PlayStation 4 - Page 580 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #17371 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 04:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,423
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post
Sony confirmed the PS Now minimum will drop to $1.99 in a few weeks. With that said, the publishers set the pricing for their own games, not Sony. They are also looking at offering a annual pass for a fee... probably not until the full release though.

As for the Electronic Arts thing, why assume that EA is a white knight in this? None of us knows what is going on behind the scenes, and I'd be surprised if they didn't have some angle that a lot of people aren't considering with this new service.

For instance, are one of the only major PC game publishers that no longer puts major releases on Steam. Why? Because they want Valve to allow them to handle transactions through their games and Origin service, which screws Valve out of a cut of DLC and add-on money.

So doesn't it seem possible that EA wants their own sub-PS+ service on the PS3? I mean, I hear they demand that customers set up a separate EA account (with credit card) within their portal, which could conceivably used to filter us through their store and skip PSN altogether. Sony would understandably cry foul since they didn't invest millions developing a console so 3rd party digital companies could benefit without the PSN.

Even if all of this is off the mark, it seems way too simplistic to simply say "Sony doesn't want us to choose." If the price is right (and maybe if they force EA to allow us to use our PSN accounts), they'll probably change their mind.
I think that's exactly what EA wants. I don't know if I'd go as far as saying that Sony would be getting screwed by that. From my perspective, I bought the hardware, I should be able to purchase from whom I please on it. But just like apple does on the iphone, they're in control, and they get to demand a toll.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17372 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 04:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lordxar5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post
I think that's exactly what EA wants. I don't know if I'd go as far as saying that Sony would be getting screwed by that. From my perspective, I bought the hardware, I should be able to purchase from whom I please on it. But just like apple does on the iphone, they're in control, and they get to demand a toll.
So far Sony has made what I'd consider good choices so I can't fault them. Really though its just been Sony passing on EA stuff so I'm on board with that! If they passed on something I cared about I'd probably be unhappy.
lordxar5 is online now  
post #17373 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 04:50 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,423
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordxar5 View Post
So far Sony has made what I'd consider good choices so I can't fault them. Really though its just been Sony passing on EA stuff so I'm on board with that! If they passed on something I cared about I'd probably be unhappy.

I doubt their decision would have changed if it was activision, ubisoft or anyone else.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
post #17374 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 04:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
emartins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 221 Post(s)
Liked: 393
I just don't want a company telling me whats in my best interest, let me decide what is or isn't. MS had that same attitude a year ago. Its Sony saying no to EA today but what else will they start doing in our "best interest". This might of hurt the PS Now and thats why I think they passed on it. They don't want other publishers to start doing this because that would really hurt PS Now. I also believe Sony has the recommended pricing for the publishers to follow with some incentives on following it.

The billing of it is done through MS and not EA. Just like all other MS subscriptions, they charge whatever card/paypal you have on file and do not use what money you have stored on your account.

Hapi -"Lazy......cuz he's a boss like that"

mphfrom77 - "I'm an idiot."

benjamin-benjami - http://www.avsforum.com/t/1476721/battlefield-4/7200_100#post_24609271
emartins is online now  
post #17375 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 06:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lordxar5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Oh I get the choice thing. I was a proponent of the xbone digital sharing, wasnt enthused that there wasn't a resale option and a couple other things but I was largely for it. The masses challenged it and removed my choice. So it works both ways. And speaking of DRM schemes, EA has kill switches in their program. I cant wait for the "I posted a negative comment on Origin and my games don't work" to start rolling in. Or better yet your sub drops off and you lose access to all games whether their in that service or not. EA....its in the game! Has a whole new meaning!
lordxar5 is online now  
post #17376 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 06:32 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 21,225
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked: 670
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post
Sony confirmed the PS Now minimum will drop to $1.99 in a few weeks. With that said, the publishers set the pricing for their own games, not Sony. They are also looking at offering a annual pass for a fee... probably not until the full release though.

