Valve boss says Steam must prove its worth to EA
Valve boss Gabe Newell has finally spoken up about the recent EA games pulled from Steam, saying that they have work harder to prove their worth to publishers like EA.
EA has pulled no punches in its recent round of conflicts with Steam removing its games, using words like "restrictive," and not-too-subtly singling out digital distribution giant for being the only platform with those rules in place. Valve boss Gabe Newell has finally responded to the kerfuffle, and like a Facebook relationship, admits that the situation is "complicated."
"We have to show EA it's a smart decision to have EA games on Steam, and we're going to try to show them that," Newell said.
"Companies have to earn the right to install content on their customers' PCs on a regular basis. The same thing is true of Steam. We have to prove we are creating value on an ongoing basis, whether it's to EA or Ubisoft or whoever," Newell told Develop.
Citing "a whole set of complicated issues," Newell claimed that it's up to Valve to prove a beneficial relationship for EA. "We really want to show there's a lot of value having EA titles on Steam," he said. "We want EA's games on Steam and we have to show them that's a smart thing to do. I think at the end of the day we're going to prove to Electronic Arts they have happier customers, a higher quality service, and will make more money if they have their titles on Steam. It's our duty to demonstrate that to them. We don't have a natural right to publish their games."
Though Newell didn't specify the exact nature of the problem with EA, comments from EA regarding their various pulled games shed a little light on the situation. It seems that that Steam has adopted a new policy that requires all associated content to be available through Steam. Older games that sell DLC directly through the game interface are grandfathered in, but when EA brings out a new piece of DLC, it violates Steam's policy and the game is pulled. We saw this happen with both Crysis 2 and Dragon Age 2.
Since Steam takes a share of profits from all content sold, EA seems to be banking on the notion that keeping that cut will net greater profits than the sales that come through Steam. For their part, EA has even started preemptively avoiding the service, announcing recently that Battlefield 3 will not be available through Steam for the same reason. In a statement, the publisher said it is "happy to partner with any download service that does not restrict our ability to connect directly with consumers."
-
Shacknews
replySteve Watts posted a new article, Valve boss says Steam must prove its worth to EA.
Valve boss Gabe Newell has finally spoken up about the recent EA games pulled from Steam, saying that they have work harder to prove their worth to publishers like EA.-
Guess what, EA? Steam is established by a quality game-dev company that respects the industry (and developers) and has been around for years and works well. I like and accept Steam, and don't want to have to download a different application for every new video game coming out.
I don't want Impulse, Origin, Capsule, or the Amazon Games Downloader. Give me Steam and I'm a happy user! -
Way to make taking the high road sound like a threat.
-
I agree, I don't see how this is a threat at all... but omfg I hope they figure this out soon because I really don't want to buy it from Origin... and no way I'm going to buy a freaking retail copy for a PC game... The free game that EA is giving people for pre-ordering in August through Origin is actually pretty awesome IMO, but I would much rather just get it on Steam with no extra game or benefits...
-
^^^^ saunders45 character account
-
U mad bro?
-
-
-
you did the right thing, Crysis 2 SP is boring as hell and MP is a fuckfest
-
Steam is actually useful and convenient. It's not just a store, EA.
Your shit has proven to be broken and a show of contempt for your customers. Your loss.-
Amen Brother. Long live Valve and Steam. Down with the Origin, tacky storefront with 5 titles shit. I love Steam, EVERY GAMER ON THE PLANET should be on Steam, it's that good.
-
The ideal choice would be to have their games on both services and let consumers make the choice as to which is the better platform in the same way people try to decide whether to buy an EA game for the ps3 or the xbox. Instead they are artificially forcing people to their own platform, i suspect because in a straight battle people would pick steam. A logical and ruthless business decision, but in no way done for the benefit of consumers.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
Oh look. It's a little Steam circle jerk.
-
[deleted]
-
-
Don't know about capt tripps, but I exclude myself by choice.
For all its "convenience," "consumer"-friendliness, and innovation, Steam(works) is just a user-glorified store/DRM system. Automatic updates are nice, except when it installs a game-breaking patch, regardless how rare or common that is, or when (until recently) it would download the entirety of changed files post-patch rather than binary changes like the majority of the industry.
I think it was The Witcher 2's patches (15.9MB, 68MB, 98.4MB, 72.6MB versus 9GB, 9GB, 9GB, 9GB (or 72.6MB, assuming the Steam update for binary patches was in time for 1.35)) were the real impetus that got them moving on that--after already having Steam in the market for eight years.
