I think Battlefield 3 will appear on Steam eventually.

I feel like this is when I'm playing Civ 5, and am friendly with one faction, making good trades, and then all of a sudden they declare war on me, and I proceed to wipe them off the planet forcefully. Yeah EA might not make as much money through Steam compared to Origin but come on let's not be greedy! Oh wait, talking about EA here..

@TPoppaPuff: You have valid points, I guess I didn't think about buying such new games used. Even without the $10 code thing, saving $5 on a game that you could have gotten without someone else's nose pickers all over it is stupid.

I digress. Back to why I think PTD is really a bad idea. I am just now getting into Dead Space 2 and Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit, both EA titles. Sadly, I will never experience the online in either. I'm guessing there isn't much to speak of anyway, because the people who bought it new are on to the next thing (maybe they would have stuck around had more players gotten into the MP, especially in NFS where the whole experience is enriched when your friends are playing it too) and the mass of people who bought it used aren't going to pay EA $10 for a desolate online experience. PTD kills any hopes of long-term viability of the multiplayer, plain and simple.

Secondly, it seems really whiny given how long they milk the price for what it is worth. Yes, I'm sure they would like my $50-$60 for a game that came out over six months ago, but...no. The prices stay too high for too long. The only reason I even bought the two titles discussed above (both listed around $50 new at GS) was because GS ran an internal promotion that gave me much more trade-in credit if I were to buy used games with it. The $50 new EA titles were $27 used, and that's before taking into account my 10% used game discount and the extra kicker I got during the promotion. I would have gladly spent an extra $5-$10 on it new (and ALL the game's cost would be given to EA), but the approx. $20 price tag seemed much more appropriate given the age and the fact that EA's PTD has likely killed off half of the games content...multiplayer (see above).

People need to understand that EA doesn't really have a Gears of War, a Halo, or a Call of Duty. There is no EA title that people as a whole (of course there are some people, just not nearly the number the three titles above warrant) will drop a nut to get on day one and buy the "super-mega-awesome fun time $140 edition" without blinking an eye. The last installment of Madden proved that even it doesn't have the staying power it used to, and nowhere near GOW, Halo, or COD (I don't remember putting in a code for those, by the way). They are trying to force you to buy new rather than making such a superior product that you WANT/NEED to buy new (like those other guys just mentioned). EA needs to have a more varied selection of hits besides the same old sports games every year to generate the "gotta have it new" mentality. On second thought, maybe Mass Effect falls into that category, which brings me to my last point (you may actually like this one).

Lastly, PTD is used as a punishment in many cases, rather than a reward. They have completely removed the multiplayer sections for me on NFS and Dead Space, unless I give them $10. Now, I can see that if it was the week of release, but this far out it is a bit ridiculous. They should be rewarding people who buy new ( I say that as a person who honestly does not buy a lot of EA games, especially new) rather than punishing those that don't. Multiplayer is NOT a little side item to be pawned with, Zaeed from Mass Effect absolutely is. There is a huge difference there.

I'm gonna go ahead and make myself look like an idiot but I've always wondered what's up with this in articles:

"It’s our duty to demonstrate [value] to them," he said. "We don’t have a natural right to publish their games."

Why the clammers around value? Seen it done on various words in other articles too.

Considering the impact Steam as on PC users surely EA would be losing money if they didn't put it on Steam. One theory a friend had was that EA are trying to hold Steam to ransom with Battlefield 3 in an attempt to get better terms for them. Which obviously won't work as Valve don't need EA games on Steam to be successful.

Still think Battlefield 3 will be on Steam.

"I don’t think Valve can pick just one thing and think the issue would go away if we fixed that," he said. "We have to show EA it’s a smart decision to have EA games on Steam, and we’re going to try to show them that."

Why the clammers around value? Seen it done on various words in other articles too.

@BombKareshi: Thank you!

@ShaneDev said:

It's yet more PR talk the same kind that EA has been spouting. It's not worth a damn and if anything just highlights that this is a business decision between two businesses and not some grand war between two empires. They came to an impasse and they will probably work it out.

What?  This sounds nothing like EA's statements.  Valve isn't playing the blame game.  I mean, it's frustrating to see someone just say something so blatantly untrue.

Why is Gabe so cool?

EA wants to take the fight public; Gabe wants to talk it out like adults.  I can't imagine making it PR shouting match does anything but support EA's "It's us versus them!" mentality. 

