Origin: Exposing the False Dichotomy Between Two Multibillion Dollar Companies

[JambalayaBob]

Many, many people hate EA's Origin for no reason. They say their EULA is cause for panic, when it is hardly any different from Steam's, and even after EA changed it to be even closer to Steam's, they still complain and act like privacy is a thing we still have in the 21st century. On top of this, I promise you that Steam knows exactly as much about your computer as Origin ever has. Origin is a way for EA to make a lot more money, sure. But what do you think Steam is? You may argue that Steam has an excuse because it started out just as platform for online play, and evolved over time into the huge success it is now. Sure, I'll give you that, but here's a news flash: regardless of where each platform started out, they're basically the same at the end of the day.

At one point, probably some time in 2004, somebody at Valve looked at Steam and said, "Hey, we can make lots of money off of this!" Remember that Steam started off selling only Valve games, just like Origin is now with EA games. Also remember that Valve tried to start getting deals to sell 3rd party games through Steam pretty damn quickly once it was officially released. It's obvious that EA is in the process of getting publishers on board with Origin as we speak.

You might say that EA is just a terrible money-grubbing company with no interest in their audience, and you would be correct to a certain degree, but there's also a certain part of Valve thinking the same way. What's worse about Valve though, is that everyone loves them, so nobody cares what they do because they're filled with rainbows and unicorns. Valve is capitalizing on the fact that you love them, and over the years, people have been shaping them into a corporate giant. Remember that EA was once as much of an innovator as Valve is today, and no matter how good or bad the public appearance of either company is, they are still both corporations that continue to grow, amassing large sums money from their individual business strategies.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

What's worse about Valve though, is that everyone loves them,

Ooh, that really burns me up. How people LIKE things, and how that's a BAD thing.

We've had this discussion many many times, and it comes down to Steam deliberately saying "We are doing this and we won't do this"; while Origin say "We will do what we want and you have no choice".

Then there's listening to it's fans, not hijacking accounts, adding extra security and a whole heap of other things.

Bottom Line: Steam admits it has a monopoly and tries to make up for it.
Origin wants a monopoly and forces you to use it - and any other day 1 DLC/Online passes/Third Party Sharing - because they can.

 

[JambalayaBob]

It's not bad, but it makes you blind to the possible future. Valve has the opportunity to eventually become as bad as EA is now, that's the point I'm making. I highly doubt that Valve will maintain its current persona and business practices forever. As I said in my original post, EA was a huge innovator for many years, but look where it is now.

 

[superstringz]

I still love Valve and hate EA. Valve can take my money, I've never had a problem with one of their games, they've never bought out and fucked over a developer (That I'm aware of), they love their modders, and they own up to their mistakes (more so than EA at any rate, no ones perfect.) Also Valve has a sense of humor. The last time EA sold me something I liked was in 2003, with SimCity 4.

tl:dr I gushed about how I'm such a Valve fanboy, and how they're perfect magical gods all over the thread. You are welcome.

 

[Weaver]

Many, many people hate EA's Origin for no reason. They say their EULA is cause for panic, when it is hardly any different from Steam's, and even after EA changed it to be even closer to Steam's, they still complain and act like privacy is a thing we still have in the 21st century. On top of this, I promise you that Steam knows exactly as much about your computer as Origin ever has.

If you actually just go and read their privacy statements you'll find this is more or less untrue.
EA's change amounted to "don't worry, you can trust us!".

 

[lobster1077]

It's not bad, but it makes you blind to the possible future. Valve has the opportunity to eventually become as bad as EA is now, that's the point I'm making. I highly doubt that Valve will maintain its current persona and business practices forever. As I said in my original post, EA was a huge innovator for many years, but look where it is now.

Valve don't seem particularly inclined to abandon the business model that has worked incredibly well for them. If anything they're offering more pleasantry to customers now than ever before with frequent sales and a few good free games. As Gaben himself says 'Whats not to like'.

 

[random_bars]

The difference is, EA is publicly traded. Valve isn't. Meaning that the entire focus of EA always has to be to make money and nothing else - they cannot do anything that they can't explain to their shareholders as something that will maximise profits.

Valve, on the other hand, can pretty much do what they like - if they want to sacrifice a little bit of profit in exchange for delivering a better experience to their customers, they can go ahead and do so without having to answer to anybody.

 

[JambalayaBob]

It's not bad, but it makes you blind to the possible future. Valve has the opportunity to eventually become as bad as EA is now, that's the point I'm making. I highly doubt that Valve will maintain its current persona and business practices forever. As I said in my original post, EA was a huge innovator for many years, but look where it is now.

