EA decides you are required to have an Origin account

[Jagos]

Link (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/08/retail-copies-of-battlefield-3-will-still-require-origin.ars?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+arstechnica/index+(Ars+Technica+-+Featured+Content))

So you thought that if you got the retail version, you could put it on Steam, no problems right? You thought that you wouldn't have to upload another game platform just for EA games?

Well, you thought wrong.

In the "you've got to be kidding me" dept, comes EA Games charging through a very poorly aimed platform service that will surely split their audience between EA and Steam.

Gone would be your friends list, added value by being able to play other games, or even the list of games you have on Steam. Instead, think of this as akin to shoehorning people into a service that isn't needed.

Honestly, why doe EA still exist?

[Ramary]

Cause shit like this works.

Valve proved it with Half-life 2, and I do call Origin "Steam from 7 years ago".


EDIT: Origin is required for the The Old Republic as well, thought I bring that up since there is a few people who want it here.

[Azisien]

http://images.memegenerator.net/images/408x/131882.jpg

Hey I bet they'll do it for Mass Effect 3 too.

[Jagos]

They already said that all EA games are going onto the Origin service. They also took their games OFF of Steam, with no plans to allow them back.

[Ramary]

Hey I bet they'll do it for Mass Effect 3 too.

All Future PC releases put of EA will require Origin.

Have fun with that, I will be in my EA boycott box, all alone.

[Ramary]

They already said that all EA games are going onto the Origin service. They also took their games OFF of Steam, with no plans to allow them back.

Well not ALL games, but they don't want to put DLC on steam store, which is a new rule in the Steam TOS when F2P games showed up. Everyone, even GFWL, accepted, but EA.

[rpgdemon]

In other news: Valve games require a Steam account.

Why is it only terrible when EA does it?

[Jagos]

In other news: Valve games require a Steam account.

Why is it only terrible when EA does it?

Link (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/08/battlefield-3-not-coming-to-steam-ea-provides-good-reason.ars)

"EA offers games, including Battlefield 3, to all major digital download sites. In doing so, our goal is to not only reach the widest possible global audience with our games, but also to provide ongoing customer support, patches, and great new content," a post to the company's official forum stated. "We are intent on providing Battlefield 3 players with the best possible experience no matter where they purchase or play the game, and are happy to partner with any download service that does not restrict our ability to connect directly with consumers."

See a big gaping hole in this story? The one where 70 million Steam users are forgotten about? Yeah...

[Azisien]

In other news: Valve games require a Steam account.

Why is it only terrible when EA does it?

Because, long story short, Steam did it first. I'm okay with running one game platform on my PC. I don't want to run 1 game platform per game publisher.

Edit: Of course, the ideal scenario here is in Steam's hands. I wish they would change their TOS and allow integration.

[Kim]

See a big gaping hole in this story? The one where 70 million Steam users are forgotten about? Yeah...

Actually, Steam is the one who took EA games off their service, and they did so because EA was selling DLC in-game as opposed to just through the Steam store, and Valve was upset they were only getting wads of cash as opposed to ALL THE CASH.

[Ramary]

In other news: Valve games require a Steam account.

Why is it only terrible when EA does it?

Remember when I said "steam from 7 years ago"

Steam 7 years ago was HORRENDOUS. But people put up with it to play HL2.
And people will put up with it again to play BF3.

Then other publishers will get the idea of having their own service since it worked with EA, and the rest will follow. Imgine each and every publisher having a Steam, and you need a login in for each.

Pain in the ass right? That is why people hate it. At least steam has other games besides valve (and a billion other features).

[Azisien]

Well I do want Valve to have all the cash, actually. What a dilemma!

[Kim]

Meanwhile...

~console gamer dance party~

[Jagos]

Actually, Steam is the one who took EA games off their service, and they did so because EA was selling DLC in-game as opposed to just through the Steam store, and Valve was upset they were only getting wads of cash as opposed to ALL THE CASH.

That's still secondary. At this point, I'm more likely to believe EA pulled away first thinking that they can do the service themselves.

The EA diehards will enjoy Origin, but how many people are going to trust Origin when it's taken away their home of Steam and has a horrible history of DRM on their games?

[Ramary]

Meanwhile...

~console gamer dance party~

Why are you dancing? You are already in the shit hole.


(and now the thread begins its derail into console vs PC gaming)

[rpgdemon]

To be fair, Steam kicked them out. Rightfully or not, EA wanted to sell DLC through Origin, and Steam was like, "NOPE! NOT ON OUR WATCH!", if I have my facts straight.

[Meister]

and now the thread begins its derail into console vs PC gaming
and ends.

[greed]

So uh, guess I'm not buying EA games except on consoles now?


Edit: Hahahaha I'd left this sitting for ages and everything after Azisien's post hadn't been posted. Woo, big ninja.

[Azisien]

To be fair, Steam kicked them out. Rightfully or not, EA wanted to sell DLC through Origin, and Steam was like, "NOPE! NOT ON OUR WATCH!", if I have my facts straight.

I see it going down something like a relationship fight.

Steam has a system for distributing game DLC, heck I was quoting it in the Mortal Kombat thread, lots of games use it.

EA decided they want to distribute the DLC for Crysis 2 (and BF3, and I guess most other future EA titles) outside of Steam, and that violated new TOS Valve made up for Steam fairly recently, since having the DLC go through Steam = more money for Steam.

Steam: "Fine, I won't let you be with me!"
EA Games: "Fine, we didn't want to be with you anyway! You're too controlling!"
Steam: "Fine!"
EA Games: "Fine!" *door slam*
Steam Users: D:

[Ramary]

Since a lot of people are not sure of the entire story (that we know of) of the EA games being removed from steam, I will explain.

In story form

One day, at Valve Castle, the 13 men who make Steam Cannons such a magical place for games decided that they could invite the Free2Play games. They went to His Royal Roundness, Gabe. They interrupted his daily work of pressing a button marked "Delay Half-Life 3" over and over to ask his permission for this. He said yes, however to host the games, they will need some sort of way to make money, or else there would be a net lost for them. The 13 said they would ask that the game's DLC and microtransctions...

A. Be run though steam, and therefore steam gets its usual cut for items being sold there.
OR
B. A small cut of all transactions in the in-game stores be given to steam.

The Large One said this would work, and the 13 went to the Lawyer up in the Tower to make a new Tome of Servitude for this to work. The Lawyer informed them that they would have to use this rule on all games, not just the F2P or else it would be illegal. The 13 said it would have to do, and they finalized the new TOS.

As the Free2Play games launched from the steam cannons, a messenger went to the other great game kingdoms to informed them of the change. They all accepted the new Tome, even Emperor M$ of the Games for Windows Live wasteland, who considered Valve Castle his mortal foe, for he too like the money coming from the Steam consuming noblemen.

However, when the messenger approached the the obsidian gates of Baron EA, he got no answer when he called for him. Curious he entered though the back, which was open for some reason, and saw a terrible sight. A Steam Cannon! But it look old and busted. Upon further inspection, it was clearly an old model form at least 7 years ago. He saw that Steam was crossed out, and it read Origin Cannon. The messenger tried to leave, but behind him loomed EA. The baron asked "Why are you here puppet of Fatso the Huge?" the messenger gave him the new TOS. The baron looked at it and shouted with rage "GIVE MY EASY DLC MONEY AWAY?! THEY HAVE NO RIGHT!". The messenger informed the baron, then he would have to remove the games. The baron looked at him, and in a quick move, removed his neck. The baron had a thought, "Why should I look like the villain, I will do my business as usual, and not agree. They will have to force me out, and when they do, they will look like the thief!". The baron laughed as he set his plan into motion, readying his champions three, Battlefield, Star Wars, and a 3rd Mass Effect.

The 13 felt a great disturbance in the Cloud, they knew the messenger was dead. They had become aware of the Baron's plan, and they went to the Lawyer in the Tower to find a way around. Sadly he informed them that it could not be done, less others feel they deserve the special treatment as well. So they had no choice, they banished from the castle the Sons of Crysis and Dragon Age. The Baron will have his way, whatever the 13 like it or not.

And then I make another Gabe is fat joke, and here we are.

[Grandmaster_Skweeb]

I think the big issue here is because it is EA. EA has a fantastic history of..y'know...giving everything they get their hands on a bad case of pink sock-itis.

I'll be genuinely surprised if what they pull off with an Origin...client..thing works as intended instead of EA just being EA doin that EA thang.

[Lost in Time]

The one thing I'm worried about is that EA has had some shitty history with download managers before. Now I'm sure they learned their lesson, but I still can't help but have that looming fear that I won't be able to re-download it in 6 months.

