Support NeoGAF

[michaelius]

I've been meaning to make this thread for a while to get some understanding in discussion where but reading the comments on Titianfall being available through Orgin on PC has jogged my memory and also baffled, I remember tissular posts about Half-Life 2 on steam years ago.

You are completly missing the point.

Noone would care if Origin was selling Titanfall if it was also available on other platforms.
But EA wants to force us to use their platform so they are forcing Origin on us by not allowing any other choice.

 

[Walshicus]

You are completly missing the point.

Noone would care if Origin was selling Titanfall if it was also available on other platforms.
But EA wants to force us to use their platform so they are forcing Origin on us by not allowing any other choice.

Isn't that what Valve did with Half Life 2?

 

[Sapphire Dreams]

I only speak for myself here, but I have used many clients and I still prefer Steam for its usability. However given the choice if all the games were available on Steam or GOG I'd go with GOG because it's DRM free.

However, I'd buy games from the developers themselves if I had the choice. Thankfully a lot of indie devs do this.

 

[Digoman]

Repeating a lot of messages... but for me it's a trust issue, that can always turn into a practical one like the GFWL service gong down has shown.

Steam got a *lot* of hate when it was being forced by Valve using Counter Strike 1.6 and Half-life 2. I still remember being pissed off because I couldn't unlock HL2 because their servers were down. It took a lot of time and Valve "friendly" actions to earn the "respect" it has today.

Origin is also being forced by EA, and while it has improved a lot, it will still has a serious image problem because the company as a whole is not exactly known to be nice to it's customers. Just take the mess with DLC for Bioware games that still use "Bioware Points" that have to be bought in packs, despite being integrated on Origin. The fact that EA has a history of dropping support for online services also don't inspire a lot of confidence.

uPlay just gets in the way... and Ubisoft changes it's mind about services more often then EA.

GOG is a smaller company that may not last in the long term (the stunt they pulled a few years back didn't help), but they compensate that by offering DRM-free copies.

Again, it's all about trying to guess which of these companies will not screw me over. I own a lot games on Steam, several on GOG, a few on Origin and one on the uPlay store (nvidia code)... and that's a direct reflection on the level of trust I have for each of theses companies.

 

[Glass Rebel]

The only store/system I have a real problem with is uPlay because it's still terrible. Origin is fine by itself and GFWL is luckily dead. The problem with stores from Ubisoft or EA is that neither is as fully committed to the PC platform as Valve or GoG for example. There's no telling what either of them will do down the line as history shows.

 

[Takamura-San]

You are completly missing the point.

Noone would care if Origin was selling Titanfall if it was also available on other platforms.
But EA wants to force us to use their platform so they are forcing Origin on us by not allowing any other choice.

Well they see steam as direct competition.

To them is selling on steam is like asking Nintendo why they don't sell games on PSN.

 

[TGMIII]

I serves as Steams competition, do you like monopoly would you rather sit through Xbox one drm or ps3's $599 because of no competition. Is it a sin for an alternative to exist. Why is it a sin they choose to push their service like Valve did using their games.

The problem with what you're saying is that they haven't in any way forced valves hand with steam, they aren't so much competition as they are an unwanted alternative. Competition is great but in what way is Uplay and Origin trying to outperform steam.

Also remember that while huge seasonal sales were going on at steam, EA where claiming that Steam sales "cheapen intellectual property". Ultimately that's my issue with Uplay and Origin, they offer nothing over a service that was already established and one that they were happy to use until they felt the need to make more money which is fine since it's their property but I then also reserve the right to not use their services.

GoG is still the ideal DD store but for obvious reasons many publishers don't release their new titles through them.

 

[Interfectum]

I don't like Origin. It offers me nothing on par or better than Steam. In order to play social multiplayer EA games I have to create a brand new friend's list and get used to all new community features for zero return. I'm not sure why this is hard to understand.

Also, Origin has no real future as a platform. At any time EA could get tired of trying to do the PC digital download store and shut it all down. I don't trust them.

In regards to other companies like Blizzard... Their games are more than worth jumping over to a service that's not Steam. EA games are not IMO.

 

[SneakyStephan]

Noone hates gog , or gmg, or the many proprietary clients like those that wargaming, gajin etc use

it's malware like uplay or the shitty battlelog+ eadm (now called origin just to shit on the fans lol) that gets on people's nerves

people like steam because it has a LOT of features like workshop (integrated mod support , mod support is something none of the other publishers/client makers outside of valve even want to dignify as it gets in the way of their yearly releases and season passes) , market, family sharing etc

 

[Haunted]

Isn't that what Valve did with Half Life 2?

