Dragon Age 2 Disappears From Steam

[Epona]

Meh, let EA have their tantrums. DA isn't even that good.

I'm all for letting EA look like the jerk again, not that they need much assistance -- and DA never floated my boat either. I just hope this little ripple isn't the start of a massive tsunami of cloud-based BS, or that soon we'll all be looking back dreamily on the days when we actually owned the applications we use.

You never have owned the applications, you just bought the right to use them.

Wrong, you always owned it until publishers started using the internet to force full price rentals. As an example. I have 3 copies of Super Mario 64, the N64 version which is on a cartridge that I own and can do anything I like with. The Wii Virtual Console version which is extremely limited, I can't even play it on my second Wii and finally the DS version which is on a card and I can do anything I like with it.

Sorry, but you're mistaken here. Even if you hold a physical copy of the game, the EULA prevents you from doing anything you like with it. Legally, you can do as much with it as you can a digital copy on a console/PC.

What he said was true; you have NEVER owned the software. The only thing you've ever purchased is a license to use the software.

No you're wrong. Tell me what I can't do with my N64 or DS copy of SM64.

I'll tell you what I can do.

- I can play it on any N64/DS
- I can loan it to a firend
- I can resell it
- I can flush it down the toilet
- I can smash it to pieces.

Did either of those games come with EULA? I don't know and I don't care because it's irrelevant. The EULA could forbid all of those things but I can still LEGALLY do them all. I own the copies of the game. Don't drink the kool aid, when you BUY games, they are yours.

 

[Epona]

I think we may be seeing the beginning of the downfall of Steam. That sort of pisses me off too but that's the result of each publisher having their own download service, it sets up a sort of monopoly.

It's like if EA owned Target, they wouldn't want to sell their games at Wal Mart as that would compete against them.

Except target does not manufacture games, and this is not the downfall of steam, just the downfall of stocks over at EA, when share holders (like my self) see that they lose money with Origin.

Look unlike other products on the market, you cant exactly have any thing BUT a monopoly when it comes to things like steam. You have all your games on steam, you don't want to have another thing that only houses some of your games, that you have to boot up ALONG WITH STEAM or have the hassle to also close steam to run this digital distribution application, and then play those games, it simply isn't practical. No one wants 30 steam copy cats running at the same time.

Also Origin will always suck because it is run by a company with public investments, where as Valve is private, and doesn't give a shit what a bunch of people who just want to get a big return on their investments say, and will do the right thing, not the thing that fucks over the customer to make lots of money.

If EA owned Target then Target would manufacture games. Next time don't go outside the scope of an example to mount an argument against that example.

EA is a publisher at this point, it does not actually make the games, it buys up developers, who make the games and it publishes them out for platforms and advertisement. It doesn't even make the hard copies, it tells a manufacture to do that part.

This is pathetic. The publisher doesn't physically develop or manufacture the games but they do fund both.

 

[thedarkfreak]

Meh, let EA have their tantrums. DA isn't even that good.

I'm all for letting EA look like the jerk again, not that they need much assistance -- and DA never floated my boat either. I just hope this little ripple isn't the start of a massive tsunami of cloud-based BS, or that soon we'll all be looking back dreamily on the days when we actually owned the applications we use.

You never have owned the applications, you just bought the right to use them.

Wrong, you always owned it until publishers started using the internet to force full price rentals. As an example. I have 3 copies of Super Mario 64, the N64 version which is on a cartridge that I own and can do anything I like with. The Wii Virtual Console version which is extremely limited, I can't even play it on my second Wii and finally the DS version which is on a card and I can do anything I like with it.

Sorry, but you're mistaken here. Even if you hold a physical copy of the game, the EULA prevents you from doing anything you like with it. Legally, you can do as much with it as you can a digital copy on a console/PC.

What he said was true; you have NEVER owned the software. The only thing you've ever purchased is a license to use the software.

No you're wrong. Tell me what I can't do with my N64 or DS copy of SM64.

I'll tell you what I can do.

- I can play it on any N64/DS
- I can loan it to a firend
- I can resell it
- I can flush it down the toilet
- I can smash it to pieces.

Did either of those games come with EULA? I don't know and I don't care because it's irrelevant. The EULA could forbid all of those things but I can still LEGALLY do them all. I own the copies of the game. Don't drink the kool aid, when you BUY games, they are yours.

If they're "yours", you could dump them and put them onto the internet without violating any laws. You can't. You don't own it, you own a license for it. That license restricts what you can do with it.

