rudy
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 8,704
Read my post above this is not possible for the long term viability of the company. It is like saying microsoft should just give up and make office for android because it is better for consumers.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
EA/Crytek/Steam/Origins Discussion - Read the first post before commenting
- Thread starter Oldie
- Start date
Read my post above this is not possible for the long term viability of the company. It is like saying microsoft should just give up and make office for android because it is better for consumers.
So you're all for a Steam monopoly...?
Is there a need to point out why monopolies are bad ?!
Dion
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2004
- Messages
- 3,932
Didn't realize you play 10 games at once.
Ryom
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Messages
- 1,854
There is no monopoly and can never be, as Valve is beholden to developers and publishers to utilize Steam for distribution. If Valve start acting like dicks, all the pubs/devs have to do is roll their own DD site. This is why Valve has EVERY incentive to play nice.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,594
Some things to keep in mind -
The games being delisted (or not listed) are tied to Origin (or being tied somehow) apparently like how certain games tied to Steam regardless of where you purchase. This is the first time this will happen to Steam I believe, which is why there is no precedent. Keep in mind Impulse had already came out before to state the implications of them selling Steam tied games, as they were also trying to sell a similar service.
Steam will not let you buy DLC unlock codes, example is Battlefield Vietnam, unless you have the original game on Steam. This does suggest they want you to be tied to the service, as opposed to simply selling you the product.
The comment is in response to those who believe that Steam/Valve should be the monopoly in digital game distribution, everyone should agree to their terms, and that this is better for and the choice of all consumers.
The games being delisted (or not listed) are tied to Origin (or being tied somehow) apparently like how certain games tied to Steam regardless of where you purchase. This is the first time this will happen to Steam I believe, which is why there is no precedent. Keep in mind Impulse had already came out before to state the implications of them selling Steam tied games, as they were also trying to sell a similar service.
Steam will not let you buy DLC unlock codes, example is Battlefield Vietnam, unless you have the original game on Steam. This does suggest they want you to be tied to the service, as opposed to simply selling you the product.
The comment is in response to those who believe that Steam/Valve should be the monopoly in digital game distribution, everyone should agree to their terms, and that this is better for and the choice of all consumers.
WorldExclusive
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,548
I use MSConfig to prevent programs clogging up my system tray.
When the program is needed, run it then and exit the program when done.
It will be interesting to see if EA can start carrying other games besides the ones they publish.
Some devs maybe afraid to use Origin, if Valve says they will drop them from Steam.
Depends on what kind of a deal they can work out. If EA/Origins takes a smaller cut (to grow marketshare) they might be able to pick up some business - and EA publishes enough games themselves to make a pretty decent library to start from.
People said that about the DRM in Assssin's Creed too, but it still sold pretty damn well.
While I'd rather that things weren't exclusive to a download service, Id' like to get them anywhere, I am glad to see competition to Steam. I'm happy if it is in the general form like Impulse, or publisher specific. The reason is that I don't want to have to put unlimited trust in one company.
If Steam becomes the One True Way(tm) to buy games then there is the problem of what happens in the future. Maybe while Valve is run by Gabe Newell it remains a great service that everyone loves. However the man is mortal (and perhaps more mortal than most if he doesn't start taking his weight seriously :/) and some day the company will change hands.
Well if they are just one player in the market, they'll have to continue to be good. They'll have to rely on giving people what they want to keep marketshare. If they are the only guys? Maybe they decide to screw people. Now you have to pay a monthly fee to play your games, and a per download fee, and an unlock fee every month you want to continue an already purchased game. Complain? They take away your library of games. You can't do anything because all games are Steamworks only.
So I'm happy there's some competition, including publishers don't their own thing. I'll only get mad if EA decides they require their own thing. However right now, doesn't seem to be the case. You can still buy Crysis 2, and other EA titles, on Impulse. I'm ok if EA wants to run their own service too.
If Steam becomes the One True Way(tm) to buy games then there is the problem of what happens in the future. Maybe while Valve is run by Gabe Newell it remains a great service that everyone loves. However the man is mortal (and perhaps more mortal than most if he doesn't start taking his weight seriously :/) and some day the company will change hands.
