EA explains why Crysis 2 was pulled from Steam

By on July 8, 2011, 10:00 AM

There has been some speculation about a possible break-up between EA and Valve, after Crysis 2 was pulled from the Steam platform and appeared on EA's new storefront sporting a misleading "only on Origin" tag. Although many of us saw this as a power play to draw people into using their service, EA was quick to clarify that in fact the decision was not theirs, but rather the result of a business requirement from Valve to make DLC packs available through Steam.

EA's David DeMartini, who now heads the Origin platform, sought to explain the publisher's position in a blog post this week: "We want our products available to as many players aspossible, which means we make them available in all the places that gamers go to download games and services. […] But we take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services to our players. You are connecting to our servers, and we want to establish an ongoing relationship with you, to continue to give you the best possible gaming experience."

DeMartini goes on to explain that, at present, there is only one download service that does not allow them to manage this experience directly, and that they are working diligently to find a mutually agreeable solution. He doesn't mention Steam by name, but speaking with Gamasutra he states in no uncertain terms that Crysis 2 was taken down because of downloadable content being available through Direct2Drive, but not Steam.

Except under 'extremely special circumstances' EA promises to make games available on every major download service. Star Wars: The Old Republic is one of those extremely special circumstances, as the company has already said they're trying to build an audience for Origin with exclusive content. According to DeMartini, there may be other Origin exclusives in the future, but it will be the exception rather than the norm, as they are also interested in reach.




User Comments: 36

Got something to say? Post a comment
Guest said:

@EA:

Please repeat after me: "I will learn to share my toys with Valve."

Now repeat: "Valve is not my enemy; high prices are."

And lastly: "EA is a good company that it is making some very bad noise right now."

paynetrain007 said:

I think EA has a right to pull off of steam for that reason. They are a company and they own their games in their entirety. Should they not be able to have entire control of the game regarding its patches and DLC? Although using Steam's wouldn't be a bad idea because it helps with anti-piracy. But they should have a right to control their content how they please.

Guest said:

What a load of crap, EA's had the agreements with Valve since the beginning, DLC content availability is not new to them.. you don't think when they were developing origin, they didn't see this and say "this is a great way to make Valve look like the bad guy and give EA a way out and smelling like a rose..". Problem is your trying to get people with more then a 50 IQ to believe that you needed to take exception to Valve supporting it's customers and users and that it was critical to do so, JUST as you launched origin..

please, EA, your a bunch of tossers. 1/2 bil. in banked profits last year was not enough for you? i certainly won't be buying another EA game any time soon.

treetops treetops said:

Steam uses system resources and throws ads in your face good riddance.

Guest said:

Steam already exists, what do we need Steam clone for? Arg...

Guest said:

@Treetops: What ads? The ones telling you about new games, I love that. You must be naive to think EA won't do the same.

pcnthuziast said:

@treetops umad?

Steam rocks!

I hope Origin fails miserably.

That is all.

codefeenix codefeenix said:

Mass Effect 2 got me into steam, ME3 wont get me out.

Guest said:

It's simple: Steam sucks!

TekGun TekGun said:

And nothing of any value was lost to steam users.

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

They just don't want to pay a cut to Steam. Pretty simple.

Staff
Per Hansson Per Hansson, TS Server Guru, said:

This sounds very reasonable to me, I can't understand how you are so butthurt over this decision that EA has made.

I guess it's the new big thing to bash anything Crysis 2 related whenever you are given the option?

example1013 said:

Wow, a bunch of steam fanboys. In case you've all forgotten, Valve did the exact same thing to Microsoft for Portal 2. Sony gave them complete control over everything related to the game, and so Valve gave every PS3 Portal 2 purchaser a PC code for a free Portal 2 copy. 360 users were left out because Microsoft has their own set of rules that Valve would have to play by for updates and DLC and the like.

Guest said:

I'm so angry with EA these days, it makes my face twitch every time I see those 2 letters in that particular combination.

