Why are so many people here so against the EA Sub service?

Avatar image for krullban
Krullban

1470

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By Krullban

I don't see the problem? It seems like an absolutely fantastic deal for anybody who plays EA games. Is it just another "EA is the devil no matter what they do." situation?

I'm legitimately confused as to what is bad about it. It looks extremely good.

Avatar image for herk
Herk

249

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Probably cause it's EA and they have a bad reputation

Avatar image for turboman
turboman

10064

Forum Posts

19

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 11

As someone who really enjoys the PS+ service, I don't see anything wrong with the idea (Rotating list of free games, discounts, early access)

The problem is that EA isn't releasing a ton of games this year, and I doubt that list of available games is going to grow as rapidly as PS+/Xbox's service.

Avatar image for bones8677
Bones8677

3539

Forum Posts

567

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 11

One such problem I anticipate is; will we no longer see EA games showing up on Games for Gold or Playstation Plus? Are we heading for a future in which all publishers will have their own subscription services? If EA goes this way, you better believe Ubisoft will be next in line. Eventually all Playstation Plus will only be Sony games because all other publishers want their own services.

Avatar image for lawgamer
LawGamer

1481

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

@krullban said:

Is it just another "EA is the devil no matter what they do." situation?

That's probably part of it. Let's be honest, EA doesn't exactly have a sterling reputation in this industry. Although I don't know if they deserve quite the level of vitriol they typically get, for the most part that negative rep is entirely their own doing. That leads to a lot of consumers waiting "for the other shoe to drop" as it were, particularly when the deal looks pretty good on its face.

This sound great now, but I have to admit, I also wouldn't be completely surprised if EA ends up doing something nefarious with it down the line.

Avatar image for jeust
Jeust

11739

Forum Posts

15085

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 15

I also have nothing against this service, as long as EA continues selling single games in retail as they have been.

Avatar image for nightriff
nightriff

7248

Forum Posts

1467

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 7

Because they haven't proven they can provide a quality service and this service is a paid demo. People talking like you can play new games for a small fee, you play a few hours and then have to buy the game. It is an excuse to not provide a free demo to players to see if they want to purchase it or not.

That don't have any good will to pull this service off and don't deserve the benefit of the doubt. PS+ was the same for me and Sony provide they can provide a quality service.

Avatar image for clubvodka
Clubvodka

470

Forum Posts

1246

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 6

It's just because it's EA. If Sony or Microsoft (particularly Sony) did this and rolled it into Gold/PS+ people would lose their shit (in a good way).

They just have a horrible track record with money-grabbing tactics.

For the record, I'm actually excited to see where it goes.

Avatar image for extomar
EXTomar

5047

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By EXTomar
@krullban said:

I don't see the problem? It seems like an absolutely fantastic deal for anybody who plays EA games. Is it just another "EA is the devil no matter what they do." situation?

I'm legitimately confused as to what is bad about it. It looks extremely good.

EA has for a couple of years done some pretty questionable moves which may sway people one way. For me, I'm not sure what you mean by "absolutely fantastic deal for anybody who plays EA games" because I wouldn't want to play they offer now along with coming up with 6 or more EA games I'd actually play over an entire year to make it worthwhile.

If you need an analogy: This would be like Time-Warner saying "We are announcing 'Time-Warner Access' where you subscribe for $30 a year and you can get access WB movies (from a selected list) for free where right now we are offering 'Terminator Salvation', 'I Am Legend', 'Dolphin Tale', and 'Oceans Twelve'! You can watch any of our movies for 30 minutes with an option to buy the digital version for 10% off."

Yeah that is a deal that some maybe interested in but others may think is pretty worthless. It isn't EA or the idea of a subscription service from EA but the deal itself is questionable in value.

Avatar image for corevi
Corevi

6796

Forum Posts

391

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

I already own all the EA games I want (and some I don't) and other than Bioware they don't have anything upcoming I'm at all interested in, unless of course Battlefront ends up being the absolutely faithful sequel they've been promising, but I doubt that.

