New report further suggests Battlefield 3 to bypass Steam

Several days ago it seems that publisher Electronic Arts was suggesting that the PC version of its highly anticipated first person shooter Battlefield 3 would not be sold on Valve's popular Steam service. Today another report also seems to suggest that the game won't appear on Steam either. The Develop web site reports that Baird, a financial research firm, claims to have had meetings with game retailer GameStop.

According to the story a representative from Baird states, "The upcoming EA title Battlefield 3 will be sold as a download through GameStop, but not through Steam." The rep added, "Given Steam's dominance – and insistence on users downloading a Steam client application – publishers are likely to be receptive to a competitive alternative."

Earlier this month a page on the Battlefield 3 web site posted up a list of retailers that would sell the PC download version but Steam, by far the biggest provider of such games, was not among those listed. Since we first reported on this story, that page has been removed from the Battlefield 3 web site. So far neither EA nor Valve has officially commented on the availability of Battlefield 3 via Steam.

EA recently relaunched its PC downloadable store as Origin and has already announced a couple of upcoming PC games will be available for download exclusively via their new service. The sci-fi first person shooter sequel Crysis 2, published by EA, was also recently removed from Steam. At the time EA said they had nothing to do with that decision, saying, "Steam has imposed a set of business terms for developers hoping to sell content on that service – many of which are not imposed by other online game services. Unfortunately, Crytek has an agreement with another download service which violates the new rules from Steam and resulted in its expulsion of Crysis 2 from Steam."

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft delays Mediaroom IPTV conference to 2012

Next Story

BBC to survey UK mobile coverage - and you can take part too

56 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Origin is garbage, I purchased a game through it the other day, not only does it not load when trying to launch it, it appears to be missing a lot of data. EA haven't even bothered their arses to reply to my support query. Plus it seems I can only download the game for 1 year then my licence runs out. I have games on Steam I bought nearly 10 years ago and can still download them now whenever I want to.

There is no offline mode either in origin, that I can find.

Dhalamar said,
The blind devotion people have for Steam is always amusing.

I'm not blind, but I like having all my games / friends neatly packed together in one app.
So far I haven't seen a single argument from EA that would give me an incentive to try out Origin. All EA is doing is pointing the finger at valve and blaming them.

Wow, finally some competition for Steam? Of course I'm going to be 100% **for** this! As far as I can tell, this can only benefit us as gamers and paying customers. There's nothing at all wrong with a little healthy competition, and those of you calling EA greedy should be wagging those accusatory fingers at Steam as well. In essence, EA is doing exactly the same thing most of you clearly adore Steam for -- though I clearly remember a time when people bore an equal animosity for Steam.

Let's remember what some healthy market competition does for us -- or better yet, I'll point out a few examples where lack of competition HURTS us as consumers --

Microsoft Windows, anyone?
How about your electric company?
How about your gas & cable companies?
How about your phone companies, who all lease their lines from the same conglomerate?

The reason some of you don't want Origin is simple -- you want all your games coming from the same marketplace. But -- what if you could get those same games at even less cost with the addition of another purchase platform?

The choice is easy for me. I work hard for my money, and I welcome competition if it saves me a few bucks.

Tzaar said,
Wow, finally some competition for Steam? Of course I'm going to be 100% **for** this! As far as I can tell, this can only benefit us as gamers and paying customers. There's nothing at all wrong with a little healthy competition, and those of you calling EA greedy should be wagging those accusatory fingers at Steam as well. In essence, EA is doing exactly the same thing most of you clearly adore Steam for -- though I clearly remember a time when people bore an equal animosity for Steam.

Let's remember what some healthy market competition does for us -- or better yet, I'll point out a few examples where lack of competition HURTS us as consumers --

Microsoft Windows, anyone?
How about your electric company?
How about your gas & cable companies?
How about your phone companies, who all lease their lines from the same conglomerate?

The reason some of you don't want Origin is simple -- you want all your games coming from the same marketplace. But -- what if you could get those same games at even less cost with the addition of another purchase platform?

The choice is easy for me. I work hard for my money, and I welcome competition if it saves me a few bucks.

