Origin courting 'forward-looking' third parties

EA's controversial digital service, Origin, will be expanding its offerings beyond the publisher's games. EA CEO John Riccitiello told investors at a conference call today that "forward-looking publishers" have been asking to join the service.

78

EA's controversial digital service, Origin, will be expanding its offerings beyond the publisher's games. The newly launched storefront is planned to feature platform "exclusives," being the only place to digitally download the upcoming MMO, Star Wars: The Old Republic. EA CEO John Riccitiello told investors at a conference call today that "forward-looking publishers" have been asking to join the service--a digital storefront that's directly competing with Steam and traditional retail outlets.

"We don't see a conflict," Riccitiello said, confident in the company's future plans with Origin. "This is core to our strategy."

"We've had a lot of inbound inquiry about getting on," Riccitiello explained. "Many forward-looking publishers really want their content on any and every platform possible. One more sale is better than not. By way of example, even though we have Origin, we are pushing EA content digitally on any and every platform that we can."

Although EA would like to propagate their content across as many channels as possible, Steam has been a point of contention. The market leader currently does not offer Crysis 2 for sale, for example.

One investor asked if Origin would threaten the publisher's relationship with retailers. Riccitiello admitted that "yes, our margins are better on Origin." By selling directly to the consumer, the company bypasses the cuts retailers and digital storefronts take on sales. However, "we think our ecosystem is critically important to the vitality of our sector and the company, so we're strong on supporting [retail]."

"We hope to be HBO meets Netflix for gaming. But we're also very keen to have our content distributed anywhere and everywhere gamers are."

Andrew Yoon was previously a games journalist creating content at Shacknews.

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    July 26, 2011 5:45 PM

    Andrew Yoon posted a new article, Origin courting 'forward-looking' third parties.

    EA's controversial digital service, Origin, will be expanding its offerings beyond the publisher's games. EA CEO John Riccitiello told investors at a conference call today that "forward-looking publishers" have been asking to join the service.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 5:46 PM

      "But it's only for EA titles"

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 6:07 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 6:13 PM

      The gloves are off.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 6:17 PM

      Valve has almost the entire industry making games for them to sell, expect every major publisher to launch their own digital delivery service in the future. If having a single service means that much to you, buy a 360.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 6:29 PM

        Or just buy on your service of choice?

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 9:26 PM

          I've had my "Steam or nothing!!" policy running for years, regarding online authentication and activation DRM. There's been a growing list of games that I flat-out can't buy under that policy, like anything GFWL, anything Ubisoft, and now, anything EA.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 6:32 PM

      I for one am surprised!!!

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 6:52 PM

      And also Dragon Age 2 just got removed off steam.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:04 PM

        good riddance!

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:07 PM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 7:27 PM

          I'm thinking EA wants to lose me permanently as a customer.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:23 PM

        holy shit it did.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:30 PM

        I really wish Valve would vocalize *something*, whether "Well, EA's being assy" or "We're negotiating to fix things up".

        Silence from them and watching EA titles drop from Steam worries me greatly.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 7:32 PM

          At least this helps: http://www.destructoid.com/steam-yanks-dragon-age-ii-may-not-be-origin-related-207166.phtml

          The move may have been due to the fact that the new DLC can only be ordered from an ingame store in DAII, which may violate Valve's terms.

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 7:35 PM

            I just bought the Batman DLC from GFWL last week because that is the only place I could buy it from. Same with Bioshock 2's Minerva's Den.

            • reply
              July 26, 2011 7:58 PM

              Those titles debuted on Steam before Valve's policy change regarding DLC took affect this Spring/Summer. At least, that's what I am hearing. DLC must now be offered on Steam. You can't sell your DLC exclusively through a non Steam service/store any more.

              • reply
                July 26, 2011 9:29 PM

                [deleted]

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 10:00 PM

                  I am in total agreement. I am still a PC gamer but only due to Steam. I appreciate my Xbox 360 for how it "just works" and have concluded that ease of use is the PC's biggest problem. Mass Effect was the straw that broke this camel's back. When I realized I had to create a bioware.com account and then purchase bioware points to get Mass Effect DLC, I guess I just reached my limit. I am all tapped out when it comes to accounts and I also realized that spreading a game's content across multiple storefronts would prevent conveniences like being able to reinstall the game with a single click and letting the process run over night. I saw where this fragmentation was going (i.e. back to the pre-Steam era). My hands went up. No mas. It's too much of a hassle.

