Will all versions of BF3 need Origin ?

[Lobotomist]

I would like to preorder BF3 and get the extra map pack.
But i am hesitating , because i dont want to install Origin.

Will there be any way to get BF3 without Origin ?

Physical version maybe ?

[Heliocentric]

No, not if you get it on PS3 or 360, but on PC yes.

[Lobotomist]

Q: Will there be any way to get BF3 without Origin ?

A: No, not if you get it on PS3 or 360, but on PC yes.

----

You got me confused here

[CMaster]

Q: Will there be any way to get BF3 without Origin ?

A: No, not if you get it on PS3 or 360, but on PC yes.

----

You got me confused here

He's answering the question in the title, not the body.

[GothicEmperor]

Origin's not that bad, really. :/ Just need to alter a few things after installation and it'll be almost less intrusive than Steam.

[Althea]

According to this site (http://bf3blog.com/2011/08/origin-required-to-play-battlefield-3/) and a number of others, Origin is required regardless of where you purchase it, pretty much like Steam is required for Steamworks titles.

[Lobotomist]

Bummer.

I guess , no choice. I might as well preorder it directly trough Origin....

[westyfield]

Bummer.

I guess , no choice. I might as well preorder it directly trough Origin....

It's more expensive through Origin, though you do get access to the beta. There are a lot of different pre-order bonuses for different retailers, it's worth having a look to see which is cheaper or which gets you the bonuses you want.

[GothicEmperor]

I bought it twice, once for myself (through a mail order company), and once for my brother, through Origin. I've got the SPECACT kit while he's got the earlier Beta, the Physical Warfare kit (well, he unlocks it earlier) and can play it earlier as he doesn't have to wait for the physical copy to arrive. And we'll both get Back to Karkand when that comes out.

I'm very much satisfied with that arrangement.

[Unaco]

I reckon the Pirate Edition will probably get rid of the necessity of installing and running Origin. It will probably have a Universal release date as well, rather than the Non-Pirate Editions, which are planning on taking several days to cross the Atlantic, getting lost in Europe and finally washing up on the shores of the UK.

[Mistabashi]

I reckon the Pirate Edition will probably get rid of the necessity of installing and running Origin. It will probably have a Universal release date as well, rather than the Non-Pirate Editions, which are planning on taking several days to cross the Atlantic, getting lost in Europe and finally washing up on the shores of the UK.

The pirate Edition also won't be able to play on regular servers, and will in fact be relegated to playing on hacked servers with no cheat protection.

[Heliocentric]

Just remember it needs win 7/vista

[Unaco]

The pirate Edition also won't be able to play on regular servers, and will in fact be relegated to playing on hacked servers with no cheat protection.

Yes... But those 'exclusive' servers probably won't cost £2 per slot per month.

[Heliocentric]

Yes... But those 'exclusive' servers probably won't cost £2 per slot per month.
Who says they wont have cheat protection? Its called an admin.

[Unaco]

Or 'community self regulation'.

[GothicEmperor]

Just remember it needs win 7/vista
And DirectX10 or 11, IIRC. That's not really much of a problem, though; Dx10 compatibility has been around since Windows Vista.

[Kadayi]

I reckon the Pirate Edition will probably get rid of the necessity of installing and running Origin. It will probably have a Universal release date as well, rather than the Non-Pirate Editions, which are planning on taking several days to cross the Atlantic, getting lost in Europe and finally washing up on the shores of the UK.

Just stop ok.

[Unaco]

Just stop ok.

No.

Stop what anyway? Pointing out, as many, many people do, that some of the time, the Pirate Edition of a game has less restrictions and more functionality than the Official Edition?

If you don't want to read my posts, add me to your Ignore list.

[Lobotomist]

Just remember it needs win 7/vista

Whaaat!

No way man!

Now I am really not getting it

[Heliocentric]

Whaaat!

No way man!

Now I am really not getting it

It's a wall for me, I got my pc before vista came out but with with a year old graphics card it hammers every game sent at it. So, sure I need to buy win 7 but how much is it going to cost me?

Edit: apparently £70 for home premium. Not too bad I suppose.