And if the EULA forbids it, then no, you CANNOT legally do it. It's not irrelevant. By opening and playing the game, you are acknowledging and accepting the terms of the EULA, and if you don't agree to the terms of the EULA, then you do not have a license to use the software. Just because you CAN do something DOESN'T mean it's legal.

And with Steam, I can play my games on any computer I want. I don't have to worry about the disc getting scratched or broken(with a physical copy, if something happens to it, I can't use it anymore. Digital distribution has a similar limit, in that if the server goes down, you can't use it, but I find it to be a better trade-off.) I can let my girlfriend use my account to play Fallout: New Vegas. I can't resell it, but I've never been one to sell games, anyway.

I own a game on Steam just as much as you own a game on disc. You own a piece of plastic and a license to use the software on it. You do not own the software.

 

[Pyrian]

I want to know what these rules actually are. I am rather dubious of the assertion that the Steam contract requires you to use Steam as the SOLE source of DLC; indeed, I suspect that would be an illegal stipulation under "anti-competitive" laws.

On the other hand, I could see Steam requiring that DLC be available for purchase through Steam for any games available through Steam. If the removed games only allow in-game DLC, that would violate such a term.

 

[DrScoobs]

hang on. BF3 is coming to steam. BF3 is a game largely oriented at the "PC hardcore" gamers. how do most PC gamers get their gaming fix? steam

good work EA. you may well have dug your own grave. I for one really want BF3 but refuse to download another cpu/gpu sucking application for it. I already have steam and itunes running at nearly all times as it is.

 

[KrossBillNye]

I want to know what these rules actually are. I am rather dubious of the assertion that the Steam contract requires you to use Steam as the SOLE source of DLC; indeed, I suspect that would be an illegal stipulation under "anti-competitive" laws.

On the other hand, I could see Steam requiring that DLC be available for purchase through Steam for any games available through Steam. If the removed games only allow in-game DLC, that would violate such a term.

I think that is what is in the EULA policy.

That as long as the DLC is available off of steam the company can sell the same dlc off their site. That way if the consumer doesn't want to buy the steam version they can buy the company's version.

regardless I too would like to read through it to see what is stated in it. All of my previous statements are only from speculation from all of what is going on right now.

 

[Epona]

Meh, let EA have their tantrums. DA isn't even that good.

I'm all for letting EA look like the jerk again, not that they need much assistance -- and DA never floated my boat either. I just hope this little ripple isn't the start of a massive tsunami of cloud-based BS, or that soon we'll all be looking back dreamily on the days when we actually owned the applications we use.

You never have owned the applications, you just bought the right to use them.

Wrong, you always owned it until publishers started using the internet to force full price rentals. As an example. I have 3 copies of Super Mario 64, the N64 version which is on a cartridge that I own and can do anything I like with. The Wii Virtual Console version which is extremely limited, I can't even play it on my second Wii and finally the DS version which is on a card and I can do anything I like with it.

Sorry, but you're mistaken here. Even if you hold a physical copy of the game, the EULA prevents you from doing anything you like with it. Legally, you can do as much with it as you can a digital copy on a console/PC.

What he said was true; you have NEVER owned the software. The only thing you've ever purchased is a license to use the software.

No you're wrong. Tell me what I can't do with my N64 or DS copy of SM64.

I'll tell you what I can do.

- I can play it on any N64/DS
- I can loan it to a firend
- I can resell it
- I can flush it down the toilet
- I can smash it to pieces.

Did either of those games come with EULA? I don't know and I don't care because it's irrelevant. The EULA could forbid all of those things but I can still LEGALLY do them all. I own the copies of the game. Don't drink the kool aid, when you BUY games, they are yours.

If they're "yours", you could dump them and put them onto the internet without violating any laws. You can't. You don't own it, you own a license for it. That license restricts what you can do with it.

And if the EULA forbids it, then no, you CANNOT legally do it. It's not irrelevant. By opening and playing the game, you are acknowledging and accepting the terms of the EULA, and if you don't agree to the terms of the EULA, then you do not have a license to use the software. Just because you CAN do something DOESN'T mean it's legal.

And with Steam, I can play my games on any computer I want. I don't have to worry about the disc getting scratched or broken(with a physical copy, if something happens to it, I can't use it anymore. Digital distribution has a similar limit, in that if the server goes down, you can't use it, but I find it to be a better trade-off.) I can let my girlfriend use my account to play Fallout: New Vegas.

I own a game on Steam just as much as you own a game on disc.

