So a few weeks ago, news broke that EA wouldn't be selling Battlefield 3 on Steam, much to the chagrin of many PC gamers. At the time, there was no explanation given, however we've now got some info as to why EA won't be putting the upcoming FPS title on Valve's service -- and it seems to be related to Steam's patching and downloadable content policies again.
In a forum posting on EA's message board, a staffer claims that "Steam has adopted a set of restrictive terms of service which limit how developers interact with customers to deliver patches and other downloadable content. No other download service has adopted these practices." This does sound consistent with EA's reasoning as to why Crysis 2 and Dragon Age II were withdrawn from Steam a few weeks ago. I wish we knew a bit more about what these supposed "restrictive terms and limits" were all about.
It's still not so cut and dry, though. The posting does say that Battlefield 3 will be available at "over 100 other digital retailers" so it's not strictly speaking an Origin exclusive. The posting also claims "We hope to work out an agreement where Steam can carry Battlefield 3" so there maybe some resolution to this situation.
Way I see it, gamers like their games on Steam and aren't keen on using other download services. Yes, it may be slightly irrational but I wonder how long EA would keep their games off Steam when they start to look at sales.
EA confirms no Battlefield 3 for Steam [Planet Battlefield]
Contest:
9:00 PM on 08.06.2011 | 
Really no other publishers has this kind of problems with steam when it comes to DLC, and the only reason EA is making a big deal out of it is to make there "Origin" service look good by comparison.
If they cared about anything other than profits they would quit their moaning and put their DLC on Origin for Origin users, and on Steam for Steam users, and get rid of that bullshit points system.
I've never had apronlem patching games on steam.
You're move
I've never had apronlem patching games on steam.
You're move
Fuck posting from a phone.
You took the words right out of my mouth ... Exactly how I feel
I'm no fan of EA, but I fully support anything DICE does and really, Origin is only a download client, not a 'platform' like Steam is. Plus you can download it at plenty of places, including the king of customer service, Amazon.
Please don't make no Steam support the #1 reason you don't buy BF3. It really is an absurd reason after this statement.
And yet EA is the *only* publisher to complain about it.
Its an absurd reason after ea issues a bullshit statement? Okay then, sure.
*rolls eyes then goes to play all his games that get updated perfectly fine in a timely manner on steam*
Don't get your hopes up, DICE is great, but I played the Alpha ... anddd lets just say some of my expectations were crushed. I'm waiting for the Beta to see if I'm going to buy it...
I hate to say it but as long us console gaming's popularity keeps growing, companies like EA and more are gonna keep screwing over pc gamers.
Now I just hope BF3 lives up to the hype and delivers in terms of quality and sales.
I'm not buying BF3 because its not on Steam. u mad? u mad.
That's a major difference from having a publisher distribute already pay-for DLC through Steam. And Steam asking devs to send patches to them for distribution makes sense. Keeps the game up to date for everyone, even those who would buy it for the first time after X number of patches.
I think EA's just being butthurt that they can't force Origin on Steam users.
And what word would that be?
I have no idea what Valve ever did to earn those rose colored glasses you guys are seeing them through, but they're a corporation just like EA or anyone else in the industry. They're not a charity. They do what they need to do to make money. This really isn't a case of David and Goliath, and some of you guys need to realize that neither EA nor Valve is your friend.
I won't buy it because it's not on Steam, but because your Origin account can be cancelled due to inactivity.
One corporation id clearly better then the other guess you missed that.
Steam is all well and good for games like Magicka and Amnesia getting exposure, but EA doesn't need Steam's platform for BF3 to be successful.
Valve earned those glasses because so far they have managed to maintain a stance as the lesser of the evils. Hell I was dragged kicking and screaming against my will to Steam.
So far their DRM is acceptible
(its the best of the worst...)
Their download policies are great
(Hell I still remember when Digital stores gave you a one shot and you're screwed chance to download what you bought)
Their selection is great.
(Lots of indie games and with the disdain publishers are racking up, I'm to the point where I'll buy a hand full of indies over AAA cookiecuter titles, frothing over with abusive DRM)
Steam is consistent, for the most part.
Yes Valve has made some decisions that have put me off, they certainly are not perfect. But for the most part they earned every shred of respect I have for them.
And seeing as I am in the midst of a 7+ year EA boycott, I'm inclined to give Valve the benefit of the doubt unless EA can convince me otherwise. And let me tell you that gonna take a damn lot of convincing.
- Refused to support Dreamcast due to Sega/2K making quality sports games
- Made sure Nintendo, Sony and anyone else couldn't have access to most sports licenses
- Fears the used market, so they cut content as an "incentive."
- Fears the used market, so they create "online passes."
-Still fears 2k on the Basketball front, so much they didn't bother competing last year.
- Doesn't seem to make baseball games, as Sony and 2k do those better.
- Seems to have a problem with Sony and MS getting a cut on DLC, too.
So should I really be surprised they feel the same about Steam and come up with similar reasoning to make Steam look like the bad guy here?
EA doesn't want to live in a world where they have to face direct competition, just a world where everyone kisses their ass.
None of that of course has anything to do with the other games or their dlc.
EA's 'eh'. They aren't offensively terrible (like, say, Activision), but they certainly aren't 'good' to the consumer.
Of course, I have no interest in BF3 or Origin, so I'm 'biased' in the matter. DICE seem pretty decent from the couple games I've played, and the dickery seems to come from EA more so.
How it will really work (or how I personally HOPE it turns out): Oh shit, our sales for PC are terrible--time to put our games back on Steam.
A swing and a miss.
Worlddoes,
The maim issue is greed and maxing it.
Also, "Over 100 digital retailers"? Um, I'm pretty sure there's nowhere close to that number. Let's see, there's Steam, Direct2Drive, Origin, Good Old Games (which won't sell Battlefield 3), Amazon, OnLive and...? Maybe 5-10 others that nobody ever heard of.
Also, I doubt there's any difficulty in publishing a DLC on Steam, just take a look at magicka, they released new DLC practicaly every month since the launch date, and no one complained about anything. Actually, I've never seen a developer complain about steam, quite the contrary, you can find tales and tales of indie devs who earn enough with steam to keep making more titles.
Anyway, excuses, excuses, excuses...
And they wanted to beat mw3, lol, good job.
They want to support their customers directly through in-game means. This is great when they want to release the game on other digital retailers other than steam. It lets EA support all their customers instead of having to provide a limited service in order to cater to steam customers.
That's not to say that Steam is the evil here.
Steam probably has these restrictions in place because they want to provide a better for their own customers. Someone who uses steam more than anything else would probably want it on the steam store rather than EA store.
It all comes down to supporting their own customers. It might work if Steam lets EA have the in-game support, but EA lets steam sell whatever DLC is released for the title, which is what I personally hope for.