Errrr: Origin’s “Landmark” 9.0 Update

My main complaint: Why hasn't EA changed the storefront's name to 'Storogin'? I mean, aside from the fact that it's a hideous monstrosity of a made-up word.

Let me begin this by noting that, in actuality, EA’s at least been paying solid attention to Origin lately. Lending a helping hand to crowd-funded games taking their wobbly first steps was a smart idea, and putting out a big call for input from users is a much appreciated gesture – assuming, of course, that EA actually takes resulting criticisms to heart. That said, Origin 9.0 – a self-described “landmark update” – isn’t exactly encouraging. Once it rolls out, you’ll gain access to a free-floating friends list, re-sizable game icons, and, er, a clock.

EA gave a very excited blow-by-blow of the less-than-formidable update in a blog post.

“Origin 9.0 is nearly here! In the coming days, we’ll be rolling out a landmark update to millions of Origin users worldwide, beginning with players who have opted in to beta updates and going live for everyone else soon thereafter. Your suggestions and feedback over the past few months have driven many of the changes you’ll see in Origin 9.0. We’ve added a clock to Origin In-Game, increased your control over your My Games library, and made our menus more navigable.”

More navigation! ALL OF THE NAVIGATIONS. And while the pop-out-y bits and malleable menu elements look nicely functional, that’s sort of the issue: Origin’s functional – and that’s it. In the same timespan it’s taken to get Origin 9.0 out the door, Steam’s added Greenlight, Source Filmmaker, a large selection of F2P games, remote installs, and now Linux support is on the way. Sure, EA’s opted to dive out of the line of fire and behind the old “Well, they had a head start” excuse, but if it’s honestly hoping to compete, it can’t stay years behind the curve forever.

What I’m saying is, beyond being a branded storefront, I still don’t understand what larger purpose Origin serves. In truth, I’d actually like to see it, er, pick up some steam, because I don’t think it’s healthy for Valve to not have a viable rival in this space. But this – at least, so far – isn’t the way to do it. Origin’s neither sprinted to the point of being neck-and-neck with Steam nor has it differentiated itself in any meaningful way.

Instead, it’s just puttered along at its own languid pace, harmlessly reminding us of its existence every time we pop open a big-name EA game. Hopefully, though, 9.0 is just the beginning of a much, much larger movement to put some meat on Origin’s emaciated bones. Because right now, I’m Commander Shepard, and this is most certainly not my favorite store on the Citadel.


  1. TsunamiWombat says:

    At least it always works unlike FUCKING UPLAY *shakes fist at ACreed games he couldn’t play for a whole weekend*

    • CaspianRoach says:

      Not a single online-based system “always works”. There’s bound to be problems and downtime. Also, you very well could play your AssCreed by starting Uplay in offline mode. The game loses some online additions but otherwise is perfectly playable (singleplayer that is) (and assuming you’ve launched it online at least once).

      • diamondmx says:

        I think that “launched it online at least once” is the issue.

      • SanguineAngel says:

        Origin has uninstalled Mass Effect 3 FOUR TIMES from my computer without me asking it to. So it doesn’t necessarily work all THAT well

        Edit: That was aimed at TsunamiWombat. Apparently I don’t work that well either.

        • telpscorei says:


          As someone who doesn’t have Origin installed, and is cautiously awaiting a time when it is not consumer unfriendly enough to allow onto my hard drive, I have to ask: What? It can do that? Are you serious?

          • amidcnb says:

            Today’s deals! HD waterproof sports watch (8G memory, movement activated, hidden cameras, digital video recorders) price reduction of 20% 59,99 $! link to

          • SanguineAngel says:

            I am indeed! Highly frustrating. I am not quite sure what the heck has gone on myself. it started when the new ending DLC dropped. I’ve just sort of given up to be honest.

            To be clear, I don’t know they specifics of how or why – I just know that after the DLC dropped I logged into origin to download it and it told me the ME3 was uninstalled and low and behold clicking the shortcut to get the game going yielded no result. Everytime I have reinstalled the game it has been magically uninstalled when I restart the service.


          • telpscorei says:

            Wow… That’s just wow.

    • JoeGuy says:

      Have to say. I add all my games from Origin like ME3 to my Steam Game Grid View (the new customizable images is awesome) so I can launch there, but Origin’s offline play is usually better than Steam’s. My issue is that DLC won’t be playable if you don’t sign in before launching the game though.

      • HothMonster says:

        If dlc is unavailable are you able to open save files which have encountered dlc content? Would be pretty lame to make offline mode not work because you capt shep has a dlc gun equipped.

        • Devan says:

          I don’t use Origin, but I think it would depend on how the game is built (unless Origin imposes its own rules on it). I’m pretty sure Mass Effect/Dragon Age games won’t let you load up a saved game offline if there’s DLC used in it.

          Oblivion did a good job of making the game flexible enough that you can load a save with content that has since been removed, and it’ll continue on without it.

        • Sisco says:

          For ME3 it works fine. If you have a savegame with DLC content, it will load everything in offline like it was online (apart from the galaxy of war ofc)
          If you start a new game though, you don´t have access to the DLC stuff until you get online at least once, then they will be added to your game and save.

  2. Brun says:

    What I’m saying is, beyond being a branded storefront, I still don’t understand what larger purpose Origin serves.

    The larger purpose of Origin is to give EA a way to digitally distribute its games without having to pay fees to Valve for patches and DLC. That was the whole reason Origin came into being, and why EA pulled all of its games from Steam.

    There’s nothing really wrong with that, and as you say it’s probably unhealthy for Steam not to have any competition.

    • CaspianRoach says:

      >pay fees to Valve for patches and DLC
      DLC, yes, but as for patches — aren’t you confusing them with Microsoft?

      • Brun says:

        I’ll be honest and say that I wasn’t 100% sure on patches, although I thought I remembered hearing that they factored into EA’s departure from Steam.

        • Xocrates says:

          EA may have said something along the lines that they wanted to be able to patch on their own terms, but that doesn’t mean they had to pay valve.

          • RaveTurned says:

            The business logic is probably that while they didn’t have to pay Valve, other vendors (Microsoft) already make them pay and if Valve suddenly decided to started charging them too they’d have them over a barrel.

        • Phantoon says:

          No, EA wanted to retain the ability to charge for patches (among other stupid things). This is exactly like why TF2 on the ecksbawkz hasn’t received any support- Microsoft wants to charge for patches.

          • Tams80 says:

            Those above were talking about if Valve were charging EA for distributing patches through Steam.

            There was no mention of EA trying to charge customers for patches through Steam.

        • zeroskill says:

          fees for patches? Are you drunk?

          • Zephro says:

            Nope. EA want to patch their own games on PS3, have wanted it for years. Let’s them bypass outside business control of Sony going “hang on that’s a patch not a paid for bit of DLC WTF?” it let’s them bypass testing by Sony etc. etc.

            Strangely the platform holders operate in the strange position of protecting their customers from publishers sometimes.

