Jump to content

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


Cyhwuhx
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here's one.

My friend just got into the dash beta this weekend, and wants to get into EA Access, he didn't get an invite to it though.

Could I recover my tag on his console, download the Hub, then sign in with him and access it that way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. One guy still doesn't know that the PS4 online service has to be paid for more than six months after launch and the other refers to these games as streaming games over and over, when they're not. Shit podcast is shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same disadvantages as any digital distribution service, hardly a false claim.

The fact that you lose the games once the service goes? Yeah I suppose so. Fair comment. It's still not gonna stop the vast majority of people going for digital distribution though (once the prices on PSN and XBox aren't eye wateringly silly for new games). It's just way more convenient. I've not bought any movies or music on physical media for years. I don't own any physical media for my PS4/XBone/Wii U.

Do you still buy DVD's and Blu-ray? Genuine question. I get your concerns but you're on the losing side with the physical media thing I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you still buy DVD's and Blu-ray?

Not even remotely the same. I typically watch a film once, then maybe if I really like it I'll watch it again in a couple of years. The ephemeral nature of digital purchases therefore barely matters -- I typically rent films via iTunes, so in fact I only get them for the day; totally ephemeral. But -- crucially -- the price of entry is less than a fiver.

Games, I'm spending £40+, and I want to spent weeks with it. And then it's either a game I know I want to return to one day, in which case I'm uneasy about digital purchases. Or I want to pass it to a friend or sell it on, in order to get some extra value for my money; not being able to do either with digital purchases is a problem. I'd say I've probably sold on two thirds or so of all the games I bought in the last console generation. That would represent hundreds of pounds wasted if I couldn't have done that. That's quite a steep price to pay for -- what upside? Not having to get up and change disks? Whoopdifuckingdo.

Cut prices upfront, heavily, and maybe I can be swayed (hello, Steam) but I wouldn't spend serious money on digital distribution of full priced console games. Nor would I use the "use a US account" trick, as it's explicitly against the service ToC and is basically a ticking time bomb for whenever the platform holder decides to delete them from your account. I'm not comfortable with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. One guy still doesn't know that the PS4 online service has to be paid for more than six months after launch and the other refers to these games as streaming games over and over, when they're not. Shit podcast is shit.

"Yeah but you get ps+ games with that"

Games with gold?

This has been the most amazing reveal in years. EA offer a decent service but because a bunch of bellends can't get over their weird mentality about EA being the devil they try every way they can think of to put it down and when it's clear that there are no massive negatives... They can't bring themselves to back down and expose themselves more and more as the odd balls they are.

Edit: to those who have negged, please, I'm begging you to tell me what the negative side to this service is instead of just clicking the button and running off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Yeah but you get ps+ games with that"

Games with gold?

This has been the most amazing reveal in years. EA offer a decent service but because a bunch of bellends can't get over their weird mentality about EA being the devil they try every way they can think of to put it down and when it's clear that there are no massive negatives... They can't bring themselves to back down and expose themselves more and more as the odd balls they are.

Yeah, because they don't have a track record of making nice gestures that turn out to be anti consumer. Never happened has it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that you lose the games once the service goes? Yeah I suppose so. Fair comment. It's still not gonna stop the vast majority of people going for digital distribution though (once the prices on PSN and XBox aren't eye wateringly silly for new games). It's just way more convenient. I've not bought any movies or music on physical media for years. I don't own any physical media for my PS4/XBone/Wii U.

Do you still buy DVD's and Blu-ray? Genuine question. I get your concerns but you're on the losing side with the physical media thing I think.

I wasn't considering the loss of subscription, just that the nature of many modern games + subscription lead to less then stellar gaming when offline.

In EA's case, they're going about it in an odd way. Like the video mentions, over time the consumer is going to want all of these things in a single package. Gaming separated over different subscriptions? Then Netflix and all the rest? Starting out the service by telling the consumer that nothing Titanfall related will be in it? Wouldn't you rather not mention Titanfall at all and just add it a year down the road like you no doubt will (unless completely bonkers?).

