RANDOM VIDEA GAME NEWS!

[TSBasilisk]

Ubisoft, EA, and others teaming up to challenge Steam's dominance

 

Uplay and Origin will apparently now be selling games from both major publishers, while Uplay is also opening the door to a wide range of other publishers. It looks like EA and Ubi are making a concerted effort to get a bigger piece of the digital distribution pie.

[AwesomeOcelot]

Ubisoft, EA, and others teaming up to challenge Steam's dominance

 

Uplay and Origin will apparently now be selling games from both major publishers, while Uplay is also opening the door to a wide range of other publishers. It looks like EA and Ubi are making a concerted effort to get a bigger piece of the digital distribution pie.

That would be great if I could get Ubisoft games on Origin, because as far as Alice Madness: Returns, Crysis 2, and Dragon Age: Origins I haven't had any issues with Origin, a login window pops up at a the beginning or in game, I log in, the game works. I'd prefer using Steam, and I'm not going to be using their browser plug-in, but it's definitely functional for me.

[Lord of Lost Socks]

Axis of evil. Why not invite Activision in while they're at it.

Edited February 19, 2013 by Lord of Lost Socks

[TSBasilisk]

Competition is a good thing in any service. Steam has enjoyed a near-monopoly of digital distribution to this point; hopefully having other big-name publishers becoming viable alternatives will force them all to develop better practices to lure customers to their own service. EA and Uplay are the publishers with enough content and money to host their own distribution systems, so it's logical they'd be the next ones to jump to this level. It wouldn't surprise me if Squeenix follows eventually.

 

Anyway, I don't know what the exact details of their client verification system crossovers are. Hopefully their deal will allow each publisher to act as the sole client for the other publisher; otherwise, we may end up buying via Origin and then installing Uplay to verify anyway.

Edited February 19, 2013 by TSBasilisk

[Morgoth]

http://www.destructoid.com/developer-gearbox-lied-to-sega-2k-over-colonial-marines-245986.phtml

 

A:CM actually was canceled once.

[TSBasilisk]

Would that it had remained so. The story of how the game was made is scarier than the game itself.

 

---

 

Anodyne makes money thanks to people pirating the game

 

Rather than whining about the game being pirated, they held a 72-hour promotional sale in response. The promo broke sales out of a slump, raking in an additional $24,000. If it's anything like Steam sales, they'll probably continue to see increased purchases for a while, even at the regular price.

Edited February 19, 2013 by TSBasilisk

[Zoraptor]

Anyway, I don't know what the exact details of their client verification system crossovers are. Hopefully their deal will allow each publisher to act as the sole client for the other publisher; otherwise, we may end up buying via Origin and then installing Uplay to verify anyway.

Presumably they'll just sell the games on each others services. If you bought something like EU3 on Origin you never have to play it through Origin, nor do you have to have the client running and this is true for all (?) 3rd party games sold there, it's just a storefront unless it's an EA title. In effect it would be similar to buying, say, Anno2070 or ME3 on another 3rd party vendor like Gamersgate and just about exactly like ZombieImpulse.

 

The people getting confused by that over at RPS really show that they haven't used much other than steam, wanting the client to run full time on 3rd party titles is a behaviour just about unique to Steam and Steam alone, other clients are far less intrusive and nannying though still not as good as client free like GOG or Gamersgate.

[AwesomeOcelot]

People say competition is good, but I don't trust markets to do anything good for consumers except with commodities. We had almost a decade of offensively bad DRM. Media corporations act more like cartels and monopolists, and I see this as another example of them seeing off a challenger to that. The thing is Valve were an independent developer, they weren't screwing consumers and developers over for decades, there's forces other than market pressure. Where are Origin and Uplay going to put the pressure on Steam? Prices? Service? Features? I don't see it, they've shown no interest in that, they're going to try to push Steam out with money for exclusives plus the games they publish, pull games from Steam. It's going to be Steam keeping EA and Ubisoft honest, as long as Steam can compete.