[Yrcrazypa]

My issue with this is if EA is successful with Origin, every other major company is going to want to try making their own platform. Activision will almost certainly do this if EA does well.

[Jagos]

My issue with this is if EA is successful with Origin, every other major company is going to want to try making their own platform. Activision will almost certainly do this if EA does well.

I don't see it happening. Yes, Ubisoft already has their own platform but how much money are they losing in ignoring the Steam giant?

[Melfice]

I don't see it happening. Yes, Ubisoft already has their own platform but how much money are they losing in ignoring the Steam giant?

Not very much, actually.
Ubisoft is happily representing itself on Steam.

[Jagos]

And that's yet another reason to ignore them... You need Uplay + Steam to have an account there?

After all of my deals with Warhammer going bust, I'm going to pass.

[Melfice]

Admittedly, as far as I'm aware, I don't have any Ubisoft games on my PC so I don't have any first-hand knowledge about it, but isn't Uplay something absolutely and completely optional?

I know that you can access it on the console versions of Assassin's Creed 2 and Brotherhood, but I'm fairly certain I wasn't forced to sign up for it at all.

EDIT: I mean, it's not even a proper download platform I think? It's just something you can access in-game to give you some stupid bonus things for achievements you achieve. EDIT ADDENDUM: Oh, and I guess you can access help for when you get stuck, or something. Shit, i don't even know. It's NOTHING compared to Origin though, let alone Steam.

[Jagos]

When I was reading about their new Driver game, it allows you to unlock the multiplayer mode if you bought it brand new. Technically, it's a $10 deal ripoff that I just see no point in wasting my time with. It's just unnecessary stuff.

BTW, Ubisoft? Scott Pilgrim on Steam. Get on that!

[Melfice]

Yeah, but that bit is remarkably similar to how the Cerberus Network works.

I mean, I think you needed to access your PC for that as well? To link it to your EA or BioWare account... I don't even fully remember how that worked.

[Aldurin]

My hope for this is that EA fucks up their attempt at bringing Origin to power again and lose more money than they would have it they let Steam take the standard cut. Then they apologize and try to get all of their games back on Steam. Both companies make shitloads of money (Valve obviously with more) and we get our games without multiplatform bullshit.

[Aerozord]

Because, long story short, Steam did it first. I'm okay with running one game platform on my PC. I don't want to run 1 game platform per game publisher.

Edit: Of course, the ideal scenario here is in Steam's hands. I wish they would change their TOS and allow integration.

monopolies are bad.

and I DONT want all my games tied to one program. There have been times steam bugs out on me and suddenly all my games are out of commision

I hate how many companies force me to launch through steam, I dont want my single player games forcibly connect me to a multiplayer network.

I want my options

[Bells]

wait, but doesn't steam have an Offline mode that allows you to launch any game on your pc without having to be online?

[Osterbaum]

It does.

[Aerozord]

wait, but doesn't steam have an Offline mode that allows you to launch any game on your pc without having to be online?

It does.

that no longer functions, I tried to launch New Vegas while my internet was acting up and got hit with "this game cannot launch in offline mode" meaning it is a constant internet connection game

[MuMu]

Offline New Vegas works fine for me.

[Krylo]

Aero, it's not that I want to call you a liar or anything, but I literally just restarted Steam in offline mode and then fired up New Vegas with no problems.

[Kim]

I've found offline mode with Steam a bit dodgy at times due to the whole cloud saving thing because I tried to load up Bit.Trip Beat offline and because it couldn't access the cloud I had to start on the first level, and then it saved that and when I was online again I think that overrode my cloud save. It was a fuckin' mess.

[Kerensky287]

monopolies are bad.

and I DONT want all my games tied to one program. There have been times steam bugs out on me and suddenly all my games are out of commision

I hate how many companies force me to launch through steam, I dont want my single player games forcibly connect me to a multiplayer network.

I want my options

I agree that monopolies are bad. That's why if they ever stop selling PC games retail, then I'd be happy about Origin et al. But Steam does not have a monopoly on the "getting games to people" service. They have a monopoly (kinda) on digital distribution, which is a very different thing.

The reason why monopolies are bad (for the consumer at least) is because the corporation with the monopoly has all the supply, so they can set the price point. There's no competition, so there's nowhere to go for a superior product.

But in this case, nobody HAS a superior product, and Steam has no extra fees or requirements that would push consumers to a different provider. I love steam because it consolidates all my games in one place, updates automatically, lets me chat with friends ingame, and gives me the option (the option, mind you!) of buying extra DLC and so forth without going too far from my starting point.

If somebody made me install a second digital distribution system, then that'd be another program I HAVE to have installed in order to run all my games. It's just another thing to run at startup. There is no benefit whatsoever that I can see to being forced to run a program in addition to steam so I can have access to every game I own at once.

I feel kinda like your business education is talking for you when you say that monopolies are bad because in this case, there isn't a whole lot ABOUT the monopoly that's making the customer suffer.

I mean, if it becomes a competitive market then maybe Valve would be forced to pump in a bunch of extra features for customers to enjoy, but I'd rather have Steam as it stands than needing Valve's DDS, EA's DDS, Ubisoft's DDS, Blizzard's DDS, and so forth running all at once... or worse yet, needing to switch between them on the fly.

[Ramary]

I honestly don't know where all this Steam monopoly business is coming from....

It is not a monopoly, not even of digital distribution, it is a market lead....by a lot mind you, but that is because steam is hands down the best service, and has been around longer then anyone else. The only "monopoly" they have is that if you want digital verson of valve games and many indies, it is there or nothing.

But then again Blizzard does the exact same thing with their own games, and jack up the prices, while valve does the reverse (Starcraft 2 is STILL 60 bucks, while Portal 2 is actually 30 after only 4 months.)

EDIT: Oh and EA only wants you to buy DLC from them AND THEM ONLY. THAT is a monopoly, and the desire for that is why EA games are being booted from steam, refer again to my little story earlier.
EDIT2: ANDDDDDDD you can ONLY get The Old Republic on Origin(besides retail) and thanks for that, they are able to CHARGE EXTRA FOR A PRE-ORDER OF A DIGITAL ITEM.
AND CLAIM THAT THEY ARE "LIMITED".
I. HATE. EA.

[Krylo]

They don't even have a monopoly on Digital Distribution.

Amazon has a digital distribution platform, Direct2Drive is one, and there's a few more as well. Those two I can just name off the top of my head.

The thing that's nice about the Steam platform over other platforms is that it incorporates all the things Kerensky just said. And the reason having more platforms that do that (rather than just having most/all distributors sell through steam as well as other digital distribution services) is, again, as Kerensky said, it'd be an unnecessary strain on HD space and (if you're running them all at all times like most people do with steam) memory.

Edit: Ninja'd on the first bit by Ramary.

[Aerozord]

Offline New Vegas works fine for me.

Aero, it's not that I want to call you a liar or anything, but I literally just restarted Steam in offline mode and then fired up New Vegas with no problems.
I am guessing, this is the reason
I've found offline mode with Steam a bit dodgy at times due to the whole cloud saving thing because I tried to load up Bit.Trip Beat offline and because it couldn't access the cloud I had to start on the first level, and then it saved that and when I was online again I think that overrode my cloud save. It was a fuckin' mess.so its probably not a problem always, but still an annoyance. Though good to know its merely an exception


The reason why monopolies are bad (for the consumer at least) is because the corporation with the monopoly has all the supply, so they can set the price point. There's no competition, so there's nowhere to go for a superior product.

half right, the other reason is because of barriers of entry and choke points.

The first we are already seeing. Because steam is so omnipresent no one wants to adopt another one. This leads to second problem of basically forcing developers to use their system. People only want to buy through steam, they only want to connect with steam, and they only want steam on their systems thus they have to use steam.

This means Valve would control the price point for developers, decide how much of a cut they take, and what games even get there. Dont assume Valve is some paragon of business ethics and wont abuse this when it realizes developers have nowhere else to go

[Krylo]

But Developers DO have other places to go. Amazon, retail outlets, and Direct2Drive.

All three of which cleanly dodge your issues by not having an installed component of the platform on your computer. You just buy and download and your purchase history is saved with the company in the case of Amazon DD and Direct2Drive, so you can redownload later if necessary.

If Steam started trying to charge more than Amazon or D2D Steam would quickly find itself unable to sell non-Valve titles.

Edit: I know there are more DD platforms than that. Anyone know what they are off the top of their heads?

