News Article

Talking Point: Would You Pay for an EA Access Subscription on PS4?

Posted by Sammy Barker

In the game

Whether you like it or not, gaming is gradually becoming much more service driven. The wheels have been in motion for a while, with Season Passes and long-tail downloadable content business models designed to keep you spending more on a single game for longer. However, the announcement of EA Access overnight – a PlayStation Plus-esque subscription service tied specifically to EA Games published releases – seemingly represents the end goal for the Redwood-based giant. But is it something that you’d actually spend money on?

The prospect certainly sounds appetising on paper. For just $5 per month or $30 per year, you’ll be able to nab complete access to “catalogue titles” such as FIFA 14, Madden NFL 25, Battlefield 4, and Peggle 2 for the duration of your subscription. You’ll also be able to enjoy new titles likes Dragon Age: Inquisition a little earlier than everyone else, while discounts will be available for the majority of upcoming content. Considering that it would cost you more to rent the above roster of releases, it sounds like an excellent deal – at first glance, anyway.

Sony doesn’t agree with the value proposition, however. In a statement to Game Informer, the company came down surprisingly harshly on the Xbox One exclusive scheme, suggesting that it passed on the promotion because it doesn’t represent ‘good value’ for fans. “Gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price,” a spokesperson said. “We don’t think that asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific programme represents good value to the PlayStation gamer.”

That comment has peeved some PlayStation 4 owners, as they feel that they should be able to make up their own mind. That’s a fair criticism, but we can see the platform holder’s long-term viewpoint. At the present, PlayStation Plus provides a variety of free titles across multiple systems as part of a single subscription fee, but this move threatens to splinter that. For starters, it’s unlikely that we’ll see an EA published title added to the Instant Game Collection in the near future, as the organisation is much more likely to peddle those giveaways as part of its own programme.

The real danger, however, is that this could set a scary precedent for other publishers to follow. The likes of Activision and Ubisoft certainly have enough content to support a similar service, while we daresay that even Bandai Namco, Tecmo Koei, Bethesda, Konami, Capcom, and SEGA could attempt to take a piece of the pie. Should things head in that direction, that’s eight additional subscription services that you could end up paying in order to reap all of the rewards, on top of your annual PlayStation Plus pledge which would be seriously diminished without major publisher support.

But does that potential but perhaps unlikely eventuality give the platform holder the right to dictate what constitutes good value? It stands to reason that if EA’s offering really is poor, consumers will vote with their wallets, and the whole model will die a premature death as a consequence. We can certainly see Sony’s point when it comes to the content offering, as the likes of Peggle 2 and Titanfall – a title which isn’t available as part of the service yet, but presumably will be added later – haven’t even released on the PS4 at the time of typing. With less content on offer, it certainly loses its lustre.

But is it something that you’d even pay for anyway? There’s been a lot of bluster about the service since its unveiling yesterday, but as is often the case with exclusives, we suspect that some of that excitement has stemmed specifically from the programme skipping the PS4. Alas, it would be unfair to indicate that there’s no earnest enthusiasm at all, as some do seem eager to stump up the relatively affordable asking fee in order to unlock instant access to the abovementioned games. We can certainly appreciate that there is definitely value there.

Whichever side of the fence you currently sit, we reckon that this is a story that’s going to run and run. Much like the Online Pass phenomenon that temporarily defined the latter half of the PlayStation 3 generation before fizzling out, we suspect that all eyes are going to be on how well EA Access performs. If it takes off – and becomes a big advantage for the Xbox One – then expect Sony to reluctantly change its stance. You may also want to prepare yourself for a future of many subscription services, rather than just a few.


Would you be willing to pay for EA Access, or does it not represent any real value for you? Do you think that Sony’s right to pass on the programme on the PS4, or should it at least give owners the choice? Share your enthusiasm for Push Square Premium in the comments section below.

Would you pay for an EA Access subscription on the PS4? (85 votes)

Yes, I think it sounds like great value

12%

Hmm, I need to know more

16%

No, it doesn’t sound worth it to me

72%

Please login to vote in this poll.

More Stories

User Comments (62)

Davros79

#3

Davros79 said:

I would say NO. And i would also initve EA to kiss the soft dangly collection of objects that hang "exclusively" between my legs.

Shaolin

#4

Shaolin said:

On first inspection this actually sounds like a pretty good deal and especially so for sports game fans.

I voted "Hmm, I need to know more" because at this early stage it would be almost impossible to judge the value. After a year or two it would be easier to calculate the savings.

That's why I'm a little bit disappointed by Sony's smack-talk here because how can they make such a sweeping statement about the value of the scheme before it's off the ground. That would be like EA predicting that PSN Plus would be bad value a month before it started.

