EA Won’t Pay To Depict Real Weapons In Video Games Anymore

EA no longer wants to pay for the rights to depict real weaponry in games like Battlefield or Medal of Honor.

Reuters reports that following recent events like the Newton school shooting, as well considering some of the heat that company took when Medal of Honor: Warfighter’s website provided links to real world weapons and tactical gear manufacturers, EA has decided that they will no longer pay for the rights to use real weapons in its video games.

Thing is, EA will still use them anyways.

EA has stated that though they will not pay to depict these weapons in-game, they do intend use their likeness regardless and even use similar names.

EA told Reuters that they believe they have a constitutional right under the tenets of free speech to use trademarks without permission. “We’re telling a story and we have a point of view,” said EA’s President of Labels Frank Gibeau. “A book doesn’t pay for saying the word ‘Colt,’ for example.”

What do you think about EA’s new approach to depicting real weapons in-game?

In related news, we recently learned that the Medal of Honor franchise is still a part of EA’s considerations for for their fiscal year 2013 plan, despite poor Warfighter sales and reception.

Thanks, Kotaku

  • EA is a horrible company…they have ruined so many games. I wish they would go away.

  • Jason Davis

    Well said, said well! lol

  • MasonMei

    It matters not, since MoH series is quite “dead” after that amount of cash for weapon rights (and result in nothing, literally), and BF series continues to give us crap gun models. Gun rails are not modeled but simply covered with images, hell.

    If you want top-notch gun models go play Call of Duty. This isn’t a fanboy cry, I know CoD graphics suck, CoD runs on 10-yr-old crap engines, CoD MP sucks, but I Mean It, CoD gun models are one of the best among all FPS titles, if you ever pay close attention to it.

    Check this out: http://images.wikia.com/callofduty/images/a/a8/SCAR-H_Reload_BOII.png

    • dontevenbother

      Yes, ‘cos gold encrusted guns look legit.

      • Alpine Maffu

        Your point may be valid but your delivery is douche.

      • He was talking about the look of the guns not the color moron.

      • You don’t get it.

      • MasonMei

        Did I even mention gold camos, or do you shit gold, like Tywin Lannister? We all know it’s a lie 😀

    • Batman

      He´s lying he is a COD fanboy I know him. But he is right, BF guns are much better and realistic, but their iron sights sucks

      • MasonMei

        I actually played more BF3 than I play MW3 and BO2 put together in the last year. I just don’t like few things in these games so I say’em out, does that make me a fanboy? So I must post “Yeah Battlefield 3 rocks” under all BF3 news and “Holy i love COD” under all COD news to look less fanboy-ish? That’s BS I’m only telling you the fact and the truth, I don’t cry and make a clear statement of which game’s better, and if I’m still a fanboy…… Well, F you sir.

        Anyways, BF guns are much better? Have you ever paid any attention to the details? Oh no you haven’t, since they don’t have much to offer.

    • becuase cod is only running and spray around nothing less nothing more.

      • Dirtknap

        What a delightfully insightful comment old chap…

    • Jason Davis

      I agree with you there fo sho, But the Gun Models on on BF3 on PC are better than Console obviously, but i have always admired the detail COD put’s in the Guns at least!

    • After seeing most of the guns in person and then looking at them in-game in the best detail on PC BF3 and COD, I can say that for sure the guns look more like the real thing in COD. I can also say that I don’t think it matters if the guns are licensed or not. CS:Source and CS:GO have been successful without it. I imagine other games can be as well.

      • Fat fuckin nerds need to die

        Wow dude, don’t you ever fucking work or go outside? Holy fuck you’re a fat fucker. Dude you comment on every piece this lame excuse for a website posts. Also, I don’t see you “firing ever single gun” at all. You’re to much on the nuts of this website. Annnnnd to just finish off this “troll or whatever you fuckin fools came up with, I’m giving you the bird lol. Go fuck your self

        • Fat fucker killer

          Oh my bad you said after seeing most of the guns. Which is still bullshit lol

          • James K

            “Far fucker killer”

            Heh, are you related to Patrick Pewterschmidt?

            • Pow! Right in the kisser! Pow! Right in the kisser! Pow! Right in the kisser!

        • lol

          “Takes one to know one.”

        • A solid contribution… much like the shit I took earlier today.

      • Sorry for the remarkably rude comment Aaron. He’s been “taken care” of.

        • Wait, you guys can do that? Can you also ban people? If you can, ban that Battlefield Engineer guy. Please and thank you.

          • MasonMei

            I think that guy is unregistered and types his name everytime he makes a post, so if there isn’t an IP ban, there’s no way to handle him. Sadly.

            • God dammit. Looks like we’ll be dealing with him for a little longer then.. and when I say little I mean a lot longer.

