Q&A: IGA Worldwide CEO on Battlefield 2142 dustup

In-game ad firm's head honcho clarifies meaning of ominous privacy disclaimer included in EA's latest wartime shooter.

Gamers who picked up EA's newly released shooter Battlefield 2142 might have noticed an ominous disclaimer in the package.

The disclaimer notes that the game may include software that records users' IP addresses and "other anonymous information" collectively referred to as "advertising data." It also says that information is sent off to advertising firm IGA Worldwide for the purpose of delivering in-game ads, and if users don't want IGA to have access to that data, their only recourse is to not play or even install the game on a computer with Internet access.

Reports that EA was forcing spyware on consumers quickly began to spring up online, prompting GameSpot to go to IGA Worldwide with a few questions. The company's CEO, Justin Townsend, spelled out what the company was looking at and why.

GameSpot: Are the disclaimers like the one in the Battlefield 2142 package common to all the games you provide ads for?

Justin Townsend: It tends to vary by publisher. It's not something that IGA Worldwide does. It's the obligation of the publishers themselves to decide what they want to disclaim and in what manner they want to present it. Different publishers tend to have different ways of doing this; some take it more seriously than others. You'd have to speak to EA about their policy, but ultimately EA felt the need to communicate to consumers that, "This is a part of what we do and we need to collect certain non-private data that can be used to help us serve the appropriate ads to the appropriate countries."

GS: The term "advertising data" in the disclaimer is fairly vague other than to emphasize that it is anonymous. Can you tell us specifically what the advertising data consists of?

JT: Absolutely, more than happy to. The first thing that we do is we need an IP address. What that IP address allows us to do is serve the relevant advertising to the relevant person. There are different versions of [advertising content] for different markets. By getting the IP address, we know that we have to give the French ads to the French, and the US ads to the US, and the German ads to the German population. That IP is then discarded. We don't keep it. We use it purely to make sure we're sending the ads to the correct location.

GS: And any other advertising data?

JT: It's not what you would call advertising data in the traditional sense of advertising data. The only other data that we really collect is what we need to report back to the brand to serve the campaign. It's never, ever user-specific. It's very generic. We report that we served so many ad impressions that were exposed for a certain duration of time at a certain angle and a certain size onscreen. But that's not specific to any unique player.

GS: It's been reported that the IGA technology monitors surfing habits and other computing habits. Is that true?

JT: Completely untrue. In advertising, it's important to understand that there are two key forms of advertising. One of them is called above-the-line advertising. In mediums such as television or radio or print, what you're looking to do is communicate the brand values to the consumer in the hope that the next time they go shopping and make a purchasing decision, they will think of your brand.

The other line of advertising is below-the-line advertising, where you use media such as the Internet or direct mail, and the whole point of that kind of advertising is to enter into a transaction or a dialogue with the consumer. For that kind of advertising, you do need lots of personal data.

What we do is above-the-line advertising. We're looking to transport the image and the values for the brands we're doing the advertising campaign for. It's not user-specific. We're not looking to get into transactions or dialogues with any individual consumer. It's purely to communicate the brand values to a mass consumer audience. It's not a dialogue or a transaction medium here. Therefore, we don't even need that kind of data, nor do we want that kind of data.

GS: We've heard other firms say the holy grail of in game advertising is one day being able to see ads in a game and then click on them, and that will take you to the transaction or dialog that you were describing. Is IGA not interested in that, or is it something you just aren't working on right now?

JT: Number one, it's not something we're interested in. We don't want to do anything that will disrupt the gamer's experience. [Publishers] spend millions of dollars on creating this intellectual property so that gamers can have an enjoyable experience and not be taken out of that experience. Secondly, I don't believe that the concept of clicking on a billboard and going to a Web site will work. That turns in-game advertising to a transaction-and-dialogue medium, and not an image-transfer medium.

Now there may be at some point in the future--if publishers work with the communities well to make gaming Web sites--the ability to come up with more tailored advertising. But that's not something we're looking at or even considering.

GS: How does IGA plan to address the concerns of gamers weary of in-game advertising?