People here know by now that I'm a long standing PlayStation fan but this comment from Sony is like someone trying to chat up a pretty girl and getting promptly rejected then afterwards claiming that he wasn't interested in her in the first place. Sony, I have problems believing you when you talk like that.

ferrers405

#5

ferrers405 said:

No, because most of EA games are annual and the value of this games decreases very fast.

meppi

#6

meppi said:

Knowing EA. Hell no! Not on PS4, not on anything else either.

Trikeboy

#8

Trikeboy said:

No, no, no, no, no, no and......... no. PC, PS4, Xbox One or even on Wii U. EA games are soulless and crap.

N711

#11

N711 said:

If it was like Ubi maybe but EA? not sure they got much already released games to offer for PS4 . one Im looking forward to is due in about 2 years time. anyway PS+ is a good service why pay 2 services for old games? not worth it

get2sammybAdmin

#12

get2sammyb said:

I think it looks like good value at first, but the big problem with this is that they're going to struggle to keep it feeling fresh. Like, sure, $5 to rent four games is great and all, but I'd only really want Battlefield 4. It's not going to get new stuff added every month, so why would I keep paying for it? The early trials and discounts do nothing for me either.

Dolphan2388

#13

Dolphan2388 said:

We get to play games for 2 hours 5 days before release. Isn't that called a demo. We're paying for demos now.

THEundying27

#15

THEundying27 said:

Big blockbusters? Their annualized sports games suck. Notice how nba live didn't make the cut. Lol.

Paranoimia

#16

Paranoimia said:

It's not something I personally would have signed up for, but I have to pull them up on this:

"Gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price"

If that's the case, why doesn't a PS+ subscription include at least some form of limited access to Sony's Music and Video Unlimited services?

FullbringIchigo

#18

FullbringIchigo said:

in a one word anwser, NO!

in more than one word no because most of the games EA make I don't like IE: Fifa or Madden or Battlefield so to me it's not worth it

I could see it appieling to some people though

Shaolin

#19

Shaolin said:

@get2sammyb Do you know for certain that they are trials/demos. Or is it early access to the full game? I'd say that there is an important distinction in there. I can't vouch for the correctness but I've read comments on other websites saying that you can dip in and out whenever you want to rather than having to pay for several months back-to-back. So that $5 for your Battlefield for the kids over the Summer hols actually starts to sound like it could be pretty good to me. Therefore, if EA doesn't keep the available titles fresh then people will just put their subscriptions on hold because, let's face it, it's not like PSN+ where you need to keep it active for multiplayer.

@N711 Maybe Sony need to drink some more just to see the girl at all lol!

DualWielding

#20

DualWielding said:

come on, there's no denying not having this program on PS4 is a blow to Sony and its scary how unprofessional their comments were... I would personally not pay for it as I don't play that many EA games but I imagine there are lot of people who buy multiple games for them all the time and for them is a great value.....

Now with the relationship between Sony so sour, its pretty clear we'll never see EA games in PS+ again. And honestly if someone didn't care to play online and only had a PS4 I think they'll prefer to pay 30 a year to get 3 Triple A games out the bat than pay 50 for 2 indies per month.

rjejr

#22

rjejr said:

If EA offers it on Wii U we can get complete access to Need for Speed.

ECHOBLAST

#23

ECHOBLAST said:

No way.
If they want they can do this business with sony internally and include it with the ps+. We player doesn't have to pay twice for playing.

Shaolin

#24

Shaolin said:

After reading a few comments (on this site and on others) I'm still in the "Hmm, I need to know more" camp.

But I'm starting to see the merit in some people's argument that Sony simply doesn't want the competition. I mean how could it have hurt us gamers to have the extra choice? All those blithering idiots above just chanting "No" like trained chimps at the circus could still have just chosen not to subscribe while others who wanted to subscribe could have done. That would have been win-win, no?

get2sammybAdmin

#25

get2sammyb said:

@Shaolin Eurogamer says they're "trials", though your progress will carry forward into the final game. In other words, they're premium demos.

Carl-G

#27

Carl-G said:

NO :D I'm not giving EA(or Activision to) 1 penny this Gen, i hate'em. Like the end of PS3 Gen i just used my cold hard ca$h all on brilliant PS Exclusives really :P

Shaolin

#28

Shaolin said:

@get2sammyb Okay, so I've had a look around on the web at a few sites and from what I've seen you might want to look into that one independently rather than relying on Eurogamer for that.

I'm not saying that it won't turn out to be demos but most of the heavy hitting sites out there are not using the "trials" or "demos" phrasing.

This is important because whether it is early access to the full game or merely a feature limited demo will completely change the value proposition of the subscription. Also, it would be nice to get the facts right in the vein of not appearing to incorrectly describe a service that's not coming to PlayStation ;)

Shaolin

#29

Shaolin said:

@get2sammyb Okay, from the horse's mouth at http://www.ea.com/eaaccess/en_GB/faq.html

"What will the pre-release trials include? Will my progress carry over?
Each game is different, so each game’s trial will be, too. In some titles you’ll be able to play one of the game's modes for a limited time, while other times you can jump right into the full game. And since you’ll always be playing the real game, any progress you make will carry over so you can pick up where you left off on launch day."