Well if they are just one player in the market, they'll have to continue to be good. They'll have to rely on giving people what they want to keep marketshare. If they are the only guys? Maybe they decide to screw people. Now you have to pay a monthly fee to play your games, and a per download fee, and an unlock fee every month you want to continue an already purchased game. Complain? They take away your library of games. You can't do anything because all games are Steamworks only.
So I'm happy there's some competition, including publishers don't their own thing. I'll only get mad if EA decides they require their own thing. However right now, doesn't seem to be the case. You can still buy Crysis 2, and other EA titles, on Impulse. I'm ok if EA wants to run their own service too.
I've held off posting because I wanted some more information in regards to why the games were removed but I don't think that we're going to get that infor anytime soon.
I enjoy Steam and the benefits it provides, always have. I love the business model, sales, and the perks the service offers. I'm all for competition but I don't like the idea of having multiple clients for my games. Is it a huge deal? Nah, it is a minor annoyance but it does have the potential to raise some severe repurcussions across the industry. Ubisoft started Uplay, EA has Origins, Stardock has Impulse, etc...etc...
Steam started the DD game module and has introduced indie gaming to the masses. Steam isn't in the business of just selling their own products. They've reached out to developers, publishers, and independents and made their rules as transparent as possible. They consistently give as many options to their users as possible and add services that make gaming more social and accessible. Yes these services have the added luxury for keeping users glued to Steam and as such can provide the monopoly that many people fear.
However, what are the benefits of having a gaming distribution service split across a dozen different publishers, sites, or stores? Cheaper prices or random sales? This causes a fragmented gaming library and while not a big deal with 1 or 2 central DD sites it does seem to pose a potential nightmare when spread across 6 or more DD clients.
Perhaps a better solution would be to have a program that allows all your games to sync to a central gaming platform that offers similar services to Xfire, Steam, etc...without being an online DD store. It could let you know where the games are stored or purchased from i.e. Steam, GoG, D2D, Uplay, Origins, and whatnot.
All I know is that I love the idea of having all my games in a central location, I also love competition, and I love simplicity. I'm sure there is no easy answer to this for all involved but as a consumer give me options to install my games to a central client regardless of whether it is Steam, GFWL, Origins, or whatever else there may be. Plus if they can removed the multiple layers of DRM that would be even better!
Not as well as it could, especially on the PC. Same for Settlers 7 and Silent Hunter 5.
I enjoy Steam and the benefits it provides, always have. I love the business model, sales, and the perks the service offers. I'm all for competition but I don't like the idea of having multiple clients for my games. Is it a huge deal? Nah, it is a minor annoyance but it does have the potential to raise some severe repurcussions across the industry. Ubisoft started Uplay, EA has Origins, Stardock has Impulse, etc...etc...
Steam started the DD game module and has introduced indie gaming to the masses. Steam isn't in the business of just selling their own products. They've reached out to developers, publishers, and independents and made their rules as transparent as possible. They consistently give as many options to their users as possible and add services that make gaming more social and accessible. Yes these services have the added luxury for keeping users glued to Steam and as such can provide the monopoly that many people fear.
However, what are the benefits of having a gaming distribution service split across a dozen different publishers, sites, or stores? Cheaper prices or random sales? This causes a fragmented gaming library and while not a big deal with 1 or 2 central DD sites it does seem to pose a potential nightmare when spread across 6 or more DD clients.
Perhaps a better solution would be to have a program that allows all your games to sync to a central gaming platform that offers similar services to Xfire, Steam, etc...without being an online DD store. It could let you know where the games are stored or purchased from i.e. Steam, GoG, D2D, Uplay, Origins, and whatnot.
All I know is that I love the idea of having all my games in a central location, I also love competition, and I love simplicity. I'm sure there is no easy answer to this for all involved but as a consumer give me options to install my games to a central client regardless of whether it is Steam, GFWL, Origins, or whatever else there may be. Plus if they can removed the multiple layers of DRM that would be even better!
Not as well as it could, especially on the PC. Same for Settlers 7 and Silent Hunter 5.
Shalafi
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2009
- Messages
- 22,956
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0228/technology-gabe-newell-videogames-valve-online-mayhem.html
Guys, read this, that's a pretty enlightening read.
Guys, read this, that's a pretty enlightening read.
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
In the other thread which ended up being closed, this is exactly what I was trying to express -- you did it better that I did.
Thank you for the link. It was a very interesting article.