As for the Electronic Arts thing, why assume that EA is a white knight in this? None of us knows what is going on behind the scenes, and I'd be surprised if they didn't have some angle that a lot of people aren't considering with this new service.

................
The angle is obvious. You pay the yearly $30 fee and you get access to the basic game. For instance Battlefield 4. You only get access to the original game that came out in 20913. If you want to play and DLC or add ons, you need to purchase it. I know if I get a stand alone game like that I will get the add ons. So if I play a game through EA access I will still get the add ons. But at least you get a 10% discount on the DLC and add ons with EA access. Plus if they do end up offering a newer game through EA access on the XBONe, I most likely won't be paying for a full stand alone version on the PS4. Since it would cost me more money. Of course there also needs to be content I want to play too. At the very least the EA access will allow us to try out a new game for a couple of hours. And then if you purchase the stand alone digital version, you will get 10% off. But of course it will still need to be on the XBOne to get that discount.

39TB unRAID1--53TB unRAID2--36TB unRAID3
LED DLP
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme

aaronwt is online now  
post #17377 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 06:35 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 21,225
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked: 670
Quote:
Originally Posted by emartins View Post
I just don't want a company telling me whats in my best interest, let me decide what is or isn't. MS had that same attitude a year ago. Its Sony saying no to EA today but what else will they start doing in our "best interest". This might of hurt the PS Now and thats why I think they passed on it. They don't want other publishers to start doing this because that would really hurt PS Now. I also believe Sony has the recommended pricing for the publishers to follow with some incentives on following it.

The billing of it is done through MS and not EA. Just like all other MS subscriptions, they charge whatever card/paypal you have on file and do not use what money you have stored on your account.
I don't understand how it could hurt PS NOw when PS now is for streaming old last gen games isn't it? Or does Sony plan on also streaming current Gen games? That is the only way that I could see it being affected. If they plan on also streaming current gen games. Either way though for me, I have no plan on streaming any games.

39TB unRAID1--53TB unRAID2--36TB unRAID3
LED DLP
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme

aaronwt is online now  
post #17378 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 06:37 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,095
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 193
^^^ Just like Origin on PCs is doing little to nothing to affect Steam as a whole, the small offerings of EA Access are not a threat to PS Now, which will succeed or fail on its own merits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post
I doubt their decision would have changed if it was activision, ubisoft or anyone else.
Well, Konami used MGS4 and Valve used Portal 2 on the PS3 to have us register to their own network. So Sony has at least experimented with the concept of 3rd parties having somewhat independent access to the gamers.

But obviously those deals did not include Sony allowing them to entice us to purchase extra game content and DLC outside of the PSN store, so that must be where they draw the line IMHO.

Again, they did not invest millions of $$$ into a hardware platform just so third companies can reap the benefits with little to no cost to them. If this were the situation, Sony has to protect their fragile business model, especially since whatever deal they may ultimately make for EA Access will likely have to be extended to Ubisoft, Activision, etc.

In the end though, I just don't trust the scumminess of EA, even if their true angle for creating this portal isn't fully known right now. Sony made an unusually strong and harsh statement against EA about this issue, which makes me think there is more going on than they admit. It won't be the first time that Sony claimed we gamers didn't need something that they initially omitted, with the full truth being much more than that (remember the lack of rumble in launch PS3s?).

Still, if we can choose to rent/stream EA Access stuff using our PSN accounts alone to satisfy Sony's store model fears (if that is indeed an issue to them), I'll be on board.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!


Last edited by joeblow; 08-01-2014 at 06:43 AM.
joeblow is offline  
post #17379 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 06:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
scubasteve2365's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,159
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 244
I think some of you guys are reading too much into Sony's verbal non-response.

It's just typical corporate high level "we have to say something, so here it is" hubbub. Sony just didn't want to do it, for whatever reasons, their position in the market among them, and opted to respond as if their headquarters was located on Pennsylvania avenue in Washington DC.

Everyone of these companies makes decisions for you. Every single major consumer electronics company is a closed and controlled market. This is nothing new.

