Jump to content

EA Play was EA Access (PC, PS, Xbox) - Coming to GamePass


Cyhwuhx
 Share

Recommended Posts

I guess this must mean that EA won't be shutting down the servers for their old sports titles going forward.

No. They will still shut them down.

My word. People really aren't getting this are they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, but your assertion that it makes sense not to do it because someone might call customer service is ridiculous.

It isn't the sole reason. And that was more of an illustration of things that could go wrong. Fair enough if you read something else into it. EA Access being more or less a direct competitor to PS+ while PS+ is still required is the main reason I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's currently absolutely no negatives to this. It's an amazing added bonus for anyone that is buying an Xbox One. Pay £3.99, immediately have four games to play. Incredible deal.

Perhaps EA's catalogue is a bit too sports game orientated but fuck it, that's their speciality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's currently absolutely no negatives to this. It's an amazing added bonus for anyone that is buying an Xbox One. Pay £3.99, immediately have four games to play. Incredible deal.

Perhaps EA's catalogue is a bit too sports game orientated but fuck it, that's their speciality.

Exactly! Even if you hate EA, Xbone or Digital Distribution I still fail to see how this is a bad thing in any way!... Especially as it's an entirely optional service.

Also, what actually are the negatives? Because not actually "owning" the games when I'm only paying £4 a month certainly isn't one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. They will still shut them down.

My word. People really aren't getting this are they?

So you think they're effectively going to continue to sell a bunch of games with crippled functionality? Or are they going to yank the games from the service?

And it wasn't long ago that EA announced they were going to shutdown FIFA 12's servers in February... then decided against it the day before the announced shutdown date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think they're effectively going to continue to sell a bunch of games with crippled functionality? Or are they going to yank the games from the service?

And it wasn't long ago that EA announced they were going to shutdown FIFA 12's servers in February... then decided against it the day before the announced shutdown date.

No I don't think they will sell games with crippled functionality. Where have you got that from?

Say fifa12 was in this package (it won't be obviously, but for arguments sake). They'll shit it down and remove it from the vault. Meanwhile fifa13 and 14 will be available to play.

They don't shut the servers down because they're arseholes, they do it because there very little demand.

If there is enough demand they won't shit the servers down. I assume that was the case for fifa12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I don't think they will sell games with cripple functionality. Where have you got that from.

Say fifa12 was in this package (it won't be obviously, but for arguments sake). They'll shit it down and remove it from the vault. Meanwhile fifa13 and 14 will be available to play.

Except EA have said they have "no plans to remove games from The Vault", so yeah...

They don't shut the servers down because they're arseholes, they do it because there very little demand.

If there is enough demand they won't shit the servers down. I assume that was the case for fifa12.

No, they shut the servers down to save money and to push people onto newer titles. EA are notorious for being very quick to yank online functionality from their games.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except EA have said they have "no plans to remove games from The Vault", so yeah...

Losing the ability to play FIFA12 online is rather less objectionable if you can download FIFA13 as part of EA Access, though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is definitely the future for EA.

Notice how they are going for games that are basically annual updates - even Battlefield 4.

Now look at the majority of the "major releases" each year, across the board, and you can easily see it tying into the likes of CoD, need for speed, maybe even Assassins Creed.

It also means they can cut back on the amount of content put into the annual updates. If you're only paying 5 quid a month, or whatever, most won't complain that it's only a kit and player updated for FIFA. It even a new first player story and multiplayer maps, using the same engine, for battlefield.

Then look at the in app purchase model - perfect for this! 5 quid a month gets you the basic version, if you want to unlock more stuff - like guns - then pay for it. Again, it's only 5 quid a month so nobody complains.

But what you get is a guaranteed 5 quid a month from several million console owners AND a move to in app purchases.

I think there's certain games that won't work in this model - games that are more standalone, like GTA, Metal Gear or even the Mario and Zelda games, but the number of those games are dwindling.

It's just the natural progression of the "annual update" that's been dominating the industry for a while. It's less like the movie industry and more like the TV industry. Either buy a subscription or pay to watch through advertising. Adverts don't seem to work for games, the subscription model might...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except EA have said they have "no plans to remove games from The Vault", so yeah...

No, they shut the servers down to save money and to push people onto newer titles. EA are notorious for being very quick to yank online functionality from their games.

But you've proved your own point wrong there. They were planning to shut down FIFA12 (a 3 year old title) and then didn't. Can't the same argument be made about Microsoft? They pull online functionality from games.

