EA Explains Why Battlefield 3 Might Not Appear on Steam

@WilliamRLBaker: It's because people don't understand how bad monpolies can fuck over other buisnesses and consumers alike. When these kids grow up they'll understand how ignorant they're being.

Wow sure alot of People riding the Preverbial balls of Steam and wishing it were a monopoly in the Digital Distribution arena  *Which users have already made it into* 

considering how god awful it has been to play EA games, even on consoles for over now I gotta take valve's side here. I mean shit back in original xbox days EA wouldn't even get with the standardized friends list thing. they're just stubborn assholes.

They need to stop trying to shove Origin down everyone's throats.

@gesi1223 said:

@Infininja said:

@Gnorbooth said:

EA has every right to sell their games and DLC and get 100% of the profits. But if that's the case, then don't use someone else's service to promote and sell your games. Because if said service has now helped you in any way with promotion, sales, downloads, hosting, etc, then they are entitled to a cut.

I don't understand why Valve is entitled to a cut. Let's go back to the days of disc-based games and expansion packs. I buy The Sims at Best Buy. I love it. I play the game every day. I then find out that The Sims: Livin' Large came out this week. I'm nowhere near a Best Buy, but Walmart is just up the road. I purchase it there and install it and have a blast all over again.

Why does Best Buy deserve a cut?

This argument doesn't really apply, because if both the game and DLC are on Steam and no where else then why shouldn't Valve get a cut for having it sell on their service? Sure if you bought the game from another service and could use it in conjunction with Steam and Valve demanded a cut of the profits from that then, yes. Why should Valve get a cut?

That's the whole point of this discussion. The game is on Steam, but the DLC isn't. Valve is forcing the DLC to be on Steam in order to get a cut.

@Gnorbooth said:

EA has every right to sell their games and DLC and get 100% of the profits. But if that's the case, then don't use someone else's service to promote and sell your games. Because if said service has now helped you in any way with promotion, sales, downloads, hosting, etc, then they are entitled to a cut.

I don't understand why Valve is entitled to a cut. Let's go back to the days of disc-based games and expansion packs. I buy The Sims at Best Buy. I love it. I play the game every day. I then find out that The Sims: Livin' Large came out this week. I'm nowhere near a Best Buy, but Walmart is just up the road. I purchase it there and install it and have a blast all over again.

Why does Best Buy deserve a cut?

Does this mean that when PopCap through EA releases a new semi-DLC type game, that game is also pulled?

in my opinion, Steam is much better at customer service than EA is, so I find myself thinking that this must have to do with EA just wanting more money rather than being about giving customers a better experience. With Steam, you make an account, and buy stuff. it's simple. admittedly, the auto-updater is sometimes a pain, if you're like me and like to install mods for games, but it's not a huge problem. EA shoves its social networking nonsense down your throat (see: pre-ordering Old Republic). also, having owned more than one 360, I can say that the way mass effect 2 dlc works is really fucking stupid.

Patrick, the title of the news story is really misleading and seems purposely so. There's really about one sentence of PR spouting in here that is new. If you want to put up stories, please do more research and hold off on publishing them until you have more hard data. That may never happen, but not posting is better than crying wolf.

Find out what the Steam terms actually are, and how they have changed for starters.

I'm not trying to troll, but I think you are pushing readers away with stories like this.

You know why Steam is so restrictive in the way it allows developers interact with customers? Because the more Valve can regulate its own servers, the better the system works. Steam isn't a horrible clusterfuck like so many other downloadable services because Valve keeps it clean. If EA can't deal with that, then they ain't getting any of my money.

@GrandHarrier said:

@Rasgueado said:

@SexualBubblegumX said:

@Deiterbomber said:

@GrandHarrier said:

Steam forces you to install Steam. So complaining that a game forces you to install something (like Origin) is a null arguement.

I don't quite understand this argument.

I believe he meant if you get a boxed version of a Valve game, you're stuck with having steam on your comp whether you want steam or not.

Did you know that buying a game that requires Microsoft Windows requires you to actually *have* a copy of Microsoft Windows!!??!??