            I think it’s just the natural control freak in EA that makes them want to control their own patching channel. I can also imagine them making people pay yearly subs to get patches.

          • Archonsod says:

            Would almost work. Except for the fact Sony already charge publishers to distribute patches.

          • Zephro says:

            Technically there is a charge for testing patches after the second or third one, basically to disinterested people from releasing buggy games. It’s only charged in America though Europe doesn’t charge for patches at all.

        • InternetBatman says:

          I doubt Valve would ever charge for patches. Its a short-sighted policy that makes it worse for both developers and consumers. They’ve had the same issues on consoles, and that was one of their biggest complaints.

        • Baines says:

          I believe EA said they wanted to have everyone running the same patch at the same time, and that wasn’t guaranteed when Steam had say in when a patch would go live on the Steam versions.

          As for consoles, Microsoft charges developers/publishers to release patches. Some Live Arcade developers said that they got one free patch, and had to pay beyond that. I don’t know if that is standard policy for all Xbox 360 games, or if different publishers (or even different games) have different deals in their contracts. The excuse I believe is distribution and testing, though there may also be some measure of a “Get it right the first time” incentive. I also don’t know what Sony’s stance is.

          Some developers have implemented work-arounds to this policy, as well as the approval delay that comes with it. Basically, they set up their games to dial home and pick up non-patch updates. I believe Mortal Kombat 9 used this to get balance updates out in a timely and affordable manner. Conduit 2 did this on the Wii because the Wii doesn’t even have a “normal” patching infrastructure. Modern Warfare 3 does both regular patches (generally one or two a month) and hotfixes (more common, theoretically these get rolled into a future regular patch once they are proven acceptable) and have apparently now started going to an alternate version of hotfix.

      • Dominic White says:

        By ‘Pay Valve’, they mean that Valve’s policy is that if at all possible, if a game is available on Steam, then any DLC should be available via Steam, too.

        EA disagree, and this is why the version of Mirror’s Edge on Steam has no DLC, and if you buy it seperately on Origin, it won’t work on the Steam version either.

        In short: Fuck EA. Valve don’t charge anyone for DLC or patches.

        • CaspianRoach says:

          But they do. Every sale made in Valve Store has a percentage of it going to Valve. DLC included.

          • zeroskill says:

            Of course Valve is taking a cut off of DLC. If they wouldn’t, what would hinder sneaky publishers to just release a “starter edition” of a game with all content cut out for 2£ and then selling the entire game content through their own means and circumventing giving Valve anything at all for using Steam.


            EA didn’t want to give Valve anything for the huge amounts of payed DLC they are “offering”. So they got kicked out. And rightfully so.

          • smg77 says:

            If I wanted to sell games and DLC to a massive group of people I’d be willing to share a little with Valve to accomplish that. Perhaps EA’s stock wouldn’t be having so many problems if their games were available on the biggest content delivery service.

            Like the article said, Valve needs some real competition but Origin ain’t it.

          • Kadayi says:


            EA already distribute their DLC via their game clients though. Also I’d say there’s a bit of limit on what people will pay out with regards DLC in my view (there’s an uppper limit pricepoint), and giving Valve 30% of that action either means effectively losing a 3rd of your profitline, or raising your prices and having the customer foot the extra. Personally I’ve never felt the Bioware pricing for DLC was particularly overpriced. However I’ve often questioned the pricing of DLC I’ve seen on Steam for various titles, and in fact my general policy is to wait until it’s on sale and hoover it up then.

    • Xocrates says:

      ” and why EA pulled all of its games from Steam.”

      Then why does Steam tell me EA has 54 titles in there?

      EA may have stopped releasing in there, but they certainly haven’t pulled ALL its games from it.

      • grundus says:

        As far as I remember the only game they pulled was Crysis 2, everything before that remains and everything since doesn’t.

        • RogerMellie says:

          Dragon Age II is no longer available either (at least in my region).

          • zeroskill says:

            Dragon Age 2 shouldn’t be available to anyone, in any region.

          • Phantoon says:

            Dragon Age 2 was probably pulled because EA realized how terrible it was, not because of any shenanigans.

          • Cross says:

            Dragon Age II was pulled because DLC for it is sold in-game, and Valve wouldn’t have that. it was Steam Store or get out. EA chose the latter.

          • webtax says:

            if valve enforces dlc to be sold on steam store, then why bioshock 2 dlc isn’t available on steam, but the game is?

          • flang says:

            Bioshock 2 DLC isn’t available on PC anywhere, period. Steam ain’t got nothing to do with it.

            *Edit* Gah. Nope, I’m stupid. Minerva’s Den is available exclusively through GFWL for some damn reason, nowhere else.

      • Shivoa says:

        The issue is Valve are enforcing a recent rule that says if you release a new game on Steam then you must also put up any DLC for that game in the Steam store. They are not enforcing exclusivity of store transaction, but it must be an option. This means, if EA want to make 100% of all revenue from the £30 of story DLC for the old Mass Effect 2 (buy it new for £5 in any sale, then think about getting the full story with a small £30 additional payment), they cannot have that DLC also be purchasable in the Steam store (where Valve will take a 30% of cut of all sale value as fee). This is why new EA games with DLC plans cannot be put on Steam without being the ‘GotY’ editions where all DLC is bundled into the boxed price: it violates EA’s plans to maximise their profits through DLC sales.

        The rule was not retroactive, which is why older games that violate it were not removed. AFAIK Valve do not charge for patches or free DLC, they do take a cut of all sales (but you can get around this is consumers use your own DLC store rather than Steam to make their purchase – buying DLC in GfWL/in-game in Fable 3 gives 100% of the revenue to MS, buying the same content on Steam gives Valve a cut but leads to the exact same customer experience as you’re buying an unlock code of the DLC that is applied in GfWL).

    • zaphod42 says:

      It has nothing to do with valve charging for patches. They do not, I can promise you.

      What the REAL issue was, is games like Dragon Age. EA wants the game itself, while you’re in the middle of playing the game, to say “Hey, do there’s a field of burning orphans, do you want to save them?”

      and you go to select “Yes!” but its greyed out, and when you try to press it, it starts to buy some DLC you don’t have. So you buy the DLC, and keep playing.

      Steam doesn’t like this. Valve feels it is disingenuous to customers to try to trick them and sell them things while they’re playing. There’s deceptive ways you can hide it, and maybe the player would buy something without even realizing it. Or maybe not.

      The fact is, to err on the safe side, Valve has as policy that ALL sales, games, DLC, whatever, ALL sales have to go through the steam program, the steam store. If they want you to buy some extra DLC, they have to pop you back to steam, which you’re familiar with, so you can go through the normal steam process to buy that DLC.

      This way, your credit card info and everything is protected, across the line. Any steam game you play can only charge you additional money and sell you more things through steam itself. All of that is contained, and there’s no chance one developer could accidentally share your credit card info or make a bunch of charges you don’t approve of.

      So really, Valve is watching out for us. But EA, they’re like “well, screw you, we want this. So we’re gonna make our own service where we’re allowed to charge people however and whenever we want!”

