I'm wondering if EA's relationship with Valve regarding Steam isn't as... well, "sour"... as we all seem to think it is.
I mean, Steam is a monster. Given the choice between "getting a game on Steam with a free spike through the testicles" and "get the game elsewhere and get a free blowjob", it's quite clear that the majority would rather go for the spike through the testicles.
The success of Steam has also got to have made EA a boatload of cash in the PC gaming sector; cash that would not have even been available had it not been for what Valve have achieved. Losing 30% (or whatever the cut is) of something is better than getting 100% of nothing. It makes no sense for them to cut their noses to spite their faces.
Their strategy of delaying the Steam releases of their games is akin to a game being released with heavy DRM that gets patched out some point later. In this example, sure that doesn't stop piracy, but it surely helps with the "day 1" sales. In the case of EA vs Steam, EA can't ever hope to do the numbers that they get on Steam (at least for now), so they sort of rub an onion in the ointment, just for a little while, to get all they can on their own. There's nothing particularly wrong with that, really, and EA have shareholders that have got to be demanding a bigger piece of the pie, so it makes sense that they try and do something about it without upsetting the customer too much.
They don't pull the same thing with other DD services, because, well... Valve laughs in the face of other DD services, the sales they can get on Steam vs elsewhere is probably silly.
Hmm, I think I just wasted 5 minutes stating the obvious. ^_^
I really wish we knew exactly what the real story was behind Crysis 2.