JT: Let me put it from this perspective. I'm a gamer; I'm not from the CEO set in an ivory tower somewhere. I've played the Battlefield series since the Vietnam version and I play a lot. I've also built up gaming networks and clans before as well, so I'm very in touch with the gaming community and their thoughts. Yes, there's always going to be a subset of hardcore gamers that are generally very vocal, but in the minority. What you will find is these people often tend to be champions of the games within their own communities, and therefore they generate the followings. Yes, we take seriously what they say and how they feel, but often they are--how can I put it?--making uninformed statements and drawing uninformed conclusions, certainly around in-game advertising.

The point I'm trying to make really is that what these gamers all want every year is lots and lots of brilliant gaming titles coming out. They want high quality and great game design. Now, a triple-A title for a previous-generation platform could cost up to $10 million to produce, and it would retail for between $50 or $60.

With the next-generation platforms--the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360--those development costs for triple-A games are going to go up threefold, potentially up to $30 million in development costs per game. And what I don't see happening is a threefold increase in retail prices to accommodate that. That would not be fair; that would not be realistic. If gamers are to expect a constant flow of high-quality, next-generation games to the marketplace, they have to understand that publishers need to find and develop new revenue streams. In-game advertising is one of those new revenue streams, therefore it's only good for the industry on the whole.

At the end of the day, people buy magazines and they're jam-packed full of advertising. People get on the subway, they pay for a subway ticket, and it's full of advertising. There are many, many scenarios where you can say, "I bought something, yet there's still advertising in it." What I'd like to do is inform gamers--be they light gamers or heavy gamers--and we are putting together some thoughts around how we'd like to do that.

GS: Do you have any update on IGA's efforts to move into consoles--PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, or Wii--in the future?

JT: Certainly. We're in heavy dialogue with both Sony and Microsoft, and we anticipate that we'll be making some announcements around that at some point next year.

GS: Thank you very much for the time. We appreciate it.

JT: Thanks.

Written By

Want the latest news about Battlefield 2142?

Battlefield 2142

Battlefield 2142

Follow

Discussion

108 comments
mrklorox
mrklorox

I do the same as SteveTwo. It is relatively easy to block ads in BF2142. But the placeholder graphics that the ads replace are extremely generic though. Almost so bland that they are an eye-sore... er eye-yawn.

SteveTwo
SteveTwo

I just block the ports IGA uses. Don't get the ads, doesn't mess with my game.

bulletsword
bulletsword

if it doesn't **** up your computer or attract strangers to your house, then everything should be fine.

Aeriti
Aeriti

In-game ads = an increase in profit for the publishers Pissed off gamers pirating games = a decrease in profit for publishers Here's hoping they don't piss off to many people to upset the status quo and completely negate the value of those ads... Now, I'm not saying I will start to pirate every game I see, but if publishers are going to, lets be blunt here, whore off their in-game space to make an extra buck, then perhaps it will be worth pirating and reverse engineering to remove the ads and play for free anyways.

DarkSaber2k
DarkSaber2k

Yeah right. I'm sure they wouldn't be tempted by someone waving a wad of cash around in exchange for list of IPs and other pertinent information.

Cloud737
Cloud737

*Sigh* At least he seemed honest. I hope the future of gaming won`t be so dark because of in-game ads.

Sam_Lowery
Sam_Lowery

If you buy games with adds in them they'll just make more. Teach them a lesson.

Kcube
Kcube

I didn't beleive any of his "Why NO we would never!" Don't plan on buying anything with Ads,Bad move by the industry to trust our games with the same people that send our kids smut through the email

Cook66
Cook66

Corporate swine. I've posted my views on this elswhere. I hope you all go to hell. :)

FrankieLA
FrankieLA

EA may be greedy etc. but with skyrocketing developer budgets in-game advertising will be the norm for the rest our lives. One can only hope that the publishers execute this with gamer's in mind. Get used to it. It's only going to be more prevalent.