I have to say though, Blizzard did it first (as far as I care), with their new Battle.net @%#&! I wasn't happy about that, and I still haven't bought Starcraft 2 even though I want it. I know they're gonna do the same thing with Diablo III, of course, and then I'm just gonna have to dance to their tune. But, we excuse Blizzard, don't we? Because their games are so insanely awesome, yes? Hmf.

All the big companies want to do the same now. They'll make more money that way and it is a business after all. I've heard all the good and the bad arguments here, and I'm still in a hissy-fit about it. Why? Because I'm a Steam-user. I'm in no way a Steam-fanboy, but I do have a consolidated games library worth... well, a lot, in Steam. I have no wish to have my achievements spread out over a bunch of different "services."

Greed is changing the world of gaming, and I don't like the way it's going.

BrownPaper said:

example1013 said:

Wow, a bunch of steam fanboys. In case you've all forgotten, Valve did the exact same thing to Microsoft for Portal 2. Sony gave them complete control over everything related to the game, and so Valve gave every PS3 Portal 2 purchaser a PC code for a free Portal 2 copy. 360 users were left out because Microsoft has their own set of rules that Valve would have to play by for updates and DLC and the like.

Valve wanted to give Xbox 360 users free updates for Portal 2 just like on Steam and PS3. Microsoft requires any updates to be sold for money (not free). Basically any updates for Portal 2 would be a DLC that requires money to get. Valve did not want to charge people money for minor game updates.

yRaz yRaz said:

Per Hansson said:

This sounds very reasonable to me, I can't understand how you are so butthurt over this decision that EA has made.

I guess it's the new big thing to bash anything Crysis 2 related whenever you are given the option?

EA ignored the PC with Crysis 2 and is generally just a bad company. Most of their money comes from console sales and they really aren't paying attention to PC. However, almost all of Valve's revenue comes from PC gamers. I'm sure Valve has the best interests of PC gamers in mind whereas EA wants to shove out a whole bunch of console ports. People hate Crysis 2 because it represents everything that is going wrong with the gaming industry. Weak story line's and sub-par gameplay. If we're lucky we get some higher resolution textures with our port and tolerable controls. Ever play assassins creed on PC(just as an example of how bad ports can get)? It's near impossible because they put NO thought into the controls.

BTW, if you were paying any attention at all to the article you'd notice it was VALVES decision, not EA's, to remove Crysis 2 from the steam store. How EA is playing with the DLC from Crysis 2 is BS anyway. I'm tired of all these companies trying to force us into their own proprietary software to strengthen their market share.

When playing with these companies we have to vote with our wallets. I voted for steam and try to avoid buying EA titles as much as possible. The only time I do buy one is when I can get it for cheap on steam.

Mindwraith said:

they should just keep it on steam and make it like $10 cheaper on origin or something, that'l solve both their problems

IAMTHESTIG said:

EA are a bunch of greedy sods.

Richy2k9 said:

hello ...

well too bad, being a PC enthusiast for most multiplatform games & buying mostly where my country is supported, means i will buy only a console exclusive from EA & no more PC games from them :S ...

Steam is my second home, you'd better change your mind EA, like me there are heavy steam dwellers & we are not happy with you right now.

cheers!

example1013 said:

And then Battlefield 3 will come out, and everyone will buy it.

pcnthuziast said:

example1013 said:

And then Battlefield 3 will come out, and everyone will buy it.

Not from Origin I won't. Retail will suffice.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

This sounds very reasonable to me, I can't understand how you are so butthurt over this decision that EA has made.

I guess it's the new big thing to bash anything Crysis 2 related whenever you are given the option?

DeMartini goes on to explain that, at present, there is only one download service that does not allow them to manage this experience directly, and that they are working diligently to find a mutually agreeable solution. He doesn't mention Steam by name, but speaking with Gamasutra he states in no uncertain terms that Crysis 2 was taken down because of downloadable content being available through Direct2Drive, but not Steam.

I agree Per, lots of reasons to be pissed at Cervat and co, but this isn't one of them.

veLa veLa said:

In 2004, in the dawn of CS:S and HL2, most people hated STEAM. This was back in the day when internet was slower and less reliable. People wanted to buy games offline and not have to have internet to play. Then STEAM and ISPs improved and now everybody loves it.

