EA clarifies Battlefield 2142's IGA spyware
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Oct 18th 2006 at 1:00AM }
Electronic Arts launched Battlefield 2142 yesterday and not too many people were happy to find spyware incorporated into the game. EA is confused why players have an issue with the sheet describing advertising spyware in their copy of Battlefield 2142 ... afterall, it's not like they didn't announce they were doing this months ago.Joystiq asked EA to clarify this technology as there still seems to be some confusion (announcement be damned). An EA spokesperson stated, "It does not capture personal data such as cookies, account login detail, or surfing history." EA's statement to Joystiq can be found after the break.
In case you didn't read EA's letter in our post yesterday morning, please allow us to quote it to emphasize their clarification:
"IF YOU DO NOT WANT IGA TO COLLECT, USE, STORE OR TRANSMIT THE DATA DESCRIBED IN THIS SECTION, DO NOT INSTALL OR PLAY THE SOFTWARE ON ANY PLATFORM THAT IS USED TO CONNECT TO THE INTERNET."
If you want to play Battlefield 2142 or Need for Speed: Carbon, you'll just have to accept the consequences. IGA Worldwide -- the company taking your IP address and placing the ads in the game -- states on their website that "70% of gamers [are] saying that advertisements inside computer and video games help improve the realism of the gaming experience."
We're still waiting for EA to respond to several followup questions and will update this post when they do. Continue reading for their statement to Joystiq:
Electronic Arts statement (unedited):
The advertising program in Battlefield 2142 does not access any files which are not directly related to the game. It does not capture personal data such as cookies, account login detail, or surfing history.
BF 2142 delivers ads by region. The advertising system uses a player's IP address to determine the region of the player, assisting to serve the appropriate ads by region and language. For instance, a player in Paris might be presented with ads in French. The information collected will not be repurposed for other uses.
Battlefield 2142 also tracks "impression data" related to in-game advertisements: location of a billboard in the game, brand advertised, duration of advertisement impression, etc. This information is used to help advertisers qualify the reach of a given advertisement.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 2 of 2)
Tim @ Oct 18th 2006 9:54AM
Yeah I haven't even seen the game yet. I think I'll download it just to try it out.
Prokaryote @ Oct 18th 2006 10:02AM
If EA some how, in some way, pushes ads into Spore I'm going to be severely ticked.
v1sor @ Oct 18th 2006 10:36AM
The solution is oh-so-simple - Don't buy games from EA.
I was going to buy BF2152, but my adverse reaction to advertisments means that I'm now allergic to this, and any other game, that EA decides to pump out with this crap in it.
Oh well, at least I didn't buy the game and then find out, so I'm better off. Thanks for letting me know Joystiq!
Les @ Oct 18th 2006 11:32AM
I don't so much have a problem with them putting ads inside the game as I do the fact that they're still charging me $50 for the game to begin with.
If you're going to be shoving ads in my games then I expect the game to cost less than ones that don't have ads in them. Good thing I wasn't a big fan of any of the previous versions as this just gives me a good reason to spend my money elsewhere.
DWells55 @ Oct 18th 2006 11:09AM
Don't like it?
Sign the petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/bf2142ad/petition.html
Jeditigris @ Oct 18th 2006 11:40AM
I wonder what Ads they will be serving up to me. I have a dedicated computer for gaming. I don't surf the internet, get email, or even download updates (with the exception of Windows and Antivirus updates)on this PC. Game updates downloaded on another PC and transfered over the network. Hmmm... Any thoughts on what I will get?
mliving @ Oct 18th 2006 9:01PM
What about the bandwidth these companies are sucking from game players?
I don't want to sound like those scabs at AT&T but I pay for my bandwidth, in fact I pay a premium so my bandwidth is NOT capped.
The fact that these companies think that they can STEAL my bandwidth for revenue generating advertising by incorporating the "ad engine" in the game is patently obsurd. (Hint: if it runs as a spearate application or process you can setup a rule in Norton Anti-Virus or firewall software to not allow it to access the internet)
I can see this type of activity getting completely out of hand with the next-gen consoles from SONY and MS when sales start falling. They'll try and sell as a big value add proposition when really all they are doing to stealing and leeching the bandwidth you paid for. And I can see these companies making complete access to the internet a requirement of EULA.
Like here in Canada, Bell ExpressVu forces their customers to connect a phoneline to their receivers in order to order movies. They wouldn't dare make that requirement for the satellite service cause then they would be forcing one of their services to be purchased in order to use another when both are paid separately and governed by separate contracts.
