EA Blames Dragon Age 2 Disappearance on Valve

[Richardplex]

Very laggy double post, my bad.

 

[Richardplex]

While Steam is a useful service at times, I don't see it as the end-all be-all savior, holier-than-thou internet messiah of gaming distribution. Just like EA, Steam is a greedy money hungry corporation (you people realize Team Fortress originally was just a free-to-download, f2p mod that Valve took over, re-released as a "full" pay-for-this game and then went to micro-transactions and F2P). Guaranteed whatever they do, it is for money and not because they give "fans what they want". Corporations are inherently greedy, because who doesn't like money? Valve is no different, while they may put out decent games, with Steam they have more uber-control over you and your gaming experience. Tell me, if you lose connection to your internet that Steam will allow you to play games without it being connected to their servers. (not counting non-Steam bought games)
I'm not downing on Steam, nor am I downing on EA. They're both corporations and both out for themselves, not the fans. EA is just a bit more honest about it. Valve couches it in "we did this for you" marketing language which tends to improve profit margins, but ultimately is designed to get your money.

Okay, I'll tell you, I can. I turned off my internet and played some games that I downloaded from steam. That part of your post is just wrong, at least for the games I have.

 

[ResonanceGames]

Here's what I think the "dispute" is: Valve wants a cut of the DLC sales. EA doesn't want to give part of their DLC profits to Valve.

I don't know who removed the game, but if Valve did it, it was probably because EA violated their ToS. Either way, I think EA initiated it and are doing so to lure people away from Steam and to Origin.

Word on the street is that Valve had to change their DLC policies to accommodate free-to-play games. I'm assuming they need to take a cut of DLC sales to justify the server and service costs of distributing them through Steam. Something in that policy must have been in conflict with EA's DLC distribution, but it did NOT cause a problem for a lot of other games that use GFWL or other non-Steam services for DLC.

It wouldn't surprise me if EA is purposely not negotiating to be in compliance with Valve's TOS because Origin is launching. But we don't know that for sure.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

You know, this whole Origin vs Steam, EA vs Valve thing is one of the few times I'm glad to be a lowely console player. I don't have to worry about where I will get my games.

EDIT: I'm not anti-PC gaming at all. I'm just saying that "Not having to deal with DD services is a plus for me"

I can see where you're coming from with that, but there is also the plus side of stuff like Battlefield 3 supporting 64 player multiplayer that makes it totally worth putting up with all of this bullshit. Hopefully the next line of consoles will be able to support that stuff.

There's also the whole "Secondhand sales" thing that PCs just don't have. I checked Steam. New Vegas is $50 still. It's less than half that used for consoles.

EA, you accepted the ToS when you signed up your games on Steam. Valve retains the rights to make changes to these terms at any time, without telling you, and without your consent. You violated them, Valve removed your games.

Kind of like how if we violate your terms, you remove our games from us.

Sucks to be on the receiving end, doesn't it EA? THIS IS HOW YOU TREAT YOUR CUSTOMERS YOU FUCKS!! HOW DOES IT FEEL TO GET FUCKED BY SOMEBODY BIGGER AND STRONGER THEN YOU?! NOT VERY FUN, IS IT?!?! THIS IS WHAT WE DEAL WITH ALL THE TIME FROM YOU YOU FUCKING PRICKS!!

Ok, I admit. That made me laugh. But please, there's no need to shout.

 

[Slick Samurai]

I like how everyone sees the news that Valve is to blame and goes right back to blaming EA. I guess when it's supposed "Corrupt Publisher" VS the PC gamer love child you can't expect a fair debate.

EDIT: And all this seems eerily similar to the TF2 console situation don't it? Microsoft wanted Valve to charge console players for DLC for TF2. Valve said no and walked away with all of it. So now the PC version of TF2 gets showered with DLC on a monthly basis while the console versions haven't even seen a drop of it for years, and they're still the poster boy company that can do no wrong.

Now, the "I just want to make good games not make money" company Valve suddenly decides it wants a cut of all DLC sold through Steam. EA says no and walks away with all of it. Suddenly the "Big Bad Publisher" is in the fault while actually greedy Valve gets away without any accusations.

And people wonder why I hate Valve.