[Ramary]

Well, maybe Valve would of abused it if they were not a private company. They have no shareholders to make happy, and they also have one of the smallest cuts too because of that. Dev get better sales and better cuts on Steam as it stands. What you are claiming is basically trying to predict what may happen in the future, and every publisher having their own COMPLETELY EXCLUSIVE Steam-like platform is gonna happen more likely if origin does okay.

Then you will see monopolies everywhere.

Edit: Other DD platforms off my head
Impulse (run by gamestop)
Good Old Games
Green man gaming
gamersgate
Gametap
GFWL (ha)
and a bunch of other smaller ones.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

This means Valve would control the price point for developers, decide how much of a cut they take, and what games even get there. Dont assume Valve is some paragon of business ethics and wont abuse this when it realizes developers have nowhere else to go

But as has already been said Valve doesn't do this and has no reason to do so. They're privately owned and fucking rake the cash in precisely because they have one of the best reputations as a retailer and developer.

I mean you can tell me my Eagle scout neighbor with 6,000 hours of community service who gives to charity and walks little old ladies across the street is just waiting for the chance to take my car, but that's your word against his.

Also if you think Valve is a monopoly you obviously just plain haven't looked for an alternative.

[Aerozord]

let me ask this, why is Origin bad, without mentioning steam. I mean if its an inferior product, ok, but so far all I'm hearing is "I only want to use steam"

Now I do agree being exclusive is the issue, they should release on multiple distribution channels, I'm all for that. But using it as a complaint seems hypocritical when valve was doing it from day one.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

let me ask this, why is Origin bad, without mentioning steam. I mean if its an inferior product, ok, but so far all I'm hearing is "I only want to use steam"

Now I do agree being exclusive is the issue, they should release on multiple distribution channels, I'm all for that. But using it as a complaint seems hypocritical when valve was doing it from day one.

Because it's a bloated, outdated and utterly frivolous platform that does less than half what Steam can do while taking more memory to do so.

It has only EA games, which are sold at outrageous prices for a digital outlet. As Ramary said, it's Steam from years back. And therefore entirely useless because Steam from today exists.

[Kerensky287]

let me ask this, why is Origin bad, without mentioning steam. I mean if its an inferior product, ok, but so far all I'm hearing is "I only want to use steam"

Now I do agree being exclusive is the issue, they should release on multiple distribution channels, I'm all for that. But using it as a complaint seems hypocritical when valve was doing it from day one.

But it's a completely valid complaint. Steam already exists. If Origin had come first and, by some miracle, actually worked as well as Steam currently does, then we'd all be praising Origin.

But you know Post-It notes? The little pads of paper you can scribble notes on and then stick random places? What if someone managed to create a new product - let's call it Stick'Ems - and then retroactively made all pencils ONLY work on Stick'Ems? And to further sour the deal, pens of all kinds fail to make even a mark on Stick'Ems.

Suddenly you'd have to buy both Post-Its and Stick'Ems, and have both of them accessible at any given time. Want to use a pen? Time to whip out the Post-Its. But oh, now I don't have a pen on me, just this pencil. I guess I have to use the Stick'Ems.

It's unnecessary confusion. They're two products that work identically, performing the same function, except that they do their best to pretend the other doesn't exist. If you want the benefits of both, you have to USE both, and use them interchangeably.

Like, sure, if you really don't have any games on Steam, then Origin might be great for you. But for those of us who have our entire libraries on Steam already, it just doesn't make sense to suddenly have to install a new DDS program.

EDIT: Also, what everybody else has been saying (particularly Karesh just now). Having not even tried Origin, I've been running under the assumption that it's identical to Steam, when it is apparently INFERIOR to Steam. So that's another reason. It's basically a roadblock on the way to playing Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3.

EDIT 2:
so you cant make even one point without mentioning steam

BECAUSE YOU DON'T FUCKING HAVE TO

IN A VACUUM, ORIGIN WOULD BE TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE

THE WORLD IS NOT A VACUUM

[Aerozord]

Because it's a bloated, outdated and utterly frivolous platform that does less than half what Steam can do while taking more memory to do so.

It has only EA games, which are sold at outrageous prices for a digital outlet. As Ramary said, it's Steam from years back. And therefore entirely useless because Steam from today exists.

so you cant make even one point without mentioning steam

Oh and this was bothering me Valve IS a corporation. I dont know why you think it isn't. Its in the company registered name "Valve Corporation"

And I know its not just a name, cause under US law its illegal to register a company with corporation in its title when you are not one

[Aerozord]

But it's a completely valid complaint. Steam already exists. If Origin had come first and, by some miracle, actually worked as well as Steam currently does, then we'd all be praising Origin.

But you know Post-It notes? The little pads of paper you can scribble notes on and then stick random places? What if someone managed to create a new product - let's call it Stick'Ems - and then retroactively made all pencils ONLY work on Stick'Ems? And to further sour the deal, pens of all kinds fail to make even a mark on Stick'Ems.

Suddenly you'd have to buy both Post-Its and Stick'Ems, and have both of them accessible at any given time. Want to use a pen? Time to whip out the Post-Its. But oh, now I don't have a pen on me, just this pencil. I guess I have to use the Stick'Ems.

It's unnecessary confusion. They're two products that work identically, performing the same function, except that they do their best to pretend the other doesn't exist. If you want the benefits of both, you have to USE both, and use them interchangeably.

Like, sure, if you really don't have any games on Steam, then Origin might be great for you. But for those of us who have our entire libraries on Steam already, it just doesn't make sense to suddenly have to install a new DDS program.

it just irks me because
"Valve games only work with steam"
"EA games only work with Origin"

I mean if anything you should be upset both are forcing you to use their system. If both allow the other to publish then it will come down to consumer choice

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

so you cant make even one point without mentioning steam
ALRIGHT
LETS DO THIS AGAIN THEN

It's a bloated, outdated and utterly frivolous platform.




Oh and this was bothering me Valve IS a corporation. I dont know why you think it isn't. Its in the company registered name "Valve Corporation"

And I know its not just a name, cause under US law its illegal to register a company with corporation in its title when you are not one


Where did anyone say they weren't a corporation? All that's been said is that their stock isn't available for public purchase. They don't have a board of directors motivated purely by the increase of stock.

[Kerensky287]

it just irks me because
"Valve games only work with steam"
"EA games only work with Origin"

I mean if anything you should be upset both are forcing you to use their system. If both allow the other to publish then it will come down to consumer choice

Ah, see, now THERE'S a point. If Steam could run EA games, we might not be having this discussion.

...Except that back when Steam was launched, people were complaining about it just as much. It was a buggy, memory-hogging stepping-stone toward actually playing the games we want to play. To some extent it still is, but the versatility and convenience it now provides far outweighs the drawbacks, as I'm sure most of us would agree.

Origin is, as Ramary said, Steam from many years ago. It has all the drawbacks and none of the benefits. EA could get by just as easily without forcing us to install Origin - like, we could pick up the games from retail, for example - but they're sticking this obstacle in our path that we still have to deal with.

[Aerozord]

Origin is, as Ramary said, Steam from many years ago. It has all the drawbacks and none of the benefits. EA could get by just as easily without forcing us to install Origin - like, we could pick up the games from retail, for example - but they're sticking this obstacle in our path that we still have to deal with.

because EA is probably sick of having to give Valve a cut of their profits. This isn't odd. Valve made its own physics engine just so it wouldn't have to keep licensing one for example.

Personally I dont want either system. I'd rather all downloads be done on independent systems and use third party system of my choice for all my networking. I want to never be forced to use a specific one under any circumstances.

[Kerensky287]

because EA is probably sick of having to give Valve a cut of their profits. This isn't odd. Valve made its own physics engine just so it wouldn't have to keep licensing one for example.

No one is arguing against this. People are just upset that they're forced to use the buggy, bloated piece of shit that is Origin just because EA feels they need a piece of the digital distribution pie.

Personally I dont want either system. I'd rather all downloads be done on independent systems and use third party system of my choice for all my networking. I want to never be forced to use a specific one under any circumstances.

I'd be fine with this too but Steam does enough for me that I'm more than willing to put up with it.

Origin is something I am not willing to put up with.

[Ramary]

because EA is probably sick of having to give Valve a cut of their profits.

You are right, they want ALL the profit, EA gets a bigger piece of the pie overall on steam THEN ANY OTHER PLATFORM.

Besides directly selling it themsel-OH WAIT.

[Nikose Tyris]

Purchasing straight from EA has resulted in double/triple purchases they refuse to refund, error codes and faulty downloads; combined with download caps and the shittiest download speed I'd ever used.

