Valve Wants EA's Games Back on Steam

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

flipt

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2010
27
0
18,530
0
First off it is business. People flame EA for not going on Steam and basically being forced to use Origin. However years back, Valve forced Steam on Counterstrike players and I believe Day of Defeat players. There was no real choice. Also, Steam was marketed to gamers as a place where prices would be substantially lower due to cutting out production costs. Guess what new release prices are barely differenct than getting a CD. I do not forget that Valve did this and I don't blame EA for taking a position with their IP. For those who won't buy B3 because of this decision on EA's part, just remember that Valve did the same exact thing to gamers.

Nonetheless, I have a pretty big Steam library and I often buy bundles and new releases. Even though I did not like being forced to use a company's service to play the game I loved, I did not boycott them for it either. It is not personal, it is business and to stop playing CS then for this would have been moronic. So, I am not gonna stop playing BF titles because it is on Origin. Gimme a desktop icon, I will hit it and be in game (if their servers are working at launch lol ).

I understand it is nice to have all your games one platform, but I actually applaud EA for taking a position they believe is important. Steam (the digital incumbant) is using their market share to enforce their policies to tell a company what they had to do with their own property.

I think the people who are posting the "not buying B3" over this really don't have interest in playing anyway. So it is all piss and wind. If you really are interested, you would buy the disk or use another service other than Origin. There are options out there, even if you do not like EA.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Having used both Steam and EA's former delivery engine, I would much rather use Steam.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]bustapr[/nom]like I said bethesda goes to steam of their own free will most likely because it has good drm and an easy convenient update system. Games that require steam activation are usually safe from pirating, Fallout 3(a non steam required game) was pirated almost immediately when it came out, so they moved to the convenient system that nearly every pc gamer uses regularly. And advertising on steam is better than others. Alot of games have required steam activation through steam for the same reason. If you see something convenient that makes you money and saves you money at the same time for a small fee, wouldnt you do the same thing?[/citation]
No, I wouldn't, because it is ultimately helping make Steam a monopoly which in turn will allow Valve to dictate how other gaming companies can interact with their own customers.

Sorry, but it sounds like there is too much closeness of Valve in with Steam and this in turn could be anti-trust and anti-competitevness. Would you like it if Gamestop started demanding that DLC's for copies of games sold at Gamestop must also be sold at their retail stores? No, that would be unthinkable. Well, it should also be unthinkable for Steam to demand it as well, and we as consumers should see it for the problem it is.

If EA, or any company, wants to handle patches or DLC's through their own games, that should be something between EA and their customers. But Valve insiting on it being done through them is Valve's way of inserting themself in the relationship between a 3rd party company and their customers, and that just has no place.
 
G

Guest

Guest
EA: "They have these crazy ideas at Valve like keeping online servers up indefinitely... we need to ability to close down servers and cripple our games as soon as interest in them starts to wane. Really, we feel its the best way to support our customers, and we just don't see eye to eye with Valve on that subject."

http://kotaku.com/5832206/
 

bustapr

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
1,613
0
19,780
0
[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]No, I wouldn't, because it is ultimately helping make Steam a monopoly which in turn will allow Valve to dictate how other gaming companies can interact with their own customers.Sorry, but it sounds like there is too much closeness of Valve in with Steam and this in turn could be anti-trust and anti-competitevness. Would you like it if Gamestop started demanding that DLC's for copies of games sold at Gamestop must also be sold at their retail stores? No, that would be unthinkable. Well, it should also be unthinkable for Steam to demand it as well, and we as consumers should see it for the problem it is.If EA, or any company, wants to handle patches or DLC's through their own games, that should be something between EA and their customers. But Valve insiting on it being done through them is Valve's way of inserting themself in the relationship between a 3rd party company and their customers, and that just has no place.[/citation]
your points very valid, but theres also something else. The liscensing. If you want to sell something on any platform you must first fill out a contract with rules. If EA sells BF3 on steam they must fill out steams contract, and they must not break it. EA has no obligation to sell it on steam, but if they do they have to abide by the rules. Valve, despite being owners of steam, do not do any anticompetitive things on the platform. Valve acts just like any other publisher on steam. Steam doesnt dictate how publishers interact with their customers, they only insist that dlc for a game bought on steam and that uses steam drm and such be sold on steam.