Rattle
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2007
- Messages
- 2,841
I dunno I see all sides I guess and I understand as much as I can about all sides and opinions.
It's simple for me though, I have 60 something games on steam, I don't really like steam aside from the cheap games I can get and It's cool I can just download them. When bc2 hit I never in a million years would buy it off steam. First because steam goes down... Second why would I buy a game off steam and have to wait for the steam version of the patch? When the game has nothing to do with steam? Having said game together on steam with a bunch of other games isn't so much of a.bonus for me that I would subject myself to that inconvenience.
I'm old school I like how bc2 installs off a dvd and self updates itself. I like getting my own updates for the old cod games and every other pc game I played.
I played the original HL online before steam even existed on WONSWAP if anyone remembers.
I loathed steam for years we lost a lot of people because of it. If I actually liked and played online source games maybe I would care more. When I have time the only mp I play is bc2.
Steam is not the center of my gaming universe. It's just a catalog of sp games I played and won't play again and probably 85% of my games are ones I paid $2.50-10 bux for and will never finish. Either because they suck or just don't draw me in enuff to make me wanna waste my time finishing them.
Maybe at 33 its just not my thing anymore. Or maybe most games do suck or maybe a little of both. Either way the only good thing about steam to me is an easy and cheap way for me to find out.
When bc3 hits I'll go to the store and fucking buy it. Like I did with HL1 and UT and cod 4....
When bc3 hits I can bet I won't be playing anything else.... Steam who? I probably won't even reinstall steam after my first fresh install after bc3 comes out. If its gonna be tied to origin like hldm is tied to steam and there's absolutely no difference between a store bought and a origin version then I will get it on origin. Hopefully I won't need origin either so I can just grab my fucking dvd install my game and play it in my simpleton old school ways and be happy and forget about all this bullshit and maybe it will feel like the old days. When I played hldm on WONSWAP on dial up and had to wait all.night or 36 hours for a patch to dl and pray none called or.you got disconnected so you could play tomorrow night. And it was still like magic and it was still so fun and the best time ever. Gaming especially online gaming is junk these days. Between gabe's empire, sad faulty buggy and useless shit like gfwl.... It's so sad really and not what it used to be or should be.
It's simple for me though, I have 60 something games on steam, I don't really like steam aside from the cheap games I can get and It's cool I can just download them. When bc2 hit I never in a million years would buy it off steam. First because steam goes down... Second why would I buy a game off steam and have to wait for the steam version of the patch? When the game has nothing to do with steam? Having said game together on steam with a bunch of other games isn't so much of a.bonus for me that I would subject myself to that inconvenience.
I'm old school I like how bc2 installs off a dvd and self updates itself. I like getting my own updates for the old cod games and every other pc game I played.
I played the original HL online before steam even existed on WONSWAP if anyone remembers.
I loathed steam for years we lost a lot of people because of it. If I actually liked and played online source games maybe I would care more. When I have time the only mp I play is bc2.
Steam is not the center of my gaming universe. It's just a catalog of sp games I played and won't play again and probably 85% of my games are ones I paid $2.50-10 bux for and will never finish. Either because they suck or just don't draw me in enuff to make me wanna waste my time finishing them.
Maybe at 33 its just not my thing anymore. Or maybe most games do suck or maybe a little of both. Either way the only good thing about steam to me is an easy and cheap way for me to find out.
When bc3 hits I'll go to the store and fucking buy it. Like I did with HL1 and UT and cod 4....
When bc3 hits I can bet I won't be playing anything else.... Steam who? I probably won't even reinstall steam after my first fresh install after bc3 comes out. If its gonna be tied to origin like hldm is tied to steam and there's absolutely no difference between a store bought and a origin version then I will get it on origin. Hopefully I won't need origin either so I can just grab my fucking dvd install my game and play it in my simpleton old school ways and be happy and forget about all this bullshit and maybe it will feel like the old days. When I played hldm on WONSWAP on dial up and had to wait all.night or 36 hours for a patch to dl and pray none called or.you got disconnected so you could play tomorrow night. And it was still like magic and it was still so fun and the best time ever. Gaming especially online gaming is junk these days. Between gabe's empire, sad faulty buggy and useless shit like gfwl.... It's so sad really and not what it used to be or should be.