[Jams O'Donnell]

It's a wall for me, I got my pc before vista came out but with with a year old graphics card it hammers every game sent at it. So, sure I need to buy win 7 but how much is it going to cost me? About sixty pounds.

[Rii]

It's a wall for me, I got my pc before vista came out but with with a year old graphics card it hammers every game sent at it. So, sure I need to buy win 7 but how much is it going to cost me?

Ouch. You're coming late to the product cycle too, Windows 8 will be out in another 12 months.

Personally my solution in your situation would be to pirate 7 and buy 8 when it comes out. /shrug

[Megagun]

Windows 7 is worth every penny. It's an amazing upgrade over Vista, and an even more amazing upgrade over XP. Although I can't name a single "must have" feature, the entire package just feels so much better than ol' XP did.

As far as Windows 8 goes: I would hold off on that for at least 3 months after release, but Microsoft have actually managed to quite reliably push out non-crap software ever since Windows 7, so there's still hope that it won't be another Vista. :)

[squirrel]

Ouch. You're coming late to the product cycle too, Windows 8 will be out in another 12 months.



Sigh, I bought my copy of 64bit Windows 7 for just 1 year (Vista bundled with my Dell machine, used for 2 years). Product life of Windows 7 is way too short anyway, consider how great and stable it is.

I was told that actually it's MS's policy to have Windows updated every few years. Long product life of Windows XP seems to be an accident, or there is something we don't know. I am taught that profitable way is often not efficient way. People would revolt against capitalists if we fully understand how they conduct their business :P

Seriously, I dont blame MS for not bringing Direct X 10 / 11 to Windows XP. It's true some groups have hacked DX10 to run on Wins XP, but that's not a stable build and has the risk of crushing your system. You cannot commercially release a system that is so unreliable. Windows XP is stable by itself, but it's too aged. It's time to move on.

[GothicEmperor]

Meh, Vista got quite good after Service Pack 2. Windows 7 is basically Vista SP2 with a slightly different UI (slightly worse, IMO; I changed it to look more old school), better networking and a few of the annoying functions turned off (which you can do in Vista if you like tinkering, like I do). The only thing of any significance is that 64bit is now the practical default.

[Althea]

I switched to Win 7 about a month ago, and it was very much worth it. My system feels snappier, I like the changes to the UI and whilst I'm still getting used to it, I like it. I'm running on a very XP-esque standard theme, but the standard features of Win 7 have cut down the number of 3rd party software programmes I need running (It has a built in desktop changer, and I can hide the recycle bin on my desktop if needs be). It's a little heavy on the RAM usage, but I really don't mind all that much as it feels pretty smooth.

That said, DX10 hasn't done anything for me. Had to turn off the DX10 water effects in LotRO as they were making my eyes go funny. Anno 1404 seemed to look quite pretty, though, as does Civ V, but I wouldn't say it's a huge jump from DX9.

[Heliocentric]

All signs point to windows 8 being the ME of the life cycle of the codebase. I'd hardly say ouch.

[Rii]

I was told that actually it's MS's policy to have Windows updated every few years. Long product life of Windows XP seems to be an accident, or there is something we don't know.

Yeah, XP's longevity was an accident from Microsoft's POV. They wanted to push all these radical features like WinFS and it didn't really work out and they had to start over.

Also at one point Windows XP Service Pack 2 was going to be a separate release akin to Windows 98 Second Edition. But they backtracked on that because it didn't fit with their enterprise clients' upgrade and certification timetables/processes.


Seriously, I dont blame MS for not bringing Direct X 10 / 11 to Windows XP. It's true some groups have hacked DX10 to run on Wins XP, but that's not a stable build and has the risk of crushing your system. You cannot commercially release a system that is so unreliable. Windows XP is stable by itself, but it's too aged. It's time to move on.

Their plan at the moment is to only offer full support for the latest two releases. So at the moment the two fully supported OSs are 7 and Vista; when Windows 8 is released it'll become 8 and 7.


All signs point to windows 8 being the ME of the life cycle of the codebase. I'd hardly say ouch.