How does Microsoft Windows HURT you as a consumer ??

I don't work hard for my money , I work insanely hard for my money. But the way EA's been laying all the blame on Valve just makes me sick. Personally I don't like that approach one bit. EA should have launched Origin and touted all the wonderful things about it, giving people a real alternative to steam instead of pointing fingers at the competition and acting like a disgruntled 5 year old. EA should have launched BF3 on Origin and Steam at the same time, but at a lower price on Origin (as stated by others), now that would be true competition.
Personally I hope Valve will say "Sorry, but NO" when EA wants to release BF3 on Steam after it's been out on Origin for a little while.

Unless you are a no-life nerd (no personal offense), addict to online games, the rest of the customer does not care it they can purchase using "x" service or "y", it is just a matter of install a new application, create an account and nothing much else.

Steam is fine but far from perfection.

This is quite humorous. People claim EA is being "greedy" in wanting to control the updates etc...[for their own product] yet ignore that Steam controls the entire gaming community by being the client.

Hmm, why doesn't Steam qualify as the ultimate greedy corporation here?

Competition always benefits the consumer. Imagine only Intel or just AMD, imagine only Nvidia or just AMD [again]. In computer hardware & software competition is our best friend.

revparadigm said,
This is quite humorous. People claim EA is being "greedy" in wanting to control the updates etc...[for their own product] yet ignore that Steam controls the entire gaming community by being the client.

Hmm, why doesn't Steam qualify as the ultimate greedy corporation here?

Competition always benefits the consumer. Imagine only Intel or just AMD, imagine only Nvidia or just AMD [again]. In computer hardware & software competition is our best friend.

So you think EA is doing this for the greater good of all of us and not for money ???
( That is quite humorous )

Kosh Naranek said,

So you think EA is doing this for the greater good of all of us and not for money ???
( That is quite humorous )

No...they are doing it the same reason Steam is. They are a company out to make a profit. My point was quite simple. The "humor" was in that they railed against EA for doing what Steam is doing presently, trying to make the most money they can...yet while cheering on Steam.

I know Steam is the largest online distributor, but isn't EA also not putting it on Games for Windows Live (Xbox PC)? I used to like EA, but they've gotten pretty greedy about things.

Good, I hate FORCED intergration with steam. Steam is ok in itself but having it forced upon me and not being allowed to play offline untill I get online just ****es me off.


Got black ops and was nowhere near an internet connection... 1 month later and i can play it. Not good enough steam!

Auzeras said,
Good, I hate FORCED intergration with steam.

No one's asking for forced integration. I just want to be able to buy it and launch it from Steam with updates etc.

I don't want to be forced to sign up for EA's scumbag ad/spam.

Auzeras said,
Good, I hate FORCED intergration with steam. Steam is ok in itself but having it forced upon me and not being allowed to play offline untill I get online just ****es me off.


Got black ops and was nowhere near an internet connection... 1 month later and i can play it. Not good enough steam!

Now you'll get ****ed off buying any Valve, EA, or Ubisoft title unless you just buy it for a console... although, some companies are showing that they want to start doing the same thing for activation with the PS3, so beware there too.

Because, guess what: Soon all new titles sold through EA will require Origin activation on everything except probably the Xbox 360. As Steam exists for the PS3, you can bet Origin is heading there too.

The real problem is the fragmentation all of these services are going to bring. Much like fragmentation of IM systems like Skype/AOL Messanger/Live Messanger/ICQ/Yahoo Messanger. There is going to be a whole lot of "presence" going on with users on these services, and nothing to federate this presence between all the various services. Steam / Origin will soon exist on Cell phones, much like Lync/Skype will. All these systems really need to have presence federated, rather than end users constantly installing another active program to contact people actively on those services.

Also, I can bet you anything that within 5 years, buying digital titles from anyone except the distributer of that title will just result in frustration. As it is, buying EA titles through Steam will suck as those EA titles will then require both Steam and Origin. It just doesn't suck yet, because Steam is better than Origin in every way at the moment.

K.