My personal opinion is that the EA announcement isn't really a good deal BUT it's a kick-off in the right direction, I'm all for a subscription model that is priced right.

I don't know how video games get away from fragmentation. The gaming industry get's compared to the movie/music industry a fair amount but those industries use simple standards. Movies and music are consumables, and their creation doesn't require leverage from hardware/platform development kits. A guitar and a microphone can make music. A video game, although a consumable, is more akin to software, and as such is always going to require SDKs and platform limitations. I don't see how we can get to a point where a game developer can just make a game and we can play it anywhere and everywhere with the console/hardware prices sold with no meaningful profit and with the intention of making money with software attachment.

Maybe if the PS4/XBO cost $1000 or something, and the gaming platform economic model was based off of hardware sales and services (PS+/XBL) and NOT software sales. As long as these divisions are primarily funded with software sales, no company is going to relinquish licensing a game separately. When I think of software I use at work, which is really the only PC software of value in my life anymore, it's not platform agnostic. I can't take my copy of Office for Windows and use it on my Mac at home. These are separate purchases. Interestingly Adobe (and likely others) are moving to cloud based products that lets your license travel with you but that only works because Microsoft and Apple don't limit user-sided installations in the PC space. Microsoft/Apple make their money from Adobe in a different way than Microsoft/Sony makes money from Ubisoft/Ea/Activision. I think that is the Achilles heel of gaming fragmentation.

"The Scuba Tank" thread here
PSN/XBL : ScubaSteve2365
scubasteve2365 is online now  
post #17380 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 06:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
emartins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 221 Post(s)
Liked: 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post
I don't understand how it could hurt PS NOw when PS now is for streaming old last gen games isn't it? Or does Sony plan on also streaming current Gen games? That is the only way that I could see it being affected. If they plan on also streaming current gen games. Either way though for me, I have no plan on streaming any games.
No it will not have PS4 games, at least not for now.

I look at it as would you rather pay $5 for a month access for a next gen game or $5 for a week access of a last gen game? Sure its not PS4 games but EA will release most of the games on both gens.

Hapi -"Lazy......cuz he's a boss like that"

mphfrom77 - "I'm an idiot."

benjamin-benjami - http://www.avsforum.com/t/1476721/battlefield-4/7200_100#post_24609271
emartins is online now  
post #17381 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 07:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Artman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 52
To me this is a bad greedy move from Sony. They should allow the consumer to choose and allow us to have options. Truth is that $30 a year isn't a bad deal considering you get 4 games to start and get to play full future titles 5 days before their actual release date. To me that alone is worth it. How many times do we buy games and feel burned. I'm a sports gamer first so to me it's a no brainer. I get to try out madden 15 for 5 days and decide if it's worth buying the actual game. Having the reputation that madden has if barely improving their game this helps me. Sometimes a demo doesn't give you the full picture. It's a bad move from Sony and PSnow is terribly priced. I don't see how giving us options is a bad thing. I joined for 1 month through my Xbox one and I'll see how it goes, but so far not bad.

PSN: Artman22
Xbox live: Artman22
Artman22 is offline  
post #17382 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 07:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lordxar5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artman22 View Post
To me this is a bad greedy move from Sony. They should allow the consumer to choose and allow us to have options. Truth is that $30 a year isn't a bad deal considering you get 4 games to start and get to play full future titles 5 days before their actual release date. To me that alone is worth it. How many times do we buy games and feel burned. I'm a sports gamer first so to me it's a no brainer. I get to try out madden 15 for 5 days and decide if it's worth buying the actual game. Having the reputation that madden has if barely improving their game this helps me. Sometimes a demo doesn't give you the full picture. It's a bad move from Sony and PSnow is terribly priced. I don't see how giving us options is a bad thing. I joined for 1 month through my Xbox one and I'll see how it goes, but so far not bad.
From what what I've read, early acces is a few short hours. Its not like you can get early access to the BF Hardline campaign, can beat it, and not buy the game. You get very limited demo type access. That part I can't fault them on. Why let someone blast through a few days of a game without actually purchasing it? If things did work that way, yea I'd pay EA $30 a year to blow through their iterations in 5 days.
lordxar5 is online now  
post #17383 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 07:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,423
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post
^^^ Just like Origin on PCs is doing little to nothing to affect Steam as a whole, the small offerings of EA Access are not a threat to PS Now, which will succeed or fail on its own merits.



