EA gets in hot water over 2142 adverts - bit-tech.net Forums

WilHarris · 18th Oct 2006, 08:48

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10..._2142_adverts/

Fusen · 18th Oct 2006, 09:05

any news on the bf2124 launch? I heard random chatter in IRC that there was a bug on the first batch of disks that meant people couldn't even connect to servers

Hovis · 18th Oct 2006, 09:16

Have to say I'm not touching that POS with a barge pole anyway. Played the beta and it was absolute crap. Couldn't see anything good about it whatsoever.

Sparrowhawk · 18th Oct 2006, 09:24

Yeah, 2142 is like AOL. Shell out a load of cash, for a buggy program with tons of ads. No. Thank. You. EA.

bubsterboo · 18th Oct 2006, 09:26

Quote:

many gamers in the community are questionning why they should have to pay full price to a game which contains paid-for advertisements.

Yes, i dont see why you would have to pay full price for something that contains advertisements. Theres a lot of stuff out there thats free because of advertising, i dont see why this is any different.

Djizasse · 18th Oct 2006, 09:36

They're testing the waters with this game.
We just have to give them a proper response. Ignore the game.

Gushy · 18th Oct 2006, 09:39

totally agree that it shouldn't be full price if there is in-game advertising. I know I'll end up buying it anyway, it just seems a bit wrong.

DougEdey · 18th Oct 2006, 09:40

I was stung by BF2, I was someone who bought it at launch and I haven't played it since the patches I had downloaded reached around 2GB and I still couldn't play properly.

kenco_uk · 18th Oct 2006, 09:44

They should at least offer some kind of incentive.

I won't be buying it, looks like generic online 3d fps mkXXIV solo edition.

funkbro2 · 18th Oct 2006, 10:57

join the boycotts, i just hope EA doesnt tamper with the quality of Crytek and Valve

DLoney · 18th Oct 2006, 10:57

Paying full price if there is in-game advertising…
I wouldn’t mind so much if EA would come out and say what the profits were going to be used for. If the profits were to keep dedicated servers up, and pay for their bandwidth, that would be ok. If it was to pay for add ons to the game (missions, game types, modes, models, ect.) like people could buy in the 360 version of Ghost Recon, for free… that would be ok.

As I said. It depends were the finds are going. If they are going straight to EA without us receiving anything in return, that’s a no-go for the purchase of this game.

aitkened · 18th Oct 2006, 11:35

Of course the profits are going to EA and of course we aren't going to see any benefits. EA can't even justify saying that it's paying for their dedicated servers. just load at bf2 and tell me the ratio of ea servers to private servers. Besides, THE COST OF THE GAME is supposed to offset the servers, geez, it's a multiplayer online game for crying out loud! when you make it, you factor in your server and admin costs when pricing the product. you can't even justify it with the old "development costs are higher" argument for two reasons:

1) EA owns EVERYTHING and is a HUGE RICH company

2) 2142 is just a pretty mod of Battlefield2..no new engine...no new graphics. Anyone remember Desert Combat for 1942?? that was pretty much battlefield2 on the old 1942 engine and it was programmed and distributed for free.

I dont think where the funds are going is an issue here, the issue is the ads themselves and the means they are being delivered. As was said in the CGW podcast that broke the news "EA is obviously afraid of this software...if you're afraid of it, why do it?" The bottom line is people dont mind GIVING their information away (just look at myspace and youtube), privacy isn't the issue, what people dont want is when companies say "we're taking this information and if you dont like it, dont buy our product". To gamers like me, who have purchased (not downloaded, ripped, burned, or stole) ALOT of EA products in the past, INCLUDING battlefield 1942, battlefield 2, and preordered 2142, it's a big middle finger saying "we can do what we want because you NEED these games". well, i for one don't NEED 2142 and when i go to EB to pick up my copy today, i'm opening it in front of them, holding up the paper that says the game includes spyware, and asking for a refund.

BurningFeetMan · 18th Oct 2006, 11:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by aitkened

well, i for one don't NEED 2142 and when i go to EB to pick up my copy today, i'm opening it in front of them, holding up the paper that says the game includes spyware, and asking for a refund.

Vote aitkened for President.

Couldn't have said it better myself chief. Note, that I've taken back BF1942, AND BF2... but I actually repurchased BF1942 when it was in the bargin bin, just so I could play Desert Combat!

