Battlefield 3 not coming to Steam due to 'restrictive terms'
EA has confirmed that Battlefield 3 will not be coming to Steam, due to the service's policies on DLC. This is the same reason that Dragon Age 2 and Crysis 2 were pulled from the marketplace.
After months of reports and rumors, EA has finally confirmed that Battlefield 3 won't be coming to Valve's online distribution service, Steam. The publisher claims the reason behind the decision is Valve's 'restrictive' practices regarding downloadable content, which has seen EA butting heads with Valve quite a bit lately.
EA gave the official word on its forums, with a none-too-subtle swipe at Steam's new policy.
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. 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.
It follows with a statement on Steam's "restrictive terms of service," and hammers the point home with a separate statement regarding its policy on third-party download sites:
Any retailer can sell our games, but we take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services for the individuals and communities that play our games. These players are connecting to our servers, so we want to provide them with the very best service. This works well for our partnership with GameStop, Amazon and other online retailers.
- However, when a download service forbids publishers from contacting players with patches, new levels, items and other services – it disrupts our ability to provide the ongoing support players expect from us. At present, this is the case with only one download service. While EA offers its entire portfolio to this site, they have elected to not post many of our games. We hope to find a mutually agreeable solution to this issue soon.
The contention isn't new, or even unexpected. Steam wasn't included among a list of digital retailers in July, and one unnamed games retailer claimed it wouldn't be offered due to the necessity of the Steam client.
This goes hand-in-hand with recent events, as both Dragon Age 2 and Crysis 2 were pulled from Steam with the same cited reason. The Steam policy forbids publishers from selling DLC through its own methods without offering it to download directly from Steam. EA has opted to let its games be pulled, while offering its own marketplace for content.
Battlefield 3 launches October 25 on PC, PlayStation 3, and Xbox 360.
-
Shacknews
replySteve Watts posted a new article, Battlefield 3 not coming to Steam due to 'restrictive terms'.
EA has confirmed that Battlefield 3 will not be coming to Steam, due to the service's policies on DLC. This is the same reason that Dragon Age 2 and Crysis 2 were pulled from the marketplace.-
I give it 11 months until Origin is shut down and everything is moved back onto steam.
-
i can't see that happening. i could see EA decided to tell the PC to fuck off and releasing these big titles as console-only
-
By moved back to Steam you mean discarded and everyone who bought software on Origin told tough luck.
-
[deleted]
-
EA only terminates MMOs early. I'm sure they'll give this a good go. ToR and Battlefield 3 will give it a nice artificial push that'll make it look profitable before it gets ignored again as EA has nothing else this major to offer PC gamers.
-
-
If you have been following BC2 patch history you would realize that EA/DICE have had issues with steam starting with the launch of that game and it had nothing to do with the DLC. They blamed 'Steam Q/A" for another things like further delaying the release of a patch which turned out to be bogus.
I think Valve is changing how they are dealing with the patches when DOTA2 launches later in the year. I think they are adding methods to allow more conventional patches and file differences instead of the file replacement method. I think the change is partially a response to game like the Witcher 2 (9GB patches) and perhaps this feud.
http://store.steampowered.com/news/5856/-
They already implemented partial patches.
-
-
Yeah, they are being such stupid cunts! Why, how dare they not use a points system that makes people buy in excess of what they want. And, how dare they for not wanting gamers to have to make fifty damn accounts just to add DLC to their existing games! Those nutters!
-
-
Wishful thinking. Unfortunately you can expect it to linger as long as TOR stays somewhat active since it's it's launcher. Saying it will close down is like saying Blizzard's WoW patcher will. :(
-
-
Ooo, there is hope then.
-
-
-
-
I'm with Valve on this. EA wants to come in late to the game and use STEAM to help sell games but then keep the gamers to themselves by only selling DLC through them. Valve to the risk years ago when online wasn't considered viable and deserves to have rules saying they get DLC too.
F**K EA-
That's kinda how I'm feeling. I had issues with BF2142 digital copy on EADM and honestly it's the same usual offshore support people have grown to love. You explain everything in fine detail and they tell you to uninstall reinstall and reset your pw.
-
-
Well, I know most gamers are taking Steam/Valve's side of this story but in all honesty I'm with EA on this issue. This wasn't an issue at all several months ago as many titles available on Steam had DLC, etc. available through outside sources. And now all of a sudden, Steam seems to be demanding that they get a piece of everyone's pie, including the extra whipped toppings? I see it as pure greed on Steam's part as they were already getting a good percentage of just offering the titles and now they want more.