If you say so. From a technologist standpoint I think Windows 8 is fascinating as its success or failure in bringing Windows and x86 to the tablet space will have major implications for the future of the PC, including gaming.

From a user standpoint I like the Metro UI and look forward to more competition in the tablet space, whereas on the desktop I think they've got some good ideas going and look forward to seeing how they pan out.

For anyone interested in Windows 8 I would recommend checking out the dev blog (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/) as it goes through not only what they're doing but also the thought processes driving that. Here's a good place to start: Improvements in Windows Explorer (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/08/29/improvements-in-windows-explorer.aspx).

[deano2099]

MS might update Windows every couple of years but generally the previous release is still heavily supported. I can't seen DX12 dropping support for Win7, and I'd actually be surprised if it didn't still support Vista. Plus, upgrading from a previous version is generally significantly cheaper, especially shortly after launch.

[Kadayi]

No.

It's not up for debate.


Stop what anyway? Pointing out, as many, many people do, that some of the time, the Pirate Edition of a game has less restrictions and more functionality than the Official Edition?

Oh did it need to be stated? No did it fuck, and nor was that the intention of your post. I'm no happier than anyone else that EA are going with Origin Vs Steam, but plain truth of the matter is I'm that petty about it to start less than subtly advocating people pirate a game that hundreds of people have spent the better part of 3 years of their lives working on over it. If you want to play you, you should be prepared to pay for it. I mean seriously have you even tried Origin? It's no more an offence to the senses than Steam. Get a grip.


If you don't want to read my posts, add me to your Ignore list.

So you can post up more BS like this unchallenged? I don't think so.

[Unaco]

Where did I advocate Piracy? Where have I ever advocated Piracy? I haven't, plain and simple. And I feel you should apologise for besmirchifying my good name!

All I did was point out that the illegitimate version of the game will not have the restrictive Origin system on it. You realise a lot of the press, including the RPS writers, have pointed this out many, many times when it comes to DRM and similar systems... are they advocating Piracy? Look back at DRM articles on RPS and see how many of them have pointed out that the Pirated version has less restrictions and less requirements than a legitimate version. All those articles are advocating Piracy, are they?

Pointing something out does not mean that I condone, endorse or advocate that thing.

[Kadayi]

All I did was point out that the illegitimate version of the game will not have the restrictive Origin system on it.

The restrictive Origin system? Exactly what is restrictive about it? You don't even need Origin running in order to launch an installed game (Right now I'm in the Saboteur and Origin isn't even open). It's basically the EADM with a new name and a friends list. There's no necessity for it to be running at all once you've installed the game.

[Unaco]

"Following the unfortunate news that Battlefield 3 will not be available on Steam, EA has added more for fans to be disappointed with, announcing that Battlefield 3 will require the Origin client to run in the background while you play, even if one purchases the title at retail." http://gamerant.com/battlefield-3-requires-origin-mole-99670/

"another client running in the background, sucking up CPU cycles and RAM, is not something that's likely to make gamers very happy." http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112232-Battlefield-3-Will-Require-Origin

Also, the fact that it will restrict you to 3 machines only for your games. Restrictive.
Also, the fact that it has to be installed, and you have to log in to it periodically. Restrictive.

[Kadayi]

How about going to the actual source: -

http://bf3blog.com/2011/08/origin-required-to-play-battlefield-3/

Even they haven't confirmed that Origin actually needs to be running. Whenever you buy a retail EA title it always installs their update client.

Also how many PCs do you own? You do realise you'll be able to de-authorize machines no?

Also how many copies of your Steam account can you access at the same time?

[Unaco]

How about going to the actual source: -

http://bf3blog.com/2011/08/origin-required-to-play-battlefield-3/

Even they haven't confirmed that actually needs to be running. Whenever you buy a retail EA title it always installs their update client.

Yet, they say...

"This isn’t a big surprise, as many games these days require a client to run in the background, most notably games from Valve, where Steam is required. However, it can become an issue if the client is draining CPU power, which was the case with Origin during the Battlefield 3 alpha trial."

So... sounds like Origin was required during the Alpha at least.