MaXtor MaXtor said:

@veLa: We know this, and now we're happy with the way things are. EA isn't reinventing anything, like Valve did when they launched Steam. EA is just making a Steam clone. Screw EA.

Staff
Per Hansson Per Hansson, TS Server Guru, said:

yRaz; I don't in any way disagree with you.

I just fail to see how any of it is relevant to this article.

It seems nowdays whenever the words "EA" or "Crysis" or "Crytek" are mentioned there literally must be a bashing fest.

No matter what the original article was even about...

It's the same on most forums I visit.

IAMTHESTIG said:

example1013 said:

And then Battlefield 3 will come out, and everyone will buy it.

I'm not buying it because it probably won't have LAN multiplayer support. If it does i'll buy it, but local retail most likely. I don't buy games at full prices on Steam, or any online gaming store for that matter when I can get a physical copy with box at the same price. I only buy games on Steam when they are heavily discounted.

Guest said:

Hey LOOK at the origin picture closely there's a pattern and it reveals a bloody swastika!! what is this kind of symbol doing in a gaming name!!

yRaz yRaz said:

Per Hansson said:

yRaz; I don't in any way disagree with you.

I just fail to see how any of it is relevant to this article.

It seems nowdays whenever the words "EA" or "Crysis" or "Crytek" are mentioned there literally must be a bashing fest.

No matter what the original article was even about...

It's the same on most forums I visit.

I think that a lot of people are mad about all three of those, and they have every right to be. We could go on to debate the relevance, as I believe it is relevant, but arguing over relevance is irrelevant.

ramonsterns said:

Sounds like an excuse on their part to be perfectly honest.

treetops treetops said:

Blizzard was never on steam... Battlenet has been around before steam. Steam uses up more system resources then any other patching client. While your in the game playing steam is running up in the background taking up around 10% of your computers resources. Its pretty dumb. Also I cannot play any of my steam games through my cell phones internet, but I can play all my other games including sc2. Anytime I hear that I must use steam to play a game I hesitate to buy it and give the game a second look. I bought a game called pam on steam and its came out this year. It has NO ONE in the multiplayer. I have bought 3 games from steam and only 1 DNF has ANY multiplayer games. They come out with steam exclusive games all hyped up, steam refuses to release sales data, you buy the game and you can search for 4 hours and not find one damn multi game. DNF works fine but the other 2.... And yes I will now explain to the er slow why it would be nice to see the sales data. You use it to judge how good a game is and its multiplayer base. Steaming pile of crap.

I read most of the comments on this article and no one lists a actual benefit from having this game on steam.

Mr772 said:

EA Sucks - I haven't gotten any games from them since Madden was dropped from the PC and made console only.

Phraun said:

treetops said:

Blizzard was never on steam... Battlenet has been around before steam. Steam uses up more system resources then any other patching client. While your in the game playing steam is running up in the background taking up around 10% of your computers resources. Its pretty dumb. Also I cannot play any of my steam games through my cell phones internet, but I can play all my other games including sc2. Anytime I hear that I must use steam to play a game I hesitate to buy it and give the game a second look. I bought a game called pam on steam and its came out this year. It has NO ONE in the multiplayer. I have bought 3 games from steam and only 1 DNF has ANY multiplayer games. They come out with steam exclusive games all hyped up, steam refuses to release sales data, you buy the game and you can search for 4 hours and not find one damn multi game. DNF works fine but the other 2.... And yes I will now explain to the er slow why it would be nice to see the sales data. You use it to judge how good a game is and its multiplayer base. Steaming pile of crap.

I read most of the comments on this article and no one lists a actual benefit from having this game on steam.

It's not Valve's fault you're buying games nobody has ever heard of and expecting to find fifty thousand people ready to play online. And honestly, DNF? Out of the huge selection of multiplayer capable games on Steam, you opt for that? You realize you have access to TF2, CS, the Unreal Tournament catalogue, myriad MMOs, hell, I wouldn't be surprised it Terraria had a bigger multiplayer following than DNF does... But no, you buy Duke Nukem and a bargain bin destruction derby game and whine about a lack of online presence.