Don't get me wrong, I use Steam more than any other DD services combined but that doesn't mean that they should get a free pass. And besides, I don't agree with the majority of the gamers out there (especially here on the Shack) that Steam is the be all, end all of services and that it can do no wrong. I still have many issues in regards to what Steam does and how they do it and still feel that many of it's features are still lacking and fall far behind the curve. The Steam chat service and community service comes to mind as both are offline much more frequent than they should be, among other things.-
It's not about Steam getting the income, it's about giving the PC gamer a good experience. The reason this entire thing came around is because of how badly EA handled previous games on Steam (in particular Bad Company 2's Vietnam DLC, which EA utterly fucked over.)
Valve decided to make sure companies would not be able to fuck over their customers in the future, so implemented changes to their requirements.
Note that this issue doesn't effect DIRT3 (GFWL game with GFWL-exclusive DLC that came out after Crysis 2 DLC), so it's not 'a Valve issue.' It's entirely EA's fault.-
-
I'm seriously saying that this was entirely in response to our complaints about the horrible way EA was handling DLC. Anyone who went through that shit with Vietnam and NFS knows exactly what I'm talking about.
If it was a profit-motivated sign, DIRT 3 and SIMS 3 would have been removed from Steam. They haven't, despite breaking what everyone (wrongly) assumes is the new 'requirements' for Steam.-
-
[deleted]
-
-
The policy is probably equally quality based as it is money based. If they didn't stick that clause in there you could see companies trying to sell $5 game/trials and get the rest of the $50/60 in house through a DLC sale that Valve wouldn't see a cent of.
Just making sure games don't go that route is both customer protection and pocketbook protection.
Though that could be a load of shit since they decide what makes it on their service anyways and with the addition of free to play I have no clue how they handle the micro transactions which could be considered the same wolf in a different wool suit.-
We have no idea what their fees are on DLC. We do know that their fees on game sales were the lowest in the industry, and that when developers get on Steam they renegotiate their contracts with other digital vendors to get them to match Steam's fee.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
I don't care who is right or who is wrong. My ass is to old to install anymore game delivery systems. Ive got my Steam and that's what I use. /crankyoldgamer
-
[deleted]
-
For one, I never said Origin improved on anything over Steam as I never even mentioned Origin. But to answer you questions about what features I feel Steam is behind on, here are just a few of them (granted, they are minor, yet I feel they are important.) The Steam chat system is severely lacking. It doesn't allow offline messages, it doesn't save your conversations, etc. and for a modern chat system it is way behind. Hell, ICQ had all those features back in 98. Not to mention the fact of just how often the system goes offline on a daily bases. How often do you see the "no connection" at the bottom of the Steam window? I see it quite often, and it has nothing to do with my end. Another thing that bugs the crap out of me... When you launch Steam, you have to log in with your credentials so Steam knows who you are, your age, etc. Why is it then that, after I've logged in and I decide to check out a game or video that is rated Mature, I have to enter my age? I've already logged in and my age is on record. I know, these examples are nit-picking, but I still feel that this far in Steam's existence, many of these things should be a given. I hate to say it, but if you want a better designed system to compare to, XBox Live has done a better job at offering everything that Steam offers.
-
-
-
There'll come crawling back when their digital sales plummet to the ocean floor.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
See my posts about how Origin works, essentially, Origin does not have to run entirely because it provides no features.
It just downloads an exe for you to run to install the game. It doesn't patch, verify files, repair installs, authenticate, overlay (this is supposedly coming in the next version), or reinstall.
All it does is grab the installer off EA's server and plop it down on your computer. It doesn't even install the game. That's why you don't need it running, it's useless if it is running.-
-
Advertisers lie.
-
-
I'm pretty certain they know it's more than just a download service.
These slides are from a June 8th investor presentation
http://chattypics.com/files/slide1PNG_58sy45jawi.png
http://chattypics.com/files/slide2PNG_va5l52jda9.png
Full document here: http://investor.ea.com/common/download/download.cfm?companyid=ERTS&fileid=475188&filekey=6d4ea4b7-0389-4c68-964f-af21a86c5a7d&filename=E3_2011_IR_Breakfast_-_6-8_-_small_file_size.pdf-
lol i love how they put their 'content' at 'half' and steam at '3/4', when all they have are EA specific games.
