EA Titles and Steam

A quick look at the unfolding drama. Well, not really drama...

By ZehDon on July 28, 2011 7:54:28 AM from

As some people are already aware, several EA Titles have been pulled from Steam by Valve.
The reason is that these titles - namely Crysis 2 and Dragon Age II - have in-game options for purchasing DLC; you don't buy these games' DLC items through Steam, you buy them through the game's interal menus and/or store. This is violation of Steam's newly updated Terms of Service Agreement.
What's interesting about this is that when items are purchased in this way, Valve do not take their 30% share of the sale price because Steam doesn't handle the transaction - the game's producers/developers take all of the profit. The reason I find this interesting that Valve are reacting to what is essentially their own business model - and clearly, they're not fond of it when they're on the other side.

Steamworks, Valve's DRM solution, locks a game to Steam. If you buy a Steamworks title - such as Fallout New Vegas, Civilization V, Call of Duty: Black Ops - regardless of where or how you buy the title, it's locked to the Steam Store Client. If Impulse sold a Steamworks title, they'd simply be selling a Steam Registration Key, because when you went to download the game through Impulse, it would simply open Steam and start downloading your game there. Valve cut out every other digital distribution service with this model, and most major PC Titles use Steamworks. They're developing a monopoly.

Now that developers and producers have started to cut Valve out of the DLC Market - which is frankly not that big on the PC Platform - using Valve's own tactics, Valve reacts by simply denying service. Our way or the highway.

What's important to note is that EA sells its titles on every major digitial distribution service - they're not stripping their titles away to make room for EA's exclusive Origin service. While future titles will undoubtably be locked to Origin the same way that titles today are locked to Steam, current EA titles are available basically everywhere - it's apart of their business model. EA isn't forcing Steam's hand - Dragon Age II in particular made it's intentions clear on the very first day it was launched.

What do people think of this? Has Valve started to become the 800 pound monster in the room many have predicted? Is EA doing what EA is best known for?

Personally, this doesn't really affect me, but I don't like it's implication. Valve have some of the worst customer service in the industry (funnily enough, second only to EA's horrendeous customer service) and it doesn't surprise me that it leaves it's customers out in the cold. Steam versions of those removed titles will no longer receive updates, though they do still function. Due to the multiplayer nature of Crysis 2, it means all Steam customers can't play Crysis 2 multiplayer without manually updating their game - which they can't due to the way Steam works.
Steam is little more than a discount store to me. I refuse to buy Steamworks enabled games, because I can see the future where Valve is the only way to play your games, and if you don't dance the way they like it, you lose all of your games. Instantly. Forever. No appeals. No second chances. Gone. I don't buy games on Steam unless I'd be happy to kiss them goodbye.

Comments?

+115 Karma | 22 Replies

Steam is just another "marketplace" app, I don't care one bit if I have to get another one to play some game. Steam is merely something evil well-done.

When evil fights evil, hope for a double KO.

A couple of things here. This is pretty much the same policy Apple uses for in-app transactions for iPhone apps.

It also looks like EA has decided to play hardball, and Battlefield 3 won't be on Steam at all. It will be pretty much everywhere else (including Origin). Origin was also the only place to buy The Old Republic in DD Form when it first went on sale, so they seem to want to push it some.

I've always felt that the Valve monopoly fears were overblown because it's not hard to set up your own store if you have the games to put on it, and EA is a company that certainly does. If Activision decides to do something similar with the next Modern Warfare (and they also have the means to do it), suddenly Steam's not looking so dominant anymore.

But now that their own million-dollar networks are coming online, they want to re-negotiate. A flat economy and reported losses have not helped, so of course they're pointing at Steam's "onerous policies" as one place they can cut cost.

I think in-game DLC sales are an end run around Steam's policy. What really needs to happen is Steam needs to re-evaluate their stance on Steamworks integration. I don't know for a fact that Valve requires Steamworks to be on all Steam-playable games regardless of where they're sold. I know smaller indie devs are not required to do that, most of them choose to stay with a Steam-only version because of the effort and lack of pay off involved in creating a non-Steam version. What the policy is for AAA publishers, I don't know.

Still, I find it really hard to believe that Valve "forced" EA's hand. EA has been sending signals left and right that they want to centralize all their offerings under their own banner. This seems more like a convenient excuse to criticize Steam (perhaps rightfully) so EA can move yet another high-profile game off of Steam with a sound (to gamers) reasoning. BF3 is going to inaugurate Origin in October and I think EA wants to lock in exclusivity for as many of their titles as they can, by hook or by crook.

