It's been about a year since Sony told EA executives to talk to the hand regarding subscription service EA Access, but the publisher doesn't seem all that bothered these days. Speaking with GameSpot, bigwig Peter Moore said it "doesn't matter" that the service is not available on the PlayStation 4 – despite the device having the largest global audience these days.
"It's on the Xbox One, and those customers love it," he beamed. "We have analytics on everything these days and subscriber satisfaction rates are through the roof. EA Access customers get to play more, because of the Vault, they get to play early, ahead of general release date, and they get to pay less because of the discounts that it offers."
For those of you so firmly entrenched in the PlayStation camp that you don't actually know what EA Access is, it's essentially a PlayStation Plus-esque service solely for EA games. For around $4.99 a month or $29.99 a year, subscribers get access to an ever increasing stash of free software, as well as discounts and early access to various upcoming games.
And it's proved a real coup for Microsoft, as it's been able to promote titles such as Star Wars Battlefront as being available first on the Xbox One. Sony, however, has said that the service does not offer the "kind of value that PlayStation customers expect" – and so it's blocked the publisher from offering the subscription on its system.
We reckon that the Japanese giant's statement is unfair, because EA Access is good value for money. The problem is that it creates a scary precedent; what happens if the likes of Ubisoft, Activision, Take-Two, and Warner Bros all try to launch their own subscription services, too? This, in our opinion, is what has got Sony running scared.
Of course, it still doesn't seem right that the platform holder has made up our mind for us – after all, shouldn't it be down to consumers to decide whether EA Access is value for money or not? Judging by Moore's comments, the initiative is unlikely to ever make its way to the PS4 – but would you like it to eventually? Sign up in the comments section below.
[source gamespot.com, via gamezone.com]
Comments 39
It doesn't offer the kind of value us Playstation gamers expect because we expect terrible value thanks to Playstation Now.
I don't think I own a single EA game on PS4, yet the value for money (compared to PS Now at least) is undeniable for those who like the bulk of what EA puts out.
Ea access is great value and a very real reason why I brought a Xbox one.
If ea access was on ps4 Microsoft would be a lot worse off. Sony have read the market conditions wrong and ps plus has been a joke last 12 months compared to what it was
I always believe consumers should have a choice. I don't give a freaking damn about any of EA's franchises so I don't have EA Access but I appreciate that on MS' console I at least get to make that choice.
Well, I don't need to have it but it would definitely be a nice thing to have. Seems stupid that Sony would flat out refuse it. Maybe have a poll of the actual users and see if we do want it or not.
I think the EA pass program is setting a bad precedent. I'm worried that in time, all larger houses will have a subscription plan like this. The problem there is that once those are firmly in place, they can start withholding new releases behind a paywall. You say early access, but what is meant by that is delayed access for those not willing to pay.
I think Sony did the right thing. I don't want gaming going the same way as TV football coverage... paying separate subs for Sky, then BT Sport, and maybe others as they come along. I got sick of it, so dropped them all.
I don't think Sony are "running scared", I think they're just doing the consumer-friendly thing and trying to nip it in the bud before it takes hold. Sure, EA Access may be good value for those who enjoy their games, but as you say, what happens if all the others start doing it? Then it becomes very consumer-unfriendly... sub to EA, sub to Ubi, sub to Activision... and all while having to pay a PS+ sub as well. Then it stops being viable.
Much better, much more consumer-friendly, surely, to have one central subscription for anything like this?
That being said, PS+ does need to start upping its game on PS4 now. Approaching 2 years after launch, there's a decent back catalogue of games now... it's time to start offering some bigger titles, at least one every other month.
Individual subscriptions and game streaming... I hope it never becomes the main way to play games. Depending too much on the internet doesn't seem like a good idea to me. And I don't care about every single game any studio releases, there are some of each that I enjoy. I don't wanna pay a full subscription to play that one game.
It can't and shouldn't be compared to PS Plus or Xbucks Live, IMO it's crap.I have little interest in EA games.
@Spooke2k PS Plus still provides 72 free games a year, does EA. @Gamer83 the choice is the xbone if you want access to old hat and betas.
PS4 is Sony so it can do what it likes, I appreciate their stance.
Sony are right to refuse, EA are ridiculous. How many subscriptions do we need.
Honestly the only EA game I enjoy anymore is FIFA and I don't even buy those yearly. I am looking forward to Star Wars Battlefront as well but still I don't play enough EA games so it doesn't bother me that Sony to doesn't have this.