Then there's the case of the value of the EA titles themselves. Any physical edition of Maddan/Fifa becomes dirt cheap after a while. From a money prospective, the physical copy would win over the £20 deal, at least in the sports titles regard. The only reason the rock bottom prices don't apply to next-gen yet is because next-gen hasn't been around a while, yet.

We're also not clear, unlike PS+, on what we'll be getting long term, when will titles be switched up? As a consumer I'm still getting infinitely more value with PS+ than EA's offering at first glance, which is also mentioned in the video. Why is it single platform currently?

This isn't a debate on physical/digital. It's me laughing at EA's attempt and feeling, no doubt, that they'll screw it up (and screw the consumer) down the road.

PS. I'm an avid user of Steam and been subbed to PS+ for approaching 3 years. I buy DVD's/Blu-Ray's to my fav films/shows (ST:TNG Season 6 will be next) as they'll always be superior to what stream offers + special features + internet connection is never a God given right/a certainty + Netflix just doesn't provide all the stuff I want to watch (saying that, I've been subbed to Netflix for a couple years also, given it's fairly low price compared to something like Sky).

I still buy physical games where and when it makes sense. £40-50 digital will never make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, because they don't have a track record of making nice gestures that turn out to be anti consumer. Never happened has it.

So your argument against EA access is that although it's good, EA might do something bad later?

That's the argument?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then there's the case of the value of the EA titles themselves. Any physical edition of Maddan/Fifa becomes dirt cheap after a while. From a money prospective, the physical copy would win over the £20 deal, at least in the sports titles regard.

FIFA14 for Xbox 360 is currently being sold for £19.99 on amazon.

Or one year of EA access.

I agree about digital distribution at the moment. It's too expensive and you can't sell on. That's why I don't buy my games in that way. But you're mad to say that ea access isn't great value for money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is if you're not a fan of EA games. I'd rather pay the extra for a PS+ subscription, personally and get more choice.

Edit: that was meant as a reply to Elmo.

Well yeah if you don't like EA games this isn't a good service. But then again it's completely optional and aimed at people who do like EA games.

There's not a choice of either EA Access or improved PS+. It's just a service being offered that you can subscribe to or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So your argument against EA access is that although it's good, EA might do something bad later?

That's the argument?

My argument, if you really want to call it that, is that EA does nothing for the consumer. Its always self serving, and if we dont see why now, its probably because we've not seen their full plans yet. This is clearly a trial run for something, to test how much we'll pay and what we'll want in return. EAs history is one long story of attempts to screw people, some successful and some not. They are the least pro consumer video game company out there and everyone knows it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about digital distribution at the moment. It's too expensive and you can't sell on. That's why I don't buy my games in that way. But you're mad to say that ea access isn't great value for money.

You can't compare physical ownership to digital rentals.

The only fair comparison is to do so against similar services (Games with Gold and PSPlus).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't considering the loss of subscription, just that the nature of many modern games + subscription lead to less then stellar gaming when offline.

In EA's case, they're going about it in an odd way. Like the video mentions, over time the consumer is going to want all of these things in a single package. Gaming separated over different subscriptions? Then Netflix and all the rest? Starting out the service by telling the consumer that nothing Titanfall related will be in it? Wouldn't you rather not mention Titanfall at all and just add it a year down the road like you no doubt will (unless completely bonkers?).

oh I don't know......maybe they want to ensure that people don't hold off on buying Titanfall now in the hope that it'll eventually appear on EA Access? Just a thought!

Then there's the case of the value of the EA titles themselves. Any physical edition of Maddan/Fifa becomes dirt cheap after a while. From a money prospective, the physical copy would win over the £20 deal, at least in the sports titles regard. The only reason the rock bottom prices don't apply to next-gen yet is because next-gen hasn't been around a while, yet.

Yup and at that point people are free to buy the physical media equivalents instead and move back off the digital thing if they want. If I see FIFA 16 for £2.50 in Game second hand and Battlefield 6 for £3.50 then I'd personally be more than happy to let my EA Access lapse if it didn't make financial sense. I wouldn't care that FIFA 14/15 and Battlefield 4/5 were no longer playable as I'd be playing the latest versions. I'd have that choice, you see.