 

[ResonanceGames]

While Steam is a useful service at times, I don't see it as the end-all be-all savior, holier-than-thou internet messiah of gaming distribution. Just like EA, Steam is a greedy money hungry corporation (you people realize Team Fortress originally was just a free-to-download, f2p mod that Valve took over, re-released as a "full" pay-for-this game and then went to micro-transactions and F2P).

That's not quite true. Valve hired the people who made the Team Fortress mod for Quake and paid them to make Team Fortress Classic for Half-Life (which came with most versions of the game, but could be purchased separately). That same team made Team Fortress 2 from the ground up, which is on tangentially similar to TF and TF classic. Also note that Valve does not shut down free mods using the Team Fortress name, and there are plenty of them out there.

 

[crimsonshrouds]

EA, you accepted the ToS when you signed up your games on Steam. Valve retains the rights to make changes to these terms at any time, without telling you, and without your consent. You violated them, Valve removed your games.

Kind of like how if we violate your terms, you remove our games from us.

Sucks to be on the receiving end, doesn't it EA? THIS IS HOW YOU TREAT YOUR CUSTOMERS YOU FUCKS!! HOW DOES IT FEEL TO GET FUCKED BY SOMEBODY BIGGER AND STRONGER THEN YOU?! NOT VERY FUN, IS IT?!?! THIS IS WHAT WE DEAL WITH ALL THE TIME FROM YOU YOU FUCKING PRICKS!!

Uh.. You ok now? You look like you've been holding back a lot of anger?

It looks to me that ea is trying to screw the companies that sell their games and ignored the TOS.

EA greed will get you.

 

[anthony87]

Silly EA, we all know that Valve can't do bad things.

 

[Worgen]

this still wont be good for ea but it might be good for valve, assuming that ea is telling the truth about how valve wants to sell dlc, this might make them rethink it a bit, I like valve and how steam works but a bit more freedom in how transactions work is... usually nice... I guess

 

[manythings]

What "restrictive terms of service" was there exactly that prevents download off of Steam? I've got to call BS on EA on this part. It cannot possibly be purchasing downloadable content in-game, because many other games allow that including the just added new set of Free-2-Play titles that Valve ENCOURAGES!

Valve basically imposes a "We're the only ones to digitally sell this high profile product" clause. It's not a new concept.

 

[Daverson]

I'd bet my left nut, if they have violated the Steam TOS, they've done it quite intentionally.

I mean, you don't see other companies making huge public spectacles when games get pulled, do you? Hell, you don't see other companies games getting pulled all that often either!

 

[ResonanceGames]

Valve basically imposes a "We're the only ones to digitally sell this high profile product" clause. It's not a new concept.

This is demonstrably false. Tons of games launch simultaneously on D2D, Onlive, Gamer's Gate and Steam.

 

[Korzack]

You know, this whole Origin vs Steam, EA vs Valve thing is one of the few times I'm glad to be a lowely console player. I don't have to worry about where I will get my games.

EDIT: I'm not anti-PC gaming at all. I'm just saying that "Not having to deal with DD services is a plus for me"

True, but then I'm starting to see this as a miniature version of the MS V Sony console skirmish.

 

[raankh]

[snip] Businesses need to make money.

That's not strictly true, although it's a matter of semantics-- in our current system businesses need to make more and more money. If a business earns (revenue-costs) 15 million this year and 14 million the next, they haven't "made" 39 million, they've lost 1 million.

Infinite growth is strange that way.

 

[Bajinga]

While Steam is a useful service at times, I don't see it as the end-all be-all savior, holier-than-thou internet messiah of gaming distribution. Just like EA, Steam is a greedy money hungry corporation (you people realize Team Fortress originally was just a free-to-download, f2p mod that Valve took over, re-released as a "full" pay-for-this game and then went to micro-transactions and F2P). Guaranteed whatever they do, it is for money and not because they give "fans what they want". Corporations are inherently greedy, because who doesn't like money? Valve is no different, while they may put out decent games, with Steam they have more uber-control over you and your gaming experience. Tell me, if you lose connection to your internet that Steam will allow you to play games without it being connected to their servers. (not counting non-Steam bought games) EDIT: apparently this doesn't happen anymore... weird.
I'm not downing on Steam, nor am I downing on EA. They're both corporations and both out for themselves, not the fans. EA is just a bit more honest about it. Valve couches it in "we did this for you" marketing language which tends to improve profit margins, but ultimately is designed to get your money.