Well, Konami used MGS4 and Valve used Portal 2 on the PS3 to have us register to their own network. So Sony has at least experimented with the concept of 3rd parties having somewhat independent access to the gamers.

But obviously those deals did not include Sony allowing them to entice us to purchase extra game content and DLC outside of the PSN store, so that must be where they draw the line IMHO.

Again, they did not invest millions of $$$ into a hardware platform just so third companies can reap the benefits with little to no cost to them. If this were the situation, Sony has to protect their fragile business model, especially since whatever deal they may ultimately make for EA Access will likely have to be extended to Ubisoft, Activision, etc.

In the end though, I just don't trust the scumminess of EA, even if their true angle for creating this portal isn't fully known right now. Sony made an unusually strong and harsh statement against EA about this issue, which makes me think there is more going on than they admit. It won't be the first time that Sony claimed we gamers didn't need something that they initially omitted, with the full truth being much more than that (remember the lack of rumble in launch PS3s?).

Still, if we can choose to rent/stream EA Access stuff using our PSN accounts alone to satisfy Sony's store model fears (if that is indeed an issue to them), I'll be on board.
Well, this is an easy one to answer at least. Can anyone with the xbox EA access tell us what happens when you try to purchase DLC for those games? I'm pretty sure it still goes through the xbox store.

Either way, IIRC they're already making a profit on the hardware, arent they? So this isn't really the "give away the blade, sell the razor" situation that consoles used to be. I don't think they get a cut if you buy or rent a movie on vudu, so why should games be different? Ultimately they're going to fight the cross platform trend as long as they can, and right now they've got the leverage to do so, but just barely. But this is a perfect example of the devils bargain we make with these consoles. I'm honestly a little surprised MS even agreed to it.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
post #17384 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 07:47 AM
Senior Member
 
icelt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordxar5 View Post
Anybody check out the PS Now open beta? I keep forgetting about it but its apparently up. Prices are stupid from what I'm reading.
Obviously everyone views value differently but just last week I payed Amazon $5.99 plus tax to stream 12 Years a Slave in HD. That temporary streaming license I purchased was good for 48 hours. Soooo... in that context I personally don't get all the "stupid pricing" hub-bub.

I mean I'm not overly interested in the service at the moment, but the pricing seems fairly reasonable especially for the 7 days and longer durations. But that's just me.

Last edited by icelt; 08-01-2014 at 07:51 AM.
icelt is offline  
post #17385 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 08:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
emartins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 221 Post(s)
Liked: 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post
Well, this is an easy one to answer at least. Can anyone with the xbox EA access tell us what happens when you try to purchase DLC for those games? I'm pretty sure it still goes through the xbox store.

It goes through the Xbox store and you can use your xbox wallet as well. Only the sub bypasses the xbox wallet.

Hapi -"Lazy......cuz he's a boss like that"

mphfrom77 - "I'm an idiot."

benjamin-benjami - http://www.avsforum.com/t/1476721/battlefield-4/7200_100#post_24609271
emartins is online now  
post #17386 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 08:23 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 21,225
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked: 670
Quote:
Originally Posted by emartins View Post
It goes through the Xbox store and you can use your xbox wallet as well. Only the sub bypasses the xbox wallet.
And it shows the discounted price. It shows the original price with a line through it. And next to it is the price with 10% off which is what EA access members pay.

