Jimquisition: EA Access ... Denied

Wulfram77

New member
Dec 8, 2013
43
0
0
Loop Stricken said:
Wulfram77 said:
It's $5/$30. That doesn't require massive amounts of trust.

And, yeah, eventually they'll try to screw us. But they'll do that anyway. I don't see why it'll be worse with subscriptions.

And really, are we so enamoured of the current AAA publishing model? I'm not, so why fight to defend it? A subscription model could end up encouraging a less short term approach, if retaining customer loyalty becomes more important than covering holes in your cash flow with rushed releases.
If I may approximate a Jimism, that's like saying "Ooh well they're gonna fuck us in the arse eventually so I might as well lube them with the moist demanding chasm of my mouth in the meantime"!

Madness.
I don't see the logic in refusing a pretty good deal on the grounds that it will cause water to run down hill, bears to defecate in the woods and the pope to convert to catholicism.

Being an inveterate critic of the status quo and an unthinking conservative makes no sense.
 

DragonDai

New member
Jun 3, 2012
21
0
0
Man, I really wish I didn't have to pay for online services or multiplayer access or early release or pre-download...oh...wait...I don't...I game on a PC.

EDIT: To actually contribute:

Wulfram77 said:
I don't see the logic in refusing a pretty good deal on the grounds that it will cause water to run down hill, bears to defecate in the woods and the pope to convert to catholicism.

Being an inveterate critic of the status quo and an unthinking conservative makes no sense.
This is NOT a good deal for anyone but EA. Let's break it down.

Okay, 5 bucks a month. And you get some things that should be free already (early access, pre-download, demos, etc) and some things you'd have to pay for (games). But why do you think EA is giving you access to this stuff? What's their motivation?

MONEY. Any other motivation makes no sense. EA doesn't love you. They don't care if you're happy. They just want your money. So, apparently, that good deal you think you're getting, well, it's a better deal for EA.

Somehow, the people behind this project at EA convinced some shareholders that they would earn MORE money doing this than not doing this. This MUST mean, by extension, that if this service didn't exist, you'd give EA LESS money than you'd give them if this service did exist.

But how is that possible? You're getting free games, right?!? I mean, surely free games > 30 bucks a year? That short answer is no, the free games, for the VAST majority of people, will not be > 30 bucks a year. EA will pull all sorts of shenanigans to make sure you get little to no value out of your 30 bucks a month. You'll get games you already own, games you don't want to play, and games without DLC or pre-order content. That's all for sure. You might also get games missing key features. Say a version of Battlefield where you don't get to play Single Player at all, and you're limited to 1 type of map or 1 type of game mode. Things like that (although that last bit is pure speculation).

At the end of the day, the key thing to remember here is EA wants to give you LESS content for MORE money. If they suddenly come to your door and say "LOOK AT ALL THIS CONTENT! It's only 30 bucks a year! Isn't that super?" You can be 100% positive that nestled in that content somewhere is a giant turd sandwich. In fact, you can be pretty sure that the vast, overwhelming majority of that "content" IS a turd sandwich.

Just remember. EA doesn't care about ANYTHING except getting you to give them your money. This is NOT a good deal. How can we tell? If it was a good deal, EA wouldn't be offering it to you. It's that bloody simple.
 

Pops16

New member
Nov 4, 2012
12
0
0
Demonchaser27 said:
What happens when they don't release a game for 4 - 6 months but your still paying for it? That's free money for EA. There is little real value for what they're giving.
Exactly. I had no desire to buy any games for months now.
 

strumbore

New member
Mar 1, 2013
93
0
0
Another excellent analysis by Jim, I would have put more emphasis on the carving-up of content though (I know Jim talks about it a lot, but that's the name of the scheme, after all). Minimizing production (content) and maximizing pre-emptive cash flow (pre-orders and subscriptions) is the Holy Grail for media companies.

