Dragon Age 2 missing from Steam
Dragon Age 2 has gone missing from Steam just as the Legacy DLC was released for it, bringing back memories of the recent Crysis 2 controversy.
The EA and Steam saga marches ever onward. Dragon Age 2 is no longer available on Steam, apparently pulled just as the new "Legacy" downloadable content was released. No reason has been given by Steam or EA regarding the absence.
This wouldn't be the first time a game was pulled from Steam in recent weeks. When Crysis 2 disappeared from Steam, it seemed like a shot across the bow of Valve's digital service as EA aggressively marketed its own service, Origin. EA claims the issue was merely an "agreement with another download service which violates [Steam's] new rules."
Eurogamer notes that the game's removal coincides with the release of the "Legacy" DLC for Dragon Age 2.
Dragon Age 2 DLC is sold through BioWare's own systems. For example, Legacy costs 800 BioWare Points. It seems that Valve pulls games if new DLC can't be sold directly through Steam. Existing games with external DLC services are likely grandfathered in. EA notes that Steam has recently implemented "new" rules. Offering DLC via BioWare.com may be the reason the game was pulled. Other services, such as Direct2Drive, still offer the game digitally.
BioWare is mostly saying mum on the issue, but one employee told forum-goers, "I can't really comment on this topic other than to say that if you already had it purchased via Steam before today you shouldn't have any issues."
Meanwhile, EA's plans for Origin remain somewhat in the dark. We've heard unconfirmed reports that Battlefield 3 won't be sold through Steam, though the rumors do claim it will come to other download services like Origin and GameStop's distribution channel. EA has declined to comment on the ongoing rumor, but introduced Origin with word that The Old Republic would be exclusive.
Shacknews has contacted both Steam and EA regarding Dragon Age 2, and will update with any new information.
-
Shacknews
replySteve Watts posted a new article, Dragon Age 2 missing from Steam.
Dragon Age 2 has gone missing from Steam just as the Legacy DLC was released for it, bringing back memories of the recent Crysis 2 controversy.-
-
it can be "just business" alright - but its that attitude that turns customers off. as many have said, Valve has earned our money for their service.. theres a laundry list a mile long for what theyve done. EA on the other hand has worked really hard in the past to piss off their customers severely.
so sure. its not personal. but it wont matter to people like me who actually boycott products on principle to shape a better market. (still havent bought one single DLC for any game. )-
Digital Distribution is a PC Gaming business only, and we all know PC Gamers pays attention to the happenings in the world around them; we don't crowd around to buy the next rehash of COD. This Activision anti-gamer like attitude that EA is taking is going to bite them right back in the ass. We are PC Gamers. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Don't expect us.
-
-
Oh right, excuse me wile I go order Resistance 3 for the PS3 on EA's Origin....
-
-
Successful troll is successful.
-
-
-
-
-
Though it is still offered through all the other digital stores, like D2D.
-
-
I agree
Oh the nerd rage from is going to be fun to watch, fun to watch indeed.
Though I personally feel that both EA and Valve are out to protect their bottom line and this whole feud has my bullshite sense going off big time here. EA is spin control with big business spin masters and Valve is letting out the internet forum Legion.
plus Gamer Boycotts always me make laugh. esp. when its over something like this. Boycotts are for dealing with real social injustice not for when somebody gets mad about running another companies client on their PC.
-
-
-
It's alright. I beat it after 4 hours. It's a very standard dungeon/underground adventure. While the environments are different, it still takes place underground.
Plenty of loot and a few side quests to get besides the main DLC quest. You can bring any party member along you have at the time. I highly suggest to bring Carver or Bethany.
If you liked DA2, then Legacy is up your alley. To me, it was enjoyable for $10, I wonder how much dialog changes depending on which party member you bring. Varric spoke a lot.
-
-
EA = Activision
-
Valve pulled the game. Dont be stupid.
-
-
So you're saying valve didn't pull it? Oh wait....
-
-
I never said that. But I don't think it's a fair move to pull on a game that they previously said OK to. For future games? Sure. But not for a game that's 8 months old, and Valve already signed off on.
-
-
I didn't infer it either.
-
-
a) Nothing that saunders45 said supports the claim that he "inferred" Valve were being dicks.
b) The ability to "infer" something is not restricted solely to the reader.
c) Stop arguing semantics. You look like fools.
-
-
-
-
-
-
That's fucked up logic man. Valve changed their rules months ago, EA is going ahead with releasing the DLC that way anyway. It's pretty obvious to anybody who still believes in personal responsibility this is EA's fault, plain and simple.
-
So, EA releases a game, fully abiding by the current rules that steam has for DLC. Then, valve changes those rules (after DA2 had launched), and tells EA that if they release DLC for the game (which is OK according to the deal they already had), they must redo their entire content delivery system to abide by the new rules. I can see them being stickler about future titles, but for a game you already OK'd? That's bullshit.