[entrerix]

i agree with ocelot

 

they aren't going to compete with steam by actually trying to outdo them, they are going to "compete" with steam by holding back titles

[alanschu]

Ubisoft, EA, and others teaming up to challenge Steam's dominance

 

Uplay and Origin will apparently now be selling games from both major publishers, while Uplay is also opening the door to a wide range of other publishers. It looks like EA and Ubi are making a concerted effort to get a bigger piece of the digital distribution pie.

 

I don't know if it's necessarily "teaming up" but rather just trying to expand their potential target markets.  EA and Steam are unfortunately at an irreconcilable differences with regards to their service (unfortunately ), but I do think Steam suffers, albeit minimally, by not having any more EA games on it.  Likewise, Origin would be better if you could get the digital copies of Valve's games too.

[Zoraptor]

Again, since this always comes up about how it's poor innocent steam being brutally victimised by nasty people not obeying their diktats automatically like a good Paradox* lapdog.

Still got it the wrong way around. Steam refuses to take EA titles which require Origin, not EA refusing to sell them via steam as you can buy DS3/ ME3 etc etc just about everywhere apart from Steam and EA demonstrably did not pull legacy titles. The exclusion is because Steam changed their TOS to exclude Origin and similar things like Connect. It's 100% and uniquely Steam's fault for wanting to be a special snowflake and dictate terms to all and sundry, and again Steam expects other vendors to sell stuff under exactly the same but reverse conditions, ie with their client and shop front end bundled into it.

The key to keeping companies honest is not to have some monopolist sitting on a mountain shouting orders to the peons below about how they should sell their games, it's to have the spine and intestinal fortitude to tell companies to go FOADIAF and- here's the hard part- actually stick to it if they do stuff you don't like. Honestly, the free ride Valve get with their crap you'd think they were selling the cure to cancer rather than being a glorified Gamestop selling wholly voluntary luxury good with zero intrinsic value while taking a slightly smaller- but inflated, given relative costs of e vs retailing- cut which ideally ought to go to the creator of the product, not some jumped up middleman.

*Who are now selling on Uplay. Still not on GOG though, eh, eh? Pathetic, supine, spineless, and liars to boot. FOADIAF.

 

**plain text editor, she go crazy!

Edited February 19, 2013 by Zoraptor

[AwesomeOcelot]

Still got it the wrong way around. Steam refuses to take EA titles which require Origin, not EA refusing to sell them via steam as you can buy DS3/ ME3 etc etc just about everywhere apart from Steam and EA demonstrably did not pull legacy titles. The exclusion is because Steam changed their TOS to exclude Origin and similar things like Connect. It's 100% and uniquely Steam's fault for wanting to be a special snowflake and dictate terms to all and sundry, and again Steam expects other vendors to sell stuff under exactly the same but reverse conditions, ie with their client and shop front end bundled into it.

You obviously don't have a clue why EA pulled their games, it has nothing to do with requiring Origin. Steam still sells Uplay games without Steamworks, or games like Tribes:Ascend where you can install from Hirez without losing anything. It's widely available information that EA games got pulled because they were selling DLC through the game, which broke Steam's agreement with EA, that's why Crysis 2: Maximum Edition exists, bundled DLC sold through Steam. Don't talk about things you obviously don't know anything about. Edited February 19, 2013 by AwesomeOcelot

[TSBasilisk]

Sounds like even more of a tangled mess than I thought. In any case, gonna try and clean up the mess I made with a different topic:

 

Trailer released/leaked for Murdered: Soul Suspect

 

Short and nothing in-game, but it does confirm the suspicion that the detective you play is trying to solve his own murder. The comment that he's after a "freak" makes me wonder if there's going to be more supernatural overtones to this than just a dead protagonist.

[Orchomene]

Again, since this always comes up about how it's poor innocent steam being brutally victimised by nasty people not obeying their diktats automatically like a good Paradox* lapdog.

 

Still got it the wrong way around. Steam refuses to take EA titles which require Origin, not EA refusing to sell them via steam as you can buy DS3/ ME3 etc etc just about everywhere apart from Steam and EA demonstrably did not pull legacy titles.

 

I don't see many EA games on Gamersgate.

[TSBasilisk]

But they are putting up recent titles that didn't make it to Steam - Mass Effect 3, Crysis 3, Dead Space 3... lots of 3s the last two years...