39TB unRAID1--53TB unRAID2--36TB unRAID3
LED DLP
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme

aaronwt is online now  
post #17387 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 08:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rolltide1017's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 2,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 242
I'm not sure how I feel about EA Access and I'm not sure I would subscribe but, I don't like that Sony turned them down using this dumb excuse:

Quote:
“PlayStation Plus memberships are up more than 200% since the launch of PlayStation 4, which shows that gamers are looking for memberships that offer a multitude of services, across various devices, for one low price. We don’t think asking our fans to pay an additional $5 a month for this EA-specific program represents good value to the PlayStation gamer.”

Based on that comment then they should block there own BS Now service because it does not offer PS+ members a good value for "one low price".

That was just a dumb comment to make IMO. Surely they could have come up with a better statement then that.

I know others disagree but I think it is very simple; EA Access is not on PS because of BS Now, just like we can't play MP3s on our PS4s because of that stupid Sony Music service (9 months later and still nothing, it don't take that long to build an MP3 player). Sony is not going to allow a service on PS that will compete with one of there own and make no mistake, it does compete with Now. I'd be much more interested in a service like EA Access that offers 6 month old games then a service that offers 10 year old games.

And yes, I meant to say BS Now because the service is BS IMO. It doesn't work great, the prices are ridiculous and the games selection is very poor IMO.

PSN ID: RollTide1017

Last edited by rolltide1017; 08-01-2014 at 08:32 AM.
rolltide1017 is offline  
post #17388 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 08:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lordxar5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by icelt View Post
Obviously everyone views value differently but just last week I payed Amazon $5.99 plus tax to stream 12 Years a Slave in HD. That temporary streaming license I purchased was good for 48 hours. Soooo... in that context I personally don't get all the "stupid pricing" hub-bub.

I mean I'm not overly interested in the service at the moment, but the pricing seems fairly reasonable especially for the 7 days and longer durations. But that's just me.
The hourly is what's hanging people up but after some logic is applied it may not be too bad. Say I just want to see if I like a game or know that the game only takes a couple hours to beat, then a few bucks for a few hours isnt too bad.

I might check a game out just to see how well things work. If I like it I'd get a sub. If its meh it gets a pass.
lordxar5 is online now  
post #17389 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 08:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 557
Something to remember. Microsoft still has a deal with EA for marketing and exclusive content. Sony may not have been offered this service at all. Also, Microsoft aren't in a position to refuse to offer something due to their poor sales in 2014.* This EA service could be screwing them over royally, but they really can't refuse to offer it, they need everything they can get right now.

*For context, the quarterly reports for the big 3 show Sony outshipping Nintendo and Microsoft combined by a very wide margine. The PS4 alone likely outshipped the Wii, Wii U, 3DS, 360 and Xbox One combined worldwide based on the numbers we were given. Sony is back on top and they are in a position to actually say no to a publisher and the publisher can't really talk back. Whether that is resulting in something positive or negative for gamers remains to be seen. (But if it is anything like Origin, it is just more EA greed that will hurt more than it helps them or us)

Last edited by PENDRAG0ON; 08-01-2014 at 08:53 AM.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #17390 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 09:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Epyon415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 175
A brief thought on EA Access; is this a pre-cursor to an "all digital" market? If adoption is high enough there is logic to discontinuing or limiting the quantity of physical discs in favor of a streaming subscription model.

PSN & XBL: Epyon415
Twitch.tv: http://www.twitch.tv/epyon415
Twitter: @gundumgaming
YouTube Gameplay Videos
Epyon415 is offline  
post #17391 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 10:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Smigro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pennsyltucky
Posts: 1,842
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcclayton View Post
I just bought a ps+ subscription. And now its showing up for download.
Ah ha, could it be because that was a PS+ freebie title which means you have to have an active PS+ account to play the game?
Smigro is offline  
post #17392 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 10:12 AM
Member
 
MD MC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 14
The way I see it, I think EA may have the most to lose. Think about the top selling games over the last few years. We've had GTA/COD (cross platform), TLOU (PS3) and Gears/Halo (360) but besides those, Madden, FIFA, and the BF series, year after year, are at the top of sales. This is due to the casual gamer crowd who blindly buy their one sports game a year on release day. If anything, these people may hold of their purchase after either trying it for 5 days or just waiting to see if it gets thrown in the rotation of free games. I will also mention some additional opinion that EA, with their size/weight they thow around, also gets one of the higher cuts per sale than small publishers. MS may wave additional fees for digital purchases through the program that get 10% off, ($6 bucks is all the discount is) which probably offsets packaging, shipping, etc, all those things that the poeple who pay for digital games think they shouldnt have to pay. "That money should go to the developer" is what I always hear. Well, here you go, discount on digital.