Sociologist
Sociologist

Don't listen to the foolish people on this site who don't own the game. I have access to a copy and can tell you this... EA, MASSIVE, and IGA are all a bunch of money grubbing whor3s, because BF2142 is the most unpolished POS I've seen in years, (and I've been gaming for quite some time). I've seen better mods for BF2 then this game, and it is still a shame that Desert Combat, (a bf1942 mod) is still better designed than BF2142. The ads are spyware, and do track what sites you surf on the net, (and whether the data is all anonymously uploaded or not is inconsequential since we are still being monitored). When you open up the game box, you get a flyer saying that your activities are being monitored, (although the language is in such legalese, that many people may ignore it). Moreover, EA is planning on doing the OL Switcheroo.. that is, the dozens of billboards and advertising cargo containers are not showing ads yet until a certain amount of games are sold... EA is waiting for the right time to launch the ad server database to constantly stream ads about 21st century products to a game that takes place in 2142... wtf?

dnzperson
dnzperson

I own BF2142 - I don't mind any in game advertising, as long as it doesn't interfere with gameplay. And for the people saying "I paid for this game with my hard earned money... blah, blah, blah" - If you've got the money, and a computer to run the game on etc etc - you really aren't that hard done by. A lot of people in the world get a lot worse than you do. If you don't want to play it, fair enough. I think it is good that you care enough about something to make your opinion heard. If no one speaks out, then there will not be any change. Remember, EA is in this to make money - not friends - so if you want them to stop ingame game advertising you need to make it cost them more than it generates. But in my opinion, if the ads help support game development and they don't impact on the experience, then I'm all for it. I've already learned to block out ads everywhere else, tv, magazines - even this site (sometimes). I recon it was cool to see things like the Nokia billboard in GRAW, made the game seem more real.

jbltecnicspro
jbltecnicspro

Well said, Thoksville. This is why I refuse to purchase BF 2142, and I hope that everyone else will do the same.

Thoksville
Thoksville

Hey, Just quick word to add my voice to a lot of the stuff gone before. 1. Hidden/vague "data collection" programs/processes/rootkits? Blehh! Clandestine! 2. Game != magazine. Magazine/subway ticket is throw-away current news item, game is immersive escapism for relaxation, same as a good book or movie. I don't see any ads in the middle of LotR book. Any movies that have product placement in them look and feel cheap and low quality. 3. Game is luxury item. Again, it's about quality. I don't see anyone spending $50k to join a golf club and then getting advertised to and their golf habits tracked. The money is spent to get away from that. (=> IGA has suicidal business model which they're managing to successfully sell to greedy publishers) 4. Towards the extreme, if media does influence game direction/content, again quality will bottom out. 5. Can't see how costs are a problem in the BF2142 case since no novel technology has been introduced (where's the gravity gun?!). Where ideas are flowing necessitating rising costs for a single game, why not choose the episodic content model? After seeing comments around the place, and a less than convincing blurb from this JT-"i'm a gamer"-CEO clown, I'll be using my power through the democratic process of choosing not to buy BF2142. It's a pity, it was sitting on my wish list for a while. As everyone else has also pointed out, thanks again to Gamespot for getting on this.

jbltecnicspro
jbltecnicspro

Well, this pretty much seals it for the next generation of games, in my opinion. Now days, most games aren't revolutionary or original. Come on EA, do you really expect us to pay for this game to get, what - a couple of new game modes here and there, and different maps? This is solid proof that when corporations and mass-media players get involved in the video game world, gamers lose. While right now, the whole BF with spyware isn't that huge, it could be the "gateway drug" of what's going to come next. I don't know about you guys, but when I play games, I do it to escape the advertising blitz of TV, and the problems of the real world - if only for an hour at a time. I don't want to be hammered by advertisements while I'm trying to enjoy a solid deathmatch. Please, take your ads elsewhere and leave me alone - I'm trying to enjoy my game. As to my comments in the first paragraph - I've pretty much given up on gaming. I just gave my little brother my Xbox 360 recently, because I cannot find a single title that I want to play. Sure the graphics in "Game X" are outstanding, and sure it has some decent online play, but it seems to me that graphics, sound and the surface presentation of games is the only thing that has improved since last generation. Seriously, they're making a Call of Duty 3 already, and it's only been what - a year since Call of Duty 2? What percentage of the games coming out on PC in the next year will be first-person shooters? Or better yet, what percentage of the games coming out for the next generation consoles are merely sequels to pre-existing games? Oh yeah, Nintendo has some original games alright, based on twenty-year-old franchises... Anyways, to close my comments. Screw you EA, you used to be good when you made games for Sega and Playstation, but I guess the money is more important than your fanbase. And to all of this "next gen" BS, the next generation seems to be taking a step back, as far as I'm concerned. I'll continue to play my Sega Genesis until something comes to sweep me off my feet, though I doubt such a product will come.

