EA Explains Why Crysis 2 Was Pulled from Steam

[wildkitten]

Typo in my above post. I meant is EA not the publisher of Crysis 2.

 

[reggieray]

There is a Crysis 2 and also FU EA.

 

[porksmuggler]

[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]It's really disturbing how people criticize content makers wanting control of their content rather than a competitor controlling their content.[/citation]

Okay, time for a little gaming industry 101. There's a lot of history here too, EAs been around since 1982, and is often referred to as a Evil Empire, and a studio killer.

The "content maker" of Crysis 2 is Crytek (the correct term is Developer).
In this case, EA is the Publisher.
Steam, a service of Valve was the Distributor.

Valve is all three, developer, publisher, and distributor, depending on the title. Valve in this case is not a "competitor". Valve and EA have many partnership agreements, depending again, on the title. Sometimes Valve is a distributor, sometimes EA is a distributor (like Portal 2, Valve is the developer and publisher, but EA is a retail distributor for the game).

 

[Guest]

[citation][nom]mortifera142[/nom]look EA....I love what you guys did with the published series battlefield and the works on bf3, but listen if you want bf3 to available to the pc market, valve/steam owns the pc market and your going to have to get over that and allow us gamers to enjoy the full extent of bf3, and no we will not use origin.[/citation]
You won't? Well you're not gonna be playing BF3 then, are you?

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]porksmuggler[/nom]Okay, time for a little gaming industry 101. There's a lot of history here too, EAs been around since 1982, and is often referred to as a Evil Empire, and a studio killer.The "content maker" of Crysis 2 is Crytek (the correct term is Developer).In this case, EA is the Publisher.Steam, a service of Valve was the Distributor.Valve is all three, developer, publisher, and distributor, depending on the title. Valve in this case is not a "competitor". Valve and EA have many partnership agreements, depending again, on the title. Sometimes Valve is a distributor, sometimes EA is a distributor (like Portal 2, Valve is the developer and publisher, but EA is a retail distributor for the game).[/citation]
EA is still the publisher. Valve, the owner of Steam, is also a publishing company and still EA's competitor.

What people seem to miss in this, is that Valve is wanting to control how one publisher does business and how it manages it's library. If EA wanted to put patch and DLC downloaders into the games own launcher, is that something Valve (Steam) should have any say so over? And from a consumer standpoint, this is allowing Valve to hold all other games hostage forcing the publishers to distribute content the way Steam says so. Shouldn't Steam just stick to selling the games?

It's like the example I gave above about Fallout New Vegas. I was interested in that, a Bethesda title, until I learned I had NO choice but to make a Steam account to play it. Why should I have to make a Steam account to play a game I buy on a physical disc from a store? If it was a Valve game, ok, I would understand that. But it's not. Sorry, but this is something that would make Bobby Kotick proud. Sure he's not secretly running Steam as well?

 

[greliu]

I think in the end there's nothing wrong with EA trying to control the content that is distributed to its own game, such as crysis 2. However, I do understand that it's hard to support another companies digital distribution since steam is already such a great service and does truly express interest in its customers directly through its actions. But, whether we like it or not, I think a lot of companies are going to try and make their own digital distribution services due to the fact that value/steam have been extremely successful in this area. I do like how everyone uses value on the PC, it's much like are version of XBL except much better lol. But, let the best win I guess

 

[Guest]

Did EA said they wants full control of updates and downloadable content, and Valve doesn't allow that kind of funny business on Steam?? So now they want to handle this funny business themselves? Did I read something wrong here? So EA is try to be funny here?

