Battlefield 2142 In-game Ads Use Spyware Tactics

Submit your own resources!

Michael Cozzolino   (Oct 19, 2006 at 19:46 GMT)

EA just keeps on making me a bigger fan. *sarcasm*

Yannick Lahay   (Oct 19, 2006 at 20:01 GMT)   Resource Rating: 3

In-game ads are not a problem if they are part of the game.
For example, in soccer games, the ads add a touch of realism in the game, and the players don't complain at all.
Added to this, there is no spyware at all...

Ads should lower the cost of the game, logically.
But EA wants to lay down the law, they don't want to serve the players and reduce the cost of their games, they want more money! They are very poor you know...

It wouldn't be surprising to find a crack on the net, to eliminate the spyware... Good job EA!

Jay Barnson   (Oct 19, 2006 at 20:14 GMT)

I just ranted on this yesterday.

Summary of my opinion? Unless there's a clear benefit to the consumer, they will likely balk.

If the game was being sold for $20 instead of full price, MAYBE. But it's attached to a best-selling franchise. So maybe I'll be surprised and dissapointed and consumers will roll over and take it. Usher in a new era.

I know I won't be getting it. I'm still frustrated by BF2.

Scott Burns   (Oct 19, 2006 at 20:15 GMT)

I enjoyed the demo and was probably going to pick it up. Then I heard about this, now I most likely won't.

Steve Flowers   (Oct 19, 2006 at 20:31 GMT)

Same here. I really dig the franchise. Great guys there too.

My 2c on game ads, if they aren't interrupting my gameplay and in my face interrupting my experience, I don't really care. The placement of a coke machine, pepsi, whatever. Stuff I might see in real life and it isn't obviously a contrived element - it's cool. An NPC taking out a butterfinger and asking me if I want some might be over the top...

I wouldn't mind having an ad appear on the lobby screen as long as it is small enough to ignore (provided there was some benefit to me and not just additional revenue to the publisher - the PUBLISHER...). Maybe they are supporting extra persistent game servers with it? I doubt it:)

In game ads are OK, but for NO reason flash up a fullscreen ad at me during:

> Gameplay
> Loading screens
> Debriefing or conclusion screens

Back in 1998 or so, I was a bored RADAR instructor at a training center in California. I wrote a 15 page design document during labs and tests for a space based MMO with ingame ads to support persistent world services (so folks that bought the game wouldn't have to pay a monthly fee to play) and sent it to EA. I did get a kind letter in return along with a submission package, but didn't do anything about it.. I think I was too interested in playing a game called Tribes ;-) Passed up an opportunity, or at least a potential path for starting what is a hobby for me now as a profession many years ago -- who knew...

The kinds of ads I imagined were video billboards on the sides of freighters, at ports, etc... Familiar stuff that would be cool, mostly subtle, and not over the top or even obviously an ad in most cases.

James Bond   (Oct 19, 2006 at 20:34 GMT)

I think the point here is that untill you actually buy the game, you are not aware. That is unacceptable.

J. Erick Christgau   (Oct 19, 2006 at 20:39 GMT)

Why pay $50 and deal with this adware crap to play BF2142 when you can just play Tribes 2?

@James you are absolutely, 100% correct. How can I agree to something I can't even read til it's too late to return the item? This has always been a big problem.

Eric Forhan   (Oct 19, 2006 at 20:49 GMT)

Well, while I don't like ads I also know that game development is getting more expensive (unless you're an indie ;) ). Spyware is a different matter altogether.

I did read an unofficial post that it only monitors what you look at in-game; ie, how long you stare at a Victoria's Secret ad versus a Nissan ad and it sends those stats to the server just like any other BF2142 stat. I can see some use for both the game maker and ad-buyer in that they'd actually have some physical statistics as to whether or not the ads are worth the money. I don't know if this is true.

OTOH, all of it still feels a little creepy and I won't be buying a game I had previously looked forward to.

Nikhil Sharma   (Oct 19, 2006 at 21:10 GMT)

2142 is way more stupid compared to BF2 itself (try the demo yourself). I'd rather play Quake Wars any-day over BF anything.

Also, I think this AD system is great, but I really don't see the point of EA using this feature for a 'hit' game (so they say) that is selling millions of overpriced copies already. Not to mention that if any company using in-game ADS they should make it clear 'what' info will be exactly taken from the user's PC. Saying 'no personal information' will be taken is like reading all those spam mails telling you to get free penis transplant ANYWHERE you please (OK, bad example).

