Will EA games ever return to Steam?

[Mumziz]

So my question is will any EA published games return to Steam? Personally i despise Origin so damn much and EA. But they got some really good studios, like DICE and Bioware.

I mainly want them back because they seem to change their attitude. With Battlefield 4, Battlefront and Mirrrors Edge coming out I would love to have those games on Steam.

[haerin]

I don't think so, release in origin makes more money.

[FireFox]

i hope not, EA is making me sick...
xD

[Anamon]

Diposting pertama kali oleh cheese:

[...] the ever increasing development costs due to the high level of graphical fidelity that is demanded by 'gamers' while the price of a game has remained pretty much constant (accounting for inflation) over the past few decades and you have a more grounded explaination for studio closures.

That is certainly true, but it demonstrates more a broken business model than anything else. The influence these most costly elements have on the actual quality and longevity of a game is highly questionable. By which I mean to say, the development of production costs is in no relation to how much fun you actually have with a game, and for how long -- which is why people aren't ready to pay more for them. I doubt people would pay double for a game just for it to have improved graphics. But this is what publishers push, in either the knowledge or illusion that they need to put their focus there, if a game is to make it in the mainstream market.

While on the other end of the spectrum you have of course independent studios that can make a profit with large-scale games even in the $15-$30 price range, because they don't play the graphical gimmick or million-dollar voice actors game.

Diposting pertama kali oleh cheese:

What they are is heavily pirated. [...] Given gamers proclivity for theft, there seems to be no alternative to at least some manner of DRM.

The alternative is to make a good game that people want to buy. You can never relate pirated games to lost sales, because the overwhelming majority of copies are pirated by people who either wouldn't ever want to, or even be able to, pay for an original copy. Call it wrong or immoral that they're playing it anyway, but it changes nothing about the fact that their negative financial impact is somewhere between zero and negligible. Piracy numbers are largely proportional to the popularity and actual sales of a game. If it doesn't sell enough copies, it wasn't good enough. There's no way around that, although of course publishers are very reluctant to admit that fact, in particular in shareholder communications. Publishers who are chaired by people with more knowledge about the videogames industry, such as Paradox, know better.

To arc back to budgeting, what you're doing with DRM is throw money out the window three times over: once for the development or licensing of a DRM system, once by deterring a growing number of people from purchasing the game, and once more -- by far the largest and most underestimated -- through increased costs in customer support. With, of course, always close to no success at all in what the DRM was supposed to do. Not only because it's circumvented, but because "not paying" is kind of the point of piracy, so people who couldn't pirate your game just won't play it. That's money that could have been spent on improving the quality of the game, which is the only way to increase your sales.

Diposting pertama kali oleh cheese:

If EA go bankrupt gaming will be much poorer for it. You think publishers are conservative now, imagine how risk adverse they'll become if one of the biggest of them suddenly collapsed?

I'd like to think that other publishers would be smart enough to see that such a turn of events would be due to EA's management and policies, not because of problems inherent to the games industry and its economics. It's not uncommon for the big dogs to fail, and it's usually because they're unable to deal with their size, and the budgets involved -- mismanagement and all. It wouldn't be the first time, and in the past there were always other players ready and willing to fill the gaps. The risk-taking that benefits the world of games as a whole is not the risk of spending huge budgets on established franchises, but supporting creative teams, even if just with small or moderate budgets. And I'm not trying to say that EA doesn't do this -- they have in the past, and occasionally do so still. A failure of EA would do nothing to hurt that model. I see the major publishers struggling, but if this is heading for a breaking point (which it will if those broken economics continue to be employed), it should be a change that for us as consumers will be, if anything, positive. The interest in games is huge and growing, and it's unthinkable to me that there would be a shortage of new guys willing to capitalise on it.

[vanmeteran]

Diposting pertama kali oleh Anamon:

Diposting pertama kali oleh cheese:

[...] the ever increasing development costs due to the high level of graphical fidelity that is demanded by 'gamers' while the price of a game has remained pretty much constant (accounting for inflation) over the past few decades and you have a more grounded explaination for studio closures.

That is certainly true, but it demonstrates more a broken business model than anything else. The influence these most costly elements have on the actual quality and longevity of a game is highly questionable. By which I mean to say, the development of production costs is in no relation to how much fun you actually have with a game, and for how long -- which is why people aren't ready to pay more for them. I doubt people would pay double for a game just for it to have improved graphics. But this is what publishers push, in either the knowledge or illusion that they need to put their focus there, if a game is to make it in the mainstream market.