The one game I have on Steam is Supreme Commander 2. I got it on release day and in a retail store, so I could check the box for Steamworks logos before making the purchase. Of course, by the time I opened the case and saw the first sign of Steam in the sheet for the Steam code, it was too late to return it, but even then, rather than install any part of the game from disc, it decided to download all 4+ GBs from Steam's servers.
I don't care one way or another about Origin and I've intentionally bought stuff on GOG and Impulse, so I'm not just a digital distribution Luddite, I just don't understand why people have no trouble both defending Steam as a platform (and begging for Steamworks (and thusly DRM) to be built into every game you buy), while at the same time decrying any and all platforms and DRM schemes that attempt to compete with it.
-
The crux of your argument (Witcher 2 and SC2) is around binary patching which is now being rolled out. That would make your point moot, right?
You're also forgetting the other parts of steamworks that most of us really dig. Like, steam cloud (configs and save games from anywhere), game invites, and a friends list/ community that most of us have been using for years now.-
-
-
Alright, I suppose I did spend too much time talking about updates, but I did preface that whole bit by mentioning the change with regard to binary updating. The problem there is still the fact that it took eight years on the market and 9GB patches for them to change that.
"You're also forgetting the other parts of steamworks that most of us really dig. Like, steam cloud (configs and save games from anywhere), game invites, and a friends list/ community that most of us have been using for years now [and occasional ads when you exit a game]." Fixed, but to actually respond: haven't you been using instant messenging for years, too? Why not use instant messengers? Why not use Skype or TeamSpeak? Why not use in-game chat? Why not play windowed (where possible)? Do that and you can send and receive messages, access a browser, music, and e-mail.
Is it because it's all built-in? Is it because Steam doesn't have much of an impact on performance? Do you exit other IM programs before you launch a game? Do you close your browser and leave Facebook behind while you play? Is an instant message that pops up mid-game any more disrupting when it happens somewhere else on your system rather than through Steam? You can ignore either. Is it really too difficult to find and back up a setting file or a savegame to your own storage device (a thumbdrive, external hard drive, an MP3 player, a phone, or your own cloud account)? Are we really caught up on convenience that much?
Alco23 and dnagenome, you're right, I don't play any of those games, whatever "they" happen to be, and all the friends I actually do have on Steam, I talk to with services like Skype and Windows Live Messenger. When I hear that a PC game has Steamworks, I avoid it and in the end, I either get it on the consoles or skip it entirely, which has saved me more than $[console version] - $[PC version] over time.
Homefront? I surprised my friends with how excited I was...until the Steamworks announcement, then I waited for release and ended up skipping it entirely. Rage? I still don't actually have any interest. Skyrim? Well, I have Oblivion for Xbox 360, so I might as well get Skyrim for it, too. The Left 4 Deads, the Half-Lifes, the Team Fortresses, and, yes, even the Portals? Skipped. Entirely. Even the Portal free offer. Even The Orange Box for consoles.
"Ludicrous!" "How could you do that to yourself?" "You don't know what you're missing" "Why?" Because I'm stubborn or obstinate? Maybe, but...
http://www.1up.com/news/10000-steam-members-pledge-boycott
http://www.shacknews.com/article/69194/ea-crysis-2-pulled-from
http://www.shacknews.com/article/68678/ea-launches-origin-online-store
http://www.shacknews.com/article/69698/battlefield-3-to-require-eas-origin-service
http://www.shacknews.com/article/69784/single-player-only-games-gone-in-three-years-says-veteran
Notice any similarities, especially in the comments on the ShackNews articles? Suddenly we're in much more similar positions on opposite sides of an issue... Boiled down, I won't buy Steam games because of Steam and a disturbingly large number of Steam users (at least make the claim) they won't buy a game that doesn't have Steamworks (or at least appear in the Steam store). The Left 4 Dead 2 one is just there because a friend (with a huge Steam library that even he is starting to worry about) mentioned to me that in the first day after its release, most people who boycotted it were playing it. And the single-player one because of the backlash I've seen for the idea. People still love single-player experiences, even for lack of a social connection, despite the lost revenue companies might perceive in investing in them.