This system is great for Indies.. but for a 50$ game selling millions and being funded by a publisher like EA.. screw that. Of all the money they blow on useless advertising for lame games, they can use those millions to fund random titles by making them bug-free and adding new features that ACTUALLY are fun.

Chris Harpan   (Oct 19, 2006 at 22:46 GMT)   Resource Rating: 4

Well, it was coming folks. Ads in games will appear wether we like it or not. I don't like it anymore than most of you, but it will happen.
Our company has already discussed this, and if and when we ever decide to use ads in games, we will only use them at the very beginning loading screen or launchpad, nothing in game what so ever.

Btw, one other note on EA's new "adware" you may have to uninstall a windows security update to actually play the game due to the adware.
Edited on Oct 19, 2006 23:10 GMT

Ray Noolness Gebhardt   (Oct 19, 2006 at 23:30 GMT)

I know this sounds sort of purist, but if I actually pay money for a product, there should be no ads, no matter what. If you want to charge 100 dollars for your game then fine, if its really THAT good, I will still buy it. The same thing has happened with DVD's. You spend all that money for a DVD, and at the start there are unskippable ads. In my opinion that is not acceptable.

The root of all these problems I believe are EULA's. Instead of having government mandated laws, individual corporations make their own laws. Copyright law was originally designed to prevent such things. Copyright law gave acceptable rights to both copyright holders and consumers. Now that we have DRM, adware, and so on, the landscape is much different. Why doesn't the governement step in and supply some sort of laws that make things acceptable for both the producer and the consumer? That would be a logical step in the right direction.

Mincetro   (Oct 19, 2006 at 23:54 GMT)

So... It records your IP Adress to download in-game ads judging by what ones in-game you look at most... Like Gmail? I might have missed the point here, but for me it depends on what the advertising revenue is used for.
Free expansions/levels/major updates = Good Ads
Greedy Corporate Pockets = Bad Ads!

Dennis De Marco   (Oct 20, 2006 at 00:12 GMT)

A good book doesn't have ads, nor anything to take your attention away from the story. A book doesn't record where you read it, how long you take reading a paragraph, or change it's words.

With more and more people using DVR's to record television and seeking other alternatives to entertaiment (Video games, MMORPG games) it's natural for the commerical sucking parasites to look for a new place to peddle their stuff. EA is more than happy to provided such a place in addition to charging the same price for games. Games are interactive, and the player can't just time skip the commerical.

The only way to say no, is not to purchase the product. It is unfortunate that most of the younger generation is so accustomed to commericals and so prized on fast now enterainment, will purchase it anyway.

As an Indy you have a choice. Do you want your game to be like a book, or like a magazine?
Edited on Oct 20, 2006 00:20 GMT

Alan Hembra   (Oct 20, 2006 at 00:38 GMT)

I won't buy it and I own all the previous titles. Bunch of @$$ clowns at EA!

Nikhil Sharma   (Oct 20, 2006 at 00:42 GMT)

@Dennis

Sometimes magazines with ads are a better alternative. :P

Just saying, this option is good for Indie developers if used properly (that is, don't spam ADS left and right). I remember in SWAT4 (Sierra), the ads would appear on posters and computers, which was actually very realistic and provided welcome change and 'real world' feel to the game as well. But soon it went haywire with 20 '50 Cent' posters appearing all over the place.. then we just blocked them in the end. I still think it was pretty good system, but SWAT4 developers messed it up by releasing no patch for prob the best tactical shooter out there after Raven Shield. Guess they made the money they wanted for next title.


EDIT: Oh and EA can do this right. On NFS (Underground series esp.) games, ADS would appear on billboards, was pretty cool, and I really don't mind them.. I hardly even noticed them (only remember Wal-Mart ads).
Edited on Oct 20, 2006 00:44 GMT

Nigel Budden   (Oct 20, 2006 at 01:54 GMT)

Just my 5c worth, Anarchy Online has used in game advertising for a while, the difference is that they allow users to play the base game with no expansions for no monthly fee, which is something that was a good example of using advertising in game. So as others have already pointed out, it can be used for good, as well as evil.

Teck Lee Tan   (Oct 20, 2006 at 02:16 GMT)

I'm surprised nobody's posted up the photo of the "Licence Agreement" yet:



Obviously even EA realises how dodgy this is to the point they have a separate agreement on paper. Love how the warning comes inside the box, so you can't actually return the blasted thing once you find out about the spyware bullshit.
Edited on Oct 20, 2006 02:17 GMT

Nikhil Sharma   (Oct 20, 2006 at 02:30 GMT)

Actually, they pretty much made it clear that this game will feature advertising from the start in many interviews (I think on IGN or Gamespy). People who bought it should already know about this (hell, I read a lot about a game I want to purchase), and probably are OK with advertising and know what it involves.