_Sam_
_Sam_

I hate in-game advertising. I didn't know this game had it

Jaeme
Jaeme

my biggest problem with in game advertising is not just the stuff that others have brought up(data collection, spam increasing and such) although I agree with those points as well, my biggest problem is that if you look at advertising supported media(network tv, newspapers, magasines) you find that the content of the media;it`s editorial voice are modified to cater to what the ADVERTISERS want, not the consumer. That means that the type of story, or the "spin" of it are changed to reflect what the advertisers feel is best for their purposes rather than strictly artistic or informational purposes. Ultimately advertisers want to be associated with "good/happy" images, safe images and product that attracts the biggest market and the richest market. That potentially means that besides having to meet certain criteria to get a publisher to green light a project they may now have to get advertising approval for that project as well. No advertiser would want to be associated with the bad press surrounding "Bully", so maybe the game wouldn`t get made. And what about games like "Psychonauts"? It didn`t sell well so now Tim Schaffer would get advertising black listed from making a new game. No more "risky" content, no more small market or niche titles. Also, advertising is never happy with just a taste. They will always expand as much as they can. Perhaps ads in the middle of Metal Gear Solid cut scenes?(they are at least half an hour long most of the time) Or perhaps "todays game brought to you by Preperation H, great relief for your gaming hemmaroids!" Jack Thompson starts buying advertising time at the start of games to tell you what a worthless childkilling scumbag you are. Publishers need to make their games more available to us for longer periods and in easier to purchase ways. Games are only available on the shelves for such a short time before they disappear. If movies were distributed in this way they would be even more advertising packed and idea free than they are now. We have to treat advertising like the antithesis of art and info that it is and get game publishers to try harder to find ways to NOT have ads in their games. (check out "The Media Monopoly" by Ben Bagdikian to see just how bad it could get)

Leavemebe
Leavemebe

What a lying, disingenuous lying liar. You can bet your sweet bippy that they are foaming at the mouth trying to get BIG GIANT FLASHING ADS into your video game experience, no matter what this untruthful marketer says. He's in marketing, he's paid to lie, he's paid to try and separate you from your money, however best he can do it. That means slow, frog-soup style insidious insinuations of advertising: first come the single line text ads in the game browser, then the scrolling ads, then full color in game product placements in game textures, then games that are just vehicles for ads. Screw you parasitical vampires, get your money for your crank and blow and diseased hookers elsewhere, you're not getting it from my video gaming dollar, it's how I try to avoid you scum in the first place.

hampton2003
hampton2003

i personally hate in game advertising, its pointless, especially for a FPS where you dont have time to look at something like a poster on the wall. the ads just bug me making the game feel tacky and unrealistic. and i'm a fan of BF but i dont want them taking info from my pc (i dont trust EA, with anything other than the fact they've made a "few" good games), although i have nothing to hide, id just dont care for seeing ads from yahoo, myspace, and gamespot (the three most common sites i visit). really if i want to seem an ad about a new game at gamespot i go online to the site and look it up. this is something i just dont know if i want to be involved in.

