PlayStation.Blog: PlayStation Now Subscription Program: All The Details

[Luongold1]

Well looking at EA's sub service for $30 a year and I get newer games and I dont have to stream...not impressed by this offering..

 

[Nervusbreakdown]

Did they say EA Access was junk? I don't recall them saying that.

Anyway, can you imagine how hard it would be to get the current hardware BC with the old hardware?

It is not a rip off either, it is simply a choice. Nobody forced people to get rid of their old hardware. You want to play PS3 games, play them on hardware specifically designed for them.

ok they didnt use the word junk but its pretty much what they were saying that EA access dont bring a good value to gamers. If its a choice then why SONY didnt let EA have their access then?

Plus we at one time had BC on our old games and now instead of doing it on this people have to keep the old system instead popping their old game to the new system to keep playing their games. Instead SONY said no to ea because its SONY way and the only way instead of having a "choice".

At least EA games are new next gen titles, discounts, and early access for games.

 

[Shawn Jelsic]

Good to know there are additional support. Like I mentioned, the urge to play older game diminsih as there are more game for current gen. Sure, once in a while you wanted to boot up your old console to play a title or 2. Keyword is 'once in a while'. At least from my own experience.
15bucks (which will totally be even more expensive across the pond) is a bit to pay monthly if you only occasionally play these games.

While the pricing models are similar, Tv shows & movies do not age like video games. I am not saying the service is bad, but I am just questioning the subtainablity of the in the long run, unless of course the lineup for indies title are strong. If people wanted to subscribe, I am not stopping them.

I see what you're saying, but I think you maybe missing the fact that this service is not aimed primarily at users with a prior Playstation console but rather those without it. why do you think it is expanding into so many devices (TV, tablets, phones, ect.)? basically it is for those consumers with no interest in buying a game console. to elaborate on that, think of candy crush and facebook. a lot of the users are not gamers, but because they have a device that supports them, they find themselves indulging in them without ever considering the fact that it is a game they are playing nevermind the quality of them. kids are the same way, which is why tablets have become so popular over dedicated handhelds.

now, the fraction that is aimed at gamers has more to do with those individuals not ever owning or experiencing the game at all due to it launching on a platform to which they never had a chance to purchase rather that be Playstation 1, 2, 3, PSP, so on and so forth. it has less to with you using it for backwards compatibility for games you've already played. that would be too straightforward while lacking longevity.

Playstation Now gets the user in cheap and as quickly as possible without any contracts or startup/shut off fees. I think it is a dang good consumer-friendly approach.

 

[Shawn Jelsic]

Well looking at EA's sub service for $30 a year and I get newer games and I dont have to stream...not impressed by this offering..

downloads uses a lot of resources from the actual device as well as TIME, not to mention it only being limited to just that one device. that's the difference between this an EA's offering. let us not even get on scale.

 

[Luongold1]

downloads uses a lot of resources from the actual device as well as TIME, not to mention it only being limited to just that one device. that's the difference between this an EA's offering. let us not even get on scale.

Meh, I own both so I can compare, I dont mind having to download them, I would rather download them and not even have to worry about streaming or button delay or timing issues and what not, plus TIME, I can just download when I go to bed at night and BOOM, got the game the next day..

 

[menace-uk-]

ok they didnt use the word junk but its pretty much what they were saying that EA access dont bring a good value to gamers. If its a choice then why SONY didnt let EA have their access then?

Plus we at one time had BC on our old games and now instead of doing it on this people have to keep the old system instead popping their old game to the new system to keep playing their games. Instead SONY said no to ea because its SONY way and the only way instead of having a "choice".

At least EA games are new next gen titles, discounts, and early access for games.

You seem to be trying to mix one thing in with another. The "Choice" was making the decision to rid yourself of PS3 hardware. You(as in gamers) made that choice, now it seems you want Sony to rectify the consequences of your choice. Yes, BC had been given is some limited form before, but this sort of thing is really not a standard. It is illogical to assume we will get it, or even that we should be given it, IMO.

EA Access is a different matter entirely.

 

[Shawn Jelsic]

Meh, I own both so I can compare, I dont mind having to download them, I would rather download them and not even have to worry about streaming or button delay or timing issues and what not, plus TIME, I can just download when I go to bed at night and BOOM, got the game the next day..

again, this takes up to much resources. there is a lot of waiting involved and a lot of space being utilised in order to play these games, and then it is limited to just that one device. in addiction this, the catalogue is significantly smaller.

EA access cannot do this: http://gamerfitnation.com/2015/01/samsung-tvs/

....and that's the problem.