10 years ago, yes. The landscape has changed. Consumer needs have changed.

As much money as EA pumps into Origin, it will not become the next Steam. EA can't be Valve.

I don't like Origin. It offers me nothing on par or better than Steam. In order to play social multiplayer EA games I have to create a brand new friend's list and get used to all new community features for zero return. I'm not sure why this is hard to understand.

Also, Origin has no real future as a platform. At any time EA could get tired of trying to do the PC digital download store and shut it all down. I don't trust them.

Bottom line: Blizzard games are more than worth jumping over to a service that's not Steam. EA games are not IMO.

Well said.

But I'd also rather have Diablo and Hearthstone integrated in Steam as well, with my existing friends list, achievements etc. Still - b.net is pretty much the least bad extra platform from the ones mentioned in this thread. All courtesy of the trust Blizzard has been building over the last decade and more.

Compare that to the treatment people get from MS, Ubi and EA and it's easy to see why GFWL, uplay and Origin are as reviled as they are in the community.

 

[Principate]

That's a false dichotomy.
You don't have necessarily to choose between an awful alternative or a monopoly.
Not to mention Valve with Steam was perfectly capable to put the basis to allow and even endorse its own competition. They essentially created some of the competing stores they have today.
Monopoly my hairy ass.

You don't have to choose an awful company just be open to options rather than ridiculous sentiments like steam or no buy.

 

[Valnen]

Origin and UPlay actually make playing games worse. They're slow and bloated programs.

Origin seems fast to me. It actually works better than the Steam client. It also handles DLC better in that it's easier to see what you own and don't own. It also never makes my computer hang unlike Steam.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Do people really hate GMG, GoG, Amazon, and Humble Bundle? First I've heard of it

I think the problem occurs when there are Steam competitors who can only justify their existence by locking games to their service, so that people aren't actually given a choice as to which service to use. That way they aren't really competing with Steam so much as forcing an inferior service on PC gamers.

 

[Wiktor]

You are completly missing the point.

Noone would care if Origin was selling Titanfall if it was also available on other platforms.
But EA wants to force us to use their platform so they are forcing Origin on us by not allowing any other choice.

Steam isn't a platform. PC is the platform.
And publishers are free to put their games whenever they decide. I wish all games would be on GOG, Valve's ones included, but I'm not going to complain about every title that doesn't kand there.

 

[Faabulous]

For me is a simple matter, I CAN buy from steam, because they support my currency and payment methods and I CAN'T buy from Origin/Uplay, because they don't.

Origin goes even further in that they go against the law here, converting straight from dollars on PC games (in Brazil the maximum price for PC games are 99R$, on steam a 60 dollar game is 99R$ on Origin a 60 dollar game is 130R$) AND has the nerve to charge us all the conversion fees and IOF (tax on imports). Steam does NONE of that while still supporting Brazillian payment methods like BR Bank transfers and BR credit cards while Origin forces as to use International Credit Cards and pay EVEN MORE taxes.

 

[Dolor]

Do people really hate GMG, GoG, Amazon, and Humble Bundle? First I've heard of it

I think the problem occurs when there are Steam competitors who can only justify their existence by locking games to their service, so that people aren't actually given a choice as to which service to use. That way they aren't really competing with Steam so much as forcing an inferior service on PC gamers.

Yep.

 

[Sentenza]

Frankly I find detestably hypocritical how many people love to feign ignorance about why some of us like Steam more than its competition and how they insist to wave around this "you love monopoly" bullshit to guilt trip the people they are arguing with.

Really?
You genuinely can't grasp why a company being consumer-friendly for years (never ever released a single paid DLC, and they release tons of them), being the pioneer of this kind of service (so the established, de facto standard in the market) and so on... is generally more loved than companies like EA or Ubisoft, which made of consumer exploitation, unreliability and abusive practices essentially their main strategy over the last decade?

Jesus Christ, you're clueless.

 

[benny_a]

For the most part it's because other clients have little to nothing advantageous to offer when compared to Steam, and since Steam is the oldest of the bunch it's where many have most of their games so naturally there's a desire for consolidation, plus Valve is largely consumer-orientated. Furthermore, there's no practical reason as to why a game backed by a publisher should not be on Steam -- it's just petulant politics.

What do you mean no practical reason?

It's 20-30% more money in the pockets of EA and Ubisoft if they sell their games on their own store.