So it seems that the closeness to the full game will vary even though it's always described as a trial. That'll lessen the appeal of the service on the feature-limited occasions. But it does also say, "other times you can jump right into the full game" and that does imply more than just a premium demo.

charlesnarles

#31

charlesnarles said:

@get2sammyb "Premium demos" sure sounds like a euphemism to me. Renting anything is stupid, just buy it or don't. Maybe then Darwinism could return to the media and devs would be motivated to earn their keep

Tsurii897

#33

Tsurii897 said:

@Punished_Boss I think there are like 3 EA games, that were all launch titles iirc: some Fifa (I think 13?), NFS Most Wanted and the half-assed Mass Effect 3 port.

I actually wouldn't (or rather won't) pay any subscription like that. I don't care for EA, am not much of an online player and so far none of the PS+ games really captured my interest. I'll just get the PS4 for my RPGs and some other (single player) games and if they ever start to restrict everything with a fee like that, I'll just sell the console and start leaving the house more often :p

mitcHELLspawn

#34

mitcHELLspawn said:

Honestly I think it has some pretty good value... I mean if you pay for the service, then buy a couple of their new games that you were going to anyway like dragon age battlefield and NHL for me.. then the service ends up paying for itself with the discounts. It's easy to see big Sony fans automatically knocking this because they're not getting it, but I think it has some real value... I think personally for me it would be a lot more appealing if it were coming from another publisher like ubisoft.. but either way I'm going to think about getting this service... it would be pretty cool to play dragon age 5 days early! And 30 bucks for a year is just pocket change anyway so why not.

Demi_God

#35

Demi_God said:

nah, I wouldn't pay for a subscription to EA or anyone else. I'm already paying for PS+ which is fine by me, but I won't do another subscription, screw that. Not only that, but this is EA, they have quite a long ways to go and I can again see their little evilish ways they are trying to sneak through here.

Kohaku

#36

Kohaku said:

Well, I will not pay for it because I will do it on my Xbox One. I allready pay on my PS4 for all those indie games I get for free and which I do not want. But I don't complain about that because Sony knows what is good for me it seems. You know, for the player and what EA wants is not good for me as a player, said Sony.
I don't care to pay $30 a year for playing some older games. People are allready paying money for years to play older games on their PS3, so what's the difference Sony?

Jazzer94

#37

Jazzer94 said:

@Tsurii897 It said Fifa 13 but it was 12 maybe 12.5 (feeling generous). ;)
I honestly think Sony just don't want the competition, PS+ isn't really much better and has only seen an increase in subs due to it being borderline required for the PS4 given time this could rival it I'm just not that interested because I don't play UFC, Madden, NBA Live or FIFA.

kensredemption

#38

kensredemption said:

Since EA's been treating Nintendo and Sony fans like third class citizens, I refuse to buy anything tied to them anymore. That unfortunately means that I'll have to cancel my Dragon Age reservation, but if luck holds, I could get it used for $10 in two months after release.

As long as my money never reaches EA's money grubbing hands, I can sleep at night. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll just troll around on ME3 for my Wii U since it's the only next-gen console with a ME title so far. That, plus I'm still continuing my boycott of EA products that aren't available on Nintendo platforms.

...Actually, you know what? Screw it. I'll just collectively burn any EA games I come across. lol

CanisWolfred

#39

CanisWolfred said:

No. Only game they've released in the last 5 years that I liked was the first Dead Space. Series went to crap after that. Only game they got coming out that I want is Battlefront, and I'm in "wait 'n' see mode" for that...

Dohv

#40

Dohv said:

I don't play much EA games, the next EA games I'll buy are ME4, Mirror's Edge 2 and Battlefront. And obviously those games are years off. Even as a Xbone owner I won't subscribe for this, I dot even subscribe to XBL yet. MS and EA have been in bed together this whole generation despite their games selling much better on the PS4. I don't even like digital games or EA games enough to be interested in this. And I will not be playing multiplats on my Xbone anyways.

But I don't understand Sony's comments saying it's not a good value for customers. Uh what ? PS Now is a total ripoff from what we've seen so far.

alphadrago5

#41

alphadrago5 said:

Absolutely not. Considering the only two games in the near future i'd play from the list are battlefield and dragon age, and I don't even like battlefield..
Yeah i'm better off buying my game(s) than supporting another subscription. I can definitely see other companies taking part in the subscription bandwagon, so hopefully sony's refusal puts an end to that before it's even begun.

