350°
Submitted by fblan001 500d ago | article

Electronic Arts States They Will No Longer Obtain Licenses To Use Gun Brands in Video Games

Fernando Blanco From Electric Avenue said - "After Electronic Arts made the tumultuous decision to promote the dealers of assault weapons with their flagship products, the company has stated that they will no longer be paying manufacturers to use their brands in their video games. Despite the fact that EA will no longer be paying the gun manufacturers, they have said that they will be continuing to use branded guns in their games without a license." (EA, Industry)

Alternative Sources
Naate  +   500d ago
This is a smart move, in my opinion. Distance themselves from the companies that America is starting to distrust while still including them in the actual game.

May not be classy, but it's smart.
fblan001  +   500d ago
the gun company already get free publicity from the games anyways, in fact the gun companies should be paying EA for featuring them, not the other way around, but thats law for you.
CarlosX360  +   500d ago
It's not that simple. Gun companies do sue game companies for "use" of the guns. See: Activision sued for gun use in MW3. Or, try finding the delta lawsuit, too.
dcbronco  +   500d ago
Gamers aren't the ones buying the vast majority of guns. If there is never another video game with a gun in it, guns will continue to sell fine. Now if you said no one can ever bring up the second amendment again, that would hurt sales.
morganfell  +   500d ago | Well said
Yes, let's distance outselves from the inanimate onjects while continuing to make violent games that use likenesses of said inanimate objects. Absurd and hypocritical in one move.

Do not get me wrong I love violent games but if one is honest this move is idiocy.
kB0  +   499d ago
@Morganfell

It's not idiocy from a business stand point.

Sell the same game, with same guns with different names. Get the same amount of money and save on licensing.

I don't see any idiocy in this...I only see us as customers getting less for our money (I mean theoretically...the game still plays the same just minus the feel of "real" gun names)

Not idiocy at all, just business. It's also not hypocritical if you look at it in the business sense...but it is if you look at it from a customer's view.

Either way, companies gon be greedier:)

I say crack open a beer, order in some Tacos and play some Counter strike GO. The 15$ game with gun licenses:)
irepbtown  +   499d ago
Just because they will stop using the license doesn't mean they won't include the guns.

If a company like Polyphony Digital decided not to use a license for the cars in Gran Turismo, don't you think Car Manufacturers (firms) would request their cars being added? GT is so big, huge fanbase, it would be ridiculous NOT to have your car in there.

Free advertising is great and any Business would like that. Although Weapons may be slightly different, I think the concept remains the same.
Wenis  +   500d ago
Starting to distrust? speak for yourself
ExPresident  +   500d ago
Speak for yourself. The only thing EA is doing here is saving themselves some money by not paying for the license. That's it.

This has nothing to do with any sort of bogus distrust in gun companies that you are trying to create.
guitarded77  +   500d ago
Not really. It just shows that EA is willing to bow to a minority voice in the public. Most Americans AREN'T against guns or their makers. Most Americans ARE against gun violence.

I think it's crappy for creating authentic gaming experiences. They'll probably still use the base model like AR15, but just not a specific brand. What about guns built specifically by a certain manufacturer... we don't get to see them? Or is EA gonna risk a lawsuit? Have to wait and see I guess.
SilentNegotiator  +   500d ago
I can't wait to use the all new AJ-Morty 7. And the Dessert Eagle. lol

Look as if you're trying to distance yourself from guns, save money. EA has nothing to lose.
#1.5 (Edited 500d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
JeepGamer  +   500d ago
This is EA we're talking about. They are doing it for one reason and one reason only.

'Hey, we can use this as an excuse... Let's do it...'
1Victor  +   499d ago
And The Lawsuits Will Begin In 3 .....2......1
3-4-5  +   499d ago
I actually like when dev's take the time to get creative and create their own brands, as if the company existed somewhere.

Borderlands is a good example. It makes you feel like that world is more real than using real guns in a fake game.
Syntax-Error  +   499d ago
SMART MOVE?
How about cowardice move! That's not why they did it and I applaud them for why they did, but your reasoning to why is what most would call a B!TCH MOVE. I would have them pay me if I carried their guns in my game. I'm not going to pay them squat. Most guys that use that gun in the game want one in real life or at least investigate and research it. Games make consumers more familiar with products. Would an average guy know a .45 from a 9mm? The gun manufacturers should pay EA to put their guns in their game and not the other way around. I would feel comfortable to shoot a .45 in a game not know if it was S&W or HK
#1.9 (Edited 499d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
McGamer  +   499d ago
EA's stance on gun control is absurd and nothing but a ridiculous publicity stunt. The fact of the matter is not one terrorist or serial killer buys their guns with a permit or at Wal-Mart for that matter.

The ONLY thing gun control laws do is disarm the public against the government which is unconstitutional.
gedden7  +   500d ago
Soooooo how's this make BF4 then...??? Oh thats right BF4 will be in the futre lol AKA BO2... Did anyone see that coming??