Though EA should mention what exactly is being transfered in that 'no personal info' part on and from player's PC.

Jeremy Alessi   (Oct 20, 2006 at 03:17 GMT)

Go society! I have to agree that this is utter garbage. At the very least you should have the option of allowing the advertisments on/off. Seriously, people get a game to escape reality and now people are being bombarded with advertisments in game. I have to admit that as a kid I really liked seeing ads in games. Pizza Hut signs in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles was awesome in my opinion. It seemed to validate the game and make it more 'real'. I guess you could say I see it both ways. I can see it as beneficial and detrimental. Any way you look at it though there should be an option to enable or disable it.

Vashner   (Oct 20, 2006 at 03:38 GMT)

EA found these guys and gobbled them up.. EA has a habit of ruining good games like Earth & Beyond..

Like LEAVING pumping shooters in a Subscription space combat game AFTER Halloween lol and cutting laser damage to 1/4 of original etc.. almost as bad as how Smedley and SOE run a MMOG.

This is what happens when you put Suits in charge of creative staff and why Garage Games is so important to give us tools to get around the creative "spin jobs" these people try to serve.

Now SOE did get the in game ad's first in Planetside and they let people play free to Battle Rank 6 (a certification / gear restriction). Which is cool...

EA little more slippery.. like this forced "EA Downloader" tool they put on your pc. I will not buy 2142.. it's good but I am washing my hands of EA.. they pissed me off one to many times.

Anton Bursch   (Oct 20, 2006 at 06:27 GMT)

I think the BattleField games are boring as hell... maybe if I had something interesting to do like look at ads I might actually play. Nah. Game still sucks. That's the real issue here. Why is this game still being made. It's a glorified mod.

Stefan Lundmark   (Oct 20, 2006 at 09:10 GMT)   Resource Rating: 2

I really could not care less if there are ad's in there. If it is a good game, I will buy it.

Devon Ly   (Oct 20, 2006 at 10:07 GMT)

You think EA is in the game publishing or game development business or better yet do you think EA cares about individuals then I'm afraid your severly mistaken. EA is summed up by this one equation

Profit = Revenue - Expenses.

It's obligation is not to the people who plays its games, it to make a CRAP load of cash for it's shareholders. What's more scary I just had a look at the NASDAQ, Electronic Arts floats at $55.84 a share, Microsoft at $28.29 a share.

Now imagine this, this is a company that has a policy to hire eager new talent and burn and churn them into the ground. A mechanism to reduce expenses and thereby boosting profit. Now if this is how EA thinks about it staff then imagine how they think of us. In the end, they are not going to give a rats bottom because they numbers will say 98% of the people who play 2142 didn't kick up enough of a fuss about the "advertising" to make it a problem. The sad part is similar companies seeing EA will do exactly the same thing.

The only way I can foresee EA removing this "advertising" is if they don't sell enough units to even break even. Putting the reason down to people strongly opposed to the advertising technique. But with such a popular franchise not likely to happen, so advertising is gonna stick.

Statistics are a wonderful thing, I'm a Business Analyst myself and I can tell you EA will be using the information they aquire to target where to distribute games, when to distribute, how long people play for (maybe not to the exact second but time possibly playing = time stamp right now - time stamp from last time you ran application) their collecting your IP address remember they don't need to know any personal details your IP tells them exacly what they need to know, what type of game a demographic prefers. You think it's just advetising but it's so much more.

In EA's quest for more profit it's milking us it's cows to the slaughter for every cent we are worth. You think we're people to them? hahaha we're number of sales, we're potential to repurchase for future games.

Now EA probably had a projected profit they were promising to it's shareholders. But as I recall this company with no moral conscience is currently being sued by employees for exploiting them to do outrageous numbers of hours at work. Look a level deeper and you can probably guess why this advertising strategy is only now appearing. If the class action is successful EA will lose ALOT of money and expenses will go up (because they will have to pay employee the money they deserve). Thereby reducing profit, and less profit = not very happy shareholders. and unhappy shareholders = selling of EA share, selling of EA shares = drop in price = drop in share price = bye bye EA. So to counter act this they need more revenue to reach the projected profit line. This making sense now?