Avatar image for mindbullet
MindBullet

879

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

I think lingering resentment for EA is a big part of it. They've never really had a good relationship with gamers, and while they do get a bum rap sometimes they have earned a lot of that heat. I think Patrick mentioned it in his article, but it already seems like despite what such service could be capable of doing they're still going to find ways to give the bare minimum while asking for as much as possible. Then again, the thing has barely started up, so it is quite possible things will change, but I get the feeling this service is going to be primarily used as a platform to sell new games "at a discount" with the promise of 'free games' used more as a lure than a focus. They're cutting out the middle man entirely, and not only are you paying them for their games directly, but you are paying them a subscription fee on top of that.

Also, yeah I guess physical games are getting even deader so RIP.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e49e9175da37
deactivated-5e49e9175da37

10812

Forum Posts

782

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

The product being offered doesn't appeal to the interests or create an effective value proposition for some. That's completely valid, but getting mad about it is ridiculous so I hope you haven't got mad because a product you don't want exists.

And then for other people, it's not what they grew up with so it's clearly sinister and part of a slippery slope to their nightmares.

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for spraynardtatum
spraynardtatum

4384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

I don't know how to feel about it yet honestly. I don't like that it's publisher based. The price is low but it's troubling that more and more companies are pulling ownership away from customers in exchange for a cheaper entry fee. But this is basically a rental service anyways so ownership isn't really expected.

Also it's weird how it's set up that the actual games seem to be playing second fiddle to their DLC. You get Battlefield 4 for "free" but you only get a discount on premium (which is also a subscription service I might add).

I don't know, I think it's weird as of right now and the games that come with it aren't very compelling.

Avatar image for spraynardtatum
spraynardtatum

4384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

It's just because it's EA. If Sony or Microsoft (particularly Sony) did this and rolled it into Gold/PS+ people would lose their shit (in a good way).

They just have a horrible track record with money-grabbing tactics.

For the record, I'm actually excited to see where it goes.

To me this feels like it fits in perfectly with Microsofts always online vision from the Xbox One's horrendous reveal which didn't go over so well.

Avatar image for euandewar
EuanDewar

5159

Forum Posts

136

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

I think it sounds pretty neat.

Avatar image for theveej
theveej

944

Forum Posts

1999

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Wait, EA thinks games are changing from products to services?!?!? Their first set of offerings are not bangers!?!? They are not releasing many games next year (aka they are not rushing games to get ME3'd )?!?! HOW EVIL of them

Honestly though, if their offering was more than sports game it might have been received better (with new sports games on the horizon having the 14 version is kind of lame).Maybe including HD remake of G3 games might be the route to go (or using this on origin which makes a lot more sense).

I like the idea a lot, but offering doesn't interest me much at this point.

(p.s EA is not that evil....)

Avatar image for deactivated-5f8907c9ada33
deactivated-5f8907c9ada33

486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

There's nothing wrong with it, gamers are just whiny. If you don't like it you're not being forced to pay for it. If you're like me and don't see any value in it, then ... don't subscribe to it! I'm pretty sure there's a bunch of people who are going to find some value with it, more power to them.

Avatar image for extomar
EXTomar

5047

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18  Edited By EXTomar

Do you know what would be an interesting deal? Offer "DLC for all EA Games for free". That could be worth the subscription fee that offers value where the gamer is offered maximum flexibility instead of from a select list of blessed games.

Really, offering free and discounts on games that are old is a lame offer because we all get that today for free.

Avatar image for bybeach
bybeach

6754

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#19  Edited By bybeach

Too digital....

Because there is not enough to justify it for me. I will of course deal with EA as needed, because even when I buy disk(and with EA I do) I am enrolled if I understand correctly. I have an EA account, as the same as I have a Blizzard account.. But my investment with them is purely as required. Not wanted. Blizzard I give more a pass to. Their games are more specialized and have a unique identity. They come from another corner of the field. But EA is just wedging themselves in without the kind of presentation of uniqueness, and justification as a viable alternative that I would like to see. They are simply a self serving extra hoop.