Also, why are they the 'actual source'? They aren't linked or mentioned in any of the articles I linked, so they can't be the source of their information, and they themselves say they are " the leading Battlefield 3 fan site", not the official BF3 site/blog.


Also how many PCs do you own?

Also how many copies of your Steam account can you access at the same time?

I own 6 PCs. My main gaming desktop, my Asus EEE, my Office desktop, an old gaming desktop that is at my parents house, an old laptop and another old gaming desktop (these last two aren't in use currently, but the other 4 are).

I can access my Steam account from one machine at a time. But that's not the point Kadayi. I am one person... I am only going to NEED to access my Steam account from one machine at a time. That's not a restriction that hurts me. Whereas, I can install Steam on ALL of my machines (make sure it doesn't start on startup), and have all my games available at any one of these machines.

With Origin, I might be able to log in from 2 places at the same time (but why would I want to? I can only really play 1 game at a time)... but I can only install my games on 3 of those machines. I couldn't have (as an example of a Steam game I have on all of my machines) SpaceChem available everywhere for a quick level every now and then, or Dungeons of Dredmore for a quick play... I'd have to chop and change and reactivate the game on all my different machines.

[Lobotomist]

Well I recently had windows 7 installed at my work PC

And I am not impressed at all.

And not impressed nearly enough to cough 70$ , and reinstall dozens of games and applications.

[Kadayi]

So... sounds like Origin was required during the Alpha at least.

Alpha test. Emphasis on the test bit. The whole point of testing is find issues (such as memory leaks, etc. etc)


Also, why are they the 'actual source'?

That's the site the article you posted linked to. Even then they are building off of their interpretation of this twitter post: -

https://twitter.com/#!/zh1nt0/status/100892143303925760

Q: What about the rumors spreading on the forums that we need origin to play BF3 if we have the DVD? D:

A: Yes those "rumors" are true :)

The reason you go to the source is to avoid the Chinese Whispers nature of gaming internet news. That Twitter post is hardly confirming anything, let alone that Origin being on all the time is an actual requirement. however one news report past that and suddenly: -


The forced use of Origin will definitely be a problem to those who wanted to purchase a retail title in order to avoid the Origin client, which many feel will just be a hassle to use. This decision could spur higher sales of the console versions as PS3 and Xbox 360 gamers need not worry about using the Origin client to log in.

Trust no one, least of all rag tag sites to do due diligence, or not push agendas based on personal conjecture.


I own 6 PCs. My main gaming desktop, my Asus EEE, my Office desktop, an old gaming desktop that is at my parents house, an old laptop and another old gaming desktop (these last two aren't in use currently, but the other 4 are).

6 PCs?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2p5svFJ9cQ&feature=player_embedded

First world problems.

[Unaco]

Yeah Kadayi... because that video just obliterates the restrictions that Origin will impose, on the number of PCs I own that I can install a game, that I own, on to. Oh wait, no it doesn't.

I'm not saying that Origin is the worst thing ever (I've defended Origin before, I think EA are perfectly entitled to release it and push it). I'm not equating Origin to anything despicable or truly terrible. But, it's restrictive. It has restrictions that Steam (the current standard for these sorts of clients) doesn't have. And, most importantly, it isn't offering me anything I really, truly want in return for accepting those restrictions... Unlike Steam, which offers (for me) quite a lot that I appreciate, that negates the restrictions of it (group chat rooms, screenshots, friends, the sales, etc). Admittedly, a lot of those things Steam has built up over time, and wouldn't be the same if it was released new today (groups would need to be established, friends made etc). Which is actually one of my gripes with Origin... that it's coming so late to the game. Me and Steam have buried our hatchets, and get along rather pleasantly just now. Origin is still staring at me across the room and turning away whenever I turn round, refusing to meet my eyes.

The issues with Origin might be small, compared to other problems in the world. But they are still issues I have. And, I'm not dedicating my life to trying to remove them (got a very worthy cause already)... I'm commenting on them, briefly, in a thread relevant to the issues, in a forum relevant to the issues, on a website relevant to the issues.

[Kadayi]

Yeah Kadayi... because that video just obliterates the restrictions that Origin will impose, on the number of PCs I own that I can install a game, that I own, on to. Oh wait, no it doesn't.

