Games that don’t offer a “co-op” mode, like BF4, are going
to have to give back a little of their profits if they are to keep pace with
the increasingly SOCIAL NATURE of gaming.
copyright Mike Reed |
Do you hear me sweetheart? I said, EA is going to have to
allow for SHARE PLAY, and whatever Microsoft’s iteration will be, if they are to stay competitive in the mindset of gamers who prefer the online,
multiplayer experience, to the single-player game mode. I count myself amongst
the former.
Since Share Play requires the purchase of the PS4 AND the PS
Plus membership, it’s not like either company is sacrificing much.
“Yeah, but how does EA benefit from Sony’s PS Plus sales?”
My guess is that Sony has extended a partnership agreement
with specific distributors like EA. If a purchase of EA software is made via PS
Plus, EA gets a cut, and EA get access to the PS Plus membership.
But even if there were no economic incentive, EA and DICE
need to do the decent and see that their faithful Battlefield customers are
rewarded for their loyalty, and in the process, lay the framework for the
future of Battlefield gaming online.
"FINALLY 120! But wait, WHAT DO YOU MEAN EVERYONE IS ALREADY 130!"
It's not fair but neither is the nature of gaming. We are a Darwinian lot and even though we chant "fair play" it's with a certain knowledge that the online multiplayer first-person-shooter is a dog-eat-dog, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST world in which we inhabit.
It, therefore, came as no great surprise when, in the midst of gloating my recent 120 - BRIGADIER GENERAL achievement, I became aware of the multitude of my superiors who had already attained 130. God bless em and I hope to meet you ALL on the BATTLEFIELD, jerks.
BOOM SALAD FOREVER! PSN>JOHNDAVIDFLORES
BOOM SALAD FOREVER! PSN>JOHNDAVIDFLORES
No comments:
Post a Comment