[Zoraptor]

Regional restrictions? Their backgraphic is Crysis 3 at the moment, for example. Direct link for ME3 and DS3 as examples, even if it won't let you buy them.

 

 

Still got it the wrong way around. Steam refuses to take EA titles which require Origin, not EA refusing to sell them via steam as you can buy DS3/ ME3 etc etc just about everywhere apart from Steam and EA demonstrably did not pull legacy titles. The exclusion is because Steam changed their TOS to exclude Origin and similar things like Connect. It's 100% and uniquely Steam's fault for wanting to be a special snowflake and dictate terms to all and sundry, and again Steam expects other vendors to sell stuff under exactly the same but reverse conditions, ie with their client and shop front end bundled into it.

.. it has nothing to do with requiring Origin. Steam still sells Uplay games without Steamworks, or games like Tribes:Ascend where you can install from Hirez without losing anything. It's widely available information that EA games got pulled because they were selling DLC through the game, which broke Steam's agreement with EA, that's why Crysis 2: Maximum Edition exists, bundled DLC sold through Steam.

FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT- - - - -  IT DID NOT BREAK EA'S AGREEMENT WITH STEAM, STEAM THEMSELVES ALTERED THE AGREEMENT - - - - - -FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT

 

That is why games with exactly and absolutely identical behaviour to that which you claim- incorrectly- to be the problem and published by EA like, say Dragon Age Origins are still available for sale on steam. When Origin came out suddenly the exact same behaviour meant no steam, due to Valve's changes to the sales agreement. Thus Valve excluded the games. If EA wanted to exclude them DAO etc would not be on steam at this very moment, and if steam always had those rules DAO would never have been on steam in the first place. Demonstrably, verifiably, FACT, not some "widely available information says".

 

Sheesh, your objection makes absolutely no sense whatsoever unless it's steam being the problem, else EA wouldn't sell Crysis 2 there either let alone sell on other DDs. Your argument is, in effect, that EA is at fault for not slavishly following Steam's- altered, pray they do not alter them further- diktats, diktats which no other DD vendor requires. Contorted logic, at best.

 

 

You obviously don't have a clue why EA pulled their games..Don't talk about things you obviously don't know anything about.

El Oh El.

Edited February 20, 2013 by Zoraptor

[Cultist]

Having years of experience in interaction with both Steam and Origins, I have no idea how EA and Ubisoft could compete. Origins-exclusive games are not even close enough to compete with Steam. The difference is in customer treatment. With both Ubisoft and EA it is so low, that they earned their own level, like Awesome-Good-Average-Bad-EA\Ubisoft. And seing how they are getting worse every year, I doubt they have any desire to improve. So far the only improvement was in their approach - from "you are a pirate and a thief" to "we suspect you to be a pirate and a thief".

[BruceVC]

Again, since this always comes up about how it's poor innocent steam being brutally victimised by nasty people not obeying their diktats automatically like a good Paradox* lapdog.

 

Still got it the wrong way around. Steam refuses to take EA titles which require Origin, not EA refusing to sell them via steam as you can buy DS3/ ME3 etc etc just about everywhere apart from Steam and EA demonstrably did not pull legacy titles. The exclusion is because Steam changed their TOS to exclude Origin and similar things like Connect. It's 100% and uniquely Steam's fault for wanting to be a special snowflake and dictate terms to all and sundry, and again Steam expects other vendors to sell stuff under exactly the same but reverse conditions, ie with their client and shop front end bundled into it.

 

The key to keeping companies honest is not to have some monopolist sitting on a mountain shouting orders to the peons below about how they should sell their games, it's to have the spine and intestinal fortitude to tell companies to go FOADIAF and- here's the hard part- actually stick to it if they do stuff you don't like. Honestly, the free ride Valve get with their crap you'd think they were selling the cure to cancer rather than being a glorified Gamestop selling wholly voluntary luxury good with zero intrinsic value while taking a slightly smaller- but inflated, given relative costs of e vs retailing- cut which ideally ought to go to the creator of the product, not some jumped up middleman.

 

*Who are now selling on Uplay. Still not on GOG though, eh, eh? Pathetic, supine, spineless, and liars to boot. FOADIAF.