We're also not clear, unlike PS+, on what we'll be getting long term, when will titles be switched up? As a consumer I'm still getting infinitely more value with PS+ than EA's offering at first glance, which is also mentioned in the video.

Uhuh, which is why I'm happy paying £20 for a year to see what appears. £20 is fuck all in the grand scheme of things (to me)

Why is it single platform currently?

Because Sony don't want it. Which is ridiculous. I want the choice. I don't want Sony deciding for me. Just like removing Linux support and BC on PS3. Should have been my decision on whether I wanted to use it. Not Sony's.

This isn't a debate on physical/digital. It's me laughing at EA's attempt and feeling, no doubt, that they'll screw it up (and screw the consumer) down the road.

And the consumer will be free to abandon them. What is this thing where people think they're unable to walk away from a company? People got pissed off with MS's always online stuff and the rest, so walked away and went to the opposition. Same thing applies here. If they take the piss, you walk away. What's so hard about that?

PS. I'm an avid user of Steam and been subbed to PS+ for approaching 3 years. I buy DVD's/Blu-Ray's to my fav films/shows (ST:TNG Season 6 will be next) as they'll always be superior to what stream offers + special features + internet connection is never a God given right/a certainty + Netflix just doesn't provide all the stuff I want to watch (saying that, I've been subbed to Netflix for a couple years also, given it's fairly low price compared to something like Sky).

I don't understand this bit. You're advocating it being ok to have multiple subscriptions as long as the price is low? £20 a year for slightly older EA games seems decent value to me!

I still buy physical games where and when it makes sense. £40-50 digital will never make sense to me.

Yeah I'd agree with that. They're too high a price at launch and don't really seem to come down. £30/£35 is something I'm more comfortable with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£19.99 at Amazon is unusually cheap for FIFA, which usually stays at £30-45 until the next is released.

Which brings me to the only real negative I can see to this, that it devalues the second hand market of their games meaning I can't sell my old FIFA on for as much as I did before.

Shame, but the positives out way the negatives.

You can't compare physical ownership to digital rentals.

The only fair comparison is to do so against similar services (Games with Gold and PSPlus).

I wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My argument, if you really want to call it that, is that EA does nothing for the consumer. Its always self serving

Welcome to Capitalism. :)

Every company is self serving. They're purely there to turn a profit. Some are just better at making it look like they're doing us a favour. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to Capitalism. :)

Every company is self serving. They're purely there to turn a profit. Some are just better at making it look like they're doing us a favour. :)

Exactly. Angel, everyone is after your money mate. But you have to power to not give it to them. I suggest not subscribing to EA access.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"FIFA14 for Xbox 360 is currently being sold for £19.99 on amazon.

Or one year of EA access."

Unless I'm misinterpreted that - if so apologies.

I'm saying that's two ways of spending £20. Either buying a copy of a game or renting it for a year along with three other games.

To me the latter is far more appealing.

So yeah sorry I probably was comparing. But was highlighting the fact that they're different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh I don't know......maybe they want to ensure that people don't hold off on buying Titanfall now in the hope that it'll eventually appear on EA Access? Just a thought!

People who want it now would still buy it now. Even the wink of knowing your top tier games will make it onto the service eventually is better marketing then the way did. (regarding Titanfall)

Yup and at that point people are free to buy the physical media equivalents instead and move back off the digital thing if they want. If I see FIFA 16 for £2.50 in Game second hand and Battlefield 6 for £3.50 then I'd personally be more than happy to let my EA Access lapse if it didn't make financial sense. I wouldn't care that FIFA 14/15 and Battlefield 4/5 were no longer playable as I'd be playing the latest versions. I'd have that choice, you see.

You have the choice of not subbing at all if it looks fishy in the first place. Which to me, it does.

