Dragon Age II Pulled From Steam, EA Points Finger at Valve

Are people who bought this via Steam still going to be able to get the Legacy DLC?

I guess this settles that I won't be getting the DLC for DA2.  Maybe I would have found it in myself to start the game again and finish it this time, but I'm not going to find it in my heart to buy it again through another service.

@ashriels said:

Steam cannot possibly be that restricted, when financially insecure indie developers can sell their games across all of those digital platforms. I'm calling EA out on their bullshit. Their argument doesn't make sense.

That's a different economy of scale. The downside of losing a certain margin of possible profits is far outweighed by the exposure and ease to content that Steam provides; I can't tell you how many times I've heard people say "Well I guess I'll buy Indie Game X once it comes to Steam," rather than purchase it directly from the developer. It also helps that unlike other services (ie, X-Box Indie Channel), Valve actually supports and advertises the smaller indie stuff, partially because they realize that content actually selling benefits everyone in the chain. It all very symbiotic, especially if you're a first time developer, and is far better than the old brick and mortar retail-chain that was far more restrictive.

I think EA's perspective (right or wrong) is that they find that the loss of revenue (specifically when it comes to DLC, which is odd) is more of a burden than the benefit of having their content on the main gateway that PC gamers use these days, especially when they're promoting their own new digital store where they reap 100% profit. I don't claim to know Steam's internal policies, but the implication from EA is that their cut is a step above other digital distribution services, possibly on the understanding that they are the most popular digital store in town. You'll need to keep your content on their store or else you're going to flounder on the PC market, because who the fuck buys things anywhere but Steam? EA seems to think they can call Valve's bluff, so now it's a game who blinks first.

@Abndak said:

I would love to know what these " restrictive terms of service" are. I somehow have a feeling bringing them up would make ea seem ever more evil than they seem now.

Steam wants all DLC for games to go through them, so they can take a slice of that money. EA said no, we'll let users download the DLC straight from us. Steam said, later Dragon Age 2.

Doesn't really make EA seem too evil.

I wonder what will happen to those who bought DA2 through steam. Whoever decided to remove it has a massive stick up their ass and shoulda thought about the consumers first.

@Tennmuerti said:

@Brodehouse said:

It's funny people are so vigilant against EA and Ubisoft and yet excuse any Goddamn thing by Valve or Blizzard.

Wait wait, did you actually just compare Ubisoft DRM to that of Valve or Blizzard ... lmao

Ubisoft's DRM requires you to be connected to the internet. Loading up my Steam games requires me to be connected to the internet.

@Jedted said:

I wonder what will happen to those who bought DA2 through steam. Whoever decided to remove it has a massive stick up their ass and shoulda thought about the consumers first.

So you are making a judgement call on the ones who removed it without bothering to know how it affects those that have purchased already? ... bravo

FYI the games are simply no longer being sold on Steam, if you own it already you can re-download it and play to your hearts content as much as you want.

@coryrx8 said:

Apple came out with a policy for the App Store saying that prices for in-app purchases (which Apple gets a cut of) cannot be any higher than out-of-app purchases (which Apple doesn't get a cut of). People scream, throw a fit, call for an end to Apple's walled garden, compare Steve Jobs to Hitler, etc. Valve does pretty much the same thing with Steam? People blame EA. WTF? I'm thinking that Valve's monopoly on digital PC game distribution has gone to their heads, but for some reason the average PC gamer is willfully blind to it.

Way to completely fail in understanding he difference between the two situations. Most PC gamers are fine with it since they have basic reasoning skills (some of them anyway)

@Soulblitz said:

Are people who bought this via Steam still going to be able to get the Legacy DLC?

Yep, nothing changed in that regard, you can still get it through Bioware's website like you would have had to in the first place anyway.

@Brodehouse said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@Brodehouse said:

It's funny people are so vigilant against EA and Ubisoft and yet excuse any Goddamn thing by Valve or Blizzard.

Wait wait, did you actually just compare Ubisoft DRM to that of Valve or Blizzard ... lmao

Ubisoft's DRM requires you to be connected to the internet. Loading up my Steam games requires me to be connected to the internet.

