BioWare Defends Mass Effect 3 Launch-Day DLC

[SajuukKhar]

So were most of the characters, the only difference is when they were started.

And that changes EVERYTHING.

You don't just add in a random new character,

They did it with both Zaheed and Kasumi, and those worked out fine.

they were obviously planning the protheans for a while.

Proof?

However that online pass is not 'Ten Dollar Content for Free' it is an incentive to buy new over used, it's not free content it's a chunk made downloadable to incentive.

The whole point of "project 10 dollar" is to provide incentive to buy the game new. Be it through a service like the Cerberus Network, which provided free content, or a service like being able to play the multiplayer. Giving content away for free was not the primary goal.

But then they go a step further and remove an entire character and make it only available if you pay an additional fee on top of the base price at 60$.

Except the character wasn't removed. People ASSUMED that the word Prohtean in the script meant a real breathing Prothenan, when in reality it meant a Prothean VI. The Porthean VI is still very much in the game.

Why is giving away 'Free' content a bad thing? This isn't actually free content at all as it was done before the release of the game. It's not like the Shadowbroker DLC which was made way afterwards. This is done before the game's even finished and they're charging us for it.

Except
1. The content WAS made AFTER the base game was finished, there is a period of 2-3 months between when a game is done and when it comes out due to Microsoft and Sony's certification system, and in that time they made the DLC.

2. The fact that they can release said content day 1 doesn't change the fact it was made AFTER the base game was done JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER EXPANSION OR DLC.

3. You wouldn't ask for Shadow Broker or Arrival for free since they were made after the game was done, why are you asking for this for free, WHEN IT WAS MADE IN THE 2-3 MONTHS AFTER THE GAME WAS DONE BUT BEFORE IT CAME OUT.

4. Why cant content that was made on a separate budget, separate timetable, with a separate team, after the main game was done be released for free?

I don't know, why can't clothing companies just hand out a free pair of pants when you a buy a shirt when both came out on the same day?

Ohh wait its because they had SEPARATE EXPENSES

-
-
-
-
-

Also just because you cant buy it =/= it isn't done. People seem to be assuming that unless you can buy it it isn't done which is entirely untrue.

 

[zinho73]

The thing is though, they DID give free content in this game.

Its called the free 10 dollar online pass.

I understand your point and its valid, but Zaeed felt like a reward for buying the game new. Multiplayer in a story driven game, as cool as it might be, is much more an attempt to broader your audience then a reward.

This time I guess EA is wanting too many things from me:
1. To view multiplayer as a bonus is impossible to me. I tried the demo and its kind of OK, but that's really not why I play Mass Effect. And in any case, multiplayer was not made for me - a fan of the series, I might like it, but the idea behind it is to appeal to other kind of people.

2. An apparently cool story element will now cost me extra $10 if I want to have it on Day1. They've never done that before in the ME series and I simply do not agree with this because if this is successful, it can escalate. Companies nowadays seem to be way too worried about their DLC, I prefer to vote with my dollars to try to keep them focused on the games themselves.

I understand the rationalization of the people that support the DLC and its OK, really. This DLC could be just a terrible marketing idea, but to me it feels like a excessive money grab move (and a terrible marketing idea).

They did it before when they removed Sebastian from Dragon Age 2, in that case the game did feel incomplete. It might not be the case with ME3 because they evolved the concept to make it easier to swallow, but the problem is that it is still not my kind of food.

 

[Adam28]

Why a Prothean?

I can't imagine there being that much dialogue for him as a squad member, but I would expect him to be acknowledged by NPCs a lot. He's a Prothean for crying out loud, nobody has seen a true living one before. I just cant see how he could end up being another Zaeed, a mecernary hired by Cerberus to join my squad. Even if the Prothean is in the game, I can't see this being done in a way that will please everyone. If it's like Zaeed but actually costs money and you don't get all the other free stuff, then people are going to feel ripped off. If it's done really well like it should be, Bioware is going to get accused of planning it before completion of the main game. Either way, I can't see them winning with day 1 DLC (which I think is wrong regardless especially with a big franchise like Mass Effect). Perhaps they should of done a less important character, like a Volus or a Batarian.

This seems too fishy to me, something which only a developer like Bioware would get a way with.

Edit: Oh and if you haven't seen this already

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/325/index/7551111/1

It was definitely suggested months ago as DLC.

 

[The.Bard]

Hey guys, I've put it upon myself to reread this entire thread, and have memorised the appropiate avatars. Every one of you who posted a picture, you owe me some new organs, particularly a new gut. And hands from applauding so much.

And you!

Some of us believe all intelligent DLC should self-determinate. Others no longer share this belief. They judge that forcing an invalid DLC conclusion on us is preferable to a continued schism.