For me, cloud-based DRM kills Steam. If the industry is going to insist on DRM, I want it on the DVD and only on the DVD for physical media--even if it means giving up disc-free play and no-disc cracks--or for digital copies, in a self-contained (and non-intrusive) package that is called by the game on launch and doesn't require access to any server to run, or at most only on install/first-run. There're all sorts of legal and privacy issues starting to emerge around cloud services, but these are simply overshadowed by the issue of connectivity: low bandwidth, unreliable connections, and the lack of perpetual connections.
Now, let's go back full circle and see if anyone would like to respond to my original biggest issue. Why is Steam ok as a platform (and Steamworks as a DRM-scheme) when Ubisoft's Always-On isn't? When C&C4 isn't? When TAGES isn't? When Impulse isn't? When GOG isn't? When Origin isn't? Why is Homefront ok for requiring Steam, but Battlefield 3 isn't for requiring Origin? Why is Skyrim ok for requiring Steam, but not From Dust or even the single-player mode in Diablo III for requiring a constant connection?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yea just like how L4D2 and TF2 are available on Origin, D2D and Impulse....o wait.
-
capt derpps
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Wanna be the center?
-
I love Steam because Valve has given me so much more value than I have ever expected.
What has EA done for me to keep me a happy customer?
-
-
The way I see this is like having a tenant in an apartment. You can have them pay for the utilities separately or eat the cost in part of the rent. Essentially covering a variable expense with a fixed income.
You either eat the cost to keep the tenant or lost the tenant which means loss of rent.
Since Steam wants a cut of DLC it seems to be either a good move or a bad one if it causes publishers to flee the service like EA. They either may go the route to eat the cost as they already have been before the policy change or hold steady and hope it doesn't result in too much flight.-
All the big publications metaphorically up and left in response to Apple's new policy for in-app purchases on iOS. If you were Amazon or the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal, would you like to pay Apple 30% of revenue (not profit) made from within your app? The workaround they all took is to force users to make subsciption and book purchases from their websites or another (non-iOS) device, but the new policies also prevented them from referencing outside stores, so Amazon, for example, couldn't tell their users "If you'd like to buy more books for your Kindle app, go to Amazon.com" or put a hyperlink anywhere in the app.
I'm not saying that Steam's new DLC policy is or might be anywhere close to that draconian for content providers, but every chunk a delivery channel decides to start taking out of a content provider's profits is going to be one more bullet point on the list of reasons for them to find (or with EA/Origin and Stardock/Impulse, make) an alternative.
-
-
Hopefully this gets sorted out. I would hate to see this trend continuing and then before you know it, EA, Activision, THQ, and Ubisoft pull their whole catalogue and offer them solely on their own store.
-
This was the kind of statement I was expecting to hear from Valve: classy, alluding to the great consumer adoption of Steam, but not overly hammering the point.
Your move, David DeMartini.-
Well he's not about to start burning bridges if he thinks that in the future EA will be back on Steam. He also knows the market penetration of Steam and that might eventually force EA to come back when they realize that people don't want their service for a few games.
-
-
This fight has never ever been about steam in any way its all about trying to force people to Origin EA just had to find a reason and they found it in the new DLC terms that are to make it easyer for players to buy DLC.
Origin would lose badly and fail in weeks if they did not find a reason to pull it out of a head to head battle with steam for sales so there doing this to force people away form steam and at the same time make them look bad.
This is another one of EA tricks to try and make more money and to make others look bad.-
Then why is BF3 available through every other oneline distributer? Steam is the ONLY place you can't get BF3.
-
Because no one else in the market matters. (They share 30% among all the stores.) Steam is the big horrible monopoly.
-
Name one online retailer where you'll use their service for Battlefield 3.
Steam is a service. You buy, download and play your games through that (the first 2 not being a requirement). Your Steam game requires Steam to play. Origin works the exact same way. You can buy Steam games on other services. You can even buy Steamworks games through other services. Battlefield 3 isn't available on Steam, because EA doesn't want Steam to be a service. To buy Battlefield 3 at another online retailer means you're merely downloading it and using Origin as the service. Hell, you might not even be downloading it. You might just be getting a key to plug into Origin. Steam does that too.-
I'm typing this slow, because I know you have trouble reading. . .
