/XBLGold feel mandatory because the multiplayer paywall, so they should be criticized, not the companies trying to compete with arguably better services.
That is Sony problem to "work harder" to secure the titles, which atm is all indie titles anyways so they are not doing it atm.
The consumer friendly answer is not to ban other options that could potentially compete
SEGAvangelist
Member
I think the service would do better with actual promotion. EA Access hasn't been promoted much so far, but I believe they mentioned doing just that in those recent financial reports. I predict Sony will announce EA Access is coming to PS4 at E3 and the heavy promotion will begin. We'll see much better numbers once that happens.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Well since I am being to forced to pay for one service I'd rather get everything on that one. Any additional service is not really competition because Plus is almost mandatory. Criticism or not nothing will change on that front. I feel like I have to keep repeating this, but I'm not against EA Access. I just see how it not being on PlayStation can possibly be beneficial in the long run.
Well we can agree to disagree. I spend far more on games annually than $30, yet the most value for my dollar this year has easily been EA Access.
Also side note: PvZ was never on PS+. I believe it was just free during PSX. So none of these games have been given out on PS+ yet.
You're contradicting yourself
If you are against EA Access as a service but not against EA Access on ps4, then why would you agree with Sony's decision to deny gamers that right?
Hans.Gruber
Banned
Sports games pretty much get added when the interest in the respective sport is low:
Madden 15 got added after the SuperBowl IIRC.
FIFA now got added since this football season is winding down (might be different in a World Cup year).
NBA got added before the playoffs started (because the game sucks)
NHL was last month's game (season is over acc. to Wikipedia)
Can't remember how long it took for UFC, sorry
The sample size for SP games is really too small so far to make out a pattern.
NFS Rivals was added Sept. 2014, came out Nov. 2013.
PvZ October 14 - release date Feb. 14
SEGAvangelist
Member
PvZ:Garden Warefare and Battlefield 4 aren't sports games. Same goes for Peggle 2.
Hans.Gruber
Banned
Edited my post. Forgot about PvZ.
BF4 and peggle were there in the base package from the start, listing these contributes nothing to the question I answered.
Uh. I know friends who bought FIFA15 at launch for $60. Heck if you really want to get serious, some of these people got $10-20 gift cards with their purchase for preordering.
They bought EA Access for $29.99 only because they want to play FIFA early. They want to start their clubs and get a heads-up on Ultimate Team before anyone else. A lot of these people don't even play anything else but FIFA and one or two games. They're so into FIFA that they just buy EA Access because of it.
You can trade in FIFA15 on Amazon right now for $21 or sell it on ebay for $30-35, and you received a $10-20 gift card when you bought the game. That in effect pays most of your EA year sub.
That's a damn good value. A damn good one.
You've stated what's changed numerous times yourself. PS+ is now mandatory for single player. That $5 a month used to be paying purely for the IGC, it isn't anymore. Seeing as you're not likely to be cancelling PS+ regardless of what games you receive each month, where is the incentive to obtain the same sorts of games that the PS3 was seeing?
It's not a case of library size, the Vita had good PS+ offerings the moment the service hit it (hell, Vita's PS+ pretty much encapsulates everything worth playing on that machine). We're over one and a half years into the generation now... and Sony hasn't even so much as put up Knack, let alone semi-recent offerings from EA and the like. At this point you're pretty much saying it'd be preferable to simply have no decent service in order to maintain the small hope that PS+ on PS4 will someday stop sucking. As far as theoretical future scenarios go, I think the current evidence is stacked massively in EA Access' favor right now.
So basically what PS+ did.
Then why have yearly sports games? Why not but football and basketball games from 7 years ago for 2 $ and save all that sub money?
Why boast the claim of dozens of games when more than half is yearly updates.
BeforeU
Oft hope is born when all is forlorn.
Just like what Sony did with PS+. Free games and cloud saves on PS3 and then next thing you know MP behind paywall on PS4.
/s
lol EA access is fucking incredible deal. I love it.
It's better to keep the games there regardless, even if they're useless to most people. They're not exactly taking up shelf space. You may have a friend that only owns last years version, but you can still use the old version in the vault to play with them if required. To be honest, that's one of the main reasons I would like to see more companies offer something along these lines, simply to have the option to join someone in a game I otherwise wouldn't own. I may not be willing to buy something just to play it with someone once or twice, but if it's sitting there in the vault anyway? Why not.
Hans.Gruber
Banned
Here is a picture of a 7 year old football game:
http://static.gamesradar.com/images...-20/FIFAS08ps2_093007_2--screenshot_large.jpg
And here is a 2015 one:
http://i63.fastpic.ru/big/2014/0911/fa/2b97d88f46800ce86a5de746100ffafa.jpg
I wouldn't pay 2$ for the 2008 one..... BTW the red head guy retired like 3 years ago.
Why do you even come into a FIFA thread if you don't understand the basics of sports(gaming)?
Sounds like you proved my point.