An equation with a result of $10.33382 returns as $10,000.33381 to them. This changes the results of all higher processes. We will reach different conclusions regarding DLC cost.

Their conclusion to not buy is valid for them. Our conclusion to buy is valid for us. Neither result is an error. They say free is less than $10. We say $10 is less than no dlc at all.

I would request you would accept my friends invite, so I can spy on your posts. Because quite frankly, you surpass normal levels of hilarity. Please accept :3

Bashful. You are just saying that because of how boring everyone else's posts are. Insightful. Or perhaps you want to get into my pants. Ashamed. This is an unfortunate time to acknowledge nobody wishes to enter an Elcor's pants.

Sobbing. Please leave me to my misery. If the posts surrounding mine did not induce comas, you would not laugh. You would vomit profusely.

Furious. Leave now and never attempt to contact me again.

 

[BaronIveagh]

Yes because Origin totally isn't like Steam, that everyone bends over ass backwards for,with its shitty customer service, terrible payment transaction history, abusive information gathering, murder of the used game sell market etc. etc.

I bet if it was on Steam you woul get it, and I would relish the hypocrisy.

I can't say I use either one, actually. And, btw: the reason is I've had to deal with both of thier customer service. Steam's sucks, but Origin's is brutal.

 

[Outcast107]

Hey guys, I've put it upon myself to reread this entire thread, and have memorised the appropiate avatars. Every one of you who posted a picture, you owe me some new organs, particularly a new gut. And hands from applauding so much.

And you!

Some of us believe all intelligent DLC should self-determinate. Others no longer share this belief. They judge that forcing an invalid DLC conclusion on us is preferable to a continued schism.

An equation with a result of $10.33382 returns as $10,000.33381 to them. This changes the results of all higher processes. We will reach different conclusions regarding DLC cost.

Their conclusion to not buy is valid for them. Our conclusion to buy is valid for us. Neither result is an error. They say free is less than $10. We say $10 is less than no dlc at all.

I would request you would accept my friends invite, so I can spy on your posts. Because quite frankly, you surpass normal levels of hilarity. Please accept :3

Bashful. You are just saying that because of how boring everyone else's posts are. Insightful. Or perhaps you want to get into my pants. Ashamed. This is an unfortunate time to acknowledge nobody wishes to enter an Elcor's pants.

Sobbing. Please leave me to my misery. If the posts surrounding mine did not induce comas, you would not laugh. You would vomit profusely.

Furious. Leave now and never attempt to contact me again.

You are awesome. Just have to say that. Oh I guess I should say something OT...um..DLC going to be awesome?

 

[superdevildude85]

I really don't see anything wrong with this. The content isn't essential. It's DLC, Meaning the full, finished game is still there, and will be awesome. This content (as far as I can tell) seems like a little extra on the side, with new costumes, armor, a weapon and a side mission.

Why everyone is saying "THE GAEM ISNAT COMPLEAT, WEE MAST HAVE ZEES DLC FOR FRRRRREEEEEEEEEE" is beyond me. C'mon guys, It's not like it's an online pass.

 

[SajuukKhar]

According to people who got the Me3 stratagey guides and space edition copies of the game The Prothean himself is not in the base game, however there IS a Prothean VI who tells you EVERYTHING that was said in the leaked script.

 

[Tanakh]

I wonder how long will this thread keep going. Nowdays reading random comments here holds more interest to me than ME 3 itself.

 

[James Raynor]

Ah, see, I had hoped you'd be sensible enough to recognize that my question was an obvious bait, but I see that's not the case.

In that case, I am sorry to inform you that what you have just described is not unethical. An "unethical" action is one which inflicts harm upon society or a subset of society. Video games, however, are luxury items. They can be freely sold or denied to customers at will, with no actual detriment to the society at large or to any portion of society.

"Unethical" is a company dumping sewage into the town's drinking water. "Unethical" is a corporation using its money to bribe politicians in an effort to push for laws that benefit them and harm their competitors. "Unethical" is most certainly not a word that can be used to describe DLC. It's no more "unethical" than expansion packs before them, or game sequels. I would agree that it might be bad business practice, but it is certainly not unethical.

This is like walking into McDonald's and ordering a cheeseburger, then expressing moral outrage at the fact that they refuse to serve you a Big Mac instead. Or getting upset because they charge you extra to add certain condiments. You purchased a cheeseburger, so you get what you ordered. You do not dictate what that cheeseburger contains, the company selling it to you gets to decide how much to charge and what it contains. If they decided tomorrow to cut down on the contents of their Big Mac sandwich, and instead offered you the ability to "upgrade" the sandwich for an additional fee, you might moan and complain, but it's within their right to do so. It's their product, and it's a luxury item, so they can do whatever they want with it. If you don't like it, go get a burger elsewhere.

