EA and Valve are Pretty Similar

[Sight Unseen]

I think the biggest difference ... wait scratch that...
The biggest difference to GAMERS is that Valve don't have the same "We're only doing what we have to why are you complaining" attitude that EA does. Valve's attitude is usually more along the lines of "Ok, you don't like this... what did you want us to do?" Even if they don't always follow through, it at least makes us feel better than the corporate ass covering that are most of EA's press releases. So even though there are slightly suspicious practices at Valve (bundling Left 4 Dead DLC originally intended to be free as Left 4 Dead 2, hopelessly long development cycles, Portal 2 (a short game) costing the same as a full priced game) they do enough good to come out as Karmaticly ahead in gamer's eyes, whereas EA seems to only do the bad, and more of it. Also, Valve *are* game developers. EA *owns* game developers. It's a huge difference.

Portal 2 isn't that short. Between the single player campaign, the co-op campaign, and the free DLC levels there's at least 15 hours of stuff to do, and all of it was golden imo. I have spent more on games which have given me much less enjoyment for a much shorter time. Also, with the perpetual testing initiative, the replayability of Portal 2 approaches infinity. It just sucks that there's no co-op levels for it .


OT: I like Valve a lot more than EA because it doesn't feel like Valve is trying to screw me over every time I buy something of theirs, even though I've given Valve far, far more of my money than I have to EA.

 

[Lilani]

On second thought, they are pretty different.

Yeah, considering Valve has a rabid fanbase willing to die for it and EA has a rabid hatebase ready to burn their HQ down at any moment This is because in spite of its long delays, Valve actually provides good customer service in the meantime. EA farts out their games whenever they like and treats their customers like the dirt under their heels.

Plus Valve's business model more or less lacks a hierarchy, so under the hood it is VERY different from EA.

 

[GoddyofAus]

...Uhhh no, they aren't.

 

[Dryk]

Yeah, considering Valve has a rabid fanbase willing to die for it and EA has a rabid hatebase ready to burn their HQ down at any moment This is because in spite of its long delays, Valve actually provides good customer service in the meantime.

The developers provide excellent customer service, the customer service staff... not so much. I don't think I've ever got a response from Steam Support that wasn't copy-pasted from a tangentially related page from the Knowledge Base until about a week into the ticket. Even if I specifically say that I read what it says to do on the site and it didn't work they'll send me a copy-paste of it and ask me to try it.

 

[Shuguard]

Op your post was just pure awesome. Thank you for that.

The quest for money is always a common trait in gaming companies.

I think Valve makes more educated decisions by taking their time rather than having many of the rushed problems EA faces.

I think EA and Activision are much more similar rather than EA and Valve.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

The main difference between EA and Valve is that Steam provides plenty of third-party games while Origin only provides EA releases. This might not seem very significant (apart from the fact that Steam gets a bigger library), but it means that a lot of money that goes through Steam actually ends up in the pocket of third party producers/developers. So while Origin gives every cent back to EA, Steam only gives a fraction of the profit to Valve unless the game is Valve made.

What this means in practice is that EA will want to cram every cent out of Origin, because every sale made is pure profit. Valve on the other hand only gets a part of the profit from Steam and are thus better off selling loads of games as every sale is a small profit but the profit for Valve probably doesn't differ that much between $60 games and $10 games.

In essence: Origin is a producer service, while Steam is mostly a middle-man service. EA makes money out of selling their own games, Valve makes money out of selling other people's games.

 

[Scrustle]

Pretty amusing, but I don't think EA have any problems with inefficient development cycles. They wanted to compete with Steam for the same reason they do everything else. Money.

 

[Lonewolfm16]

As I see it, Valve wants money just as much as EA. They're not philanthropists. They want our cash to continue making more products and generally stay in business i.e. the primary concern of any and all commercial enterprises.

They simply understand their audience a lot better than EA, so they're quite a bit smarter on how to get that money. They do things that make us happy, so it doesn't feel like they're trying to empty our pockets, while at the same time ensuring our loyalty and support.

PS: don't think I dislike Valve. In fact, I admire them a lot. Both for their products and for their clever business strategies.

Yes but one of the primary things to remember as a consumer is that companies try to make money so if they do somthing that pleases you buy the product related to how they pleased you so they are more likely to do it again.

 

[Samurai Rabbit]

The biggest problem with Origin is price to be honest. I think Jim Sterling mentioned it a while ago. They charge full retail price for digital copies of games despite not having to cover the costs of producing a manual (or the shitty pamphlet we get from them now), packaging, distribution, storage, retailer percentage etc.

They don't get it, surely a digital download cannot cost as much to produce as a boxed product. So how can it be priced the same?

If they want to maximise their profits fair enough, what business doesn't? But you can do that without taking the piss out of your customers (and your developers).

If they make £30 from a £50 boxed game, (I've plucked these numbers out of the air!) then surely they'd make £30 from a £40 digital download. Even a saving of 20% on standard retail prices would increase sales, as people would rather download a game at a saving of 20% than buy a boxed retail version at full price.

Anyway, my ranting 1st post is over!

 

[Bvenged]

That was hilarious Though Brotherhood didn't have a hookblade and Assassin's is Ubi so I don't know why EA would like it.

When I noticed John Rowrowrowyourboat and glanced back up at his names, I burst out laughing

But yeah, great non-fiction script of the HQ of both publishers!

 

[thebakedpotato]

People seem to worship Valve like they are gods gift...

I'm sorry... What?

I find that being able to buy games... at home... online... without even having to put on pants.. for about twenty five cents on the dollar is god's gift to my personal gaming experience.

The only drawback is I can't meet my old high school friends at Fry's and then hook up and smoke pot with them later. Which is a detriment to my smoking pot and socializing... which gives me more time for gaming. Which only serves to further strengthen my argument.

 

[Saulkar]

Pretty funny. Not much discussion value but I will role with it.

 

[Syzygy23]

OP is the biggest retard in the world. Know why? He thinks Gabe Newell hungers for human flesh. You moron, it's common knowledge the source of Gabe Newells power are ZEBRA CAKES. Sheezus, get it right!

It's not that hard: Gabe Newell eats ZEBRA CAKES, his body converts them into PRECIOUS GOO, which increases his girth, which makes him sweat more, and his sweat contains mind control pheromones. Seriously, this is 3rd grade syllabus were talkin' about here.

 

[Signa]

Valve isn't doing the same things and simply hiding it: They're not doing the same things. Yes, Valve does the occassional bad or stupid thing. And we notice it. They just do it with less frequency than EA (To be honest, with Riccitello at the helm, I'm suprised EA exists at all), which constantly makes these mistakes. Just look at recently: They've managed to annoy people with more pre-order DLC, more bastardising of their franchises (Dead Space), telling consumers they should pay more, just because, and that's in the last few weeks.

So which do you think happens more? Valve screwing up, or EA doing something right.

Off the top of my head, the most egregious thing I can think of with Valve is adding crates to TF2 while it was not a free-to-play game. Every one of my crate drops could have been another item. The whole L4D2 and Portal 2 fiascos didn't even phase me, because they were both quality full games. Expecting them to give them away as free content/DLCs is just being entitled.

The best thing I can remember about EA is they were kinda honest in one interview I read recently.

 

[GameMaNiAC]

Damn, that was a good read, although I disagree with you. Valve is pretty indie when compared to EA.

The new Source Filmmaker Valve are kind enough to let go for free made me fall in love with them even more.

 

[thebakedpotato]

People seem to worship Valve like they are gods gift...

I'm sorry... What?

I find that being able to buy games... at home... online... without even having to put on pants.. for about twenty five cents on the dollar is god's gift to my personal gaming experience.

The only drawback is I can't meet my old high school friends at Fry's and then hook up and smoke pot with them later. Which is a detriment to my smoking pot and socializing... which gives me more time for gaming. Which only serves to further strengthen my argument.

Which gives you more time for gaming AND less pants time, which is also a bonus!

You're absolutely right!

I would like to take this chance to personally thank Valve for their tireless and constant struggle towards bringing us closer to a world without pants!