On the off chance that EA makes a title I want, I would be better off to go to the store and buy the disc.

Edit: Except when the game disks come without a fucking authorization code I am looking at you Warhammer online

[Jagos]

FFS, really? I mean, REALLY? People think that Steam has a monopoly?

Here's a place where you can shop for various prices for the same game, different distributors. (http://shockedfish.com/)

Here's other competitors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_distribution)

Okay, people, a thing about the word "monopoly". It means you are the only one to *supply* a product. Steam is not. People use it because of all of the features it gives. Features such as convenience of product, time saving, word of mouth, and cheap prices. WoM can not be denied. Do you see Steam running a lot of ads outside of its service? OR do you see Steam advertise something then everyone and their mom suddenly look and say "oh shit, impulse buy!". Thought so.

Now I do agree being exclusive is the issue, they should release on multiple distribution channels, I'm all for that. But using it as a complaint seems hypocritical when valve was doing it from day one.

Aero, just... Stop. Please...

Here's the entire skinny. EA doesn't want to use Steam because it wants to sell you DLC directly. I don't care either way because I buy DLC to games I like. They require their own crappy service (everyone has noted the reasons, and you're ignoring them to say people are being hypocritical when they're giving very valid reasons not to trust EA) over the 70 million people that are on Steam. They are providing other distributors their games, hoping to starve Steam. It's rather short sighted and stupid on their part, since Steam has a very good reputation that EA does not have.

EA problems that you can google:

EA Spouse
Spore DRM
Bioware DRM[quote]

I'm not saying Valve is perfect, but damn, the problems pale in comparison when this is the same company that realized same day world wide releases of their content eliminated a lot of need for piracy, cheap pricing of games, a pretty fair and lenient way to make money for the small developers that use the service, a bevy of free games, and a very rabid consumer base are just a few of the advantages it leverages.

For EA to ignore all of this for their own bedridden and evil DRM laden cash grab is poor planning on their part (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/08/what-ea-will-lose-if-battlefield-3-remains-off-steam.ars).

Look, EA is free to take their ball and go home to Origin. That doesn't mean I'm following. The games that require a *second* activation are the first ones I ignore. Goodbye Ubisoft, Rockstar, and (from now on) THQ. I've made only one other exception and that's Capcom's SFIV AE because I absolutely want to learn El Fuerte, barnone. Other than that, no reason exists to have two systems on my machine at once when my laptop is three years old.

Now you're expecting me to download and keep patched a second system when my laptop only likes one? Oh, let's not forget all the people that are perfectly fine with their first gaming system and all the friends and clans they've made on there.

Yeah Origin. One game versus Counter Strike, Half Life Two, and Modern Warfare 2. You're really going to do well by forgetting the Steam players.[/sarcasm]

[quote]On the off chance that EA makes a title I want, I would be better off to go to the store and buy the disc.


Not if the newest need Origin to be activated. And that's exactly what they're doing for their new games. You won't be able to get away from EA's games.

So basically, EA is the new Ubisoft.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

So basically, EA is the new Ubisoft.

Don't call it a comeback, they've been here for years.

[Aerozord]

EA isn't doing anything wrong in a business or moral sense. All they want to do is introduce a competing product to Steam. There is nothing wrong with them requiring their system to use their games, or atleast no more wrong then Valve forcing you to do the same. Its natural for a company not to want to have to pay its competitor to release a game so from a business point its logical.

Besides if you dont like having to have both steam and origin running, just shut off the one you aren't using. Not like you will be playing two games at the same time. I shut steam off all the time.

[Ramary]

Here is a basic history of EA

1980s to 1995- We make games!

1995 to 2008- You know what? Why should WE make games when we can just buy devs who make BETTER games and run them dry, then toss them away right before we pay them. Oh and let us buy the NFL license so only WE can make proper football games, SHIT MAN, WE LOVE MONOPOLIES

2008-2010 Huh, people hate us now, wonder why. Lets try and make new IP and see if that makes people happy.

Today- FUCK that did not work, LETS BUY DEVS AND RUN THEM INTO THE GROUND AGAIN, YEEEEEEHAW. MORE MONOPOLIES WHILE WE ARE AT IT! Only we can sell you DLC. Fuck Yeah.

[Aerozord]

Here is a basic history of EA

1980s to 1995- We make games!

1995 to 2008- You know what? Why should WE make games when we can just buy devs who make BETTER games and run them dry, then toss them away right before we pay them. Oh and let us buy the NFL license so only WE can make proper football games, SHIT MAN, WE LOVE MONOPOLIES

2008-2010 Huh, people hate us now, wonder why. Lets try and make new IP and see if that makes people happy.

Today- FUCK that did not work, LETS BUY DEVS AND RUN THEM INTO THE GROUND AGAIN, YEEEEEEHAW. MORE MONOPOLIES WHILE WE ARE AT IT! Only we can sell you DLC. Fuck Yeah.

its called objective observation. I am not judging the act based on my opinion of Valve or EA, purely on how I view this particular product and the market for similar products. EA could be run by acid spitting lizard people, doesn't mean this specific move is wrong

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

EA isn't doing anything wrong in a business or moral sense. All they want to do is introduce a competing product to Steam. There is nothing wrong with them requiring their system to use their games, or atleast no more wrong then Valve forcing you to do the same. Its natural for a company not to want to have to pay its competitor to release a game so from a business point its logical.

Besides if you dont like having to have both steam and origin running, just shut off the one you aren't using. Not like you will be playing two games at the same time. I shut steam off all the time.

Business

Removing your product from an already proven market.

moral
Releasing half the story to implicate the other party as the initiator of events.


its called objective observation. I am not judging the act based on my opinion of Valve or EA, purely on how I view this particular product and the market for similar products. EA could be run by acid spitting lizard people, doesn't mean this specific move is wrong

But how absolutely unbelievably horrific EA's past practices have proven to be doesn't have anything to do with how fucking stupid the entire thing is and how at fault EA totally is!
Just because somebody brings this shit up doesn't make it the centerpoint of their argument. Stop with this "You mentioned Valve your point about EVERYTHING ELSE is invalid!" "You mentioned EA's history so the rest of that stuff doesn't matter!" stuff. It doesn't make sense.


Also objective observation has basically fuckall to do with business or ethics. Circumstance and historical precedent are pretty ingrained into both.

[Ramary]

its called objective observation. I am not judging the act based on my opinion of Valve or EA, purely on how I view this particular product and the market for similar products. EA could be run by acid spitting lizard people, doesn't mean this specific move is wrong

History repeats itself. You gotta look at the patterns of a certain group. EA has A HISTORY of bad business and douchtastic tactics. Your failure to not take previous EA dealings into account is frankly baffling.

EA is not in compation with Valve, Valve wanted consumer rights and choice of DLC provider, and EA just took it's ball away and tried to build his own shitty ball court. In many cases DLC at the moment is a monopoly, especially on consoles, but PC is usually a different story. EA likes getting all the DLC money, so they refuse to let anyone else sell it since its a different issue. That is why the EA games were kicked off.

THERE CAN BE NO COMPETITION BETWEEN STEAM AND EA, WHEN EA GAMES ARE ONLY ON ONE OF THE 2 PLATFORMS. And that CAPS LOCK statement is unbiased and ignoring the history of both companies.

[Aerozord]

well I do not agree, but I see your point and also see no point in arguing it. Though why not just take the simple solution and not get EA games. If this really is a deal breaker then I see nothing wrong with taking your consumer dollar elsewhere.

If you dont like a service dont use it

[Ramary]

Well no crap I am not using it.

The problem is, if it actually gets enough money though this. Shit rolls down hill, soon every Publisher will realize if they only make their games on one service they can set the price themselves, and not everyone is like Valve. Imagine each and every game you own has to have their own freaking login to play, with a steam thing the background that has to be on all the time as you play, eating your RAM.

Sounds fun right?

[Loyal]

Though why not just take the simple solution and not get EA games. If this really is a deal breaker then I see nothing wrong with taking your consumer dollar elsewhere.

If you dont like a service dont use it Isn't this what everyone in this thread has been saying up to this point.

Like, exactly what they have been saying they are planning to do (or not do).

That they have no intention of using EA's shitty service.

[Aerozord]

and not everyone is like Valve.

thankfully, publisher that only funds itself, skilled at manipulating public opinion while implementing mechanics based on psychological tricks. TF2 is a prime example on how Valve knows how to manipulate its customers into feeding them more money, and having said customers thank them for it

Not saying EA is good, they eat up all the talent and take away creative control the moment you stop meeting quota, which means running series into the ground rather then allowing them to end. As well as relying on outdated business models that alienate rather then incorporate consumers.

Just personally I'd rather go up against the overtly evil titan then the two faced politician thats fooled the masses

[Ramary]

You. Did not. Just compare. EA's killing of dev studios like Westwood and Origin Systems (CALLING THAT PLATFORM ORIGIN IS LIKE AN INSULT BY THE WAY) to valve selling COMPLETLEY COSMETIC hats in a now free to play game.

You know what Aerozord
http://i1085.photobucket.com/albums/j426/Ramary/fuckingbobo.gif
Fuck. You.

I am leaving this thread now.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I've read this entire thread and the only one talking sense is Aero. I don't what the rest of you dudes are smoking.

[Aerozord]

You. Did not. Just compare. EA's killing of dev studios like Westwood and Origin Systems (CALLING THAT PLATFORM ORIGIN IS LIKE AN INSULT BY THE WAY) to valve selling COMPLETLEY COSMETIC hats in a now free to play game.

technically no, I mean the fact they use basic skinner box techniques to keep people playing a game, while using human competitive nature to motivate purchases of microtransactions. Even making the game free to play, not only does it great good press, but ultimately their profits skyrocketed thanks to new players dumping large amounts of money on in-game purchases.

They also know how to throw people a bone to hide cash grabs. Drop system is become increasingly more ineffective as item saturation kicks in and the chances of getting a specific one is lower, and sheer volume pressures new players to buy them. one random hat takes 72 weapons to craft, do you have any idea how long it takes to get 72 items?

Another example is giving item creators money for the items they make. Sounds nice until you remember these people are basically free labor for valve and are just getting compensated for their work

EA does gut companies, but it also grants companies massive resources. Remember alot of our great games were made by studios under EA umbrella. While Valve, never gives any developer a single sent to work on a project.

PS, just playing devils advocate to point out Valve aren't saints and all companies are motivated by money, Valve just hides it better. I just worry about the fervent defense of it.

[EVILNess]

For me its the added benefit that finally won me over to Steam (The sales, the community options, the wide selection of games, the auto-patching, etc) I remember clearly when Steam first launched with HL2, and I hated it. I still hate that, but Valve put in effort and won over my trust and goodwill. A bit of sugar helps the medicine go down, if you will.

Origin might end up being okay in the long run, and I might use it to play Mass Effect 3, if it doesn't end up on Steam. I personally would rather get it on Steam and not be able to buy DLC then to go thru the hassle with another account, installation, and dealing with EA's rather poor track record of online communities.

I will not be one of EA's early adopters. The online services I have seen them build have been downright bad. Command and Conquer 4 comes immediately to my mind, and I just don't think they can really muster up the long term effort that Valve has, and is required, to win over and build up the PC community's goodwill.

I might check it out someday, but not for a while.

[Jagos]

Besides if you dont like having to have both steam and origin running, just shut off the one you aren't using. Not like you will be playing two games at the same time. I shut steam off all the time.

Yep, it's called "I'm not supporting EA nor their service that doesn't add value to the one I already own".

-E- Aero, you have NO IDEA what you're talking about. The hole you're digging for yourself and your argument is getting deeper. STOP.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

technically no, I mean the fact they use basic skinner box techniques to keep people playing a game, while using human competitive nature to motivate purchases of microtransactions. Even making the game free to play, not only does it great good press, but ultimately their profits skyrocketed thanks to new players dumping large amounts of money on in-game purchases.

Wow! Valve shows good business sense and has a morality bone!
Or at least a damn sight more of both than EA.

They also know how to throw people a bone to hide cash grabs. Drop system is become increasingly more ineffective as item saturation kicks in and the chances of getting a specific one is lower, and sheer volume pressures new players to buy them. one random hat takes 72 weapons to craft, do you have any idea how long it takes to get 72 items?
Do you know how many items you actually need to play TF2?
Hint, it's 0.
You start out with what many players consider the best weapons, and then every fucking thing else is just different. You are neither required to use them to succeed nor is it even really recommended to do so barring specific cases.
Every weapon you get can most definitely be traded for whatever the hell you want if you look long enough for somebody who wants it.
Also it's 54 items to craft a hat.

Another example is giving item creators money for the items they make. Sounds nice until you remember these people are basically free labor for valve and are just getting compensated for their work.
What.
I mean
what.
If Valve had never done it and then after people complained eventually implimented the system then sure but for fuck sakes the moment it was managable they started handing that money over to the creators that were helping make their market a success. Why are you taking all the good stuff Valve does, that other companies refuse to do or skimp out on doing and acting like it's all part of some crazy conspiracy on their part?

EA does gut companies, but it also grants companies massive resources. Remember alot of our great games were made by studios under EA umbrella. While Valve, never gives any developer a single sent to work on a project.
EA gives massive resources and in exchange it works the remaining staff of a company to the bone and literally fucking destroying lives with insane work schedules. Read this shit: http://ea-spouse.livejournal.com/

PS, just playing devils advocate to point out Valve aren't saints and all companies are motivated by money, Valve just hides it better.

That
That's so stupid I can't see straight.
You literally have no reason to be saying any of this about Valve other than that nobody else is saying it? That people like Valve because of their practices means obviously they're up to no good?

They added hats and a microtransaction market to TF2, get this: BECAUSE THEIR CUSTOMERS ASKED FOR IT
Not figuratively like "They were asking to get robbed" they went onto the Steam forums and asked repeatedly for Valve to implement a way for them to get the specific hats they want without playing hours and hours and going through a trade market for it. Even if they were charged for it. Valve complied with their consumers and reaped massive benefits for it.
I just worry about the fervent defense of it.

From what I see you basically have no reason to think ill of Valve other than "Look at all the good stuff they do! It must be for a malevolent reason because nobody is that nice!" Which is ludicrous. Gabe Newell and his staff are gamers, they care about their market and they prove it with just about every damn step Valve takes in this industry. If you wanna talk shit about them, you damn well better be willing to back it up with something.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

This is totally the new console wars.

[Nikose Tyris]

This is a thread where everyone disagrees with Aero, except Smarty.

When Smarty agrees with you, it is time to sit back and re-evaluate your position on things.

[Jagos]

But fifth hasn't come in with true snark to battle Smarty yet...

This isn't a thread quite yet.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

This is a thread where everyone disagrees with Aero, except Smarty.

When Smarty agrees with you, it is time to sit back and re-evaluate your position on things.

Or you know, I was completely undecided and didn't care but Aero is the only who posits an argument I can find. Like if the other people actually drop an argument I would probably go the other side but shitttt nobody has yet. This is the most one-sided engagement since the invasion of france.

E: Like I haen't played a videogame released after about 1996 and really don't give a shit about the videogame industry. I'm totally objective and neutral in this topic and only one side is making any sense and not making ridiculous arguments devoid of logic.

[Azisien]

I'm not really sure what the argument is anymore and I was the one originally quoted.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I'm pretty sure it's whether EA bathes in the blood of babies or just drinks it. Possibly how much lube does Valve need to use when it buttfucks us.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Brand of lube is important as well. I've found that the generic brand and the leading commercial brand have subtle but important differences in performance.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

E: Like I haen't played a videogame released after about 1996 and really don't give a shit about the videogame industry. I'm totally objective and neutral in this topic and only one side is making any sense and not making ridiculous arguments devoid of logic.

That's probably exactly why.
Aero's arguments only make sense if you don't know of or entirely ignore EA and Valve's history.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

That's not at all relevant to the discussion. EA could have shot Martin Luther and sank the Titanic. Doesn't change shit.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

That's not at all relevant to the discussion. EA could have shot Martin Luther and sank the Titanic. Doesn't change shit.

It...Yeah, it is.
If you mean the original topic of just origin and why it in and of itself is terrible then there's still numerous posts about just that, but it's sort of swapped over into why a few of EAs recent titles have been pulled from Steam and what the whole situation implies for the future of the market and whatnot.

That discussion is pretty heavily tied to the histories of both companies and why one got away with making their own platform years back and the other shouldn't be doing it right now.

Hell, even the original discussion has relevancy to EA's history because in my opinion it's perfectly legitimate to take one look at Origin and think to yourself "Sure that's fine and dandy but EA has a long and storied history of fucking with its customers in new and imaginative ways and I want no part of that."