Consumers need to have clear and entrenched rights when it comes to the internet and these types of activities especially when they NEED your equipment, bandwidth and hard disk space to complete their revenue making business model.
Plaid Ninja @ Oct 18th 2006 4:39PM
I used to love EA, but now I really hope they go under. They're an overrated, bloated, lazy company that rakes in the cash while putting out games that are either half baked, or are minor tweaks on an existing game. For example - Burnout Revenge, while adding some new & interesting gameplay, has the absolute worst single player navigation system. Utter shit. FIFA 2007 for XBox 360 is missing much of the content its PS2 & XBox buddies were given. Same with World Cup 06. And now EA, after charging an arm & a leg for its games and essentially forcing its overpriced titles onto people (no more $20 NFL 2K games, etc) wants to get even more money and set a dangerous precedent by putting advertising into our games in a very obvious and intrusive way?
I'll take that as long as the game is free. Otherwise, fuck you, EA.
MrTroy @ Oct 18th 2006 12:17PM
Well I'm really on the fence with this issue. I mean on one side, they aren't stealing your information. They're checking to see who's standing in front of what ads and how often they're there. If that's the case people are over reacting.
On the flip side. It takes away from the game to have a ad made for our day in a post modern setting. It's just dumb. It works for some, just not all.
Also. This kinda crap belongs on consoles not PCs. PCs are too vulnarable for this. Granted "EA isn't doing this or that" but once you drill that hole in your wall, rats will get it.
(For the record the reason I say "Consoles not PCs" is cause there's less important information to get from there, and they're harder to hack)
jygsaw @ Oct 18th 2006 12:26PM
Hmm... I'm wondering if programs such as Spybot S&D and Ad-aware will notify that such spyware is running on your computer and attempt to remove it. Anyone so far have any experiences with a situation like that?
Simey @ Oct 18th 2006 12:46PM
There's one thing about this ad serving that nobody has picked up on - could it be related to the EA master server connection problems that *everyone* playing the demo over the last few days has experienced?
Right now the game is unplayable due to master server disconnects - WHY does my PC need to maintain a connection to EA's master server for the entire duration of the game? And why does it kick you out of the game server if this connection is lost? Is it all related to this ad-serving?
Whilst the strategy and game design is excellent, the engine, physics and graphics let it down badly - it looks DATED, it moves HORRIBLY, the sounds are AWFUL.
I wish Valve had written it - it would have been absolutely amazing if they had.
Anyone who thinks that ad-serving in a game is a good idea just isn't thinking about it. Anyway, it's an atmosphere killer.
DiscoGodfather @ Oct 18th 2006 2:18PM
The argument that "this is okay because Google/Steam/WoW/whoever does it already" doesn't make it right. Just because other people are doing something doesn't mean that it's acceptable. This is the kind of thing most people learn in grade school, but it's a point that has apparently been lost on some people here.
Everyone who thinks that it's okay for EA to force people who want to play online to have their PC invaded by an unwanted program that monitors information outside the scope of the game should go out and buy this game immediately. You're clearly EA's target audience, and the good folks at PespiCo, McDonald's and Nike will be happy to influence your opinions on their fine products.
I had planned on picking up a copy of this game today but the recent revelation about the IGA software and EA's subsequent clarification that essentially says "this is how it is so deal with it or play offline" have convinced me not to. There's no way I am paying money to be treated like this.
This isn't my way of sending some kind of "message" to EA, this is just my way of saying that I have the freedom to not be subjected to intrusive programs on my computer and I have the right to not be subjected to advertising in a game I have already paid full price for.
theArbiter @ Oct 18th 2006 3:57PM
Guys,
Just a comment from someone who works in the industry.
Whilst I totally agree that we need to be extremely careful of advertising in games at the expense of the experience itself, this stuff is nothing new - nor that invasive.
Massive and IGA have been players in the industry and have been serving up ads to us for a long time. Splinter Cell: chaos theory, SWAT 4, test drive - just check Massive's website and see for yourselves - they take an IP address for geotargeting data to serve up relevant ads. then the impressions are sent back to see if their ad has been seen at all - in a similar way to banner ads on the web.
Sure enough, when reviewers see a disclaimer falling out of the box that alludes to spyware, it's all about sensationalised blog links and gamer forum headlines - BATTLEFIELD 2142, SPYWARE etc etc. for more visits and the setup of another bitching post.