Alternatives to Steam is a good thing, if Steam becomes too big and has a monopoly they can start charging whatever they want.

I agree with Valve.  Like Gamestop or Best Buy - Steam offers a customer base, and in return deserves a cut of the sales. 

@Swoxx said:

I'm gonna go ahead and make myself look like an idiot but I've always wondered what's up with this in articles:

"It’s our duty to demonstrate [value] to them," he said. "We don’t have a natural right to publish their games."

Why the clammers around value? Seen it done on various words in other articles too.

It's used to edit a sentence to make the context coherent. For example, in this case Gabe may have mentioned value earlier in the exchange, and finished by saying "It's our duty to demonstrate that to them." Since "that" contextually means "value", Patrick can sub "that" out, in order to get to the essence of Gabe's comments without quoting several extraneous sentences.

Hopefully that explanation isn't too confusing.

- Scott

You can bet your ass dice want that shit on steam.

The sad fact, which is kinda in the spirit of current EA, their Origin Norway store is more expensive than Steam, even for old titles like Dead Space 2 and I am not talking about Steam offers.
 
Dead Space 2 - Origin - 400 NOK = 52 EUR.
Dead Space 2 - Steam - 30 EUR =  235 NOK.
 
If your currency is strong vs the Eur, Origin is, overall, a rip off.
I kinda bet, since its EA, that if it was reversed and the Eur was strong we would be paying in Eur....
 
EA has been treating their customers like shit for years.
Thats the main reason I dont really want to use Origin, or Windows Live (PC) for that matter, to buy games.

It sucks that EA doesn't want to have their shit on steam anymore, but I can't really blame them for wanting to make more money. Who doesn't want to make more money? When EA puts their games on Steam they don't get as much of the purchase price from the consumer as they do when they put them on their own site. Makes sense, but it still sucks ass.

Get Steam or GTFO

@Sinful said:

yep i see....just more jibber jabber PR talk. by the way pat...still need to lrn to proofread your stuff....it's spelled "Bus" not "Buss" maybe if you cut your beatuful hair youll be able to see what you post. and send your locks to me for my "things to sniff" collection.

"lrn" "beatuful"

I hope you were being ironic =P

It's a free market. If EA wants to cut out the middle-man, then let them. Just remember the next time EA whines about sales and losses, decisions like not putting your games on Steam might have contributed to this.

Here is EA statement: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6322428/ea-explains-steam-store-absences?tag=updates%3Beditor%3Ball%3Btitle%3B1

Last month, Electronic Arts' first-person shooter Crysis 2 disappeared from Valve's online storefront Steam, sparking speculation that the publisher was pulling its titles from rival marketplaces to make them exclusive to its own such offering, Origin. Today, EA's head of global e-commerce David DeMartini released a statement about the flap, explaining exactly why some of the publisher's titles are no longer available on Steam.

DeMartini stressed that EA will allow its titles to appear on any downloadable storefront, but there is a catch. The executive said, "we take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services to our players," and so insist on being allowed to "establish an ongoing relationship" with customers and contact them to inform them of new patches and available content.

"Unfortunately, if we’re not allowed to manage this experience directly and establish a relationship with you, it disrupts our ability to provide the support you expect and deserve," DeMartini said. "At present, there is only one download service that will not allow this relationship. This is not our choice, and unfortunately it is their customer base that is most impacted by this decision. We are working diligently to find a mutually agreeable solution."

As of press time, Valve had not responded to GameSpot's request for comment.

EA has gone on the record saying they want their games on Steam, but Valve pulled Crysis 2 and Dragon Age 2 from Steam due to certain issues at hand that both companies have to work through.

The problem I have with EA's statements however is that they want to "take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services to our players," and so insist on being allowed to "establish an ongoing relationship" with customers and contact them to inform them of new patches and available content.

They have been communicating and providing patches to us through Steam for years. They won't patch through Steam, or sell DLC through Steam. EA just wants us to get in bed with them with this Origin bullshit.

I think Valve are trying to avoid another GFWL incident. Valve wants to sell EA's games, but they also want to sell their DLC too. They don't want to force their customers off site for continued support and DLC. It reminds me of Fallout 3 on Steam, which required Games for Windows Live for some odd reason. Fallout 3 DLC was initially only available on Games for Windows Live and not Steam and that probably bothered me just as much as Valve.

