Unified system = Monopoly.  Last I checked that was a bad thing. But it is the 21st century. Perhaps I am wrong.

Did alot of people not even read the story?   it's not an Origin only exclusive... quit complaining that they are forcing you to use Origin.

lol, people really hate EA for some reason, they seem to have a good reason for pulling it. i'm with EA on this one.... wow never thought i would say that.

Did alot of people not even read the story?   it's not an Origin only exclusive... quit complaining that they are forcing you to use Origin.

So, the way I understand it, Valve just wants all DLC to be available on Steam, and I don't think they want it exclusively on Steam, though I'm not sure about that part.

So, how can EA say that this "limits their ability to connect with the customer"?

I don't know how EA "connects with the customer" when said customer is buying DLC or downloading a patch other than having a chance to get them to buy more of their stuff, and therefore they don't like Steam trying to make the process of buying DLC or patching more transparent.

Now, I don't know whether any of this is true, maybe Valve just wants all DLC exclusively on Steam and if so, then they are the "bad guys", but as I understand it right now, EA just wants the ability to make all customers have to go to Origin so they can sell them more stuff.

This only hurts EA, some kind of agreement needs to be made soon.

@Korne said:

@Shuborno: It has to do with DLC sales. Steam does not allow a game to be on their service if they do not allow Steam sell the DLC for that game. It doesn't have to be exclusive to Steam, but they want it to be available through the service. EA has not been doing this, and has been releasing DLC that can be bought through an in-game menu that takes you to an EA store. So it sounds like EA wants to cut out the middle man and sell the content directly, while Steam is against this since it basically uses the Steam service to sell the content without Valve getting a penny.

Finally someone who understands it. I've been explaining this on forums since Crysis 2 was pulled yet no gaming press seems to see it.  All it would take for these EA games to be compliant with Steam's TOS is to sell DLC on steam aswell as origin (much like Bad Company 2). It wasn't a problem for EA on that game and thats why no one is buying their BS on BF3. It is plain and simple, this decision is solely based on EA's greed. They are hiding behind the fact that BF3 will be a juggernaut in terms of sales to test if they can get away with making EA's own store the only place to sell all the DLC on all their games.  And they will get away with it.

@wolf_blitzer85 said:

So how come EA is the only one having problems with Steam? Are there other publishers out there that feel the same way?

How many other publishers have Origin?

For anyone interested, if you want 20% off of BF3 through Origin then sign up for an account and make tomorrow your birthday. They will send you an e-mail that will have a code in it that you can input right before you place your final order (There will be a line with like "promotional code" or something along those lines).

@GrandHarrier said:

Unified system = Monopoly.  Last I checked that was a bad thing. But it is the 21st century. Perhaps I am wrong.

Monopolies are not bad by definition...

Why should EA be forced to put content on a service? Why should Valve dictate to developers and publishers what HAS to be on their platform? They have absolutely no right to this. They can and should be allowed to DENY content, but its fucking bullshit to suggest that they have any grounds to tell people "Let us sell content A or we'll remove content B".

You used the same quote twice...

Taking the Steam side here. If your game is on Steam the DLC should be there as well. Last night I spent like 10 minutes trying to figure out how to get Minerva's Den for my steam copy of Bioshock 2, and the whole time downloading it from GFWL I was biting my nails (bad habit, I know) about whether it would work with my steam copy or not. It did.

If there is DLC I should be able to get it from the steam interface. I don't want to have to download a separate interface and client for every damn company that wants to sell me DLC. When I reformat my computer I don't want to have to futz around with other sites that may not even be UP anymore. I just want Steam to handle it. That's why I like steam; it handles things for me. DLC should be part of that.

@wolf_blitzer85: Origin.

DA2 sucks period. I just don't get the revisionist apologist fad coming around rearing its ugly head defending a subpar product. It has been cool to hate the product, so now I guess it is cool to go against the well established fact that DA2 blows chunks.

@iAmJohn said:

@xobballox

@CL60 said:

@Donos said:

@iAmJohn said:

I wonder if the issue is that Valve wants to sell the DLC while EA wants to sell it themselves a la Bioware's site.

To my knowledge, this is it.

EA seems pretty justified to me. Just because Valve sold the base game shouldn't mean they have the exclusive right to sell every piece of related content. It sucks for Steam users that Valve won't let EA mange their own game.

This. EA seems justified in not wanting their games on Steam if Valve changed their TOS to say that. Shit like this makes me understand why people generally hate us PC gamers. We say we're all about choice but then a game isn't on steam and you all go apeshit, and wont buy a game that looks great simply because it's not on Steam. Just seems like pointless whining to me. It doesn't matter where I can buy the game. I'm going to buy the game regardless because it looks good.