Hell I hope it goes further than that and EA wont use ANY lic agreements so THAT 2k can make a proper football game..
fblan001  +   500d ago
I'd say its about bloody time.
iNcRiMiNaTi  +   499d ago
The future? You mean like BF 2142?
coolasj  +   500d ago
There's not too much of a difference between a real life M4A1 and the made up M4A2 when you're playing the game. I like it even if it's just because they save who knows how much money.
fblan001  +   500d ago
I know, I wonder how they are going to do with old ww1 weapons and that sort of things. Are they gona have a whole new array of lookalike weapons for old models?
elhebbo16  +   500d ago
Wait so BF4 is gonna have fake gun names? (not that is bad or anything)
Donnywho  +   500d ago
What the hell does agent 47 have to do with all this?
#5 (Edited 500d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
BISHOP-BRASIL  +   500d ago
All firearms 47 used throughout the series are based on famous brands and some are even named exactly or like the original as MP5, Desert Eagle, SVD/Dragunov, R93, AK-47, AK-74, M4, M60, M14, PGM, etc... Even the highly customized Silverballers are in fact AMT Hardballers (it's not even called silverballer on the first game but Hardballer).
BitbyDeath  +   500d ago
Uncharted does too
BISHOP-BRASIL  +   500d ago
But this is about EA... Why would they use an Uncharted picture?

EDIT: Right after I typed I understanded the complain... Man, am I dumb or what? Hitman have nothing to do with EA!!! kkkkk
#5.1.2 (Edited 500d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report
Skate-AK  +   500d ago
It seems like everyone asking if they are going to have fake weapon names, WW1, or future weapons, didn't read the article. It says they will still use the Brand Name of the gun they just won't pay for it. If the manufacturer wants to sue then that is what they have to do.
hazelamy  +   499d ago
so they'll just use them without paying and try to defend it saying it's a freedom of speech thing, like they did with that helicopter recently.
gotta love ea.
wait, did i say love?
that was a typo, i meant to say loathe, despise, abhor, detest.
any of those will do actually.

it's amazing.
they're so rabid about their so called rights when it comes to people reselling the games they bought, yet they use other companies products in their games and don't think they have to pay them?

hypocritical greedy scumbags, that's what ea are these days.
well, that's hardly a recent development, but they seem to be more blatant about their selfish greed lately.

what i've been saying for years is being proven true, they want the benefits but none of the responsibility of whatever they're involved in.

i don't think i've ever actually said this about a publisher before, but maybe they deserve to have their products pirated.
i mean, if they don't respect anybody else's patents/copyrights, why should anybody respect theirs?

what's next, they stop paying to use sports licenses?
if a book can feature sports teams without paying a license, why should they?

actually, it might not be a bad thing if it meant they stopped paying adulterous shitbag sports stars a fortune to appear on their covers.

i'm not a supporter of the gun manufacturers or anything.
but if they get away with this here, they'll just push it, there's already the case over the helicopter, it'll be licensed cars next.
reborn1213  +   499d ago
they are just doing it to save money. that is all. and the money they save is not going to be passed down to the consumer. do you think they will say "we saved 2 million on license, we can lower the cost of the game."
nope. they are just going to pocket it. this does no good for anyone except ea..especially if they are still going to be using the brand names.
PiperMCFierceson  +   499d ago
Know how am I going to know what guns are what.
Erudito87  +   499d ago
i had no idea this many gun nuts were on n4g
jakmckratos  +   499d ago
It really won't make a difference to me...the specific names are stupid. I just call them like the triple shooter, shotgun, rpg, sniper, cooler sniper...I don't need the name.
MaverickStar7  +   499d ago
Man people are all over the place on what this means. What they are doing is stopping with using licensed brand names like McMillan or Larue Tactical as they did in Medal of Honor Warfighter. It was also part of their promotion for the game and they caught flak for it. They will just go back to replicating real guns and models without designating a specific manufacturer. Many companies make a model similar 1911 pistol, and many make rifles off the AK-47 or AR-15 platform because the patents expire and then anyone can make them. The "AR-15" designation is trademarked by Colt, but other companies can still make similar style rifles. Now something like the Vector or Desert Eagle would require a license because those are newer weapons with existing patents and dev would probably want to use the name.

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
10°

Opinion: Five ways Destiny can be improved

12m ago - For the most part, Destiny is a solid shooter. But here are five things Bungie can do to improve it. | Xbox 360
20°

The Vita Cast Episode 42: Terrible Accents

16m ago - The Vita Cast is back for another episode full of PlayStation Vita news. See what Tyler and Kyle... | PS Vita
30°

Dragon Ball Xenoverse: All Ultimates & Specials (BETA)

29m ago - Players around the world are taking a sneak peak into the world of the Japanese beta for Dragon B... | Xbox 360
40°

GotGame |Gaming with Killatia Cannon Brawl

1h ago - Today on Gaming with Killatia we check out a sweet little indie game known as Cannon Brawl for th... | PC
Ad

Study Game Design at DeVry

Now - DeVry University, is an accredited* university offering you the flexibility of over 90 locations, online courses and a wide variety of bachelor's a... | Promoted post
40°

GamesAsylum: Disney Infinity: Marvel Super Heroes – Review

3h ago - GamesAsylum: "As much as we admired Disney for taking on the juggernaut that is Activision’s mone... | PC