EA basically wants to use a service and not pay for it. all that dlc IS going to the steam folder and will be used through steam, and will be aded to the game provided by steam.
 

stingray71

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2010
100
0
18,680
0
I hate how steam manipulates the installation of a game. With EA download, you at least get the same unmolested version folks get on DVD. You don't have to wait for steam patches.

I really don't care either way and can't blame EA for what they are doing, why have a middleman.

"I'm not buying BF3 unless it's on steam". Yeah right, who you kidding.
 

hetneo

Distinguished
Aug 1, 2011
451
0
18,780
0
LOL what a bloody rubbish, just to provoke people into bashing EA because they want to sell their own product w/e way they want. No one in EA is stupid to think that they can compete with Origin against Steam. But looks like Valve got a bit too greedy in demands from publishers to sell all DLCs through them and to have no exclusive content distributed through other retailers.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]bustapr[/nom]your points very valid, but theres also something else. The liscensing. If you want to sell something on any platform you must first fill out a contract with rules. If EA sells BF3 on steam they must fill out steams contract, and they must not break it. EA has no obligation to sell it on steam, but if they do they have to abide by the rules. Valve, despite being owners of steam, do not do any anticompetitive things on the platform. Valve acts just like any other publisher on steam. Steam doesnt dictate how publishers interact with their customers, they only insist that dlc for a game bought on steam and that uses steam drm and such be sold on steam. EA basically wants to use a service and not pay for it. all that dlc IS going to the steam folder and will be used through steam, and will be aded to the game provided by steam.[/citation]
You are right, one does have to abide by the rules of the contract. However, your point about EA wanting to use Steam seems contradictory to the article. The article is making clear EA does NOT want to use Steam any longer and that Steam wants EA back. The 3rd paragraph makes it clear that it is EA taking their titles off of Steam and that Steam wants EA back.

And simply because a contract says something and 2 parties sign it does not make a contract valid. The involvement of Valve and their insistence how other companies interact with their customers (in other words forcing EA, Bethesda, etc to provide DLC's and such only through Steam)where Valve has no business, can be seen as anti-trust. At the end of the day Valve is a competitor. They do not have EA's or any other companies interest in mind.

All EA is doing is saying that they wish to deal directly with their customers rather than have Valve dictate to EA how they can interact with the consumer. Now, do not mistake me for being some loyal EA follower. They have done a LOT of things I disagree with, but at the same time I can look at something rationally and take each individual case and weigh the merits and in this case I applaud EA for taking control of their own customer service.

And I agree with Stingray71's comment. I purchased the original Dragon Age from EA directly, a friend bought it from Steam. My download was identical to the disc, his Steam version had differences, differences which caused problems.

I would much rather have 3 or 4 different download managers on my computer than to help make one company be a monopoly interfering with their competition.
 

KelvinTy

Distinguished
Aug 17, 2011
194
0
18,690
4
I can't believe how many people actually like steam - -"
Personally, I hate it. It's not that stable, a lot of crap needs to be online to work, the typing in cdkey bit feels really bad, there were different ways to crack it, even today, there is still at least one way to jack in some codes in the ram and allow you to download games (new or old) and distribute them for crackers and hackers... etc
Besides, what is wrong with using yet another client? It's not like HDD storage space is that limited now-a-days...
I would love another client, if it's good, it could compete with steam. If not, there will be work-around made and used... That is usually how it is.
 

demonhorde665

Distinguished
Jul 13, 2008
1,492
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]pooflinger1[/nom]Wow. What a bunch of whiney babies. EA did not pull off of steam because they wanted to create a competing service. They pulled off of steam becase STEAM screwed up. Not EA. Steam was trying to force them to do things their way, and their way only. EA was willing to do things their way, but not have their way the only way. They wanted to give their customers OPTIONS instead of having to get everything through a single content provider.You people that keep saying that you're not buying it if it isn't on steam need to get a grip. Steam caused it to not be on steam. Not EA. And you can't compare a service that has been available less than a year, to one that has been around for over 10. Of course origin is not on the same level as steam. It takes time to mature.[/citation]


you got this SOOOOO ass backwards

first off steam never disallowed comapnies to sale dlc directly, what they don't allow is fopr acompany to ahvea steam game and not offer the dlc on steama s well which is what EA is wanting to do , bassically they wnated thier games on steam but NONE of the dlc sold through steam , they are the ones that want to kill choices not STEAM

perfect example of what i'm talkign about is fallout 3, bethesda sales the dlc directly for store versions , and for steam versions valve sales the dlc

what ea is wanting is to force steam version's to use origin for the dlc
THAT IS KILLING CHOICES!!