While on the other end of the spectrum you have of course independent studios that can make a profit with large-scale games even in the $15-$30 price range, because they don't play the graphical gimmick or million-dollar voice actors game.

Diposting pertama kali oleh cheese:

What they are is heavily pirated. [...] Given gamers proclivity for theft, there seems to be no alternative to at least some manner of DRM.

The alternative is to make a good game that people want to buy. You can never relate pirated games to lost sales, because the overwhelming majority of copies are pirated by people who either wouldn't ever want to, or even be able to, pay for an original copy. Call it wrong or immoral that they're playing it anyway, but it changes nothing about the fact that their negative financial impact is somewhere between zero and negligible. Piracy numbers are largely proportional to the popularity and actual sales of a game. If it doesn't sell enough copies, it wasn't good enough. There's no way around that, although of course publishers are very reluctant to admit that fact, in particular in shareholder communications. Publishers who are chaired by people with more knowledge about the videogames industry, such as Paradox, know better.

To arc back to budgeting, what you're doing with DRM is throw money out the window three times over: once for the development or licensing of a DRM system, once by deterring a growing number of people from purchasing the game, and once more -- by far the largest and most underestimated -- through increased costs in customer support. With, of course, always close to no success at all in what the DRM was supposed to do. Not only because it's circumvented, but because "not paying" is kind of the point of piracy, so people who couldn't pirate your game just won't play it. That's money that could have been spent on improving the quality of the game, which is the only way to increase your sales.

Diposting pertama kali oleh cheese:

If EA go bankrupt gaming will be much poorer for it. You think publishers are conservative now, imagine how risk adverse they'll become if one of the biggest of them suddenly collapsed?

I'd like to think that other publishers would be smart enough to see that such a turn of events would be due to EA's management and policies, not because of problems inherent to the games industry and its economics. It's not uncommon for the big dogs to fail, and it's usually because they're unable to deal with their size, and the budgets involved -- mismanagement and all. It wouldn't be the first time, and in the past there were always other players ready and willing to fill the gaps. The risk-taking that benefits the world of games as a whole is not the risk of spending huge budgets on established franchises, but supporting creative teams, even if just with small or moderate budgets. And I'm not trying to say that EA doesn't do this -- they have in the past, and occasionally do so still. A failure of EA would do nothing to hurt that model. I see the major publishers struggling, but if this is heading for a breaking point (which it will if those broken economics continue to be employed), it should be a change that for us as consumers will be, if anything, positive. The interest in games is huge and growing, and it's unthinkable to me that there would be a shortage of new guys willing to capitalise on it.

i for one continue to play games long after they are considered populare, and i will tell you a secret... it is not for the graphics.

Anamon, i totally agree!

[AskopF]

xDDDD

[MohawkNinja]

Probably not

[rzn]

I hope so. Origin is crap

[¡¡¡¡ magicschoolrp.com]

i dont understand how can be titanfall source engine, and its EU , ♥♥♥♥ EA, dont givee the source engine to them :D

[Websteroni]

Maybe it's the Source 2 that only devs can have access to.

Diposting pertama kali oleh ­­:

i dont understand how can be titanfall source engine, and its EU , ♥♥♥♥ EA, dont givee the source engine to them :D

[Almighty So]

Origin sucks, but ye its their system, I would like to have them back.

[Toe with a Hat]

EA are getting worse and worse i hop not

[admcmei]

This idea of EA as the mega evil corporation is really reaching conspiracy theory-level stupidity.

[Dog]

So many ignorant people in this topic it's unreal.

EA are trying to be a good business now and I don't want them to lose Origin because it's a good application, I don't want my gaming to be monopolised.

[Nathan]

I'd really like Mass Effect 3 to come to Steam, though I don't care about it enough to use Origin. All these big publisher's bringing out their own Steam equivalents (or not :P) is a pain. I have hundreds of games on Steam and I like having them all in one place. I imagine a lot of people feel the same and aren't moving/using both. Here's hoping EA games will be back on here like before.

[Websteroni]

Were talking about it on Steam, what did you think was going to happen.

Diposting pertama kali oleh el Dog.?:

So many ignorant people in this topic it's unreal.

EA are trying to be a good business now and I don't want them to lose Origin because it's a good application, I don't want my gaming to be monopolised.