In a world of PVR's that can cut out tv ads, and a general downturn in traditional advertising, the advertisers are looking at ways of reaching target demographics. It's just business. MSFT has bought masssive - SONY may pursue their own route. Nintendo? Who knows.
What I'm saying is, DO speak out, my fellow gamers - because this really is a fine line that every games publisher/developer should be walking at the moment, and decisions to integrate dynamic ads should be carefully considered depending on the game construct.
As companies become bigger and bigger, and the games industry draws more attention by the idiots who still think games are total geek domain and even less(which fucks me off even more), don't necessarily understand them, so this kind of stuff happens.
BUT -
FUCK EA! FUCK SONY! FUCK MSFT! is just plain dumb as a comment. Want to boycott games with advertising? You'll find you'll be boycotting more games that you think, from UBI,
After browsing through these posts, it's clear there's a few people who see the writing on the wall, and sensationalist idiots who post before they think about stuff they actually don't have a fucking clue about.
Newmiracle @ Oct 18th 2006 4:00PM
"Whilst the strategy and game design is excellent, the engine, physics and graphics let it down badly - it looks DATED, it moves HORRIBLY, the sounds are AWFUL."
D to the ITTO!
I'd tolerate the ads if the game was decent enough to justify them. Would I be pissed if HL2 had WacArnold's ads in them? Sure- but it's a good game and I would have sold out hard and played it to the finish.
I've been playing the demo for a week or two now- and I am definetly dissapointed. BF2 was fun for me for a while... and I did get the Spec Ops expansion... but MAN- this iteration is adding almost next to nothing.
And if BF2 was being criticized for lack of a realistic "feel" to the weapons- 2142 takes the cake. Simey, you are totally right. The sound is horrible. Little things like how the gun sounds make a huge difference on your experience in the game. I really love the 'point capturing' idea- which is why I continue to play the demo from time to time. But it definetly feels like lazer-tag some times.
I want an awesome Space-marine next gen FPS that doesn't blow and has great multiplayer. Any suggestions?
gareth @ Oct 18th 2006 5:28PM
will the ads be inside the game on billboards or just at loading screens and stuff?
t @ Oct 18th 2006 9:23PM
Just to sum up what's been said so far.:
People who are pirating games feel they are less likely to pirate a game if the game contains advertisements.
The advertisement statistics might be hack-able and or manipulated. And some gamers feel they are more likely to hack because of the advertisement software. EA may be able to counter some of this activity through the use of punk buster or similar anti-cheat software.
Some gamers feel such advertisements should reduce the price of a game.
Other games feel betrayed by EA, and do not approve of their advertisement software. Some have suggest boycotting games that contain such advertisement systems.
Some gamers are concerned the advertisement software could cause the gaming software to lag and or negatively effect game play and or rendering.
My thoughts:
Personally I think EA should have given gamers the choice of install the software. Sure, choice could reduce the amount of data collected, but this is why, statistical analysis with a large data sampling can easily cover the loss of data with very little variance.
And it will reduce negative publicity around their new advertisement software.
EA should also focus on getting cd-keys connected to credit cards. So they can directly, and specifically link in game advertisements directly to sells.
Also leaving the community out of the advertisement loop will negatively effect their success. WHat happens when server admins realize that EA is making a profit off of their community (witch they pay for), they may chose to block out maps that contain adds.
Also 3rd party level designers do not have any reason to implement adds in their levels.
If EA payed server owners for the add time players experiences on their server, server admin would have motivation to host levels with adds. It also means server admins will have more money for bandwidth. More bandwidth means those servers are more likely to be popular, witch in turn, creates a better environment for advertisements.
It also means that admins will want the ability to prevent non add users from connecting to their servers. Just like they do with punk buster. Witch gives gamers two great reasons to install the advertisement software. By doing so they gain access to popular servers. Witch also give them access to server with the best bandwidth.
By paying map designers for the add time experienced in their maps. They will be more likely to add advertisements to their levels. It also means they will have additional motivation to make maps for games that contain advertisement tools. Of corse this means they will also be more likely to want the ability to chose if gamers can play their maps with game adds disabled; WItch giving gamers another great reason to chose to enable advertisements.
This would be a system that benefits every one; Including the gamer.
Comments:
I'm sure some gamer will call me a traitor; for even suggesting such a system. But advertisements have been in gaming from day one. Arcade cabinets advertise the games with-in. Nintendo use to include a poster with each game containing adds for other great games to buy. Not to mention a coupon to order Nintendo power. WItch means it isn't a question of will there be advertisements; but a question of how they will be implemented, and how the gaming community will influence advertising practices.
