[QUOTE=hexpunK;31115443]You uhh, you do know that Origin only installs games and isn't a form of DRM like Steam, meaning it won't have a single impact on the game if you buy it retail or from another distributor right?
No?
Then stop complaining about it.[/quote]
[quote][url]www.origin.com[/url] is your new destination for browsing, buying, downloading and playing your favorite games. You’ll get the best content from EA – on a PC or a mobile device – directly from Origin. At launch, you’ll be able to set up an Origin account and immediately connect with your friends.[/quote]
Hmm, sounds familiar....
This isn't about DRM - SecuROM never affected me asides from dumb disc-read errors. It's about going against Steam.
[quote]That would be the fault of DICE, the developer, not EA, the publisher.[/quote]
Quality control exists for a reason. As the publisher, EA is responsible for assuring the product - or product updates - they're pushing out are still fully functional. Ultimately, it's their responsibility.
[QUOTE=Reimu;31115650]Hmm, sounds familiar....
Quality control exists for a reason.[/QUOTE]
I've used Origin myself, it doesn't interfere with your games at all, it merely provides an community interface [B]if[/B], and only if you choose to leave it running. I can run the games I own on it without the application launching. Unlike Steam. Do research before you shit sling something.
Oh, and quality control for updates is more the task to the developer, not the publisher.
iirc the clans would be competing for actual prizes so i guess its more than just adding a clan tag...
[QUOTE=hexpunK;31115707]I've used Origin myself, it doesn't interfere with your games at all, it merely provides an community interface [B]if[/B], and only if you choose to leave it running. I can run the games I own on it without the application launching. Unlike Steam. Do research before you shit sling something.[/QUOTE]
Origin is a competitor in the Digital Distribution realm to Steam, and they've already confirmed Battlefield 3 and other EA games are at least going to be holding exclusive content. And then there's other things, like EA can - and has already - "retire" games from download.
If BF3 appears on Steam then that's different. This is about competition and who I'm loyal to compared to a service EA has claimed will "match its leading competitor" by March 2012.
God, I can't believe I had to spell that out.
[QUOTE=Reimu;31115761]Origin is a competitor in the Digital Distribution realm to Steam, and they've already confirmed Battlefield 3 and other EA games are going to be exclusives. And then there's other things, like EA can - and has already - "retire" games from use.
God, I can't believe I had to spell that out.[/QUOTE]
Crysis 2 was pulled for breaking agreements with Steam, not because EA wanted it off. I am not aware of any other games being pulled recently myself, and does it matter if the game is Origin exclusive at all? Either buy it on Origin and install the game, then remove Origin, or just buy it retail and shut the fuck up about it. The game will self update, Origin doesn't have the capability to update games. It not being on Steam has [B]no[/B] impact on the playability of the game. If anything you should be complaining about the use of Punkbuster again instead of nitpicking.
[quote]I am not aware of any other games being pulled recently myself, and does it matter if the game is Origin exclusive at all?[/quote]
If a game became Origin exclusive, that means EA has full control over its sales as a digital distributor. That harms Steam as a service, which loses these sales or even potential customers.
I don't like Origin on the principal that it's a rival to Steam. Why can't you understand that? This isn't about Crysis 2, or DRM, Punkbuster, the interface, whatever. It's about EA trying to gain a foothold in a market and to surpass their rival, which I don't like.
Also yes, I later double-checked and Battlefield 3 isn't an exclusive title (as of yet). EA has also had Alice on Steam, which shows a sign that BF3 might not be Origin exclusive. I refuse to buy it on principal though, no matter what role Origin plays, if I have to use that service. I won't create an Origin account.
[QUOTE=Reimu;31115975]If a game became Origin exclusive, that means EA has full control over its sales as a digital distributor. That harms Steam as a service, which loses these sales or even potential customers.
I don't like Origin on the principal that it's a rival to Steam. Why can't you understand that? This isn't about Crysis 2, or DRM, Punkbuster, the interface, whatever. It's about EA trying to gain a foothold in a market and to surpass their rival, which I don't like.
Also yes, I later double-checked and Battlefield 3 isn't an exclusive title (as of yet). EA has also had Alice on Steam, which shows a sign that BF3 might not be Origin exclusive. I refuse to buy it on principal though, no matter what role Origin plays, if I have to use that service. I won't create an Origin account.[/QUOTE]
So you'd rather a digital distribution monopoly where Valve and only Valve can sell games because Steam is a good platform, with no competing services to encourage them to lower prices? So what if BF3 isn't on Steam, it won't hurt Valve that much, they still have the hundreds of other developers who agree to publish there. None of the older battlefields were on Steam at launch either, didn't hurt Steam one bit. Not at all.