That I can't legally dump and distribute it on the internet doesn't mean I don't own it. I own my car but there are some things I can't legally do with it, run you down for example.

The EULA is not a law, get that out of your head. The EULA could forbid you to do something that consumer protection laws allow. For example, you see all those used games in Gamestop? Perfectly legal no matter what the EULA says.

Actually, the law allows you to make a backup of your physical copies (in the US anyway). Digital Distribution is a full priced rental, you have no physical copy so you can't do what you want with it. Physical copies though can be resold, loaned out and even flushed down the toilet.

 

[Sartan0]

This would trouble me more if I still intended to pick up DA:2.

 

[The Lugz]

i have no particular love for ea, they keep making douche-bag moves against other company's buying, selling and firing people and making gamers look worse than ever with rediculus adverts

to cap it all they sold out crysis 2 to consoles, and made the pc version less impressive than the original

#edit#
yes, this IS ea's fault if they cant abide by the rules steam lays down when they enter an agreement that's called breech of contract

steam on the other hand practically give me games, with their mad -90% deals on game packs and other insanity

if you wait around, they'll give you free games ( ok maby only short, indie titles but still )

and overall the service is pretty slick and streamlined and an experience i'd happily recommend to anyone, and do on a regular basis

ea can't buy that kind of loyalty and that's something they don't seem to comprehend informed gamers will always support whoever supports the industry and their personal gaming fun

you cant exactly have any thing BUT a monopoly when it comes to things like steam. You have all your games on steam, you don't want to have another thing that only houses some of your games, that you have to boot up ALONG WITH STEAM or have the hassle to also close steam to run this digital distribution application, and then play those games, it simply isn't practical. No one wants 30 steam copy cats running at the same time.

Also Origin will always suck because it is run by a company with public investments, where as Valve is private, and doesn't give a shit what a bunch of people who just want to get a big return on their investments say, and will do the right thing, not the thing that fucks over the customer to make lots of money.

i dunno, it will give something for the 8+ cores, and quad channel ddr3 controller Intel seem desperate to sell us to do

also, valve employees are paid better than google or microsoft ones saying they don't do everything possible to make money seems illogical but they don't make you pay extra for pre-orders the way bioware is trying i suppose!

 

[Worr Monger]

So help me if Mass Effect 3 is not on Steam, I don't know what I will do.

I would have worried about the same thing... but then I remembered I already ordered the Mass Effect 3 Collector's edition on Amazon... so I'm covered anyway.

It'll be a cold day in hell before I support Origin. I'll go to D2D first if I'm really desperate.. I already have a few games on there anyway.

I actually hope they do make BF3 exclusive to Origin. I wasn't planning on getting it anyway... So hopefully it will crash and burn while MW3 does as well as ever. Stupid EA.

 

[thedarkfreak]

That I can't legally dump and distribute it on the internet doesn't mean I don't own it. I own my car but there are some things I can't legally do with it, run you down for example.

The EULA is not a law, get that out of your head. The EULA could forbid you to do something that consumer protection laws allow. For example, you see all those used games in Gamestop? Perfectly legal no matter what the EULA says.

Actually, the law allows you to make a backup of your physical copies (in the US anyway). Digital Distribution is a full priced rental, you have no physical copy so you can't do what you want with it. Physical copies though can be resold, loaned out and even flushed down the toilet.

I'll agree that the EULA is not a law; it's more a contract. I'll also add that I don't, in any way, believe that any game publisher would actually bother going after anyone who violates any minor condition in the EULA.

And while the law may allow me to make backups of my physical copies of games, there is no law that says console makers have to let those backups work on their consoles. While such a backup would(most likely, some forms of DRM notwithstanding) work fine on a PC, all three main consoles today will not play backups unless they are modified to do so, either through homebrew software or hardware modding. Both can be classified as violating the anti-circumvention laws in the DMCA, which is a federal law. Whereas I can redownload my Steam games as many times as I want, even on multiple computers. Heck, the Xbox Marketplace, PlayStation Network, and Wii Shop Channel all let me redownload titles I've already purchased. The Wii Shop Channel is more restrictive, though, limiting it to one console, because of the way they identify it. If something happens to the console, though, Nintendo can transfer the licenses to another console.

If I have a physical copy, yeah, that's a bonus. It's great to have the disc ready for me any time I want it. But shit happens, and if that disc becomes damaged, I'm simply out that money and can't play the game anymore. To me, digital distribution is much more convenient.