Isn't that what Valve did with Half Life 2?

Yes.

 

[crazy monkey]

competition is good. it is like if console players bitched that there should be only one console.

 

[Interfectum]

Steam isn't a platform. PC is the platform.
And publishers are free to put their games whenever they decide. I wish all games would be on GOG, Valve's ones included, but I'm not going to complain about every title that doesn't kand there.

You're not going to complain because it's a silly request. Most people don't use GOG. Tons people DO use Steam and would like the option to have their PC games integrated into that service unless there is a very legit reason not to. EA playing around their digital store isn't a really good reason for me as a gamer.

 

[JakeD]

steam works on three levels - as a store, as a DRM tool, and as a social/community site

it's got plenty of competition as a store (amazon, GMG, humble) and it's won as a social community site. most people (well, everyone except game publishers) view the DRM aspect as an annoyance/necessary evil.

it's only the DRM aspect of the other clients that bothers people, because it (occasionally) does not work as well as Steam, and nothing pisses PC gamers off more than not being able to play games they paid for because of DRM issues. i would buy games off Uplay/Origin if they were DRM free

 

[Principate]

Do people really hate GMG, GoG, Amazon, and Humble Bundle? First I've heard of it

I think the problem occurs when there are Steam competitors who can only justify their existence by locking games to their service, so that people aren't actually given a choice as to which service to use. That way they aren't really competing with Steam so much as forcing an inferior service on PC gamers.

One of those is DRM free the rest don't really use their own drm but the DRM they use is Steam that's not much of a point, when arguing about different drm services.

They sell Origin keys also you realise.

 

[Dolor]

What do you mean no practical reason?

It's 20-30% more money in the pockets of EA and Ubisoft if they sell their games on their own store.

How does that benefit me? I'm the one making the purchasing decision.

 

[Gowans]

10 years ago, yes. The landscape has changed. Consumer needs have changed.


As much money as EA pumps into Origin, it will not become the next Steam. EA can't be Valve.

So then what about Battle.net?

It seems accepted with Blizzard but a big fuss with Origin


I don't know I've been a PC gamer for so long I identified not being locked into one platform as a benefit, I guess that's becoming a old school of though on the platform now.

 

[JaseC]

What do you mean no practical reason?

It's 20-30% more money in the pockets of EA and Ubisoft if they sell their games on their own store.

As I've already pointed out, the games that EA and Ubi don't sell on Steam are sold on other stores.

 

[Interfectum]

It seems accepted with Blizzard but a big fuss with Origin

People don't like EA. EA is not a trust worthy company. I don't want my digital library dependent on whether or not EA gets bored of playing around with a PC storefront.

Most people trust and like Blizzard and Valve. Hence not much of an issue.

 

[Principate]

Frankly I find detestably hypocritical how many people love to feign ignorance about why some of us like Steam more than its competition and how they insist to wave around this "you love monopoly" bullshit to guilt trip the people they are arguing with.

Really?
You genuinely can't grasp why a company being consumer-friendly for years (never ever released a single paid DLC, and they release tons of them), being the pioneer of this kind of service (so the established, de facto standard in the market) and so on... is generally more loved than companies like EA or Ubisoft, which made of consumer exploitation, unreliability and abusive practices essentially their main strategy over the last decade?

Jesus Christ, you're clueless.

It's about refusing to buy use other free products. Not about supporting a company. The former is actually ridiculous, it is simply begging for a monopoly to take advantage of you.

 

[petran79]

from personal experience, steam has a buggy offline mode.

Sometimes opening steam in online mode is faster than offline mode.

Also i wouldnt recommend having many games on steam while offline. They dissappear for no reason.

While for online steam is #1, for offline, piracy is the most convenient option.

Consoles are not there yet, but they suffer elsewhere

 

[TouchMyBox]

I love the Humble Store because they treat their customers and devs right and give people the best of both worlds with steam keys and DRM-free copies of games.

GoG is cool but they refuse to support linux so I haven't been using them much lately, but I look forward to the day when they change their mind.

GMG, Amazon etc. are sweet when they are offering competitive prices on games.

Every time I launch UPlay I feel like i'm putting my balls in a vise grip, but they have a couple sweet games.

Every time I launched Origin I felt like I needed to take a shower.

 

[Principate]

As I've already pointed out, the games that EA and Ubi don't sell on Steam are sold on other stores.

They sell them to those stores and so determine the margin that's not an actual point. It could as low as a 5% margin we don't know

I pointed this out but for some reason you completely ignored.