Uhuh, which is why I'm happy paying £20 for a year to see what appears. £20 is fuck all in the grand scheme of things (to me)

Neither to me in the grand scheme of things (though I'd have better things to spend the money on due to not liking EA titles in general outside of Popcap). It's still too much to me considering the price of second hand sports titles, but I suppose if people play them with any regularity, the time to money value is high.

Because Sony don't want it. Which is ridiculous. I want the choice. I don't want Sony deciding for me. Just like removing Linux support and BC on PS3. Should have been my decision on whether I wanted to use it. Not Sony's.

I can understand Sony's reasoning (digital game sub = 1 sub better than 5) but ultimately, yes. It's not like they don't provide both netflix and amazon, for example. The PS4 gamer loses. Is it available on PC/Origin, then?

And the consumer will be free to abandon them. What is this thing where people think they're unable to walk away from acompany? People got pissed off with MS's always online stuff the rest so walked away and went to the opposition. Same thing applies here. If they take the piss, you walk away. What's so hard about that?

Already answered above but just to add to it: This is EA. It could be hard to cancel your sub (I've read horror stories of Star Wars:TOR subs re-activating by themselves and EA mailing you saying 'hey if your okay with this we're going to re-activate for you!), even Microsoft were known for having to phone up to them during the early years of the 360 to cancel Gold. The hassle really is wasted time for people like me. Even at the cost of 4-5 sandwiches, do I really want to be on the phone for an hour to someone in India? Do I really want to add yet another sub to the growing collection of subs?

I don't understand this bit. You're advocating it being ok to have multiple subscriptions as long as the price is low? £20 a year for slightly older EA games seems decent value to me!

That paragraph was to show my stance on the physical/digital argument, aka I'm fairly mutual on it on modern stuff. Stuff I love I'll want in my hands, but whats the point of owning a disc when they don't even bother printing a manual and the disc is essentially a 15gig download where PS4 and Xbone are concerned? Pointless to the consumer in the long term if the service shuts down. Our rights to physical games have already been taken from us. Owning a box doesn't seem to (very sadly) change that unless you are buying Nintendo.

Edit: This is also a lot different as a value comparison compared to buying DVD's and Blu-rays, where the release of a film/show on disc, if handled well, is filled to the brim with amazing value when you own that physical edition. Granted the majority don't seem to care for commentaries and extras about what Patrick Stewart was having for lunch 20 years ago or things of that nature. It's a complete shame the value of physical gaming has had nearly all of it's weight put to a single corner now: retro gaming.

I've yet to buy anything physical for Xbone and PS4. But own nothing digital that would be sold for over £20 retail. Take that for what you will.

Yeah I'd agree with that. They're too high a process at launch and don't really seem to come down. £30/£35 is something I'm more comfortable with.

My solution to digital has always been Steam Sales. MS/Sony have only gotten in on the Sales act in recent years, but their lack of backcompat with PS3/360 probably isn't doing as much goodwill for them as it might have. I've seen no decent sales for PS4/Bone yet. (but why would I? They're not even at the year old point.) £30-35 would still be too high unless I'm hyped like hell or a big fan of the franchise and zero incentive exists on getting the physical edition of it.

EG: If Sonic Boom came out on bone/ps4 and not wii u, and no physical collectors tat. I'd go digital, because the disc is just a 'oh hey download me'. If the game is great/I love it, I'll consider getting that useless disc down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, so the value for money question still goes back to a fair comparison to similar services, where EA Access is objectively poor.

Subjectively, I can see how people will be happy with the EA offering with a defined list of sports games updated each year.

Edit: reply to Elmo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, so the value for money question still goes back to a fair comparison to similar services, where EA Access is objectively poor.

Edit: reply to Elmo

Oh I see where you're coming from. You're saying that compared to PS+ it's less value for money. Maybe. I mean that's actually subjective as it depends on what you want out of it. Some might say that the £40 they've paid for ps+ on ps4 has been poor value for money because they haven't enjoyed the games offered and the money for online play hasn't improved the service.

I can compare it to physical ownership though because I would be more than happy to get a year on this service over a second hand copy of one game.

I could even sell my copy of FIFA14 to fund a year on this and I'd be more than happy with that.

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.