      I absolutely agree that Steam could use some competition, but don’t make it out like Origin is the good guys here.

      They’re trying to abuse the market, Steam tried to block them, and so they left steam.

      • jalf says:

        Or we could reword it slightly:

        “Valve wants a cut of all DLC sales. EA wanted to be able to sell DLC without giving Valve a cut”.

        Really, saying that Valve is “watching out for us”, or that they are the “good guys” is silly.

        They’re a big company which runs Steam because it’s earning them piles of cash. No more, no less.

        • Kadayi says:


          Love Steam, but the Valve can do no wrong/are the good guys spiel gets a little tedious.

        • Bhazor says:

          Sadly people still refuse to seperate Valve the developer from Valve the distributer. As a developer they’re great as a distributer they have one of the worst track records for DRM. Steam is one of the most bloated and prevalent of the DRM systems out there and you can lay all other DRM schemes right at their feet.

          But it’s Valve! They made Half Life! So if you complain its just because you’re a hater.

          • Milky1985 says:

            “Steam is one of the most bloated and prevalent of the DRM systems out there and you can lay all other DRM schemes right at their feet. ”

            DRM (and by far worse DRM, things like starforce, initally launched in 2002 if the internet is to be believed compared to steasm 2003 release) was out there before steam was out so not sure how you can blame all DRM on steam. Facts are fun!

            Also prevalent DRM yes, and i willa dmit that steam has a basic DRM system, but bloated? Seems ok in terms of mem and CPU usage to me. As one of the few with an offline system (despite the vocal minority saying it doesn’t work, it works fine for everyone i have actually spoken to) shurly it shoudl be an example of DRM done right, gives you everything you need without too much limitiation.

            No DRM is obviously better tho.

          • Tams80 says:

            @ Milky

            Well on my computer at the moment, Steam is using over double the amount of RAM Origin and Desura are using (this is with all three clients doing their bare minimum). Origin and Desura together use about the same amount of RAM. OK, I do have more than enough RAM to spare, but Steam is still rather bloated.

            It also is DRM and offline mode used to be terrible. I haven’t used it in a while, but last time I used, you had to have at least run the game once online in order to play. When you’ve just mass downloaded some games (from a sale) and the go offline, this is a problem. You don’t seriously expect someone to load all the games they just got as they hurry to get out the door?!

          • Sparkasaurusmex says:

            Agree that Origin seems to be faster and more streamlined than Steam, but I do believe their offline mode works a tiny bit better than what you’re saying. I recently stayed in a cabin, after purchasing a bundle and downloading all the games into steam. I ran none of them and went to the cabin, all but one were playable in offline mode without having to run them first. The other had a stand alone patcher outside of steam, and so was unplayable offline.

      • ThinkMcFlyThink says:

        This is a ridiculous exaggeration. EA wants to sell all DLC in-game rather than have two forms of delivery for DLC: in-game and in whatever storefront wants to sell the DLC so they get their cut. There’s no trickery or deception in those DLC sales, it’s an in-game storefront. And yes, I’ve played Dragon Age and know exactly what you’re talking about. Their little Warden’s Keep DLC guy was annoying, but not deceptive or trickery.

        Valve doesn’t want to stop EA from doing in-game DLC because they are white knights, they want them to sell DLC in their own platform so they get their cut. That didn’t used to be the their policy, they changed it, and so the EA schism began.

        • diamondmx says:

          I have to say, every time an EA game (and I do believe it’s only EA games that have done this) tells me right in the middle of my play experience, without my expecting it: “Buy DLC now!” – I throw up in my mouth a little.

          It’s incredibly immersion breaking, and seriously tacky shite.

          Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age are both guilty of this.

          • Sparkasaurusmex says:

            Yeah, I believe he’s correct about the intentions of Valve (to have the DLC sales to themselves) but I also agree that in game DLC sales are disgusting and at worst can ruin the experience of the game.

      • Kaira- says:

        “Steam doesn’t like this. Valve feels it is disingenuous to customers to try to trick them and sell them things while they’re playing”

        And that’s why you can’t buy things from TF2. And TF2 doesn’t have item drops which can only be utilized by spending money on them.

        Oh wait.

        • Misnomer says:

          Ninja’d. Was giong to make a comment about TF2 crates not being disruptive to the game experience.

          • PopeJamal says:

            Do you actually pay for these crates while still in the game?

          • Stromko says:

            I haven’t personally encountered this, but it sounds like this person did: link to

          • Kaira- says:

            You can get crates for free. You’ll have to pay to actually open them.

          • MadTinkerer says:

            And if you don’t like crates, you can trade them with people who do for MOAR HATS.

            Free Trade-able Hats = Valve are always saints and EA are always and forever scum. Debate over? Debate over.

        • Milky1985 says:

          Well its half true, you can also trade with someone for a key, whcih was the second reason they did the system (indirectly paying for hats :P) so its perfectly possible to do it without spending a penny yourself. But hey , facts tend to get in the way of a good bashing :P

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            Not to be rude here, but how many TF2 players are out there that are actually willing to trade keys (a paid item) for… well…anything? I’ve never met one in all the years I’ve been playing, and the last time I tried to trade various items for a key or two I was literally laughed off the forums.

          • Malibu Stacey says:

            how many TF2 players are out there that are actually willing to trade keys

            Loads if you bother going to the trade sites like tf2outpost instead of hovering around the cesspit of the Steampowered user forum.
            I’ve opened dozens of crates & have 20 or so keys currently sitting in my TF2 backpack at present & I’ve never once bought anything from the TF2 store since it’s launch. People will quite happily trade metal, hats & other stuff for keys.

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            So I need to rely on third-party organizers just to get a few keys? Eh…

            I suppose that works for some people, but if I can manage to finally build an entire Croc-o-Style kit purely from trading in-game for scrap parts, why should it be so damned hard just to find someone willing to trade their keys within the confines of the TF2 forums or the game itself?

            I just don’t understand why TF2 has to be so rigidly complex when it comes to the social aspects of trading.

          • Malibu Stacey says:

            So I need to rely on third-party organizers just to get a few keys? Eh…

            I suppose that works for some people, but if I can manage to finally build an entire Croc-o-Style kit purely from trading in-game for scrap parts, why should it be so damned hard just to find someone willing to trade their keys within the confines of the TF2 forums or the game itself?

            You’re complaining about having to use a 3rd party site dedicated to trading but have no issue with using a 3rd party forum to do the same. Steampowered User Forums aren’t linked in any shape or form to your Steam account & hence neither your TF2 account.
            Alternatively you could join trade servers which you find using the server browser within TF2 & chat to people in game to trade stuff but I guess that’s too obvious.

            I just don’t understand why TF2 has to be so rigidly complex when it comes to the social aspects of trading.

            Because it’s a team based FPS not an MMO maybe?

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            You’re complaining about having to use a 3rd party site dedicated to trading but have no issue with using a 3rd party forum to do the same. Steampowered User Forums aren’t linked in any shape or form to your Steam account & hence neither your TF2 account.