@blah01
No one tells you that you have to buy a subscription on EA Access. However, Sony tells you that you have to buy PS Plus when you want to go online with your console. At least EA gives you an option to take a subscription or not. Sony is not for the gamers.
@Kohaku
All online game services require a subscription these days. I think you'll find that Sony has done more for games than EA ever has or ever will.
@Bad-MuthaAdebisi personally I feel ps plus has gone backwards in last 12 months the games it had provided. I like indie games but when your diet of plus consists of that it becomes testing. I loved outlast which for me was benchmark and its declined since.
It's all personal choice and personally I feel that the service has gone backwards including the network stability.
72 games is great but when it's a struggle to name more than 5 good ones on plus I enjoyed not so much
@Kohaku I don't remember gaming being about getting the best bang for your buck. The amount of new amazing games Sony has provided through PS+ and will continue to provide says how committed they are to providing the best experience they can to us.
EA access, I'm sorry, but I find absolutely no worth in that crap. The only reason it's even getting the attention on the Xbox one is because where is their version of PS+? they don't really have one with their subscription so in all reality, EA access is MS's version of PS+. I know others don't find value in PS+, but if those same people are saying there is more value in EA access, they are only kidding themselves. o.O
PS+ hasn't gone backwards, it started late so they got better games, that's all there is to it. the later on it gets, the better the games are on PS+. Look at PS3, they got really good games on PS+ and still do today, but look how old the system is. Exactly. Regardless, PS Plus is still worth more in terms of value.
I think the service should be on ps4, there is always ppl interested in these kind of services, and Sony shouldn't stop this from coming to the system.
I personally don't play alot of EA games anymore, I only play their NHL games, so it's not worth it to me, but I know alot of ppl that would live this if it was on ps4.
Its fantastic value for money whether you are a sports fan or not and I really wish it'd come to the PS4. They just added Dragon Age Inquisition now too and with more DLC on the way for BF Hardline that'll be on next I expect.
@bigdoggy what the hell are you on about? Its called Games with Gold and features games on the Xbox One and 360 (which are going to be backwards compatible) each month similar to PS plus. Do you have an XBOX one out of interest?... I'm guessing not.
It's not really a bad idea, as a matter of fact it's a service that's probably targeted for consumers like myself: the occasional EA shopper. I get sports titles like once every two to three years and pretty selective about the titles I do buy from them. For the price of one budget title a year I get access to growing library of titles I may have never played (Dragon Age Inquisition). And the few titles I am interested in, I get a discount on (Battlefront and the occasional Madden). Add the fact they are looking into adding Backward Compatible titles to the vault that $30/yr becomes even more attractive.
I think there's a lot a fear mongering and what if's being loosely thrown around concerning every big publisher starting something like EA Access. Say they did decide to charge for a subscription service. It's as simple as voting with your wallet. If we throw a fit as a consumer like we do with lesser issues, they'd likely back down or cancel the service due to low sub numbers. Also, it's not like retail releases and incentives would go away if subs became popular. Heck people still complain they don't have great Internet or caps to worry about, which drives people away from digital as it is, and that's not even getting into the digital "ownership" issue.
@Sir_JBizzle totally agree with the fear mongering.. Its like that person above spouting nonsense about Microsofts monthly sub service without having a clue what they are talking about.
EA access is £20, you get a ton of games to play as much as you want for that year. You get exclusive demos before the game releases to try it. You also get a discount on the digital purchase if you so wish.
New EA games can still be bought at the same price they've always been (on this gen) and there is no penalty for not having it from the point of view if you dont want it you aren't being forced too..
So exactly what are the disadvantages of publishers doing this? If they all did it I mean.... What exactly are the disadvantages (im talking about if it was the same model/cost as EA).
@Cron_13 exactly. it's mearly a option for those who want it. It's not like brand new games are getting put into the vault. Most of the games added are nearly a year old at the time of addition. If I was a betting man, I'd wager the end game for EA is to get people to spend money on DLC. I'd like a peek at those numbers.
I'd probably be labeled as part of the problem, but if every company did this, I'd just choose which ones I'd want to sign up for and forget the rest. I already spend thousands of dollars a year on my gaming habit, a 100-some-odd dollars extra for access to a handful of publishers older titles won't hurt me much. I don't see any disadvantages really unless they force the subs on people to ire of consumers and retailers.