                  I suppose I could see a case for more accounts with products like MMOs or casual, browser based games but for your traditional video game product, the DLC should be available on Steam. Making the customer jump through hoops to buy content is not good business sense. You may pocket a higher percentage of the sale price but people are very fickle when it comes to their entertainment. It's not a good idea to make them have to work for it. Keep it simple.

                  • reply
                    July 27, 2011 7:23 AM

                    Precisely this. I buy A LOT of DLC on consoles (and even some stuff on PC). I have not purchased any of the Mass Effect 2 DLC (despite being very interested in it) because of the inconvenience of getting it through Bioware's store. It's ridiculous.

                    I was definitely planning on getting Mass Effect 3 and maybe even Battlefield 3 (since I'm starting to really get into Bad Company 2) but all of this digital store posturing is leaving a bad taste in my mouth. Fuck 'em, I'll wait 'till they put their games back on Steam.

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 10:16 PM

                  God yes. The method for buying ME2 dlc is just ridiculous. You can't do it in-game (though there's a menu option that'll minimize and open the store, and then you can't put more than a single item in your cart at once and have to buy it all with shitty MS point style nonsense instead of just cash like a normal purchase.

                  As much as I enjoy their games, this bullshit has got to stop if they want me to continue buying them.

            • reply
              July 26, 2011 8:04 PM

              Those DLC releases came out before Valve's new ToS went into place. IE: They technically don't violate their new ToS.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 7:40 PM

          It's the smart, mature play. Nothing to be gained by finger pointing and trying to assign blame. Any response would also be fuel for EA's PR department and would be spun in a manner to make EA look like the victimized party. Best not to even wade into that game.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:34 PM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 7:55 PM

          The upcoming DAII Legacy DLC is the most likely candidate. Valve was probably informed or found out that it would not be offered through Steam. That's my guess.

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 7:57 PM

            What the fuck.....

            • reply
              July 26, 2011 8:01 PM

              What are you asking about? The change in Steam's policy regarding DLC is apparently the sticking point to a lot of this. Legacy is slated to arrive today, if I am not mistaken. If Legacy is only offered through no Steam sites like bioware.com then DAII disappears today. Makes sense to me.

              • reply
                July 26, 2011 8:37 PM

                Then why is Mass Effect 2 still up there?

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 8:40 PM

                  The new policy likely only applies to stuff that came out after the change. So if new ME2 DLC came out and EA didn't use Valve's system, Valve would probably pull that too

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 8:42 PM

                  because all of their stuff was offered before steam changed their policy that all dlc has to go through them if the product is sold on Steam. It wasn't retroactive just anything after and that's what the sticking point is.

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 9:32 PM

            Nick Chester's guessing that EA offering the DLC via an in-game store was what triggered a Steam terms violation: http://www.destructoid.com/steam-yanks-dragon-age-ii-may-not-be-origin-related-207166.phtml

            EA really really loves in-game stores.

          • reply
            July 27, 2011 2:58 AM

            I'm sure both the customers are greatly disappointed.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 8:10 PM

        Who the fuck cares EA, I can't believe I almost bought this game.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 8:27 PM

          It's weird how everyone is blaming EA when all signs point towards it being Valve that pulled it

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 8:33 PM

            naw, I'm just saying that DA2 is a shitty game so no big loss that it's gone.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 6:54 PM

      No, no, we'd have to be nuts to think they'd want to sell third-party games.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:01 PM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:21 PM

        You are misconstruing what that argument was. EA wanting other publishers is normal. Other big publishers going to Origin is nuts. Lets just wait and see who goes to Origin and how it all plays out.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 8:07 PM

          Exactly. Everybody with a store front would be happy to sell their competitor's content. You're shaving off 10%-20% of the revenue from your competitor's products and that money is going right into your own pocket. Of course EA would like to have control or influence over the digital distribution of their competitor's products, but those same companies would be fools to empower a rival with their own funds.

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 8:30 PM

            The other publishers are alraady giving that money to Steam and a handfull of other storefronts. Why would one more make a difference.

            • reply
              July 26, 2011 8:51 PM

              If you're a major publisher like Ubisoft or Activision then EA is one of your direct strategic competitors. Valve not so much.

              Also, it's not just about selling content. The social features (friends list, groups, unified server browser and matchmaking) and customer data are far more important over the long term. You definitely do not want to see those features under EA's control.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 6:58 PM

      Its like Steam with Guns in Hell.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 7:08 PM

      lol EA wants a war

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 7:19 PM

      Valve: we give you a free set of tools which include cloud support, achievements, copy protection, matchmaking, and other things.

