Originally Posted by M1sT3rM4n
The issue isn't whether the DLC's free/not free. It's that they are trying to bring in 3rd-party advertising. The industry has already attempted this in the past and it appears to be very ineffective: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2071492
(only 35% of all players were able to recall the advertisements displayed in game.
Also, EA must consider the demographics to which it's trying to employ this marketing strategy. For all we know, it might be wasting precious resource designing in-game advertisements for a demographic that doesn't respond to them at all.
Precious resources? Nissan is paying for those.
As for being ineffective, it was found ineffective in racing games due to the environment being secondary and you didn't pay attention to it without ads, so putting ads in already ignored space was a bad idea.
Honestly, in-game advertising should have started a decade ago when we still had loading screens that lasted long enough to read what was put on them. In-game advertising is not something you should logically oppose unless it's obtrusive to the point of affecting the gameplay. Yes, I wouldn't want to see a Avengers 2 poster in Bioshock Infinite, but if they've got actual commercials playing over the audio in Madden when you're selecting plays, I'd actually improve the realism of the experience. Games that are supposed to be in the real world can only benefit from in-game advertising.If they're going to advertise, they better make games cheaper!
Well, no. Advertising is an alternative and/or supplement to MTs/DLCs/FTP that are aimed at upping the average price-per-player since it is believed simply upping the average title to a $70 price tag would lose too many sales. This increasing of the average price-per-player is something the industry has wanted for a long time. Inflation since the start of $60 games with the most recent console generation has $70 today equal in buying power to $60 in 2005, it's not some kind of evil.