            The official Steam Trade forum requires a linked Steam account. The TF2 trade forum does not, but it is actively moderated by Steam employees and volunteers. Calling Steam’s forums “3rd party” is highly inaccurate.

            Alternatively you could join trade servers which you find using the server browser within TF2 & chat to people in game to trade stuff but I guess that’s too obvious.

            I’ve used trade servers in the past — that’s how I’ve completed the majority of my kits. Nice assumption there.

            Because it’s a team based FPS not an MMO maybe?

            How is that even fucking relevant?

      • Phantoon says:

        That’s the absolutely wrong argument to use for why EA is in the wrong here.

        Sidenote, Valve does not have shareholders. Again, if Steam does something you think is worse than genocide (you are an idiot), then send a mail to Gabe. He may not reply, but he’ll probably read it.

      • Zephro says:

        While not 100% agreeing I know this is what Sony have to do with EA on a daily basis. If EA start pissing customers off on Sony’s platform the customers take it out on Sony more than EA, so Sony have to enforce unified stores/wallets etc to maintain the customer experience.

        Also because Sony get’s a cut. But there are valid PR reasons why you don’t let publishers have that much control on the consoles.

      • Arglebargle says:

        If EA ninja-sells DLC through Steam, without Steam getting a cut, Steam is still going to catch trouble and support calls when it doesn’t work right.

    • Dr. Evanzan says:

      I understood Nathan’s “what larger purpose it serves” as referring to what purpose it serves for the user.

      While you are probably correct about EA’s motivations for Origin, that doesn’t provide any motivation for me as a user beyond not being able to play certain EA games elsewhere (hence “branded storefront”).

    • RogerMellie says:

      I’m struggling to see the big deal. If I want to buy Ikea goods (and I seldom do), I go to Ikea. Isn’t this the digital version?

      I’d like it if I could keep my games in one place and all that but I don’t think EA see that as their problem.

      • SanguineAngel says:

        Well, unlike Ikea where Ikea branded goods tend to vary really only slightly from other brands (a bed is still a bed) each computer game is unique (well you would hope so anyway) and so being able to get specific games in only one place creates a monopoly so they can (and do) charge very high prices without competition.

        • RogerMellie says:

          Completely agree in the sense that it’s disappointing from our POV, but again, EA don’t see that as their problem. Capitalism no?

          People who create unique items can always charge a premium for them. I’m not happy about it but I’m not happy to pay £15 for a cinema ticket either. I pay, or I don’t get the product.

          • SanguineAngel says:

            Well yes, but as a general consumer, I am quite entitled to not be happy about it and to also voice my concerns.

            I can and do vote with my wallet but the sad fact is that when the minority votes with their wallet, it makes bugger all difference. Companies won’t noticed that a (relatively) small amount of money they never had was still not there.

            Perhaps if we all bought the game and then got refunds they would take notice, because the reduction would be visible.

            The other visible protest is, of course, to complain. Which, as a consumer, is actually our most effective weapon.

          • RogerMellie says:

            @SanguineAngel – I think we’re agreeing here. I completely agree it’s OK to be disappointed and to voice said disappointment. I think it’s not really OK to say ‘it’s not fair’, which you didn’t.

            The phrase I used first – struggling to see the big deal – could have stood to be a little more specific.

      • Slightly_Lions says:

        The difference being that once you’ve bought your furniture you don’t have to keep going back to Ikea to use it.

        • gwathdring says:

          Well played. :P

        • PopeJamal says:

          You don’t have to go back to Ikea, you can just let one of their “furniture wardens” stay at your house.

          He will stand in the corner, quietly watching everything you do, to ensure that you don’t use your furniture inappropriately or in a manner that is unfair to other Ikea furniture owners.

        • Sic says:

          That’s basically the thing.

          Right now, there is a guy from IKEA in my bedroom 24/7. That’s annoying, and I struggled with it quite a bit in the beginning, but now I get along with him just fine. He usually stays in the closet.

          What’s happening right now, though, is that more people are trying to get into my bedroom, just because I bought a damn lamp from them, and it wasn’t even that good of a lamp (I already tossed it the fuck out). I really don’t get why those people should be here, I’m still not entirely comfortable with IKEA guy, mind you; so the sheer nerve of those people banging at my door isn’t doing anything other than making me promise to myself that I’ll never give them money ever again.

          That’s the real issue here. I’m not letting any more god damn people into my room. IKEA guy is already more than enough. I don’t get why those other guys can’t just accept the fact that IKEA guy was here first, and that I’ve only got the one closet.

          • RogerMellie says:

            Damn that IKEA mention!

            I get that it’s not ideal for the consumer- I don’t get why we expect EA to use a servce that inhibits its profit margins.

          • Sparkasaurusmex says:

            Since EA is a publicly owned US corporation, knowingly doing something that inhibits their profits would actually be illegal.

      • Melf_Himself says:

        To make the analogy complete for the case of PC games, it would be like first having to construct an IKEA in your living room if you want to buy something from IKEA.

        Valve got away with it because they were the first, and it’s a good service. I will never run two “always on” game services on my computer, because having just the one IKEA in my living room is enough for me.

        Are we really expected to house bloat from every game publisher on our computers? No thanks.

    • ScubaMonster says:

      Actually, I’d say the entire reason for Origin is more DRM.

  3. diamondmx says:

    One pretty significant flaw is that there is no gift purchase option in Origin.
    If you put a game you already own in your cart, it just frowns and tuts until you take it back out.

  4. db1331 says:

    I’m excited to continue to use Origin only for games that require it.

    • kaffis says:

      I’m resigned to continuing to not use Origin for games I really would have loved to play.

  5. gwyrdd says:

    My dodgy internet connection is at least happy that Origin never seems to really care when said dodginess is occurring. Steam, on the other hand, refuses even to load without it, offline mode be damned apparently.

    • nearly says:

      I’m happy to say that I can actually launch games without Origin. when the Internet’s out, I end up playing my Origin games

    • Milky1985 says:

      File restart in offline mode if the connection is dodgy so it doesn’t attempt to contact the servers it thinks are available cause it sees you as online.

      Dunno why this is a challenge :P

      • Malibu Stacey says:

        Because reading & clicking are hard for some people apparently.
        Hell Steam itself even pops up with a dialog & says “I can’t connect to the internet, do you want to restart in offline mode?” with handy “Yes please let me play my lovely singleplayer games” or “No thanks, try again because I need my Dota 2 fix & I’ve switched my router on now” buttons.

        • Tams80 says:

          Last time I used Steam’s offline mode, it worked if you clicked ‘go offline’. If you accidentally clicked ‘reconnect’ it would always try to reconnect from then on and not let you go offline. It tried to connect even if you logged off, so I usually ended up clicking the wrong button at some stage and thus could not access my games until I got an internet connection.

          It’s not really a problem now though, as I don’t buy games from Steam anymore if I can help it.

