Will WAR use the same "practices" as BF2142?

Enigma · October 2006

Today I bought Battlefield 2142 since I was an avid fan of BF2 and the earlier BF 1942.

However, like an idiot, i never bothered to do any research on the game before shelling out 54 bucks (tax included) only to open the box and see a big, fat, adware notice accompanied with the instructional manual.

EA has partnered with a spyware site and when you open the security seal (hence cannot return it) it says you have to agree to these terms or you cannot install the game. VERY shadey business practices.

So,

do you think EA will pull the same devious, ugly stunt to WAR as they did with BF2142? Remember Dice made BF2142 but EA still were the ones responsible for the adware. You think EA will have Mythic do the same?

Sramota · October 2006

NOPE!

Mythic is still independent and according to them, EA has NO say whatsoever in the case of WAR,
so don't worry ::::02::

starman999 · October 2006

I have been playing BF2142 for a while now.......

I havent noticed anything sketchy other than the normal instabilities that plagued BF2. The game is good as first person shooters go but nothing to write home about. I really wish someone would incorporate the setting into a continuous storyline and make an RPG out of it.

As far as adware I havent had a problem with any of it.

checkthis500 · October 2006

Originally posted by Enigma
Today I bought Battlefield 2142 since I was an avid fan of BF2 and the earlier BF 1942.

However, like an idiot, i never bothered to do any research on the game before shelling out 54 bucks (tax included) only to open the box and see a big, fat, adware notice accompanied with the instructional manual.

EA has partnered with a spyware site and when you open the security seal (hence cannot return it) it says you have to agree to these terms or you cannot install the game. VERY shadey business practices.

So,

do you think EA will pull the same devious, ugly stunt to WAR as they did with BF2142? Remember Dice made BF2142 but EA still were the ones responsible for the adware. You think EA will have Mythic do the same?

I was under the impression that there were ads in the game, not adware.... And to the guy that said that Mythic is independent, they were bought by EA. They're now EA Mythic. They're EA's mmorpg branch now.

Volkmar · November 2006

Originally posted by checkthis500

Originally posted by Enigma
Today I bought Battlefield 2142 since I was an avid fan of BF2 and the earlier BF 1942.

However, like an idiot, i never bothered to do any research on the game before shelling out 54 bucks (tax included) only to open the box and see a big, fat, adware notice accompanied with the instructional manual.

EA has partnered with a spyware site and when you open the security seal (hence cannot return it) it says you have to agree to these terms or you cannot install the game. VERY shadey business practices.

So,

do you think EA will pull the same devious, ugly stunt to WAR as they did with BF2142? Remember Dice made BF2142 but EA still were the ones responsible for the adware. You think EA will have Mythic do the same?

I was under the impression that there were ads in the game, not adware.... And to the guy that said that Mythic is independent, they were bought by EA. They're now EA Mythic. They're EA's mmorpg branch now.

Yes, there ads in the game, but how those ads are determined? Cause everybody see different ones.

The program included go sniffing searching for what sites you visit and how you use internet in general to give you "customer-tailored" ads in the game. So a car fan will see car ads, while a corp drone will see stock ads or office products and so on.

I'm not much against the concept of having a program like that, it is all anonymous and it doesn't transfer any info to anybody else. Most FPS use much more intrusive cheat-detecting programs anyway.

What bugs me is that you pay full price for a game AND IT COMES WITH ADS IN IT!!!

In my opinion, if you make people pay for the full box, no ads should be included unless there are secondary high costs involved (like EA is hosting the servers where you play on, Sadly i do not know if that is the case, but i doubt).

If you put Ads in your game, then cut the box price or even better make 2 versions, one adfull at 30 $ and one ad-free at 50.

Anyhow, even if Mythic is NOT independent anymore, In-game ads are not at all proper for a Warhammer Fantasy game so i am confident we won't see any. Beside, we have to shell 15 bucks already each month for it.

RJCox · November 2006

Originally posted by Enigma
Today I bought Battlefield 2142 since I was an avid fan of BF2 and the earlier BF 1942.

However, like an idiot, i never bothered to do any research on the game before shelling out 54 bucks (tax included) only to open the box and see a big, fat, adware notice accompanied with the instructional manual.

EA has partnered with a spyware site and when you open the security seal (hence cannot return it) it says you have to agree to these terms or you cannot install the game. VERY shadey business practices.