I'm sure everyone reading this thread feels complete sympathy for your untenable position Mr 6 PCs.


The issues with Origin might be small, compared to other problems in the world. But they are still issues I have. And, I'm not dedicating my life to trying to remove them (got a very worthy cause already)... I'm commenting on them, briefly, in a thread relevant to the issues, in a forum relevant to the issues, on a website relevant to the issues.

By advocating game piracy....

[Unaco]

I'm sure everyone reading this thread feels complete sympathy for your untenable position Mr 6 PCs.

What does the number of PCs I own, have to do with my arguments?


By advocating game piracy....

Show me where I'm advocating Piracy. I asked you to earlier, and you still haven't. Stating that Pirates get a 'better' product does not advocate Piracy... like I say, many commentators and journalists and gamers have stated the same thing, but don't advocate Piracy. I am the same... In some instances and for some features, the Pirated version is better (think restrictive DRM, client requirements, limited activations etc). Do I think you should pirate a game that has such features? No. You should either skip the game, or buy it and put up with the restrictions, or buy it and use 'community made modifications' to circumvent the restrictions if they're really that bad. In the end, a purchase isn't just about how good the product is (it's probably the most important aspect), but there are also other aspects... morals, giving back to the devs, funding the creation of new games.

If stating that Pirated versions of games can be better than legitimate versions, in some respects, is advocating Piracy, then I'm guilty of it... and so are most (if not all) of the writers on RPS, and a helluva lot of games journalists, and gamers, and commentators.

[Kadayi]

What does the number of PCs I own, have to do with my arguments?

Absolutely everything. I mean I can't think of anyone I know (even my geekiest of hardware geek friends) who actually own 6 PCs themselves. So when you're sat there bemoaning your lot all I hear is the world's smallest violin playing. Maybe you should start up an e-petition.


Stating that Pirates get a 'better' product does not advocate Piracy...

Who exactly are you trying to convince here?


I reckon the Pirate Edition will probably get rid of the necessity of installing and running Origin. It will probably have a Universal release date as well, rather than the Non-Pirate Editions, which are planning on taking several days to cross the Atlantic, getting lost in Europe and finally washing up on the shores of the UK.

[Unaco]

I'm not 'bemoaning my lot', and you really shouldn't wilfully misinterpret what I'm saying. I'm pointing out that they're putting restrictions on the game (Origin and activations, staggered release dates)... does that become less true depending on how many PCs I own?

Again... How does stating that a Pirated version is a 'better' product advocate Piracy? And how am I any different to the RPS writers who have pointed out the same thing? And the release date thing... again, something RPS have commented on and pointed out. They advocate Piracy in your view then?

Please Kadayi, explain to me how that is advocating Piracy, rather than pointing out how things are.

Edit: On the release date thing, I was a little wrong. They're releasing in US 25th, then taking two days to get to Australia (27th) before finally finding Europe a day later on the 28th. The Pirated edition will probably be available on the 25th, if not earlier. Pointing that out does not advocate Piracy. It points out the that there's a problem.

[Rii]

If it helps the situation any, I can clarify than I've advocated piracy in this thread.

[Kadayi]

Edit: On the release date thing, I was a little wrong. They're releasing in US 25th, then taking two days to get to Australia (27th) before finally finding Europe a day later on the 28th. The Pirated edition will probably be available on the 25th, if not earlier. Pointing that out does not advocate Piracy. It points out the that there's a problem.

The 'problem' being that the entire European physical media (DVD, BLU-Ray, CD, + associated electronics) distribution system is orientated towards Friday retail releases vs Tuesdays as in the US. That 'problem'? The one that no amount of 'it's not fair' internet wobbly throwing is going to remotely change? (because games are only a small % of the business) I mean clearly patiently waiting 3 days is completely out of the question (who has willpower after all, we are all slaves to our desires no?). Rampant piracy is the only solution to this terrible injustice. I mean there are people in America (of all places) playing a game, that you're not able to play yet. WTF!!!! Call the President!!!

[duff]

Unaco - just leave it. I learnt that lesson a long time ago!