YeuEmMaiMai
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2004
- Messages
- 34,367
I don't care who did it because in the end it adversely affects their respective customer base... They have very little grace time to sort this out before it negatively impacts them.
LstBrunnenG
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Messages
- 6,676
If these games were pulled because they required origin, what about all the GFWL games?
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,594
They do not quite offer the same thing, with many key differences. Lets assume GFWL and its features work flawlessly at the moment, just to avoid that argument since it isn't important to this discussion, but the GFWL service when used in a game does nothing to lessen your need of Steam's features or drives you to purchase from the GFWL marketplace. Origin does both of these.
Also as far as I know these games are available at multiple other DD services besides Origin, just not Steam.
You can also buy the game now at retail or other DD sites for better deals then would have been available on Steam (in the case of BF3) and not have to worry say about not sharing community functions with other players, because everyone will be doing it though Origin.
Also as far as I know these games are available at multiple other DD services besides Origin, just not Steam.
You can also buy the game now at retail or other DD sites for better deals then would have been available on Steam (in the case of BF3) and not have to worry say about not sharing community functions with other players, because everyone will be doing it though Origin.
Never have been a fan of how EA has handled their download services in the past. So I am reluctant to bother trying them again, even if it's the only place I can get or register my purchases. I had loads of problems with the way they handled the content packs for battlefield 2 until they eventually put them into the patch for everyone (after I was tired of fooling with them trying to get them to work anytime I reinstalled and figuring out at what point I screwed up by patching before installing them or after installing them, etc etc.....frustrating).
Anytime a new game from EA came out (specifically battlefield for me) I had problems linking my game accounts...I had to contact support to get the series bonuses for owning previous games and they screwed it up a couple times. So if I login to my EA account, I have like......10-15 aliases on my account that I can't remove or deal with in anyway.
They are going to have to offer some spectacularly good deals or bonuses to make me try anymore of their download services to play their games. I would like to try SWTOR, and they might be able to get me to try their service if they offer a trial period for the MMO via it...only if it doesn't tank in the reviews before they offer the trial.
Anytime a new game from EA came out (specifically battlefield for me) I had problems linking my game accounts...I had to contact support to get the series bonuses for owning previous games and they screwed it up a couple times. So if I login to my EA account, I have like......10-15 aliases on my account that I can't remove or deal with in anyway.
They are going to have to offer some spectacularly good deals or bonuses to make me try anymore of their download services to play their games. I would like to try SWTOR, and they might be able to get me to try their service if they offer a trial period for the MMO via it...only if it doesn't tank in the reviews before they offer the trial.
Godmachine
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2003
- Messages
- 10,472
Well its Valve's choice , EA has been wanting to get into (and trying lots of times) the digital download market. I personally invite competition , like I said in the previous thread.
The more the better , if prices drop then it can only benefit us.
The more the better , if prices drop then it can only benefit us.
LstBrunnenG
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Messages
- 6,676
You can buy games through GFWL, and you need it to run the game.
Maybe the way they're doing it is you buy a code from Steam which unlocks the game in Origin, and after registering it with Origin you don't need Steam anymore. That's how Steamworks games work on D2D. Someone want to buy Crysis 2 on D2D and see what happens?
Either way I'd love to see an official clarification from Valve on this. While they're better than they used to be, EA is not a 100% trustworthy source here.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,594
Yes I'm aware that you can buy games and it is DRM. But again I listed why it is not the same as Steam and I assume Origin (haven't used it yet).
You touch on this idea when mentioning steamworks. GFWL is something that works in addition to, while Steam and Origin work in place of.
Explain to me, how can publishers just roll their own DD system (and be successful at that), with Steam having the majority of the usage ? You think it's that simple to start a new system and be successful, while another is the favorite ? Good luck with that. This thread alone (and the previous one) has many examples of why many people that already use Steam, do not want to use another DD system and go as far as saying "if it's not on Steam, I won't buy it"...which is a pretty ridiculous statement, but it shows how much Steam has grown.
The only time where Valve had incentive to play nice, was when they were no one in DD business. Now that they have a very large chunk of that pie, they are acting like a monopoly and if some game is cheaper on another system, then Valve just removes said game from the Steam catalog. It's their way or the highway and I can't think of any good reason to accept this without question.