So,

do you think EA will pull the same devious, ugly stunt to WAR as they did with BF2142? Remember Dice made BF2142 but EA still were the ones responsible for the adware. You think EA will have Mythic do the same?

Enigma my man, I would have expected so much more from you of all people...

A little research would have turned up this response, which I posted on no less than 6 different message boards, including these I'm fairly sure, a couple weeks back when all this first broke loose:

There are no plans to put advertising in Warhammer Online, Dark Age of Camelot or Ultima Online. EA reviews the appropriateness of in-game advertising on a case-by-case basis. We would only put ads in a game where is makes sense inside the fiction and enhances the fantasy experience.

And then there was this explanaition taken directly from the Dice/2142 website which I posted on all those same sites:

Posting on behalf of the Dev Team
--------------------------------
Greetings,

We would like to provide more information on in-game advertising in Battlefield 2142. To try and help everyone better understand it, here is how it works.

The in- game advertisement is respectful of players' privacy: it never accesses files not directly related to the game, and it does not capture personal data such as cookies, account login detail, gameplay behaviour or surfing history. As it is an integrated part of Battlefield 2142 and not a separate program, it only runs when the game is running.

Because BF2142 delivers ads by region, the IP address of the player is used to determine the region of the player and helps serve ads by region and language; for instance, a player in Paris will be presented with ads in French. Note that this IP address is not stored on the advertisement server and is not repurposed for other uses.

A unique ID number is anonymously assigned the first time the player joins a Battlefield 2142 online game. It is stored locally on the PC but is not linked to any personal details.

The in-game advertisement gathers what we call impression data, such as location of the billboard in the game or duration of advertisement impression. It
helps see how many people have seen an ad but not who has seen it.

We are also conscious that the advertisement shouldnt distract the player from the overall gaming experience, so all ads fit in the unique environment of each level in the game. The content of the ads is also controlled to ensure that no offensive content is displayed in Battlefield 2142.

We all hope that this explanation will address recent concerns on the advertisement in Battlefield 2142.

See you on the Battlefield.
Your Dice Live Team

Which explains that it does NOT go through your surfing habits or other private information but is instead simply there for region determination and to gather impression data etc.

If I didn't know you better and know you're not that type of person I'd almost call this a troll post.

whpsh · November 2006

I almost bought BG2142 but got lucky and found all the warning sites (ironically the day after I went to get it, it just wasn't in stock ... whew).

I read somewhere (sorry for not posting the interview ... am looking for it now) in an interview with the ad/spyware makers that, among other factors, it took into acount the region I was in and my age. How does it get this kind of information?

And even if it doesn't do anything on or to my computer, I really don't like being watched, even in a game. And recording what I choose to look at is ... well ... spying. Spying + Software = Spyware, yes?

Why on earth would I let anyone record what I was doing in game? I wouldn't be happy with a marketing intern sitting on the back of my motorcycle, recording everywhere I go, what things I buy or consider buying, and other unknown "variables".

And having it fall out of the box in a leaflet ... just bad. REAL bad. And I was really excited about BF2142.

I think some appropriate political quotes are applicable. There's more, for sure, but these will do.
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman." - Pres. Clinton
"I am not a crook." - Pres. Nixon
"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." - VP Cheney - June 05

logangregor · November 2006

Originally posted by whpsh
I almost bought BG2142 but got lucky and found all the warning sites (ironically the day after I went to get it, it just wasn't in stock ... whew).I read somewhere (sorry for not posting the interview ... am looking for it now) in an interview with the ad/spyware makers that, among other factors, it took into acount the region I was in and my age. How does it get this kind of information?And even if it doesn't do anything on or to my computer, I really don't like being watched, even in a game. And recording what I choose to look at is ... well ... spying. Spying + Software = Spyware, yes?Why on earth would I let anyone record what I was doing in game? I wouldn't be happy with a marketing intern sitting on the back of my motorcycle, recording everywhere I go, what things I buy or consider buying, and other unknown "variables". And having it fall out of the box in a leaflet ... just bad. REAL bad. And I was really excited about BF2142.I think some appropriate political quotes are applicable. There's more, for sure, but these will do.
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman." - Pres. Clinton
"I am not a crook." - Pres. Nixon
"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." - VP Cheney - June 05

uh....Im guessing you didnt see the post right above yours.
Yeah....you might want to read that.