  6. Agnol117 says:

    The point about Origin failing to differentiate itself from Steam in any meaningful way hits home, especially when you consider that this update seems to serve no purpose other than making the Origin UI more like Steam’s.

    • zeroskill says:

      “no purpose other than making the Origin UI more like Steam’s”

      Which is astonishing since EA is so well known to be industry innovators and pioneers.

    • Archonsod says:

      Funny thing is Nathan actually pointed out the difference in the article – Origin is just a store front.

      I disagree with it lacking appeal though; most of Steam’s features are actually a turn off for people like me who just want to hand over the cash, get the game and play it without any social network nonsense or similar crap getting in the way, and particularly without having to be dependent on a somewhat flaky client running at all times.

      • Jimbo says:

        The appeal for me is that a chunk of my money doesn’t go to a middle-man who adds zero value as far as I’m concerned. I’d rather buy direct from the dev/pub where possible, as long as they are competitive on price (which is very rarely the case, unfortunately).

        I’m A-OK with EA games not being on Steam. Neither side is really ‘in the wrong’ here, they just don’t agree terms and that’s totally fine. If EA doesn’t want to trade by Valve’s rules, that’s their prerogative. If gamers don’t want to buy EA games because they aren’t on Steam, that’s their prerogative. I don’t believe for a second that a significant number of people will actually make good on the latter though, so it’s not really an issue.

        Valve can dictate how Steam operates RE: DLC sales, and that’s fair enough, but they shouldn’t be able to dictate how the entire market operates. I’m glad there are still at least a couple of companies operating in PC land who don’t feel like they need to go along with whatever Valve decides.

        • Kadayi says:

          Agreed. Also I do find the whole ‘No Steam = No sale’ talk fairly amusing. I can’t say I’ve had much problem with Origin, and in fact I’ve run it and ME3 through Stream as third party games and been able to take Screenshots and use Steam chat without any problem. Personally I buy games because I’m interested in playing them. The idea of boycotting a publishers titles because they’re not available on a particular platform seems rather surreal given how easy it is to add 3rd party titles.

        • Melf_Himself says:

          Lol @ referring to a publisher as “not a middle-man”.

  7. faillord_adam says:

    “pick up some steam”

    I see what you did there

  8. Dominic White says:

    Just to remind people, what EA are calling ‘Origin’ is actually EA Downloader rebranded, which is almost as old as Steam. One day, people opening EA Downloader were asked to update it, and the only thing that changed was the logo and name.

    The fact that it’s about four years behind Steam in terms of functionality is beyond a joke now.

    • mondomau says:

      Yes, it does make the apologists defending it as a ‘new bit of software trying to find it’s way’ look a bit silly.

      • nearly says:

        Not really. The scope and intent of the service has changed. While it may be based on older software, it’s intended to do very different things ultimately

    • Soapeh says:

      I love the way that Steam recognizes games that have been manually copied into their folders from a backup and automagically patches the missing content when you launch the game – a real boon for migrating to a new computer from an external backup. Origin needs to download the whole installer and then go through the process of installing which is pretty ridiculous in this day and age.

      I have full copies of ME 1&2 and BF3 from my old PC but Origin refuses to let me play them until they have been completely redownloaded and reinstalled. I’m just not going to bother playing them.

    • Kadayi says:


      I don’t recall EA downloader being a digital storefront within itself, or keeping titles upto date or in fact acting as a launch program tbh. It was more akin to the current GOG downloader, where in it would act as a means to download digital purchases made on the EA website.

  9. Bhazor says:

    It took around 6 years for Steam to get basic functionallity and it’s still laggy, badly laid out and has a very tempremental offline mode. But hey, they’re Valve.

    • jalf says:

      Or, more to the point, those 6 years are behind us.

      The thing is, if you’re not a fanboy or a zealot, if you’re not out to defend one service or bash the other, if you’re simply interested in having good products and services available to you as a gamer, then it doesn’t matter in the least which service got from “launching” to “usable” in the shortest amount of time.

      The only thing that matters is “which services have reached a state of being “usable” here and now, in 2012″.

      Steam took 6 years to get to the point where it didn’t suck, sure. But in 2012, it generally mostly works. Not counting the offline mode, the sporadic “unable to connect to servers” thing and very variable download speeds. But what’s relevant is Steam’s state here and now, versus Origin’s state here and now.

      Steam’s state in 2006 vs Origin’s state in 2015 is only relevant to those looking for ammunition to defend or attack one of the platforms.

      • Toberoth says:

        Very well said.

      • greenbananas says:

        For someone who’s not a fanboy or a zealot and who wants a service that’s usable here and now, there’s a fair bit of steam on your spectacles. So, “generally mostly works” (but only if you don’t count its faults) is ok? Surely by those standards, Origin “generally mostly works”?

        What’s relevant? What’s relevant is up for the OP to decide. Fortunately, you were so unaware of what it was that you ended up proving his point. Which was, as far as I interpreted it, how the average consumer (if comments like yours are anything to go by) protects Valve and Steam with White Knight-ish dedication vs. the spite those same consumers treat the other gaming majors. Not that those majors don’t deserve it, (because they do) but a company that shoved DRM in online store form on the game everyone wanted to play “because $$$” is deserving of the exact same treatment, no matter how good their PR is or how the DRM “mostly works”.

  10. The Godzilla Hunter says:

    Oh, oh, oh! I know, I know!

    How about they let me choose what language the store uses!

    • Forceflow says:

      This. So badly. I live in Belgium, a tri-lingual country, and I always get presented the store in French, whilst I have Dutch as my primary language.

      • Lord Byte says:

        Yes! Funny thing is that the majority is Flemish! Not to mention that this, and has been a point of contention in Belgium. At least it’s not Ubisoft whom ONLY support Belgian French and Belgian GERMAN! Yes, German, which less than 1 percent of the Belgians speak. As for Dutch, the majority language of Belgium, they tell you (official support!!!) to login as Dutch (Netherlands).

      • Toberoth says:

        I have exactly the same problem. It’s infuriating!

  11. Hirmetrium says:

    In defense of Origin, it isn’t bad (like others), it’s… marginally functional and serves a purpose, and isn’t a tremendous resource hog that is raped daily by its userbase causing it to slow to a crawl. And, despite stupid lines about IP cheapening, its 50% off at the moment for some big titles.

    But EA are out of touch with their audience, and nothing shows that more than how slowly and how little origin has improved. The storefront is still crappy, I can’t stop adverts appearing on startup, and I CANNOT GET IT TO DEFAULT TO MY LIBRARY INSTEAD OF THE STORE ARRRRRRRR.

    I’m going to write a strongly worded but kindly email now.

    • gwyrdd says:

      So we’re still using “raped” as a way to describe when something is used in an aggressive or overwhelming manner, eh? Classy.

      • grundus says:

        I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest he may be a Battlefield player, we do tend to refer to being herded into our spawn as being ‘baseraped’.

        • RaveTurned says:

          Because if everyone else in a community is doing it too, that makes it just fine.