 

[sykozis]

[citation][nom]greliu[/nom]I think in the end there's nothing wrong with EA trying to control the content that is distributed to its own game, such as crysis 2. However, I do understand that it's hard to support another companies digital distribution since steam is already such a great service and does truly express interest in its customers directly through its actions. But, whether we like it or not, I think a lot of companies are going to try and make their own digital distribution services due to the fact that value/steam have been extremely successful in this area. I do like how everyone uses value on the PC, it's much like are version of XBL except much better lol. But, let the best win I guess[/citation]

Regardless of what the Valve/Steam sheep think. Valve is a company and Steam is their product. Their sole purpose is to make a profit. The ONLY reason they appear to care, is to generate profits. Valve gets a piece of every sale made through Steam. Steam is nothing great....it's just a content distribution service. Some of you talk about it like your life depends on it though. Regardless of the "agreements" in place....Valve and EA are direct competitors. Both companies would be perfectly happy if the other ceased to exist. Valve, from a legal standpoint, does not have the ability to tell a developer what features can or cannot exist in their game, but they do have the authority as a distributor to decide whether or not the game is available on Steam. Now, if your life revolves around Steam....great, send Valve all your money. Otherwise, take a break and go outside. See what the world has to offer. This deal between EA and Valve isn't going to hurt EA. At the end of the day, EA will still turn a decent profit.

 

[Device Unknown]

I'm with Wildkitten. Despise Steam/Valve and anything else that wants to play middle man.

 

[Sohaib]

Ok, there are hundreds of games by numerous game developers distributed on steam and none of them got pulled away yet and no one complained about it. As a matter of fact, most big companies are integrating steamworks drm in their titles which just explains how good valve/steam is with distribution.

EA games have been on steam for a very longtime and now just before Origin's release, EA had problems because of valve? EA you can go F*** yourself, i don't buy your bullshit. If BF3 will be on steam, i will buy it if not i will not no matter if it gets 70 or 100 metacritic score.

 

[Lan]

Wow, such animosity here. I'm obviously in the minority on this one. But whatever happened to just running out to your local store and buying it? It isn't that hard and personally I'm not overly thrilled about Steam to be honest. Is it that hard to respect an individual company's right to manage their own product? If you all don't want to buy it from any place other than steam, that is your choice, you'll be missing a great game. But don't flame EA when its your choice not to play the game, not theirs.

 

[tgoods44]

I like how EA played this out *cough*. "Its not our fault". When really, its very very simple. They want to exploit more money out of their consumers and by having their own service they accomplish that. It's sad that an unbiased 3rd party Digital Service who tries to do right by their customers gets the shaft for it.

 

[rohitbaran]

Well, I am happy to get game updates and patches through steam. It is nice of EA to try to serve their customers personally, but frankly, it seems more of a tactic to get more advertizement real estate.

 

[jn77]

EA has a great laps in judgement for its pc users ever since their first DRM. We should just all ban EA products and purchase them

 

[jaywed]

Who cares! Im too busy enjoying the Steam Summer Sale! EAWho

 

[guardianangel42]

I call BS. After reading the first few paragraphs, I was initially swayed. I came into this article assuming that EA was just going to try and explain away why they pulled the game from Steam but after reading that it wasn't pulled from the other digital distrobution platforms I changed my mind.

Then I read EA's reasoning. I own Mass Effect 2 and Crysis Warhead on Steam. DLC isn't downloaded through Steam in Mass Effect 2; I have to go to Bioware's website and download it there and then click on the installer.

EA has been able to perfectly manage DLC on the Steam platform. They have also been able to perfectly manage providing patches to Crysis Warhead. It was a hell of a headache trying to download patches for my disc based copy of crysis so I much prefer the easier, automatic update system of Steam.

What EA has told me is that they want to take their games from a system that they have managed to work perfectly fine in for at least two years (by my experience) and to switch from an update system that works perfectly fine to their own proprietary system and the handful of much lower marketshare distro platforms out there.

I don't buy it.

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]tgoods44[/nom]I like how EA played this out *cough*. "Its not our fault". When really, its very very simple. They want to exploit more money out of their consumers and by having their own service they accomplish that. It's sad that an unbiased 3rd party Digital Service who tries to do right by their customers gets the shaft for it.[/citation]
How is EA trying to exploit more money? While I hate the entire move to making half games for full price, then releasing DLC's for more money to make the game complete, it's not like Steam is trying to end that practice.

What Steam is trying to do is tell other companies HOW they can distribute content and such and if it's not done the Steam way, kick, you're of Steam. It's not like EA is pulling it's games off Steam.