WendoXXX · November 2006

hmm what i dont get is that iv been playing bf2124 for like a month or so and havent seen a add yet. Where are they suppost to show?

whpsh · November 2006

uh....Im guessing you didnt see the post right above yours.
Yeah....you might want to read that.

I did read the post, and the whole point of mine was, I thought, pretty obvious.

You can "say" it doesn't do all these things, but that doesn't mean it doesn't. Especially after the way the whole incident occurred. If it wasn't anything they were trying to hide, why wasn't the notice put on the outside of the box? I'm sure the only reason they bothered with a notice at all was because some other games that incorporated the same styled "watcher" programs were discovered and got their backsides sued.

Gamers, and people in general, are getting really tired of being lied to, tricked, and in general, being on the receiving end of shady business. Anyone else remember the NGE? Deceiving your potential customers and then expecting everyone to bounce around and be happy when you post a "we know what it looks like, but it isn't ... trust us" is ridiculous. And those that believe it? To borrow one from Obi-Wan: "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

logangregor · November 2006

Originally posted by whpsh

uh....Im guessing you didnt see the post right above yours. Yeah....you might want to read that.

I did read the post, and the whole point of mine was, I thought, pretty obvious.
You can "say" it doesn't do all these things, but that doesn't mean it doesn't.

Using the same logic, you can "say" it DOES all those things, but that DOESNT MEAN IT DOES. The only way I would beleive it to be very invasive spyware is if you have a link with quotes from some UBER computer nerd that actually knows EXACTLY what is happening.

Especially after the way the whole incident occurred. If it wasn't anything they were trying to hide, why wasn't the notice put on the outside of the box?

Oh I dont know, maybe they didnt want people like yourself having a fit over ads in game and then jumping to conclusions sort of how your doing now. Looks like that ad didnt help much. Maybe the notice should of said, "Remove tin foil hat before playing".

I'm sure the only reason they bothered with a notice at all was because some other games that incorporated the same styled "watcher" programs were discovered and got their backsides sued.

Thats laughable. Just think about what your saying for a second. WHO is going to sue them? Oh you and your lawyer, against EA's FULL TIME STAFFED LEGAL TEAM?

Gamers, and people in general, are getting really tired of being lied to, tricked, and in general, being on the receiving end of shady business. Anyone else remember the NGE? Deceiving your potential customers and then expecting everyone to bounce around and be happy when you post a "we know what it looks like, but it isn't ... trust us" is ridiculous.

It all makes sense now. Another BURNT swg fan that is AFRAID of every game he comes into contact with.

And those that believe it? To borrow one from Obi-Wan: "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

Hey Im all for conspiracy theory but I think you should get some more evidence before attacking a game, MUCH LESS continuing to slander the game after a community manager comes here specifically to deny your claim.

logangregor · November 2006

Heres a link that you should read

http://www.maximumpc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=49694&start=0

scaramoosh · November 2006

EA are the funding publisher they can put w/e they want in the games case/cd

whpsh · November 2006

Here are a few lawsuits that were/are in progress concerning spyware.
Sony
PCWorld
New York
Direct Revenue

They vary in applicability, but many of them claimed that the software EULA provided with the software was enough. Personally, I think the line is a little too thin.

I'm not so avid as to dig into all the court files and cases, but here's the Texas Law.
Texas Law (just go to search and type in Spyware)
I'm assuming that the other states involved vs. Sony (and some of the others) have similar laws in place.

Some of the more specific parts of the claim are:

"unwanted ads" - in the context of any software including ads I really don't want to look at. I'd guess that the paper notification of their "practices" relieves EA of some legal liabilities. This is especially important because another claim in the suit against BMG is that:

"Moreover, recent news accounts allege that newly created viruses that exploit this phantom file have been spreading. A user unfamiliar with installation and removal of this technology may be vulnerable to new security risks and possibly identity theft."

I would suppose that by including a physical copy of the EULA, whenever someone does bust open the file and personal information is sent to other servers, EA just has to point out that they included a piece of paper in the box and it isn't their fault you've got a 117 credit score and the government of Turkkazikman has sent your name to Interpol for computer espionage crimes.

And the hack will happen. People get paid lots of money to do it. And to borrow one from Michael Biehn:
"That's what he does. That's all he does! You can't stop him. He'll wade
through you, reach down her throat, and pull her _______ heart out."