Avatar image for meatball
MEATBALL

4235

Forum Posts

790

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

I don't really have an issue with the service existing, but it's not something I'd subscribe to. Thinking about it now, though, it does feel like another big step towards publishers getting your money through subscription rather than through purchases that result in you actually owning something and that's a sort of dark future I'm not so big on. But I am also a crazy person who isn't particularly fond of everything moving to digital. I like the ownership that comes with purchasing a physical product.

Avatar image for clubvodka
Clubvodka

470

Forum Posts

1246

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 6

@spraynardtatum: That's actually a really good point. I was 100% fine with all their DRM, always online stuff, because I never borrow games from friends (what friends) and I'm always online. So it makes sense for them to get back to their original vision in a more subtler way.

Who knows if that's what they're actually doing but it fits for now!

Avatar image for raven10
Raven10

2427

Forum Posts

376

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 5

I have nothing against the concept. If they provide a good value for the price then that is fine. On the same token this is $5 a month right? That's more than PS Plus ($60 a year compared to $50) and the same price as Xbox Live Gold. PS Plus and Gold though give you new free games every month (4 games in Microsoft's case and 6 in Sony's case). EA just isn't going to be able to match that. With this being an Xbox One exclusive thing they are already including almost every game they released for the system thus far. So what do you add to that? Do you put games onto the service when they are six months old? If so you are still only going to get a couple of games a year. I guess my issue is that compared to the value for PS Plus and Xbox Live Gold I just don't see it. Of course we don't know the degree of the discounts. If every EA game was also 50% off on release then I might say it is worth it, but you would have to really like a lot of EA series, which just doesn't seem especially likely for most people.

Avatar image for sethphotopoulos
SethPhotopoulos

5777

Forum Posts

3465

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 8

Aside from Bioware they have nothing I want. Doesn't help that it's on a console which already has its own subscription service for video games. I can see this being on ok deal on PC but not on a console. Also with EA's service being publisher specific on a new generation they have no backlog and very little coming out. At least PS+ covers PS3, Vita, and PS4. This seems like a bad deal.

Avatar image for c_rakestraw
c_rakestraw

928

Forum Posts

11164

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 3

#24  Edited By c_rakestraw

It seems like a fine deal if you buy a lot of EA games, but for me, I'm already spending $100 per year to keep PlayStation Plus and Xbox Live active. I don't need yet another subscription. I'm already content with what I'm getting.

Avatar image for cornbredx
cornbredx

7484

Forum Posts

2699

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 15

#25  Edited By cornbredx

They're not. They're against EA in general.

Avatar image for geraltitude
GERALTITUDE

5991

Forum Posts

8980

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 2

It's half the price of PS+, less then half the deal.

I appreciate that if you are someone who plays many of EA's racing games, sports games, shooters, RPGs, Sim games, etc, the deal has more value to you. I just don't really do a lot of EA..

It's true with PS+ you get free games you may not like (same with EA's backlog) but obviously PlayStation has a much bigger catalog of old and upcoming games to pull from than EA.

Some other thoughts:

  • Anxiety about all these services piling up. Not EA's fault but paying PS+ and EA+ and R*+ and Ubi+ and so on is too much. Maybe one day it'll only be publisher/developer subscriptions but until then this could be a heavy load.
  • I don't like the Titanfall exception and what it means for the future. Sounds like the "Real Premium" stuff could always be excluded.
  • Very surprised the subscription doesn't affect DLC... I would be *far* more interested in paying 5 bucks a month if all DLC for this or that game was included.
  • I think a 2 hour demo 5 days before playing a game is nothing to be excited about, so this "major bonus" doesn't excite me.
  • 99% of the time I buy an EA game that isn't a BioWare game it will be on sale anyways, so a 10% discount is, again, not very exciting. Unless suddenly EA drops out of every single sale on every platform (never going to happen).

That's about it!

Don't hate it, it just doesn't excite or entice me at all.