350°

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."

Read Full Story >>
electricavenue.net
Naate4156d 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.

fblan0014156d 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.

CarlosX3604156d 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.

dcbronco4156d 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.

morganfell4156d ago

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.

kB04155d 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:)

irepbtown4155d 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.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4155d ago
Wenis4156d ago

Starting to distrust? speak for yourself

ExPresident4156d 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.

guitarded774156d 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.

SilentNegotiator4156d ago (Edited 4156d 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.

JeepGamer4156d 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...'

1Victor4155d ago

And The Lawsuits Will Begin In 3 .....2......1

3-4-54155d 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-Error4155d ago (Edited 4155d ago )

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

McGamer4155d 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.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 4155d ago
gedden74156d 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..

fblan0014156d ago

I'd say its about bloody time.

iNcRiMiNaTi4155d ago

The future? You mean like BF 2142?

coolasj4156d 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.

fblan0014156d 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?

elhebbo164156d ago

Wait so BF4 is gonna have fake gun names? (not that is bad or anything)

Donnywho4156d ago (Edited 4156d ago )

What the hell does agent 47 have to do with all this?

BISHOP-BRASIL4156d 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).

BISHOP-BRASIL4155d ago (Edited 4155d 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

Show all comments (33)
130°

Electronic Arts CEO: AI Is "At the Very Core of Our Business"

Today EA hosted its Investors Day, and Chief Executive Officer Andrew Wilson talked about the company's dedication to generative AI.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
Chocoburger6d ago

He's so excited to layoff more employees for FAKE STUPIDITY computer programing to replace them.

Hopefully EA takes a nosedive just like Ubisoft is currently doing. Lack of money is the only thing that can hurt them and possibly change them.

DarXyde5d ago

Knowing EA, I think they're more likely to sell their games cheaper or make Access the only way to play their titles than change course. They seem committed to destroying their labour force.

And the sad part here is that the proof of concept is there, where games can be made using AI.

I hate to say it, but those working in the gaming industry might be cooked. And unfortunately, I'm doubting most people will care as long as they get games they want. EA would absolutely dangle Dead Space 4 or a new Burnout in front of us, developed with AI. I wouldn't take it, but I think most fans would.

CantThinkOfAUsername5d ago

If AI does a better job then yeah why not? Though, I have massive doubts it will. If developers aren't willing to put effort in their games then they shouldn't be surprised that they're replaceable.

Chocoburger4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

Damn, a new Burnout, don't even bring that up. It hurts just to read those words.

The indie scene is massive theses days, but the big budget scene is mostly trash. I wouldn't mind to see these big publishers suffer or crumble away.

But that can only happen when the casual gamer stops buying yearly roster updates or whatever garbage is marketed to them on TV.

DarXyde4d ago

CantThinkOfAUsername,

I disagree. I don't believe the developers are at fault here. I would think those people don't like what EA is doing, but it's EA and they have tremendous power in the industry. Not everyone has the leadership qualities to peel off and form their own company. Add to the fact that falling out of grace with EA might just be an industry kiss of death. These people don't have any power, so I really don't agree with saying they're not willing to put in the effort.

thorstein5d ago

Now we just need to develop AI CEO and sell it to the board of trustees.

staticall4d ago

Hopefully, the only people who're going to be replaced by an AI are Andrew Wilson and his top management goons.

TheNamelessOne5d ago

And EA games aren't at the core of my purchases.

XiNatsuDragnel5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

Lmfao ea needs to do an ubisoft rn

ApocalypseShadow5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

Of course it is. EA has been lazy for years. Profiting for investors and themselves without putting in the work. Having AI write code or build graphics for them just makes them even more lazy.

I'd laugh if those same investors built "executive code" and got rid of EA's CEO and board of directors and replaced them with AI.

Show all comments (30)
120°

Next Battlefield Developers Are "Obsessed With Finding the Fun"

Today Electronic Arts hosted its Investors Day and its executives shared what's next for the Battlefield franchise.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
1nsomniac6d ago

ohh god, here we go!

This is exactly why the gaming industry is failing. It's now an industry of suits "trying to find the fun".

...I'll help you out a little, If you're trying to find it, then it's not fun and neither are you. move on!

LucasRuinedChildhood5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

I disagree, tbh. I definitely wouldn't classify Vince Zampella as a soulless suit. It's kind of an acknowledgement that Battlefield fell off which is why they had to bring him in in the first place. He's probably the best shot EA has of making this franchise fun again.

From a software development perspective, what I read in the article of Zampella's approach of being able to easily playtest and iterate from early on in development is a good thing. That's likely a big part of why his COD games and Titanfall were so fun.

PapaBop5d ago

Calling Zampella a suit lol! People like Zampella are the half suits if you will, they bridge the gap between art and business. Suits don't care how fun a game is, they only care about profit margins.

Markdn5d ago

It's people like you that's ruining the gaming platform, negativity already before it's even dropped

Noskypeno4d ago

20 years ago, Bungie used to have the motto "making games we want to play", if the devs are having fun it's a good sign it's going to be an enjoyable experience. If the devs are worried about shareholders, quotas, fitting in with current trends and trying to make a small percentage of the population happy, it's not an encouraging sign.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4d ago
gold_drake5d ago

if u need to "find the fun", thats a huge problem lol

Redgrave5d ago

This rings a bit like they might be looking for a good, long while

Relientk775d ago

Do they actually mean fun, or "surprise mechanics" and ways to monetize?

EazyC5d ago

Honestly, get them to sit down and play Bad Company 2 together.

If they can't see why that had the magic, they shouldn't be game developers.

Show all comments (13)
160°

EA CEO Dubs The Next Battlefield "One Of The Most Ambitious Projects In Our History"

The CEO of EA has iterated his massive ambitions about the next Battlefield entry in the new Q1 2025 financial results.

Inverno52d ago

Clicked to say exactly this. They set themselves up for disappointing failure.

Cacabunga51d ago

When i hear them say this sounds like they keep surpassing themselves… just backwards..

micro transactions, always online, no SP campaign.. everything that makes me🤮

RaidenBlack52d ago

It ain't Bad Company 3 ... so stop false-promising ... but make it current-gen only plz ... it'll be 2025 ffs

blacktiger51d ago

damn! I was about that dream thing

Chocoburger52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

More intentionally released broken games with micro-trash-actions, and of course fake apologies written by ChatGPT instead of doing it yourself because you don't give a crap if you sell people garbage for their hard earned money.

Ass.

Seth_hun52d ago

They are always saying this, with every title. :)

Bebedora52d ago

EA is the superior do not doubt them. They are Canadian,

Snookies1252d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Isn't that the whole point of having a "series" of games? Isn't the follow-up supposed to be inherently better or "more ambitious" than the previous entries? Unfortunately, this has not been the case for Battlefield in quite some time. I've still never even redeemed the free BF 2042 code I got a year and a half ago lol. Such a shame, used to be one of my favorite shooters back in the day.

Bebedora52d ago

You just need colurs and some rainbows. Anything will work. BF was killed once EA got their filthy paws over it, like the monkeys they are.

Show all comments (29)