But stop and think about this. In it's push to try to force other publishers to handle content for their games in a manner Valve wishes them to, they will end up hurting customers because how many games that are tied into Steam and then get kicked off because Valve doesn't like how those other companies have relationships with their customers, will get screwed over by losing some funcionality of the games they puchased.

 

[zkevwlu]

[citation][nom]Lan[/nom]Wow, such animosity here. I'm obviously in the minority on this one. But whatever happened to just running out to your local store and buying it? It isn't that hard and personally I'm not overly thrilled about Steam to be honest. Is it that hard to respect an individual company's right to manage their own product? If you all don't want to buy it from any place other than steam, that is your choice, you'll be missing a great game. But don't flame EA when its your choice not to play the game, not theirs.[/citation]

When was the last time you've been to a midnight launch of a major title? The lines are 3 hours long and you might not even score a copy unless you're holding a pre-order receipt. So are you seriously telling me that driving to a brick-and-mortar store is somehow better than downloading it from Steam?

Also, have you ever lived in a town where the closest EB/GameStop is over an hour drive away? You want to also tell those guys that driving to pick up a game is "not that hard"?

I will never understand the Steam haters. What has Steam done in the past to piss you off? What exactly does Steam do now that is so unacceptable by modern consumer culture standards? They stream big titles straight to your computer, they update your games for you, they keep your save files and CDKEYs on their servers, and frequently they sell you really good games for less than the price of a big mac meal at your local McDonalds. They basically do everything to keep your gaming experience NOT COMPLICATED. And the best part of it all, THEY OFFER THE SERVICE FOR FREE.

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]jaywed[/nom]Who cares! Im too busy enjoying the Steam Summer Sale! EAWho[/citation]
And if the games you buy aren't published by Valve, and Valve has an issue with how the publishers of those games give you content, what will you do once those games get kicked off Steam by Valve and you have limited access to what you bought?

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]guardianangel42[/nomWhat EA has told me is that they want to take their games from a system that they have managed to work perfectly fine in for at least two years (by my experience) and to switch from an update system that works perfectly fine to their own proprietary system and the handful of much lower marketshare distro platforms out there.I don't buy it.[/citation]
Except EA didn't pull Crysis 2 off Steam, Valve KICKED it off Steam because they don't want EA, or Crytek since it seems to be what Crytek has done having another agreement with another distributor, not what EA did.

 

[jaywed]

[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]And if the games you buy aren't published by Valve, and Valve has an issue with how the publishers of those games give you content, what will you do once those games get kicked off Steam by Valve and you have limited access to what you bought?[/citation]

The games cost me $5 most of the time and havent a single problem yet. So cry me a river. Ill take my chances 😉

 

[schmich]

[citation][nom]Anomalyx[/nom]Did anyone else catch how EA is complaining that Steam, a distribution platform, is behaving like a distribution platform? A couple tricky PR statements tried to make Steam look like they've done something horrible, and that their system is inadequate. In reality, the way EA wants to control Crysis 2 is what is incompatible.[/citation]
So...their system is in adequate. I've also felt that last time I bought a game on Steam. For those interested I'll explain my experience:

I had bought Battlefield: Bad Company 2 in retail. The way Battefield games work is that once the game is launched you login with an EA login. So you could launch BF:BC2 on a friends PC and login with your accaunt.

Now the expansion called Vietnam came out and ALL it was is a CD-key. The game is "inside" (it gets downloaded) the original game and you add the key when you login in the main game. DICE, creators of BF, publicly said that retail version of BC2 and digital versions of Vietnam are compatible (and vice versa) because, as mentioned, Vietnam is just a cd-key. If you buy it anywhere all you get is the key, retail you don't even get a DVD with the content (it's an empty box with a key).

Anyway, as soon as Vietnam pre-ordering went live I decided to try out Steam for once. According to DICE and many forum moderator posts it should work and Steam doesn't say anything about requirements. When Vietnam actually goes live I cannot get the key I bought from Steam. I look through forums on how to get it.