 

[KrossBillNye]

I just realized I feel sorry for Bioware through all this. They are the ones getting effected by this move as well...

 

[Worr Monger]

I just realized I feel sorry for Bioware through all this. They are the ones getting effected by this move as well...

I agree. When they announced that TOR would be Origin exclusive, I almost decided that I didn't want it.

But I don't want to miss out on a good Bioware game, and punish them for EA's dumb decisions. So the physical copies are still an option. I was hoping to go digital copies-only from now on... but EA will force my hand I guess.

 

[The Lugz]

Digital Distribution is a full priced rental, you have no physical copy so you can't do what you want with it. Physical copies though can be resold, loaned out and even flushed down the toilet.

not really, anyone with a dvd burner and a decent idea how steam works could quite legaly and legitimately make a data disc containing their game files and or the steam system

or, more likely just dump it on a backup drive

as for loaning it out, just send them the confirmation code from steam and your biddies can use your account untill you update your password

it's possible, not as easy for sure but possible

 

[Epona]

That I can't legally dump and distribute it on the internet doesn't mean I don't own it. I own my car but there are some things I can't legally do with it, run you down for example.

The EULA is not a law, get that out of your head. The EULA could forbid you to do something that consumer protection laws allow. For example, you see all those used games in Gamestop? Perfectly legal no matter what the EULA says.

Actually, the law allows you to make a backup of your physical copies (in the US anyway). Digital Distribution is a full priced rental, you have no physical copy so you can't do what you want with it. Physical copies though can be resold, loaned out and even flushed down the toilet.

I'll agree that the EULA is not a law; it's more a contract. I'll also add that I don't, in any way, believe that any game publisher would actually bother going after anyone who violates any minor condition in the EULA.

And while the law may allow me to make backups of my physical copies of games, there is no law that says console makers have to let those backups work on their consoles. While such a backup would(most likely, some forms of DRM notwithstanding) work fine on a PC, all three main consoles today will not play backups unless they are modified to do so, either through homebrew software or hardware modding. Both can be classified as violating the anti-circumvention laws in the DMCA, which is a federal law. Whereas I can redownload my Steam games as many times as I want, even on multiple computers. Heck, the Xbox Marketplace, PlayStation Network, and Wii Shop Channel all let me redownload titles I've already purchased. The Wii Shop Channel is more restrictive, though, limiting it to one console, because of the way they identify it. If something happens to the console, though, Nintendo can transfer the licenses to another console.

If I have a physical copy, yeah, that's a bonus. It's great to have the disc ready for me any time I want it. But shit happens, and if that disc becomes damaged, I'm simply out that money and can't play the game anymore. To me, digital distribution is much more convenient.

I agree with everything you said here but to avoid another low content post warning I will say more than I need to. LOL

Technically speaking there is a bit of a contradiction in the law. You are allowed to make a backup of any media you purchase BUT you aren't allowed to crack the DRM. This will eventually be taken to court and worked out and hopefully the original law will stand because as it stands a publisher need only add DRM to a game to cancel out a consumers right to make a backup.

I will also say that content downloaded from XBOX Live is also tied to the console, just like the Wii. With XBOX Live you can (only once a year though) transfer your content to another XBOX but it is still only tied to one console at a time. You can put your account on another XBOX and download the content but then you must be online to use that content. DRM is a complicated mess that only make life harder for you and me, the paying customers. I don't know if PSN is the same way as I don't have a PS3.

 

[DeaconSawyer]

WHY DO THEY HATE MONEY!?!?!

 

[thedarkfreak]

That I can't legally dump and distribute it on the internet doesn't mean I don't own it. I own my car but there are some things I can't legally do with it, run you down for example.

The EULA is not a law, get that out of your head. The EULA could forbid you to do something that consumer protection laws allow. For example, you see all those used games in Gamestop? Perfectly legal no matter what the EULA says.

Actually, the law allows you to make a backup of your physical copies (in the US anyway). Digital Distribution is a full priced rental, you have no physical copy so you can't do what you want with it. Physical copies though can be resold, loaned out and even flushed down the toilet.

I'll agree that the EULA is not a law; it's more a contract. I'll also add that I don't, in any way, believe that any game publisher would actually bother going after anyone who violates any minor condition in the EULA.