[icupnimpn2]

I'd say Origin needs BF3 more than BF3 needs Origin.

[Unaco]

I'm going to comment one more time, and then I'm going to stop... because you're wilfully misinterpreting my posts Kadayi, and trying to twist what I'm saying.

Of course we can do something about the retail distribution system, or force the retailers and publishers to do something about it, by voicing our disdain and problems with the current system. We do have some power as their customers. But that point is moot here... because, as we've stated, Origin is a requirement for BF3. This is 'digital' game, it'll need Origin to unlock it before it's playable. Why not distribute retail copies a week earlier, so all the shops have copies to put on display at the same time, and everyone can unlock at the same time, digitally? Why not have all the digital downloads unlock at the same time, but keep the retail the same? That might actually encourage people in Europe to get the game through Origin... buy a boxed copy and get it on the Friday (or whenever Amazon send out your copy), get it from Origin and it'll unlock a few days earlier. With the increasing digital distribution of PC games, staggered or delayed releases do not make much sense, and should be gotten rid of.

But anyway, about your (mis)interpretation of my statements. I'm not saying that rampant piracy is the only solution, or that this is a terrible injustice, or WTF!!!, or anything like that. Perhaps I was a little flippant in my first comment, but that wasn't advocating piracy, stirring the masses to bring down the system by downloading the game, etc, etc. It was pointing out there are issues with BF3 and Origin that are being pushed onto legitimate customers, possibly to their detriment (which I think was the point of the thread, seen as the OP was asking if there was a way to avoid Origin), but (probably) won't affect those who pirate the game. I didn't say these issues were the greatest threat to gaming, or anything like that... I just pointed out they exist.

Waiting 3 days is something I'd be happy to do, but if it could be different, I'd much prefer that. Using Origin and being restricted by it is something I'd also be happy to do, but if it can be changed, to be less restrictive, then I'd much prefer that. There are issues... they may be small (notice I didn't swear, or use any more than 1 exclamation mark, or type anything in ALL CAPS), but they're issues all the same, and this seems like the thread to discuss them.

And with that said, I'm done. Please try and read back over my posts Kadayi... try to take your angry blinkers off, and see that I wasn't advocating Piracy, I was being flippant about the restrictions EA/DICE/Origin are putting on the game.

[duff]

I'd say Origin needs BF3 more than BF3 needs Origin.

Absolutely, EA are (correctly) gambling on the fact that BF3 is a big enough title that most people won't be put off by Origin, and thus an ideal oppurtunity to obtain a large initial user base.

[Kadayi]

Unaco - just leave it. I learnt that lesson a long time ago!

Spoilsport ;)


Absolutely, EA are (correctly) gambling on the fact that BF3 is a big enough title that most people won't be put off by Origin, and thus an ideal oppurtunity to obtain a large initial user base.

I must admit I'm really not sure where they are going with it. I think it's a huge gamble on EAs part and I really do wonder what John Riccotello is upto tbh. Origin in and of itself isn't overly offensive. Fundamentally it's the EADM with a new name and a friends list, and (at least in its present form) it doesn't require you to be logged in to play your games (advantage Origin, Steam to serve)
however at the same time it completely lacks for any of the community features tools that Steam offers. Already EA are pretty much talking down BF3 as unlikely to sell more units than MW3 to investors. I don't doubt that it's going to be a big seller for them, but at the same time, they could of been leveraging the steam community for sales.

One thing I thought was rather profound was logging onto Steam and looking at my friends list (yes they do exist) and seeing about 30 people all playing DX:HR a day after release. Buying that level of 'you need to be playing this' advertising is costly, where as peoples Steam friends list will do it for free.

[duff]

Yeh agreed. But BF3 (and DX:HR for what its worth) are so big that the amount of sales lost from the Origin requirement or Steam marketing will be minimal. I'm sure the Origin move will have cost them sales but not a large amount. People put off by Origin, like me, are likely to think "I'd rather have it on Steam but there is no way I'm not playing BF3". If they had made this move with something like the Sims Medieval I think it would have swung the other way. Ofcourse once all the people who get BF3 have Origin on their computer they will probably be less put off by other Origin exclusive stuff. Then I'm sure EA will begin the milkfest with stuff like BF3 skins/camo or Sims 3 packs etc.

