Rumour: Crysis 2 Steam return due to lack of in-game store

Wednesday, 30th May 2012 09:49 GMT By Johnny Cullen

The return of Crysis 2 to Steam last night is because of changes made by Crytek that doesn’t see the shooter include an in-game store to sell DLC, an RPS report is claiming.

EA said the changes that paved the way for Crysis 2′s Steam return were made outside of the publisher, instead adopted by developer Crytek.

“Changes made by Crytek to Crysis 2: Maximum Edition have brought the game back into compliance with Steam’s terms of service,” said an EA rep.

Its never been mentioned why EA’s titles were pulled from the service, but it has been generally assumed the addition of in-game stores in its games broke Steam policy.

Valve boss Gabe Newell said at the time “a whole complicated set of issues” were the reason why EA titles were pulled from the service. Several titles published by EA Partners, like Crysis 2, are already on Steam, such as Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, Shank 2 and Warp.

A Crysis sequel, Crysis 3, launches next spring for PC, Xbox 360 and PS3 through EAP.



  1. Llewelyn_MT

    As opposed to Battlefield 3, that obviously has the in-game store. Wait, what?

    #1 3 years ago
  2. GrimRita

    I dont think its the in game store. its probably down to Battlefields dozens of small DLC packs for £4.50 and EA not wanting to share the slice of that pie.

    Who cares, there games arent missed on Steam

    #2 3 years ago
  3. TheBlackHole

    Steam’s policy is basically, ‘if you sell a game on our store, we want 30% of ALL DLC (packs or items) sold through that game’. this is the crux of their issue with EA.

    As much as people love Valve (and I’m in that camp, for the most part), Steam is becoming something of a monopoly over the PC game market. That’s not good for anyone, especially consumers.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Llewelyn_MT

    @3: You’re absolutely right. I buy games outside of Steam whenever possible, but it’s getting harder every day.

    I have no problem with multiple clients to handle my digital copies. The problem is Origin is years behind Steam when it comes to usability and stability. Forcing people to use it is just as bad (if not worse) then Steam’s monopoly. What’s stopping them from selling BF3 on Steam for a higher price then on Origin? People would have choice and EA their profits.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. DreamCleaver

    @3: That’s true and I worry.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. TheWulf


    As the sensible person here, I call bullshit for two distinct reasons. (Hooray for logic. Someone has to have it.)

    Obvious reason #1: You have no citations for the 30% thing, that’s a rumour but no one has ever actually confirmed it. If you have a reliable source that actually confirms this information, then you should share it. FACTUALLY speaking, it could be anywhere between 2% and 30%. We just don’t know what the ACTUAL numbers are.

    Obvious reason #2: Valve is like Apple in that they care about the user experience. They want to ensure that if you buy a game from their service, that all the DLC will be available from their service, and thus compatible with the way they host games on said service. This, I believe, is their true core issue with EA. EA wishes to see all DLC for their games removed from Steam, and the response from Valve is basically “Nope, because that would impact upon user experience. And unlike you guys, we actually care about our customers.”

    Basically, what EA is demanding is the equivalent of being able to download a demo of a game at Apple’s app store, and then having to go to a non-Apple verified site to enter your payment details to get the full version of that app.

    That shit doesn’t fly with Apple because it impacts the user experience, it means that people have to go to a source they might not know is trustworthy, and they might find that the software they have to deal with when they’re not dealing with Apple is substandard. So Apple’s conditions for hosting apps on the app store is that payment for the apps and the DLC are handled through the app store.

    Valve is no different. It’s simply understanding good business, which I don’t think many people have a great grasp of. See, if Valve sells a game, and then someone has to go to Origin to get the DLC, Valve take part of the fault and the complaints because they aren’t selling the DLC. If they aren’t selling the DLC, they’re forcing their users to use shitty, substandard software (Origin).

    Gabe recognises that Origin is more than a bit shit, he’s even said so himself, and he doesn’t want Steam to become involved with it because Origin has offered nothing but bad user experiences from day one. Remember the Mass Effect 3 launch? Yeah. That’s what he doesn’t want.

    Unlike Origin, Steam has always offered a consistently good user experience, Valve has built a reputation upon this in the same way that Apple have. They just don’t want that reputation ruined by EA.

    Can you blame them? I sure as hell can’t.

    Citation for Gabe thinking that Origin is a bit shit.

    Right here on VG24/7. And again, that’s why he doesn’t want anything to do with it. If Valve isn’t allowed to sell DLC for a game, then it means that people have to go to Origin for DLC for a game they bought on Steam. If they have a bad user experience with Origin (and ultimately they will), that reflects poorly upon Steam.

    Like I said, Apple doesn’t want to put up with this shit because they know that the software of their competitors is pretty damn awful. Same for Valve.

    Furthermore, maybe if the software of Valve’s competition wasn’t so incredibly shit, they’d actually not be a monopoly. Valve is a monopoly because it’s doing everything right: Steam sales, a great UI, easy to buy games, easy to patch games, and so on. It’s hands-down the best experience on the PC regarding buying, installing, and playing games. We all know this (hipster craziness aside).

    So yeah, if he doesn’t want to be in a situation where Origin and its likes reflect badly upon him, why should he have to be?

    #6 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.