I don't quite understand the point that you make here.

You say that Valve is a company out for money, and not in it for the fans.

Well, as much as you may be right that they are in it for money (which companies/businesses aren't?) they do deliver a good service with Steam, and their games are nearly always top standard. So we are getting something in return for the money we give.

I'll adress the Team Fortress Classic issue.

When this mod came out on Quake, a lot of people enjoyed it. So did Valve. You have to empathise with them. Say you were in that position; you had complete control over how popular a good mod got. You would ask people to pay for it, as it is you who got it to where it is.

As for EA being more honest... I'm not so sure. A lot of gamers ahve had a grudge against EA for quite some time now, as they don't put enough effort in their games and a lot of the time, it's been predictable... anyway, in this case, they aren't being more honest; they're making life more difficult for themselves. People won't buy these games unless they are on Steam; a lot of people just don't trust EA anymore.

 

[Sgt Pepper]

Also, IMO, I think that it's a lot much better and easier to sell DLC through Steam instead of selling it from your own.

I agree, I'm gonna pick up the DA2 Legacy DLC soon and whilst, in the grand scheme of things, it's not that big of a deal buying DA2 DLC is more cumbersome than buying through Steam.

Buying Exiled Prince wasn't the most monumental task ever but it was no where near a smooth an experience as picking up the Fallout: New Vegas DLCs on Steam, which was a straightforward and seamless process.

Seriously EA, I'd pay a pound or 2 extra for the DLCs if they were on Steam!

 

[42]

well to look at it from a side that isn't EA hater, from a purely business perspective EA selling a games DLC directly through the game is taking away a cut of the money Valve would normally have when it's on offer through their store. I always thoughy DLC was Steam's strongest point as you don't have to dig around for it, you just have to go to the games store page, and when it's tied to your account, it automatically becomes apart of the game. which saves time from having to re-download them seperately if you un-install a game and want to play it later. Unfortunately EA if we look at it from a conspiracy perspective, they would probably would have violated the terms on purpose, so it could you know help their newly launched Origin service. In all honesty Steam is great as it just does everything right. Multiplayer is fantastic on steam, and i'd say that it's a better DRM then any stupid thing EA or any other publisher can come up with.

 

[manythings]

Valve basically imposes a "We're the only ones to digitally sell this high profile product" clause. It's not a new concept.

This is demonstrably false. Tons of games launch simultaneously on D2D, Onlive, Gamer's Gate and Steam.

The DLC thing says otherwise. Buy with Valve or fuck you is the message.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Can anyone be sure it just wasn't a matter of good taste in games on Valve's part? I know if I operated a digital distribution platform for games I'd insist that weren't stagnant piles of maggot covered dog shit before offering to sell them. Sadly, Dragon Age 2 wouldn't make the cut in that case as to call it a pile of maggot covered dog shit would be giving both maggots and dog shit a huge disservice.

Meanwhile Steam carries FFXI. L4D2 (Which we all seem to have forgotten, had even less additions than the average present day iteration of a CoD game. Ohhhh, melee weapons and new maps! That isn't just DLC! That deserves a $50 release!). Champions Online, which was like City of Heroes, but worse in every way except customization. New Vegas, which was the one of the buggiest games ever. Black Ops. MW2. F3AR. Fable III. Nancy Drew games. Hunted: The Demon's Forge. And just many, many more absolutely fantastic games! But no no, you're SOOOO right.

To be honest, I was searching for a post like this, because I knew somebody would make it and I knew it would be the most asinine thing ever. Wouldn't you believe it? I was right on both counts!

 

[ResonanceGames]

Valve basically imposes a "We're the only ones to digitally sell this high profile product" clause. It's not a new concept.

This is demonstrably false. Tons of games launch simultaneously on D2D, Onlive, Gamer's Gate and Steam.

The DLC thing says otherwise. Buy with Valve or fuck you is the message.

No, that's the message you parsed from some vague statements made by EA.

There are plenty of other companies selling DLC for Steam games outside of Steam that aren't in violation of the TOS and haven't been kicked off. I presented a pretty realistic scenario of what probably happened earlier in the thread. You're jumping to conclusions with very little evidence.