Mincetro   (Oct 20, 2006 at 10:25 GMT)

Not really, but you explained everything alot better than the nerd rants everywhere else on the net. It's nice to hear some real-world info about the situation, thanks for that.

Derek "GreatMazinkaiser" Hill   (Oct 20, 2006 at 11:10 GMT)

I suspect if their spyware is anything like the system used by SOE's Planetside, then blocking the ads would be a relatively simple task. IIRC, all that was required was to block a few hosts on your computer.

Alexander "taualex" Gaevoy   (Oct 20, 2006 at 13:34 GMT)   Resource Rating: 5

Well, guys, some of you missed the point here: ads is ONE thing - you can show them, they are cool, _BUT_ using _spyware_ methods to data mine on a personal computer IS BAD.

EA should just show ads from Nike, Cola, etc without data mining on a computer - otherwise it's a felony, fraud and invasion into someone's property.

I bet EA's shares will sink down soon, the are loosing about 40% of Battlefield franchising fan base (that's what I've heard).

Just my 2 cents ;)
Edited on Oct 20, 2006 13:36 GMT

Michael Perry   (Oct 20, 2006 at 14:04 GMT)

So, it's been confirmed that the "spyware" in question does not data mine your cookies or browser history. The game does post IGA on surfaces and what not, and depending on how long the player looks at it, when he looks at it, from what angle, and from what distance, that will send the information for further IGA. In other words, if I glance by an IGA for Subway while trying to pick off a sniper, there's a good chance that it will not register as a successful Ad.

If, however, I spend a few minutes staring at a billboard of "The Simple Life", there's a good chance I'll see more TV show ads or Paris Hilton products. That's a scary thought. God help me if I go AFK to take the dogs out and my mouse is centered on an IGA for Valtrex or HPV treatment. I don't think I'd play if all my IGAs were displaying herpes and cancer treatments. I'd shoot myself with my virtual pistol and call it a day.

On a personal rant, does IGA break immersion? Depends on the game. For BF 2142, most likely IMHO. Will IGA stop? That also depends on something. . . more indie games flooding the market that don't contain it. Moral? Put your noses back to the grindstones and give them some competition!

Devon Ly   (Oct 20, 2006 at 14:05 GMT)

Opps I forgot to mention this before.
www.escapistmagazine.com, I'm quite enjoying this magazine well worth a read.

Anyway here's their take on EA and it's history if your interested
www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/14

Also not all game giants are monsters there are some articles about Ubisoft
I'm a bigger Ubisoft fan after reading this
www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/58

Eric Forhan   (Oct 20, 2006 at 15:09 GMT)

We pay for magazines and get ads. We pay for comics and get ads. We pay for cable/dish TV and get ads. We pay to see movies at the theater and see actual ads before the movie, and 'product placement' during.

The major difference here is that they can tell how long their ad is being looked at, and try to show ads more aligned to what the player responds to.

Now, while that's great for the advertisers it's also a little eerie to me.

AcidFaucet   (Dec 13, 2006 at 01:29 GMT)

Anyone catch the last part of the EULA in the picture, the part in ALL CAPS.

After reading that remember that BF2142 is an online only game pretty much.
Good old corporate logic.

Danni   (Feb 25, 2007 at 02:50 GMT)

Where does it say they are using spyware tactics? Because they track your IP address? Bit overly paranoid here are we not?

Did you know DoubleClick, the largest online broker for advertisements you see on websites know what you like, what sites you visit, tracks you using IP and unique identifiers and if they had their way, would have purchased databases to tell who you are by name, all from an image on a website! Guess you had better stop using Web browsers too now eh?

In my mind, advertising crosses into spyware when it receives personal information about you and as EA's little privacy policy states verbatim above, it is all anonymous data. So how is this spyware again?
Edited on Mar 08, 2007 04:33 GMT

Father Infidel   (Dec 08, 2007 at 05:37 GMT)

sheesh, if a friend had not already bought this for me i would never play it, in protest. ingame advertising is fine if it's worked in cleverly, hell even crudely, but f'ing spyware?!? ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD will never be enough for these typical "corporate" goobers, and their mental condition is both sad and comical... but these types of people are seriously going to be the death of our world as we know it; we have been handing it to them on a golden platter and they are choking it down shamelessly. mark my words they will destroy our world.

You must be a member and be logged in to either append comments or rate this resource.

Home | Products | Solutions | Downloads | Support | Search | About Us
Copyright © GarageGames.com 2000 - 2008 All Rights Reserved