UK Advertising Regulator Nixes EA's Dungeon Keeper Advertisement Due To Microtransactions
from the freedom-isn't-free dept
Electronic Arts, fresh from being upset in the most recent "Worst Company" contest, isn't taking the defeat lying down. In fact, they're in full rebuilding mode, acquiring as much news about pissing people off as possible. Recently, for instance, you may have heard that the next Sims game will be published without the much-loved toddler children sims or the ability to create swimming pools in players' homes. The response from EA essentially states that they don't think that stuff is important, despite the public outcry. With an eerily similar recent history in the form of the SimCity debacle still fresh in everyone's mind, people aren't too happy.
But the real trump card the company has rolled out recently is the Dungeon Keeper mobile game which pissed off roughly everyone. And I don't just mean the critics, who essentially look upon this reboot of a beloved franchise as blasphemy, but even consumer rights groups are getting involved due to the cynical attempt in the game to extract microtransactions out of players through in-app purchases while claiming to be a free game. The UK's Advertising Standards Authority disallowed EA advertising Dungeon Keeper as a free game and describes the ad this way:
A direct e-mail for the mobile app game Dungeon Keeper stated "GET DUNGEON KEEPER ON MOBILE FOR FREE! ... DIG. DEVISE. DOMINATE. Build the most badass dungeon ever! Raise an army of diabolical minions and lay twisted traps to destroy any opponents foolish enough to set foot in your lair. MASTER THE HAND OF EVIL Cast powerful spells, pillage and plunder other players’ dungeons, and slap your imps around to make them work harder. A world of wicked fun is right at your fingertips. What are you waiting for, Keeper? Get it for FREE!" A footnote stated "WIRELESS FEES MAY APPLY". The ad also featured a screenshot of the game which appeared to show a well-developed dungeon, and was accompanied by artwork depicting characters from the game.The problem? Well, by most objective estimations, you can barely play the game without shelling out for in-app purchases. See, the game uses two kinds of currency in order to construct dungeons, which is the gameplay within the app. There's stone and gold, which replenish and accrue over time, and there are gems which are paid for with real-life money or some very limited in-game actions. EA argued that everything that appeared in their ad, including depictions of a created dungeon, could be achieved without spending any real-world money and just playing the game. And they're technically right, but they forgot to mention that the amount of time we're talking about to do so makes the game unplayable. Also, they forgot to mention how, in a departure from games like Candy Crush, the time players are made to wait gets longer as they progress in the game.
We noted that, although some of these actions could be done simultaneously, there was a limit to how many actions could happen at the same time and that the length of the countdown timers increased according to how far the player had progressed in aspects of the game. We therefore regarded it as extremely likely that players would reach a position where they would be unable to take any further meaningful or progressive action in the game until a timer had finished or been skipped, and that these periods would become longer and more significant, and the cost of skipping increasingly higher, as the player progressed. Although some of the features in the ad did not require waiting for a timer, we noted that these were either incidental or brief (such as ‘slapping’ the imp characters) or were dependent on other actions that were gated by a timer. We acknowledged that the Gem currency, through which the timers could be skipped, could be obtained for free through normal gameplay and that the game could therefore be played without spending currency to bypass the countdown. However, we understood that the rate at which they could be accrued was slow in comparison to the amount needed to play the game at a reasonable rate, where the delays did not significantly impact on the ability to continue playing.In other words, the ad said the game was free and didn't mention in-app purchases, but the game is essentially unplayable without such purchases. In addition, progress in the game is specifically met with a mechanic designed solely to extract in-app purchases in the form of an increasingly long countdown timer. It's a scummy way to make a game, to advertise a game, and to treat customers, particularly within a game that is universally considered to be garbage.
The end result is the ASA nixed the ads that depicted the game as free and ordered them to make future ads clear about in-app purchases and the limitations on free gameplay. If EA wants to keep on making this money-extracting drivel, they certainly can, but they can't pretend they aren't. Consumer protection done right, in other words.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: advertising, dungeon keeper, free, in-app purchases, microtransactions, uk
Companies: ea
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
And this is new?
It was shortly thereafter that I realized games like that were pointless, unless you planned to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars a month for the privilege of playing it at any sort of pace that is actually fun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And this is new?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I like the game
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I like the game
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
And you know what? I gave EA the damn $10 because I was enjoying the game!
Ugh, bunch of whiners! What happens if a lawsuit like this wins, anyway, huh? Do you hate the F2P business model so much that you want to kill it for those who actually 1) have a brain and know that marketing isn't the unvarnished truth, and 2) like the evolution of the venerable shareware concept from the early days of the PC?
LET ME HAVE FREE LIMITED GAMEPLAY WITH FULL CONTROL OVER WHETHER I WANT TO REWARD THE DEVELOPERS OR NOT!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
If you are getting what is essentially a demo without paying, how is it any different than normal pay to play, with a free demo like what has happened since the 1980s?