@Kohaku
Take your fanboy nonsense elsewhere. Sony is perfect and are trying to protect consumers by blocking a totally optional subscription while providing us with two subscription services, one being the best in the business in PS Now.
@Spooke2k and xbox is great value cos u can buy a console which is graphically inferior to ps4! yep buy a console which does 900p/30fps, get charged for xbox gold subscription AND get charged for EA subscription per month. Heck why not start subscriptions for Activision, THQ, SEGA, Ubisoft and every other company. Silly idea and thank goodness Sony hasn't allowed this extra subscription to hit The Gamers. Can imagine the poor xbox owners in future having a monthly bill of £70 for xbox gold and fees paid to each publisher... yep a scary £840 yearly subscription fee for wait for it... early access of 5 days and paying 'extra' which you never had to pay before! It's like EA 'soft' tax!!!
@bbq_boy
Stop the fear-mongering bullcrap. You don't have to pay for any subscription you don't want. If people don't see any value in EA Access they simply don't have to sign up for it and if they do see value they can get it. It shouldn't be up to you or Sony or anybody else to decide what is or isn't 'good value' for other people. If a ton of people bought EA Access they obviously saw something about it they liked. And if other companies saw this strategy working and wanted to jump on, so what? As long as it's merely an option it's not hurting anybody.
@blah01 Nintendo and PC don't require a subscription for online services.
I think Sony did the right thing and the side effect is that it's gonna protect our interests, even though their really trying to protect there's.
We're talking about corporations here, and I know some of you think it's as simplistic as making a choice- use the service or don't use it, seems simple.
It's not necessarily that simple, @glassmusic #6 makes the perfect point about it becoming (eventually) a pay wall, with a sub quality free service left over.
@Gamer83 While its a slippery slope kinda logic, I'd bet thats what most people supporting Sony's decision are fearing, that it may not actually be just 'an option for an advantage' in the future, but 'an option to even play' in the future.
Stopping it here prevents even the possibility of such a thing occuring, and to be perfectly honest, its flipping EA, whose biggest customers are people who buy the yearly Madden and FIFA and thats it, who have a combined IQ that might beat a turkey if their lucky, meaning a high likelyhood of a skewed result that could easily convince other companies it'd be worth it to go all in and then force the paywall nature upon us. (This is 100% perception here, don't get me wrong I don't actually know EA's best games sales wise and I know for a fact that smart people buy Madden, Fifa, etc. blah blah blah IcouldgoonbutwhybotherwhenI'mtiredandwantingto... goto... sleep...?)
EDIT: Why is the asterisk shorthand for bold? I'm gonna leave it here but ask a question, is there a way to have it not do that, preferably using the quick post at the bottom of the page? I like to overuse my asterisks dangit...
@bbq_boy it's a consumer choice and regardless of specs of hardware which is why I brought a ps4 start with by way Sony are restricting choice.
I love sports titles so Xbox gives me a good choice with ea access I love my ps console but ea vault should be option
I suspect truth is Sony are concerned all publishers do this and then less selection for them to pull on for ps plus games if it's already in vault.
After all for third party publishers in ea case Sony are now the middle man!!!!
Sony probabaly blocked it because they couldn't make money from it, Sony only really care's about money hence the terrible server's we get, even so i'm not gunna lose sleep over this i'm not fussed really.
@crystalorbie The problem with the 'Slippery Slope' argument as a defence for Sony's stance on this is that surely the slide was started by PlayStation Plus in the first place when it started offering games to people who signed up. Nobody seemed too bothered then; so why is it okay when Sony do it but not okay when another company does. Seems like a double standard to me.
@Cron_13 mhmmm, I don't think so.
What I find entertaining is when people get so hurt because someone doesn't like a certain thing that they (in this case, you) like. So then you resort to saying "well, they don't understand or they don't have an Xbox One). For one, I don't have to go out and buy the system (do you work for microsoft in that you try to make people buy system and even then there point isn't valid, but now that they have the money, well.....?) I don't think you do, in that case, deal with it. I don't like EA, I see no value in there crap because it's just EA games and I have yet to see any one of there games where they haven't cut corners but toss out mediocre game after game that shows no baring at all. Battlefield hardline is a great example of something that is nothing more than pure 100% recycled crap. I wouldn't doubt if Starwars will be on there soon because I don't think that game is going to live up to what the previous games were. Can you say small linear Bad Company maps in a starwars game? meh, crap
And before you start pointing fanboy favorites, understand that I don't agree or like Sony's Playstation Now or there rental service at all. They are extremely overpriced and show no value, zero. Playstation plus on the other hand is great because I've experienced games I wouldn't have normally played or bought and a lot of them are very fun. I'm trying to make sense of why Sony shows great value in PS plus, but anything else be it rentals or anything is a horrible value. It makes no sense, but still for me, PSplus is a much better value and I get to experience games I wouldn't play and now I'm glade I did play or am playing them.