This sounds like the exact same problem. Before you know it EA would have released all their games with an Origin launcher. Basically, games like Battlefield 3 and Crysis 2 would require that you run Origin in order to play the game even if you bought the game on Steam (like GfWL on Fallout 3). And they would probably sell their DLC exclusively through Origin.

I registered with EA once before, for an NHL game, and shit that didn't pan out well. All they did was acquire my email so I could get spam mail from them. I'm not giving them anymore money than I have to. By that I mean these god damn partner programs. I love Bioware, I just wish they would ditch this EA and release their games on their own terms. I'm starting to get really bothered with all this streamlining game production. Mass Effect 2 wasn't nearly as good as it could have been, and Dragon Age 2 was just god awful.

My friends always look at me like I'm crazy when I tell them "I usually buy hard copies of my games rather than digital downloads" (until I explain that you get to play it sooner). I do like steam, I like how it has so much in one place, and it's convenient.
 
Did anyone read that e-mail talking about the switch to Origin? I know I just looked at the subject and said "that's nice, I'll remember that next time Iog into NWN2 or whatever game it was I haven't played in years"

@Sinful said:

@Riboflavin said:

@Sinful said:

yep i see....just more jibber jabber PR talk. by the way pat...still need to lrn to proofread your stuff....it's spelled "Bus" not "Buss" maybe if you cut your beatuful hair youll be able to see what you post. and send your locks to me for my "things to sniff" collection.

"lrn" "beatuful"

I hope you were being ironic =P

nope....it's just that I'm a nobody who posts on a website. Pat on the other hand is a "Professional" that gets payed. Oh by the way...can I have a lock of your hair?

LOL

I've exhausted all my ideas why EA shouldn't try to compete directly or indirectly with Steam and I stand by most of the ideas which favour Steam.

If there is truth in that Steam is Valve's monopoly in PC gaming, then I don't mind since they're not being very evil about it, unlike EA with their sub-par and weak Origin platform that they're trying to force on us (and if somebody dares say "don't buy their games, nobody is forcing you lol!" then there are simply too many things to say about your sort, none of which is very good).

HERE is a good thread on the official EA forums outlining what they must do to improve Origin, because they're clearing trying to compete with Steam, otherwise they wouldn't force the current crap state of it on us,

I like what Newell says in response to the situation. A delayed, but well thought through and resolute comment. Unlike typical EA behaviour which seeks to neither confirm nor deny any rumors, etc., as soon as possible

In general, I think Steam has improved so much and the majority of users like it so much that it would be hard to make a good alternative and attempting to do so would only upset the user base, like it already has. I hope they sort it out and start releasing all their games on Steam again, with the option of using Origin. If EA wants people to adopt it, the people should decide if it's worth adopting, without being forced to do so.

 
The whole situation is unfortunate and just stinks of EA thinking they can compete w/ Steam. 
 
Either way, I don't care what service I have to go on. 
I'll create an America Online account if I have to. 
 
I will play Battlefield 3... 
 
; ) 
 
(Bravo EA, you forced me into being an Origin member because of one game from a dev you had enough money to purchase) 

@Sinful said:

@Riboflavin said:

@Sinful said:

yep i see....just more jibber jabber PR talk. by the way pat...still need to lrn to proofread your stuff....it's spelled "Bus" not "Buss" maybe if you cut your beatuful hair youll be able to see what you post. and send your locks to me for my "things to sniff" collection.

"lrn" "beatuful"

I hope you were being ironic =P

nope....it's just that I'm a nobody who posts on a website. Pat on the other hand is a "Professional" that gets payed. Oh by the way...can I have a lock of your hair?

Sure, next time I get it cut. Been meaning to for a while but i'm lazy. Also I don't want to pay post, so send me one of those prepaid envelopes.

This is just the standard issue with EA and online services. They want as much control as they can get and they need anybody with an advanced online service to change their policies in order to accommodate them. This is the reason why EA were not on Xbox Live for the first couple years and why they are the only ones on Live with their own servers.

Now that said I have played the Battlefield 3 alpha and though I believe I am still under NDA to not say anything I believe I can say that the way they have structured that game to work on PC with Origin would probably not work on Steam. I don't think EA withholding Battlefield 3 from Steam is so much an act of defiance but an act of necessity.

Fuck, not having battlefield on steam is really going to suck

Address, not explain is more like it :)

EA needs to stop facepalming themselves

It sure sounded like he "threw them under the bus" to me. He pointed the finger at them by implying that EA's taking the games off Steam. And EA is saying Valve is doing it.