Exactly, this whole thing is not a big deal unless you like to whine about pointless shit for the sake of whining.

What if I like Steam and think that the benefits of auto-patching and having everything in one place greatly outweighs my want to buy games anywhere else? What if I also think it's perfectly acceptable for Valve to want a cut of the DLC for a game they're hosting on their servers?

I would argue it's not hard to open Origin for a quick patch (which is auto-patching I'm almost sure), then close Origin, and use Steam's add-non Steam game feature to put BF3 on your Steam game's list to use Steam stuff if having Steam stuff is a major issue for you.  Dragon Age 2 works fine like that.

(1) Exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. (3) The exclusive possession or control of something.  These sound like good things to you? Do you honestly believe that were Valve to have complete marketshare, they'd continue to be the benevolent masters you so willingly support?

There's a cost/reward analysis that EA has done that no one is mentioning here. They know the numbers and must have realized that losing distribution through Steam is less of a loss if they maintain all other partnerships and institute their in-game strategies that violates Valve's TOS.

EA isn't dumb, they've done their homework and know what they're doing. This wouldn't be happening if EA would be losing more money by forgoing Steam. However one has to wonder why other EA games get away with this like ME2 and DA:O. Last time I checked Cerberus network and "choose this dialog and buy DLC directly" in Dragon Age aren't exactly Steam friendly.

This is a pissing contest to see who flinches first. Either way EA gains more users for its own service, despite losing some goodwill points and not fighitng to keep it on Steam. However I can totally understand not letting Valve dictate the playing field all the time. Hell ask Randy Pitchford, he's not a fan of that shit despite coming around to it anyway. Money talks and it will once Battlefield 3 does or doesn't come to Steam after the initial sales are in.

EA doesn't compare to Blizzard in anyway whatsoever, Blizzard; like Valve have earned the players trust and fandom through decades of excellent games and goodwill towards the players, EA's hasn't earned any of this, and they aren't in the same class as far a PC gaming is concerned. On top of that, both Blizzard and Valve have excellent stores, downloaders and download policies, EA has already proven they can't get any of this right, hopefully they have fixed it with Origin, but somehow I doubt it.

The thing that upsets me about this is that I doubt Battlefield's DLC will even be worth buying (aside from the probable GOTY edition). If it was given the same treatment as Crysis 2 and DA2 I could buy it before the DLC policy got it taken down. Would a GOTY edition with all of the DLC in the game in one shot be enough to avoid this?

Steam is cool enough to let me download games years later if I want. Too bad EA/Origin doesn't do that.

1 year according to EA/Origin's Terms of Service as of June 3, 2011.

We do not guarantee that any Content or Entitlement will be available at all times or at any given time or that we will continue to offer particular Content or Entitlements for any particular length of time. We reserve the right to change and update Content and Entitlements without notice to you. If you have not used your Entitlements or Account for twenty four (24) months or more and your Account has associated Entitlements, your Entitlements will expire and your Account may be cancelled for non-use. Once you have redeemed your Entitlements, that content is not returnable, exchangeable, or refundable for other Entitlements or for cash, or other goods or services.

However one has to wonder why other EA games get away with this like ME2 and DA:O. Last time I checked Cerberus network and "choose this dialog and buy DLC directly" in Dragon Age aren't exactly Steam friendly.

So, the way I understand it, Valve just wants all DLC to be available on Steam, and I don't think they want it exclusively on Steam, though I'm not sure about that part.

So, how can EA say that this "limits their ability to connect with the customer"?

I don't know how EA "connects with the customer" when said customer is buying DLC or downloading a patch other than having a chance to get them to buy more of their stuff, and therefore they don't like Steam trying to make the process of buying DLC or patching more transparent.

Now, I don't know whether any of this is true, maybe Valve just wants all DLC exclusively on Steam and if so, then they are the "bad guys", but as I understand it right now, EA just wants the ability to make all customers have to go to Origin so they can sell them more stuff.

Steam is cool enough to let me download games years later if I want. Too bad EA/Origin doesn't do that.

1 year according to EA/Origin's Terms of Service as of June 3, 2011.

We do not guarantee that any Content or Entitlement will be available at all times or at any given time or that we will continue to offer particular Content or Entitlements for any particular length of time. We reserve the right to change and update Content and Entitlements without notice to you. If you have not used your Entitlements or Account for twenty four (24) months or more and your Account has associated Entitlements, your Entitlements will expire and your Account may be cancelled for non-use. Once you have redeemed your Entitlements, that content is not returnable, exchangeable, or refundable for other Entitlements or for cash, or other goods or services.