Anyways, in-game DLC sales are only an end run around the sales agreement if the contract specifies it. Perhaps its time Valve caught up to the technology themselves, or satisfy themselves with the game sales and the DLC that developers didn't bother to create an in-game service to handle. Because let's be honest. Very few games out of the whole can afford to have an elaborate account system to handle player accounts, credit card transactions and all that BS for in-game purchases. That's all the AAA publishers obsession with DLC and nickel and dimeing players. That doesn't reflect the majority of the market IMO. So I think Steam's policy by and large is ok, and this is publishers flexing their muscles because they (SHOCK!) have games this year and next that people are actually excited about it. If they can force Valve to accept some looser restrictions on Steamworks integration, it will probably be good for everyone. But publishers have the freedom to tell Steam "no" just like everyone else. It's not like they are a lack of options in this area, as opposed to 5 or 6 years ago.

Quoting Nenjin,

reply 4

I think this is less of an issue of "Valve's ebil monopoly" and more of the fact that the publishers finally take DD seriously now. 4 or 5 years ago, Valve didn't have to worry about these issues and I think Steamworks was developed with that in mind. When Steam turned out to be a money maker for everyone, the publishers dove in to get their share, and did so happily, for several years.

But now that their own million-dollar networks are coming online, they want to re-negotiate. A flat economy and reported losses have not helped, so of course they're pointing at Steam's "onerous policies" as one place they can cut cost.

Yes. This one of the reasons I won't accept steams way of doing things. They take complete control over a gamers license to play. Since gamers can't make backups, they become dependent on steam staying in business. Some people tell me that steam can never fail. I disagree. This latest incident is yet another clear example of how quickly steam can lose its edge. There is much more, such as steams servers being unable to handle current demand, + rising energy costs, net neutrality issues, ISP throttling, ++.

So games like Civ5 and Fallout: New Vegas that are steam exclusives, will never be bought by me. It's not a matter of steams evil empire, its simply a matter of actionable ownership over software usage licenses. There's other considerations of why I don't like steams methods. But control of the usage license trumps them all.

I want digital distribution. But I want actionable control over my usage licenses more. Only GOG.com gives both.

And will probably be the only one do it for the foreseeable future. EA, Activision/Blizzard and Ubi aren't anymore interested in giving us more control over our licenses than Valve is.

My issue, being a satisfied Steam user, is that where as now, I have two places where my games are located (Steam's cloud and my hard disks next to me), in the next 3 years my games may be stored in 4 or 5 places. Steam's cloud, EA's cloud, Ubi's cloud, Blizzard/Activision's cloud, THQ's cloud, in addition to any other Impulse purchases I make, GoG purchases, or any of the other half dozen DD retailers I DON'T yet use.

I mean, am I the only one that sees this as a negative? Steam set the precedent, but now that the battle lines are being drawn over exclusivity and rights, it's going to fall on the consumer to manage all these accounts. And in the wake of all the hacking nonsense? Who exactly feels secure and comfortable putting their info and their accounts out there into the hands of this many people all in the name of gaming?

I've been a big proponent of DD up until these last few years, but it's starting to escalate to a level that makes me feel both worn out and put in the middle of something I shouldn't honestly have to be affected by. There's no good solution for me here, because some people will always hate Steam, and they honestly don't have any right to a monopoly on DD. In a perfect world, we'd have a benevolent dictator of video games who would keep them in trust for us to play after we bought them. But that ain't reality, even if you're a Valve fan boy. So all that's left is the proliferation of DD networks and consumers getting farther and farther away from actual ownership of their games as they're spread out over half a dozen companies and networks.

And the AAA industry wonders why indie games that sell you an executable with no online validation are doing so good these days. A free rogue-like may not be Battlefield 3, but damn if it isn't fun, free and you're not required to do 10 things to play it or fool with it yourself.

For people who like Steam and don't mind its restrictions, it's been a great service. For people like me who find the restrictions of Steam a deal-killer, it's been a massive headache. I've skipped many games I'd otherwise loved to have played because they're Steam exclusives, and it's only getting worse. Each of us has a different preference and comfort zone with regards to these services, and the underlying problem is that we as consumers aren't being given any choice in the matter.