It sure sounded like he "threw them under the bus" to me. He pointed the finger at them by implying that EA's taking the games off Steam. And EA is saying Valve is doing it.

“I don’t really know what they’re referring to by that,” he replied. “In general with Steam and Steam partners its incumbent on us to create value for those partners, whether it’s EA or Ubisoft or Take Two or any of the other developers who are using it, so that’s our goal, to create enough value so that is makes sense for partners to use the technology, the tools, services and community that we’ve created.

“We’re going to keep trying to do that with EA and trying to convince them that it’s worth it to have their games on Steam.”
 
In short, EA is lying.  Like they always do, like they always have, like they always will.  Jesus fucking Christ this isn't something new.  EA has been full of shit for 10+ years.

• EA said: "Our games were pulled because of our DLC distribution methods." Valve said: "The DLC distribution methods are against the Steam ToS." The truth: The games were removed because of their distribution of DLC in the game itself.

So please tell me and explain how EA is lying. I'd love to hear it.

God I can't stand EA apologists.   

Here is EA statement: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6322428/ea-explains-steam-store-absences?tag=updates%3Beditor%3Ball%3Btitle%3B1

Last month, Electronic Arts' first-person shooter Crysis 2 disappeared from Valve's online storefront Steam, sparking speculation that the publisher was pulling its titles from rival marketplaces to make them exclusive to its own such offering, Origin. Today, EA's head of global e-commerce David DeMartini released a statement about the flap, explaining exactly why some of the publisher's titles are no longer available on Steam.

DeMartini stressed that EA will allow its titles to appear on any downloadable storefront, but there is a catch. The executive said, "we take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services to our players," and so insist on being allowed to "establish an ongoing relationship" with customers and contact them to inform them of new patches and available content.

"Unfortunately, if we’re not allowed to manage this experience directly and establish a relationship with you, it disrupts our ability to provide the support you expect and deserve," DeMartini said. "At present, there is only one download service that will not allow this relationship. This is not our choice, and unfortunately it is their customer base that is most impacted by this decision. We are working diligently to find a mutually agreeable solution."

As of press time, Valve had not responded to GameSpot's request for comment.

EA has gone on the record saying they want their games on Steam, but Valve pulled Crysis 2 and Dragon Age 2 from Steam due to certain issues at hand that both companies have to work through.

The problem I have with EA's statements however is that they want to "take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services to our players," and so insist on being allowed to "establish an ongoing relationship" with customers and contact them to inform them of new patches and available content.

They have been communicating and providing patches to us through Steam for years. They won't patch through Steam, or sell DLC through Steam. EA just wants us to get in bed with them with this Origin bullshit.

I think Valve are trying to avoid another GFWL incident. Valve wants to sell EA's games, but they also want to sell their DLC too. They don't want to force their customers off site for continued support and DLC. It reminds me of Fallout 3 on Steam, which required Games for Windows Live for some odd reason. Fallout 3 DLC was initially only available on Games for Windows Live and not Steam and that probably bothered me just as much as Valve.

This sounds like the exact same problem. Before you know it EA would have released all their games with an Origin launcher. Basically, games like Battlefield 3 and Crysis 2 would require that you run Origin in order to play the game even if you bought the game on Steam (like GfWL on Fallout 3). And they would probably sell their DLC exclusively through Origin.

I registered with EA once before, for an NHL game, and shit that didn't pan out well. All they did was acquire my email so I could get spam mail from them. I'm not giving them anymore money than I have to. By that I mean these god damn partner programs. I love Bioware, I just wish they would ditch this EA and release their games on their own terms. I'm starting to get really bothered with all this streamlining game production. Mass Effect 2 wasn't nearly as good as it could have been, and Dragon Age 2 was just god awful.

I like to think the debate between EA and Valve went something like this.

EA: "We want to push our products and sales onto our customers through your service."

Valve: "No, that's not how we operate."

EA: "Get Bent"

@xbob42 said:

God I can't stand EA apologists.   

 How about Valve slappies? Can you stand them?  It's hilarious you think Valve is some altruistic, only-out-for-the-gamers endeavor, compared to EA's evil empire. Gabe playing dumb about "what EA wants" is just as much bullshit as all that nonsense you accuse EA of "always" putting out there. Gabe is just as big a huckster as any talking head in the game industry. The fact that you're suckered in by it shows that at least he's doing a good job, at least.

