SamuraiKnight27 If the subscription was a yearly cost with only a slight increase from what they already charge for the yearly release, it would basically be the same thing we’re doing now. The difference is that a subscription guarantees EA gets that payment every single year, no matter what.
If they made the greatest NHL game ever, some people might buy it once and skip a year or two before buying again. A subscription removes that option—it’s a built-in safety net for EA.
At the end of the day, the whole goal for us as fans is to see passionate, dedicated developers roll out every single feature they want—and that we want—without EA getting in the way. But for that to happen, the model still has to make EA more money. Otherwise, what incentive would they have to change?
I would just cancel my subscription after a year so how is EA guaranteed my money after that?
Of course — just like now, you don’t have to buy the game every year. But if it’s really good and you want to keep playing, most people would keep their subscription going year after year, the same way they currently buy the new release each year. I’m talking about the group of players who already purchase annually — for them, the subscription just replaces that yearly purchase. If you’re not someone who buys every year, then this idea wouldn’t really apply to you.
One of the big things you have to think about also is from a HUT perspective. Like it or not, HUT is a valuable mode for the franchise and if you did this subscription idea, you would then have to either go away from the entirety of HUT which would not be something people would be happy about as they like to create their own "superteam" of all stars. The other problem you might face is what I will call "the great reset" in that over the entirety of a games lifespan, HUT players are evolving from base mid 80 OVR players to 99s. If you made it a subscription model how do you reset everyone from 99 back to mid 80s to start again? Sure that is what they are doing now but it is a mental thing where it is "The new season update for this game is out and now my entire team and collection of cards is gone and I have to grind back up again." vs "Oh its a new game and it's time to start building my collection back up.". Two statements that have the same meaning but have a way different mentality behind them.
Thanks for your reply and for sharing your thoughts, I really appreciate the feedback. I hear you on the great reset. I do not play HUT myself, but my subscription idea would not remove the yearly reset at all. You could still start a fresh HUT season every September just like today. The subscription would only replace buying the base game each year but there would still be a September renewal for your subscription just like the NFL does with NFL red zone and NFL game day.
In reality it is no different than a yearly release, it is just a fail safe for EA to roll out a better, higher quality game with many more feature missing and for players to continue subscribing if it is worth it. Packs, events, and the HUT grind would stay the same, the only difference is the base game becomes one evolving platform getting better and better increasing game value within the season, boosting new subscriptions, and ensuring current subscribers. If the game keeps improving, people keep the subscription , if not, they can drop it. That feels like a fair balance for both sides. It gives the fans more value with a higher quality game, and it ensures EA still gets their money every year through subscriptions on top of HUT, which seems to be their main focus right now and part of why so many other features have been left out.
Community Manager