If anything, its more like the free games on PSN and XBL, but with a cost. Games that no one buys new anymore and wouldnt buy unless heavily dicounted digitally.

I think this is step in the right direction, just not for me. I dont play yearly sports games (although i did get hooked on the next-gen goodness of NBA2K14 on the PS4, but that is not EA) and I have BF4, so it would take them adding a game that I felt was worth the $30 entry fee.
MD MC is offline  
post #17393 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 10:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Smigro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pennsyltucky
Posts: 1,842
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD MC View Post
The way I see it, I think EA may have the most to lose. Think about the top selling games over the last few years. We've had GTA/COD (cross platform), TLOU (PS3) and Gears/Halo (360) but besides those, Madden, FIFA, and the BF series, year after year, are at the top of sales. This is due to the casual gamer crowd who blindly buy their one sports game a year on release day. If anything, these people may hold of their purchase after either trying it for 5 days or just waiting to see if it gets thrown in the rotation of free games. I will also mention some additional opinion that EA, with their size/weight they thow around, also gets one of the higher cuts per sale than small publishers. MS may wave additional fees for digital purchases through the program that get 10% off, ($6 bucks is all the discount is) which probably offsets packaging, shipping, etc, all those things that the poeple who pay for digital games think they shouldnt have to pay. "That money should go to the developer" is what I always hear. Well, here you go, discount on digital.

If anything, its more like the free games on PSN and XBL, but with a cost. Games that no one buys new anymore and wouldnt buy unless heavily dicounted digitally.

I think this is step in the right direction, just not for me. I dont play yearly sports games (although i did get hooked on the next-gen goodness of NBA2K14 on the PS4, but that is not EA) and I have BF4, so it would take them adding a game that I felt was worth the $30 entry fee.
Has this been happening as much lately as it was years ago when sports game were still redefining how the games played? I know me and my group of friends are a small sample size, but if we are anything to go by we are huge sports fans and I know all of us have gotten away from buying the yearly EA sports titles...even Madden.

I see EA doing this for the opposite reason you are saying...I think they are trying to re-coup some possible lost sales by suckering people into getting their rental service. On top of that, like it was mentioned earlier these games will be bare bones so there may be something that someone tries on the service which will make them buy the actual game to get all of the content.
Smigro is offline  
post #17394 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 11:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Anthony1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by icelt View Post
Obviously everyone views value differently but just last week I payed Amazon $5.99 plus tax to stream 12 Years a Slave in HD. That temporary streaming license I purchased was good for 48 hours. Soooo... in that context I personally don't get all the "stupid pricing" hub-bub.
Yeah, but you got 12 Years a Slave, which is a recent movie, and you got it in HD. You didn't get a movie from 8 years ago, in standard def. Also, you could have had 8 people in your house watching that movie. With videogames, you typically can only have one person playing at one time. It's not apples to apples.
Anthony1 is offline  
post #17395 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 11:23 AM
Senior Member
 
Artman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordxar5 View Post
From what what I've read, early acces is a few short hours. Its not like you can get early access to the BF Hardline campaign, can beat it, and not buy the game. You get very limited demo type access. That part I can't fault them on. Why let someone blast through a few days of a game without actually purchasing it? If things did work that way, yea I'd pay EA $30 a year to blow through their iterations in 5 days.

From what I heard. It's going to be 2 hours for games that have campaigns, but the sports games are fully available the whole 5 days just like season pass on the Xbox 360.
RemoWilliams84 likes this.