I want it to be a system that benefits every one.
Talus @ Oct 18th 2006 10:30PM
Hey...that's the picture I took!
This pic started off at TotalBF2142.com and it's EVERYwhere now, and I get no photo credit ;)
Booger @ Oct 20th 2006 6:43AM
@48 and @46.
A better way would be to use your firewall to block access to those specific IPs/domains.
Of course, if they were smart, EA would use a challenge response system:
e.g. connect to BF2142 server
while connecting, adware contacts adware-server "IP blah, connecting to internet server, gimme ads to display on map Y"
10 seconds later, after no response from blocked domain, BF2142 displays error "conection to server lost" and dumps you back to the server list screen.
I'm just hoping some hacker comes out with a NO-CD/NO-ADWARE patch.
Until I hear of a reliable patch, not going to buy BF2142, might download a copy to play solo to practice a bit in anticipation of an appropriate hack at which point i'll buy the game...
ZzZz @ Oct 19th 2006 2:53AM
quoting from post 66 "EA should also focus on getting cd-keys connected to credit cards. So they can directly, and specifically link in game advertisements directly to sells."
[sarcasm] OH YEA SURE why not just give EA our address and banking details while we are at it [/sarcasm]
what gamers want is to be annonymous while playing a game they'll enjoy.
FSK405K @ Oct 19th 2006 9:19AM
I stopped watching The Sopranos because of product placement. Screw HBO. Screw EA.
N0Skillz @ Oct 19th 2006 12:55PM
Didn't read all the comments. But did noone see the new patch that once you install it, in most instances, will come up with a application error until you uninstall a Windows Security Patch that fixed a kernel exploit?
ljcabrera @ Oct 19th 2006 1:21PM
Why not just edit your hosts files to block the IP of the ad server. then your good to go
Hoodie @ Oct 19th 2006 6:29PM
It is important for as many people as POSSIBLE to not buy this game and to return it the store if they had. Complain enough to management, they'll give you your money back if you stop yelling and curing and leave. do this enough, CompUSA Corporate (or other store) would get word of this and perhaps tell EA.
If In-Game AD-WARE is proven "Sucessful" - then it'll open the door for other companies to COPY EA's BS advertising deal... then if ALL games are doing this, well - then we're all scewed and either we play and live with it or never buy a game again.
Complain to EA, they have a phone # - contact their tech support... but a little digging, I found their PR email list:
http://info.ea.com/company/company_prlist.php
EA MANAGEMENT TEAM:
Lawrence F. Probst III, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
V. Paul Lee, President, EA Studios
Gerhard Florin, Executive Vice President and General Manager, International Publishing
David P. Gardner, Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer Worldwide Studios
Frank D. Gibeau, Executive Vice President and General Manager, North American Publishing
William B. Gordon, Executive Vice President and Chief Creative Officer
Warren C. Jenson, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial and Administrative Officer
Joel Linzner, Executive Vice President, Business and Legal Affairs
Nancy L. Smith, Executive Vice President and General Manager, North American Publishing
Steve Bené, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
Erick Hackenburg, Senior Vice President, Global Online Publishing
Mitch Lasky, Senior Vice President, EA Mobile
Jon Niermann, Senior Vice President, Managing Director
Human Resources Kenneth A. Barker, Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
$3billion last year wasnt enough money...
BTW: I am a UT player - and I think the developers of that series of games have done fairly well since 1998 with the original Unreal Game. Check out: www.unreal.com and go to UT2004 section (still downloadable demo) but here is what you see in that section (and for other UT games):
- FREE PATCHES
- FREE MAPS
- FREE MODS
- FREE VECHICLES
For UT04: http://www.unrealtournament.com/ut2004/downloads.html
-282mb demo with 4 fully function maps and free multiplayer to this very day.
- MegaPak - 205mb = 9 maps and other goodies... they re-packaged this for purchase if you bought the game new, rather than downloading. overall, over 100maps out of the box.
I have over 400 maps myself - most of these designed by end-users of course. An Open system allows people to make all kinds of mods, maps and more... especially since the game comes with the editor.
UT2007 is comping out soon... and many of us can't wait to buy it, but if it had AD-WARE built in, I'd do a 180 in a heart beat.
The static built-in GAME ads are NOT a problem... If they ADD to the game. Of course in games likt GTA or UT, etc - they usually have FAKE products. But if Pepsi was a can of cola rather than "cola" - it wouldn't bother me.