Valve don't seem particularly inclined to abandon the business model that has worked incredibly well for them. If anything they're offering more pleasantry to customers now than ever before with frequent sales and a few good free games. As Gaben himself says 'Whats not to like'.

Yes, because all the executives at Valve today won't ever retire or get another job or anything. It's not like the same people run a business forever. Corruption in a company is formed from the growth and changes that take place throughout it; no company can maintain any one way of running its business forever. Here's an example of a company that people still love but does in fact have some iffy business practices going on: Google! People like Google, as they have for a long time, but not everything they do is ponies and unicorns, even though the majority of its fans are either blind to it or don't care enough yet. Youtube, for instance, has a ton of problems that I don't think anyone ignores, but most people just blame Youtube instead of Google, even though Youtube is a large part of Google.

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google The fact that there's a pretty big Wikipedia page on Google Criticisms says enough.

 

[WitherVoice]

If Origin works nonintrusively, I'll be fine with it. If/when it doesn't, I'll hate it. This is exactly the same treatment Steam gets. Steam is awesome and wonderful when it works, and when one of the features irks me, or I lose internet connection and can't play a game because it wants to "update itself first", or something like that, it's the worst thing in the history of EVER!

Bottom line, I don't give a toss about the company behind the service. The service lives and dies on its own merits. I haven't tried Origin yet, but I'm sure it'll be a gross violation of privacy that I will tolerate because I like games, just like Steam is.

EDIT: Also, Jambalaya, you're reaching. It's not that people don't think Valve and Google can do any wrong, it's that we put up with their shortcomings because experience has shown that the benefits outweigh the foul-ups. Personally, I think there are good reasons to trust Google as well, mostly this: they already have all the information in the world. They probably know more about us than we do ourselves. Here's the thing, though: we aren't that interesting. The information about us is more useful to them as a huge glob of data from which clever, wide-reaching ideas can be drawn or honed.

Basically, the cure for paranoia is basically realizing how uninteresting you are. Nobody cares about your secrets. You could go write a blog about your secrets, and nobody would read them. Nobody cares about what YOUR system specs are. Valve and EA both care that "hey, our users seem to run systems that are on average THIS powerful. If we make this game to specs that suit that, we can sell more stuff because more people can use it".

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Valve has the opportunity to eventually become as bad as EA is now, that's the point I'm making.

It also has the chance of creating Episode 3...but at this point, both are highly unlikely.

But if I had to have Ricitello or Newell behind me, it'd be Gabe every time. Even at a pie eating contest.

[sub] Oh goddam, another month.[/sub]

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Here's an example of a company that people still love but does in fact have some iffy business practices going on: Google!

When did people ever love Google? They've been dodgy bastards since conception.

Valve give you free stuff. EA still charge for abandonware.
Valve admit they're taking your information. EA tell you they're taking all your information.
EA's EULA has huge red pen marks on it. Valve's? I've yet to see anyone take that one apart properly without saying "ZOMG THEY COULD SELL YOUR KIDS!".

Steam dies : Valve says they'll unlock all games.
Origin dies : EA hasn't even admitted it could.

 

[JambalayaBob]

If you actually just go and read their privacy statements you'll find this is more or less untrue.
EA's change amounted to "don't worry, you can trust us!".

They say that they won't ever personally identify you in their new EULA, that should be enough. What harm can a company possibly do with information about your computer if they can't ever know who's it is? If you mean that they could still just not obey their OWN CONTRACT, then fine, sue them! Let's see who wins that battle.

 

[Irridium]

Well, you see, EA has proven that they will gladly screw you over if they want. They installed a rootkit(SecuROM) on my PC, and when I used up my limited installs for Spore after I tried, and failed, to install it on my PC because of my crappy connection they had the gall to tell me to "buy the game again" if I want more "install points".

They attack used sales when used sales are not their enemy, 4 years ago they said that the $60 price point was broken and had to change, and here we are with their own service and they're not doing anything to fix the problem they pointed out. Instead they're content with pushing a busted-ass business model and then bitching at used game buyers for issues they're not willing to do anything to fix.

So yeah, I'm not exactly too fond of EA.

Meanwhile, Valve and Steam have at least TRIED to make Steam worth your while. They provide reasons for why you should use Steam other than "because we have the games".

Valve has shown they will stick with their products and improve them over time.

EA has shown they will stick with their products for a couple of months then essentially forget about them. The only thing they're improving is how they screw over customers.