Your reasons for hating Origin are absurd. It will not hurt Valve as it is only for EAs' games, which are usually pretty bad on PC with the exception of DICE games and a few others. If you buy it retail, you won't even need to touch Origin, which will use your EA account that you will need to play BF3 with anyway, so you wouldn't even need a new account.
If you are so worried about them providing competition, then you really don't know how this kind of thing works. If nobody provides competition Valve could run riot with their pricing and terms of service, having rival companies try and undercut them is a good thing for us, the consumer.
Whatever though, if you still think Origin is bad after this, have fun without BF3, we won't miss you.
[QUOTE=Nightsure;31111779]Wait, you have to [I]pay[/I] to start-up clans? Just an in-game clan?[/QUOTE]
No
[QUOTE=hexpunK;31116149]So you'd rather a digital distribution monopoly where Valve and only Valve can sell games because Steam is a good platform, with no competing services to encourage them to lower prices? So what if BF3 isn't on Steam, it won't hurt Valve that much, they still have the hundreds of other developers who agree to publish there. None of the older battlefields were on Steam at launch either, didn't hurt Steam one bit. Not at all.
Your reasons for hating Origin are absurd. It will not hurt Valve as it is only for EAs' games, which are usually pretty bad on PC with the exception of DICE games and a few others. If you buy it retail, you won't even need to touch Origin, which will use your EA account that you will need to play BF3 with anyway, so you wouldn't even need a new account.
If you are so worried about them providing competition, then you really don't know how this kind of thing works. If nobody provides competition Valve could run riot with their pricing and terms of service, having rival companies try and undercut them is a good thing for us, the consumer.
Whatever though, if you still think Origin is bad after this, have fun without BF3, we won't miss you.[/QUOTE]
I didn't say I'm not for competition. I just prefer Valve to be in the lead of the market and to hold onto the current position they have. I don't like the idea of EA heading this market, because I trust Valve much more. I don't like the idea of GameStop Impulse having a strong hold in digital distribution, because GameStop makes inherently poor business decisions. If these services can inspire Steam and improve it, I'm for that. But I want Steam to be the top service in the end of the day. That's just brand loyalty, plain and simple.
The problem with BF3 not being on Steam is the idea that it builds momentum. It robs sales and exposure for Steam, the latter being especially important. Games like mw2 and BO opened up Steam to a group of gamers that never used Steam. If Origin takes hold of a similar demographic through BF3, that could mean these players may pour money into Origin the same way many people do towards Steam. That means that lost profit expands than simply losing money on BF3.
What if I don't have an EA Account, or lost my credentials? Does that mean I have to create an Origin account?
At the moment Origin is EA-only. That doesn't mean EA might expand their base in the future. It's not even officially released yet; it's only in beta. That means Origin as you know it might even change within 3 months.
That's ok, the Battlefield games have been in decline since Modern Combat anyway.
[QUOTE=holdenmcclure;31113416]Remember people.
Call of Duty invented clans.
Call of Duty invented friends lists.
Call of Duty invented Vietnam.
Call of Duty invented shootan.
Call of Duty invented everything.[/QUOTE]CoD also invented destructible environment.
[quote]
But, the game likes to follow in CoD's wake suspiciously. When mw2's first DLC started appearing, EA decided to launch their DLC-mocking campaign at the same time. When Black Ops touted customizable units, EA goes ahead and releases the "SPECACT Kit Upgrade," which claims players can change how their soldiers look and flaunts the Special Ops-related theme. When the Vietnam-theme is revealed in the new Call of Duty game, EA goes to Vietnam with Bad Company 2. When Call of Duty Elite pops up, EA counters with Battlelog. They released screenshots of Battlelog the same EXACT day Elite beta goes live. This isn't a coincidence. EA is trying to compete with CoD by mimicking them - the EA CEO even claimed they want to take down Call of Duty - which is in the end what's so insanely stupid and turns me off [/quote]
Hi thanks for reading my other posts
Can someone tell me what you actually are paying for?
Im gonna get MW3 just to play with my brother and have a good time on the box but I am definetly not going to get this unnecesary ELITE bullshit which in no way affects actual gameplay and if it would I would still not get it.
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;31116924]Can someone tell me what you actually are paying for?[/QUOTE]
All we know is that you can get the DLC for free by paying for premium. And the article claims clans require payment.
The FAQ hints most of the premium services are tied to MW3 than anything.