PSN: Artman22
Xbox live: Artman22
Artman22 is offline  
post #17396 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 11:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RemoWilliams84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 1,972
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artman22 View Post
From what I heard. It's going to be 2 hours for games that have campaigns, but the sports games are fully available the whole 5 days just like season pass on the Xbox 360.
Where did you hear this? Not that I don't believe you, but I haven't seen anything that has had EA elaborate on the details.

Xbox Gamertag/PSN ID: RemoWilliams84

"I started out with nothing, and I still got most of it." -Seasick Steve

RemoWilliams84 is offline  
post #17397 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 11:34 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
joeblow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,095
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post
Well, this is an easy one to answer at least. Can anyone with the xbox EA access tell us what happens when you try to purchase DLC for those games? I'm pretty sure it still goes through the xbox store.
Not that easy to answer. Once EA has us set up a separate account that solely ties into their network, they can introduce the kind of scenario that Valve rejected on Steam.

I think that's the point - why turn over the keys to the castle to a company that would love to bypass any obstacle that forces them to share their profits, if given the chance?

The fact that EA is playing hardball too makes me question their overall motives. Note that they announce and release the EA Access beta at the same time Sony's PS Now open beta launched. Mere coincidence? The two companies are upset with each other about this whole thing, and it is naive to believe we know all the simplistic angles as to why.

Los Angeles Lakers - 16 NBA Championships!

joeblow is offline  
post #17398 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 11:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lordxar5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artman22 View Post
From what I heard. It's going to be 2 hours for games that have campaigns, but the sports games are fully available the whole 5 days just like season pass on the Xbox 360.
That could be. I'm not a sports guy so those part fly below my radar.
lordxar5 is online now  
post #17399 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 12:28 PM
Senior Member
 
icelt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post
Yeah, but you got 12 Years a Slave, which is a recent movie, and you got it in HD. You didn't get a movie from 8 years ago, in standard def. Also, you could have had 8 people in your house watching that movie. With videogames, you typically can only have one person playing at one time. It's not apples to apples.
Don't think I was suggesting it was apples to apples. I was simply comparing the cost versus benefit ratio between one form of entertainment and another form.

So that might be similar to comparing the $ per pound of apples versus oranges. They aren't exactly the same but they are both fruits and therefore to most consumers they are probably more alike than different.

Like I said, everyone has their own unique sense of value. To you paying $6 to watch a recently released movie once with 8 other people is perfectly acceptable whereas spending $6 to rent a 3 year old game for 7 days is not. Ok. However to many others, at least this is what Sony is betting on, that same cost/benefit analysis is perfectly agreeable.

I suppose my main overarching point is that compared to other forms of entertainment I don't think it's reasonable to state that the current pricing structure for the PS Now service is fundamentally stupid. That's all.
icelt is offline  
post #17400 of 17868 Old 08-01-2014, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Anthony1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by icelt View Post
Like I said, everyone has their own unique sense of value. To you paying $6 to watch a recently released movie once with 8 other people is perfectly acceptable whereas spending $6 to rent a 3 year old game for 7 days is not. Ok. However to many others, at least this is what Sony is betting on, that same cost/benefit analysis is perfectly agreeable.

Yeah, I totally get what you are saying. I know that there is a certain segment of consumers that don't have a problem with things like this. For many of them, the convienence factor is just off the charts, and that's more important to them than anything else.

There of course is also an affluent set of customers that would have absolutely no problem spending $3 to play an older game for 4 hours, because 3 bucks to them is the equivalent to 1 penny for me.

I just wonder if there are enough of these people to actually sustain the whole business model that Sony is running with.
Anthony1 is offline  
Reply PlayStation Area

Tags
Playstation 4 Games , Playstation 4 Camera , Playstation 4 Dualshock 4 Wireless Controller , Playstation 3 160gb System , Sony , Playstation 4 Console
Gear in this thread - 160gb by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off