And maybe everyone reading this board is so tech savy they don't have to worry about it, even when it happens. But there are lots of folks out there that aren't. And in the case of teens and parents sharing the same computer, it could get extremely messy.

And every game that has included software like this (Black & White, SWAT4, etc) has gotten the exact same response from the customer base. I'm curious if the sales (or so far, lack of, apparently) of in-game ads is making up for the loss of buyers? And this question begs: how many people will intentionally avoid EA games because of this.

Anyway, my overall point is that if you have to explain that your software ISN'T spyware (or adware, or greyware, whatever), haven't you've shaved the line a bit too closely?

CyberWiz · November 2006

Geez, ingame ads and still have to pay for the game ...

Honestly, I dislike EA even more then I already did.

It is worse then Microsoft.

There should be an easy to notice warning on the box that it contains ads, and should be priced less then a regular boxed game.

Greetings,

CyberGhost.

Blurr · November 2006

It's a pretty shitty deal, them putting this adware into the game.

However I must say that I have been playing BF2142 since it came out and even in beta. I have never ever ever even seen 1 ad in the game. NEVER!

I really don't know what the ad program is supposed to be doing, but it doesn't seem to be doing it for me, lol.

From what I understand, how it finds information about you is a) it tracks how/when you see the billboards in the game (I try to look away from them whenever I can) and b) if you're playing online at 7-9pm at night, it assumes you're 18-24 or something like that

Wolfjunkie · November 2006

Originally posted by scaramoosh
EA are the funding publisher they can put w/e they want in the games case/cd

Nope. People keep forgetting Games Workshop.
Games Workshop have to approve everything put ingame.. And if EA puts spyware, GW can just pull the license.

Mwyn · November 2006

Originally posted by whpsh
Here are a few lawsuits that were/are in progress concerning spyware.
Sony
PCWorld
New York
Direct Revenue

They vary in applicability, but many of them claimed that the software EULA provided with the software was enough. Personally, I think the line is a little too thin.

I'm not so avid as to dig into all the court files and cases, but here's the Texas Law.
Texas Law (just go to search and type in Spyware)
I'm assuming that the other states involved vs. Sony (and some of the others) have similar laws in place.

Some of the more specific parts of the claim are:

"unwanted ads" - in the context of any software including ads I really don't want to look at. I'd guess that the paper notification of their "practices" relieves EA of some legal liabilities. This is especially important because another claim in the suit against BMG is that:

"Moreover, recent news accounts allege that newly created viruses that exploit this phantom file have been spreading. A user unfamiliar with installation and removal of this technology may be vulnerable to new security risks and possibly identity theft."

I would suppose that by including a physical copy of the EULA, whenever someone does bust open the file and personal information is sent to other servers, EA just has to point out that they included a piece of paper in the box and it isn't their fault you've got a 117 credit score and the government of Turkkazikman has sent your name to Interpol for computer espionage crimes.

And the hack will happen. People get paid lots of money to do it. And to borrow one from Michael Biehn:
"That's what he does. That's all he does! You can't stop him. He'll wade through you, reach down her throat, and pull her _______ heart out."

And maybe everyone reading this board is so tech savy they don't have to worry about it, even when it happens. But there are lots of folks out there that aren't. And in the case of teens and parents sharing the same computer, it could get extremely messy.

And every game that has included software like this (Black & White, SWAT4, etc) has gotten the exact same response from the customer base. I'm curious if the sales (or so far, lack of, apparently) of in-game ads is making up for the loss of buyers? And this question begs: how many people will intentionally avoid EA games because of this.

Anyway, my overall point is that if you have to explain that your software ISN'T spyware (or adware, or greyware, whatever), haven't you've shaved the line a bit too closely?

I wouldn't consider myself "tech savy", even so, I am personally not worried about this. Why? Mythic have said they ARE NOT doing it in WAR. Sure I can sit here and be paranoid and wonder if they are lying and sneaking things in anyway despite what's said but I trust they would not do so without notifying their users. Ultimately it is OUR responsibility to read the EULA. I like alot of people often just click through it after having scan read it once on install, because it's a: lengthy b: boring so if I have agreed to something stupid by that quick click of the mouse button I have only myself to blame. They aren't that difficult to interpret either. I am certainly not going to game while wearing a tin hat of paranoia +1.

Howdy, Stranger!

Will WAR use the same "practices" as BF2142?

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Will WAR use the same "practices" as BF2142?

Comments