Battlefield 3 Beta: On Sainthood

Posted by on Wednesday, September 28, 2011 · 4 Comments 

Dear Reader,

Throughout history, mankind has called on those of a noble mind and fortified spirit to lay themselves on the altar of righteousness. It is through triumph against remarkable adversity that heroes and legends are born, people whose deeds will echo through the ages as a testament to the ethical principles that mankind strives for. You know many of them: Gandhi, Mother Theresa, Bonhoeffer, Albert Schweitzer. Well, you can add another name to that list: Andrew Ranson Allen. This guy, right here.

YOU SEE WHAT I DO FOR YOU, GABE NEWELL?!

So what have I done to deserve sainthood, you ask? It’s simple: through sheer power of will, and unmistakable strength of character, I am not pre-ordering “Battlefield 3″ on EA’s new digital distribution system called Origin, which would thereby allow me to play the Beta at this very second. I am waiting two entire days to gorge myself on the succulent morsels of DICE’s incoming masterpiece. And why would I starve myself in such a cruel fashion? To make a political statement of the utmost deftness:

“Origin sucks, Steam for life”

Hit the jump, and let’s continue this philosophical inquiry.

I’m a capitalist, as is every American who isn’t a raving hypocrite, but I must confess that when it comes to Steam, I make an exception. I’ve created a little bubble around the acquisition of video games over the internet, and within that sphere suspended all notions of Antitrust, or fair competition, or even democracy. In the land of Steam, I believe in only Steam, and the furthering of Steam’s interests. Anything that dares to compete with Steam should be obliterated on sheer principle, and whatever collateral damage is incurred as a result is a small price to pay.

It’d be nice to play the BF3 Beta right now, but I’m ready and willing to have less “Battlefield” in order to ensure that EA never gets a foothold in this market. Are there games EA could dangle in front of me that would break my spirit? Perhaps. But about 90 percent of them are made by Valve or Blizzard anyway, and neither enters the equation.

It's Not Steam. Boo!

It’s not really personal against EA…well, not entirely personal. I have some affection for Electronic Arts, but I’ve had it about up to here with them meddling in things that don’t concern them. You all know what I’m talking about: those damned EA servers. Not only is it annoying to have to reckon with both Xbox Live and EA Online, the latter frequently denies service for no good reason. Just give up and let Microsoft/Sony handle the internet, damn you. This little pissing match is blowing back on your customers.

But even putting these things aside, I’m just not willing to let anyone compete with Valve, because I cannot imagine that there’s another company anywhere that so adroitly melds crushing financial success with player-positive, art-centric values. Most companies are one or the other, or one at the expense of the other. If some other competitor takes the field position from Gabe and Friends (my new nickname for them), it is inevitable that gamers at large will get far fewer totally awesome deals, amazing innovations, and “just cuz” acts of kindness. The miracle that is Valve’s existence feels fleeting and fragile to me, and I am more than ready to heap my body on top of it for its protection.

So nay, I say to thee, Origin, and nay to BF3 Beta. I shall fast in rags on the street, while the muffled booms and laughter of the soulless proletariat echo from inside the hallowed halls of those willing to forego their principles.

_AA

P.S: You can also acquire the BF3 Beta right now if you pre-ordered “Medal of Honor.” But if you actually did that, I don’t even know what to say to you.

finally, science has joined forces with revenge

 

 

 

 

 

Categories: Articles · Tags:

  • Brendan Corcoran

    What does the BF3 beta have to do with Origin (aside from the PC version of it)?

    I don’t buy EA’s argument that only Origin allows them to push updates
    for BF3 the way they want (something about Steam’s update policy being
    restrictive or prohibitive).

    However, on the EA servers argument, I must defend their decision to use
    and require the EA servers from a technical standpoint. And it’s not
    EA’s fault, actually. It’s the fault of Microsoft and Sony for having
    game consoles EA wanted to release their games on. I’ll clarify.

    Microsoft and Sony both provide a basic level of hosting for multiplayer
    games on their respective services that publishers can leverage for
    their games to reduce costs. In a perfect world, every publisher’s
    developers would utilize those systems and everyone would be happy
    because they would always work and be accessible.

    Unfortunately, we don’t live in a perfect world.

    The problem EA faces with deciding between using their own servers to
    house stuff like stats is that Microsoft and Sony almost *definitely*
    have different policies for what can and can’t be recorded onto their
    servers, as well as how much data can be stored, how it is used, and how
    much it is used. These rules are usually defined in an Acceptable Use
    Policy or AUP, and this is something you’ll only be familiar with if you
    have ever signed up for a service that has specific resource
    limitations. Web hosting, cell phone data plans, and the like come to
    mind.

    If EA can’t store the same data in the same way on both Microsoft and
    Sony’s servers, then they have to spend an indeterminable amount of time
    tailoring it to each of those services, for each game they release that
    would use them. That means a potential of 200% more work for them,
    because they’re already going to be using the EA servers on the PC
    versions.

    Their solution was to normalize all that data so that every game has the
    same common access point when it comes to data storage for stats and
    account names. They can decide how much data they want store, how it can
    be used, and how much it can be used. They also open up access to their
    stats servers to developers to create websites that aggregate
    statistics in a user-friendly format, which you can’t do for games that
    are only hosted on Microsoft or Sony’s systems. The only stats systems
    spawning from those are 1st party sites, which admittedly are usually
    good, but don’t necessarily offer everything a player wants. The Halo
    stats website is one of these, but also keep in mind– that game is only
    on one platform.

    The only disadvantage to this system is that if it goes down… it’s
    likely that everyone is affected across all 3 platforms. They have
    systems in place that are there to minimize/eliminate the possibility of
    that happening, but shit does happen. There are other implications to having the systems controlled by EA, such as them being able to shut the service off whenever they want (technically, but not realistically– except for sports games).

    TL;DR – Would you rather EA’s developers spend more time (and money) and possibly deliver a subpar experience, causing them to want to charge for more services OR put up with the occasional disconnect or technical hiccup?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew-Allen/7605503 Andrew Allen

      What Origin has to do with the Beta is that if I had pre-ordered BF3 on Origin specifically, I’d be allowed into the Beta two days early along with the Medal of Honor pre-order people. 

      • Brendan Corcoran

        Well, so what? Two days is hardly a long time to wait…

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew-Allen/7605503 Andrew Allen

          I’m aware of that. This piece is intended to be ironic/hyperbolic.