Or a windows emulator on a Mac. Or other such work arounds if you prefer linux. Steam is an additional layer on top of your basic operating system. I suppose I shouldn't have given you a serious response to such a stupid comment, but maybe you were being serious, who knows; My point remains, complaining about EA asking you to use Origins is a null arguement if you are willing to install Steam which is much more intrusive as it REQUIRES you to use it, and log in every so often, lest you lose access to your games. And if you seriously complain about "having to sign up for something else", then I hope you never create a new fucking user account for ANYTHING, not NeoGAF, not Giant Bomb, not IGN. NOTHING. Because the amount of time it takes you is less time than it takes for you to take a shit, and considering how full of it you must be to use that arguement, that is likely pretty often.

I didn't complain about that at all actually. Not once at all in this thread.

Gotta buy a copy of windows still to run bootcamp. I suppose you don't have to, but I would assume that advocating for piracy wasn't your intent. Though... I suppose I shouldn't be giving such a serious response to such a stupid comment.

I'm going to read the fine print before making any assumptions.

@Chainblast said:

@BlastoTheSpectre:
What kind of Steam sale? The $7.50 kind? Great for you (and me), but how much profit do you think EA made on that sale? Very little, that's how much.

How much do you think most publishers enjoy having their investments pawn-off like a $15 whore?

I can't tell if this is fake rage or not, but since it got a reply, it's worth noting that the publishers set the prices and agree to the sales. Valve sales aren't hostile to publishers, they are easy money for games that are otherwise producing little revenue (in the case of old games), and they require zero investment on the publisher's part. Also, again not sure if you're trolling or not, but there is no cost of goods here, thus the profit is 100% assuming the game is already in the black. Valve gets their cut, but the vast majority of the sale of the game goes to the publisher. So yes, if EA puts a $20 game that sells 400 copies a week ($8,000) up for $7.50 and it sells 4000 copies that week ($30,000), they net $22,000 minus Valve's fee. Steam sales data isn't available, but it's quite likely that the "$15 whore" sales are ten times more profitable than that example.

Not sure if this has been mentioned amongst the confusing rage on both sides, but this all has to do with the Steam decision to allow Free to Play games. Once they did that it became necessary for them to adjust their publisher agreement so that DLC (microtransactions) are administered by Steam so they get a cut. They couldn't very well let EA host Battlefield Heroes on Steam for free and then not get a cut of the microtransactions in that game, so Battlefield Heroes isn't on Steam. DLC for all EA games now falls under this category too.

Certainly they could make an exception for games that have a purchase price, but given what a shitshow it is to purchase, download, and install Dragon Age and Mass Effect DLC on PC I imagine Steam received a ton of support requests that they could not fulfill. Steam choosing to take a stand on the issue is awkward, but I certainly would have preferred to purchase the DLC for those games from Steam rather than go through the EA hoops. Borderlands DLC was a snap and was a great deal if you got it on sale after the GOTY edition came out.

I really hope PC game distribution doesn't get really fragmented. There should be one online distributor and it should be Steam.

I'm starting to like that people with enough balls to call Valve on their bullshit are showing up.

Maybe we should start an organized boycott group on GB.

Why all the excuse crap just say you want to make your game exclusive to your download service like PS3 exclusive titles and Xbox360 exclusive titles. whats with all this drama if not to gain free marketing for upcoming titles. I hear good things about this game but might not purchase the game if they create barriers to purchase.

@GrandHarrier said:

@cide said:

Did you know BF3 matchmaking isn't in-game? It launches your fucking internet browser. Steam should be the least of their worries

This has actually been rather lauded by alot of the others I've seen playing the Alpha, as it allows you to hop into matches rather quickly.

I think it's crazy enough that people are being forced to use in-game browsers for almost all of the new games in the first place.

@BlastoTheSpectre: 
What kind of Steam sale? The $7.50 kind? Great for you (and me), but how much profit do you think EA made on that sale? Very little, that's how much. Oh, but they're greedy? Yeah, because the world runs on good will and games cost next to nothing to make. Right. When reality sinks in for you, and what seems like at least half of all people commenting here, you can join myself and the rest of the grown-ups enjoying a well made product. Oh shit, who am I kidding, you'll pound your chest like a strung-out pubescent high ethical boy until you finally cave, buy BF3 via Origin and never mention another word on the subject. 
 
Let me ask you and everyone else a question. Do you think Valve would ever let EA sell its games on Origin? Not a fucking chance. What's the difference? Absolutely nothing. The only reason Steam is as successful is because they have huge sales that sell publisher titles for next to nothing. How much do you think most publishers enjoy having their investments pawn-off like a $15 whore? They don't, and EA is no where near the last company to part ways with Valve and its Steam service. 
 