[Professor Smarmiarty]

There has been somes posts that Origin is a bit bad product but that more a criticism of the execution than the idea.
And why does it matter what they did in the past? I don't understand.
They want to make their own download platform, exactly what Valve did. This idea clearly is not an idea inherentely evil as Valve do it too. People are criticising them for making their own download manager. Valve did the exact same. Why can't we criticise them? It's the exact same action. Past actions have no relevance in this field.
Further, surely if we are talking about the future of the industry we should promote as many copetiting products as possible unless we love monopolies. You can say Valve has a better product bcause they are a better company and that's ok, nobody is forcing you to use origen. Competition will only make them better.

I have no idea what relevance the past has to do with anything. Both companies are developing download platforms. It's as simple as that.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

There has been somes posts that Origin is a bit bad product but that more a criticism of the execution than the idea.
And why does it matter what they did in the past? I don't understand.

...Because they've shown no sign of changing their policies or tendencies, and that sort of indicates that they're totally willing to pull the same shit they always have in this new platform.
Hell, they're already doing it. Overcharging for digital copies of games, and charging extra for pre-orders as though they're somehow limited and special.


They want to make their own download platform, exactly what Valve did. This idea clearly is not an idea inherentely evil as Valve do it too. People are criticising them for making their own download manager. Valve did the exact same. Why can't we criticise them? It's the exact same action. Past actions have no relevance in this field.

Except, if you knew your history about it: Valve did get shit for it. They got shit for it even though Steam wasn't an exclusively Valve platform like Origin is for EA and its affiliates. But at the time of release Steam was more or less acceptable, but all these years later releasing a product that's got the same functionality as something from that long ago is ridiculous. Origin just plain doesn't make the cut for a modern piece of software, not in functionality, memory footprint or stability.


Further, surely if we are talking about the future of the industry we should promote as many copetiting products as possible unless we love monopolies.

There's no monopoly, not even remotely. Plenty of other platforms and venues exist for Digital distribution as has been said repeatedly.

You can say Valve has a better product bcause they are a better company and that's ok, nobody is forcing you to use origen. Competition will only make them better.

That's...exactly what we're saying as far as I'm aware. Nobody is talking about Firebombing EA for their bullcrap, they just don't like Origin and are not going to use it.
Honestly here, at this point I'm not even sure your problem is that you don't know the history of the companies, I think it's more that you just haven't read the damn thread.



I have no idea what relevance the past has to do with anything. Both companies are developing download platforms. It's as simple as that.

No, one developed theirs in 2003. The other is releasing a product in 2011 as though it's still 2003.
Further, Steam acts as a general store. There are products from as many developers as they can cram on in it. Origin is exclusively for EA.
That you think they are the same situation and the same product is just further highlighting how little you know of the situation.

[Ramary]

There has been somes posts that Origin is a bit bad product but that more a criticism of the execution than the idea.
And why does it matter what they did in the past? I don't understand.
They want to make their own download platform, exactly what Valve did. This idea clearly is not an idea inherentely evil as Valve do it too. People are criticising them for making their own download manager. Valve did the exact same. Why can't we criticise them? It's the exact same action. Past actions have no relevance in this field.
Further, surely if we are talking about the future of the industry we should promote as many copetiting products as possible unless we love monopolies. You can say Valve has a better product bcause they are a better company and that's ok, nobody is forcing you to use origen. Competition will only make them better.

I have no idea what relevance the past has to do with anything. Both companies are developing download platforms. It's as simple as that.

I came back for this tasteless metaphor.

Hey, there is this summer camp for the Jewish people, there is all kinds of good stuff. Sure it is run by the Nazis but what relevance does the past has to do with anything!

[Azisien]

There has been somes posts that Origin is a bit bad product but that more a criticism of the execution than the idea.
And why does it matter what they did in the past? I don't understand.
They want to make their own download platform, exactly what Valve did. This idea clearly is not an idea inherentely evil as Valve do it too. People are criticising them for making their own download manager. Valve did the exact same. Why can't we criticise them? It's the exact same action. Past actions have no relevance in this field.
Further, surely if we are talking about the future of the industry we should promote as many copetiting products as possible unless we love monopolies. You can say Valve has a better product bcause they are a better company and that's ok, nobody is forcing you to use origen. Competition will only make them better.

I have no idea what relevance the past has to do with anything. Both companies are developing download platforms. It's as simple as that.

I pretty much agree with what's stated here but going from the personal level and extending your line of reasoning a little further...

There is a large group of people that like Steam, and for the foreseeable future, as justified as the existence of Origin may be, will prefer Steam to Origin. There's plenty of already stated reasons for this. Steam has had many years to evolve into a highly functional game delivery platform.

Within that group of people there's a large subset that like the games EA makes. We want to play them. Now we can't play them our way, we are forced to get Origin. We're limited to three options: be heroic and boycott EA games that are Origin exclusive have less fun and be grumpy all the time, grudgingly get Origin to play EA Games and worry about the hundreds/thousands of dollars we might lose if Steam ever went under, or pirate EA Games to at least play single player.

Now, a counter-argument that I predict might come up is, even Valve games aside, many PC titles have required Steam to play (Black Ops, TW: Shogun 2, etc). I don't actually condone this. I personally like Steam so this doesn't affect me, but I think retail boxed copies of games should be 100% DRM free.

Long story short, we're just complaining. And we're entitled to do so, god damn it. The shift is annoying.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

...Because they've shown no sign of changing their policies or tendencies, and that sort of indicates that they're totally willing to pull the same shit they always have in this new platform.
Hell, they're already doing it. Overcharging for digital copies of games, and charging extra for pre-orders as though they're somehow limited and special.

Then don't get the product? Nobodies forcing to you.



Except, if you knew your history about it: Valve did get shit for it. They got shit for it even though Steam wasn't an exclusively Valve platform like Origin is for EA and its affiliates. But at the time of release Steam was more or less acceptable, but all these years later releasing a product that's got the same functionality as something from that long ago is ridiculous. Origin just plain doesn't make the cut for a modern piece of software, not in functionality, memory footprint or stability.

Again don't get it. Every industry in the world is full of companies released old technology copying what is popular. There is nothing inherentely wrong or evil about it. If it's inferior don't buy it.



There's no monopoly, not even remotely. Plenty of other platforms and venues exist for Digital distribution as has been said repeatedly.

But the arguments in here support a theoretical monopoly in that they say things are ok when Valve do them but not when EA does the same thing. The fact that there is no monopoly is completely irrelevant. People are clamoring for a monopoly. Maybe Origin is just a test and they are going to release the greatest download manager of all time. But if people here had their way we would never know it because only certain companies are allowed to release products.


That's...exactly what we're saying as far as I'm aware. Nobody is talking about Firebombing EA for their bullcrap, they just don't like Origin and are not going to use it.
Honestly here, at this point I'm not even sure your problem is that you don't know the history of the companies, I think it's more that you just haven't read the damn thread.
The entire thread is basicallly people bashing EA with the very odd reference to Origen thrown in and particularly in the manner of "They shouldn't have made this" rather than "This is shit, I'm not going to get it". I think you haven't thread the thread.
Again history of the companies is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

I came back for this tasteless metaphor.

Hey, there is this summer camp for the Jewish people, there is all kinds of good stuff. Sure it is run by the Nazis but what relevance does the past has to do with anything!

In court we don't judge people on their past crimes (except in specific circumstances) because it leads to instant guilty verdicts without consideration of the facts of the current case. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING HRE>

[Bells]

I came back for this tasteless metaphor.

Hey, there is this summer camp for the Jewish people, there is all kinds of good stuff. Sure it is run by the Nazis but what relevance does the past has to do with anything!

i THINK it's an unwriten rule that when Godwin's law take effect the thread gets closed...?

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Then don't get the product? Nobodies forcing to you.



Again don't get it. Every industry in the world is full of companies released old technology copying what is popular. There is nothing inherentely wrong or evil about it. If it's inferior don't buy it.


Once more, I'm not going to.
Why the hell do you keep reading my complaints about Origin if you don't want to, Smarty? Nobody is forcing you. You don't have to read them at all!
Because that's all I'm doing, complaining about it. If you want to tell me why I'm wrong in my complaints fine, but so far all I'm hearing is "DON'T LIKE IT DON'T GET IT"
Which GUESS WHAT
IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M GONNA DO


But the arguments in here support a theoretical monopoly in that they say things are ok when Valve do them but not when EA does the same thing. The fact that there is no monopoly is completely irrelevant. People are clamoring for a monopoly. Maybe Origin is just a test and they are going to release the greatest download manager of all time. But if people here had their way we would never know it because only certain companies are allowed to release products.