          • Phantoon says:

            It’s the denigration of words. Misuse a word too much and it loses meaning. Rape is no longer a vile, reprehensible act that should be punished with the full extent of the law. If you’re a gamer, it means you beat someone. And if you’re a extreme feminist, it apparently means a man looked at you in a way you didn’t like.

            Since we’re going to spiral off into the deep end ANYWAYS, as is the wont for these comments now, let’s bring up Tosh and why he’s offensive. Should anyone be surprised his act is crass? No, but you should be surprised at how lazy it is. He goes for shock humor, because he knows saying “rape” at people will get a reaction. So when that lady who did not know who he was, he dealt with it in the most unprofessional manner possible. Sure, hecklers are always a problem for comedians, but that was incredibly poor form, especially when she said one thing and began to leave. Rather than coming up with anything (because Tosh has zero ability to improv), he just said “derp lol rape” at her. And that’s his audience. I suppose there’s nothing wrong with being a lazy, talentless hack. Sure worked for Mencia, who just steals all his jokes.

            But anyways. It’s a complex issue. In closing, I hope Tosh is raped by alligators wearing clown makeup.

          • Lemming says:

            The point, actually, is context. Words are allowed multiple meanings because as human beings we have this great ability to contextualise. It’s how language grows. Using ‘rape’ in a context outside of the physical act does not diminish its meaning in that context in any way whatsoever. People who claim otherwise are simply wrong.

            Does using ‘Jesus’ as an expletive or expression of surprise diminish people’s beliefs in Christianity? Or, reversely, If I called a man committing a homosexual act a ‘faggot’ would you think it was just odd rather than offensive because I must mean the food or a bunch of sticks tied together with string?

            Context is everything, and getting offended because someone uses a word in a different way to you is not going to stop language pushing forward, and it doesn’t give you some imagined moral high ground. The word ‘Rape’ is no exception to that.

          • Jimbo says:

            Don’t get me started on the whole ‘murder of crows’ thing. It makes me so mad.

      • Legionary says:

        Sometimes finding the right word in the vernacular can be murder.

      • Skabooga says:

        Not that I disagree with your sentiment, but there is literary precedent:
        link to

  12. Spider Jerusalem says:

    the best thing to do, if one would like to compete with steam, is have a lot of games and sell them cheaply. something amazon’s figured out quite nicely as of late.

    • nearly says:

      undercutting the undercutters has never failed.

    • Mungrul says:

      And even more cheekily, have more than half of these games actually register on Steam. Genius I tells ya.
      This is something Green Man Gaming do to some extent too.

  13. sinister agent says:

    What I’m saying is, beyond being a branded storefront, I still don’t understand what larger purpose Origin serves

    But of course you don’t. You haven’t been … improved yet. Such enlightenment will only come when you are chosen.

  14. mlaskus says:

    I will not install Origin until it let’s my choose the display language. Right now you can only change the language of some of the menus and the whole store’s language is automatically set to the one used in the country you’re in. Useless.

    Many people complained about it, EA is aware of the problem but they don’t seem to want to fix it.

    • jrodman says:

      You have to understand. We americans do not understand language.

  15. AmateurScience says:

    I don’t mind Origin so much, but golly gosh to goodness is it hard to just browse the store. I’ve lost count of the number of times someone’s told me there was a sale on at Origin and I’ve been unable to find the game. Sure it’s got a search function but if you just want to browse the collection there’s nothing.

  16. Shooop says:

    It’s so considerate of EA to make sure all the games they’re making which in turn will require Origin are complete garbage so I won’t ever have to even worry about using it in the first place.

    I think I should send a them a thank you card.

    • Vorphalack says:

      I agree, but maybe you should put a clock on the card. It’s 2012 after all.

    • oceanview says:

      Indeed. Since I will never buy anything from EA ever let’s hope they make all their releases origin mandatory so it doesn’t pollute steam anymore.

      • caddyB says:

        I don’t give a flying fuck about EA hostility ( although it’s well deserved if a bit naive ) but I’m not going to install yet another “you have to run this to play games” software. I didn’t do it for Ubi and I’m not going to do it for EA.

        Steam is more than enough for the convenience factor for me ( and I can run Sots II and Blacklight:Retribution and Tribes without Steam anyway, and I only play Crawl:Stone Soup and Dwarf Fortress other than that anyway, so nanana ).

        I feel like the other guys are just late to the party. Everyone’s got Steam because Steam was here first and it’s some sort of a necessary evil. I wonder if I bought more games on and gamersgate than Steam, but I don’t know.

  17. Alexander Norris says:

    In the same timespan it’s taken to get Origin 9.0 out the door, Steam’s added Greenlight, Source Filmmaker, a large selection of F2P games, remote installs, and now Linux support is on the way.

    Er, yes, and Steam has also been around since 2004. Apples and oranges here.

    • jalf says:


      Does being around since 2004 means that it’s easier to make improvements in 2012?

      How so? The point is that all these things are additions to Steam *which have happened after Origin launched*.

      And in the same span of time, nothing much has happened with Origin.

      I’m not sure I see the relevance of what Steam did before Origin launched.

    • zeroskill says:

      Hardly. EA fancies themself as Valve’s competitor on the digital distribution market, but to be honest, if Origin wasn’t living off it’s established exclusive franchises it would be dead already.

      Frankly, EA/Origin has nothing to offer other then that. No wonder they fear comparison with Steam.

      And I can’t see that changing. Valve will just move on forward with the software doing what they always did. I would be very surprised if EA would come up with some real innovation anytime soon.

    • Lemming says:

      I’m starting my own car company, and I want you in on the ground floor, friend!

      It’s £10,000 for my first model and yes it’s just a board on some wheels but it’s unfair to compare us to Mazda or Ford – they had a head start on us after all. Apples and Oranges, mate – you understand, don’t you?

    • Milky1985 says:

      Its the same with MMOs that are released, people say “its better than wow at release” but you are not comparing the two at release, you are comparing the one released now with the other product as it is now.

      Yes it takes a while to develop but you ahve to compete at the level things are now.

      It would be like me releasing a computer with 1 MB of ram and a 23 mhz processor saying “well i have just started, but i am better than dell are when they started so its all fine”

      Actually that probably would be better than dell now so it may be a bad example :P

      • jrodman says:

        Games are not quite the same though. You might want to play another game also, or want a new experience, and the idea that it’s “good enough” might sell you.

        Although if it’s being pushed as a reason to switch.. well.. yeah.

  18. JoeGuy says:

    I’m pretty sure EA offering their DLC separately to Steam’s store is what ended certain games chances of being on Steam. I’m sure people noticed once Crysis 2 wasn’t offering DLC from an in-game service it was allowed back on.

    Dragon Age 2 still offers that service and uses BioWare’s social page for DLC too, that’s the ultimate problem. EA want all the DLC profit and to control community interaction.

    • smg77 says:

      Right. They want to use Steam’s massive user base to sell the game but then cut Valve out of DLC profit. It’s really shady.