and taht is what steam is against because it DOES make things more complex for consumers and elss convienant. steam wants to be able to sale dlc for the steam versions NOT non steam version.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]you got this SOOOOO ass backwards first off steam never disallowed comapnies to sale dlc directly, what they don't allow is fopr acompany to ahvea steam game and not offer the dlc on steama s well which is what EA is wanting to do , bassically they wnated thier games on steam but NONE of the dlc sold through steam , they are the ones that want to kill choices not STEAM perfect example of what i'm talkign about is fallout 3, bethesda sales the dlc directly for store versions , and for steam versions valve sales the dlcwhat ea is wanting is to force steam version's to use origin for the dlcTHAT IS KILLING CHOICES!! and taht is what steam is against because it DOES make things more complex for consumers and elss convienant. steam wants to be able to sale dlc for the steam versions NOT non steam version.[/citation]
Ok, you need to explain to me how EA wanting to have DLC's go through their own products denies choice? If Steam is not wanting to allow developers and publishers to use anything but Steam to send DLC and patches to customers of those games, that is Steam denying choice, not EA (or any other company).

I'm sorry, but if I buy an EA game on Steam, I shouldn't have to continually go to Steam for patches or DLC's. That would be like Gamestop or Target telling a publisher that any game sold there has to be a seperate version and the Gamestop/Target versions can only be patched or DLC's with discs sold at those stores only. Would you be willing to accept that? I would hope not. So why accept it from Steam?
 
G

Guest

Guest
I'll say this: Steam makes downloading and installing stuff an absolute cinch. Including DLC. Downloading the DLC for Borderlands was just as simple as downloading the game itself. By comparison, when I wanted to download DLC for Mass Effect 1 and 2, I practically had to go on an expedition to the wilds of the Amazon to find it—and then launch a second expedition to find where I could go to buy the points I needed to buy it. Yeah, way to go, EA. Making it a challenge to buy your DLC makes you sell more of it. Right.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Steam sucks. All of you are morons for saying you won't buy games unless they're on Steam. Valve often screws over their customers, doesn't care about customer support or service, and only causes more problems for gamers. Hell, Valve's the company who PUSHED me from pc gaming for awhile.

EA is right in so many ways to not use steam. It's junk.
 

kr0nix

Distinguished
Aug 12, 2009
3
0
18,510
0
I live in Sydney, Australia, and am usually faced with having to pay over the odds for a game on Steam. For example, it costs 60 USD to preorder COD:MW3 on Steam USA, but 100 USD for me to purchase it on Steam Australia.

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-1537333.html

Eh, what's so great about Steam again? I will personally be importing a hard copy of BF3 from overseas, as I've done in the past. Evidently, Steam treats its USA fanbase far better.
 

shplayer

Distinguished
Dec 1, 2011
2
0
18,510
0
The only EA games that I will get is by Pirating...and online EA games by buying It on Ebay from random person. I want them to profit off me the least amount they can. I actually used to buy non-multiplayer games on steam to support the Developer's and EA. They have gone way too far this time by pulling the PC games hurts the PC gaming community. PC gaming is nothing compared to the amount of people using Xbox Live or Playstation Network. Steam brought Mostly every PC gamer to one place to make the community a pretty decent size. Splitting the already small PC gaming community is just a big mistake and will not attract as many new people as it would if there was just one PC digital store platform.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I was going to buy SWTOR but as soon as I found out I had to download and install Origin I decided not to. Newell's right - EA has not earned the right to have a digital platform running on my PC. The game - I want. The distribution platform - I do not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY