EA Are Watching You..... No Really!

magick

jjjjjjjjjjjjjaysus as if it couldnt get any worse !!!(spyware1)!

Ponster

fightin irish wrote:

An interesting little article to throw in the pot. Posted on our forums tonight.

http://hgamer.blogspot.com/2006/10/another-reason-to-say-no-to-battlefield.html

Interesting true but looking at the comments and other blogs it seems that it's a Microsoft problem and not one that EA could do much about really. EA release software, MS release a patch that breaks it.

It seems to be MS that are bringing out the fixes for the programs broken by their latest patch so we'll have to wait for them to get around to it....

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/924867/

Mantel

kyp_durron wrote:

Hmm why would it be 70 quid? It is running the same engine as bf2 surely this would cut costs, therefore it should, if anything cost less then average.

hahhahahahahah, this is EA we're talking about. You could also say that the in game ads will cut costs, hell a few years ago publishers would have been saying the same thing. Just don't be surprised that a patch has already been released for the game and it hasn't even gotten out the door.

Ponster

Mantel wrote:

Just don't be surprised that a patch has already been released for the game and it hasn't even gotten out the door.

Damned if they release it, damned if they don't

I wouldn't say it was a common event and haven't bothered to look up examples but releasing a patch on release isn't all that strange actually. When I worked for Sierra Games some of the most intensive work went on *after* the release of the game when all the feedback was coming in from the gameplayers. It doesn't surprise me that the coders got to work on the first patch as soon as the demo was released. Nothing to do with EA and how good/bad they're able to make games but everything to do with normal software practise.

DonkeyStyle \o/

COOL!
I wonder if it has Starforce aswell?!

Just downloaded the demo of this... not sure if I'll bother installing it now.
Don't really want to support gaming as an advertising platform personally.

jonski

Ponster wrote:

I wouldn't say it was a common event and haven't bothered to look up examples but releasing a patch on release isn't all that strange actually.

First thing I do when I buy and install any game , is look for the patch 1.01 . I don't know if they had to patch something that was a glaring mistake or just something that showed up when loads of ppl started playing the demo online , if it was the latter then it is to be expected really .

As for 2142 being on the same engine as BF2 , then I believe that really isn't the case , once BF2 was starting to get off the ground the 2142 team broke away and redid the engine for their game . I would say it is the equivalent of using the Unreal engine to make you own game ( insert name here someone that knows of a game that uses the unreal engine )

As for the advertising , I still haven't gotten my head around if this uses bandwidth or not . If it does , then we pay for our own bandwidth and no matter how small the transfer , it should be ours to do with as we please . If not , then I would also feel that if new advertising is being put into games then the retail price should reflect this .

KoKane

Its a genius money maker on their part. Whoever thought of this system would have got a huge fat promotion.


Instead of offering deals to advertisers while making the game and having those ads there permanantly and the same ones all the time when you play, they now have a system where the ads can be changed at intervals, which means lots of money for EA.
Someone wants to advertise their latest Gfx card, what do you do?
Forums, magazines etc etc oh and billboards that are in the games.
Then they look at what ads get viewed the most to find if it was succesful from that point of view.


Genius.

magick

Genius

perhaps but i dont want to know while fighting for my life what time fair city is on at on RTE or that tescos are doing the "buy 2 pizzas get a 3rd free" offer , what next u pass an intel sign and hear that annoying little jingle or find ur tank is out of fuel but can go back to battle with "the power of Shell!"

DonkeyStyle \o/

They should monitor the players framerate aswell... and suggest hardware upgrades and where you can buy them.
And if the players shot accuracy is below a certain threshold, they can be offered a great deal on a new gaming mouse.
Ooh, and ads for SpecSavers could be shown if the player often shoots his own teammates.

Give them an inch, they'll take a mile... we had EA pimping Cellular in NFSU2.... now interactive 3D targeted advertisements here we come! and we'll get to pay €55 for it! ... well, I won't because I'm finished with EA if this is the direction they're taking.

magick

it occurs to me that the EA is actually using the Battlefield series as an experiment to find out how much bullsh*t a customer base will take before they finally learn. It's like a kid that keeps grabbing a hot cup, saying 'ow', then grabbing it again.

Ponster

But my points is that in another couple of years, the people that are against ads will have to go back to playing boardgames if you want to avoid them.

I played the beta and demo. The ads were there but I didn't realise it until I read it in the forums and then went back to verify. When you're playing BF2/2142 you really don't get all that much time to look around and stare at the scenery

oRlyYaRly

I like in game ads for real things.

magick

But my points is that in another couple of years, the people that are against ads will have to go back to playing boardgames if you want to avoid them.

emmm no , cos in a free market society ppl can either install a game with spyware or now ,its their choise .

I for one wont be installing it

however if ppl buy enough of the game then EA will push the idea though and probably go a mile more in the future.

However in a free market, then if enough ppl are pissed off with the idea of crappy buggy games/spyware then ppl wont buy it, and the company will be forced to go with what the market dictates , i for one hope enough ppl will take a stand against spyware in games.

If u had choise during the installation "do u wish to install the spyware in 2142? yes/no"
I think we know what option u would choose , ironic isnt it most software u have to pay to remove the spyware in 2142 u pay to have it installed!11(spyware1)

Winters

oRlyYaRly wrote:

I like in game ads for real things.

Crazy2262

I for one was looking forward to the new Battlefield when I frist heard about it, but now I won't be installing Spyfield 2142 and I didn't think much of the demo when I played it, its BF2 with a new mod and now with spyware.

I sure as heck don't wanna spend €50 or whatever the price just to have spyware installed on my PC. If I wanted spyware on my pc I'd look at porn sites. at least there the spyware is free, lol.

Zillah

I really wouldn't be bothered if EA were passing some of those gigantic shedloads of cash they'll be getting for this on to us. But they're not, the game costs the exact same amount as it would have otherwise.

Thats why a lot of TV channels are free, you pay for them with your ad viewing time, so essentially we're paying for the game twice and then some.

KdjaCL

Anyone know what a million guaranteed games playing viewers is worth in ad revenue?

The revolution has started a "version" has been released that can be played online that does not contain IGA stuff.


kdjac