    • Nathan Cox

      Gun models, absolutely. Optic models, not particularly. I wish they’d put more focus on making their optics more realistic. For example: I own the same model of EOTech HWS that they use in Black Ops 2, and the reticle in game is wrong in both size and opacity.

      • MasonMei

        You got the point, Black Ops II EOTech looks worse than in previous titles so I never bother to use it. Anyways iron sights on CoD guns are of much practical use.

    • RyMann88

      You do realize that these guns are only highly detailed on one side right? The right side of the gun (at least in MW2 or older, never specifically checked for MW3 or BO2) they only put effort on one side of the gun to cut down on resources to keep the engine running smooth. Games like Battlefield do model the entire gun… And I mean the entire gun from the barrel, the stock, and the grip.

      • MasonMei

        I do realize that MW2 M16 is only modeled on the left side, yet in latter games this is not present. Anyways, how can you tell BF does model the endire gun? And even if it’s wholly modeled, it looks crappy.

      • Why would you care if the whole gun is perfectly modeled? That’s like trying to admire the wheels on your car while you’re driving.

    • Top notch Gun models ?! u mean top notch gun details and serial code that is written on the side of gun ? right ?

      • That makes the model look better.. yes.

      • MasonMei

        Yes I mean it, what’s wrong with that? Do you ever see similar things on BF3 guns? No.

    • Batman

      If COD updates to a new engine that is good as frostbite, the weapons will be much more releastic than BF3 weapons

      • MasonMei

        As good as Frostbite? This is total fanboy-ish buddy. Frostbite 2 sucks, you know, it’s almost nothing without the HDR a.k.a blinding glare. Dx11 SFX? Not present. High detail images? Not present. Real-time destrucion? Scripts instead. CoD doesn’t some Crapbite 2 to create “much more realistic” weapons. That 10 year old crap IDtech 3 engine will suffice. It’s just a matter of devotion. And skills of modelists. DICE should definitely find someone like LoneWolf3D to model their guns.

        • God bless your little brain.

          Your wrong in so many ways it astounds me. God forbid we have a game with sun light that looks real instead of the wax look of your other engines you mentioned. Unreal Engine 3 is a shit engine unless EPIC is using it otherwise it runs like crap. Also CryEngine3 may look nice but the games behind it suck major ass. The first Crysis was awesome but that is about it. Dice is doing stuff with there engine that other engines only wish they had. The only other engine that truly impresses me is the RAGE engine by Rockstar powering Red Dead Redemption and the new GTA5. Now thats a quality engine.

          • MasonMei

            So you are trying to tell me “I’m wrong” yet you say nothing other than “Unreal Engine 3 is a shit” and “CryEngine3 may look nice but the games behind it suck major ass”. I’m talking about engine performance and you start to bring up some freakin’ games. So convincing bro, god bless your little brain. At least I pointed out in which aspects do UE and CE shine, yet you try to win me over with your lame ass reasons? Do you even know how to debate?

            “Dice is doing stuff with there engine that other engines only wish they had” Laugh my 1000 freakin’ arses off, dude. What did they do, create nothing at all and a Battlefield 3 with crap graphics and that shit sun, yet they called it “50% power of Frostbite 2”. Ok I get it, so you mean in BF4 I’m gonna see a 100%. Wait what? BF4 is running on “BRAND NEW” FROSTBITE 3? Bitch please, if you call this a change in engine, you should definitely stop bitchin’ about how COD never changes their game engine.

            Anyways do you imply that Battlefield 3 is really good? Suck a bag of pricks man. It’s fun yet it never matches the criterion of being “good”.

    • Spookeh Jow

      The models might look somewhat better but there is at least one error on every single MW3 gun aside from the P99. Check out IMFDB’s Mw3 and BO2 pages for reference.

  • MNJayW

    So let me get this straight, they aren’t going to PAY to use the likeness they are going to just do it. This has nothing to do with the school shootings and everything to do with maximizing profits. If it was about the shootings they would just stop using the likeness of the real weapons.

  • thebulky1cometh

    I’m a COD player, but I’m not here to troll – I just think this absolutely sucks for you BF guys. This sounds like something the greedy people of Activision would try to pull!

  • Latch

    What the hell does this have to with school shootings?


  • It’s like the movie Office Space…..
    Yeah, I don’t think we’re gonna pay to use real gun names anymore.
    So you’re not going to use the real gun names?
    No, we’re using the real gun names. We’re just not gonna pay anymore.

    They’re big enough, that they can pretty much “ruin” a gun manufacturer by dragging it out in court for years if a relatively small company like Beretta sued them for using “M9” or “M93r”.

    ”We’re telling a story and we have a point of view,” said EA’s President of Labels Frank Gibeau. “A book doesn’t pay for saying the word ‘Colt,’ for example.”