But REQUIRED updates and sending/Receiving data for Advertising is WRONG WRONG WRONG! The game should be FREE... and still *I WOULD NOT PLAY IT* We have enough problems with AD-WARE.
Everyone needs to step up the preasure on EA about this - even if YOU are not going to buy their games, LET THEM KNOW WHY! Kill this now, like how we killed the ORIGINAL DIVX (Pay-Per-Play DVDs, with no extras - you paid $10 for a movie which worked for 10days, then you'd pay $2-5 to unlock it for 24/48hrs something like that... of course it required a DIVX player too) and Disney has tried TWICE now with self-destructing DVD... To save hassle of returning to rental store: The disc would die in about 3 days after you broke the air-tight seal. But you could mail it to some service for recycling so to not make bigger landfills.
Dude @ Oct 20th 2006 3:07AM
I wouldn't doubt if folks at EA sell hacks. I mean, they spend SOO much time programming how an ad is seen, from what angle and for how long the ads is looked at but they can't stop the hackers? I have seen the hacks for sale, even before the game is released, I imagine some of the profit made from hackers goes back to EA. This would follow how these companies think..."Hey, as long as it improves the bottom line, who gives a crap what the consumer wants or feels... HAHAHA, those little fish are funny" Why can't they release a patch that actually does some good. The BF series is the most hacked game I have seen. Don't tell me these hackers have EA stumped on how to stop them... Riiight. FIX THE DAMN GAMES EA and quit focusing on how to get a fatter wallet, because it will just be a matter of time when you all are out of work.
Ads are everywhere, you can't go to a Little League game without seeing some banner set against the back wall of the baseball field. But I don't pay to see those games. I DO PAY for a PC game. EA should kick some of those profits back to the consumer, and I am not talking about a download.
I read in a previous post, and I will be doing this, completely stay away from those companies that place their ads in the game. Also, I will just idle in the game, staring at the ads and skew the data.
EA, You have just lost respect of the consumer, try as you might, that you CAN"T get that back with money.
Russ @ Oct 21st 2006 5:31AM
All of you guys complaining... If you hate paying to see advertisments so much then you should probably stop paying for all of the things that have WAY MORE forced advertizing that is costing you WAY MORE money. Including: cable tv, the internet, dvd's, basically anything to do with any kind of entertainment. Christ look at this page its loaded with ads, as is 99% of all other industry websites. How about web pages with with google ads? Think those ad's are completely random? Ever use the google search engine before? Whoops they just collected advertising information on you, you better stop using it and going to any site that has google ads. I can only assume your paying the $30-$50 a MONTH like the rest of us to have all of these banners, and ads forcibly thrown in your face. You are OK with this but not an ad that you will probably never even notice in a game? Chances are even when you do see ads (like billboards, posters, or storefronts) in a game, advertising or not, it ads a level of realism to the game.
I can't remember exactly what game it was (maybe a GTA) game but the first time I saw a large Best Buy store in the game I thought that was the coolest thing ever. That was advertising. Dont you think seeing an actual Coke vending machine with real products is cooler looking then a generic "Pop" or "Soda" machine in a game? I do... We see these things every day so seeing them in a game shouldn't really be causing an uproar because it's also adding realism. Yeah its also advertising and the publishers may cash in, but hey I really don't give a crap. Just don't charge me an arm and a leg for the game, but make the game more fun, viseral, and realistic and you guys can laugh all the way to the bank for all I care. I'm in the game industry and let me tell you it's a very tough business so if you can earn a few extra bucks to keep your head above water so you can make more good quality games (rare) them I'm all for it...
As long as the ads are not intrusive in any way I personally don't mind. And I REALLY hate commercials. So much I have stopped watching TV about 10 years ago. But in game ads? I don't really see a big deal as long as a bug fricken commercial doesnt pop up on the screen trying to make me watch it. IMHO as long as I have the option to ignore an ad and am not forced to take part in watching it I am ok with it.
Russ @ Oct 21st 2006 5:32AM
I'll just re-iterate my earlier point. I don't really understand why everyone has their panties all in in a bunch. Every day we deal with 100's and 100's of ads (literally) being shoved down our throats for things we are already paying for. Especially the web. I don't see people boycotting or complaining about that, ever. We all pay for the internet and TV, and we are shown 100's of ads every day... When will you start boycotting all of that? Why are you on this website? There are ad's up there!!! AHHHH DOWN WITH THE INTERNET! How about down with everything ad related and see how much fun you have playing all the games and television shows that don't exist anymore because the ban of advertising altogether. Why do you think games and TV exist? If there was no advertising how long do you think any retail company would last?