And then, there's this: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112372-Gabe-Newell-Its-Up-to-Valve-to-Bring-EA-Back-to-Steam

Specifically, this part: "Game companies have to earn the right to install their content on their customers machines".

EA has not done that. Ever.

Valve has.

 

[Zhukov]

One of those companies has repeatedly shown itself to be worthy of my trust.

One of those companies has repeatedly done the exact opposite.

Guess which is which.

[sub][sub][sub][sub](PS. I installed Origin a couple of weeks back.)[/sub][/sub][/sub][/sub]

 

[Atmos Duality]

On top of this, I promise you that Steam knows exactly as much about your computer as Origin ever has.

Perhaps your average user isn't aware of what their software actually accesses and does to their computers, but I do.
Steam DOES NOT request unlimited access to scan my hard drive whenever they bloody want, and their EULA doesn't legally stipulate that request either (furthermore; the hardware survey is anonymous AND optional. Origin's is mandatory); only the portions that contain its install data/games, and its local registry keys (for the Steamworks DRM) which is a far more finite definition of "requested access" than Origin's "we want to see what 'software' you have. Origin's statement legally equivalent to requesting unlimited access to every single bit on your hard-drive, since the term "software" is just that vague.

It's not bad, but it makes you blind to the possible future. Valve has the opportunity to eventually become as bad as EA is now, that's the point I'm making. I highly doubt that Valve will maintain its current persona and business practices forever. As I said in my original post, EA was a huge innovator for many years, but look where it is now.

It's a valid point; the Valve we know today will not be the Valve we know in 10 years.
However, it's important not to interpret this as evidence to favor Origin more; in that context, it's a fallacious argument because it's evidence based on a "what-if" scenario and it ignores the merits (or lack thereof) which Origin possesses.

In short: For the time being, I have ample reason to trust Valve, and insufficient reason to trust EA.

If those terms change, so does my behavior within the market. I have a battlenet 2.0 account due to Starcraft 2, but I refuse to use it anymore on account of its terms having become too restrictive and counter-productive (I can't play with my friends without accessing Blizzard's servers through a network bottleneck).
If you disagree with this, fine; that's your opinion. But do not assume my position is based on stubborn stupidity; I know perfectly well what I'm getting into, and I value my LEGAL rights more than I value my play time.
One is quite objective and protects me from abuse, while the other is completely superficial and replaceable in comparison.

 

[Weaver]

If you actually just go and read their privacy statements you'll find this is more or less untrue.
EA's change amounted to "don't worry, you can trust us!".

They say that they won't ever personally identify you in their new EULA, that should be enough. What harm can a company possibly do with information about your computer if they can't ever know who's it is? If you mean that they could still just not obey their OWN CONTRACT, then fine, sue them! Let's see who wins that battle.

What the EULA specifically states is that they will never share information that personally identifies you to third parties; it does not state they will never store information that personally identifies you.

The real concern is just with the permissiveness of the EULA itself. I really and honestly doubt EA has any interest in storing a list of every movie I've watched on my computer this week or whatever; The issue though, is that they could. They're likely just throwing the clause in there as a catch-all. I'd really wager they plan on just building and storing user information (like home address, etc.) so they have a legal means of storing your credit card information for faster transactions.

 

[JambalayaBob]

I like Valve a lot more than EA, let's make that clear. Yes, EA has pretty atrocious business practices, but they didn't always. No company in HISTORY has ever maintained good business practices forever. EA became how it is because of new people taking over the positions of those who originally ran the company, and over time corruption seeped in through executives getting greedy. This ALWAYS HAPPENS not only in business, but in every organization of society. It might take a very long time sometimes, but it WILL HAPPEN. Do you think the founding fathers would be happy with the US in its current state? Almost certainly not! Corruption is imminent, and it's stupid to act like EA has always been a big bad monster and Valve will always be a pretty pink princess.

 

[Sixcess]

EA has terrible PR. Really. They trash talk their competitors, run embarassing and childish adverts, beat popular franchises to death, release tons of crap and generally do nothing that might challenge the perception of them being a greedy, soulless mega-corp that distrusts its customers.

Valve on the other hand is run by a jolly fat man who (virtually) gives away games at Christmas (and any other time they have a Steam Sale.)

 

[Something Amyss]

It's not bad, but it makes you blind to the possible future. Valve has the opportunity to eventually become as bad as EA is now, that's the point I'm making. I highly doubt that Valve will maintain its current persona and business practices forever. As I said in my original post, EA was a huge innovator for many years, but look where it is now.

Monopolies usually put on a friendly face before they eat you.