    Base on that quote, it seems like their lawyers feel like they’d win in court and are willing to be sued. EA made a “business decision”.

    • As usual, your thoughts stand as being the most well thought out. Spot on.

      • Thank you Aaron!

        • thebulky1cometh

          Hey, uh…did you really just say Beretta is a “relatively small company?”

          • thebulky1cometh
            • I did say it was “relatively small”, yes sir.

              Beretta’s yearly revenue is about 73 million compared to EA’s 1.15 billion. So yes, they are relatively small compared to EA… roughly 15 times smaller.

              That’s like me suing a 16 year old high school kid with a part time summer job, just to mess with him.

            • Pine

              If EAcstopped making games – nobody really cares. If Beretta stop making cap guns, the world changes.

            • Doesn’t change the fact that EA could ruin Beretta financially with a long, drawn-out civil suit.

            • thebulky1cometh

              Where’d you snag those numbers? If they are true, you meant to say “relative to EA,” not “relatively small.” Joe’s corner pizza shop is relatively small… not a companyddoing millions per year.

            • I got the numbers from their annual reports. I thought I was clear about what 2 companies I was comparing in the original post. Didn’t mean to confuse you. 🙂

          • MrLadyfingers

            Relative to Electronic Arts? Most likely.

    • Jason Davis

      Good stuff

    • Dr_Dakka

      While I do hate some of EA’s practices, I think they’re right in this one. I always thought it strange that EA was *paying* to have real guns’ names. If anything, the manufacturer would pay because it serves as advertising of that gun.
      Sure many people have grown up with the model that you pay to wear a brand. See many popular clothing lines – you pay to advertise their product. It’s quite backwards.

      I think it’s fine. If someone likes the gun enough to have in real world, they will either purchase that branded gun used or go purchase it new in-store. The manufacturers would ‘ruin’ themselves if they fought it out in court. Why would they do it? they ultimately benefit from the free advertisement

    • jhk655

      Wow this was three years ago, and game devs are still paying to have a guns likeness in their game. lol. Lot of good that did.

  • thats a realy bad idea , No ea don’t do it

  • licensedbeast

    One way ticket to worst company award… again.
    Earned by proving they are still super cheap.

  • Haha! this is so EA. Next, they’ll be telling us that they don’t have to make a new game, just to give it a new title. BF4 will just be BF3, with new maps.

    They’ll say that books come out all the time as 2nd, 3rd, 4th, editions. BF4 is just the 4th edition…

    This is why books are not the same…

  • RoadTripToJalalalabad

    EA was already doing this with Battlefield: G53, M416, M5K, ACW-R, etc. These are all modified names to avoid a trademark lawsuit. The ones that aren’t modified probably have been contested and settled in a prior case already, or are from weapons manufacturers who are happy for the free advertising.

    I think this is news only because MOH wont be needing licenses any more, and EA took an opportunity to look like they are righting their ship.

    EA, forget this kind of hype. Hype us with innovative gameplay features and release stuff without major bugs and server-dependency/DRM failures.

  • xHDx

    Although people are saying this is a bad, decision, its not. Half of you say they are super cheap and gained the worst company award, but in-fact i doubt this is based on the video games actual sales and more likely on the Economic side of things. Also, I would`nt play the next BF if the guns had the same names, 2/3 years running, honestly. Would you?

    If anyone actually read the article which i know some did, it said they could lose a lawsuit without damaging their company. They are revoking the licenses just to stop the chances of lawsuit cropping up by 100%! If anyone thought about why EA refuse to hold gun licenses (thinking of the word “gun” and the words “real life”), it becomes kind of obvious. And every knows how the US Government react when it comes to Video Games and real life murders.

    Read the article and think about it thoroughly before posting, Thanks!

  • Alco

    I doubt EA plans on depicting any weapons at all in MOH any time soon…

  • Mogwai Warrior

    Gun manufacturers should be paying EA. I guarantee a lot of people got interested in guns just from playing these games.

  • henry

    why not just stop paying in the first place. i think this is EA using newtown as an excuse to save a few bucks, that aint cool.

  • EPIC fail

    Anybody who says the guns are more realistic in COD needs there meds checked. You do realize DICE models every gun based off there real life models. Also there is different models for lots of guns either by manufactures improving them or changing them completely. I know your trying to find a little something COD does better but COD fans fail again.

  • The Army Ranger

    Dang! I was hoping for BF4, the “M416” would be called the “HK416” instead. The latter sounds cooler.

  • Chris

    I think they should nut up and support the 2nd Amendment like true Americans. Damn liberals.

  • EA

    Love it how EA say ‘EA told Reuters that they believe they have a constitutional right under the tenets of free speech to use trademarks without permission’.
    Would they still be saying that if someone used the EA trademark without asking?