Now that everyone and their dog wants to build a walled garden, I think the Steam fans may finally be on the same side as guys like me. The problem isn't Steam, it's that we're forced to use it. With every major publisher mandating their own competing service for their own titles, that's going to be a lot of fragmentation and a lot of gates and a lot of services you don't want to use. I just want one fewer service than you do, and what we all want is consumer choice. That's what we're losing here.

And the AAA industry wonders why indie games that sell you an executable with no online validation are doing so good these days.

For me, this is the ideal. Give me an executable and leave me alone. I'm willing to live with platforms like Impulse for patching purposes, but the moment you start telling me how I can and cannot use my game you can say goodbye to my business.

Don't like it at all! Monopolies are dangerous and must be stopped.

Having games on five different DD sites though....ugh!

If I have to choose, then five different DD sites are better than one getting an evil monopoly like STEAM seem to be doing.

The ultimate way would be like Nenjin says but good luck with that....

I want a social network like STEAM where you collect achievements and compare with your friends. Chat with your friends and easily invite them to games. Seeing which game they are in is also cool.

As for GOG with just getting an .exe and that's it, no. Not acceptable. Without achievements and STEAMS community it's not worth to buy the game.

For an example. I played Puzzle Quest: Challenge of the Warlords. I bought Puzzle Quest II on STEAM to be able to collect achievements, see stats, compare with friends and this whole community thing.

If Puzzle Quest II would have been on GOG, then what difference would it be from a pirate copy?

Quoting Campaigner,

reply 8

If Puzzle Quest II would have been on GOG, then what difference would it be from a pirate copy?

A clear conscious knowing that you did the right thing and bought the game. B/c your an upstanding example of the human species.

Just saying.

As for GOG with just getting an .exe and that's it, no. Not acceptable. Without achievements and STEAMS community it's not worth to buy the game.

So what's ideal for you is unacceptable for me, and what's ideal for me is unacceptable for you. This is why consumer choice is important.

For me, I want no strings attached. I could care less about achievements or social networks. For you, the strings aren't a big deal and the features that come with them are attractive. Neither of us want to be forced into a service that conflicts with our priorities, but in the future we're all going to lose out it seems.

A clear conscious knowing that you did the right thing and bought the game. B/c your an upstanding example of the human species.

This.

Quoting Darvin3,

reply 10

For me, I want no strings attached. I could care less about achievements or social networks.

I am the same way, Darvin, and I agree, consumer choice is slowly, but surely being taken away by invasive DRM.

Not if companies follow the gamer's bill of rights. =]

quoting post

Steam versions of those removed titles will no longer receive updates, though they do still function.

Since "day one" game are usually filed with bug who sometime make the game impossible to play of finish... that update are a service you pay for when you buy a game ( when a game is released, dev have already calculate the cost of support and included it in the price tag )... will it mean that Steam will refound the people with game removed?

Time that Impulse become a worldwide distributor and not a "US only" for major title... 90% of my recent game are from Steam because i cannot buy them on Impulse due to these infamous "US-only"...

I miss the time when i own the game that i buy... now, you license it but distributor can change the license term when they wish... i have 20 years old game that i continue to use, who was update during 20 years... how long will last all the game that i have buy via steam ( or any other digital distributor ) ?

Quoting Nenjin,

reply 4

It doesn't, and it's pretty easy to demonstrate that. There's a ton of games on Steam that don't use Steamworks. Batman: Arkham Asylum uses GFWL instead of Steamworks, and I have the Steam copy of that. There's no Steamworks in Recettear. Fallout 3 didn't use Steamworks (but New Vegas does).

Steamworks is the service that provides achievements, cloud saves, and stuff like that. It's NOT the thing that provides access to the Steam overlay (Steam's DRM wrapper does that, and Steam applications do require that). Steamworks is an entirely value-added thing that developers like to use because it saves them from having to build that stuff.

Where people get confused is that while you don't have to use Steamworks to sell on Steam, you *do* need to include Steam if you use Steamworks. That's because Steamworks is built into Steam, so in order for the game to access it Steam has to be running. No doubt that was done deliberately as Valve gives Steamworks away for free. What they get out of it is Steam on more peoples computers.

Quoting Stant123,

reply 12

Not if companies follow the gamer's bill of rights. =]

As long as the conglomerates like EA continue to ignore the Gamer's Bill of Rights, by dismantle the good studios and assimilating them, and not caring about us gamers, then the Gamer's Bill of Rights won't do a whole lot.