  19. says:

    I will henceforth refer to Origin as OS9.

    Next up: Cat names and a shiny button UI!

  20. zeroskill says:

    A clock. I am amazed by the innovation EA brings to the table. Ground breaking stuff.

    • Stochastic says:

      At least Origin isn’t getting worse or being bloated with unnecessary features. I’d rather them take their time in updating and add features and functions that people actually care about.

      But yes, it is rather underwhelming.

      • Vorphalack says:

        You don’t care about it, therefore no one cares about it. Must be awesome to live in a world where everyone else is wrong or doesn’t count.

        • Brun says:

          Pot, kettle.

        • Stochastic says:

          I didn’t express myself clearly. I’m in favor of them adding the clock. Really, I think it’s a neat feature even if it is boilerplate. What I meant to say is that EA should continue what they’re doing rather than inject Origin with a bunch of unnecessary features just to compete with Steam. Working on the basics first (inventory and menu upgrades mostly) is absolutely what they should be doing.

          Although I agree with others in that it wouldn’t hurt them to try and differentiate themselves a bit more rather than just play catch up.

          • Toberoth says:

            They probably should have worked on the basics before they released the client.

          • Vorphalack says:

            Well that sounds more reasonable. I’d object to anyone complaining about the ”bloat” of features on Steam simply because they are good for the people who use them, and as far as I can tell have no negative impact on the main service.

    • VelvetFistIronGlove says:

      It’s about time they added that. It’s such a minute feature, I thought they’d have added it in the second update or thereabouts.

  21. JXPheonix says:

    Linux support is on the way?


    Why is NOBODY getting excited that the press has stated that “LINUX SUPPORT IS ON THE WAY!!”!!!!!

  22. Blackcompany says:

    Dear EA: Landmarks only matter if you’re going in the right direction.

  23. BreadBitten says:

    All Origin needs to do is have a working ‘offline mode’ (a term that still hasn’t stopped sounding any less silly) that cements a purchased/downloaded game to a user’s PC, lets the user make backup copies of games, lets the user restore backups even while offline and I ‘might’ try it out…unless that gets Valve to overhaul their ‘offline mode’ in response, in which case screw Origin.

    • Lemming says:

      If Steam detects your router, it thinks there is a way to get online whether the phone line is active or not – yes it’s a design flaw but it’s easily solved by turning the router off/taking your network cable out/turning your wireless connection off.

      Tada! Offline mode!

      • Milky1985 says:

        Or selecting the “go into offline mode” option from the menu :P

        • jrodman says:

          The “go offline” menu selection has a significant number of failure points that unplugging your network cable does not.

          For example, if steam isn’t running and the network is “available” but doesn’t actually work while steam is starting up, it will sometimes refuse to let the offline mode work.

          Yeah, it smells like a bug, but it definitely has some intention to not just allow offline mode to always and instantly work in all scenarios without trying to phone home (slowly). That it completely fails sometimes is just additional trouble.

          That said, this is not *usually* a big problem, though it does bite me when trying to play games on the laptop in transit.

          • Milky1985 says:

            “Yeah, it smells like a bug, but it definitely has some intention to not just allow offline mode to always and instantly work in all scenarios without trying to phone home (slowly).”

            AFAIK this is true if you have not been online for a while (think its 30 days) , it requires you to connect again to revalidate but its let me selcet work offline whenever that has happened for me.

            As long as you don’t make the mistake of killing the process while its loading up to load it up later like i did on an old laptop. That tends to kill the blob file that holds the data :P

  24. Tei says:

    Origin just now looks flat. It seems the client renders something like a webpage, and this webpage is optimized for 1024×769 and to complete the resolution people use now, theres some huge empty columns. Plus what is on the center don’t really show what games theres on the shop. Its more a interface designed to obscure the fact theres not much games. I can understand that, but is not something that help “browsing”.

    Anyway Origin exist to convince everyone to pay 60$ or 70$ for videogames that normally cost 50$. So in more than one sense is a shop designed to scare away customers.

    Origin is all “He, buy MH4 for 70$!… ” and Steam is “He, this 5 games for 12$, and get a hat free”.

  25. MattM says:

    Competition is good and I am glad there are things like GoG, Impulse, and Amazon games. The #1 problem with Origin is its association with EA. EA has shown over and over that they are not interested in long term support of their products. They release games in pretty good shape and will patch any early game breaking bugs, but that is it. Documented, reproducible bugs are left unpatched and the dev team is moved to a new project. After a few years servers are turned off and multiplayer is disabled. This isn’t a company I want to have controlling my games account.

  26. Roshin says:

    “…increased your control over your My Games library…”

    I just thought that sentence was hilarious. Whose games are they again? :D

  27. tehfish says:

    I wonder if it’ll fix the ‘origin.exe uses 100% of a CPU core until you manually terminate the process, if you resume from suspend/hibernate mode’ bug that i have.

    Getting highly annoying, if it weren’t for the fact i need it for ME3 i’d uninstall the thing…

  28. famicube64 says:

    All I want from this update is an option to disable the “special offers”.

  29. phelix says:

    Perhaps a bit off topic- but are the spywarey EULA shenanigans in Origin still there? Haven’t heard about them in some time, but it’s probably too optimistic to get my hopes up.

  30. Zenicetus says:

    Since ME3 was the only reason I had to install Origin, I’ve just been thinking of it as a launcher for Mass Effect. Now that I’m through with that game, I don’t have any reason to load it again unless something awfully attractive is released that I can’t get on Steam, or directly through a developer storefront.

    Given the klutzy interface and poor integration with Windows (like dumping to the Windows uninstaller to remove a game), I think EA isn’t really aiming to be a Steam alternative. They seem content to make it just a basic storefront for purchase and launching of EA games.

  31. Alexandros says:

    I’m all for competition and I would love for someone to challenge Steam’s level of service. GOG is doing a wonderful job but it’s not going to make it without mainstream games. However, I don’t want competition if it’s from companies with the mindset of EA. I would much rather have a Valve “dictatorship” than take the chance of EA winning and then showing its true face. Same for Activision and every other huge publisher.

    If other companies with a proven track record of respecting their customers can mount a serious challenge against Steam, then great! If not, I for one welcome our new Valve Overlords.

  32. RakeShark says:

    I could have sworn my launcher says “Origin Beta”, so they got confused about the decimal placement? 0.9?

    • Brun says:

      It’s just so that if there are problems with it they always have “it’s a beta” as an excuse of last resort. Nor is such an approach terribly uncommon for software companies – remember how many years Gmail wore the “beta” tag?

      • Milky1985 says:

        I REALLLY hate companies who do this, if its beta it should not be used to launch your major tripple A games. Whiel betas are given to clients they are still testing not production level. If its being used for that , its not beta.

        I hate that google and activision have destroyed the idea of a beta, used now for marketing purposes because as a software developer it ruins actualy proper betas. Things in beta should be feature complete but you test each bit of it not all at once, but peopel complain that its not all there and say “its crap not buying” cause beta means “extended demo” or “its out but has bugs”.