-
Wow, slide 2 actually looks pretty cool with what they have planned.
-
How is it they rate the same cross-platform compatibility as Origin? Steam runs on the PS3, Mac and PC. Origin is PC only.
-
They're adding android
-
http://chattypics.com/files/slide3PNG_h8zhhwok7u.png
Cross-platform to them means Mobile/consoles/facebook as well. Your origin "personna" can also include your console profiles. Even if it's not actually running Origin there's still some kind of communication (ie. logging into the same EA account to play an easports game on console that you use for playing a PC game).-
Hahha, that's cute. Oh EA.
-
If you got a kick out of that you should probably read the full transcript from that call.
Interesting quote that caught my eye
John Riccitiello: I am a strong believer that over the course of the next two to three years, the majority of transactions off of Origin service will not be pay to download $49 PC game or – it’s going to be inside the game for micro transactions, types of subscription, types of ongoing business models that can only be done when you own the content and the platform.
Which might explain why they're so set in sticking to their guns on this DLC/microtransaction confrontation with Steam.
-
-
NICE FIND! +1 for you , sir.
-
-
lol!
-
[deleted]
-
wjw
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I don't believe you. Can someone else confirm this?
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
How is not having to run Origin a good thing?
-
-
[deleted]
-
No buy, then. This opens the door to activation DRM (Crysis 2 used SolidShield), and mandatory EA.com login to play the game (but that was in BC2 as well, right?).
-
Don't some EA console games have this requirement too?
-
Only for the multiplayer part. They've been slowly expanding the games that need 'EA PASS' to function. The next up is all of their sports games.
-
Yup. Like I've said before, EA wants to be the Facebook of video games.
-
-
Yeah, most of them. Even lesser played titles like Skate and Skate 2. It's dumb.
-
-
[deleted]
-
Very true; you know who usually ends up adding on stupid ass DRM on Steam releases? EA and Ubisoft.
-
-
-
Lame excuse, Steam is about as unrestrictive as it gets.
Blatant marketing ploy to try and sully the good name of Steam and Valve and convert people to this Origin shite, epic fail EA, epic fail.-
No, it's not. You're thinking of D2D.
-
-
-
IAWTP
-
Same. and unlike all those people who said they wouldn't buy MW2 and did, I didn't, and I won't buy this either.
-
Signed. Sounded awesome, but at this point in my life I'm less interested in jumping through hoops to play games than I used to be.
-
-
I'll start caring if and when EA makes a game worth buying into a soon-to-be-defunct-platform for.
-
-
http://shacknews.com/laryn.x?id=26456707
Goddamn front pagers riling me up -
so people shouldn't protest they should just roll over
-
-
Its apparently cool to say one wont buy this because of Origin, but nowt because of leveling. Its both for me
-
-
Listen, right or wrong, they need to at least be honest about it. Saying that they want to be able to patch and deliver DLC when they clearly can and have in the past is just a blatant lie. The only reason to have your own platform is sales. Period. Don't bother to lie and say it's about the customer's "experience" to cover it up. Just own up to it. By holding Steam out as the only platform NOT getting the game, you look like douches. If Origin were the sole exclusive service getting the game, we wouldn't be having this controversy. We'd just call them morons for not "getting it" and go buy the disk. But no, they had to single out a service we like and make a big deal out of it.
Listen, EA, you're allowed to make a profit. Just be honest about it. Here, let me help.
"Yes, we (EA Games) love taking your money. We want to take more of it than normal. We cut out the middle man and gave a giant middle finger to our largest (only) competitor in the distribution space."
There, don't we all feel better now.-
It's not a lie. Steam changed their policy earlier this year which is why they "can and have in the past"
-
[deleted]
-
What you have siad does not make their statement false in any way. People need to stop thinking that this has ANYTHING to do with Origin.
EA doesn't want to have to sell their DLC through Steam's system. Steam removes their games from their store as a consequence.-
-
Because the policy went in to effect after the latest DLC for those games have been released. We've been over this a thousand times: The only games that have been pulled are ones that have released NEW DLC in the last 6-or-so months.
-
-
If you don't think this has anything to do with Origin, you're being naive. Actually, you just said it...