The reason they're doing it, is because they want a cut of the DLC profits, because as of now, they get none. DIdn't people have a shit fit about Apple doing this exact same thing for the App Store?-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
It seems that, based on the staggered removal here, games which offer non-compliant DLC are only removed when that non-compliant DLC is made available. Crysis 2 was pulled only when EA broke the agreement WRT that game, but DA2 was still available. Now that DA2 has noncompliant DLC, that has been pulled.
Actually, this makes me really curious about The Sims 3, because the DLC catalogue for that game is massive and always growing AND it's handled through the Sims website/launcher, so either it was grandfathered in (wasn't it put on Steam earlier this year?) or there's something else going on.-
That's a really good point regarding The Sims 3.
-
That's what doesn't make any sense in this whole scheme of things.
EA and Maxis HAVE to be making tons of money on that DLC, and it's all managed through the EADM (or was, back when I grabbed all mine lol)/Sims 3 launcher. You acquire the DLC with Sims 3 points off their website, and you can even manage the import process from inside Sims 3. Valve never sees any of it, but it's the same situation where it hooks into the base game.
And it was added to Steam in late January, with some of the expansions coming later.
-
IIRC, you can buy any of the expansions or stuff packs directly in game with sim points. Sims 3 Generations just came out last month, and another expansion is coming out in October. They just released another "Stuff" pack yesterday but it's not on Steam yet. It looks like the "expansion" packs are all there, but EA has to be making a boatload from the individual DLC items.
-
Well, every company has their own internal talks with their distributors and it's entirely likely that The Sims 3 gets a pass. Be it permanent or temporary nobody but the insiders know. It's possible that Valve considered the amount of work necessary to patch The Sims 3's store (which is even more tightly built in to the game than, say, Dragon Age II) was cost prohibitive. Maybe they worked out a deal where they would play ball with Valve's DLC system in The Sims 4 only if they gave a pass to The Sims 3. There are bunch of ways it could have gone down.
I do know that the Sims department at EA is for almost all intents and purposes an entirely different company, so it would make sense that those negotiations are separate.
-
-
-
-
Same is true of ME2, which uses the same shitty system for DLC that DA2 does, but ME2 is still on Steam.
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Please try to actually read what I wrote. I meant they as in Valve. Steam doesn't get any of the DLC profits because you're buying Bioware points and the transaction is handled directly by EA.
-
[deleted]
-
I didn't see your Vietnam DLC post. As I stated below, I'm certain they are trying to avoid those issues. But do you think Valve isn't at all interested in gaining some of the DLC profits? Of course they are. Which is why I posted what I did. If they made a it an issue for games released after the new TOS, then I can totally side with Valve. But pulling something that was OK'd under the previous terms is not cool. At least, that's how I see it.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
You don't think they OK'd Dragon Age 2 & the DLC system when it was put on steam 8 months ago?
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
Wait, so EA patched DA2 to use a completely different DLC system that what it shipped with? I haven't seen that anywhere.
-
No, they didn't, that's his point. His point is it's the same game they approved, but because they released new content for it (outside of Steam) it's now retroactively unapproved.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I have about as much evidence as everyone else has. We know the change went into effect this year, and that DA2 was released last year. Obviously, when DA2 was released, it was compliant. Valve changed the TOS, and when EA released DLC for DA2 that wasn't available through Steam, Valve pulled it. Because the DLC is all handled directly by EA, Valve gets no money from it. I'm sure they're trying to minimize headaches from DLC issues, but IMO, it's mostly about the money.
-
So you think EA didn't know about it? Also, didn't EA say for crysis 2 that they simply wanted to do their thing, which steam didn't allow? Outside handling of patches and what not. (Yeah I would def. love for my steam games to stop auto-updating and instead molest me with the shitty EA downloader)
-
-
-
There is nothing you could say to convince me valve is in the wrong here. I have way to much hate built up for Electronic Arts, the company that buys out companies just to rape the IP ad infinitum. I remember the Bullfrogs, the Westwoods, the Origins even. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and EA will never be my friend.
-
Ok then....
-
To expand on that, EA has a very long history of being the "bad guy". You are the literal devil's advocate in this instance saunders.
-
I suppose so, but I can't say I've ever had any bad experience's with EA. I've been playing their games for years, and IMO, they've greatly improved from the early-mid 2000's garbage. I can even say, I was vastly surprised by the Origin customer service recently. I screwed up my SWTOR Pre-order by applying the early access code to a different account (my SWTOR account was different than my normal EA account) but they fixed it.
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
I've never played Crysis 2, so I don't know how the DLC works. Sorry. Again, I'm not trying to be a jerk about this, just pointing out a different POV.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
So you're admitting that your judgment of who is at fault here is 100% biased and will not and never will be based on the facts of the current situation.