Quoting Zeta1127,

reply 15

Ofcourse. The Gamers Bill of Rights today got the same authority as if the native americans published a new constitution which they would say is for the whole of America. It would get laughed at & ignored.

Quoting Campaigner,

reply 16

It get laughed at & ignored.

At least there is one company that understands such ideals, unfortunately they were the very same people who came up with the ideals.

On the other hand, EA has already killed two great studios in Westwood Studios and Pandemic Studios, because EA bought them out and dismantled them.

Quoting Zeta1127,

reply 17

At least there is one company that understands such ideals, unfortunately they were the very same people who came up with the ideals.

On the other hand, EA has already killed two great studios in Westwood Studios and Pandemic Studios, because EA bought them out and dismantled them.

When I started typing this, I thought I was gonna win easily and that Stardock violated like five points. I knew that from memory. But now that I've checked it, it seems you're mostly right....

Talking about Elemental: War of Magic.

1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don’t work with their computers for a full refund - FULFILLED

2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state - LOL

3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game’s release - FULFILLED

4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game - FULFILLED

5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will play adequately on that computer - DON'T KNOW

6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won’t install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their consent - FULFILLED

7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time - FULFILLED

8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers - FULFILLED

9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play - FULFILLED

10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play - FULFILLED

This is one of those instances where I just don't understand how I could be convinced I was gonna win....

Verdict: Only one, possibly two fails. Very good.

Quoting Campaigner,

reply 18

This is one of those instances where I just don't understand how I could be convinced I was gonna win....only 2 fails. Very good. But still, shouldn't ALL points be fulfilled?

2 fails? You didn't list any fails.

So let's see, #2 you list LOL. I can't speak for elemental, but Sins was released in a finished state. It ran exactly as advertized, and did everything they claimed on the box. That's a pass.

#5 you list as don't know. You count a point you have no idea of the answer to as a fail on their part? Are you serious? Your inability to figure out the answer is not a fail on their part, it's a fail on your part. Again, I don't know about elemental, but Sins, my laptop doesn't meet two of the minimum requirements to play the game yet it plays it just as well as my desktop which blows the recommended requirements out of the water. I'd consider that a passing score as well.

So they score a 10 out of 10.

This is what happens when you start typing and then change the main point and the ending halfway through....I erased the beginning and endtext and then forgot to add back which game I was talking about.

LOL is the answer to if War of Magic was released in a finished state. It classify as a fail....

The other, well it's the only one I don't know about. Have read some concerning reports on the forums but not so much so I can't be certain. If trustworthy people on the forums say how it runs on the minspecs then I can rate the point.

Sins may fulfill all the points but I got no experience with that game (except the official videos) and I focused on Elemental.

Quoting Stant123,

reply 19

2 fails? You didn't list any fails.

So let's see, #2 you list LOL. I can't speak for elemental, but Sins was released in a finished state. It ran exactly as advertized, and did everything they claimed on the box. That's a pass.

#5 you list as don't know. You count a point you have no idea of the answer to as a fail on their part? Are you serious? Your inability to figure out the answer is not a fail on their part, it's a fail on your part. Again, I don't know about elemental, but Sins, my laptop doesn't meet two of the minimum requirements to play the game yet it plays it just as well as my desktop which blows the recommended requirements out of the water. I'd consider that a passing score as well.

So they score a 10 out of 10.

WoM was released in nothing resembling a finished state. The on-disk version was so broken that reviewers refused to review it and waited for patches. The zero-day patch couldn't do things like Alt+Tab, had constant OOM errors, and was only "finished" in the sense that there was a game in there somewhere. Oh yeah, and the multiplayer didn't work at all for the first month. This was absolutely failed.

As for the system requirements... kind of? It works, but you can expect a lot of problems unless you play in cloth map mode (that is, without 3d). That also means no tactical combat, you have to auto-resolve. Of course that's on a pretty marginal computer, so I don't know how you want to score that.

Well, like I said, I was speaking in terms of Sins and not the others because I don't have those, but as per right number one, if you so felt that the game didn't function at a reasonable level of performance, you could, within a reasonable amount of time, return your game for a full refund.

Do keep in mind, those rights listed above aren't completely accurate. http://www.gamersbillofrights.org/

The Forums Are Now Closed!

The content will remain as a historical reference, thank you.

EA Titles and Steam

A quick look at the unfolding drama. Well, not really drama...