"EA doesn't want to have to sell their DLC through Steam".
Where ARE they going to sell it? Origin.
They want the sales, to themselves, period. Valve wants a slice. EA wants the whole pie. There's nothing wrong with wanting it either. They just shouldn't have launched into a smear campaign about Steam being the bad guys as their excuse.
-
-
-
-
-
-
No, it doesn't.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
I cant wait to blow up your tanks.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
To whom it may concern at Electronic Arts:
It is my understanding that you want to "connect directly with [y]our consumers." In that spirit I'm offering to you this open letter.
I have purchased many EA titles over the years. Within the past year I have picked up Dead Space 2 and Crysis 2, both on Steam. While your systems were intrusive in Burnout Paradise and Crysis 2 I lived with it.
But your current direction with Origin disappoints me and with Origin you have gone a step farther than I am willing to go. I recognize that for Battlefield 3 or for The Old Republic many will accept Origin. I will not.
I'm also disappointed that you have chosen to attack Steam and are attempting to make Valve out to be the bad guys. I have seen no other publisher chaffing at what you label as "restrictive terms of service." If these terms are so bad why are other publishers also not crying foul?
At this point I assume Valve is not saying anything because it would be a bad business practice given their working relationship with you. However, your attempts to try them in the court of public opinion is merely further evidence to me of your duplicity. I am one of those people who had pre-ordered Dead Space 2 on PC only to find out from you *on release day* that you would not be supporting the PC with the same DLC that would be on the consoles. Therefore, my history with you and DLC is somewhat tainted.
Valve, on the other hand, have earned my respect through years of supporting games and gamers with free DLC. Multiple free updates for Team Fortress 2, multiple free updates to the Left 4 Dead series, and making Portal content available to independent developers in support of Potato Sack updates. I can understand why you would want to paint them in a bad light.
So, with the numerous other titles being released this fall, from Deus Ex: Human Revolution to Batman: Arkham City, I was debating the purchase of Battlefield 3. Now, based on your actions the debate is over and I will not be purchasing Battlefield 3. In fact, there is no other EA PC title I plan on purchasing for the foreseeable future. I purchase games from Steam, from GOG, and other services on occasion. But at this point I refuse to install Origin on my PC and will pass on EA titles unless they return to Steam. -
Meh, oh well. I'm still gonna buy it and play the shit out of it.
-
-
It activates on Origin. So, I'm not sure what your point is.
-
Huh? Got a link?
-
-
I've read some things that indicate the contrary.
-
Well, regardless of what system it uses to play on, you can activate and download a bunch of stuff that EA has put out (I think 2009 is the cutoff). Not sure why this wouldn't apply to BF3.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Wait, why can't EA allow DLC to be download from in-game AND also make them available directly through Steam? Sounds fair to me. Does that still go against Steam's policy?
But I agree with Steam's decision. Without DLC available through Steam, Steam can't sell games bundled with their DLC nor can they have them on sale. Imagine buying BF3 (or any other game) on sale for $10 and then have to buy a whole bunch of DLC which is only offered by EA for $15 each. I'll take Steam's service over EA's thank you very much. I don't need your "amazing" service EA (lol)-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
hmmm, I never knew or noticed that. So seems EA is just making up an excuse to not sell on EA so they can sell Origin. It's all marketing...just look how popular Origin is now.
-
-
Surely they won't be making more money by not selling it on steam. The money they make from selling DLC exclusively would surely not make up for the loss of not selling the full game on steam.
For all we know the DLC/maps might be free just like BC2.
-
-
-
-
-
EA jesus
-
I really hope this doesn't kill the chance of shackbattles with this game.
I'll be buying this, because for me it'll likely be no different than BC2 (which I bought retail). Its also one of the games I'm most looking forward to this year. I respect those who choose not to buy it, but I can't wrap my mind around that. As much as I like Steam...I remember getting along fine without it...it just seems so alien to me to demand that a game be on Steam or otherwise you won't play it. I mean things like Warsow aren't one Steam...even if you buy Quake on Steam you're going to need to take further steps to play Quakeworld.
I like the features that Steam offers...but those are the icing on the cake...I'm a gamer; I like games and playing said games. If this affected the experience I had playing the game, if it changed the gameplay in a negative way or made the game less playable I'd understand...if this was going to add lag, or limit my in-game options, or remove game-types or other features I could wrap my mind around it. Maybe I'm too disconnected from all this; I'm not on Facebook...I don't really use friends lists...if I were required to go to a website to download patches and install them...it wouldn't bother me; I had to do that before back in the golden age of PC gaming and later on it'd save me having to wait for a game to update after I install it off a disc because I could back up those patches.