The only difference is that this model can weasel around and claim that it is free without telling about how the pay part works. This action is not against the type of game: It is against the marketing of it! You will still have your game exactly as the developer wants to give it to you. The only difference is that the developer cannot market the game as "free", which is completely reasonable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
Cost, essentially. These types of games are MUCH more expensive altogether. Also, in the old days, you'd just pay once and be done with it. There is no such option with microtransactions, so you're condemned to constantly being harassed for more money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
The story isn't about a lawsuit. Would you like to try the argument again, this time with facts?
The actual story is that advertising is regulated by an official body, and they found that advertising a game with these kinds of paid components as free was misleading. EA are free to advertise the game all they want, as long as they tell the truth in those ads.
"Do you hate the F2P business model so much that you want to kill it"
The F2P model is fine. Misleading consumers and using sneaky tactics such as increasing the amount of time they have to wait in an attempt to force them to pay? Not so much.
Again, the F2P model is OK, the publishers just need to be honest about it.
"I gave EA the damn $10 because I was enjoying the game!"
Cool, I hope you got your money's worth. But, unless I'm missing something, you didn't buy the game with that $10, you only rented some unobstructed access to it. Do you see the problem? I doubt most people would be complaining if there was an option to buy the full game rather than drip feeding it money to keep playing at a reasonable pace.
"like the evolution of the venerable shareware concept from the early days of the PC? "
You mean games where you got a set number of levels and got asked to pay more if you wanted to keep playing - and then keep the FULL game forever? Not games where you're asked to pay $X if you don't want to wait 20 mins to several hours after you've played for a few minutes, and then pay again?
Do you see the different here?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
CwF+RtB, right?
The ad regulator is slicing very narrowly on the concept of how much of the game can be played for free, or how far you can go without paying. If there is any free play in the game, then it's hard to say that you cannot play for free. Making a player wait for their next turn (time limiting their play) is a pretty common concept in the freemium model, it provides the RtB incentive.
EA has done this on a number of games, their Real Racing game is a perfect example of having those time delay features built into the game in a useful way. Yes, it's a freemium, but the free part is entertaining enough. I also understand if nobody actually pays for it at some point, then the game will disappear or no longer be supported.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
The real issue is that when you start from a false premise, most of what you say is crap. Personally, the biggest complaints about the game I've seen is that people wanted a full price game they were willing to pay for but got this implementation instead. Many of those people have paid GoG for the original versions of the game rather than put up with this one, but would still be willing to pay, say, $5-10 for an unrestricted version.
"Those who like it pay for it, and those who don't will not."
The same goes with demos of free "lite" version of games that people try out then pay the full version for. The difference here is that the customer has no choice of merely buying the game, they only have the choice of renting some extra features for a temporary amount of time. Some people, who want to pay for the game, don't like this. It's possible to like the game, but not be willing to pay constant fees just to continue playing.
Stop lying to yourself and pretending that it's just a case of "those evil freeloaders" vs "paying customers". That's a simplistic half-truth and any pronouncements you make on that assumption will be false.
"CwF+RtB, right?"
Indeed. And "we've designed the game in a way that means you have to keep paying us money if you want to keep playing" does not equal RtB.
"If there is any free play in the game, then it's hard to say that you cannot play for free."
No, there's a limit. if the game is nigh-on unplayable or not possible to complete without paying cash, then it's not free.
"Making a player wait for their next turn (time limiting their play) is a pretty common concept in the freemium model, it provides the RtB incentive."
Once again, instead of making smug pronouncements, you might wish to understand what the arguments you're trying to adopt actually mean. Because you're really missing at least one vital component.
"EA has done this on a number of games"
They have, and few of those have had the backlash that this did, from either fans or industry regulators. Similarly, many, many competitors have also done the same without such things. Perhaps you'd like to consider why that is rather than whining about strawmen again.
"I also understand if nobody actually pays for it at some point, then the game will disappear or no longer be supported."
...and if they do, that's the market speaking, and there's plenty of better competitors out there who will take the money instead. Perhaps, because "give us money every 10 turns" isn't a real RtB unless you have something else to offer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
If you want real free to play games, look to League of Legends or Path of Exile where only vanity and non-advantageous offers is for sale. Closing down a significant part of the game in ransom is not a free game. It is a demo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
Not even close. I'm 100% willing to pay for games, but not when the games are so obnoxious about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
But you also forgot the sine qua non: connect with fans. Micro transactions (and paying shills to polish turds for you on discussion forums) is not connecting with fans, it's thinking of them only as suckers and treating them like shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
There is no lawsuit, so not sure what the shit you're talking about....