 

[Interfectum]

It's about refusing to buy use other free products. Not about supporting a company. The former is actually ridiculous, it is simply begging for a monopoly to take advantage of you.

Not liking Origin or uPlay is not begging for a monopoly. Most people don't beg for League of Legends or Starcraft 2 on Steam.

 

[Zia]

It's about refusing to buy use other free products. Not about supporting a company. The former is actually ridiculous, it is simply begging for a monopoly to take advantage of you.

Do you work on Origin? You're unbelievably dense.

 

[Fox_Mulder]

I bought SimCity at dayone on Origin (thanks polygon).
They won't have my money for a looong time.

 

[TGMIII]

So then what about Battle.net?

It seems accepted with Blizzard but a big fuss with Origin


I don't know I've been a PC gamer for so long I identified not being locked into one platform as a benefit, I guess that's becoming a old school of though on the platform now.

Battle.net has been around from 96 and received huge upgrades in 98 with the release of starcraft. Blizzard have always held their games within battle.net, it's just that recently they've released a client to create increased uniformity between their games.

 

[Azure Dream]

...so does that mean Valve has stuff like Dota2 and Team Fortress 2 running on uPlay and Origin without any Steam requirement then? Because if not I don't see how their being exclusives is any more justifiable.

Don't get me wrong--I absolutely love Steam. All the crazy Steam sales (coupled with the piss poor performance of last-gen consoles) helped drive me towards PC gaming, and it's my central hub for it. But I really don't have a problem with using Origin for Titanfall. The game looks like a lot of fun, and the only other options I'd have for playing it are buying a new console.

Nor am I keen on the idea of Steam being the only game in town. As much as I love Valve is doing, I still wouldn't trust them to have sole monopolistic power over all of PC gaming.

I get your point... I know Half-Life 2 buyers were REALLY pissed at being forced to use Steam when that game first came out, when the service was crap... But my point is, Steam exists at a certain level today, and it keeps getting better, so the exclusive titles aren't really what keeps me on the service. Origin isn't beating them on features (although I will grant they're getting better), it's trying to succeed based on locking away titles. In effect, both are doing the same thing, yes, but on Steam, it doesn't really bother me, because there's already so much I enjoy about the service, the exclusives aren't really a continuing selling point for me. But with other services, like Origin, they're not quite up to the same level yet, and are using exclusive titles to try to forcefully yank customers toward them, instead of having a better service on the whole. I'm not saying it's awful at this point (although it started out that way), but with Valve, it's compelling to have a big game on Steam because they build up all sorts of crazy, interesting subsystems to go along with it, like the item trading interface, trading cards, profile rewards, Big Picture, VR interface optimization, etc. What's the compelling reason to play a game on Origin, other than you have to play it on Origin?

 

[Principate]

Not liking Origin or uPlay is not begging for a monopoly. Most people don't beg for League of Legends or Starcraft 2 on Steam.

It's not about Origin specifically. It's about people actually saying Steam or no sale.

Do you work on Origin? You're unbelievably dense.

Says the person trying to close off an Open platform,

 

[JaseC]

They sell them to those stores and so determine the margin that's not an actual point. It could as low as a 5% margin we don't know

I pointed this out but for some reason you completely ignored.

I replied, you just missed it:

That's not how digital distribution works. The key difference between physical and digital is that with the latter "stock" isn't paid for by the retailer because there are no inherent costs involved in the process of providing keys, and because of this prices are publisher-approved. Not to mention that DRM-free games -- such as those on GOG -- do not use keys in any way, shape or form: the products in such cases are just pre-packaged installers and thus there's no actual stock involved.

You also don't seem to be aware that Valve does not charge for Steam keys and there is nothing preventing a publisher from ignoring the Steam Store itself but providing Steam keys on its own terms for 100% of the revenue. One such example is Disciples: Reincarnation.

 

[Takamura-San]

Frankly I find detestably hypocritical how many people love to feign ignorance about why some of us like Steam more than its competition and how they insist to wave around this "you love monopoly" bullshit to guilt trip the people they are arguing with.

Really?
You genuinely can't grasp why a company being consumer-friendly for years (never ever released a single paid DLC, and they release tons of them), being the pioneer of this kind of service (so the established, de facto standard in the market) and so on... is generally more loved than companies like EA or Ubisoft, which made of consumer exploitation, unreliability and abusive practices essentially their main strategy over the last decade?

Jesus Christ, you're clueless.

I don't believe that anyone is calling for hating on Steam.