Kounji
Kounji

Personally, I'm done with EA at this point. EA has all but ruined the experience of playing their games. In the context of sports games ads are expected it comes with the territory in real life as well ( stadiums, sponsorships) but for a game that takes place 20 years from now in a broken down future in game ads can really disengage a player from the immersion of a game. I know EA stands to make quite of bit of money from this deal but in the end they have to think of what they're consumer really wants and in the case of most gamers is less advertising. That's one of the reasons(minor even) why gamers stay away from television. The ip thing i'm not as concerned with. The sad thing is I understand that the cost of videogames are rising as far as production and the only thing that can help is to drop the movie model of making games and adopt the television model which includes advertising, if companies can find a way to make ads less intrusive I think it can become acceptable. Anyhoo my two cents

Blisster
Blisster

It seems that it really comes down to trust. If you trust the game company or not. That would be a good gamespot poll topic.

cjcr_alexandru
cjcr_alexandru

"That IP is then discarded. We don't keep it." "The only other data that we really collect is what we need to report back to the brand to serve the campaign. It's never, ever user-specific. It's very generic." Now how can I be sure about that? I don't know but this in-game advertising can transform in something...ugly. At least when I watch TV they can't track my activities, but with the PC... is another story.

Lazy_Marine
Lazy_Marine

Guy's don't buy in to the CEO's BS, "I'm a gamer too, i know how its like blah bleh blagh", Gamers need to make a stand against in-game advertising, this is only the start. If we don't criticise and object against in-game advertising, the corps will not stop, and this trend will only increase. Devs and publishers need to realise, that in-game advertisign ruins the "immerssion" and overall experience a gamer has in a game, which is a MAJOR factor for most of us. And the only way to make this stop is to BOYCOTT games in-game advertising, starting with BF2142.

V-Nine
V-Nine

This is too large an issue to tackle here and raises an eyebrow in the worst way. I'll be sticking to the console Battlefield games until they start spying too. What the heck do I need with a burgerking ad in the middle of an online battle? is it full of hidden power-ups? or easter eggs?

ubiquityxx
ubiquityxx

So the method at which EA is incorporating this into their games isn't clear to me and hasn't been discussed in this thread. Does the software run along side the game as a separate process like WoW's warden or is it part of the game executable - run when only the game is played? Or is it a service that loads on boot-up crawling through your web history and cookies reporting back? Or even worse ... a rootkit? The means to which they deliver this is important but doesn't seem to be stated anywhere I look - any clues to those running 2142?

patmacfad
patmacfad

He makes sense. Their has been a lot of talk from all sorts of developers about the rising costs of game development, what with the "next-gen standards" rolling around. As long as I don't get interrupted during actual gameplay, then I'll be fine with it. Plus, unlike many people here, I don't have any beef with EA, which seems to be fueling their opinions. Then again, I've never bought any of their sports games.

fhamner02
fhamner02

Now I really am glad my dell inspirion can't run this game. I was slightly irked at first, but after reading this news, I am reminded that there is a reason for everything. Come on now, EA, why don't put that money into making better games and not spying on people. They say it's for advertising, but I've worked in retail for 8.5 years and don't but any of that.

Agronot
Agronot

If this isn't a sign of commercialism in gaming, I don't know what is. As for BF2142, I hadn't panned on getting it anyway. Not woth my money to by a mod of BF2. Give me the days of BF one with the Desert Combat mod any day. As for those that think this is limited to PC gaming...please. Do you really belive that this doesn't happen on consoles? The only way you can't be tracked playing a game is going to an arcade....maybe!

Quivox
Quivox

Thanks gamespot for doing this follow up, and thanks to the other members for their colorfull opinions. What do the developers think of this? My biggest regret is with DICE because I played the Battlefield 2142 demo and they made a great game. I'm going to buy the game tommorow though but this whole IGA issue is dissapointing. I always thought games were a work of inspiration. Where developers put their heart and soul into making something they belive in. Having to place advertising in an artistic work is saddening . If the developers need funds that badly to make great games I'd gladly pay a bit more than have them suffer this indignity.

NinjaFoot
NinjaFoot

At least I know to avoid all EA games now.

hrah
hrah

EA is diggin its OWN grave !!!, i will be very careful when i buy my next pc game. and why is this not that bad Blackstaff ??? , this is just the beggining or do you think they will stop doing this just because they care so much for us???, when they are making more money now, and IF this were good, wouldn

Blackstaff
Blackstaff

This isn't near as bad as people were making it out to be, "Full of spyware and adware" stuff.