Djpuk · 18th Oct 2006, 12:44

So I guess that nobody buys newspapers or magazines?
You pay for them and they are mostly adverts anyway, do you close your eyes when you get on a bus or tube as you paid for those tickets and you still get advertising rammed down your throat.
I am not saying I am a fan of this move but it is a natural progression from billboards in footie games etc.
Advertising is everywhere I don't understand why putting it in games is such a big deal.
Any of you who are in business know that it is a necessary evil and reaching such a defined audience as the game users is advertising gold, though we may not like it this was and will continue to be inevitable.
It could be worse, at least you don't have to pay a subscription to keep playing like WOW for example.

mikeuk2004 · 18th Oct 2006, 12:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fusen

any news on the bf2124 launch? I heard random chatter in IRC that there was a bug on the first batch of disks that meant people couldn't even connect to servers

Launch is this friday. I already got my email from Play.com saying its been dispatched. I should receive it friday

Cant wait

kenco_uk · 18th Oct 2006, 13:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djpuk

So I guess that nobody buys newspapers or magazines?
You pay for them and they are mostly adverts anyway, do you close your eyes when you get on a bus or tube as you paid for those tickets and you still get advertising rammed down your throat.
I am not saying I am a fan of this move but it is a natural progression from billboards in footie games etc.
Advertising is everywhere I don't understand why putting it in games is such a big deal.
Any of you who are in business know that it is a necessary evil and reaching such a defined audience as the game users is advertising gold, though we may not like it this was and will continue to be inevitable.
It could be worse, at least you don't have to pay a subscription to keep playing like WOW for example.

I think you've grabbed the wrong end of the stick. It's not advertising as such, it's the fact that it's spyware which delves into your IE/FF cookies/caches and attempts to advertise products from websites you visit regularly.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a furore regarding EU legislations and this tactic.

aitkened · 18th Oct 2006, 13:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenco_uk

I think you've grabbed the wrong end of the stick. It's not advertising as such, it's the fact that it's spyware which delves into your IE/FF cookies/caches and attempts to advertise products from websites you visit regularly.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a furore regarding EU legislations and this tactic.

Two things, first, to DJpuk, it really isn't about the adds..but what would you do if you bought a particual magazine every month for like, $10 a month and it never had any adds in it, then all of a sudden, they started filling the articles full of adds and charged the same amount?? that's the issue here.

second. EA and IGA claim that the only information collected is your IP and some in game info like how long you look at a particular ad. The IP is apparently the only thing that is used and it is to ensure that ads are presented in a "geographically correct" way (so that american's dont get french adds for products available only in france). but if that's the case, why the paper disclaimer that says that the software may "record your IP address and other anonymous information"? if they ONLY recorded the IP for geographical purposes, why not just say "the software only records and uses your IP for geographical advertising and does not access any non-game resources on your computer"? seems to me that would have been a much safer way to let people know.

Djpuk · 18th Oct 2006, 13:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenco_uk

I think you've grabbed the wrong end of the stick. It's not advertising as such, it's the fact that it's spyware which delves into your IE/FF cookies/caches and attempts to advertise products from websites you visit regularly.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a furore regarding EU legislations and this tactic.

EA say they only take IP addresses to deliver localised content, given the ramifications there would be if they were found to be doing anything else you have to believe that their intentions are honourable.
If they are doing anything more I am sure that somebody will find out (will probably take less than 1/2 an hour for a good hacker to find exactly what info is going back to them) and publicise it, I really do not think that EA are about to do a Sony here.

mclean007 · 18th Oct 2006, 13:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenco_uk

...it's spyware which delves into your IE/FF cookies/caches and attempts to advertise products from websites you visit regularly...

Dammit, so the only ads I'll be getting in game are for bestial pr0n?

Ooops...

kenco_uk · 18th Oct 2006, 13:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djpuk

EA say they only take IP addresses to deliver localised content, given the ramifications there would be if they were found to be doing anything else you have to believe that their intentions are honourable.
If they are doing anything more I am sure that somebody will find out (will probably take less than 1/2 an hour for a good hacker to find exactly what info is going back to them) and publicise it, I really do not think that EA are about to do a Sony here.

Honourable intentions? Like the way they've attempted to placate their fan base by never quite fixing BF2 so it runs on more than a handful of configurations?

I, for one, would never wantonly install spyware on my PC. What if it got compromised? I'm sure EA would issue a patch promptly.. (and it worked properly).

Buy this game and it opens the doors to all software publishers to do what the hell they like with the info on your PC.

/daily mail mode off.