[squirrel]

I for one will embrace EA Origins with contempt, just for Battlefield 3. That's just way of life is.

Anyway, I do not worry about privacy, the owner of the Internet Bar where I play games at, said he would take care of it. I do online transaction at home anyway, haha.

But seriously, if you play game at home, dedicating one machine for gaming may not be a solution. We dont know how Origins works. If it compromises privacy "unintentionally", all machines in the very same LAN network would be at risk, too. Let's say EA is a firm "Too Big To Cheat", so it won't cheat.

[icupnimpn2]

Absolutely, EA are (correctly) gambling on the fact that BF3 is a big enough title that most people won't be put off by Origin, and thus an ideal oppurtunity to obtain a large initial user base.

Yea. Console players don't really care about steam or non-steam. EA has had success with Battlefield Heroes, and that doesn't use steam. A lot of the potential install base that will buy from retail stores don't care about steam or non-steam -- they have a disc, they install it, they run the game. Disc games still don't come with digital copies as a rule, so some customers will see Origin as added value or a new feature and not as a divergence from their preferred method of digital game distribution.

All these factors make BF3 a good trojan horse for the service.

[deano2099]

The 'problem' being that the entire European physical media (DVD, BLU-Ray, CD, + associated electronics) distribution system is orientated towards Friday retail releases vs Tuesdays as in the US.

Not too sure on that. I've seen a few cases where shops have put out games early because one shop 'broke the street date'. They seem to be able to manage it when it's their money at risk.

The whole Origin thing is... interesting. It's no worse than Steam, and we've mostly accepted Steam now. But then, when Steam launched there was a huge AIM out-pouring about needing that for Half Life 2, so I don't see why EA should be spared the same thing...

[I'd also say that there's a difference between pointing out the advantages of piracy and advocating it, much like trying to explain why the London riots happened was different to sympathising with them].

[Rii]

If anyone's interested, Ars has just put up a good overview of the Windows 8 tablet environment: link (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/09/hands-on-with-windows-8-a-pc-operating-system-for-the-tablet-age.ars).

[Kadayi]

Not too sure on that. I've seen a few cases where shops have put out games early because one shop 'broke the street date'. They seem to be able to manage it when it's their money at risk.

Sure with some titles retailers will go the extra mile and take special delivery of items before Friday (Starcraft 2 springs to mind). However it's not demonstrable that BF3 is going to quite make that leap.


If anyone's interested, Ars has just put up a good overview of the Windows 8 tablet environment: link.

Surely deserving of it's own thread no?

[duff]

Sure with some titles retailers will go the extra mile and take special delivery of items before Friday (Starcraft 2 springs to mind). However it's not demonstrable that BF3 is going to quite make that leap.


Really? If I had to put money on it I would say that in the UK BF3 will outsell SC2 at retail. I could be completely wrong, just my guess.

[Kadayi]

Really? If I had to put money on it I would say that in the UK BF3 will outsell SC2 at retail. I could be completely wrong, just my guess.

I think anyone with any sense has already pre-ordered it tbh. MW3 will certainly get a joint release date, but MW2 sold something like 23 million units worldwide so retailers are expecting that to sell like hot cakes.

[deano2099]

I didn't mean some games come out early by design. I mean some games are meant to be out on the Friday, except the stock comes in earlier, and one shop in town decides to start selling it. Then everyone follows suit. Which suggests: a) shops are getting the games in before Thursday night and b) they have the facility to get them on sale early. I don't think changing it would be half as big a deal as people think.

[TixyLixx]

I'm just gonna purchase a CD key and torrent the client that'll bypass it.

[Unaco]

On the RO2 launch...


"Actually, if I awake myself from my stupor for a moment, it’s worth noting that Tripwire have pulled no staggered territory release bullshit here. They’ve fully acknowledged that there are No Oceans, and released the game worldwide on a Tuesday. For that I give them five high fives." John Walker, Sound The Horns: Red Orchestra 2 Released

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/09/14/sound-the-horns-red-orchestra-2-released/