Things are changing.

@GrandHarrier said:

@Rasgueado said:

@SexualBubblegumX said:

@Deiterbomber said:

@GrandHarrier said:

Steam forces you to install Steam. So complaining that a game forces you to install something (like Origin) is a null arguement.

I don't quite understand this argument.

I believe he meant if you get a boxed version of a Valve game, you're stuck with having steam on your comp whether you want steam or not.

Did you know that buying a game that requires Microsoft Windows requires you to actually *have* a copy of Microsoft Windows!!??!??

Or a windows emulator on a Mac. Or other such work arounds if you prefer linux. Steam is an additional layer on top of your basic operating system. I suppose I shouldn't have given you a serious response to such a stupid comment, but maybe you were being serious, who knows; My point remains, complaining about EA asking you to use Origins is a null arguement if you are willing to install Steam which is much more intrusive as it REQUIRES you to use it, and log in every so often, lest you lose access to your games. And if you seriously complain about "having to sign up for something else", then I hope you never create a new fucking user account for ANYTHING, not NeoGAF, not Giant Bomb, not IGN. NOTHING. Because the amount of time it takes you is less time than it takes for you to take a shit, and considering how full of it you must be to use that arguement, that is likely pretty often.

I didn't complain about that at all actually. Not once at all in this thread.

Gotta buy a copy of windows still to run bootcamp. I suppose you don't have to, but I would assume that advocating for piracy wasn't your intent. Though... I suppose I shouldn't be giving such a serious response to such a stupid comment.

@Gnorbooth said:

EA has every right to sell their games and DLC and get 100% of the profits. But if that's the case, then don't use someone else's service to promote and sell your games. Because if said service has now helped you in any way with promotion, sales, downloads, hosting, etc, then they are entitled to a cut.

I don't understand why Valve is entitled to a cut. Let's go back to the days of disc-based games and expansion packs. I buy The Sims at Best Buy. I love it. I play the game every day. I then find out that The Sims: Livin' Large came out this week. I'm nowhere near a Best Buy, but Walmart is just up the road. I purchase it there and install it and have a blast all over again.

Why does Best Buy deserve a cut?

@Krrutch said:

"and are happy to partner with any download service that does not restrict our ability to connect directly with our consumers." aka spam them with the latest deals on origin

Oh Irony.

@CylonAndrew said:

Paradox Interactive also has a problem with Steam. I mean, it blocks the multiplayer for Darkest Hour because it is set up so you can only do Direct IP so it somehow blocks it.

What?

Paradox Interactive also has a problem with Steam. I mean, it blocks the multiplayer for Darkest Hour because it is set up so you can only do Direct IP so it somehow blocks it. Steam is not completely innocent and EA has a right to complain considering their position as a major publisher while little Paradox is not in the same boat and cant afford to complain. Think about that. Oh, and dont get me started on the delayed patching...

Did you know BF3 matchmaking isn't in-game? It launches your fucking internet browser. Steam should be the least of their worries

@GrandHarrier: Sorry for the links, it's just easier to illustrate on some of that stuff (and, well, that music video is great).

Did you know BF3 matchmaking isn't in-game? It launches your fucking internet browser. Steam should be the least of their worries

I'm pretty much with @Shotaro on this. There are a lot of proprietary things out there that have been installed with games, so many that have sold pretty well, that I doubt the average PC gamer is really going to care unless it really makes a huge system footprint. Backends are just that: in the back end of the system, in the background. You can tell it not to start up unless you're playing the game in question, and it'll just take up another tiny chunk of hard drive space. It's hardly worth fretting over, and there isn't much competition between Steam and Origin, if any. The only issue that Valve is having is with Origin taking over the updates and DLC management, because it would make their support have to deal with and reroute any issues that users would have with the Origin service in addition to actual Steam-related issues. Not only that, but it would be inconvenient to the user.

@GrandHarrier said:

@Shotaro said:

methinks I will be waiting until Battlefield 3 comes out on steam... for now at least. I do think it will hurt sales of BF3 a little I mean after all look at Half Life 2 that really suffered because it made people install steam...

Sorry that last bit was hard to write with a straight face but I managed it - BF3 will still sell spongeloads and steam now has competition. IMO this is a good thing it forces both companies to pull their fingers out and make the systems even better.