"Do you hate the F2P business model so much that you want to kill it"
This isn't an attack on F2P, it's an attack on EA's bullshit marketing tactics. As noted in the article, EA can make games like this all they want, they just can't pretend the actual gameplay is reasonably free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
I recommend you include a "For Dummies!" (but clearly not using that term because there will be trademark issues) section with all of your articles from now on. Just like a three line summary so people with no reading comprehension can follow along with the rest of us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry, this article and whole premise is crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heroes of Dragon Age
Now it is possible to play the game without spending real money as I do - I can even get into the top 10,000 in a pvp match (with effort), especially as a few gems are rewarded as you progress in pvp. However it seems certain that the higher ranked players are spending quite a bit of money to get there and the game is definitely designed to keep you spending money as a way to continue playing, rather than as an optional extra to support the developers if you wish to. I would be much happier if the game instead had a limited free mode with the option to pay to unlock pvp say - I would definitely have paid for it as it is fun, it's just that the freemium elements are irritating and detract from the overall enjoyment of the game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They've been doing this a long time and I am continually surprised to hear yet another scheme to bilk money from their fans because I would have figured by now they would be out of business from the amount of fans they've pissed off.
If you want to continue to be the next pissed off fan be my guest and continue to buy their games. But don't bitch when it hits you. People have had far more than enough time to realize just what these two gaming companies are about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So if you see someone who really loves EA, he most likely gets paid to shitpost
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It ultimately comes down to how much you trust the particular youtuber to avoid these pitfalls and how open the person is about his/her economic dependencies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Doesn't matter, EA will work around it
Now I know some of you are gamers. And I know you're going to tell me I'm wrong. But your arguments will hold no weight until the day when EA is driven out of business -- which would come quite quickly if gamers had any collective intelligence whatsoever. It's clearly in their self-interest to see EA destroyed, not just because EA is a pack of assholes, but because it would be a warning shot across the bow of the rest of the gaming industry. And it would be EASY: just stop giving EA money. Very trivial thing to do, doesn't require anything other than a little bit of self-restraint.
And yet they're not even capable of that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But, but, but
And that is also a problem so to say. I can ignore a game like Sim City (or ) since there are alternatives but those sport games, due to licensing, do not have alternatives. And those are the major income source for EA. Any studio/brand under the EA umbrella that doesn't have that kind of exclusivity is under constant reorganization and/or demands to essentially turn out a sequel every year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: But, but, but
And no doubt, thanks to EA and your own inability to show some backbone, you will be.
No whining. You DESERVE it. All of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Doesn't matter, EA will work around it
Are their masochistic gamers who don't care how a company treats them, and will buy every 'new' 'shiny' game a company throws out, no matter how broken or recycled it is? Absolutely. However, that same idiocy shows itself in every other industry, from movies to electronics, music and more.
It's not a 'gamer' problem, it's a 'masochistic idiot problem'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One of a few games
So EA is getting a game banned for microtransactions? Well, I can name one game that's coming up that's not going to be free to play but it's gonna have microtransactions up the wahoo: Sims 4, due to be released September 2.
And guess what? The gamers this time are not just letting EA take them for a ride. There's the official forum, and other forums in the community that are absolutely outraged and upset at all that EA has done to this latest incarnation.
So when you state that all gamers are stupid, you're generalizing for too many people.
We eventually got the idea that we're being reamed, and now we're officially pissed off at EA and making a lot more noise than we would in the past. We're signing petitions (for all the good that will do) and verbally sparring with their reps on every occasion possible. EA's no longer is the god of games. We've learned our lesson, over and over again.
We're tired of being used as walking wallets.
There's no guarantee this time that their latest iteration of the series will even sell very many copies. It's that bad, because EA has been frantically trying to woo us back with all kinds of cookies and ice cream, only to be laughed at by almost everyone and jeered at by the people who they think will be buying it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One of a few games
You know what kind of petition would get EA and similar companies to pay attention? Ones where people state that they will not buy games from a company as long as they continue the same practices that people find so offensive/annoying.
As long as people had the willpower and self-restraint to follow through with that 'pledge', and each signature meant that EA would be losing out on any future sales from the one signing, something like that, if it got enough signatures, would likely get their attention quite nicely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Still, fuck EA.
Seriously, fuck EA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How about a demo version
If you liked the demo, then you bought the game.
Personally, I'm also getting tired of games that claim to be free, but then ask players to buy stuff to continue the game. You know what, I would happily pay $15-$20 to play "The Sims: FreePlay" without the need to buy "power-ups" or wait 24 hours for my next chance to get Life Points. Heck, I was going to buy "The Sims 3" until I read the reviews that said it had less features than the "FreePlay" version.
But like some other posters are saying, game companies will keep making freemium games as long as people play them and they make money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
UK Advertising Regulator Nixes EA's Dungeon Keeper Advertisement Due To Microtransactions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]