You don’t like day one DLC. You love it. If a game you’re excited about doesn’t offer it, then you’re disappointed; in fact, you’re more than likely jolly angry. You beam with joy and pride when you see that this game you’ve bought is stuffed to the brim with microtransactions, as this allows you to fulfil your desire to continue spending money on something you’ve already paid for. What’s that? Are you trying to say this is not how you feel? Well, you’re wrong – as BioWare has kindly explained.
“Fans do want more content. From the moment the game launches. They tend to say ‘I want it now!’ So it needs to be there when it’s ready. They choose when to pick it up, day one or later.” So says Fernando Melo of BioWare at GDC Europe (as reported at Eurogamer). We’re not entirely sure what an “online development director” is, but he’s one of those.
The above statement – entirely unexpectedly, of course – completely ignores the fact that a big chunk of Mass Effect 2 singleplayer DLC was free for everybody with an online pass, while all Mass Effect 3 story DLC (“Extended Cut” aside) costs money for everybody. Melo did point out that day one DLC keeps writers and concept artists in work while the rest of the team finishes the main game; but again, this doesn’t explain why consumers might prefer to pay for content rather than get it for free. More disturbingly Melo went on to say, after comparing the online pass system to Call of Duty Elite & Battlefield Premium:
“If you have five DLC packs at $10 each, you can only ever earn a total of $50. Gamers are actually happier, as they are able to spend money [in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer] when they want. People may not want to pay upfront. They may be happier to pay when they are ‘in the moment’.”
Make of that what you will. If for some bizarre reason you disagree with BioWare’s opinion on what you want, before you get angry, ask yourself: have you ever bought day one DLC, or paid money for microtransactions? If so, then maybe BioWare knows you better than you know yourself. What evidence is there to disprove that?
Comments