But THEY'RE NOT THE SAME THING
Or, they are in a way the same basic principle, but one is about eight years late, sixteen hundred patches/upgrades short of being fucking acceptable.
Which isn't even mentioning again that Steam is a multi-developer platform for distribution while Origin is exclusively for EA related products, which, if you follow the trend, would lead to having different platforms for every fucking developer or publisher. Which is ridiculous.
The entire thread is basicallly people bashing EA with the very odd reference to Origen thrown in and particularly in the manner of "They shouldn't have made this" rather than "This is shit, I'm not going to get it". I think you haven't thread the thread.
Again history of the companies is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.
Except in the ways that they are as I'm repeatedly stating.
Also, "Origin". It's not that hard.

Also Impulse GMG and D2D user here, I'm a fan of almost any Digital distributor. But EA is taking the principles of brick and mortar stores and bringing them into it. Extra cost for Pre-order, exclusive DLC which gives one consumer an advantage, and generally overpriced stuff compared to the competition. There's no reason for it save greed and no cause to support it save "being the devil's advocate" like Aero admitted he was being.
Or I guess in your case being willfully ignorant but still trying to tell people who you admit know more about this stuff that they're wrong.


In court we don't judge people on their past crimes (except in specific circumstances) because it leads to instant guilty verdicts without consideration of the facts of the current case. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING HRE>

We've had this debate where someone was saying that you don't judge people for past crimes before, and I'll say exactly the same thing again: you don't call them guilty for a past crime, but you damn sure can be more harsh in the result once you get there.

And, again, for the umpteenth fucking time, Steam: 2003. Origin: 2011.
Even if you can say "Both are digital distribution platforms launched with similar problems", that doesn't match up as a comparison when you consider how many advances in software have come along over the years. It's an inexcusably bad product for this day and age, particularly with EAs vast resources which could have been used in some damn testing for once.

[Nikose Tyris]

EA

Testing

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Edit:
Bug Report: Program double/triple bills once every 10 transactions.

Response: Not a bug; functions as intended.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Edit:
Bug Report: Program double/triple bills once every 10 transactions.

Response: Not a bug; functions as intended.

Bug Report: Games I had previously purchased are not being accepted when I try to add them to Origin.

Response: Buy them again.

[Nikose Tyris]

Bug Report: Game I purchased through EA's Origin system failed in download, will not let me restart.

Response: Repurchase game.

[Marc v4.0]

Bug Report: Game won't install, says registration code is invalid but never asks for code to begin with

Response: Try using this code...

[Marc v4.0]

I openly admit to knowing nothing at all about this, and the past has nothing to do with the present day

K

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Why are you doing this to yourself

I hate being happy.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Man I had a big rant here but I'm sorry guys. I forgot that the videogame industry is a magic industry and has nothing to do with the technology industry (which itself was flawed by crippled distribution methods caused by monopolisitic supply lines which we still haven't recovered from) or other business. Turns out my computer is run by magical ponies.

I also forgot that basing sentencing on past crimes is clearly designed to correct the bad behaioru of super criminals in spite of all evidence to the contrary and isn't a ridiculous relic of vindicitive sadism from the olden days.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Because your complaints are nonsense and based on the fact that whichever business model we create first is the best and we should ruthlessly cut down any competitors because we love monopolies.
Except that I love and support many other companies using the same model, I just happen to think EA is doing a shit job of it. Nothing more.
I don't think EA shouldn't get a digital distribution model, I don't think Valve should have a monopoly. I think Origin is shit.


How is that the trend? Just because EA wants their own platform how does that lead to every company having their own platform? How do we know that is profitable? How do we know what is the most innovative and profitable form of distribution? BY TESTING THEM. BY ALLOWING COMPANIES TO TEST THEM. You can't just assume the way we have now is the best.

So you can theoretically state that Valve's a monopoly over and over but I can't think maybe EA setting the precedent that a company can produce their own Distribution system and benefit from that, it might cause other companies to follow suit.

They know more about ideogames but that is irrelevant. This is about business and markets. They could be selling paper or rubber dildos for all I care.

Okay, so in the world of business and markets you treat every situation objectively?
You never take the past actions of a company, its successes and failures at one thing or another into account?
Of course you do. You see a company is releasing a new kind of product and you think "Wait I've seen them take this direction before and it didn't work then, why would it work now?"
And then you act on that.
Just because you don't know the history of the situation doesn't entitle you to ignore it and tell us we're being unreasonable when a company with a storied fucking history of bullshit pulls yet more bullshit.

You call it "greed". That is how companies operate. They are trying to make the maximum profit. Valve is doing it. EA is doing it. They use different strategies to do it.
They're using different strategies, yeah. One is using underhanded shots at their competitors, bleeding their ruthlessly bought out Intellectual properties dry and overcharging for it all the while while the other is offering the consumer the best value they can and showing support and dedication to the consumer at every step of the way.

I just really love that you're trying to tell me I shouldn't call EA evil when you admit you don't know jack shit about the history behind that statement. The history that has proven time and time again at every chance that they are fucking evil.


You can not support it, I have no problems with people saying it's a shitty product but you are all portraying it as a moral issue, EA as the devvil and as something that shouldn't b e done. That's ridiculous.

No. Shut up.
I take moral objections to the way they've done it, the way they've acted in the past, their business practices and their generally shitty way of treating people. Them launching a digital distribution platform isn't evil in and of itself, but if Hitler opens up a Restaurant next door to me I'm going to start asking some questions that I wouldn't had Gordon Ramsey done so.

Say it's a shitty product.
I did.
Say you don't like it and others shouldn't use it.

I did.

Don't say it's because EA is the devil
Nope.
I will continue to say they are the devil so long as their practices continue to demonstrate that they fucking are.

or that companies shouldn't experiment with their own digitial download managers unless you like living with even more outdated technology than we have today.

Except that's not what I even remotely said.
You actually probably don't know this, but this list here?
Also Impulse GMG and D2D user here, I'm a fan of almost any Digital distributor.

This is Green Man Gaming, Direct2Drive and Impulse. Three digital distribution platforms run by companies other than Valve. I support them, I love them, and I make use of them when they give me the better offer.

Origin doesn't. Not even remotely. Its content is overpriced, and the absolutely laughable thing here is you're talking about how I like living with outdated technology when I'm BITCHING ABOUT ORIGIN BECAUSE IT'S OUTDATED TECHNOLOGY.




Depends on the justice system. And I argue tremendously against sentencing based on past crime as it's basically just vindicitive sadism.

So just to be sure if a guy broke into your home, stole everything you own and then was later caught was sentenced to two years in jail and then immediately after being released from prison he came back to your house and did it all again, you'd be totally okay with the exact same sentence?

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Man I had a big rant here but I'm sorry guys. I forgot that the videogame industry is a magic industry and has nothing to do with the technology industry (which itself was flawed by crippled distribution methods caused by monopolisitic supply lines which we still haven't recovered from) or other business. Turns out my computer is run by magical ponies.

I also forgot that basing sentencing on past crimes is clearly designed to correct the bad behaioru of super criminals in spite of all evidence to the contrary and isn't a ridiculous relic of vindicitive sadism from the olden days.
I'm sorry I forgot that I should nod my head and agree with what you say when you're blatantly admitting you know nothing about the situation and you're acting on some fucking higher plane of existence where past actions have no place in the thought process of judging the present.
As a fan of history I find that whole idea utterly repulsive, and I'm going to leave off here with this little tidbit.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Edit: I can't wait for 2014, when some savvy business man will track Smarty down and offer him a chance to purchase the debt from somebody elses subprime mortgage, and Smarty will look the guy in the eye and say "Well I suppose I can cut some of my rubber dildo investments for that since it sounds so smart."

[Pip Boy]

The good news is that the powers of Yarr-harr and flibberty-gee have invested us all with an opportunity to make User-Friendly purchases of EA's games at the Internet Store with Internet Monies.

[Osterbaum]

So just to be sure if a guy broke into your home, stole everything you own and then was later caught was sentenced to two years in jail and then immediately after being released from prison he came back to your house and did it all again, you'd be totally okay with the exact same sentence?
Yes, yes and yes. However criminal sentences and questionable business practices aren't the same thing.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Yes, yes and yes. However criminal sentences and questionable business practices aren't the same thing.

That's true, I guess.

Maybe it's more like if you bought a BRAND HDTV, you take that TV home and you spend some time plugging it all in. For a while everything is great, but then three days later it stops working.
You didn't touch it, there's nothing near it to break it, it's just stopped.
So you call the retailer, and the retailer tells you to call BRAND. So you do.