18th Oct 2006, 08:48	#1
WilHarris Just another nobody Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oxford Posts: 2,671	EA gets in hot water over 2142 adverts http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10..._2142_adverts/

18th Oct 2006, 09:39	#7
Gushy Multimodder Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Reading, UK Posts: 162	totally agree that it shouldn't be full price if there is in-game advertising. I know I'll end up buying it anyway, it just seems a bit wrong. __________________ Intel Q6600, 4Gb Corsair DDR2 800, EVGA GTX 260 896Mb, X-Fi Extreme on an Asus P5K Premium Wifi in a Antec P182 with a SM206BW running WinXP / Ubuntu 8.10

18th Oct 2006, 09:40	#8
DougEdey I pwn all your storage Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Southampton Posts: 13,933	I was stung by BF2, I was someone who bought it at launch and I haven't played it since the patches I had downloaded reached around 2GB and I still couldn't play properly. __________________ Burnout: Paradise Stats!XBL: DougEdey Bindi PSN ID: DougEdey Twitter

18th Oct 2006, 09:44	#9
kenco_uk glourious bacon? Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Bourne, Lincolnshire, UK Posts: 6,292	They should at least offer some kind of incentive. I won't be buying it, looks like generic online 3d fps mkXXIV solo edition. __________________ MSI X58M - i7 920 4Ghz - 6GB Corsair - GTX260 648/2520 ::: Vote for bit-tech T - theevilelephant - "it sounded like bouncing around on a pogo stick, screaming in chinese while occasionally throwing a cat at a door."

18th Oct 2006, 11:35	#12
aitkened What's a Dremel? Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8	2142 Of course the profits are going to EA and of course we aren't going to see any benefits. EA can't even justify saying that it's paying for their dedicated servers. just load at bf2 and tell me the ratio of ea servers to private servers. Besides, THE COST OF THE GAME is supposed to offset the servers, geez, it's a multiplayer online game for crying out loud! when you make it, you factor in your server and admin costs when pricing the product. you can't even justify it with the old "development costs are higher" argument for two reasons: 1) EA owns EVERYTHING and is a HUGE RICH company 2) 2142 is just a pretty mod of Battlefield2..no new engine...no new graphics. Anyone remember Desert Combat for 1942?? that was pretty much battlefield2 on the old 1942 engine and it was programmed and distributed for free. I dont think where the funds are going is an issue here, the issue is the ads themselves and the means they are being delivered. As was said in the CGW podcast that broke the news "EA is obviously afraid of this software...if you're afraid of it, why do it?" The bottom line is people dont mind GIVING their information away (just look at myspace and youtube), privacy isn't the issue, what people dont want is when companies say "we're taking this information and if you dont like it, dont buy our product". To gamers like me, who have purchased (not downloaded, ripped, burned, or stole) ALOT of EA products in the past, INCLUDING battlefield 1942, battlefield 2, and preordered 2142, it's a big middle finger saying "we can do what we want because you NEED these games". well, i for one don't NEED 2142 and when i go to EB to pick up my copy today, i'm opening it in front of them, holding up the paper that says the game includes spyware, and asking for a refund.

18th Oct 2006, 09:05	#2
Fusen Supermodder Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Kent Uni Posts: 350	any news on the bf2124 launch? I heard random chatter in IRC that there was a bug on the first batch of disks that meant people couldn't even connect to servers

18th Oct 2006, 09:16	#3
Hovis Multimodder Join Date: May 2006 Location: London Posts: 120	Have to say I'm not touching that POS with a barge pole anyway. Played the beta and it was absolute crap. Couldn't see anything good about it whatsoever.

18th Oct 2006, 09:24	#4
Sparrowhawk Wetsander Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Kentucky Posts: 545	Yeah, 2142 is like AOL. Shell out a load of cash, for a buggy program with tons of ads. No. Thank. You. EA.

18th Oct 2006, 09:36	#6
Djizasse Minimodder Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Portugal Posts: 25	They're testing the waters with this game. We just have to give them a proper response. Ignore the game.

18th Oct 2006, 10:57	#10
funkbro2 What's a Dremel? Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: ontario canada Posts: 9	join the boycotts, i just hope EA doesnt tamper with the quality of Crytek and Valve

18th Oct 2006, 10:57	#11
DLoney Multimodder Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: The Great State of TEXAS Posts: 208	Paying full price if there is in-game advertising… I wouldn’t mind so much if EA would come out and say what the profits were going to be used for. If the profits were to keep dedicated servers up, and pay for their bandwidth, that would be ok. If it was to pay for add ons to the game (missions, game types, modes, models, ect.) like people could buy in the 360 version of Ghost Recon, for free… that would be ok. As I said. It depends were the finds are going. If they are going straight to EA without us receiving anything in return, that’s a no-go for the purchase of this game.

18th Oct 2006, 12:44	#14
Djpuk Multimodder Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Near Ipswich Posts: 93	So I guess that nobody buys newspapers or magazines? You pay for them and they are mostly adverts anyway, do you close your eyes when you get on a bus or tube as you paid for those tickets and you still get advertising rammed down your throat. I am not saying I am a fan of this move but it is a natural progression from billboards in footie games etc. Advertising is everywhere I don't understand why putting it in games is such a big deal. Any of you who are in business know that it is a necessary evil and reaching such a defined audience as the game users is advertising gold, though we may not like it this was and will continue to be inevitable. It could be worse, at least you don't have to pay a subscription to keep playing like WOW for example. __________________ I wish I hadn't said that!