What I don't get is why people thought they (Valve) wouldn't d that...Of course they wanted everyone to be tied to Steam. Valve is a business. They want money and don't really care who they affect, as long as they maximize their profits.
The line is crossed when they start acting like a monopoly and that is something that has been happening for at least 2 years now, as Steam grew leaps and bounds.
I think people forget that while Steam is not anywhere near a monopoly now and thus needs to play nice with publishers, if they did become a monopoly, they wouldn't have to. Right now it is something of an even playing field. Publishers need to get their products in as many markets as possible, and Steam is a big one. So they need to make nice with Steam, just like they make nice with big retail chains. However Steam isn't they only way to go, and they need those big titles to keep people happy, so Steam needs to make nice with the publishers, same as the retailers do.
Ok but now imagine a future where Steam is the only service. Retail sales are gone, games just don't sell enough retail so retailers refuse to carry them. Remember shelf space costs money, if they don't move merchandise they'll replace it with something else. Steam has killed all other digital download services because people only want to use it, and publishers all use Steamworks so other services would be useless since you'd have to have Steam anyhow.
Then Steam could dictate to publishers what they wanted. There'd be no option. You couldn't just release retail, since there is no market, no distribution. Just starting your own service on a lark isn't feasible, and so on. Steam would have all the power and you'd do as they say or they could lock you out and bankrupt you.
Worse would be for consumers. I mean say Steam gets sold to... Oracle. They decide they want to "better monetize" it, as they do with things they buy. They declare you have to pay a subscription fee to retain access, and fail to pay and you are cut off and have to pay a larger reactivation fee. You have to pay every time you download a game, and so on. Complain about it, and they lock your games. What can you do? You can't take your business elsewhere, they are the only one.
That is the issue here. Right now, even if there aren't other digital services, Steam has heavy competition from retailers. However that won't always be the case. It is likely that retail sales will vanish in a few decades. When that happens, you'd better hope Steam isn't the only digital service, or you are likely to find that they abuse the power, it just tends to happen in monopoly situations.
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
I believe --or at least Valve do a very good job at giving the impression-- that Valve are less 'greedy' than EA. Of course they are a company and exist to make money, but the difference is Gabe is already estimated to be a billionaire and his company does not have to respond to shareholders. Like he once said -- they are not working for the same clients.
Also, I do not understand those who say or compare Steam to a monopoly. They are not. They are not the sole digital distribution platform nor are their products exclusive to Steam, Valve games aside (I personally think they should sell their games on other platforms but that's just me) and Valve have earned their slice of the pie by playing nice with the costumers.
Given the track record of EA, I don't think we can say the same about them... Do you honestly think, given the chance, they will not cross that line you speak of? Frank Gibeau has said outright that the goal of EA though Origin is to become the number one digital distribution platform:
You can read the rest here.
I'm not trying to blindly defend Valve here, like I said before I believe games should be available though each digital distribution platform and that people should have the choice, just trying to put some perspective into the discussion.
Last edited:
RanceJustice
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 6,649
When I chastise EA for not putting either certain titles or the "good version" of those titles on any service but their own, I don't do so thinking Steam should be the sole digital alternative. However, producer/publisher driven services like Origin are NOT holding up their end of the deal
In theory, what should make a customer choose the publisher-driven service is LOWER PRICES. Lack of middlemen should mean that EA could sell all their games for much cheaper online direct, than elsewhere - that was the ORIGINAL idea behind digital distribution - it may be $60 to get that boxed product produced, give GameSpot/WalMart their cut, and still make a profit... take out the huge costs of production, you should be able to get by MUCH cheaper, take out the cost of a 3rd party vendor, even cheaper than that... however, typical greed just figured "They'll pay for it because that's what they think games cost, so we'll just pocket the difference".
EA is basically attempting to create a monopoly of digital distribution for its titles and that I can't abide. Hell, they're even charging MORE for many of them - see the Mass Effect 3 Exclusive To Origin Digital N7 Edition (necessary to get all the IN GAME content) at $80 on their own bloody store instead of the ME2 Digital Deluxe available initially for $60 (Debating, if there should even be special editions of single player games that are the only way to get all the game content). They need to be smacked down.