Ok, I guess you are ignorant to the differences after all. Next time try to know the actual facts before arguing a point.

@coryrx8 said:

Apple came out with a policy for the App Store saying that prices for in-app purchases (which Apple gets a cut of) cannot be any higher than out-of-app purchases (which Apple doesn't get a cut of). People scream, throw a fit, call for an end to Apple's walled garden, compare Steve Jobs to Hitler, etc. Valve does pretty much the same thing with Steam? People blame EA. WTF? I'm thinking that Valve's monopoly on digital PC game distribution has gone to their heads, but for some reason the average PC gamer is willfully blind to it.

Way to completely fail in understanding he difference between the two situations. Most PC gamers are fine with it since they have basic reasoning skills (some of them anyway)

@coryrx8 said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@coryrx8 said:

Apple came out with a policy for the App Store saying that prices for in-app purchases (which Apple gets a cut of) cannot be any higher than out-of-app purchases (which Apple doesn't get a cut of). People scream, throw a fit, call for an end to Apple's walled garden, compare Steve Jobs to Hitler, etc. Valve does pretty much the same thing with Steam? People blame EA. WTF? I'm thinking that Valve's monopoly on digital PC game distribution has gone to their heads, but for some reason the average PC gamer is willfully blind to it.

Way to completely fail in understanding he difference between the two situations. Most PC gamers are fine with it since they have basic reasoning skills (some of them anyway)

Brilliant response there, buddy. Wow, you really put me in my place with your relentless logic and sound reasoning. It's more ethical when Valve does it because "PC gamers are fine with it." I'm glad we got that all cleared up.

I didn't realize your reading skills were impaired too. Since I am a nice guy I'll help you out with this one, as a freebie: Nowhere in my response did I imply that what Valve doing is ethical because PC gamers are fine with it, this fictional correlation you produced yourself. What was said is that the situation which you compared it too is different. And that most PC gamers don't rag on Valve since they have a basic understanding of the said situation. In fact the actual correlation is the reverse, PC gamers are fine with it because they believe that Valve is not doing anything unethical, in this particular dispute. There is a big difference between the two.

@coryrx8 said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@coryrx8 said:

Apple came out with a policy for the App Store saying that prices for in-app purchases (which Apple gets a cut of) cannot be any higher than out-of-app purchases (which Apple doesn't get a cut of). People scream, throw a fit, call for an end to Apple's walled garden, compare Steve Jobs to Hitler, etc. Valve does pretty much the same thing with Steam? People blame EA. WTF? I'm thinking that Valve's monopoly on digital PC game distribution has gone to their heads, but for some reason the average PC gamer is willfully blind to it.

Way to completely fail in understanding he difference between the two situations. Most PC gamers are fine with it since they have basic reasoning skills (some of them anyway)

Brilliant response there, buddy. Wow, you really put me in my place with your relentless logic and sound reasoning. It's more ethical when Valve does it because "PC gamers are fine with it." I'm glad we got that all cleared up.

I didn't realize your reading skills were impaired too. Since I am a nice guy I'll help you out with this one, as a freebie: Nowhere in my response did I imply that what Valve doing is ethical because PC gamers are fine with it, this fictional correlation you produced yourself. What was said is that the situation which you compared it too is different. And that most PC gamers don't rag on Valve since they have a basic understanding of the said situation. In fact the actual correlation is the reverse, PC gamers are fine with it because they believe that Valve is not doing anything unethical. There is a big difference between the two.

EA wants their share of the DLC pie, Valve wants the same share. Steam can't thrive without games but it does have a large consumer base.

It depends if consumers are willing to go through EA's, which I find atrocious, content delivery system. If not EA will move back to Steam. If not Valve might have to start changing their views.

Fuck off EA, nobody wants your shitty steam-clone.

@TheChaos said:

Fuck off EA, nobody wants your shitty steam-clone.