As far as I know Valve doesn't care whether the DLC you sell is exclusive or not. Usually it's not. Their policy just says that if you are selling DLC that it has to be on the Steam store itself. If you want to sell it in game that's fine, it just has to be on the store too. EA was just making their DLC available through an in-game store only and not putting it on Steam.

There is also a discussion about this on the site here: http://www.giantbomb.com/battlefield-3/61-27006/battlefield-3-will-not-be-on-steam-according-to-ea/35-506156/

For me it is is a non-issue. While I understand how this annoys some folks who only make purchases for PC games via steam. The levels of arguing and bullshit getting tossed out has been extreme. This is not an Origin vs. Steam issue, because you can buy the game from other digital storefronts and from retail. There are incentives to get this game at Origin with in game content bonuses and EA would like you to make the purchase there no doubt, but they are not forcing you to buy it from Origin. Also for me EA has never been a great publisher to buy from on Steam. They never utilized any of the great steam platform benefits (achievements, cloud saves, join server). Buying an EA game was the equivalent of adding the .exe to your steam library. Also after playing the Alpha, holy shit Battlelog is brilliant. I don't even think we will be clicking on a .exe for multiplayer. We'll all just be logging into what is basically Battlefield Facebook.

Everyone has the right to whine, I just don't buy that this is a big deal. Though I wonder if Origin wasn't a piece of software, would the amount of complaining still be as rampant?

Lets get to the real issue though. You still can't get Sins of A Solar Empire through Steam, haha. Or shoot plenty of other games. Yeah, yeah, EA's loss. But I do believe they want it on Steam given that its not exclusively on Origin unlike say SWTOR.

Oh and I forgot to add, that Age of Conan was also removed by Steam recently. Wheres the commotion! People might have actually lost keys.

@CL60:

Exactly, TOS's are odd.

It's all about advertising. That's where the real money with Origin lies. EA is a scumbag company.

Imagine if EA walks into a GameStop and opens a little store there by themselves where they sell content to their games without paying GameStop.

Do you think GameStop would accept that? No they would throw them out. That's basically whats happening here, Valve doesn't want the exclusive rights for a game, they just want people to be able to buy DLC via steam.

I don't see anything wrong with that. Also, if they now decide to let EA have it's way, what reason would there be for other developers to sell their DLC via steam if they can just sell it ingame and don't have to pay Valve for their service?

I've had more problems with Steam than Origin, so I really couldn't care. In fact I fully support this. It's about time someone other than Blizzard took a shot at Steam! And to all those saying you're not going to buy it cause it's not on Steam, stop lying to yourselves. It's rather pathetic.

@Buck_Sexington: I get what you're saying, but it doesn't change the fact that people think less of EA -- which has a history of lowering its overhead at the cost of the end-user experience (with shady DLC integration, awful Xbox servers, and terrible digital storefront policies) -- than they do of Blizzard or Valve. Therefore, I implicitly trust that whatever Steam policy EA is raging against is there for a good reason -- and that whatever EA is doing hasn't been attempted by any other company, since EA is the only publisher to try stuff on this kind of level. (remember when they blackballed Microsoft from online play until they could get their way?)

I buy non-Steam games all the time because they come from sources I trust with my information/download licenses: Blizzard, GOG, and GFW Live. That is the critical difference at play here, and the reason I will not buy Battlefield 3 from Origin or Direct2Drive or whatever.

:(

Steam is cool enough to let me download games years later if I want. Too bad EA/Origin doesn't do that.

1 year according to EA/Origin's Terms of Service as of June 3, 2011.

We do not guarantee that any Content or Entitlement will be available at all times or at any given time or that we will continue to offer particular Content or Entitlements for any particular length of time. We reserve the right to change and update Content and Entitlements without notice to you. If you have not used your Entitlements or Account for twenty four (24) months or more and your Account has associated Entitlements, your Entitlements will expire and your Account may be cancelled for non-use. Once you have redeemed your Entitlements, that content is not returnable, exchangeable, or refundable for other Entitlements or for cash, or other goods or services.

13. TERM AND TERMINATION

Either you or Valve has the right to terminate or cancel your Account or a particular Subscription at any time. You understand and agree that the cancellation of your Account or a particular Subscription is your sole right and remedy with respect to any dispute with Valve.