Destroyeron13
Destroyeron13

I'm glad this happened, a lot of the irrational people won't be playing BF2142. Much like the 600 or so people who rated the game and haven't played it or the demo.

runstalker
runstalker

That's too bad. Of all game publishers, EA should be keeping clear of adverts -- especially in a franchise with such a core fanbase. It's also a shame that this may scare some people away from BF 2142 because I happen to think it's a really fun MP shooter and that developer DICE is very skilled at this type of gameplay. Money-hungry fools at EA can't even read their own audience.

buruburu
buruburu

http://www.massiveincorporated.com/ "By aggregating the largest audience of gamers and providing real time delivery of advertising across top-selling video games, we can provide publishers and developers $1-$2 profit per unit shipped for their titles. " Without the middlemen (ad agencies), they might make get more subsidizations, and hopefully pass the savings to the users. Although with this talk about expanded development costs for producing new titles(licensing engines, ProSports logo, etc should be less work from repetitive tools & logos) , I think a similar Moore's law applies partially to game development too (not towards all ascpects of games. Older textures were dumbed down to fit specs of hardware). http://www.ingameadvertising.com/ "With 70% of gamers saying that advertisements inside computer and video games help improve the realism of the gaming experience" Who the!?? WTF? Who said that? It seems this second one may been taken out of context, if it were a discussion about textures. It'd be more likely to be propaganda from themselves for their business. Ulitmately these businesses are middlemen, and would require fees for their "services." Why aren't the studios dealing with companies looking to place ads themselves? Do they really feel it is necessary to have "Impression data" counts? I don't think so. (units sold=end of data) I prefer creative textures. Case in point Dead Rising's movie posters in the Theater. Licensing ain't a purty picture.

kaziechameleon
kaziechameleon

people people they don't need to keep game prices down, many of these supposed expensive games are partially farmed out to dev teams in china, or elswhere, where the labor is far cheaper, on top of that games are reaching a wider audience then ever before, and pc titles are easilly under 50 dollars, look at GTR2 a great game that on release was 20 bucks. game industry is not struggling with the next generation they are simply making more money, look if EA was so low on money how can the afford a new company buy out every month, bye dice. EA isn't hard pressed for money, if anything they are the bush(our president) of the industry, they lie and decieve, anyone with common sense knows that if they could they'd charge 100 dollars a game. i don't remember asking to be raped by a game developer, because after playing GRAW and paying 60 dollars for it, i can tell you my butt hurts.

kaziechameleon
kaziechameleon

i can't believe this was on the news board so briefly that in and of it's self should say that i think GAMespot gets a little something to shove this to the side, this is something that could and will change the industry and it's only been on the homepage for a day. replaced with tiberium wars, an EA game, that i'm not looking forward to, look at generals. yeah good job of fakeing interest gamespot, why not show adds for mmo gold farmers.

kaziechameleon
kaziechameleon

godless_moron, your so right, i didn't pay for adds, especially not a add software, i already hate the lack of privacy on computers in general, but this takes the cake, i don't want more adware/spyware, on my computer, god, i'm not getting this game. i'm simply not paying for a piece of adware/spyware, who would, honestly i spend way to much time to bother with this, also why build, or include such a software, when last time i checked this game still needed a patch. wow, they have priority problems, i'm so angry anyone got a EA address so i can spam em like they'll be doing to me. the least they can do is allow you or the servre to disable this spyware, but no, they say you don't like it, stay of the internet, nice option considering the fact that their AI makes dooms imps look smart. this is beyond unjust. i'm so angry, not supprised, i thought EA would be the gready B@st@rD$ to pioner something like this but still i want to hurt someone i'm furious. it's not the adds that bother me, its the software that makes me angry, i'm not paying for a adware/spyware softwared game, i'm so furious. how about EA makes a great game a simply awsome revolutionary game, like Halo2 for consoles or Halflife2, or oblivion, but they won't they are makeing games good enough to make money. they have no ethics. after getting GRAW i want to simply spam their emials so they know my anger. aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. how about this, i'll pay for their game if i can hack their network. that sounds like a deal.

