News - EA: “we're going to be a 100 per cent digital company”

[HEXUS]

Says Electronic Arts Labels boss Frank Gibeau.

Read more.

[Lee H]

If that is the case then EA best have a look at the following court case ;

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...aded-software/

[Spank]

I've always thought that Steam and others like them could have a 2'nd marketplace where people can sell at an agreed price and the vendor takes a cut.

[HalloweenJack]

If that is the case then EA best have a look at the following court case ;

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...aded-software/

wonder how this will effect blizzard etc with digital and have to be created to play game accounts?

[Sacred]

"Through digital downloads the company can have a direct relationship with the buyer with no intermediary, that benefits both gamer and the content creator, in this case EA."

I couldn't disagree more. This provides a number of bad situations for the consumer, the first of which is price fixing. If EA are the only retailer of EA games and they want it to retail at £50 they can set the price at £50 theirs no going to places like Amazon or Play to get a better deal you either pay the £50 and enjoy the game or don't.
Secondly it eliminates the secondhand market, because its digital contant only we have no resale. This is very bad for console gamers as (or so is personal to me) it prevents stacking up 3-4 older games and trading them in for a brand new title.
Finally another problem here is I will no longer be able to take my games to say a friends for a LAN party or just to let them try the game unless I take the console/HDD with me.

This is without even considering the effect on the highstreet retail industry which will lead to loss of jobs etc. Or the complex T&C that you must sign basically stating you never ever actually own the game and can only play it when/if they see fit.

I'm sorry but the move to a total digital game environemnt favours one person and one person only and that is the entity that is selling them. Period!

[crossy]

I've always thought that Steam and others like them could have a 2'nd marketplace where people can sell at an agreed price and the vendor takes a cut.

Sounds quite sensible. Similarly I thought either some kind of "rental" arrangement (where you could hire a game for a month at a time), or one where you could trade back a game for credit against a new(er) title would have been a great idea.

I couldn't disagree more. This provides a number of bad situations for the consumer, the first of which is price fixing. If EA are the only retailer of EA games and they want it to retail at £50 they can set the price at £50 theirs no going to places like Amazon or Play to get a better deal you either pay the £50 and enjoy the game or don't.

Agreed, and you can guarantee that if EA can get away with it, then they will. "Oh dear, our profit for the quarter is down. Ah, I know, put £2 on the cost of Fifa 14, that will sort that out".

Secondly it eliminates the secondhand market, because its digital contant only we have no resale. This is very bad for console gamers as (or so is personal to me) it prevents stacking up 3-4 older games and trading them in for a brand new title.

Ah, but EA (and others) will argue that if we've all moved to digital (and it'll come - remember that Microsoft also appear to be pushing this!) then there's nothing physical to trade back. Funny that an MS Office license has a defined value, but the license to play BF3 is - according to EA - worthless.

Finally another problem here is I will no longer be able to take my games to say a friends for a LAN party or just to let them try the game unless I take the console/HDD with me.

True to an extent - I'm sure I've seen some "promises" that your friend will be able to download a game and then get you to use your "license" to activate it. Still nowhere near as easy as taking a CD and slapping it in a drive though. Perhaps some bright spark may come up with a way to "export" a game to an HDD crate/flash drive/etc so you can play it elsewhere before "importing" it again to play it on your own PC? Perhaps even some arrangement where you can "authorise" other PC's/consoles for your content - with a check that you're not playing that content on more than one device at a time.

This is without even considering the effect on the highstreet retail industry which will lead to loss of jobs etc. Or the complex T&C that you must sign basically stating you never ever actually own the game and can only play it when/if they see fit.

This is the BIG deal for me. GAME is effectively dead if digital only comes to pass, and it'll also hit HMV hard too. And if you don't own anything, then what's to say that EA/Activision/et al can't withdraw your "right" to use that at some future point. E.g. if I've got COD:2 as a digital copy and Activision decide that they want everyone to "upgrade" (at cost of course!) to MW4, so they deactivate all the earlier/legacy games as an incentive to move on - after all, they claim, "we need to recover the space on our servers occupied by these ancient titles". What's the betting that the EULA with these digital downloads will give them license - no pun intended - to do what they want, and us punters no rights at all?

I'm already very disconcerted by the way that EA and Activision are making it harder to do second hand, and also the way that they're trying to inveigle additional costs into game prices - specifically paid DLC or these "optional" (real quotes there instead of air quotes) loyalty programmes such as COD:Elite.

[martian_aphid]

Digital downloads has a big part to play and has had for many years before EA jumped on the bandwagon with Origin but I wouldn't trust EA and Origin as it will have absolutely no benefit to their customers and will only benefit themselves. Having used Origin I can say that it set digital distribution back 5 years in how poorly it was put together. As such its clear goal is to maximise their own profits, prevent trade in second-hand games and to give them absolute control over when they can strip away all rights or use of a game when THEY decide they no longer want to support it.