      EA: We are giving you a chance to give us, your biggest publishing competitor, a slice of your profits in return of nothing from us.

      Valve: Indies and Developers alike praise our level of support, competitive rates, and timely promotions.

      EA: We are giving you a chance to give us, your biggest publishing competitor, a slice of your profits in return of nothing from us.

      Valve: We have a long and celebrated history of releasing our DLC for free through Steam.

      EA: We have a long and celebrated history of overcharging for our DLC, not making it compatible with how you bought it, or just not releasing it at all on PC.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:34 PM

        Yeah. Queue the people that say "competition is good" but I am still rooting for Valve. Unless the PC has suddenly become a new found strategic platform for EA again, this pissing match is like a tornado in a teacup and it does the PC platform no good. I also don't see Ubisoft, Activision, Take Two, Zenimax offering their wares on Origin. They'll open their own storefronts before giving EA a cut.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 7:44 PM

        I may be a big Valve fan head (or used to, not so much anymore), but I've got to say that they are not without fault. Major faults that some of their competitors do right, which Valve, Steam does wrong.

        For one there is support, which is super unfriendly, and takes 2-3 business day vs much better support on other systems. Their attitude towards broken games is 'lol', while their competitors are willing to work with you and even reimburse you.

        Their billing policy is all kinds of whack. Have had an issue with your card? Well the whole account is blocked, not just the game affected by a CC issue.

        They have no trading scheme like Green man gaming, or other incentives like blue coins from GamersGate.

        Again, Steam is a good service, probably the best there is, but let's not blind ourselves in thinking that it's perfect.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 7:46 PM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 7:52 PM

          I've never said Steam or Valve was perfect, but I noticed how you completely avoided everything I said in my previous post about what EA and/or Origin brings to the table.

          That said, what other services offer refunds for a game you bought and wasn't a preorder? Impulse? Any others? What other services offer trade ins? Green Man Gaming? Any others? And how do you think those trade in's will work with future EA games bought through them? HmmmmMMmmmm lets take a guess. And insofar as incentives are concerned, Valve offers incentives all the time - their last sale had incentives that didn't require buying anything. Simply earning achievements in games or doing stuff in steam that didn't require a game got me several free DLC packs and a full free game. I'd take that over gamersgate silly blue coin program any time.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 8:05 PM

          My only experience with support was when my account info got hijacked and they responded within the hour, only asked me if I could verify my last purchase.
          Whole experience took less than an hour from my 1st email to them.

          I cannot say the same thing about any of the multiple occasions I had to contact EA for downloader issues for both BF2 and BF2142

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 8:30 PM

          "whole account is blocked, not just the game affected by a CC issue" - This is the biggest worry for me. I am very hesitant to tie up all of my games in a service that can yank everything out from under me. I'll buy stuff on sale, but if for whatever reason I feel compelled to get a game at full price when new or whatever, I get it retail.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 9:22 PM

        Don't forget shutting down online support for games every year. Yeah, it's mostly EA.com servers for console games, but still, it's the complete opposite spirit of what Valve does.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 9:29 PM

          That's just down to operating costs vs activity. Maybe some got shut down early but servers cost $$ to maintain. Demon souls one is getting shut down IIRC and that is still going strong.

          • reply
            July 27, 2011 6:00 AM

            Perhaps they should release that server code so the community can run servers? We'd be more than happy to.

            • reply
              July 27, 2011 3:23 PM

              I agree...hell they could probably release it as $10 DLC and people would buy it if there is a strong enough community behind it.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 11:01 PM

        can this please be posted as news instead? i like this one better.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 7:57 PM

      You know EA acting like children about this makes me want to use their service less.

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 8:03 PM

        And what is childish about EA telling it's investors that there might be additional publishers products on their service?

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 8:12 PM

        Yeah. They're so butt hurt that they didn't have the foresight or the organization to build something like Steam. It's such a petty, come from behind play. Unless they've redone some projections in house, I assume that the consoles are still slated to provide most of EA's future revenue. Strong arming things on the PC side, now of all times, just comes across like a child's tantrum after he spent his allowance on a toy but now wants the model another boy is holding.

        • reply
          July 26, 2011 8:28 PM

          What is petty? What are they doing that's acting like children?

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 8:50 PM

            [deleted]

            • reply
              July 26, 2011 8:51 PM

              People STILL think it was EA that pulled their games from Steam, when it was in fact Valve

              • reply
                July 26, 2011 9:00 PM

                Isn't that kind of like blaming the police officer because you got a ticket for speeding?