[QUOTE=Darkslicer;31116937]Im gonna get MW3 just to play with my brother and have a good time on the box but I am definetly not going to get this unnecesary ELITE bullshit which in no way affects actual gameplay and if it would I would still not get it.[/QUOTE]
Why can't you have a good time with your brother with Modern warfare 1? Or any of the games preceding it that play just like MW3 will play? Oh wait, your Activisions consumer garbage can.
I thought the youtubes about this were anti-activision satire!
I'm an idiot.
[QUOTE=jbthekid;31113647]I mean I have been a CoD ADDICT for the past 4 years and have moved on to Battlefield until MW3. But
cod elite is just so dumb. Treyarch had the same thing on the callofduty website during World at War but just a smaller version. Now they want us to pay for this when all cod does is piss me off? Nope. :][/QUOTE]
Pfft, unlikely. You're going to pay for it and like it when Kotick rams you repeatedly.
I'm not sure if this has been said yet, but the paying to start up clans is paying to create an official clan that can compete in Activision tournaments for real prizes, it's not like just setting up a clan and competing against other clans yourself.
Thanks for clarifying that. I thought I remembered hearing that clans could be created for free.
[QUOTE=plokoon9619;31117015]Why can't you have a good time with your brother with Modern warfare 1? Or any of the games preceding it that play just like MW3 will play? Oh wait, your Activisions consumer garbage can.[/QUOTE]
Nah man :smile: we played all games and still go forth and back and it's nice to have something "new" well in our eyes it is considering how much time we spend on playing it together (back in the days :frown:)
In other news, testing for a new "premium" service for WoW starts today. Think they are [url="http://us.battle.net/wow/en/blog/3119305"]related[/url]?
More COD kiddies stuck on COD, less on my favorite games
[QUOTE=holdenmcclure;31112395]The problem with the current gaming market is that they have no dignity or self control whatsoever. They see they want something, and they'll pay for it with little foresight or understanding of how supporting a system like this will affect the future of gaming. It's a slippery slope. Ever since Modern Warfare they've been stripping down the game as much as possible and stripping once standard features already functional on the same game engine since 2005 and either dropping them completely or reselling them.
You can't be mad at Activision though. They're a company with a profit model just like everyone else, and if they can make more for less then they almost certainly will. They don't have respect for their userbase because they don't need to. These choices aren't possible without a consumer foundation supporting them, and that's the reason it's gotten this out of hand, and for what? A cookie cutter campaign plot with animated .gif sprite explosions everywhere that's a borderline railshooter with subpar visuals? Arcade style multiplayer corridor shooting rebranded and reskinned every year? This is what people are willing to take it up the ass for in spite of all the other choices, hell, even the clones that do the same thing without the consumer buttfucking?
I'm not fit for this planet anymore. If this takes off then I'll be truly surprised. Activision must be laughing their asses off. They fire off nearly all the Infinity Ward staff while retaining the rights to the name of the company that made the franchise what it is, rebrand the game on the same engine with the same assets, and it'll sell most on Xbox 360 where they'll be paying for P2P online via Xbox Live Gold Membership AS WELL as Call of Duty Elite, just paying a tax on a fucking brand name and they'll LIKE it. I just don't get it.
Edit: I hate people who rate posts with dumb or disagree and then never reply.[/QUOTE]
I disagree. While this worked for a little bit, people are caring about Call of Duty less and less. Modern Warfare 2 was the peak of it's popularity, and while Black Ops sold well, a lot of people did not like it. I think Modern Warfare 3 will do good, but the one after won't do nearly as well. I can see people skipping out on map packs, then the games will start to sell less, then CoD won't matter anymore. It'll be fine, it's just a phase.
Modern Warfare 3 releases.
People stop bitching about things that were nerfed and bitch about second-best things (e.g: black ops ghost after stopping power was removed)
Uncreative teenagers get thousands of dollars for recording gameplay
Machinima posts 1,000 videos of the same shit daily
People find OP weapons on day 1
People cry and go back to Black Ops, claiming it was better and more fun
Adding Elite into the mix won't do much, it'll just put more money in Activision's wallet.
[editline]14th July 2011[/editline]
sorry, not elite, EL73
So you have to pay for shit that is free in every other fucking action game?
Greddy cunts.
Oh hey, another thing Activision sells that I won't be buying.
Sucks to see how horrible a game and It's community can become in just a couple of years.
Right now, I always think of Activision as Apple.
Hey look at the bright-side. This is yet another distraction to keep the COD kids away from Battlefield.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;31115564]That would be the fault of DICE, the developer, not EA, the publisher.
Holy shit I can't take you seriously any more. Well, I never did, but you get my point.[/QUOTE]
Shit, I hate when people doesn't know the difference between the Publisher and the Developer.
Even worse when they suddenly start talking like they would know everything about it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
