Dragon Age 2 Disappears From Steam

[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.

 

[Somebloke]

I'm pretty sure nothing about Steam's terms forbids in-game DLC purchases as such -- on the contrary; Team Fortress 2 and Portal 2 showcase what I'd assume to be microtransaction funtionality within Steamworks, readily available and simple to use for any client developer, little and large and the upcoming DOTA 2 will probably be thouroughly permeated with the like, with virtual junk being hawked for real cash, all over the place. None of this is off-site, of course, but that's defenceable as a customer convenience matter AND a developer one - you just offload all your ditribution woes onto your digital download service partner and the customers have everything in one place and automatically updating.

I can't really blame EA for wanting that sweet "micro" money without any middle man cutting into their profit, nor wanting to avoid having to either tie themselves up to one external service, or needing to keep up support for several, in order to provide the same service to every customer, regardless of their point of acquisition. They /are/ kind of just doing what Valve themselves are doing...

BUT: They don't have to be dishonest about it. It is Suits talking here, on EA's behalf.
I would not be in the least surprised if they have deliberately sought out specific Steam terms, which they may intentionally break, with the purpose of spinning this as draconian policies on Valve's part, with a suggestion that their own services are much nicer and customer-friendly.
I also won't be surprised if Valve turns out to remain mum on the whole thing, due to a client confidentiality agreement being used against them.


I remember when the old Electronic Arts label, with its cube-sphere-cone logo, was considered a pleasant creative entity, which published things like the "Deluxe" line of creativity tools, most noteably the almost legendary "Deluxe paint".
Then they started their sport games line...

...and then there's Activision, which started out as a few Atari employees who wanted to do their own thing.

Heh... It's kind of sad how often and long trademarks are transferred, mangled and regurgitated, over and over again, in the computer/video games world.

 

[DeaconSawyer]

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

I thought of this too, but my guess is that after EA loses a fortune on Battlefield 3 because they cut off one of their major bases, and the so called Call of Duty killer ends up being an EA killer and money pit, they will be forced to try to make it back. In doing so, Valve will bend them over and make them do as they please. I mean EA is going to need to sell its RPG and PC based FPS on the main source of PC gaming sales if they are to have any hope of making money back. And make no mistake they will lose it on these decisions.

I am not saying it was EA's choice to take their games of Steam, but it was their choice to not adhere or acquiesce to the demands that Steam was making. Maybe this puts Valve and Steam in the wrong, or maybe it makes EA dirty in their business practices. Either way it is EA that will take the hit.

It seems to be a common cycle for them. A couple years of good policy, decisions and games. And then a couple years of terrible policy, awful marketing, worse decisions and bland games. My hope is that by ME3 release we find ourselves on the upswing of that cycle.

So it doesn't matter whose fault it is because by year's end EA games will be back on Steam.

 

[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.

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.

A very anti-consumer precedent IMO.

 

[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

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.

and i agree, but you can make an offline account on a non networked pc and keep your games, in fact i recommend keeping your old pc systems for exactly that when next gen hardware arrives
i'd like to see them dispatch an armed technician to disable your pc manually XD

 

[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.

and i agree, but you can make an offline account on a non networked pc and keep your games, in fact i recommend keeping your old pc systems for exactly that when next gen hardware arrives
i'd like to see them dispatch an armed technician to disable your pc manually XD

I can also reinstall my PHYSICAL copy of KOTOR on my old XP box without needing to worry about authorization (ie, offline account).

Look, I like Steam, you don't need to convince me that Steam is awesome. I am only arguing with the "you don't own your physical copies of games either" ideology.

 

[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.

A very anti-consumer precedent IMO.

Agreed. Verner is trying to make an appeal to the US Supreme Court, and I hope he is successful.

 

[pppppppppppppppppp]

Hm, I've been wondering if I use Steam because it's the best service, or becasue everyone else uses it.

Sure, they got their customers at first by being awesome, but as someone who's never used other digital distribution methods, I'm not sure if Valve deserves my money more than anyone else. It's starting to feel like a monopoly, and monopolies are against my whole quasi-socialist philosophy.

And by "anyone else" I don't mean the jerks at EA; probably gonna check out GOG and see how it compares.