Mrskinner

#43

Mrskinner said:

@get2sammyb do you think this could be the reason why sony has just put all of its ea titles and dlc on the summer sale that has started in Europe today? Haha

heyzeus002

#44

heyzeus002 said:

I smell something questionable in the air. . From a business pov why would ea do this? Surely they would be cannibalising their own sales margins because the people who buy fifa and the like are going to buy it whether its $6 or $60 so why on earth would ea offer these top tier titles for a fraction of the price thereby negating the need to buy at full price? Unless they lose THAT much revenue from pre owned sales I cant understand the business reason behind this.. I still think it sounds too good to be true tbh but seeing as I have an xb1 as well I shall be keeping an eye on the finer details and maybe will subscribe. Lastly, I do feel that sony should have let their players decide for themselves or maybe they know some of the finer points of the scheme and based on that thought it was sheet and therefore declined

General_Spiller

#45

General_Spiller said:

@heyzeus002

Exactly. Remember, this is EA people. They will only put on annual games once they are near the end of their life-cycle. The life-cycle being once the game has been milked and most of the profit earned and the next is about to come out. All this is, quite simply, is an attempt to monetise older games where the profit margins are at their lowest.

So expect Fifa 15 for example 9 or 10 months after it is released and Fifa 16 is on the horizon.

And if anyone expects a game like Dragon Age Inquisition, ME4 within even 24 months of its release, you are absolutely out of your mind. Those types of games will only ever become 'free' once it's sequel is announced.

This is just making money of lower profit margin games that are not supported very well once the next iteration comes out....and you pay for the digital privilege to do so. Brilliant business from EA if they can get people to sign up for it.

I simplify greatly here, but i really don't see how this is a good deal to anyone except EA.

GameAce

#47

GameAce said:

I think EA has burned a lot of bridges. I probably wouldn't personally partake in this subscription service, because NBA 2K is their only game I'm serious about, but I do think PS4 owners should have had the chance to decide for themselves. To couch it as a value judgement on PS' part is in all likelihood patently disingenuous.

GameAce

#50

GameAce said:

@Tasuki Right, right. I confuse it sometimes. I've given EA more credit than they're due! NBA Live was an atrocity. A coming together of both terrible graphics and game mechanics.

Gamer83

#51

Gamer83 said:

I'll wait to see how it plays out on Xbox One before fully judging the service, but I'm not exactly looking to add any more subscriptions considering I already pay $50 a year for PS+ and will be shelling out $60 a year for Gold when I get an Xbox One.

@Dohv
Couldn't agree more with the last sentence. When you look at PS Now, Sony really has no place to talk.

YeahImASonyGuy

#52

YeahImASonyGuy said:

Honestly the 10% off digital games would save me more money since I buy so many sports sports titles every year. Hell this year with everything coming that i want it would have saved me about 6 bucks not counting the DLC I will more than likely get.

hadlee73

#53

hadlee73 said:

I only like a small amount of games made by EA, so it wouldn't be much good to me. I'll just buy the ones I want to play. I'd also be hesitant to support too many of these things, otherwise all the publishers will start doing it and there will be subscription services all over the show.

Godsire-

#55

Godsire- said:

@General_Spiller

Exactly. I, unfortunately, do end up playing a lot of EA games & I still wouldn't want this. The only reason Madden 25 is showing up on there is because Madden 15 is coming out in a month, essentially making Madden 25 useless.

This is EA's attempt at making some $ off the used game market. So instead of buying Dead Space at Gamestop used, they want you to pay for & download it digitally trough this service. Not gonna happen.

Gamer83

#56

Gamer83 said:

@kensredemption

I wouldn't say EA are treating Sony fans like third class citizens. It took the moneyhat for Titanfall but that's about it. Other than that, EA has given PS4 every game it makes.

Clamedeus

#57

Clamedeus said:

I am only interested in BF, and Mass Effect from EA. That, and i already have two subscriptions i don't feel like adding another.

Short Answer: No. lol

McSterls

#58

McSterls said:

Would this grant me access to all their great games???

No. The answer is no I would not.

Cavalier41

#59

Cavalier41 said:

I find it funny how many are calling EA games crap. EA owns Bioware and those IP's alone would contradict that sentiment. Let's not forget that Dice will be producing Star Wars Battlefront, The Dead Space series.... of course those aren't included in the package, but all are EA properties. Not liking the company is one thing, calling their games crap is quite another.

Ginkgo

#60

Ginkgo said:

I think this is a good deal that many people will take up and therefore a win to MS. Worse it is a bad look for Sony and its relationship with EA, which was already a little strained (as an outsider). To counter, Sony should do some exclusive deal with Activision.

That being said, I would be unlikely to take this up myself. I don't play many EA games, not much into sport games or multiplayer FPS, which counts out most of their stuff. Bioware stuff is my big exception with EA games which I generally love, and they weren't even mentioned.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...