It just seems overly ridiculous to me that people refuse to buy games that are not on Steam. It just seems odd. Buying a game on steam that is on another platform seems normal. But this steam or no go, seems close minded to me.

 

[Toski]

People don't like EA. EA is not a trust worthy company. I don't want my digital library dependent on whether or not EA gets bored of playing around with a PC storefront.

Most people trust and like Blizzard and Valve. Hence not much of an issue.

How long will it take for people to "trust" EA though? Let's just say that if EA keeps up Origin for 15 years and going with no changes (good or bad), and no privacy breaches, would you trust them? I have my doubts that most "Steam or bust" users would.

 

[ComputerMKII]

The benefits of installing another program/online store is inferior doesn't compensate for the clutter.

 

[Principate]

I replied, you just missed it:

That doesn't have anything to do with the argument. Unless EA allows developers to sell their games directly which we don't know, they decide the cut. Even if they did they can change their mind this is true digital or otherwise.

 

[Wiktor]

You're not going to complain because it's a silly request. .

So just because some people love to use DRM bloated client like Steams makes the idea of going GOG for everything silly? Riight.

Origin is just a small client. A simple layer to launch game. Even if it's not as convienient as Steam it's still just a dumb client. When somebody refuses to buy a game he wants over something as small as this it means to me that games are secondary, not primary, attraction to him in the whole hobby.

 

[KiteGr]

I dont agree with Origin's terms of service, so i cant buy anything EA on pc.

 

[Interfectum]

So just because you people love to user DRM bloated client like Steams makes the idea of going GOG for everything silly? Riight.

It's silly because it's unrealistic. Wanting to play a multiplayer shooter on a service that already has massive community features set up and ready to go is realistic.

It's easy to toss out insults like 'DRM-lovers' and 'you want a monopoly' when you don't understand the core issue.

 

[Takamura-San]

I dont agree with Origin's terms of service, so i cant buy anything EA on pc.

Are they any different from Valve's?

 

[ZeroX03]

So then what about Battle.net?

It seems accepted with Blizzard but a big fuss with Origin

Battle.net has been around for like 6-7 years more than Steam. I've been using it since Warcraft II's b.net edition. It's accepted because it has a long history with consumers I guess.


To the people who are saying: EA put Titanfall on Steam or I won't buy it, are you also pushing for Valve to release DotA2, L4D, etc on Origin? It seems like you're just pushing for games to be on your platform of choice rather than arguing for games to be freely available on as many services as possible. I think it's reasonable - although inconvenient for consumers - for EA to restrict their games as Valve does.

 

[TheSeks]

You are completly missing the point.

Noone would care if Origin was selling Titanfall if it was also available on other platforms.
But EA wants to force us to use their platform so they are forcing Origin on us by not allowing any other choice.

So you'd be fine if Titanfall was offered on Steam, but required Origin like Ubisoft does Uplay titles?

Isn't that what Valve did with Half Life 2?

Basically, yes. Steam was around before Half-Life 2, they offered it as a PC patching platform. But they "trojan horsed" Steam with Half-Life 2. Want to play HL2? Gotta install Steam.

 

[hey_it's_that_dog]

I serves as Steams competition, do you like monopoly would you rather sit through Xbox one drm or ps3's $599 because of no competition. Is it a sin for an alternative to exist. Why is it a sin they choose to push their service like Valve did using their games.

Competition occurs at multiple levels on the PC platform. Steam, all by itself, has price competition between products and, importantly, you can buy games that activate on Steam from a wide variety of competing store fronts.

The idea that Origin or UPlay or any other half-assed "me-too!" service from an untrustworthy mega-publisher constitutes significant (or necessary) competition is laughable.

They could vanish today and Steam would remain more or less the same.

 

[JaseC]

That doesn't have anything to do with the argument. Unless EA allows developers to sell their games directly which we don't know, they decide the cut. Even if they did they can change their mind this is true digital or otherwise.

You said that retailers can determine the price because they buy keys from publishers. This isn't how digital distribution operates. Apparently, though, you grossly misspoke and meant to say that publishers set the retailer's cut, but this isn't true, either.

 

[Valnen]

It's silly because it's unrealistic. Wanting to play a multiplayer shooter on a service that already has massive community features set up and ready to go is realistic.

It's easy to toss out insults like 'DRM-lovers' and 'you want a monopoly' when you don't understand the core issue.

The core issue is people don't trust EA. The Origin client itself works fine and is even better than Steam in some ways.