                Sure, Valve pulled the games, but only after EA openly violated their policies.

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 9:06 PM

                  EA built this huge meta-game system where you use your EA login across all of their games, and all of their DLC has been distributed through this system for quite some time now. Then Valve comes along and changes the rules saying "You can no longer use that system if you want to stay on Steam."

                  In this case, I don't blame EA for choosing to do what they've done. It would require a lot of engineering to patch their already-released games to use an entirely new DLC distribution system.

                  If the policy only applied to new GAMES released after the change, rather than new DLC for already-released games, I think it would be more understandable. As it is, however, I think it's a pretty dick move by Valve.

                  • reply
                    July 26, 2011 9:09 PM

                    lol

                    • reply
                      July 26, 2011 9:11 PM

                      Could you explain your lol? I think I posted a fairly well-reasoned argument.

                  • reply
                    July 26, 2011 9:20 PM

                    I can see EA's perspective, but to be honest, I can't find much sympathy. I think it's reasonable for Valve to expect participating developers/publishers to offer games and content in a way that adheres to their uniform system. The last thing the PC space needs is another over-engineered, intricate process for procuring extra content, content validation, patches or what have you.

                    You can see it as Valve being greedy, or as protecting the integrity of their platform.

                    • reply
                      July 26, 2011 9:27 PM

                      Well as I said in my post, I think Valve expecting that is reasonable. I think Valve expecting already-released games to change the way they deliver content is not reasonable.

                      I don't have all of the information though. Maybe Valve did give EA a heads-up years ago and EA did it anyway? It's possible.

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 9:08 PM

                  Pretty much Valve said we want 30% of the money you are making off DLC and EA said no so valve said fine you can't have these here then.

                  Yeah EA isn't playing by their rules but they also changed them late in the game.

                  Valve is more to blame then EA.... I know that won't go over well here but it's true.

                  • reply
                    July 26, 2011 9:10 PM

                    I love that Valve is torching the stupid exclusive DLC stuff that EA likes to do.

                    Segment your community through DLC only working on specific platforms? Go fuck yourself.

                    • reply
                      July 26, 2011 9:12 PM

                      EA's DLC system works on all platforms. It's Valve that doesn't want them to use a universal system.

                      • reply
                        July 26, 2011 9:14 PM

                        Actually it doesn't. Ask people who bought Mirror's Edge if they can use the DLC on the Steam copy.

                        • reply
                          July 26, 2011 9:17 PM

                          Yeah that sucks, but I believe that used an old system. All of their releases in the last 2 years have not had this problem. Their current system, the one that Valve is banning from Steam, worked perfectly fine no matter where you bought the games from.

                          • reply
                            July 26, 2011 9:25 PM

                            Their current system is also something outside of Valve's reach, which is unacceptable for the publisher when something EA does might affect a consumer which then comes to Valve to ask why their stuff doesn't work.

                            In the current system, content compliance should be guaranteed by the entity making the sale. Valve has gotten shit for selling games in the past that didn't work correctly in Win7. It's an entirely valid point. If EA wants to implement this roundabout delivery solution where it skips Valve, I would completely be sympathetic to Steam in wanting to root that out.

                            • reply
                              July 26, 2011 9:29 PM

                              As I said in the post you lol'd at above, I don't think Valve's desire is unreasonable. I DO think it's unreasonable for them to expect already-released games be patched to conform retroactively. I think the policy change should only have applied to new games after a reasonable warning period (to give games in development ample time to prepare.)

                              • reply
                                July 26, 2011 9:33 PM

                                Well we could also be assuming this came out of nowhere and EA was taken by surprise.

                                Conventional wisdom (and frank evaluations of how Valve does business courtesy of indie developer interviews) would say Valve rarely just springs new Steam policy changes on developers and publishers, and I seriously doubt EA didn't have ample time to enforce retroactive content compliance on older games.

                                DICE is still working on a 2142 patch, so I would assume EA, at the minimum, acknowledges that developers work on older games. To take another step and say, "Look, we need this, this, and this or else it'll get yanked off Steam" doesn't seem that hard.

                              • reply
                                July 26, 2011 10:15 PM

                                They only need to patch old games if they intend to create new DLC for them. That doesn't seem that unreasonable.

                                • reply
                                  July 27, 2011 4:11 AM

                                  That's a lot of work and no guarantee that you are going to make it back plus having valve take the extra 30% on top cause they now want you to play by a different set of rules.