Only when you call BRAND they tell you the TV not turning on is actually part of its intended operation, or that they don't support that TV anymore, or that it's your fault. For whatever reason they can come up with not to pay you back or replace that thing you spent money on you're out however much that TV cost, which kinda sucks.

Cut to a few weeks later, you're back at the store after pinching your pennies and oh look there's the TV section again. Guess we need a new one.
"I don't think I want a BRAND TV this time" you say.

"Why?" Asks the guy standing next to you.

"My last one fucking sucked they treated me like shit and I'm pretty sure they're Satan."

"Well I don't know anything about TVs, but you shouldn't base your judgement of the company on its past actions."

So it's a BRAND TV for you again, and another round of hell begins.

[Fifthfiend]

E: Like I haen't played a videogame released after about 1996 and really don't give a shit about the videogame industry. I'm totally objective and neutral in this topic and only one side is making any sense and not making ridiculous arguments devoid of logic.

ITT: Smarty McBarrelpants judges people who make ridiculous arguments devoid of logic.

[Fifthfiend]

Just gonna leave that sentence there, let ya'll, like... marinate in it for a minute.

[Marc v4.0]

EA has a very absuive relationship with their users.


This time, they won't take my money and procede to break my product or shit on me with crappy service that never fixes the issue. This time will be different. They promise.

[Jagos]

EA has a very absuive relationship with their users.


This? This right here? Understatement of the century.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

ITT: Smarty McBarrelpants judges people who make ridiculous arguments devoid of logic.

Nnnnnnnnnoooope.
Or at least I have yet to hear a good reason why anything that's being said is devoid of logic. If you have one, feel free to elaborate. Cause so far all I'm getting is that even though Origin is bad I shouldn't talk about it, and that even though I know full well how EA is and what they do to their customers I should just ignore that tiny detail in my evaluation of their products and get suckered once again.

[Jagos]

Nnnnnnnnnoooope.


Karesh... Look at that sentence. Now look at Smarty. Now look at that sentence. Now back to Smarty. Sadly, that sentence is about Smarty...

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Karesh... Look at that sentence. Now look at Smarty. Now look at that sentence. Now back to Smarty. Sadly, that sentence is about Smarty...

Oooh.
Man, I need to lay off the sugar. I totally took the comment at face value without even considering anything else.

Alternately, maybe I just need to go back to bed already.

[Fifthfiend]

Karesh... Look at that sentence. Now look at Smarty. Now look at that sentence. Now back to Smarty.

Hahahah

Gold star posting Jagos, A+ work

[Azisien]

This thread needs to go to bed.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Sorry to drag this up again, but Update!
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.308724-EAs-Origin-is-creepy-and-watches-you-sleep

If you read the End User License Agreement for Origin it states that by installing Origin you're giving EA the right to monitor your PC and to make a profile of you, including what programs you have installed (and whether you have any illegally downloaded material), what websites you use, etc., and that EA reserves the right to share or sell this information to third parties.

So, I guess Origin does have some functionality Steam doesn't.
My bad.

[Marc v4.0]

There is no reason to be concerned, EA will only use that information for the betterment of all mankind. History be damned.

[Jagos]

I could be a jackass, but this story gets so much better now...

Origins keeps your games only after a year (http://gotgame.com/2011/06/15/ea-origins-keeps-your-games-after-one-year/)

EA is fucktarded. In other news, grass is green. Water is wet. And no, they don't like money. That is all.

[Ramary]

That is old and outdated Jagos, we took note of that like right after E3.

It is also just a legal clause to cover their asses when they do deactivate accounts for whatever reason, but it is the same clause from the old EA accounts, and you just give support your info, and after 3-5 weeks (I kid, I had to do this myself, it was more like days, not weeks) they reactivate it.

[Meister]

You're gonna have to explain to me how "may be downloaded for at least one year after purchase" equals "may be downloaded for at most one year after purchase."

[Osterbaum]

You're gonna have to explain to me how "may be downloaded for at least one year after purchase" equals "may be downloaded for at most one year after purchase."
"At least" is still pretty bad in comparison.

[Jagos]

Link (http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-21539_7-20068598-10391702.html)

From the article, it seems that EA is planning to be a social entertainment company:

EA's Origin launch will likely be just one small part of a much broader strategy on the company's part to transition its operation away from the traditional packaged-goods model. Last month, EA CEO John Riccitiello said that his plans over the long-term involve making EA a digitally focused company.

I'm not sure exactly what this means. From the article, I read that EA is turning from conventional gaming and moving more into the casual market. They've already done this through the Sims being F2P (IIRC). From the looks, it's more about penetration with casual gamers who won't mind the handicaps of the Origin system. The problem is EA's reputation with other gamers isn't the best. Sure they'll make money, but I believe there's going to be a split of people who play on Origin vs those that play on Steam almost exclusively.

[Ramary]

The plot thickens. (http://store.origin.com/DRHM/store?Action=DisplayProductDetailsPage&SiteID=ea&Locale=en_US&Env=BASE&productID=131113000)

[Jagos]

WOW...

That is a nut punch!

-E- Actually, EA IS the publisher of these games. So they can choose to distribute them but everyone knows this is not going to end well...

[Osterbaum]

ME3 better fucking be available to play without Origin.

[Melfice]

The plot thickens as I am linked to the front page of the origins website which is Dutch.

So, yeah.
Cliffs Notes, please?

[Osterbaum]

Same here, except finnish for me and not dutch.

[Ramary]

L4D1 and 2 as well as counterstrike is on Origin now, which is the first time a non-steam DD has valve games. It is currently unknown if valve let them do it or EA found some sort of publisher's loophole. If it is the former, it is clear valve wants to make amends, if it is the later then it is just usual EA business.

[Toastburner B]

Actually, (from what I can tell) it's not a digital download. If you click "Add to Chart" it brings up another screen that lets you choose the deliver method, and the only available option is "physical", so I don't think it's a downloadable.

This makes sense since EA was the distributor for the retail copies of the game.

So, unless I am totally missing something somewhere, it doesn't look like this is as dramatic as it first appears to be.

[Jagos]

There's two problems here:

1) Do you need Origin to play these physical games? How does it connect to the Origin + Valve servers?

2) Will they still give proceeds to Valve over their distribution deal or decide to be as dickish as EA is known to be?

[Ramary]

Well if toast is right and that these are just the physical copies, then they use Steam.

I have no idea if valve gets profit from it though, but they should.

[Toastburner B]

The thing to note here is that EA only distributes the retail copies of the game. They aren't the developer or publisher. They only print the discs/make the packaging and send it out to stores. I suspect Valve hired EA out to do this because they didn't want to mess with it themselves (since a goodly chunk of their business comes through Steam), and EA already had the infrastructure in place.

This isn't a case of EA twirling their mustaches and cackling as they replace Steam with Origin in copies of these games, it's a case of EA saying "Well, we already have the distribution rights these games, we might as well sale them in our online store." Chances are the profit splits are exactly the same for sales for physical discs out of Origin.com as it is if you went and bought a physical copy of the game from Wal-Mart (except that EA gets a bit more since they are selling it directly).

[Nikose Tyris]

http://i.imgur.com/B7URl.jpg

Something interesting.

[Jagos]

... Where did you get that?

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

http://i.imgur.com/B7URl.jpg

Something interesting.

It's kinda interesting but it's also two different things.
Punkbuster needs to access your files and all that because it's checking for modifications and hacks. They make no mention of providing that information to a third party.

[Fifthfiend]

Yeah Punkbuster sounds like roughly the same as Steam SAC or whatever it is they call the thing that does memory inspection to make sure you're not haxxing their games.

That they're calling it "punkbuster" is pretty clownshow, though.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Yeah Punkbuster sounds like roughly the same as Steam SAC or whatever it is they call the thing that does memory inspection to make sure you're not haxxing their games.

That they're calling it "punkbuster" is pretty clownshow, though.

I remember one of my favorite BF 2142 servers had something going on with it where whenever Punkbuster made a kick it would display a server announcement across the screen:

PUNK BUSTED

[Nikose Tyris]

Like it's all out of my field but I figured if I put it here I'd get Jagos or someone to come in and tell me "no that's bullshit" or "lol Origin".

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Like it's all out of my field but I figured if I put it here I'd get Jagos or someone to come in and tell me "no that's bullshit" or "lol Origin".

I wouldn't really call it "bullshit" since there's some validity to the idea that a lot of EULAs contain similar clauses when it comes to the examination of files. If that's someones point of contention you can point it out.

But as far as I'm aware most people are really hung up on the selling that information part. In addition the idea that they can sell it calls what sort of information they're trying to mine for into greater question than programs like Punkbuster.