@Tennmuerti said:

@Brodehouse said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@Brodehouse said:

It's funny people are so vigilant against EA and Ubisoft and yet excuse any Goddamn thing by Valve or Blizzard.

Wait wait, did you actually just compare Ubisoft DRM to that of Valve or Blizzard ... lmao

Ubisoft's DRM requires you to be connected to the internet. Loading up my Steam games requires me to be connected to the internet.

Ok, I guess you are ignorant to the differences after all. Next time try to know the actual facts before arguing a point.

Oh wow. You've certainly showed me with those 'actual facts'. For you to talk about argumentative logic without even bothering to establish a point is incredible.

@coryrx8 said:

You responded with an ad hominem attack (I'll save you from having to look that up: it's an attack at the person rather than the idea) and stated that the two situations were different, adding no support at all as to WHY they're different. You're not debating me like a mature individual would, you're being a jackass because I criticized a company that you happen to be a fan of. These are two companies offering digital content delivery services, treating both services as a walled garden, and dictating what options publishers have in delivering additional content to consumers. Are you really that dense that you don't see how similar the two situations are? EDIT: Look, I've read a lot of the content you've posted around here, you're a great contributor to this site. You could definitely use some improvement in your tact when you disagree with someone though. I'm not blameless in this whole thing, as I was pretty quick to respond in kind, but we should have started off on better footing.

I used an ad hominem attack on purpose, because I dislike when people either misinterpret what I said or twist it to try and discredit what I said. I am indeed being a jackass, but not for the reason you assume. I am being a jackass to people who make blanket statements about a situation, especially when what they are arguing has already been somewhat addressed in the thread already. I personally do not care about Valve or any other game company in particular and will treat their decisions that affect me individually as they occur. To address the differences in the situations between Apple and Valve cases, since you are insistent:

• the similarities you described are correct and I agree with all of them
• however just because two situations have similarities does not make them identical, and the details can dictate people's opinion on the subject
• first difference is the initiation of these situations, in the first case it is Apple who are trying to exercise control, in the second EA is the party producing initial conflict, they are the ones that are putting out press releases, EA are the ones who's games are getting removed, EA are the ones who just openly launched a directly competing service and started to try to push it everywhere, Valve appears (I use that word for a reason) to be the passive party here not the aggressor, therefore naturally it's hard for people to blame them
• secondly is the history of the business practices of the corporations involved, like it or not this shapes everyone's opinion on them and current predisposition to reaction, EA has been know time and time again t continuously try various tactics and business practices to further their profits many of which have previously harmed the consumer, Apple have also not exactly been known for their generosity in prices or product version updates, Valve on the other hand has in the eyes of many rekindled the PC games market, and their business practices post initial launch drama have been nothing if not accommodating to it's consumers, naturally people are not screaming for their head as much as the are for Apple
• thirdly Valve's DLC policy can be said to encourage competition since they require DLC for a game to be available through their service and not only the ingame channel or publishers. Or at least that is what can be deduced from information available to us at this point considering we do not have the text of the actual policy yet. EA's move by comparison is seen as trying to monopolize the sale of DLC content, since they are not offering it through any other digital distributor but themselves. Likewise Apple's price move is furthering their own dominance on the platform by discouraging flexible pricing from the developers. In all 3 cases the companies are trying to do what will benefit them most, to be sure, but the minor details of how they go about it matter.
• another point worth mentioning is that Valve is not dictating the prices to the developers unlike Apple, it takes a cut, but the prices are set by the content owners to their liking, Valve is dictating a simple availability of content through their channel rather then it's price

I was initially somewhat harsher in my reply, but since you have amended your post, I likewise modified mine.

And in retrospect I was indeed a bit tactless, but not without impetus.

@Brodehouse said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@Brodehouse said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@Brodehouse said:

It's funny people are so vigilant against EA and Ubisoft and yet excuse any Goddamn thing by Valve or Blizzard.

Wait wait, did you actually just compare Ubisoft DRM to that of Valve or Blizzard ... lmao

Ubisoft's DRM requires you to be connected to the internet. Loading up my Steam games requires me to be connected to the internet.