Unless they offer a DRM-free version at retail, or later offer it through Steam, I won't buy it.
Same for and Mass Effect 3. And that really upsets me.

AeonicVision said,
Unless they offer a DRM-free version at retail, or later offer it through Steam, I won't buy it.
Same for and Mass Effect 3. And that really upsets me.

Like Steam is drm-free, right?

sava700 said,
I will buy the physical copy as I always do.. the hell with steam.

This is exactly what I plan to do. Got every other BF-title for the PC, as a physical copy. Ofcourse, systems like Steam makes it alot less hassle and more convenient, but some games just plain -deserve- being owned as a physical box.

I used to as I have some fetish for boxes. Recently though I need more room in my house and digital downloads is better. The nice thing about Steam is all my games exist on one window.

sava700 said,
I will buy the physical copy as I always do.. the hell with steam.

Yep. I was going to do this anyway. Just hope they are going to be this retarded and stupid and <insert words denoting no intellgence> and w/e with Mass Effect 3

ccoltmanm said,
If they do not go through Steam, piracy will be worse.

How do you figure this one, genius?

Just because a game is available on Steam, doesn't make it "piracy proofed". The trouble right now, is that people rely so heavily on Steam, that there are very few competitors. More competition is good for both the economy, and the consumers. Having the position of Monopoly, is rarely a good thing.

No, Steam is not a great DRM, but I will speak for both myself, and many other people in this:

Steam got me off piracy. Not only the gorgeous deals, but the fact that having a game connected to my Steam account, and thus the Steam community and all, is just so much more worth it. I love Steam, and I have no problem paying full price nowadays, whereas I would have pirated a game without thinking, pre-Steam.

Games that come integrated with the Steamworks API are even better, usually. One thing that really ****ed me off to no end about BC2, is that EA wanted to use their own damn account system, which means two things: It makes it goddamn impossible to connect with friends, and their server browser sucks.

If a monopoly is good for the consumer - then let it be!

darkthunder said,

The trouble right now, is that people rely so heavily on Steam, that there are very few competitors. More competition is good for both the economy, and the consumers. Having the position of Monopoly, is rarely a good thing.

Exactly. I don't think most people will deny that Valve has made a great service, but it's so hard to start up your own gaming network/distribution without tons of capital. Even for big companies. Same with competing with Netflix. We'll probably have our favorites at the end of the day, but until there are more companies that prove they can control the entire market without hurting users, then I'd always like to see competition.

darkthunder said,

How do you figure this one, genius?

There are many places in the world where Steam is the only way to legally get these PC titles. Origin has yet to support these regions so basically locking out Steam will lock out a sizable segment of the userbase. And guess who will offer to fill the gap?

darkthunder said,

How do you figure this one, genius?

Erm. Get out of bed the wrong side this morning, did you? Slightly too much personal attack in your comment IMHO.

jackkk1 said,
http://www.gamestop.com/pc/gam...eld-3-limited-edition/90173
LOL Digital copy price is the same as for the physical disc, great.

Double LOL! I never ever buy anything from GameStop so I wouldn't have noticed this up till now, but they actually are using Impulse for their digital download presence! This is almost identical to what Borders did with Amazon for online distribution, which ultimately ended with Borders going out of business. GameStop probably doesn't have much time left before it reaches the same fate, as beyond used games, they are a worthless MITM.

By far the worst game shopping experiences I've ever had originate from GameStop employees. Either due to those people as horrible individuals, or just due to whatever training GameStop gives to their employees. I will not be sad when they finally fail.

K.

The problem is with Valve people, not EA. EA wants to be the ones taking care of the updates themselves and not hand them to Valve for them to take care of it. Do some research before bragging about how much fail it is or some stupid non-sense like that.

At the end of the day if you really want to play you should be able to buy it wherever you can get it. Otherwise, go play MW3 so we don't need to have you crying about the game ingame too.

Lucas said,
The problem is with Valve people, not EA. EA wants to be the ones taking care of the updates themselves and not hand them to Valve for them to take care of it. Do some research before bragging about how much fail it is or some stupid non-sense like that.