                            • reply
                              July 26, 2011 9:29 PM

                              I am not opposed to EA making money, at all. I would really like to see something where Valve lowers the cut they take in return for EA putting more of their legacy titles (such as CnC Generals or NFS: Most Wanted) onto Steam.

                              Win-Win. Valve gets more money from additional sales which appear out of thin air, EA gets, let's say 5%, more money per transaction that involves little work on their part, and gamers everywhere rejoice!

                              But publisher segmentation? Screw that :(

                            • reply
                              July 27, 2011 3:10 AM

                              Also, the game falls under the umbrella of Valve's tech support to some degree, if the DLC is unavailable through Steam yet it's the DLC that causes the issue with the game, who do you talk to? Valve don't want the scenario where no one is accountable for the product that they are selling, which is (I believe) why games like Dawn of Discovery: Venice isn't available at the moment - Ubisoft are fucking around with the patches and the game is broken for some, so Valve pulled the game.

                              Furthermore, it's not particularly user friendly to buy DLC from within games (excluding TF2, which is almost too easy). The other end of the spectrum is Mass Effect 2 or even Dragon Age Origins (lol), which are mind-numbingly difficult to add DLC to (seriously, it took me 45 minutes to get DA:O's DLC enabled, and I didn't even purchase that via separate purchases).

                              Fuck EA, regardless.

                        • reply
                          July 27, 2011 6:59 AM

                          It seems like that's something they're trying to solve by moving stuff in-game, so that it works no matter where you got it from.

                    • reply
                      July 26, 2011 9:14 PM

                      This isn't over the stupid pre-order bullshit crap that they all pull though. Valve isn't doing shit about that.....hell they participate in it too. This is just DLC distribution after the fact and that they want more of a cut of the profits.

                      • reply
                        July 26, 2011 9:17 PM

                        This is speculation at best.

                        They also want to manage the content system which they are ultimately on the hook for. If you buy a game on Steam and EA decides to not enforce DLC compliance to the Steam platform, the consumer is screwed by purchasing a Steam game.

                        • reply
                          July 26, 2011 9:26 PM

                          True, but Shackers tend to make it like Steam/Valve aren't out to make money and that $$$ has no factor in this equation and they wouldn't make a lot of money off of the DLC. I'm not defending EA (because their track record isn't that good) but if some other publisher like Paradox had the same issue with DLC on Steam as EA then Valve would actually get some fingers pointed at them instead of the fact its EA fuck EA.

                          • reply
                            July 26, 2011 10:17 PM

                            EA worked hard to earn our disdain.

                            • reply
                              July 27, 2011 3:12 AM

                              Yeah, this hatred is 20 years in the making, each of their acts of disdain towards the customer more contemptuous than the last.

                              The only time I've grizzled about Valve/Steam is when the mega sales slow things down.

                              • reply
                                July 27, 2011 3:51 AM

                                A lot of the EA bitching is cause everyone else is bitching. Also they are a big corporation so they are evil and the bad guys no matter what.

                                • reply
                                  July 27, 2011 7:34 AM

                                  It's not that they're a big corporation, it's that they have constantly fucked us over with a regularity that one should only receive from the government when they are in the military. EA was actually redeeming itself before this episode, which makes their backslide all the more damaging.

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 8:55 PM

            Trying to push their own platform this late in the game, especially on the PC which is a second or third rate revenue source for them. They have now come back to the PC market after it was largely restored to health by Valve's efforts. EA wants a seat at the table in a house they didn't build and they want first serving.

            • reply
              July 26, 2011 8:58 PM

              So... they're being childish by competing with other companies? Is Google an asshole for making a smartphone after Apple did?

              Your position on this is really weird.

            • reply
              July 26, 2011 8:58 PM

              [deleted]

              • reply
                July 26, 2011 9:05 PM

                Because the fragmentation that Origin introduces is big part of what made the PC space so unprofitable in the first place. This Origin play turns the clock back. This is about short term returns vs the long term health of the platform. EA is trying to push and shove their way to the front of the line. All they see is the additional 20%-30% cut Valve takes going into their own pockets. I don't think EA has any vision where platforms like Steam, Xbox Live, PSN, facebook, google+ are headed. They are too late to the table.

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 9:08 PM

                  You are making pretty big comments about the profitability of the PC space in multiple replies that leads me to believe you're just making shit up.

                  • reply
                    July 26, 2011 9:10 PM

                    Who are you to say what is or isn't profitable in the PC space? Are you the All-Seeing Eye?