I hate you.-
[deleted]
-
I find it odd you guys are so fast to jump to defend Electronic Arts :/ Am I the only one who remembers all the shit they've pulled over the years?
-
[deleted]
-
It's a lot more than IP bullshit Benius. Simple things like the BF Vietnam DLC that only work on 1 version of the game, end user customer support, they barely patch their games besides the AAA ones, their DRM experiments suck, they try to stifle competition by getting monopolistic licenses, they "fought" to get servers they could host, and yet almost all their non sports online games are laggy, they treat their employees like shit. When was the last time they actually advertised for a non franchise game? I could literally spend all fucking day airing my complaints with EA.
-
-
Ebu's dog? I can't say I remember that one?
-
-
[deleted]
-
I don't even understand this. Alice is on steam? It got pulled a few days before release so they could add videos or something and it got readded? Then EA acts like this is some sort of conspiracy against them? Are you guys for real?
-
It DID NOT GET PULLED. IT WAS NEVER ON STEAM UNTIL AFTER THE GAMES RELEASE. FFS
-
Exactly so what the fuck is Crabs talking about?
-
[deleted]
-
Sorry man. To make up for it, I just lolled that post.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Also I really do not care how they treat their employees. It makes me sound like a dick, but if people want to keep working there and I get the product I am promised then that is not driving my purchase decision
I can't in good conscience support a business like that. They will always find another schlub to work minimum wage for over time, that doesn't mean that's the way people should be treated.
-
-
-
-
Over the years? Six months ago they waited until release day to say that the Dead Space 2 DLC wouldn't be coming to PC. They wait until my pre-order is installed then tell me something they had to know for weeks. I have no trust in EA or faith that they care about their customers.
-
I don't find it odd that people judge each situation based on its own facts and come to an objective opinion from them. I don't care if it's Valve, Old Spice, Electronic Arts, or the Ku Klux Klan, I will always do my best to educate myself with the facts at hand before decicing who I think is right in a particular disagreement.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day and all that-
For somebody in the business, you are amazingly clueless.
-
Could you explain to me how I am clueless in this regard? Keep in mind that this conversation is only about the fact that you admitted that you will literally not consider any facts brought to the table, and are making up your mind on bias alone.
We're not even talking about EA or Valve here, we're talking about an entire philosophy of how you arrive at your final decisions in life.
Basically, I think that anyone who says "There is nothing you could say to convince me of X" and really truly means it is pretty much a terrible person that the world would be better off without. Now, what you said may have been hyperbole or something but so far you're not backing down from what you said.-
[deleted]
-
Well, okay let's pretend we were having a discussion about that situation.
If, for example, it turned out and could be proven that the driver was at gunpoint, and the dude with the gun was going to kill the driver and his family if he didn't consume lots of alcohol and drive until he killed someone.
It's a fairly ludicrous situation, but IF that were the truth of the situation and sufficient evidence was presented to show that that is what happened, I would hope that you would shift your opinion from "the driver is a sorry shit" to "the gunman was is a sorry shit".
My point being that there is always a possibility that a given situation is not as it seems, and a reasonable and open-minded person should always be willing to change his opinion if given sufficient evidence to convince him.
The people I would like to see eradicated from the planet are those that willfully ignore evidence, instead choosing to stick with their judgment no matter what. Those people stifle the advancement of our society and potentially cause very real harm to other humans.
That being said, given sufficient evidence, I could be convinced to change my mind ;)-
Ugh I just thought of a much less ludicrous scenario:
What if it turned out that the driver was not the one who killed your cousin at all. Someone else killed him and framed the driver by planting evidence and whatnot.
If THAT evidence were shown, and it were sufficient enough to convince you that the alleged "driver" was, indeed, not the reason your cousin died, I would expect you as a reasonable person to no longer think he was a sorry shit.-
[deleted]
-
i think your example is a little far from the one that spawned this massive subthread. there are people in the world who could forgive a drunk driver, but that's not you, and i think that's a lot different from a situation like this. unless one of the companies killed AgentPothead's family member.
i guess that boils down to emotions taking over and getting the better of us, which is in line (i think) with what OverloadUT is saying. seems AgentPothead's emotions/bias are making is such that he will listen to no arguments or evidence to change his opinion - even if his opinion or assumptions are logically and factually not completely correct.
a guy who killed a family member is a lot different from that - so unless we are talking along the lines of "if you don't forgive you are terrible" then i don't think your example works. at least not for me.-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
The problem here is you're talking about a real-world situation that you are a part of as proof against my claim.
I could try to present hypothetical situations to support my assertion, but since you will always have more context to bring to the table to invalidate my hypotheticals, this conversation would go around in circles forever.