At the end of the day if you really want to play you should be able to buy it wherever you can get it. Otherwise, go play MW3 so we don't need to have you crying about the game ingame too.


If its a real issue, why has nobody else taked about it up to this point?

Ksg said,

If its a real issue, why has nobody else taked about it up to this point?

It is an issue. There have been a few times when my steam version of the game didn't have an update when the normal version of the game did.

Lucas said,
The problem is with Valve people, not EA. EA wants to be the ones taking care of the updates themselves and not hand them to Valve for them to take care of it. Do some research before bragging about how much fail it is or some stupid non-sense like that.

At the end of the day if you really want to play you should be able to buy it wherever you can get it. Otherwise, go play MW3 so we don't need to have you crying about the game ingame too.

No, this wasn't an issue till Origins came about. EA was fine with living within the Steam rules until they decided to get greedy. What EA wants is to control the DLC purchases so they make all the money off them. Which wouldn't be too bad if they did it like GFWL where it compliments Steam. Instead they want to replace Steam, which of course wont fly with Steam.

This is just a money grab and power pull by EA.

This is just going to segregate PC gaming. Now instead of hearing "get it excursively for Xbox or PS3" you are going to hear "Get it exclusively for Origins or Steam". I do not want this. I want ALL games to be available on ALL digital platforms.

And you should be ashamed of yourself for even jokingly suggesting anyone play MW3.

SierraSonic said,

This is just going to segregate PC gaming. Now instead of hearing "get it excursively for Xbox or PS3" you are going to hear "Get it exclusively for Origins or Steam". I do not want this. I want ALL games to be available on ALL digital platforms.

Thats a bit of a pipe dream.

Lucas said,
EA wants to be the ones taking care of the updates themselves and not hand them to Valve for them to take care of it.

No.

EA's goals are A) force used to use their crappy little Origin download application, B) force user to run all patches through them so they can constantly direct market to you (ads and spam), and C) not pay whatever it is that Steam makes for being the best gaming delivery platform ever.

It's about ads, spam, and removing the middle man we, the consumers, have chosen.

SierraSonic said,
No, this wasn't an issue till Origins came about. EA was fine with living within the Steam rules until they decided to get greedy. What EA wants is to control the DLC purchases so they make all the money off them. Which wouldn't be too bad if they did it like GFWL where it compliments Steam. Instead they want to replace Steam, which of course wont fly with Steam.

This is just a money grab and power pull by EA.

This is just going to segregate PC gaming. Now instead of hearing "get it excursively for Xbox or PS3" you are going to hear "Get it exclusively for Origins or Steam". I do not want this. I want ALL games to be available on ALL digital platforms.

And you should be ashamed of yourself for even jokingly suggesting anyone play MW3.

How is it a "money grab" when EA just want to provide the patches and support themselves?

ObiWanToby said,

It is an issue. There have been a few times when my steam version of the game didn't have an update when the normal version of the game did.

That's the publisher's fault. Steam games caches are updated by the people that own the game, not Valve. They only manage their own games. If any of EA's games on Steam aren't patched then it's EA's fault for not updating the image.

This has nothing to do with patching or any of the other nonsense EA says it does.

neo158 said,

How is it a "money grab" when EA just want to provide the patches and support themselves?

No, they want to force EA Origins on people. I've already pre-ordered for like £20 so I'm happy, but it's annoying that it's not on steam.

Lucas said,
The problem is with Valve people, not EA. EA wants to be the ones taking care of the updates themselves and not hand them to Valve for them to take care of it. Do some research before bragging about how much fail it is or some stupid non-sense like that.

At the end of the day if you really want to play you should be able to buy it wherever you can get it. Otherwise, go play MW3 so we don't need to have you crying about the game ingame too.


Maybe you should do some research too. It's amazing how blind you are to the fact that this is all EA's doing, to promote their own platform.

Lucas said,
The problem is with Valve people, not EA. EA wants to be the ones taking care of the updates themselves and not hand them to Valve for them to take care of it. Do some research before bragging about how much fail it is or some stupid non-sense like that.

At the end of the day if you really want to play you should be able to buy it wherever you can get it. Otherwise, go play MW3 so we don't need to have you crying about the game ingame too.