I hate advertising as much (probably more) than the next guy, but common pick your battles guys. There's worse things (like going to the movie theater and having to watch 20 minutes of commercials before it starts) If you want to miss out on a fun game because of some deep down fear that big brother is somehow watching you then so be it. Miss out. The rest of us that are having fun won't really miss you.
PhoenixTX @ Oct 24th 2006 12:18PM
While I think what EA is doing is pretty stupid, it's something that we are all putting up with already. Joystiq does the EXACT SAME THING. At the top of this page there is a Monster.com ad that detected my IP and placed a specific ad that mentions Dallas, TX (which is where my ISP is at).
I certainly agree that the game should be cheaper, hell, A LOT cheaper because of the ads, but since damn near every site already does it I'm not going to get all broken up about it ... probably just won't buy the game.
Mark @ Oct 24th 2006 3:21PM
I wouldn't mind so much if I could get the damned thing to play... I've got a fast rig and all I get is the damned "Insert install disk" fault. After four days and three calls to tech support they want me to pay to ship the thing back to them for a replacement citing "faulty code on the CD". I think I'll just go out and smash it with a rock - that's well worth $50!
daboggeyman @ Oct 28th 2006 4:36PM
Do this , do a web seach for EA BOYCOTT or BOYCOTT EA and join the move. The BF-2142 game set this off and now we can show them the world is bigger and more powerful than they are. So do your self a favor and join up WE CAN DO THIS
JUDGE_RELIC @ Oct 29th 2006 9:52PM
As the Admin of www.AntiEA.com, I'm wondering why everyone here is so suprised at thier screwing over of players.
Lets look at their history:
Patch 1.0: Complete and utter failure, infact if screwed up just about every pc it was loaded on.
Patch 1.2: They tried to pass it off as patch 1.0, but it didn't happen. I fixed one or two of the original issues plaguing the game, and nothing the players wanted to get fixed.
Patch 1.3: Fixed a few things, yeah, but broke more. Fixed a couple of issues that players requested
Patch 1.4 Undone what players requested fixed in last patch, fixed what 1.3 broke including the lag issues, seemingly, but not really...
EA is a joke, I'll never donate to their organization again and I don't care how nice the game looks.
Really folks what is it that games have to continue to put up with? They've been allowed to run amuck and present so called upgrades that are nothing more than copy and paste coding and graphics.
If you go out and but this game another company will do it, and then another. Soon, there will be freakin billboards plastered inside the games... what's next french election commercials?
I'm not bad mouthing the french but jesus h christ, this is enough... fuck them and their country. If this is the best they can do for us... I'm not buying it.
Szico VII @ Nov 4th 2006 5:21AM
If they need to base ads regionally, why not just ask the player which country he lives in? Have a little box when you install the game. Then bravo, the game knows what ads to show without needing your IP.
chameleon @ Oct 31st 2006 9:46PM
Well, I have had the game since the day of it's release and so far, I've seen no ad's. I didn't even notice the billboards until the images changed (from a plain logo to 'You know who your enemy is, join PAC now' or something like that, so it's all in context with the game). It's not intrusive, and so far it hasn't been annoying at all, it goes well with the atmosphere.
I was pretty much against this at first (they announced it a while back), but after some thought, I realised, why the hell not? It's not like we're losing out on anything, and as long the ad's aren't unobtrusive or detrimental to gameplay, why shouldn't they make some extra cash out of some gullible advertisers pockets?
One more thing : this isn't spyware. It doesn't run any outside proccess (the ad's are handled through ingame code).
FF @ Nov 2nd 2006 2:48AM
Bottom line: EA doesn't care what we think.
On a slightly related issue, anyone else try to get removed from the EA mailing list?
I've requested removal at least twice, but the email still arrives, promoting products I refuse to purchase.
Boycott EA games!
Suss @ Nov 7th 2006 8:22AM
Nobody has mentioned the very likely possibility that EA's claims are outright lies. The reason I believe this is that their justifications for including the spyware are in fact totally unnessesary. Heres why:
1.) The SERVER already knows the IP address of each player.
2.) The SERVER knows where each player is looking and for how long.
3.) The SERVER can already push content (ie. maps / decals) to the client.
4.) The SERVER already talks to EAs servers (for license verification)
So given the (totally predictable) bad press this spyware is causing - any sane company would simply run these tracking features on the SERVER.
So WHY is a client REALLY necessarily? Not for any of the reasons above.