Keep in mind that I'm not saying "you shouldn't hate the guy because it's possible there is an alternate explanation" in any way, shape or form. In fact, not coming to a conclusion based on the facts you've seen is exactly what I'm championing against! So you hating him based on the evidence you have in your life is exactly what I'm saying you should do. But at the same time, I am saying that there should always remain a tiny opening in the back of your mind, even if it's the tiniest sliver ever, that would allow you to change your mind in the face of updated information.
In your specific case it seems astronomically unlikely that there's anything that would change your mind. But the possibility still exists, and IF that astronomically-low-chance thing should end up to be true, you should be willing to change your mind.
At the same time, our lives only have a finite amount of time in them, and it's also important to individuals to pick and choose what is worth their time to consider. In this case, I wouldn't say that it makes sense for you to waste any of your time considering alternative explanations. And that's fine! I am not saying that you should always seek out alternative explanations for things. You should for many things in life, but there is always a point at which you must accept the evidence you have seen thus far and make a conclusion based on it. -
i just had a long conversation with him at the office (which hilariously drove someone within ear shot away) but essentially it boiled down to the fact that he thinks people should keep an open mind and be willing to hear more information and my reply was that asserting that in an absolute way is folly as there are always exceptions to the rule. i hate absolutes.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
I could be wrong, but I don't think I've ever seen D2D actually selling DLC. Steam is the only game download service I know of that sells DLC for titles other than those published themselves (I know Impulse sells the expansions and stuff for their own products, but I've never seen DLC on there)
I can understand where EA might want to use their own system, that's okay. The problem, IMO, is that their system is fucking terrible and Valve's DLC purchasing system is fucking fantastic and I've never had a single issue with it, and I can use all the same credit card info and whatnot without having to create new accounts or give anyone else my CC info.
-
-
-
This is basically EA saying "Piss off, we'll enforce content compliance our way." Funny enough, their way has a history of screwing with the consumer.
They broke their side of the publishing agreement, most likely with a bunch of advanced warning from Valve after they got burned, and the offending product was pulled for non-compliance. From a business standpoint, it is cut and dry.
-
-
-
-
EA = the current activision = EA of the nineties = these comparisons are beyond stupid.
-
-
I wouldn't mind if this was some new company trying to start up a online service but EA's really going to compete with Steam? The only thing that's going to drive their Origin is the upcoming BattleField. Please don't turn this into what consoles are this whole exclusive war, but I see it coming already.....
-
-
I'm picturing cliffhanger with no rope.
-
-
-
-
No you can still download and play it. You just can't buy new copies of it. And it will still get updates if EA gives them updates.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
I think this is pretty much the reason valves policy exists.
EA had issues in the past where they sold DLC for games but it wasn't compatible with a steam copy. EA's customer services is pretty terrible so valve ended up bearing the brunt of the support requests.
So they brought in a policy that basically says if you have DLC for a game, sell it on the steam store too. That way they can guarantee support (and of course valve get a further cut, which is probably highly undesirable to EA who want to sell you cut assets for pure profit).-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
BTW Steve, it's not a "rumor" that BF3 is coming to other digital distributors... Impulse, Direct2Drive, etc. have been taking pre-orders for a while now.
-
They should just stop trying to compete with Steam. It's the best delivery platofrm out there and it has all the features PC Gamers want and need. Chat, friendlists (and the fact all your friends actually have a Steam account), wide variety of games, etc, etc.
This Origin bollocks will fizzle out just like GFWL. Can't come soon enough if you ask me, long live Steam.
(Also If it doesn't, i'll just buy retail and avoid Origin that way, they may have DIGITAL exclusives, but that's it, and I doubt you'll need Origin to play as it's little more than a glorified marketplace) -
-
EA doesn't owe Steam any more than they do any other outlet like Gamestop or Bestbuy. And certainly not enough to change their business plans and models.
-
-
EA's new business model involves selling dlc directly to customers. My guess is this will be the case for all their games. EA's more than happy to sell the game through whatever outlets that want to carry it, but they're not going to change the new model for Steam. Steam want's part of the sweet dlc money action and won't carry games unless they get it. Steam user's lose and it's Steam's fault.
-
-
No more one-sided than the weeks of news stories we've seen filled with comments basically saying "EA IS BEING EVIL! Valve MUST be the good guy in this situation. Why? Because I like Valve, that's why!"
Valve is in the enviable position right now where they can do whatever they like and get a free pass from the online crowd. I'd bet money if Direct2Drive, GamersGate or Impulse pulled something like this, the comments here would shift dramatically.
There has to be more to this story than is being reported (mostly because Valve has no incentive to weigh in publicly since opinion is massively in their favor already), but I don't think for a second this is all EA's fault and Valve is blameless.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
Origin as we know it now will be "successful" for many years because of TOR and whatever exclusives it has (BF3...). Whether or not it will be able to complete with Steam from a money making standpoint all lies in the hands of third party publishers down the line.
-
-