C. Termination by Valve.

Steam user violates subscriber agreement, loses $1,800 in games

I've had more problems with Steam than Origin, so I really couldn't care. In fact I fully support this. It's about time someone other than Blizzard took a shot at Steam! And to all those saying you're not going to buy it cause it's not on Steam, stop lying to yourselves. It's rather pathetic.

Until somebody has the balls to come out and say, specifically, what clause EA is so intent on breaking, this is all colorful puffs of smoke.

@m0rdr3d said:

@Hailinel said:

@bigscottie said:

first!

Not even. It is a failure of a post that couldn't even succeed at your shallow goal. A failure inside of a failure.

As for the subject of the article, I still have a very difficult time seeing this as anything more than EA's attempt to force PC customers into using Origin.

Says the guy who's already gotten the "first!" quest. lol

I didn't get it by leaping in and spamning "First." I wasn't even fully expecting to get it and yet managed to stumble across a freshly posted video that had yet to be put on the front page, giving me the time I needed to not be an idiot.

EA want us all to know that we have choice, lots of choice.

We can buy games from any retailer who stock EA titles as long as we agree to only buy DLC directly from EA and not involve the retailer (or their ecosystem for patch delivery, highly encouraged sales efforts and so on) or we can not buy EA games on PC that contain DLC. That seems like quite a bastardisation of the word 'choice'.

Looking at competing publisher offerings (even those with a larger vested interest in not dealing with Steam unless they really have to, for example MS and Fable 3) it seems the rules are quite clear. If you release a new game on Steam then you must offer a direct Steam ecosystem DLC path for those customers. ie If you sell a game on Steam and it has paid DLC then that DLC must be purchaseable via the Steam store or it will be removed from the storefront. What Valve are not insisting on, but which EA seem to be trying to insinuate with their talk of choice and limiting, is to be the only supplier of that DLC.

When you buy DLC for Fable 3 on Steam Ms are complying with the rules to offer the option but maybe not the spirit as you are actually just buying a GfWL auth key that you enter into the in-game GfWL implementation to unlock and download your new content. EA could do exactly the same, they could release BF3 or return all these removed titles and include links in the games to buy DLC on Origin and all the other things they keep trying to imply Valve are trying to stop them doing, the one thing they can't do is offer no Steam DLC payment method. That is the rule they are choosing to break and that is getting the games kicked off Steam. They could do the same as MS and just use the Steam DLC store to sell auth keys for their own ecosystem (Bioware social points or Origin points or whatever they want to do) and that would comply with the rules and keep the games for sale on Steam.

But EA are all about giving consumers choice and fighting for the rights of those consumers. Just like they fought for making xbox consumers have better online experiences by telling MS they would only add Live if they could run their own matchmating servers, because all consumers like it when you switch off peer to peer matchmating in your games to push the new product. That's clearly working in your best interests. http://www.ea.com/1/service-updates

It's a shame great developers like DICE who create content of interest to so many PC gamers (when allowed to) are being used by EA to try and push their anti-Steam agenda and promote EA's Origin. Hopefully Valve will publicly comment on the misinformation EA are trying to spread (note how they avoid saying too much, implication and generic unquantifiable language only), that they haven't yet probably indicates some hope of a peaceful resolution to this issue.

Why now? After all these years, why Battlefield 3?
 
Because they know if there is a game they can try to pull this bulljive with, Battlefield 3 is it.
 
I'm holding out until this experiment fails and EA releases BF3 on Steam along with a bullcrap PR release. I give it three months, tops.
 
Or I could be wrong and you know... I'll get it after it's patched and when it's on sale on Origin.

@nmarchan said:

Because they're being jerks.

Valve has earned the benefit of the doubt because they pushed digital distribution when nobody else on PC was doing it, they continually improve their service and add cool features that offer benefits to the players, they give out tons of stuff for free, they offer the best prices in the DD game, and they have a history of NOT screwing over their customers.

EA, on the other hand, has a TERRIBLE history with PC gaming. So when it comes down to Valve's word vs EA's word, you better damn believe I'm going to side with Valve. Every single time.

"Because they're being jerks"? Really? Did EA tug on Valve's ponytails or something?

Everyone acts like Steam is perfect. Well, no, not really. Remember Valve exploiting their position as platform-holder to promote Portal 2 for like a month on Steam's front page? Remember when they got thousands of customers to buy games they might not have wanted just to try and unlock Portal 2 a few hours early? Remember how Steam is the one and only place you can download Valve games?

If EA wants to stop having to pay Valve royalties for DLC sales, then why is that wrong? EA is a business. Valve is a business. They both see you as credit cards with thumbs. That's all. Stop pretending like Valve cares about you. They don't. They just want a cut of the DLC.

