Didnt Bf3 do this already? A lot of the guns didnt have their real names.
They can use military designations, but companies can also protect the look of their designs with trademark laws.
EA is already being sued by Bell Helicopter.
Glock has enforced their trademark against other companies that have made replicas that look too much like Glocks.
Okay, so "BFG, Portal Gun, etc" have been "done to death" but not normal "real-world" weapons?
I'd love to see some more unique weapons.
Isn't stuff the US army uses not needing of any license or something like that? They use the army designations and stuff instead of company ones. So as they don't have to pay them any money, there's no reason to.
The sole reason they did this was because there were actually a large and growing group of people starting to think that buying games that give funds to gun manufacturers via licensing fees is immoral.
The sole reason they did this was because there were actually a large and growing group of people starting to think that buying games that give funds to gun manufacturers via licensing fees is immoral. The result of the licensing fees is that gamers were giving money to gun manufacturers who in turn gave that money to the NRA which used those funds to block things like background check legislation. Not to mention that the NRA has made several press releases stating that the government should regulate video games instead of guns.
So essentially video gamers via gun licensing fees were paying the NRA to tell lobby the government against video games.
I have a feeling that maybe since the US Army pays a boatload of money for the REAL weapons, that the companies they do business with would let it slide if they used the virtual ones without a license, or give them the license for free.
Just a thought
lolwut? Saying games promote street racing is the same as saying games promote violence. If you don't believe games promote violence but still don't agree with pro-gun groups, you may not want to buy a game that directly supports gun groups. You could make a parallel with car companies, but I think it's a bit of a stretch.Yet turn around and buy games promoting illegal and extremely dangerous street racing, funding car companies or games which promote murder and gang culture.
lolwut? Saying games promote street racing is the same as saying games promote violence. If you don't believe games promote violence but still don't agree with pro-gun groups, you may not want to buy a game that directly supports gun groups. You could make a parallel with car companies, but I think it's a bit of a stretch.
A growing group, eh ? You and who else... ?
I hate to break it to you, gun manufacturers do not need the extra cash from game licensing. There are more than enough people trying to buy the real thing to keep them in business for decades to come.
Regardless, luckily many firearms can get around the branding issue if they have military designations. The Colt/whatever logo will be absent from the side, but that is not much of a big deal. Some companies, like HK, are extremely difficult to get a license for if not impossible at the moment. This is why the HK 416 is dubbed "M416" or HK45 as "M45" in most games. So it will change little from them. Others, such as Barrett, are much more friendly and would probably drop licensing fees altogether if they could get products featured.
Yep. Halo 2 was one of my favorite shooters, didn't have a single branded gun in it.
The Railgun in Q3A or the Shock Rifle in UT are more memorable than a M16.
It's hard to say there's a balancing issue with guns that were made up out of thin air.
But when devs try to go the "real" route, the complains of those guns not being real and unbalanced goes on and on (see BF3 thread).
The hypocrisy of this company is never ending. So you cut ties with gun manufacturers because?...they make guns? (I didn't read the whole article) or you don't want to pay to licence their look? Yet you make a game that uses said guns.....is EA trying to "cut ties" because of the whole "gun culture" controversy going on right now? This to me sounds rather idiotic. Next thing we know they are going to stop making violent video games.....because they are violent. We will be throwing snowballs and water ballons at each other in the Next CoD 7.
What does homophobes have to do with this dicusssion? Nothing why did you have to bring it up? Stop being over sensitive.
DON'T WORRY, I AM NOT DISCRIMINATING AGAINST HOMOPHOBES!!!
It was a reference to another stupid EA move where they blamed their bad image on Homophobes. That is why I brought it up, because EA pulls stupid shit all the time.
Thanks for asking.
That will be kind of hard when their mouths are already full of them.
I get it, and I agree EA is a pretty crappy company, and they wonder why they get voted the worse company in the US 2 years straight....
We don't have the money to pay the license fees anymore but we're still going to use your brand names. Because you know, we're in the age of Entitlements. Everyone is entitled to getting things for free.
Step #1 Stop making games that involve pistols, shotguns, and rifles.
Step #2 Get an imagination.
Step #3 Create unique original guns like BFG, Portal Gun, or Guns with blades or chainsaws.