Ok, I guess you are ignorant to the differences after all. Next time try to know the actual facts before arguing a point.

Oh wow. You've certainly showed me with those 'actual facts'. For you to talk about argumentative logic without even bothering to establish a point is incredible.

Ubisoft DRM requires an always on internet connection, which means that as soon as you disconnect you are immediately prevented from continuing to play and you can't play at all without internet. Your single player experience continuously depends on the internet connection and makes you reliant on their server stability at all times. Valve DRM first of all only requires a one time check at the start, not all the time while playing. Secondly you can play your Steam games offline even without logging on to Steam online at all, a check is only requested once a few weeks. I did not bother posting these facts before, because they are well known to most PC gamers, hence repeating them for the 100th time was kind of a waste of time.

I actually did establish a point. The point was that equating Ubisoft DRM and Valve DRM is a joke, hence my amusement.

They really need to put a limit on how much people can type into these comments sections on news. The giant walls of text are so goddamn irritating to sift through.

They're never going to figure out this debt ceiling problem!

Oh wait, what were we talking about?

@buft said:

the origins/steam war continues

Steam will win. We know this to be true.

Crap... Really wanted BF3 with Steam support. I guess I'll pre-purchase at Origin or retail to get Back to Karkand, then load it mup through Steam. ^^

It's just a pissing contest, and I have news for EA: You're too late. I'm invested in the Steam platform, and I don't see the need to have yet another damn store to buy crap from. I'm not installing a publisher exclusive store for every publisher that wants to have their own spyware on my machine. Steam is bad enough. Just do what it takes and get your stuff on Steam so I can buy it. Is that so hard?

And if these shenanigans mean that I eventually wont be able to redownload DA2 from Steam, then to hell with you both.

Steam: Saving me from crappy DAII DLC

I love how much of the 'Valve-can-do-no-wrong' mentality we've got going on here. It seems to me that if they were just doing this to promote Origin they'd use the word a lot more in his statements (e.g. no mention of Origin in the list of major download services, or at all from the quotes Patrick put in the article). Also it seems that if EA was making this shit up, it would be in Valve's best interest to call them on it publicly. Seeing as they haven't, I see a little more credibility in EA's statements. 
 
P.S. I loved Dragon Age 2, so suck it. 

I love how much of the 'Valve-can-do-no-wrong' mentality we've got going on here. It seems to me that if they were just doing this to promote Origin they'd use the word a lot more in his statements (e.g. no mention of Origin in the list of major download services, or at all from the quotes Patrick put in the article). Also it seems that if EA was making this shit up, it would be in Valve's best interest to call them on it publicly. Seeing as they haven't, I see a little more credibility in EA's statements.  P.S. I loved Dragon Age 2, so suck it. 

I love how much of the 'Valve-can-do-no-wrong' mentality we've got going on here. It seems to me that if they were just doing this to promote Origin they'd use the word a lot more in his statements (e.g. no mention of Origin in the list of major download services, or at all from the quotes Patrick put in the article). Also it seems that if EA was making this shit up, it would be in Valve's best interest to call them on it publicly. Seeing as they haven't, I see a little more credibility in EA's statements. 
 
P.S. I loved Dragon Age 2, so suck it. 

unfortunately, EA Origin sells only their own games. so even for the future, the game is already over. Steam sells mostly all of games in the market. I can say 'more than 90% any game'. don't even mention 'competition'.  I think that it doesn't even effect  whether Steam doesn't sell all of EA games to get some bad impact of their profit. Steam & Valve will still make tons of money. do you think that Steam will change restriction near the future? I don't think so. by the way, I am not stick with only one download platform if any good game is available from others. I even bought lots of retail boxes as well. so to me, whatever they call 'war' or not, I don't care, that doesn't effect on my future game purchase. 

@BeefyGrandmole said:

And just because you think DA2 and crysis 2 "suck" doesn't mean valve should be allowed to pull these games off of steam without warning or an explanation.

Why exactly not?

Any retail store can choose to stop selling any game they please, and they do so all the time.