GreyFoxV1
GreyFoxV1

If they didnt need it for Battlefield 2 why do they need it for 2142? They dont and I returned my pre-order becuase of it. Learn to fix your previous game before releasing another EA. Pc gamers aren't like some console gamer you can dupe into buying into this crap.

godless_moron
godless_moron

Lets see if I got this. I pay hard earned money for a game and these clowns do not think it is enough, so they sell advertising in game to make even more. I will absolutely boycott any company that practices this activitt. These guys are fools not to expect a major backlash against their actions. I was not interested in the game, but my sons are. I will now prohibit the purchase of this game. Anything from EA is now off the buy list, no matter how good it is. That's too bad. In my browser, I can block this stuff. They are by passing this by putting it in game. Do not believe for a minute that this is keep prices low. The market determines prices. This is simply another revenue model and one that is highly questionable from an ethical point of view. It is the same as if I went to the movies and right in the middle of a movie I paid for, the theater decided to put a TV style commercial in place. By the way, the reason they are not doing this in other countries is because it absolutely illegal to do so in most European markets. DogMaEye

buruburu
buruburu

I understand the counting of instances where ads appear in the view of the game avatar validates the ads, but the regional thang, I would think it would be initiated where the user selects the language during installation. pssst... do't tell the ad rep, but I played BF242 for a few hours last night and don't remember seeing any ads in the environments. I was concentrating on the moving targets attempting to riddle by avatar with munitions. The maps are fun, and so is the overall game. Counting the das in games is kind'a like Nielsen ratings for TV channels, they can't actually determine if the person(s) are in fro of the TV at the time of the ads, but they quantify the potential for audiences that may see the ads. IGA seems to be the equivalent to the Nielson Ratings thang, and will also subsidize the content makers via ad investments. I'm fine with it. PS: lawyers and techies don't often speak the same language. Perhaps having a tech person write up the translation of the next warning letter, as it may make more sense to the users. On the content providing, company announcement ,section of the forum. Techies are more likely interested in exact parameters, while lawyers want to be overly inclusive (vague).

qiwihead
qiwihead

The thing that these ad guys always seem to miss is that games are all about immersiveness, and ads usually ruin that. Games and movies are very different than magazines and subways. Is he seriously trying to say they are somehow the same? Games and movies rely on the player/viewer being able to suspend his disbelief and allow himself to be immersed in an alternate reality. If a game like 2142--which, as the title makes clear, is set 136 years in the future--has ads for present-day products, how in the hell does that not take players out of the shared illusion of the 2142 alternate reality? Put ads in sports and racing games because that actually ads to the realism--there are ads all over sports arenas and race courses and cars. Just keep them out of games where they don't belong, and they don't belong in 2142.

misled_youth116
misled_youth116

they tell us tihs is supposed to keep the prices of the games down but already we are watching game prices go up. all it really is, is another way to make some money. If these people had half a brain they would do some research and discover that the average person doesn't play any attention to internet adds in any shape or form, if anything they usually just annoying the person using the computer.

Gamepro2421
Gamepro2421

i think he makes a good point. I'm willing to have to click around a few advertisements in my favorite next-gen games in order to never have to pay more than $50 or $60 a game. Imagine paying $100+ for a game? thats just rediculous. I say stop complaining and face the facts, if you want AAA titles w/o decimating your wallet...allow for, and even SUPPORT in-game advertising.

hagame
hagame

one question stated; "It's been reported that the IGA technology monitors surfing habits and other computing habits. Is that true? " The response says it's not true but in fact, in that paragraph and the next two he never really answers that question and in place throws up a bunch of marketing speak about advertising system types.

Autolycus
Autolycus

i promise the infromation is kept. Did you know all credit company are(equifax, transunion, and the third one) are just private companies that have a database of you finicial information. They arent governmently owned, they don't have access to anything special. They are just private companies that keep a database of everybody on the planet and they buy and sell that informations for billions of dollars a year. it takes all but a phone call to get the name and address of the I.P. Address. Or better yet a data mining company owned by an ISP. its best if you dotn play this game, or use a hack because they are going to make money off of your information