I find it very difficult to garner even the smallest bit of sympathy for you. Certainly you have no right to blame Steam for the failings of games that they neither advertised nor developed, particularly given the extent of your own delusions with regard to the projected multiplayer populations of said games.

Omnislip said:

treetops said:

Blizzard was never on steam... Battlenet has been around before steam. Steam uses up more system resources then any other patching client. While your in the game playing steam is running up in the background taking up around 10% of your computers resources. Its pretty dumb. Also I cannot play any of my steam games through my cell phones internet, but I can play all my other games including sc2. Anytime I hear that I must use steam to play a game I hesitate to buy it and give the game a second look. I bought a game called pam on steam and its came out this year. It has NO ONE in the multiplayer. I have bought 3 games from steam and only 1 DNF has ANY multiplayer games. They come out with steam exclusive games all hyped up, steam refuses to release sales data, you buy the game and you can search for 4 hours and not find one damn multi game. DNF works fine but the other 2.... And yes I will now explain to the er slow why it would be nice to see the sales data. You use it to judge how good a game is and its multiplayer base. Steaming pile of crap.

I read most of the comments on this article and no one lists a actual benefit from having this game on steam.

All the stuff that phraun said, and:

Steam barely takes up any of your resources unless you are using the shift tab menu, which is an absolutely fantastic tool.

Tell me a hyped up steam game without a solid multiplayer following. What the hell is PAM? What sort of crappy games are you buying and expecting everyone else to have?

Oh, and by the way, [link] will show you the top 100 played games both at peak on one day and right when you look at the site. Is that helpful? Yes.

Benefits of having steam:

Overlay

Friend chat system

Friend invite system

Auto patching

Steam sales

Centralised game list etc etc etc

Although I did appreciate your 'steaming' pun.

princeton princeton said:

Per Hansson said:

yRaz; I don't in any way disagree with you.

I just fail to see how any of it is relevant to this article.

It seems nowdays whenever the words "EA" or "Crysis" or "Crytek" are mentioned there literally must be a bashing fest.

No matter what the original article was even about...

It's the same on most forums I visit.

I don't even get why people care. If you hate it, then just don't read anything about it and don't play it. If you don't think about Crysis 2 then how can it possibly hurt you?

Guest said:

What methods were they attempting to use exactly?

"But we take direct responsibility for providing patches, updates, additional content and other services to our players"

Many publishers have no problem staying in contact with customers with notifications placed within the game's menu, bypassing steam notifications entirely.

This was all maneuvering to get more "Origin exclusive" titles, nothing more nothing less.

I am not against them trying to build a customer base for their service OR withdrawing their products from other services, it's the underhanded "It wasn't us, it was them" method they chose to go about it.

treetops treetops said:

All the stuff that phraun said, and:

Steam barely takes up any of your resources unless you are using the shift tab menu, which is an absolutely fantastic tool.

Tell me a hyped up steam game without a solid multiplayer following. What the hell is PAM? What sort of crappy games are you buying and expecting everyone else to have?

Oh, and by the way, [link] will show you the top 100 played games both at peak on one day and right when you look at the site. Is that helpful? Yes.

Benefits of having steam:

Overlay

Friend chat system

Friend invite system

Auto patching

Steam sales

Centralised game list etc etc etc

Although I did appreciate your 'steaming' pun.

Sweet a user who list why they like steam for a change. Every game I have played offers all that except.

Steam sales (seems like they have good sales)

Cent game list (they have to many crap games on those lists, fool me once...)

I looked at it and steam uses 10% of my cpu and ram. I hate being forced to use steam. The DNF population is booming btw for the other person who misread. If I buy a game 2 weeks after its released I expect there to be a multiplayer base. Steam is the only place I have ever bought a game 2 weeks after it was released with no multiplayer base. I don't know why that is but the fact remains. I would love for steam to turn off when I launch my game, I would love it more if it never turned on automatically when launching. Sometimes I like to browse games yes, but how hard would it be to let me load there browser at my own discretion?

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.