 Steam is less restrictive than the console platforms, so the idea that selling the same dlc on pc with fewer restrictions is somehow more of a burden is just ludicrous.

YES! Also, I'm glad to see someone agrees that  Dragon Age 2 sucked.

  Gabe himself has replied to several of my e-mails, all of which have been as far from business-related as possible, he reads every single e-mail he gets and responds to a massive amount of them.  You can say whatever the fuck you want, but I base what I say off experience, not off hearsay... I also still get letters from Santa.
 

 
EA, at its absolute best, has been hit-and-miss with me.  Their games are of varying quality (They're not making Battlefield, Dice is.).
           

holy shit, this poppapuffy dude has alot of unimportant shit to say about unimportant shit.

Its ok. If they don't want my money. They won't have it.

@KaneRobot said:

@xbob42 said:

God I can't stand EA apologists.   

 How about Valve slappies? Can you stand them?  It's hilarious you think Valve is some altruistic, only-out-for-the-gamers endeavor, compared to EA's evil empire. Gabe playing dumb about "what EA wants" is just as much bullshit as all that nonsense you accuse EA of "always" putting out there. Gabe is just as big a huckster as any talking head in the game industry. The fact that you're suckered in by it shows that at least he's doing a good job, at least.

Let me put it in simple terms for you:
 
Valve has earned my respect.  Gabe has earned my respect.  They release amazing games on their amazing service that gives me extremely discounted games in an insanely easy manner to obtain.  Their customer service has been the best in the industry EVERY TIME I'VE USED IT.  Gabe himself has replied to several of my e-mails, all of which have been as far from business-related as possible, he reads every single e-mail he gets and responds to a massive amount of them.  You can say whatever the fuck you want, but I base what I say off experience, not off hearsay.
 
EA, at its absolute best, has been hit-and-miss with me.  Their games are of varying quality (They're not making Battlefield, Dice is.) and their customer support is consistently dogshit.  Just the other day they refused to allow me to change my registered e-mail address (And I had proof that I was both the account owner and receipts for all the games, all of which were purchased on STEAM, and which EA cockblocked my access to because you need your EA account.) because to do so is "impossible," even though you can do so right on their website...  but only if you have your login info.  Having proof of account ownership is clearly not a secure way to verify an account to them, but a simple login/pass is!  Awesome.   Can't wait to see if this carries over to Origin -- OH WAIT it does because my EA account was linked or merged or something with my Origin account.  So I can now access none of it.  What set all this off, you ask?  The crappy e-mail account I linked to hotmail got hacked (I don't like EA spam or any spam.) and because that's all you need to change your password for EA's service, that also got changed.  Now, before you go off on how I probably got myself hacked, it was external, nothing else on my system was touched aside from my EA account and my e-mail account.  Not even sure what the fuck they'd do with an EA account unless they were just fucking with me.  I use the same credentials (e-mail) for Steam and that didn't get touched, though I changed the verified e-mail just to be safe.  They helped me just fine even though I was asking the SAME EXACT THING I asked EA.  That's why I fucking hate EA and you can slobber on their cock if you want.  They're consistently shit and have a poor reputation for a reason.

EA's problem with Steam is that they want to keep their 30 percent.

Im scrolling down looking at people arguing or talking about random crap that doesnt even make sense. There isnt a discussion here in any way or form. Steam exists as it is and is great for consumers and has proven itself over and over to be an amazing service. On the other hand, EA is the company that is one of the worst when it comes to how it deals with its customers and what it does to its games, especially on the PC. Its extremely obvious that EA is just being the stupid fuckers they are and making an extremely idiotic decision in every way. This does nothing for them but making them look like fools and take their games of the one service that everyone goes to when they want to play PC games. This is most likely EA being greedy or stubborn douche bags and then making a terrible business decision because for some reason most game companies are run by immature little children.

allright guys here's the long and short of it 
 
Ea is a corrupt corporate machine with no other purpose then to maximize profits with as much well-marketed shovel-ware as they can. (Dragon Age 2, Crysis 2) Then, once that's done. They are going to take the GOOD GAMES that people care about. Use these games to hold companies like Valve Hostage, basically saying "If you don't get of us as much of the  profit share as we wan't. we won't sell our game on you're network"  
 
They know Valve is a company that actually cares about it's consumers, and are going to use the cries of the community (COD AND BATTLEFIELD ON STEAM PLZ) to force them into submission.
 
Simple as that