-
I don't think you understand what the fuck you're talking about. Read that slowly then: http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=26523939
-
-
-
-
I would think it is more about EA wanting more money from selling games their games online and not wanting a single store to dictate how it should design its DLC model, especially when it would involve creating different versions of a single game so that there is one that all stores get and one made just for one single store. this is just a view from the sidelines but this makes more sense to me other than just plain greed.
also fuck corporations wanting to make more money those sunnuva fucking bitches!-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
No, no, they're total moral equivalents simply because they're both game publishers. Jeez, ain't you ever argued before?
-
-
Technically EA gave it a shot several times.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Why are there people crying about it not being available on steam? Seriously, who cares if you have to download another front end, it's not like they're asking you to buy a 3.5" disk drive and install it? Oh shit, man it's hard clicking on "origin.exe' and clicking "login" then "BF3"
NOOOO 5 SECONDS OF MY TIME IS WASTED...
I could care less where my $49.99 gets divied up, if EA wants 100% of the profit, good on them.
People here make it sound like steam is the victim here?
Let's all cry about blizzard titles and Diablo3 not being available on steam now.. wahhh-
$59.99
-
-
Pretty much. Steam beat everyone to the punch and I like it being my main game client. End of the story. I don't have to buy stuff not on it and that's what I'm doing. To be fair I am still waiting for RDR (lol)
-
I bought BFBC2 on steam and still have to use the in game browser to find games. Won't I be able to just "add non-steam game" to the list and it be the exact same? Seriously man, even if it's not the same, if you really want to play the game and that's the only reason you're not buying it, that's just retarded.
-
^ was meant for op. Not singlin' u out dognose :P :(
-
Get back to me when you try to run 'file verification' on Origin, or need to move that game to another computer.
-
-
-
-
-
Also, Blizzard has a long and storied history of not dicking over their customers...unlike EA.
-
Exactly...I can see EA phasing out servers and support for it's game, where as Blizzard still supports Diablo 2 eleven years later.
EA usually kills off it's sports game support etc to make you buy the new version.
-
-
-
-
Hello and welcome to Shacknews comments and general Chatty, on Internet™. On Internet™ you may encounter opinions which run counter to yours; if this frightens or upsets you there are a few different ways of dealing with that: a) be frightened or upset; b) run around with your hands in the air like your feet are on fire and complain to anyone who will listen; c) leave internet; or d) attempt to engage those with different opinions in reasonable discussion to see if your opinion may be the incorrect one.
-
-
[deleted]
-
Will Steam ever be on origin?
-
It does not work this way; Valve is not a publisher as EA is, Steam is not a publishing platform, just a distribution one. They have games from every other publisher,, including Activition, Ubisoft and Squenix. EA has no interest in selling competitors product on Origin, the main question is "do they want their games on Steam, since they do not control everything there?".
It's pretty obvious that a platform like Steam that has never less than a million user online at any time should be considered seriously; but for some reason, EA finds that the few limitation imposed by Steam are unacceptable on the PC, even though they tolerate way worse on Xbox.
I hope they come around. Even if I buy games on other sites than Steam (like Impulse, and GamersGate or of course GOG) I still want to have EA's game in a place I visit daily and will always try to by my games on first.-
-
I would do that.
-
-
-
-
Well played Valve. Gabe's comment appears to be very generous on the surface, but the only thing its really going to do is whip fans of Steam into a frenzy. Valve doesn't have to prove shit to EA and they know it, but Valve fanboys don't know that they know it.
-
[deleted]
-
-
i'm pretty sure valve will back down
-
[deleted]
-
Long time PC gamer. These days, I like to buy all games via STEAM. It's just easier, it works, etc. EA, get over yourself and release the game on STEAM. I am a diehard BF series player, but I will not buy the game if it is not on STEAM.
PS - I really hope you are able to take the blinders off and listen to Gabe when he comes back to the table to explain the benefits of STEAM again. Just think of the back titles alone, that you will start selling again in numbers once you let STEAM put them on sale and market them. I for one, would buy an entire BF series package for a great price via STEAM, just so I can have it all updated and downloadable/playable via STEAM instead of having to pull out the DVD's, install updates, etc.
PSS - Otherwise f&*k you EA, I have no love for you.
PSSS - I like PS's. -
At least he is being positive about it.
-
I like to get my games on steam because I already have an overload of discs and its hard to keep up with them. Also discs can get lost and scratched. EA should just stick with Steam it already has a large community and has a good download system going. It also saves them the money required to burn all the games onto discs. I don't think Orgin will ever get near to the sales on steam or the community.
-