Apparently Steam won't allow to see the CD-key if you don't have the main game bought on Steam. Valve was late in adding the requirement and so many of us actually bought Vietnam without owning BC2 on Steam. It should work no problem but for some reason Steam doesn't want to allow it. I asked support to send me the key to my verified email address and they ignored that request. In the end they said that I have to buy BC2 or they will use that one-time-refund and refund Vietnam. The latter, using the one-time refund was pretty lame considering they're responsible.

It's not a huge deal but I wasn't treated properly in my eyes. If a customer asks for help and your company has done something wrong they should try to help you with army wide open. Also frustrating when you pre-order a game to get a few days early unlock because you have a free weekend only to find out that plan was gone down the toilet.

Also, as I had mentioned to them, it was my first time trying to buy through Steam and not only do I get a bad experience I get bad support. That's something you don't do if you want customers to stay. I asked for the refund and I'm not looking back to Steam. It was my first and only game bought on Steam and I got it refunded.

I won't limit myself by boycotting Valve games or anything like that. It's only me who gets punished then as they do make good games but I'll just buy them retail and add them to Steam that way so they get less money.

 

[therabiddeer]

EA wanted to use Steam to distribute the bulk of the game then circumvent steam for DLC so they could retain all DLC profits for themselves. They are using the service for a bigger profit margin and Valve knows whats up and said no.

 

[Guest]

[citation][nom]From EA Forums[/nom]EA Policy on Selling Games on Third-Party Download Sites

At EA, we believe in choice. We want our products in all the places gamers go to download the best games and services. To that end, we offer games to EVERY major download service including Amazon, Walmart, Gamestop, and Steam.

One of the most exciting aspects of games is that they just keep getting bigger and better. Both developers and consumers have evolved beyond the traditional model that used to limit us to 15-20 hours of play on a typical disc. Today, post-launch downloads of new maps, vehicles and other content extend the experience, adding hours of fun and a lot of value.

Every download site that hosts our games sets business terms for our relationship. These terms are often complex, but the goal is to provide a hassle-free experience for the gamer. Prices, content exclusives, and loyalty programs may differ from site to site. Consumers can pick the site that bests suits their needs.

Any retailer can sell our games, but we take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services for the individuals and communities that play our games. These players are connecting to our servers, so we want to provide them with the very best service. This works well for our partnership with Gamestop, Amazon and other online retailers.

However, when a download service forbids publishers from contacting players with patches, new levels, items and other services – it disrupts our ability to provide the ongoing support players expect from us. At present, this is the case with only one download service. While EA offers its entire portfolio to this site, they have elected to not post many of our games. We hope to find a mutually agreeable solution to this issue soon.

Going forward, EA will continue to work with download partners and continue offering our games for sale on all major download sites.

The good news is: you’ve got plenty of choices. [/citation]

 

[wildkitten]

[citation][nom]elbuck[/nom]Wildkitten: "If EA wanted to put patch and DLC downloaders into the games own launcher, is that something Valve (Steam) should have any say so over? "Absolutely. Steam's value proposition is auto-patching, no DVD required in drive, single sign-on, consistency of user-interface, and best of all GIVING THEM A CREDIT CARD ALWAYS WORKS.So many people tried to buy the Crysis2 DLC, and they were not able to because the MyCrysis site offshored their e-commerce design to asscrapistan or some other country that does not understand that in order for their customers to make money, the website must be able to accept a credit card. They could not even get the simplest e-commerce transaction right.Steam has a full-blown Windows client on every serious gamers machine already. They process transactions without fail and there has never been a single BBB complaint against Valve. They run a top-notch operation and they have spent the last decade gaining the trust of the gaming community. They refuse to become a public company because they don't want to be catering to douchebag stockholders. They epitomize what a game publisher should be.... EA on the other hand is about as sleazebag guido-douche as they get.If someone tells me I have to into a publisher-specific game menu to purchase DLC **I JUST WONT PURCHASE IT**.... End of story... Steam or no sale.[/citation]
Steam is a game distributor. What right should they have to tell another developer or publisher HOW their games should be made and why should there be a seperate version just for Steam?

Sorry, but this is takin the Bobby Kotick book of gaming to a whole new level.