The logical explaination is that the spyware does more than EA is stating. I imagine that whatever this is will be revealed when the client data is eventually decoded.
FINALLY. EA: you are to games what sewage is to appetite. I will never, ever buy one of your games again.
Felix @ Nov 10th 2006 6:00PM
You people spend too much time whining.
Go to a friend's house who has the game, or download a demo and play the game.
If the idea of advertisements that don't affect gameplay at all ( you usually just find a server and log right in and rarely spend time on the Multiplayer control panel to stare at those region-catered ads ), bugs you for some reason, then you could learn to use your own willpower to ignore these small details and just play the game if you like it.
If advertisements bug you that much, go live outside of society.
Phil @ Nov 12th 2006 8:11PM
Alright guys, i've had about enough of this craziness.
Yes they use ur ip to determine what ads to show you, big deal. Every movie gets money from advertising companies, per ticket sold, if they put products in, they use their ticket sales to work out how many people saw the product. This is exactly the same as this. They just want to know how many times the ads are looked at, so they can work out how much they have made through advertising.
Ads in the background will not affect the game play, it wont be positive or negative, it will just be there, and if anyone says they are gonna kill less people or more people because of a pepsi ad in the background they are kidding themselves.
Everyone seems to be up in arms about an external process running, but if your computer is good enough to run 2142, ur only gonna lose maybe 2% performance in game. Seriously is those 2fps going to make any difference?
I am not here to say EA need more money, coz they dont need anything extra, but are we really being screwed here? You say you want a cheaper game, but how do you know its not already cheaper? Without advertising half their revenue would be gone, u'd be paying twice as much per game. They are forced to do this advertising because of piracy cutting into their revenue. If they didn't advertise, no one would buy the game because it would cost too much, they would only get a fraction of their sales, and everyone would lose in the end.
I believe all game developers should be praised for this innovative idea, tracking how often ads are seen (just like tv), making sure you get ads specific to your region, and doing it in the most inevasive way possible, in the background of a game. You should be happy EA is using tactics to raise revenue without costing you anything, they aren't increasing game price, they aren't forcing you to click here like some websites do, you dont have to do a thing but play the game you love and they will make more money that in the end is put into the company that will make your next favourite shooter.
I think you all need to take a step down from your high horse and thing to yourself, am i really ranting for a reason or just looking for a reason to rant.
Remco @ Nov 14th 2006 2:22PM
lol, a boycot will only work if you use the media, a simple site won't do any damage to them. So what 1000 players won't buy EA products.. the other millions still will.
Has anyone figured out what address the ads come from and thought of blocking them through firewall or programs like Peer Guardian 2?
Brian @ Nov 18th 2006 10:07PM
Wow! There are a LOT of crybabies in this world we live in...
I'm sure its been brought up a few times. Product placement, it's in every movie. Now they are in games, live with it, its not taking anything away from the game. The ads actually make it more realistic...
For the people with lag issues related with the ads: Your pc probably wouldn't run it without them anyways. Oh, and how exactly did you test the performance with and w/o the IGA?
Either way they are here to stay!
gg =]
USA.Major.Tom @ Nov 26th 2006 2:58PM
OK, I am on a roll with the identification of the spyware in BF2142. Guess what it IS in the Demo as well.
If you block stuff, block the IGA Info ONLY !!!
1. Went to GOOGLE and looked up IGA Worldwide and it showed up as "www.IGAWorldwide.com"
2. Went to www.swhois.com and did a lookup on IGAWorldwide.com:
Name: WWW.IGAWORLDWIDE.COM
Address: 82.165.75.226
I blocked this address at the software firewall and I am about to add it to the router as well.
3. I lit off the DOS command:
NETSTAT -A 15 (meaning look for network status/connections every 15 secs).
I light off BF2142 Demo and Alt Tabbed to the DOS netstat window.
Almost immediately several IP's showed up:
(My port 3402) Desination IP 72.32.5.13 Destination Port: 9961
(My port 3414) Destination IP 159.153.235.92 Destination Port: 18510
(My port 3430) Destination IP 207.38.11.34 Destination Port: 29990
The First was, you guessed it:
Rackspace.com, Ltd. RSCP-NET-4 (NET-72-32-0-0-1)
72.32.0.0 - 72.32.255.255
IGA Technologies, LLC RSPC-78769-1138136594 (NET-72-32-5-0-1)
72.32.5.0 - 72.32.5.15
The Second IP is:
OrgName: Electronic Arts, Inc.