What a wonderful thing it would be for developers to vaguely offer "a big-name game" for $60, the "special edition" (i.e. full-but-not-really version) for $80, the "season pass" for an additional $30, and "online-mode" through its subscription service for $40 per month...effectively trickling-out a full experience shrewdly hinted at through vague PR's advertisements over the course of a year for $150 and minimal commitment to quality or content.

Oh wait, they've been doing this for years :D. Imagine how great it will be once we do away with retail altogether and just have subscriptions!
 

Thanatos2k

New member
Aug 12, 2013
820
0
0
Wulfram77 said:
I don't see the logic in refusing a pretty good deal on the grounds that it will cause water to run down hill, bears to defecate in the woods and the pope to convert to catholicism.

Being an inveterate critic of the status quo and an unthinking conservative makes no sense.
You're pissing in the moat because it's convenient and a pretty good deal. But eventually you have to drink the water, and if everyone starts doing it...
 

DragonDai

New member
Jun 3, 2012
21
0
0
Thanatos2k said:
You're pissing in the moat because it's convenient and a pretty good deal. But eventually you have to drink the water, and if everyone starts doing it...
Best way to describe this I've ever seen...
 

disgruntledgamer

New member
Mar 6, 2012
905
0
0
Jimothy Sterling said:
EA Access ... Denied

Welcome to an incoming age of subscriptions, subscriptions everywhere!

Watch Video

You were right EA is already locking crap out unless you subscribe and EA Access isn't even out of the starting game yet., like the ability to see if their Games are total crap.



Madden NFL 15 won't be playable early unless you pay for EA Access (update)

Update: While EA initially declined to comment on the reasons for the lack of a Madden 15 demo, an EA representative reached out to Polygon after the publication of this story with the following statement to provide some additional context: "The difficult decision not to do a demo for Madden was strictly a result of the team's commitment to deliver the highest-quality game possible. We chose to put 100 percent of our development resources toward the full game."


http://www.polygon.com/2014/8/11/5991063/madden-nfl-15-no-demo-ea-access
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
EA lost me when you basically said "subscription service on top of a subscription service." Well actually if I'm being honest, EA lost me as soon as I heard "EA," but subscription service on top of a subscription service? Fuck that.
 

jpoon

New member
Mar 26, 2009
1,995
0
0
Spot on once again, thank you kind sir and fuck you EA, I have no need for your garbage pail services.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
EA doesn't offer enough to me for this to even seem attractive. If you don't play modern FPS games, it's a waste. If EA puts out a game I'm interested in, I buy it only when I know it's worth my money, and you don't tend to get any DLC money out of me. It's not even a trust thing with EA for me, it's a lack of good games that keeps me away. They may release one game a year I'm interested in, if that.
 

gamegod25

New member
Jul 10, 2008
863
0
0
cphonx said:
Even since EA lobotomized Mythic Entertainment (the creators of Dark Age of Camelot amungst other things), I've lead a very happy EA free life and I recommend everyone else do the same. It's quite liberating. Granted they've locked in some proper nouns, such as NFL and Star Wars, but as far as gameplay goes you can get pretty much everything they offer elsewhere, only better.
Never forget....

[http://s1237.photobucket.com/user/Lloyd250/media/victims-of-ea.png.html]
 

truckspond

New member
Oct 26, 2013
403
0
0
I find it funny that the only ongoing AAA series that has not had content cut out of the offline single player to sell off as DLC is the one constantly criticised for stagnating - CoD.

Seriously, name one instance where content was cut out of the offline single player for any CoD game and held to ransom behind a paywall,

While other publishers keep on cutting stuff out of the single player for DLC, CoD keeps delivering you a complete, non-bug-infested single player experience at launch if you only buy the bare minimum standard edition with no DLC whatsoever. That is how games should be. None of this online multiplayer campaign bollocks because Brink is unplayable and Titanfall is quickly dying out because once people get bored of the multiplayer the campaign stops working. None of this bollocks about cutting content out of the offline single player so the publisher can extort more money from the consumer. Just one complete base game with no DLC needed for the complete single player experience
 

ace_of_something

New member
Sep 19, 2008
5,995
0
0
I already hate it when I have to log in to their system (like uplay) to play online as it is. I really don't like the idea of paying for that too.