Of course it'll hurt sales of the game. But if you honestly feel that BF3, despite being touted as a PC title, won't sell magnitudes more on the consoles, you're just being silly. With a very few exceptions, PC titles are always the third place minority of any franchise these days. The lost sales will be a drop in the bucket compared to the mind share they will likely gain from those PC players who don't give a fuck, buy the game anyways, and register it through Origin. But don't take my word for it. We'll see in a few months time. Maybe I'll eat crow. But I doubt it. P.S. In regards to your Half Life 2 comment, that was a Valve title. And Steam was absolutely terrible. As I mentioned earlier, it wasn't uncommon for people to be unable to play their legitimately purchased title for some time after their authentication servers got hammered. Pirates were playing the game without any issues, but we, as consumers, were fucked by Valve.

I disagree what you saying about it hurting the sales of the game. The installation of Origin will not hurt it - people will moan and complain but it will be a big game online and people will eventually cave in and buy it - the first few weeks will probably be lower than EA would like but I am confident the sales will steadily rise for a while after the first week or so. I agree though that any lost sales for the PC will be a drop in the ocean but I think that like battlefield 2 before it, people will play the PC version if they have a choice. I also think it will not do as well as you seem to think on the consoles simply because of Modern Warfare 3. Ultimately our opinions don't really matter since neither of us are (I assume) analysts for the industry.

I know what you mean about the server delays for HL2 but that was more because Valve had messed up when working out the expected server load. I remember purchasing the game from steam about 8-12 hours after the US release (I live in the UK) and while the download was a little slower than I would've liked I was playing it the same day. So I dispute the last thing you said - after all if I could download the game from steam at about 8am in the US the authentication servers cannot have been down for that long (then again there are probably different server farms for each region so it could very well be we are both correct.)

@GrandHarrier: The only reason this is 'different' is because it's installing a second backend behind an existing backend. As I said before, D2D and other web-based services work differently than Steam and Origin do, and therefore you're not installing Steam behind something that D2D requires, you're just installing Steam because it's the DRM for that particular game. It's not because Valve published the game and they are requiring you to install Steam, it's because the publisher/developer of the game likes Steam's friend list and achievement backend, and chose that as the way to unify their game's multiplayer/stats/save cloud. Except in the case of Valve's own games, but it would be silly for a company to not use a backend if they've spent time developing and refining it. The exact same thing can be said for Origin, except they're trying to get Valve to distribute Origin via Steam, and then take any content control away from Steam for that game after it's on that machine. Valve isn't paying off companies to use their backend, and outside of distribution fees and such, Steamworks as an API is free to use, so Valve isn't getting loadsamoney from them unless their game sells.

Sorry for the links, it's just easier to illustrate on some of that stuff (and, well, that music video is great). I won't deny I've used Steam as a platform on PC longer and more frequently than any other, and you can call me a fanboy all day, but it's no different from a lot of unifying software. Until Android came out, iOS was the same type of thing, a platform for phones that was "the" thing to use, and perhaps Origin will be the Android to Steam's iOS, but given EA's well-known track history with forcefully-installed download platforms, the skepticism runs deep.

Pirates were playing the game without any issues, but we, as consumers, were fucked by Valve.

funny that EA of all companies would do this, considering how unbelievably awful their own DLC system is.. they should be thankful that something like Steam exists so they don't lose customers over their bizarre 'persona' account bs 
 
and dont get me started on punkbuster...
 
BF2142 Northern Strike <-  
BF2 - any DLC

The point that I've been trying to make is that people are giving EA shit over the exact same stuff that Valve did years ago.
 --------------
Why must I be forced to have your storefront on my PC to play it?

methinks I will be waiting until Battlefield 3 comes out on steam... for now at least. I do think it will hurt sales of BF3 a little I mean after all look at Half Life 2 that really suffered because it made people install steam...

Sorry that last bit was hard to write with a straight face but I managed it - BF3 will still sell spongeloads and steam now has competition. IMO this is a good thing it forces both companies to pull their fingers out and make the systems even better.

@GrandHarrier: While Steam was pretty awful years ago, nowadays it's either a great community system and game management system, or simply a layer of DRM that isn't completely useless otherwise. Years ago, it was an inconvenience because PCs weren't as powerful, and Steam wasn't as well optimized as it is now. Nowadays, with nearly every PC market shifting towards digital downloads, it's one of the more appealing and convenient ways of content distribution. I had used it off and on a little before HL2 had released, and I was just as frustrated at it as everyone else was. But that's how software works. Just about everything back then was pretty damn buggy until it was updated, and Steam was one of the first services that updated itself automatically (when it worked). That's saying something.