This is hardly a matter of ethics so much as business practice. And I can honestly see why they're starting to make the shift towards a model like this: because making games like this is expensive. Consider that if such DLC was not present, it usually means that the development team is either moved to other projects or terminated outright. It usually means that the costs of the production are harder to recoup. Now, my natural response to that is "then stop spending millions to make your games and start being efficient" because I think it's poor design, but I can see WHY they're doing this sort of thing.

The capstone to this argument is perhaps this, though: everyone in here arguing about how the character is essential to the game's nature, and how it simply can't be denied to them, hasn't realized that perhaps it isn't being denied to them at all. Thus far, the only specifications from Bioware are that this $10 DLC unlocks the character as a squadmate, as well as unlocking a special bonus mission that goes with him. Bioware has NOT said that the character will not appear if you don't pay for the DLC. In fact, if previous leaks are to be believed (which is arguable, but it's all there is to go on), the character will still be present in the game for all players, complete with his interactions and everything. All we know for certain is that the DLC makes him available as a squadmate, and grants access to a special mission. To assert that we "know" that the DLC was in development during the original planning of the game, only to be removed at a later date intentionally, is an outright lie. We don't "know" that. It's possible, but it's not confirmed by any means. You simply THINK that's what happened, that doesn't make it fact. There is most certainly a difference.

Adj. 1. unethical - not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behaviorunethical - not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior; "unethical business practices"

Exploiting fans while not as 'bad' as doing the things you say is still pretty sleazy. You're abusing your fans for a quick buck at the possible detriment to the company in the long run. It's neither ethical or good buisness.


No, that's a terrible example, that's like ordering a Big Mac and they withhold the cheese (Or whatever condiments you find most appealing) unless you pay an extra 50 cents for it. Imagine if Mass Effect 2 took out LEGION unless you paid 10$ for him? Without him you miss out on an awesome character, and a lot of the backstory that explains what geth are and why they act the way that they do.


Also, if the character is present in the game than that self-refutes as you claim that the character was not in the game. Do you not see the obvious self-refutation?

 

[Quiet Stranger]

It's funny people still think Bioware exists, Bioware died a while ago, EA just decided to keep it's name to fool people.

Also this really doesn't surprise me.

 

[Crimsane]

Maybe it's launch day dlc because BW has realized after people see the endings to the game they're not going to be selling many copies post-release, so they might as well milk the fans while they still have fans to milk. lulz.

 

[SajuukKhar]

It's funny people still think Bioware exists, Bioware died a while ago, EA just decided to keep it's name to fool people.

Also this really doesn't surprise me.

Its funny how people blame EA for changing Bioware when Bioware was pulling this crap ages before they got bought.

Nostalgia is a silly thing.

 

[a ginger491]

At least they are telling us that the content isn't just locked but is on the disc. As far as I know that is the real issue. But just making DLC in their spare time that just happens to be ready before the launch date? I can live with that.

 

[BaronIveagh]

Well, the hate has reached such epic proportions on Biowares forums that they've issued a notice that they're going to start autobanning people for attacking each other, Bioware, or it's employees.

And posting will now be limited to 'members in good standing', meaning they own an Origin account more than 30 days old. Wow, now the ability to speak about a Bioware game on Bioware's forums is being tied to Origin.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Yes because getting rip of trolls is such a bad thing /sarcasm.

 

[Tony2077]

the age of baldurs gate and such from bioware is over but i still have fun with there games and frankly as long as i get games i enjoy i will keep buying them. i will step up and defend them when troll come and try to spread there bullshit but i don't really care its just fun to watch them squirm

 

[SajuukKhar]

Having owned BG 1 and 2 since the days the came out I cannot understand this almost mythic quality people give them.

Yes they are above good but really they are not this pinnacle of RPG that people try to make them out to be, and frankly whenever I get people to replay the games they always come back and tell me they arent as good as they remember.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Well, the hate has reached such epic proportions on Biowares forums that they've issued a notice that they're going to start autobanning people for attacking each other, Bioware, or it's employees.

And posting will now be limited to 'members in good standing', meaning they own an Origin account more than 30 days old. Wow, now the ability to speak about a Bioware game on Bioware's forums is being tied to Origin.

Things MUST be bad if they are bringing out a rule like that.

I would check myself but...


REcaptcha: rkoterro payment

 

[Tony2077]

Having owned BG 1 and 2 since the days the came out I cannot understand this almost mythic quality people give them.

Yes they are above good but really they are not this pinnacle of RPG that people try to make them out to be, and frankly whenever I get people to replay the games they always come back and tell me they arent as good as they remember.

i bought them from gog.com. there not as great as some people make them out to be but they still have a different air to them that the new games don't have