Also I thought they said that they could indeed remove Vault games. Wasn't that quoted in this thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's currently absolutely no negatives to this. It's an amazing added bonus for anyone that is buying an Xbox One. Pay £3.99, immediately have four games to play. Incredible deal.

Perhaps EA's catalogue is a bit too sports game orientated but fuck it, that's their speciality.

Well personally speaking there's sod all value for me. The last retail EA game I bought was Alice (from 2011) and even that I only paid nine quid for. So for me I'd just be paying £4 a month for a bunch of games I don't have any desire to play. I already basically do that on PS+ but my membership of that pays for itself (sort of) with the extra discounts I get on the US PSN store, I save more than the $30 I paid for PS+ against the non PS+ price of games.

Obviously there are people that will be into this, but I think a lot of people will subscribe to it because it sounds good rather than because it truly offers them value. The offer does sound attractive (if you're into EA games in general) but how many people here are truly going to wait ten months to play FIFA? Or whatever war game they release that Christmas? Everyone else on rllmuk is playing it at Christmas! And that's assuming they make it onto the service at all, because obviously there's no guarantee FIFA will be uploaded every year.

The 10% discount is completely moot because it's 10% of the Xbox One digital download RRP which is about 25% more to begin with than what a boxed copy would cost you and anyone paying nearly fifty quid for a download is nuts. I'm not sure how much value is in demos either, really.

So yeah, there's a market for this somewhere because there's a certain value it offers but people should give some thought as to whether it's really for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens when Ubisoft launches its own version of this? Then Activision? Then Take Two? Do we end up paying £4 per month x the number of publishers who's games we like?

Perhaps Sony were on to something saying "no" to this, if that is indeed what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, it does make sense for publishers. I wrote this ages ago in the PS+ thread but the economics are the same:

Average attach rate for this generation was 10-11 games per console, not all of which would have been full price. Lifespan of this generation was 8 years, so that's a little less than 1.5 games per year. PS+ costs as much as one brand-new game, and has to be renewed annually.

In other words, of every single PS3 owner had had PS+ since day one, the combined spend out on PS+ subs would be not far off what they spent on games.

So EA could perhaps afford to be a little more generous than you might think.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens when Ubisoft launches its own version of this? Then Activision? Then Take Two? Do we end up paying £4 per month x the number of publishers who's games we like?

Perhaps Sony were on to something saying "no" to this, if that is indeed what happened.

The only plus side to this is that increased competition offering a similar service may lead to even better deals in order to getting people to sign up.

Agree though that the PS+ model (all publishers under one subscription) would be a much better approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens when Ubisoft launches its own version of this? Then Activision? Then Take Two? Do we end up paying £4 per month x the number of publishers who's games we like?

Do people pay for Lovefilm and Netflix and Hulu+? I'm sure some people do, but I imagine most stick to one with the occasional purchase of something outside of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First and foremost this concept caters for the non hardcore gamer that never buy the big hitters at launch. This obviously does not include the majority of RLLMUK. EA get something from their games that are more or less past their sell by date and are likely to be selling poorly brand new on a weekly basis. It's a section of the market not really catered for.

1. Hardcore that must have big releases first day

2. Casual that only buy the FIFA's, COD etc on day one

3. Casual that don't really care when they get a release and are price sensitive

EA access caters for group 3. A group that doesn't generally spend much and is likely to buy pre-owned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well personally speaking there's sod all value for me. The last retail EA game I bought was Alice (from 2011) and even that I only paid nine quid for. So for me I'd just be paying £4 a month for a bunch of games I don't have any desire to play.

That's exactly it then. No negatives because you're not forced to use EA Access and can continue just buying games in the usual way.

It might even benefit you more as those older games would be even cheaper second hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people pay for Lovefilm and Netflix and Hulu+? I'm sure some people do, but I imagine most stick to one with the occasional purchase of something outside of it.

I think a better example is probably HBO Go, where you're paying for access to a particular studio's output, but yeah, it totally applies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you've proved your own point wrong there. They were planning to shut down FIFA12 (a 3 year old title) and then didn't. Can't the same argument be made about Microsoft? They pull online functionality from games.

Also I thought they said that they could indeed remove Vault games. Wasn't that quoted in this thread?

EA could remove vault games, but I'd imagine it would be in their interest to put as many old games on there as possible, as they won't be making much money on selling, say, Dante's Inferno at retail, and the more games are available on the service, the more attractive it looks to subscribers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.