I don't want Steam to be the sole player in the digital distro marketplace - I'd like to see GoG, Impulse, Direc2Drive and especially Desura selling the same titles and able to compete on price, DRM, and multiplatform support (Linux, Mac) alongside other features. On principle I object to Origin, but if EA say... sold Mass Effect 3 N7 Edition for $20-40 there and demanded the higher price elsewhere, I could at least see the value in what they were doing "Buy direct from us, we pass the savings on to you". But they're not, so I won't, and I'll continue to object to them hoarding their titles as they do.
Personally, I'm sick of the whole concept of the "Walled Garden" for gaming, be it PC DRM or restricted sale channels, to the very idea of consoles today. I wish these companies would stop trying to lock down everything you do and squeeze another dollar out of you - their income shall be greater if they provided great games at a reasonable price, without trying to demand how you use them, where you get them, and everything about the platform they reside upon.
In theory, what should make a customer choose the publisher-driven service is LOWER PRICES. Lack of middlemen should mean that EA could sell all their games for much cheaper online direct, than elsewhere - that was the ORIGINAL idea behind digital distribution - it may be $60 to get that boxed product produced, give GameSpot/WalMart their cut, and still make a profit... take out the huge costs of production, you should be able to get by MUCH cheaper, take out the cost of a 3rd party vendor, even cheaper than that... however, typical greed just figured "They'll pay for it because that's what they think games cost, so we'll just pocket the difference".
EA is basically attempting to create a monopoly of digital distribution for its titles and that I can't abide. Hell, they're even charging MORE for many of them - see the Mass Effect 3 Exclusive To Origin Digital N7 Edition (necessary to get all the IN GAME content) at $80 on their own bloody store instead of the ME2 Digital Deluxe available initially for $60 (Debating, if there should even be special editions of single player games that are the only way to get all the game content). They need to be smacked down.
I don't want Steam to be the sole player in the digital distro marketplace - I'd like to see GoG, Impulse, Direc2Drive and especially Desura selling the same titles and able to compete on price, DRM, and multiplatform support (Linux, Mac) alongside other features. On principle I object to Origin, but if EA say... sold Mass Effect 3 N7 Edition for $20-40 there and demanded the higher price elsewhere, I could at least see the value in what they were doing "Buy direct from us, we pass the savings on to you". But they're not, so I won't, and I'll continue to object to them hoarding their titles as they do.
Personally, I'm sick of the whole concept of the "Walled Garden" for gaming, be it PC DRM or restricted sale channels, to the very idea of consoles today. I wish these companies would stop trying to lock down everything you do and squeeze another dollar out of you - their income shall be greater if they provided great games at a reasonable price, without trying to demand how you use them, where you get them, and everything about the platform they reside upon.
Last edited:
Sorry, but I can't say that's perspective at all, since you say you are not blindly trusting Valve, a money making company, when in fact you are, because you are giving them the benefit of the doubt for some reason.
I'm saying you shouldn't trust either. More competition can never hurt, especially when Steam has such a large chunk of the DD business. With more competition they will need to give customers more reasons to stay with Steam (especially in the prices department). If Steam does it, others will follow suit and we, the customers, win. If the others don't offer anything better than Steam, then people will stick with Steam. It's that simple.
And ypu use EA's statement against them, which makes no sense, since that's exactly what Steam became: the number one DD system. EA is greedy because they want to become the number one. But Valve is ok, because they are already number one...I hope you understand what you're saying here...any company wants to be number one. Using that as an argument against competition to Steam is pretty laughable. It's almost as bad as saying that Steam should be the only DD system, because "I" have more games there...
Plus the argument that because Gabe is rich means that he doesn't want more money is the most hilarious thing to read on all these "Steam praise over all" threads. That's the most absurd fallacy that there is. Valve is where they are now (in a place where they barely make any games at all and still make huge profits) because of Steam. They make a LOT of money through it. Saying that they don't care about money, is ludicrous when their actions quite clearly say otherwise.