 

**plain text editor, she go crazy!

 

Mmmm, well I don't agree with everything you are saying. But I will say that a monopoly for any industry is not healthy. That is why I support other gaming download websites like Gamers Gate and Game Stop. But Steam has also allowed Indie developers to get there games distributed using there technology and not made money from this service. So Steam also helps the industry

[alanschu]

Eh, Valve has still made a non trivial amount of money off of indie games (because they take a percentage based cut, it doesn't really provide any hard barriers for an indie game to use Steam).  Which is well within their right to do for providing the distribution service.

[BruceVC]

Eh, Valve has still made a non trivial amount of money off of indie games (because they take a percentage based cut, it doesn't really provide any hard barriers for an indie game to use Steam).  Which is well within their right to do for providing the distribution service.

 

 

Eh, Valve has still made a non trivial amount of money off of indie games (because they take a percentage based cut, it doesn't really provide any hard barriers for an indie game to use Steam).  Which is well within their right to do for providing the distribution service.

 

Alan thats not always the case, read the link below to see how Steam saved Project Zomboid and didn't charge anything initially. They are the unsung heroes of many Indie developers for similar reasons

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/07/25/how-project-zomboid-was-saved-by-steam-desura-and-fileplanet/

[alanschu]

I know it's not always the case, but Valve does garner financial success off of indie games.  Yes it's symbiotic and garners some great PR with fans and potential developers (which businesses always like) when they offer to help out those at no cost, but it's important to note that Valve is still a business and justifies their decisions in large part for business reasons.

 

They pretty much state this straight up in their new hire guide (when it comes to evaluating employee performance).

 

 

EDIT: Reading the link, I can easily see (perhaps ironically) the piracy angle chaffing the folks at the digital distributors.

Edited February 20, 2013 by alanschu

[AwesomeOcelot]

FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT- - - - - IT DID NOT BREAK EA'S AGREEMENT WITH STEAM, STEAM THEMSELVES ALTERED THE AGREEMENT - - - - - -FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT FACT

That's what Valve claimed at the time. If you have access to their agreement then post it here. Otherwise you obviously don't know what a fact is.

That is why games with exactly and absolutely identical behaviour to that which you claim- incorrectly- to be the problem and published by EA like, say Dragon Age Origins are still available for sale on steam.

You can buy that DLC through Steam, I know because I did, that's the difference. Obviously if you buy Ubisoft games on Steam, you can buy the DLC on Uplay, or many games you can buy the expansions from retail store that was obviously not what I meant. The difference was that EA were selling DLC through the game exclusively.

[Tale]

Dragon Age: Origins is still on Steam because it was grandfathered, it got on Steam before Valve applied the policy. And it and Mass Effect 2 are probably two of the games that caused the policy to be established.

 

Crysis 2's removal had nothing to do with EA. It's an EA partners game, Crytek is the one handling publishing on Steam and was the one arranging DLC policies.

 

But yeah, there's some inconsistencies. I can't remember which, but I've had people point out some GFWL games with DLC only available through GFWL (Batman, maybe), that didn't get pulled.

[AwesomeOcelot]

Crysis 2's removal had nothing to do with EA. It's an EA partners game, Crytek is the one handling publishing on Steam and was the one arranging DLC policies.

Arranging the DLC policies with EA, EA had to be involved with the policies, and I some how doubt they weren't involved in the exclusivity deal.

 

But yeah, there's some inconsistencies. I can't remember which, but I've had people point out some GFWL games with DLC only available through GFWL (Batman, maybe), that didn't get pulled.

Not Arkham City or Asylum, the DLC for city is up and I'm pretty sure it was for Asylum, the GOTY I think came out before Valve pulled EA's games. BioShock 2 has GFWL exclusive DLC but that was released in 2010 which could have been before the rules.

[Tale]

Arranging the DLC policies with EA, EA had to be involved with the policies, and I some how doubt they weren't involved in the exclusivity deal.

Well, EA wasn't. The Crysis 2 DLC wasn't even available on Origin. It was exclusive to Gamespy.

 

It was an EA partners game. EA was operating as the retail distributor. Same deal Valve does.