I don't think you understand. The only way EA would allow the game on steam is by it launching from Origin. Thus, you would have to use two different clients just to play the game, which is stupid and something Valve won't allow. Why the hell would I want to log into steam, launch the game, log into Origin, and launch the game again. That's just a waste of time.

ObiWanToby said,

It is an issue. There have been a few times when my steam version of the game didn't have an update when the normal version of the game did.

What's to say it wasn't because EA were deliberately holding back patch distribution through Steam so as to differentiate the physical media versions from the electronic ones.

Star_Hunter said,
Biggest thing is I dont want to have 20 different clients running with all my games split among them.

You dont need Origin running to play. It just a download app with social features. Want the Steam overlay then add the games as a shortcut in steam.

Why not add steam as a client and charge less to people why buy the game from origin. Doesn't that make sense.

Neo003 said,
Why not add steam as a client and charge less to people why buy the game from origin. Doesn't that make sense.

Or give exclusive bonuses to those who buy through Origin.

Neo003 said,
Why not add steam as a client and charge less to people why buy the game from origin. Doesn't that make sense.

Their goal isn't to make this work through Steam. Their goals are A) force used to use their crappy little Origin download application, B) force user to run all patches through them so they can constantly direct market to you (ads and spam), and C) not pay whatever it is that Steam makes for being the best gaming delivery platform ever.

F**k EA. Steam FTW.

Neo003 said,
Why not add steam as a client and charge less to people why buy the game from origin. Doesn't that make sense.

Bingo. Delivery across all channels, but slightly cheaper on their own network. But I guess EA wants more control over how people use their games, and don't want to miss out on any profit.

Quikboy said,

Bingo. Delivery across all channels, but slightly cheaper on their own network. But I guess EA wants more control over how people use their games, and don't want to miss out on any profit.

EA should just add the premium they lose by going through a third party distributer, subtract the cost of their own overheads of running Origin, onto the Steam price and let the market decide. That way, they transfer any Steam fan angst onto Valve, who can see what the exact extra cost is to EA, and thus, to consumers.

The rep added, "Given Steam's dominance - and insistence on users downloading a Steam client application - publishers are likely to be receptive to a competitive alternative."
That offer the same thing your trying to go against....

Nothing is wrong with Steam, there is a lot wrong with trying to force something on me though.

I am still waiting for the ability to pre-purchase BF3, but EA really doesn't want me to support them at all.

Remember EA some support is better than NO support at all.

SierraSonic said,
there is a lot wrong with trying to force something on me though.

lol wut?

SierraSonic said,

I am still waiting for the ability to pre-purchase BF3, but EA really doesn't want me to support them at all.

you r sense of self-entitlement is really disturbing

TrekRich said,
They are giving me loads of reasons to not buy there ****!

I won't be buying BF3 without Steam support. It's the ONLY way I buy/play games now.

Sorry EA. I doubt I'm the only paying customer you'll lose here with this.

excalpius said,

I won't be buying BF3 without Steam support. It's the ONLY way I buy/play games now.

Sorry EA. I doubt I'm the only paying customer you'll lose here with this.

You didn't actually have steam support for Bad Company 2. I don't really see a difference.
No friends support, no data stored in the steam cloud, no patching (at least none as much as I remember).

excalpius said,

I won't be buying BF3 without Steam support. It's the ONLY way I buy/play games now.

Sorry EA. I doubt I'm the only paying customer you'll lose here with this.

Seconded. What a stupid move by EA. I'm sure this looks commercially sensible in the medium term, but a pain in the ass for me to not have all my games on one platform.

Stefan Dascalu said,

You didn't actually have steam support for Bad Company 2. I don't really see a difference.
No friends support, no data stored in the steam cloud, no patching (at least none as much as I remember).

Well, for one, the difference is that I trust Steam. A magical new platform doesn't get my trust that it will have worked out all the kinks as Valve have done over the service's lifetime, or that I understand and trust the licence model, or that the level of convenience is where it needs to be. That's one, massively obvious difference; earned brand loyalty.