In games such as Need for Speed: Underground, who pays who?
Meaning, EA should pay the car companies to use their cars’ looks, company logos, etc…
On the other hand, the car companies get great exposure and advertising of their logos and models, so they should pay the EA…
My question, therefore, is: who pays whom here? 
EA Sports pays. I have been into Sierra Sports NASCAR sims for many years and with the release of NASCAR 2003 last year, Sierra announced it would no longer produce anymore NASCAR games due to the high costs of licensing, especially those with the auto manuacturers. The real question should be how many people are going to buy a car because they see one in a game? Probably not many. And in the case of NFS, if you can afford one of the cars used in the game, you don’t play car games.
Licensing can be a huge problem. Look at Pro Evolution Soccer 3, widely regarded as the best current action football game: it has no real names, due to licensing restrictions. Championship Manager 03-04, latest in a line of huge-selling PC games, failed to negotiate successfully with the MLS, so no US-based football players appear in the game, and it’s no longer possible to manage an MLS team.
part of the frustration for developers is that gaining those licenses can mean having to reduce the game environment so that for instance, in NFS:Underground, the cars are not allowed to be shown in a damaged condition. Kind of takes away from the emersion of a game when a 150 mph head on collision leaves neither car damaged. and both drive away.
Didn’t know that; anyway, **NFS:Porsche Unleashed ** was more realistic in that aspect. Wonder what that says about Porsche vs. Honda/Ford/Peugeot and other licensees of NFS:Underground?
And Goodyear, the major model companies are avioding puting goodyear tires on their cars because of the fees charged to put the “official” tire on the car.