And while the law may allow me to make backups of my physical copies of games, there is no law that says console makers have to let those backups work on their consoles. While such a backup would(most likely, some forms of DRM notwithstanding) work fine on a PC, all three main consoles today will not play backups unless they are modified to do so, either through homebrew software or hardware modding. Both can be classified as violating the anti-circumvention laws in the DMCA, which is a federal law. Whereas I can redownload my Steam games as many times as I want, even on multiple computers. Heck, the Xbox Marketplace, PlayStation Network, and Wii Shop Channel all let me redownload titles I've already purchased. The Wii Shop Channel is more restrictive, though, limiting it to one console, because of the way they identify it. If something happens to the console, though, Nintendo can transfer the licenses to another console.

If I have a physical copy, yeah, that's a bonus. It's great to have the disc ready for me any time I want it. But shit happens, and if that disc becomes damaged, I'm simply out that money and can't play the game anymore. To me, digital distribution is much more convenient.

I agree with everything you said here but to avoid another low content post warning I will say more than I need to. LOL

Technically speaking there is a bit of a contradiction in the law. You are allowed to make a backup of any media you purchase BUT you aren't allowed to crack the DRM. This will eventually be taken to court and worked out and hopefully the original law will stand because as it stands a publisher need only add DRM to a game to cancel out a consumers right to make a backup.

I will also say that content downloaded from XBOX Live is also tied to the console, just like the Wii. With XBOX Live you can (only once a year though) transfer your content to another XBOX but it is still only tied to one console at a time. You can put your account on another XBOX and download the content but then you must be online to use that content. DRM is a complicated mess that only make life harder for you and me, the paying customers. I don't know if PSN is the same way as I don't have a PS3.

Well, I can see how it would be problematic for some people, but I don't really mind staying online if I'm at a friend's house showing him something I just bought.

I hope it works out in favor of allowing backups, as well.

Also, you mentioned that consumer protection laws allow you to do things such as resell even if the EULA forbids it, but the US Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit disagrees. Just ask Timothy Verner, who got DMCA'd by Autodesk for selling used copies of their software. While Autodesk's claim that their software agreement supersedes the first sale doctrine was originally dismissed, an appeal ruled in favor of Autodesk, the US Appeals Court for the Ninth Circuit saying "a software user is a licensee rather than an owner of a copy where the copyright owner (1) specifies that the user is granted a license; (2) significantly restricts the user?s ability to transfer the software; and (3) imposes notable use restrictions."

I don't agree with what Autodesk did here, but this does establish a precedent.

 

[Wandrecanada]

Too those quoted and others blaming EA for this: This was a decision made by Valve to pull the title not EA.

First of all, no blame.
Secondly, I assume you have a reliable source for this? One you've not wished to share

Well if you've been at all following this mess since the whole Alice debacle you'd know it was Steam's decision. This is not their first offense either. Want more info? Well they're not very forthcoming but here's what EA sent to Giant Bomb when asked to elaborate:

"EA Partners and Spicy Horse Games appreciate Steam?s decision to sell Alice: Madness Returns," said the company. "The game is also available on several other download services including Amazon, Gamestop and Origin.com."

Find that quote at Giantbomb.com:

http://www.giantbomb.com/news/electronic-arts-appreciates-steams-decision-to-put-alice-madness-returns-back-on-steam/3396/

They've also made statements on this site that they are not interested in pulling their content from Steam. I sadly cannot navigate this site's archive to find the info but if you can you'll find it there.

 

[Smooth Operator]

OT: They're only limiting themselves. They want to take control of their own patches and shit to "ensure quality of service" or whatever, but their service is worse. It'll only cost them money when people buy their games less.

They just want to keep more money, in-game purchases would mean Steam doesn't get the standard 30% off DLC purchase.

I actually like where this is going, EA shooting itself in the foot could jumpstart some developers to branch out on their own, or Valve get's pissed and starts buying them off.

 

[Epona]

Digital Distribution is a full priced rental, you have no physical copy so you can't do what you want with it. Physical copies though can be resold, loaned out and even flushed down the toilet.

not really, anyone with a dvd burner and a decent idea how steam works could quite legaly and legitimately make a data disc containing their game files and or the steam system

or, more likely just dump it on a backup drive

as for loaning it out, just send them the confirmation code from steam and your biddies can use your account untill you update your password

it's possible, not as easy for sure but possible

This is all true but what I was saying is that Steam still retains the right to "turn your games off", this doesn't happen with a physical copy unless it is tied to some online account. In the case of older games, this isn't even a possibility.

I like Steam, I am not saying DD is bad. I am arguing that with DD you don't own your games in the same way you own SNES, N64, DS, PS2, etc... games.