        This beta crap should be actionable, in the UK in theory it is, if its released as a beta its NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE, sales of goods act , it should be a full product.

  33. Kefren says:

    I don’t understand “I don’t think it’s healthy for Valve to not have a viable rival in this space”. I spend 99% of my games money in GOG, GamersGate, and various Indie Bundles. I only use Steam under duress.

  34. Tayh says:

    I like Origin because it does what it’s meant to do, and that’s it.
    And that’s fine with me, when we’re talking DRM – it doesn’t need a dozen inferior functionalities/features to somehow “glorify” itself.

  35. D3xter says:

    “I’d actually like to see it, er, pick up some steam, because I don’t think it’s healthy for Valve to not have a viable rival in this space.”

    I wouldn’t, I would like GoG or Gamers Gate to “pick up some steam” so there’s some competition.

    If it has to be a big company I’d prefer Amazon considerably, because they seem to genuinely care and know of something called customer service/satisfaction: link to

    But certainly not EA, Activision or Microsoft, because I can already tell you that they’d only be out to screw consumers even more than they already do and “trap them” into their service so they can “microtransact” them to death and do other horrible things to them as long as they think there’s a quick buck to make.

  36. Elevory says:

    I don’t think it’s healthy for Valve to not have a viable rival in this space.

    Eh, Valve can remain indefinitely unopposed for all I care. They’re amazing.

  37. RandomEngy says:

    When I can join a Mass Effect 3 game with my friends and have everyone be able to hear each other with a success rate greater than 50%, I’ll be more optimistic about the future of the service.

    “Well that didn’t work. Okay EVERYONE quit the game and restart Origin and see if it works this time”

  38. VelvetFistIronGlove says:

    Now, Nathan, be fair. Source Filmmaker has been on the way since Meet The Heavy, long before Storigin was even a twinkle in John Riccitiello’s eye.

  39. Kadayi says:

    @ Nathan

    Source Filmmaker is an add on to the Source engine …it’s not a Steam feature. It’s not going to allow people to make movies in non Source engine games. If you want to hoist the flag about about fucking amazing Steam is and Boo hiss on Origin (because we all want a Steam monopoly in the long run don’t we) at least gets your facts straight man.

    • Milky1985 says:

      “Steam’s added Greenlight, Source Filmmaker, a large selection of F2P games, remote installs, and now Linux support is on the way. ”

      Another bit of what he wrote, To me it implys things that steam is offering, it has been added to steam because you can download it from steam, and is exclusive to steam.

      Its not a steam feature, its not said that its a steam feature, but its something that steam has offered.

      He also says they have added a large selection of F2P games, go on hit on him for saying that!

      “If you want to hoist the flag about about fucking amazing Steam is and Boo hiss on Origin (because we all want a Steam monopoly in the long run don’t we) at least gets your facts straight man.”

      It seems he doesn’t want a steam monopoly cause he says at the end “Hopefully, though, 9.0 is just the beginning of a much, much larger movement to put some meat on Origin’s emaciated bones.”, which kinda says he hopes it gets better.

      Might wanna check your own facts!

      [EDIT] He also says “because I don’t think it’s healthy for Valve to not have a viable rival in this space” so another bit to the not wanting a monopoly.

      • Kadayi says:

        Please, recognize a shill when you see one. Grayson is about as straight a games ‘journalist’ when it comes to Steam and Origin, as Brian X. Chen is about Apple products. Next time there’s an article on GOG I wonder if he’ll berate them for not having X, Y & Z features Steam has…somehow I doubt it.

  40. Continuity says:

    Fuck EA.

    That pretty much sums up my opinion. I hope origin fails, it wont, but I hope. Competition for steam is a good thing in theory… but seriously, what do we want from valve that they are not already giving us by the bucket load? Origin is pointless and only serves one function: more profit for EA. thats it. Anything else if bullshit.

  41. Moleculor says:

    Sure, EA’s opted to dive out of the line of fire and behind the old “Well, they had a head start” excuse

    Wait. Seriously? EA Downloader (what later renamed itself into Origin) was launched in 2005.

    Steam was launched in 2003.

    How is any journalist still letting them get away with “Well, Steam was on the scene first!” as an excuse seven years later?

  42. alilsneaky says:

    Just die already origin. Piece of shit won’t even boot up battlefield 3 anymore (for no proper reason whatsoever)

    @molecular : Because game “journalism”, that is why.
    Half won’t know EADM exists, the other half are just copying headlines from the first half.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      Origin won’t allow me to play my pre-Origin previously-working digital copy of MoH: Airborne, and I’ve been fighting with EA’s support crew for six fucking months about finally closing the support ticket and refunding me my money. They insist they can fix it despite substantial evidence to the contrary.

      You know what’s really screwed about my situation? EA support and Origin support (they are two separate entities, seriously) are blaming each other for the lack of a resolution on my ticket.

  43. Roshin says:

    I like how this was supposed to be about Origin, but everyone keeps going on about Steam. I guess that despite the landmark update (and the clock, don’t forget about the clock), there still isn’t anything substantial to talk about. :D

  44. Shivoa says:

    “I don’t think it’s healthy for Valve to not have a viable rival in this space.”

    I would like that viable rival to be, the pro-consumer (DRM free, single global price, value add as free extras included in every sale – except in the case of EA, I see all their old game releases on don’t even include a rip of the audio files to mp3s) policies make them an ideal alternative to Steam and Valve’s more ‘let the publisher create a contract with the consumer however they see fit’ policy.

    • Kadayi says:

      The only reason GOG we’re able to promote DRM free is because very few peoples livelihoods were reliant on making the income from the product. None of the original developers who made those old games get royalty cheques from the sales. Despite all the goodness CDProjekt put into The Witcher 2 it was still pirated 4:1 vs sales. If you put DRM in you get bitched out for being war criminals and if you don’t put it in you get pirated to hell.

      • Shivoa says:

        Are you saying that 4:1 figure is significantly higher than industry standard for games with DRM? Are you even saying that we have accurate piracy figures? Do we have data on piracy conversion to paid (piracy as a demo) or financial ability/inclination of pirates (that 12 year old kid doesn’t have money for a $60 game their parents don’t approve of, no one could sanely call it a lost sale).

        DRM only exists in the non-pirated version. You buy a week? before the game is pirated by adding large chunks of DRM. Check out some of the RPS content about DRM for why it’s a good thing to call for an end to DRM and if expand to even more newer titles then they might be able to get more movement in that direction.

  45. Tams80 says:

    Most of those Steam improvements have probably been in development for years. If I remember correctly, Source Filmmaker has been in development far longer than Origin has existed.

    I don’t understand this “Steam is so good. It’s all we need. There should be nothing else.” kind of attitude. If Origin was not being improved, then I could see reasons to complain, but it is being improved. Now you could say EA have the resources to make big updates to match the development Valve have achieved over many years, but that would be a huge financial undertaking. Programmers can only code so much a day and don’t come cheap; even the code monkeys.