@Bigdoggy its a valid argument if someone suggests lack of understanding means poor judgement has been cast.
Again games with gold and ps plus are same thing.
And depends on personal choice as to ea games.
Ps Ignorance is not an excuse if knowledge is within ones grasp with a little effort
@Bad-MuthaAdebisi Ps plus is subjective in that regard.
If you only own a single console you dont get access to 72, you get access to around 24, which still costs you more than what EA access does, when it may be comparable offer wise.
Im not saying its better, and I agree with the sentiment that Plus isnt just a game subscription service.
& it doesn't matter when Moore speaks to
@GiacomoHall I'll give you that in a general sense but I would have to add personally that they did slide a little. Namely online multiplayer is now locked behind it as well. And as this day and age appears to be moving ever more online... well, it doesn't stand well on that front.
It would be nice if you could get a 'PSM' for just the online multiplayer for a lot less per month or something... I personally am just not interested in the games PS+ offers, and those few I am I merely buy outright.
Personally I would not buy EA's subscription, but I do believe we should be able to make this choice ourselves.
Actually I'm not at all interested in PS freebies either. The only reason I have PS+ is because you can't play online without it. As it is now it seems I'm also paying for games I never download. I'm not against indie games. Luckily everyone has their own preference but I have absolutely zero interest in 99% of these games.
@Crystalorbie A lower price just for the online multiplayer part of the service would be perfect
@Gamer83 You must be so rich cos I am not. I'm in the group which is disgusted at the way our wallets are over stretched each month. Do you think EA's subscription will ever apply to other companies? Do you remember when 360 was the first console to charge a £xx monthly subscription - it was the ONLY way people could play online, PS3 was free to play online at that time. Now PS4 owners must pay to play online following the TREND set by Microsoft. This TREND if we don't fight it will drain our pockets more and more and it won't stop, and whilst you spout OPTIONS/CHOICES etc... where's our choice to play console online games FREE without a subcription charge - funnily that option was taken. My friend.. your opinion sounds good now, and I applaud choices. But when in 2 years time us gamers ('suckers') might be paying xbox GOLD (£40), PS+ (£40), EA (£20), Activision (DLC COD (£50), Destiny (£80), WoW(£104.28), Ubisoft (est. £20..coming soon:https://www.reddit.com/r/xboxone/comments/2e0gi1/ubisoft_interested_in_ea_access_type_of/), SteamPRO (ok current steam is free.. but for how long), Netflix (£89.99), DLC's (£100s!!), etc, etc. Let's see how how lovely these paying choices become. BTW will these subscriptions get cheaper or more expensive over time? I wonder if you are one the voters on the side of Xbox one's always on DRM? ie. "don't pay --- lol --- don't play suckers!" It's actually quite good in a way. It means I can't buy 3 consoles like the good old days. Nor try as many game as I want to because of budget constraints. Heck it might even stop me from playing addictive gaming and spend my money elsewhere. My gf will love me more Choices huh...
@bbq_boy
Has nothing to do with being rich, so I don't even know why that was brought up. If you don't want something don't buy it but consumers should have the right to choose. If there's no market on PS4 for EA Access, nobody would buy it. If people buy it, then clearly there's a market. So again, spare me the 'protecting' the consumer nonsense.
Also, I'm mostly a PlayStation gamer and I was definitely against DRM. I was prepared not to buy a PS4 if Sony went down the same route. Fortunately Sony saw the response to Xbox One's reveal and made the intelligent decision. This isn't like DRM, it's an optional subscription, one I see no value in for what I like to play but if somebody else does want it they should be able to purchase it. For people who play a lot of EA games, it's not a bad deal.
@Gamer83 yeah u might be right. Let's see what will happen in 2 years time and see if more 'options' like EA access bring more enjoyment to our hobby.... and deeper pockets too.
Tap here to load 39 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...