OrgID: ELECTR-60
Address: 209 Redwood Shores Parkway
City: Redwood City
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 94065
Country: US
NetRange: 159.153.0.0 - 159.153.255.255
CIDR: 159.153.0.0/16
NetName: EA
NetHandle: NET-159-153-0-0-1
Parent: NET-159-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Assignment
NameServer: SEDNS.EA.COM
NameServer: SWDNS.EA.COM
Comment:
RegDate: 1992-04-29
Updated: 2006-07-07
RTechHandle: EAMAI1-ARIN
RTechName: EA Maintainer
RTechPhone: +1-650-628-5555
RTechEmail: ea-maint@ea.com
OrgTechHandle: EAMAI1-ARIN
OrgTechName: EA Maintainer
OrgTechPhone: +1-650-628-5555
OrgTechEmail: ea-maint@ea.com
And last but Not least, the 3rd IP was:
Intelenet Communications INTELENET-207 (NET-207-38-0-0-1)
207.38.0.0 - 207.38.127.255
GameSpy Industries ICI-GAMESPY-3 (NET-207-38-8-0-1)
207.38.8.0 - 207.38.15.255
I Now own some decent routers that cost alittle cash, but guess what, I get to BLOCK the IGA from getting in, or going out. I am going to set a rule to block IGA Inbound and Outbound....
When I blocked the oubound connection to the IGA address, it kept trying to send a SYN to the 72.32.5.13 address and eventually stopped. EA/IGA can Take that adware crap and shove it !
--------------------
Major Tom
aka Gary K
UT2007forums.com Administrator
Slippster @ Dec 1st 2006 3:05AM
i actually downloaded the demo, ( didnt install it yet) and had a torrent launched for the full version of the game.
3 gigs? you gota be kidding me.
well as i weas reading this, i cancelled the torrent download and deleted the demo.
i have beter things to waste my time on.
Dev @ Dec 6th 2006 12:59PM
I dont see wut all of the big deal is about. I mean, personally, i dont give a shit either way. However I would defenetly prefer that they didnt connect to the web to find ads consitering the price i pay for BW. but im not going to boycott games or game makers just because they put a billboard in there level telling me to eat at joes. Im more concered when games suck ass as to when they advertise. And to all those people who say it adds to the games realisim, i find 1 problem with that...THE GAMES SET IN 2142!!! The game's realisim must be pretty shitty if a McChicken with chease billboard (with a 2006 copyright) makes the game more realistic. And if thats the case, thats why you should be boycotting EA, not cuz of a Nike poster in the game.
Dev Hurley
Lead Supervisor at Exclusive Games
Rice_nz @ Feb 14th 2007 8:05PM
ok. im from new zealand.
and i see no ads what so ever. and if they are trackign what i am doing thats ghey but my isp is shit so i put that down to them lagging me out.
so game bought. no ads. end. =P
New 360 Gamer @ Dec 21st 2006 5:45PM
The BIG point you are all missing is that Battlefield contains a slip of paper INSIDE the box stating that you have to UNINSTALL certain Windows security updates to play the game. Of course, if you can see the warning, it means that you have already opened the package and if you have opened the package, it is now non-returnable if you don't want the spyware installed on your computer. So now you have paid EA $50 for a game that you can't return and that you can't install if you don't want the spyware. So EA makes a sale whether you want the game or not.
New 360 Gamer @ Dec 21st 2006 5:56PM
Another thing, Microsoft does those security updates for a reason. EA may not do anything malicious to your computer once you uninstall the security update, but now you have a security hole in your system that someone evil may be able to take advantage of. It is unconscienable of EA to force you to uninstall an update that is designed to protect you in order to play their games.
littleg @ Jan 3rd 2007 7:39PM
okay, I am getting this game a bit late. After reading responses from both sides it appears that this is nothing more than a population tracker....We all are subjected to Census data polls every four years and this provides marketing folks similar informaiton. ie, if you check that you own 2 cars and live in california, car companies use that and purchase the informaiton from the Census.
I like the responce on gamespot from IGA worldwide. Stating that gamers expect high end awesome games today which cost nearly 10 million to produce and require us to pay 50-60 dollars for the game.....with PS3 and new PC systems enhancments, gamers will start to want more from games, costing up to 30 million to produce... these cost need to go somewhere, in our great movies like Lord of the Rings and Matrix, ad cost recovery aid in the reduction of these cost.....
If all they want to know is where I am in the US in order to Advertise to me then fine, perhaps I will then pay the cost to buy some newly developed add blocker....
just a gammers thoughts.....
little g