And really, who gives a shit anyway? All the people saying "guess I'm not buying Battlefield 3" are being the biggest babies about this whole thing. Just buy the game and shut up.

I would like to know what exactly it is that EA is complaining about. Right now I can only assume they want to sell DLC only via origin or an in-game interface ... in that case I'm with valve.

In any case ... I will get the game as a retail copy and bind it to steam myself, done.

That's cute. EA thinks they can hurt Steam.

@CL60 said:

@Donos said:

@iAmJohn said:

I wonder if the issue is that Valve wants to sell the DLC while EA wants to sell it themselves a la Bioware's site.

To my knowledge, this is it.

EA seems pretty justified to me. Just because Valve sold the base game shouldn't mean they have the exclusive right to sell every piece of related content. It sucks for Steam users that Valve won't let EA mange their own game.

This. EA seems justified in not wanting their games on Steam if Valve changed their TOS to say that. Shit like this makes me understand why people generally hate us PC gamers. We say we're all about choice but then a game isn't on steam and you all go apeshit, and wont buy a game that looks great simply because it's not on Steam. Just seems like pointless whining to me. It doesn't matter where I can buy the game. I'm going to buy the game regardless because it looks good. Honestly Valve seem like the greedy ones here, not EA.

It has nothing to do with Valve's greed. They RIGHTFULLY don't want EA using Steam to make money that Valve won't get a cut of. How else are they supposed to operate?

Man, Megacorporation A are a bunch of soulless greedy bastards! Megacorporation B would never let me down.

Guys, let's all boycott Megacorporation A! Until a month from now when they release an enticing product we all end up buying anyway because we forgot why we were angry in the first place.

@Phenwah said:

Man, Megacorporation A are a bunch of soulless greedy bastards! Megacorporation B would never let me down.

Guys, let's all boycott Megacorporation A! Until a month from now when they release an enticing product we all end up buying anyway because we forgot why we were angry in the first place.

I feel like you're kind of missing the point here, but you have a Sinistar avatar so I'll let it slide.

@Korne said:

Steam is totally in the right with this one... if you use the service to sell your game, you should also use the service to sell content for it, rather than skipping the distributor all together (even though they are using the steam servers).

^^^ This.

I hated buying ME2 on Steam when I couldn't turn around and get the DLC through the same service. The fact that I had to go through EA's terrible web-based store to purchase the DLC, then download and install each one of them separately (totalling in roughly 20 downloads, all said and down), it was a major pain in the ass. I say if EA doesn't want to play nice with Valve, and then turn around and blame Valve for trying to have a quality distribution service, then EA is in the wrong.

"Limits the ability for the developer to connect with consumers and deliver patches and DLC"
 
 Here is my experience, I want Mass Effect 2 DLC for PC.   I have to make MULTIPLE separate accounts outside of steam.  I have to enter in my credit card information in another separate website, buy and download my DLC in my WEB BROWSER...Then I have the wonderful privledge to MANUALLY PATCH the game with the DLC.   
 
Valve "limits their ability to connect" in every single good way possible.  Maybe Valve wants your stupid games to have free DLC, because Valve has proven it to make them more money and happier consumers.  Maybe Valve wants your games to automatically update instead of forcing everyone to manually patch their games.
 
Valve couldn't give a shit because EA is being 100% COUNTER PRODUCTIVEm and making it more difficult for the consumer to enjoy their shit.  The way EA says it, valve is limiting their ability to do what they want.  But the fact is, it is because Valve has higher standards and values the user's experience more.
 
You could buy EA DLC in the game, but everyone remembers what happened as soon as you clicked buy.  You weren't in game anymore, and there sure wasn't an automatic update that downloads the dlc after you buy it (like for example the borderlands DLC in steam)

                   

@m0rdr3d said:

@Hailinel said:

@bigscottie said:

first!

Not even. It is a failure of a post that couldn't even succeed at your shallow goal. A failure inside of a failure.

As for the subject of the article, I still have a very difficult time seeing this as anything more than EA's attempt to force PC customers into using Origin.

Says the guy who's already gotten the "first!" quest. lol

I didn't get it by leaping in and spamning "First." I wasn't even fully expecting to get it and yet managed to stumble across a freshly posted video that had yet to be put on the front page, giving me the time I needed to not be an idiot.

                   

               

The one thing that people can't argue is Valve's reputation vs Electronic Art's. Sometimes when both sides have a strong case, we have to look back and reflect upon who these companies are, how they conduct their business, and consider how they can take the industry forward in the most beneficial way.