Please explain how Steam is acting like a monopoly? If anything they are acting contrary to that model and have been for the longest time. The business model Steam has used and continues to use is extremely consumer, publisher, indie, and developer friendly. They have continually supported the use of mods, tools, and add-ons for all their games, try this on D2D or a couple other DD sites
. They give numerous options for their users, the largest discount to developers both small and large, nor do they exploit their consumers, like UPlay or GFWL. The couple times I've had to use their customer service for my dad wanting to play HL has been top notch and they went above and beyond what they had to for him. While everyone's experience is different, the overall model shows the exact opposite of what you claim. The current evidence suggests that Steam is using an aggressive campaign of kill them with kindness, once everyone is in Steam's pocket remains to be seen, but in almost a decade of use Steam has consistently sided with the consumer base unlike almost everysingle other DD site out there with the exception of Impulse and GoG which also happen to be extremely gamer friendly as well.Origins, UPlay, D2D, GFWL, etc...all exist to make money. Not a big deal and I'm fine with that as I'm sure many other people are. However, their profits come at the expense of their consumers and they have shown reluctantly that they are more concerned with those profits then they are for providing a user friendly experience for the gamers. Steam, Impulse, GoG, and even Amazon have all adopted a mantra exactly opposite of that which is why so many support those DD sites over the others.
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
You are putting words in my mouth and twisting my points...
I am not blindly trusting Valve. They have me as a costumer because they have proven themselves trustworthy and consumer friendly. Maybe this will change in the future -- who knows? But so far they have earned my money. Just as GoG or Impulse has satisfied others. Again, Electronic Arts have a history of not being as friendly so that is why I am not very enthusiastic about Origin.
That being said, I actually wrote I was not blindly defending Valve -- I added some points that can be taken into consideration but you swifted it all away with the back of your hand to repeat the same thing again. Also, I used Gibeau's statement against him because, if you read the article, he wasn't speaking about the customer, the services nor the benefits EA want to bring to us via Origin. Instead he focuses on their goals and what they want Origin to be. When someone wants to make business with me (i.e. they want me to give them money) I do not want to hear them brag about their goals, but what benefits they can provide me.
Anyways, let's agree to disagree on those accounts.
I do, however, agree with you when it comes to having competition (even though I do not think we can consider this as competition, Impulse, D2D etc. are competition to Steam because they offer the same products -- there price can play).
I'm not posting this to respond to Silus, nor to prove any point but just for information purposes since it's relevant to Origin:
Last edited:
Please explain how Steam is acting like a monopoly? If anything they are acting contrary to that model and have been for the longest time. The business model Steam has used and continues to use is extremely consumer, publisher, indie, and developer friendly. They have continually supported the use of mods, tools, and add-ons for all their games, try this on D2D or a couple other DD sites
Origins, UPlay, D2D, GFWL, etc...all exist to make money. Not a big deal and I'm fine with that as I'm sure many other people are. However, their profits come at the expense of their consumers and they have shown reluctantly that they are more concerned with those profits then they are for providing a user friendly experience for the gamers. Steam, Impulse, GoG, and even Amazon have all adopted a mantra exactly opposite of that which is why so many support those DD sites over the others.
How can you consider games being tied to Steam and Steam only consumer friendly and not a sign of monopoly or control over everything ?
It's also interesting that you didn't include Steam in your "all exist to make money" list, when Steam is the one that makes more money....
There's also this constant fallacy that Steam is great for publishers. It's not. They not only have to support the costs for the game distribution (obviously), but they also have to pay Valve for the Steam distribution. Valve however, does not let anyone else distribute their games...everything is done through Steam. So everyone needs to pay Valve to get their games on Steam, but Valve does not allow such a thing for their games in other DD systems...and Valve is the consumer friendly ?
Another point against Steam siding with the consumer, is when I pay more for a digital copy from it, than I do from retail or in some other DD system...As you said, everyone's experience is different, but you are considering ONLY your experience, when you side with Steam. I'm not siding with any system. I want more systems, so that competition is fierce and everyone wins with better prices.
If you like Steam so much, go ahead and continue to use it. Just don't be against other services that may benefit others.
No I didn't swift them away, but you said Valve gives the impression of being less greedy, when it's quite the opposite with Steam. Valve makes more money through Steam than they do through their games. And it's exactly why they are still up and running, even though their gaming catalog is so short. If it wasn't for Steam, they would either have to make more games or they would've been dead for some time now.
_PixelNinja said:
Fair enough! No need to beat the dead horse anymore. I think we both made our points clear
Hornet
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2005
- Messages
- 6,624
Was this game Alice Madness Return the 2nd missing game on Steam?
Seems to be available now
http://store.steampowered.com/app/19680/
Still no word about what happened to Crysis 2. I wished someone would explained what went wrong with that game on Steam.