[Zeven]

So EA won't be supporting consoles then, hm?

[tickleonthetum]

I already don't buy any games that 'require' Steam, Origin or any other draconian online systems. This just means I won't be buying any more EA games.

I have no trust in the game publishing companies at all. They can just deactivate a game, change how it plays, restrict access, force content, etc.

They don't want you to sell second hand, they want everyone to buy new direct from them, that's the whole point! They want all the money!

Gaming is slowly but surely dying as we knew it. In the near future you will only be able buy and download games either as direct downloads from the publisher or via a service like Steam. You will not be able to burn it to a disk. They will control your backups. They will decide when you can play, they will decide how you can play, they will decide when a game is to stop working and require you to get a newer version. They will add and delete content from your games as they see fit. They will fill the games full of advertising and they will nag you constantly to upgrade, expand, buy, buy, buy!!

And the worse thing is? It's the players who are letting them do it by still buying their games.

[Andeh13]

Steam is brilliant, very happy with it & love the ability to re-download the games multiple times in a very quick fashion. No more serial keys, lost discs, brilliant!

Wont touch origin with a barge pole, not only the EA brand but too many negative reviews across the board!

[Jingee]

Having seen the prices that these publishers charge for digital copies of games on the Xbox Live Marketplace compared to boxed retail... I bet EA/Activision cannot WAIT to get everyone buying digital only.

[tickleonthetum]

The other problem with EA is they seem to want to force people into multi-player gaming, see the new Sim City for example.

I don't play well with others so only play single player games...

[Jingee]

The other problem with EA is they seem to want to force people into multi-player gaming, see the new Sim City for example.

I don't play well with others so only play single player games...

I think this was proved with how EA forced multiplayer into Spore, only for everyone to get flooded with penis' roaming every galaxy. I'm sure Sim City will be ruined by something similar too.

[Fraz]

Gotta say, I love Steam too. I think there is a decent amount of goodwill on both sides with Steam/Valve, which benefits both parties fairly. However, I suspect that with EA and Origin, things are probably not quite the same... certainly, I don't plan to go anywhere near it anytime soon.

[Lucio]

Digital only distribution makes sense, and in theory should benefit both the consumer and the distributor, the former with lower prices due to reduced transportation costs and lack of production facilities, and the later with a bigger share of the profits from the sale.

Of course, what I expect from EA is none of the benefits for the consumer, whilst they reap the benefits of the latter.

[crossy]

I already don't buy any games that 'require' Steam, Origin or any other draconian online systems. This just means I won't be buying any more EA games.

Hmm, I was under the impression that Steam was regarded as "best of breed" wrt digital downloads - and best of all because it's a third party not necessarily subject to the whim of the publishers.

Origin etc unfortunately are not so blessed. That said - for the very limited use I've made of it - Origin's been okay. It appears - to me at least - to be a good deal slower than Steam, but still usable. Although the constant pop-up adverts (every time you log in!) is quite annoying.

They will decide when you can play, they will decide how you can play, they will decide when a game is to stop working and require you to get a newer version. They will add and delete content from your games as they see fit. They will fill the games full of advertising and they will nag you constantly to upgrade, expand, buy, buy, buy!!

Yes, that's what's Troubling Me too (good tune by the Pete Walter band by the way), especially as I still have the occasional blast on some VERY old titles (remember CallOfDuty:2 anyone?)

The other problem with EA is they seem to want to force people into multi-player gaming, see the new Sim City for example. I don't play well with others so only play single player games...

Totally agree - although some cynic of my acquaintance suggested that the push for MP is so they can (a) charge everyone extra for "optional" (as in actually "mandatory") DLC that appears at regular intervals (= regular income stream); and (b) they don't have to spend any time at all scripting, developing and testing the SP campaign, (so the game itself costs less to make = more profit).

As I've said in the past, while I'm not boycotting EA, Activision and all the other grasping game sausage factories, what I am doing is scaling back my purchases. So far fewer games (actually diverting more of my funds onto old games - better value for money and still playable) and the "top drawer" titles that I am buying are in the "normal" editions rather than the more expensive "special/collector" editions.

So I'll probably get Black Ops2 and MOH:Warfighter, although I'm quite tempted to the special editions for Assassin's Creed III. And that'll be it for me for this year - apart from perhaps the odd special offer (tempted to BF:BC2 on the PC - saw it offered for less than £10 recently) and a game here and there on my phone. Normally I'd spend £300+ on games (PC and XBox) but this year I'm going to see how close to £100 I can get.

Anyone got any feelings - good or bad - about uPlay? It just strikes me as strange the way that there's an inter-relationship in uPlay-enabled titles between uPlay and the game itself. E.g. Being able to buy stuff in uPlay for your game is fine, but being able to earn uPlay points by completing tasks in the game seems an "interesting" approach.