@BeefyGrandmole said:

And just because you think DA2 and crysis 2 "suck" doesn't mean valve should be allowed to pull these games off of steam without warning or an explanation.

Why exactly not?

Any retail store can choose to stop selling any game they please, and they do so all the time.

@Deusoma said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@BeefyGrandmole said:

And just because you think DA2 and crysis 2 "suck" doesn't mean valve should be allowed to pull these games off of steam without warning or an explanation.

Why exactly not?

Any retail store can choose to stop selling any game they please, and they do so all the time.

Because when a retail store pulls support for a game, it doesn't mean that people who bought the game from them already suddenly can't play the copies they bought. This is not the case with Steam. Single biggest drawback of digital distribution.

Wrong. This is not the case. You can still play any game you purchased on Steam DA2 or Crysis2. Steam only stopped selling the game.

This has already been mentioned in the comments.

I posted in this thread already defending Valve, and I still do, but I was thinking today, what is the difference between these games being pulled and Portal 2, which has an in game store that sells stuff for real money that isn't available directly through Steam?

@Kidavenger said:

I posted in this thread already defending Valve, and I still do, but I was thinking today, what is the difference between these games being pulled and Portal 2, which has an in game store that sells stuff for real money that isn't available directly through Steam?

The fact that there is no distribution agreement.

@Tennmuerti said:

@Kidavenger said:

I posted in this thread already defending Valve, and I still do, but I was thinking today, what is the difference between these games being pulled and Portal 2, which has an in game store that sells stuff for real money that isn't available directly through Steam?

The fact that there is no distribution agreement.

I think there has to be more to this than the DLC issue, Valve can't hold others to a higher standard then they do for their own games and expect stuff like this to not happen.

@Kidavenger said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@Kidavenger said:

I posted in this thread already defending Valve, and I still do, but I was thinking today, what is the difference between these games being pulled and Portal 2, which has an in game store that sells stuff for real money that isn't available directly through Steam?

The fact that there is no distribution agreement.

I think there has to be more to this than the DLC issue, Valve can't hold others to a higher standard then they do for their own games and expect stuff like this to not happen.

The standard is simply not applicable to their own games because they are selling them themselves anyway. There is no need for Portal 2 to sell the micro-transaction items through Steam because either way it is still Valve that is selling them. Plus there is no standard. It's a simple contract. Between Valve and a third party. In the case of Portal 2 there is no third party to have a contract with.

(I'm not defending Valve by the way, just explaining the business/legal reasoning)

@Rhaknar said:

its all about the cut that Valve takes on everything (including DLC) and by having it as a in game store thing, it bypasses Steam so valve doesnt get the cut, EA gets 100% of it... and thats fine. But is Legacy not available on XBL and PSN for example? And they get cuts of that shit FOR SURE. So while EA has every right to want to have 100% of profit on DLC, its OBVIOUS this is about Origin vs Steam and they are using this as a way to look good and still get their games off steam.

Exactly.

Is anybody actually buying this? Just do it aleady, EA. You made your bed, now lie in it. 
 
You're not going to get this done without consequences, and we all know Steam can't stop you. Take your licks and quit being such wimps.  
 
It wasn't an accident. It's not her fault. You didn't trip and impregnate her. Own the baby.

and the same dungeon re-used 200 times totally makes it a bad game get at me).

Valve should stop being so restrictive and EA should stop shoving all this Origin stuff down peoples throats.

So, this issue has become a non-issue? DAII still isn't available on Steam so I guess it won't return at all?

So, this issue has become a non-issue? DAII still isn't available on Steam so I guess it won't return at all?

@AndrewB said:

@RVonE said:

So, this issue has become a non-issue? DAII still isn't available on Steam so I guess it won't return at all?

Neither side is willing to budge and nothing has changed, so I guess not. It would probably be more of an issue if Dragon Age 2 was half the game its predecessor was. Then it would be something worth getting upset over.

Whatever, I enjoyed both games even though they both have their flaws (the second more than the first, of course). Besides, DAII sold well, so I don't understand why it isn't an issue.