Jimothy Sterling said:
I suggest Bug Princess could be a playable character in Hyrule Warriors - a few months later they announce Bug Princess as playable.

I make a joke that Capcom has been dropping the ball by not remaking Resident Evil for the new consoles like it always does - two days later, Capcom announces it's remaking Resident Evil for new consoles.

I make a Jimquisition about how EA Access will soon see EA gating off content it used to provide as standard - 47 MINUTES LATER, Electronic Arts announces it's gating off content it used to provide as standard.

I genuinely, truly, believe I am some sort of Holy Being.
soooo.... what're your lucky numbers?
 

RandV80

New member
Oct 1, 2009
1,507
0
0
Even if it is a good deal one must remember that EA and their likes being a large publicly held corporation is after one thing only: making money and maximizing profits.

So how can this 'subscription service' be a good thing for customers and make EA money? Well, pre-order bullshit aside the big publishers have always put the focus for making all their money on the first few months of a games release. They send out that big first batch, rake in their millions, then start pushing/hyping the next release. Making money after that period is under utilized, and for consoles if someones grabbing an older game they're likely buying it used from Gamestop or wherever and the publisher makes no money. So it makes a lot of sense for them to create an annual revenue stream for themselves and provide these older games which they're not making money off of anyways free of charge, and it is a good deal for the customer.

That takes care of the 'making money' part, the problem comes from the latter end of the equation 'maximizing profits'. Once the model is in place they're going to do everything they can get away with to squeeze ever last bit of value out of it, and if that means taking away stuff that used to come for free to encourage us to 'subscribe' then that's what they're going to do. And it's what they're already doing with the Madden news brought up here.

Someone else already posted the update from news article but here it is again:

Update: While EA initially declined to comment on the reasons for the lack of a Madden 15 demo, an EA representative reached out to Polygon after the publication of this story with the following statement to provide some additional context: "The difficult decision not to do a demo for Madden was strictly a result of the team's commitment to deliver the highest-quality game possible. We chose to put 100 percent of our development resources toward the full game."
I mean wow seriously can you get anymore sleezy than that? It could make a little sense if they scrapped the demo entirely, since it does take some resources to piece it together, but isn't there going to be one for the Xbox One EA subscribers?

Now I haven't bought a game from EA/Activision/Ubisoft for years, thank Steam for that, so it's not really going to effect me. But the sad thing is all they need is like 500k or so people to sign up for it to call it an 'outstanding success' and 'what the consumer wants', then we'll see all the other monkeys follow along making their own subscription services.
 

MrBrightside919

New member
Oct 2, 2008
1,626
0
0
So, not only will we need an xbox live subscription, but now there is ANOTHER subscription we can have. How long before everyone company has a subscription service?

Not sure if anyone made this joke yet but...

Subscriptions inside of subscriptions inside of subscriptions...

Subsception!
 

lordloss217

New member
Feb 25, 2014
16
0
0
MrBrightside919 said:
So, not only will we need an xbox live subscription, but now there is ANOTHER subscription we can have. How long before everyone company has a subscription service?

Not sure if anyone made this joke yet but...

Subscriptions inside of subscriptions inside of subscriptions...

Subsception!
Imagine a subsception within a subsception: SUBSCEPTIONSCEPTION!!!!
 

MrBrightside919

New member
Oct 2, 2008
1,626
0
0
lordloss217 said:
MrBrightside919 said:
So, not only will we need an xbox live subscription, but now there is ANOTHER subscription we can have. How long before everyone company has a subscription service?

Not sure if anyone made this joke yet but...

Subscriptions inside of subscriptions inside of subscriptions...

Subsception!
Imagine a subsception within a subsception: SUBSCEPTIONSCEPTION!!!!
Dear god in heaven!

I'm calling Leo as we speak...