                    • reply
                      July 26, 2011 9:13 PM

                      I'm not saying what is or isn't profitable. Dr_Cube is.

                  • reply
                    July 26, 2011 9:17 PM

                    I am laboring under a safe assumption, mainly that the PC space is still small potatoes next to the consoles. I also write under the assumption that PC gaming would be dead without Steam.

                    • reply
                      July 26, 2011 9:18 PM

                      Okay so you are making wild assumptions not grounded in any fact or empirical data. That makes your arguments based on these assumptions pretty pointless to even read.

                      • reply
                        July 26, 2011 9:26 PM

                        I would hardly call either of those assumptions wild. I think consoles still being the big money earners is a safe bet. Steam taking the PC off life support less so, but given how closely Origin's roadmap mimics Steam's feature set...well...I think that pretty well solidifies Steam as a major justification when Origin's backers went before EA's board to obtain funding for that initiative.

                        You coming back with a canned response that all these "assumptions" discredits all my previous posts in this thread is weak, OverloadUT. I think they are backed up by pretty sound reasoning as listed above.

                        • reply
                          July 26, 2011 9:49 PM

                          PC Gaming is dying and Baby Jesus Steam saved it? And nobody would buy games without it? Lol.

                      • reply
                        July 27, 2011 3:16 AM

                        I take the amount of games I bought on PC before Steam existed, then take the amount of games I buy now and multiply that by 30 million Steam accounts to conclude that Steam has saved the PC as viable platform to make entertainment products for.

                • reply
                  July 26, 2011 9:59 PM

                  [deleted]

                  • reply
                    July 26, 2011 10:04 PM

                    [deleted]

                    • reply
                      July 26, 2011 10:32 PM

                      Yeah. If you are going to throw your hat into the ring then better to be one of the first as opposed to one of the last. Still, the PC is a small slice of EA's business. BF3, and especially ME3, are going to move more units on console. Origin cannot be cheap to run and it has no hope of getting support from other publishers. I see zero to tiny growth prospects here. Tighter control or direct access to customer data is good but aside from a short term cash grab, what can they really hope to accomplish with this thing?

          • reply
            July 26, 2011 9:44 PM

            they repeatedly take pot shots at Steam, talking down about it while failing to produce a service that is as good if not better than what Valve offers.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 8:11 PM

      [deleted]

      • reply
        July 26, 2011 8:21 PM

        If BF3 and the Mass Effect Trilogy are only to be had on Origin then I will eventually break down and buy them but not at full price and not even at half price. EA's lucky they have DICE, I could go the Xbox360 route for Mass Effect and be Origin free. Battlefield and perhaps The Sims are the only EA product lines that appeal to me. At this point, I think its the fragmentation of the community features, the player base via competing friends list, groups, online profiles/achievements, server browser, matchmaking that upsets me the most.

      • reply
        July 27, 2011 4:51 AM

        Yeah, I heard they're using the mob to get their way...

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 8:27 PM

      Is this a surprise at all? Of course that's the direction they're going

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 8:33 PM

      Steam is so successful because it's a neutral ground. Aside from Valve, publisher controls the service. I can't imagine any publisher looking at Origins and going "yea, there's no conflict of interest here." Valve has no real incentive to tank other publishers' games because they release games so infrequently. EA has every incentive to do so because it is directly competing with other publishers all the time for the same customers. For example, look at BF3 and MW3. If Activision was stupid enough to put MW3 on Origins, EA would be incentivized to push customers away from MW3 and onto BF3.

    • reply
      July 26, 2011 9:06 PM

      Oh boy, here we go.

    • reply
      July 27, 2011 12:52 AM

      What "forward-looking publisher" in their right mind is going to want to join Origin (a competing publisher's platform) and allow said competitor to have access to their sales data.

    • reply
      July 27, 2011 4:55 AM

      Those "forward-looking" are going to have to look really, really, really, really, really far forward.

      So far forward the only thing they'll see in the distance is the abyss.

      • reply
        July 27, 2011 6:08 AM

        It is a rather interesting statement. I would expect forward-looking publishers would have already been on Steam, since it's still in the future compared to Origin.

        Steam: Friend's list, its own good and non-invasive DRM scheme, SteamPlay (multiplayer code, matchmaking, and voice support for free), automatic patching, differential patching, file verification, driver updating, game file transfer between computers, and Steam Cloud (saved game and screen shot transfers).

        Origin has no matches for any of those features. It does not even do file verification or patching.

    • reply
      July 27, 2011 6:09 AM

      [deleted]

Hello, Meet Lola