Seems to be available now
http://store.steampowered.com/app/19680/
Still no word about what happened to Crysis 2. I wished someone would explained what went wrong with that game on Steam.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,594
(Snipped it so the image isn't repeated)
Now we don't know what this is yet, but if they add say a 10% (might be 5%) store credit loyalty program like Gamersgate, isn't that the progress of competition? Wouldn't people love it, especially those of you with hundreds to thousands worth of Steam purchases, to have Steam take notice of something like this and implement it?
One the issues is this, if Steam has such high margins and profits as speculated, than either they need to share more of that margin with consumers and/or the content provider. If they refuse to do that yet create barriers of entry so other services cannot compete, this then starts going down the path of being a market with an anti-competitive monopoly.
Personally I'm not against Steam or do I support Origin. What I am against is this concept of "Steam for everyone" and the sometimes double standards used to support this from an ethics standpoint. Either the market situation needs to have strong competition/alternatives or have third party oversight to balance the interest of all parties.
Well put. Especially since Gabe, though not officially divulging their profit from Steam, has admitted on multiple occasions to it being overwhelmingly profitable. I think that's a point a lot of people miss when they swallow the Valve marketing stuff - they're a company out to make money. If they can do so whilst appearing to be supportive of indie developers and grow their brand image rather than damage it, all the better.
WorldExclusive
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,548
Valve hasn't explained why they removed the game, we only had EA's side of the story.
They still haven't offered an explanation to their users.
That's how I feel. I would like both services to be successful. It's when people hope Valve's competition fail, and it will only hurt them pricing and service wise.
With competition, Valve may roll out that long awaited trade-in program to keep their users, that's when the industry starts move forward.
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
The problem with this at this present time is that Origin is only proposing EA's games. When they start proposing third party content, then we can really start talking about competition.
I've said this many times, while I use Steam and wish to keep my games there and admit to not having much trust in EA, I am absolutely for multiple platforms so that people can have the choice as to where they purchase their games. What I do not want and am a afraid of is ending up with having X number of accounts stretched across X number of platforms with X number of clients -- it will be completely insane. I just don't want publishers/developers going down that road...
Yes -- that was indeed the second game that went missing from Steam. Good to know it is on both online stores now!
In regards to Crysis 2 all we know, according to EA, is that there was a breach of terms of use with Crytek, therefore Valve removing the game.
I've said this many times, while I use Steam and wish to keep my games there and admit to not having much trust in EA, I am absolutely for multiple platforms so that people can have the choice as to where they purchase their games. What I do not want and am a afraid of is ending up with having X number of accounts stretched across X number of platforms with X number of clients -- it will be completely insane. I just don't want publishers/developers going down that road...
Yes -- that was indeed the second game that went missing from Steam. Good to know it is on both online stores now!
In regards to Crysis 2 all we know, according to EA, is that there was a breach of terms of use with Crytek, therefore Valve removing the game.
Last edited:
black_b[ ]x
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2002
- Messages
- 1,753
I wonder if the re-vamping of EA Store into Origin included new features which turned it into a competing business with Steam? Perhaps Steam had a non-compete clause in their DD agreement with EA?
This is how I feel. More download services, great, the more competition the better, but by "competition" I want more choices of which platform for where to download a game, not publisher (or maybe even developer) exclusive download clients. I already dislike the fact I need a uplay account to play AC2, a "yuplay" account for Wings of Prey, an EA account to play the BF games, a GFWL account to play those games (which I usually just end up creating an offline profile). I dont want that to extend to purchasing DD games as well where I need X client to play with X publisher and Y client to play with Y developer.
WorldExclusive
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,548
That will call for Valve to loosen their grip on the market, which will not happen without competition.
Valve makes entirely too much money with Steam, and to allow it to become compatible with a central client will skim sales from their service big time.
Every gamer would be looking for the best price instead of service, reducing the advantage of Steam. It's very tricky, but we'll have to use multiple clients until gamers call for a central client.
Dion
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2004
- Messages
- 3,932
Alice from Origin doesn't require Origin to be open. This is a feature steam needs ASAP. And yes I agree with you. People are complaining about the wrong things. The price of the games should be more of a concern. Something I have learned about the gaming community. They are suckers for alot of things.