Without sounding too smartass, compare Steam to other (full-install) DRM methods you've experienced in the past. Which would you rather use? And how likely would it be to have those DRM methods effectively connect you with other friends playing that game you purchased?

methinks I will be waiting until Battlefield 3 comes out on steam... for now at least. I do think it will hurt sales of BF3 a little I mean after all look at Half Life 2 that really suffered because it made people install steam...

Sorry that last bit was hard to write with a straight face but I managed it - BF3 will still sell spongeloads and steam now has competition. IMO this is a good thing it forces both companies to pull their fingers out and make the systems even better.

@GrandHarrier: While Steam was pretty awful years ago, nowadays it's either a great community system and game management system, or simply a layer of DRM that isn't completely useless otherwise. Years ago, it was an inconvenience because PCs weren't as powerful, and Steam wasn't as well optimized as it is now. Nowadays, with nearly every PC market shifting towards digital downloads, it's one of the more appealing and convenient ways of content distribution. I had used it off and on a little before HL2 had released, and I was just as frustrated at it as everyone else was. But that's how software works. Just about everything back then was pretty damn buggy until it was updated, and Steam was one of the first services that updated itself automatically (when it worked). That's saying something.

Without sounding too smartass, compare Steam to other (full-install) DRM methods you've experienced in the past. Which would you rather use? And how likely would it be to have those DRM methods effectively connect you with other friends playing that game you purchased?

This will dramatically effect my choice to buy Battlefield 3.

@Pinworm45: Yes'sir. But Blizz and I go way back, so they get a pass.

No Steam: no buy. Fuck you, Origin.

Maybe Diablo 3 will be out by then and it won't matter anyway!

No Steam: no buy. Fuck you, Origin.

Maybe Diablo 3 will be out by then and it won't matter anyway!

I still smell BS from EA blaming steam. I've never heard any other game companies pull games and say it was Steams fault. With EA's track record, I just say it's their greed.

No Steam then no buy.   But thanks EA for at least "trying" to make us care about orgin.

I'm guessing EA is only doing this because they want to make some headway with Origin, their miserable Steam knockoff. I fucking hate it.

As much as I'd love to play BF3, I'm gonna stick behind Valve on this one. If they don't put it out on Steam, I'm not buying it.

@GrandHarrier said:

Steam forces you to install Steam. So complaining that a game forces you to install something (like Origin) is a null arguement.

I don't quite understand this argument. There is a lot of stuff that requires Steam because it is only available on Steam, but usually you willingly install Steam, knowing that Steam is the service you will be using to purchase that game, download it, and acquire any updates and/or downloadable content through. What EA was doing (or attempting/proposing) that Valve is refusing to accept is installing their complete backend, completely separate from the Steam service, through the normal install process. The reason for this is because that backend isn't simply an engine (like DirectX or .NET Framework), or a friends list backend (like Games for Windows Live or UPlay, though I'm sure these services are beginning to skirt the line), it is a complete storefront engine that forces content through a pipeline that is completely seperate from the Steam servers. The reasons I stated are two major ones, but if you need a third, despite EA and DICE being big and "trusted", having no control or information regarding the information pipeline involved with a game's updates and DLC means EA could suddenly pull, change, or add content, and Steam servers would be none the wiser.

Imagine downloading 10GB worth of a video game (it's likely), having the download finish only to download the 5-100MB EA Origin backend, have it install, then have to download an additional 5GB of updated files and/or DLC. It doesn't affect any other download service the same way, since most other download services like Direct2Drive and such sell either the initial game and DLC codes to download from other services, or you simply download the game as an installer, and download updates as seperate files or downloaders. Since Steam is an inherently different type of service, it needs these barriers in place to keep companies from effectively screwing over its customers.

@SexualBubblegumX said:

@Deiterbomber said:

@GrandHarrier said:

Steam forces you to install Steam. So complaining that a game forces you to install something (like Origin) is a null arguement.

I don't quite understand this argument.

I believe he meant if you get a boxed version of a Valve game, you're stuck with having steam on your comp whether you want steam or not.

Did you know that buying a game that requires Microsoft Windows requires you to actually *have* a copy of Microsoft Windows!!??!??