I don't have a problem with Steam...I LIKE Steam...but I don't NEED Steam...its not make or break. There aren't a lot of multiplayer FPS games I'm excited about this year...this is one of the few (along with Tribes Ascend, which people are also going full sperglord nerd-rage over as well). MW3 may not have dedicated servers or the modes I care about (like HC DOM)...and I can't get to excited over the whole "tacticlol" angle MW2 and now it seem to be taking (BLOPS was tolerable...but the series peaked with CoD4).-
I'll also likely be buying it at a store or from Amazon...that was pretty much my plan anyway though (something like this I generally buy in a box).
-
It's too early to say on the Shackbattles, but it's possible it will have a serious effect. BC2 has had a very well attended Shackbattle but MW2 did not (IIRC) and I think the uproar over several of their decisions played a big part in that. Anyway, this is as good a reason as any to be upset at EA. Their marketing shenanigans are causing problems for the people you game with.
Personally I'm undecided on a boycott but still pretty unhappy at EA. I may just wait until it goes deep deep discount or not get it at all. The sad fact is that boycotts don't work terribly well unless you get a huge force behind them. The feedback loop is too long and not subtle enough. Beating EA up consistently in forums like this and publicly is far more effective. That said I don't like giving my money to company's that will just use it to work against what I want. I haven't bought an RIAA-affiliated CD in the past decade, not because I'm making some "statement" but because they need to starve and die for their business practices. EA (along with Activision and Ubisoft) is nearing that level of evil. Although if I met a DICE (or Blizzard or Nadeo) employee, I'd buy them a good meal and tell them all about how much I love their games. (Again, similar relationship to RIAA and the artists I like.)
-
I get what you're saying but you're putting a lot of faith in an unknown service. I highly doubt EA will be releasing stand alone patches. If you need updates chances are very good you`ll be getting them in exactly one place, Origin. The fact is we don't know how well Origin will work in terms of pushing updates, cloud, etc, etc. Steam has proven themselves, Origin has a long way to go. It's unfortunate that we the gamers will suffer through EA's learning curve.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
But if you buy brick and mortar how will EA deliver value to you. The answer is obvious. EA will be forcing Origin down your throat regardless of where you buy from.
Which gets back to why Steam is putting their foot down. Steam is saying, nuh uh, *we* want to ensure a good experience for our users by delivering updates in a timely and seamless fashion. As soon as Steam fails to deliver an end to end service to it's customer it will be just another store front. Props to Steam for holding their ground. Quite frankly they are only doing what we, the customers, have asked for. Remember we vote with our wallet. Every game we buy on Steam is a vote that we approve of the way Steam manages our gaming experience.-
Sounds silly when you say it backwards.
-
-
-
Now I'm wondering if games like Crysis 2 and Dragon Age 2 would be re-added to Steam with the game is finished it's run and they have the Ultimate/GOTY versions with all the DLC..?
One would think, the easy solution here would be to simply make the addons available to Steam... -
Isn't this similar in some ways to Valve's criticism of Microsoft's DLC/Patch policy with LIVE?
-
[deleted]
-
-
I guess it won't be coming to my computer. Oh well.
-
I'll wait 'til BF3 goes on sale unless it's super fucking stellar.
From what I've heard about the alpha, seems like I can wait a while.-
Also, I should note that I don't have as much of a problem with Blizzard's implementation of online, because it's actually done pretty decently and has features that actually help me find community and play the game I want to with others.
I really wish that Blizzard stuff was available on Steam and I always launch SCII with Steam, but the new battle.net is actually not too bad to use within SCII.
-
-
What other reasons would Valve not want Steam users to not have to go to another site to get patches and updates beside money?
Would it disrupt multiplayer on Steam with various Steam users running different patched versions of the same game? And if so, why would EA want to expose their customers to taking unnecessary steps to update when they already have a download service that can auto-update?
Sure, I can say Valve wants a piece of the DLC pie but I can just as easily say EA is willing to make my gaming experience more cumbersome so they can get more of the pie as well. Don’t know which one sites worse with me.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
